Kobe Bryant's rank! One man's opinion

I hate Kobe Bryant. Have I mentioned that before? I hate reading about how great he is. I hate anything that insinuates he's the next Michael Jordan. I hate hearing -- mostly from delusional Lakers' fans -- that Kobe is better than LeBron James, a chorus that will only grow louder with Kobe winning his fourth ring.* However, as much as I dislike Bryant, I am forced to admit that this title has propelled him to another level, and he now has to be considered one of the top players of all-time. The question is, exactly how high up the list is he?

* Allow me to dispel the notion that Kobe is better than LeBron right here, right now. The argument is not that Kobe is a more accomplished basketball player than LeBron -- there is no doubt that he is, as he's been playing longer and thus has had more time to accomplish things -- but that he is currently a better basketball player. This is a complete and utter crock of shit.

First off, let's tackle the Kobe's-team-won argument sure to be in vogue with the pro-Kobe set. Look, as much as one player can dominate a game, basketball is still a team sport. Aside from limiting his turnovers, what more could LeBron James have done to beat the Magic? Here are Kobe and LeBron's relevant averages in their respective Magic series:

Kobe: 32.4 points, .430 FG% , .360 3pt%, .841 FT%, 5.6 rebounds, 7.4 assists, 1.4 steals, 1.4 blocks, 3.2 turnovers

LeBron: 38.5 points, .487 FG%, .297 3pt%, .745 FT%, 8.3 rebounds, 8 assists, 1.2 steals, 1.2 blocks, 4.2 turnovers

LeBron's only substantial deficit is in free throw shooting, which he more than made up for by by getting to the line nearly twice as often as Kobe (15.7 attempts per game versus 8.8). This -- and his 57-point edge in field goal percentage -- allowed him to average six more points despite taking slightly fewer shots per game.

What was the difference then? Teammates. Kobe's are simply much, much better.

Underserved All-Star bids notwithstanding, Mo Williams, LeBron's undisputed No. 2 -- and I mean that figuratively, as he played like total shit against the Magic -- would be no better than than fourth-best player on the Lakers, behind Kobe, Pau Gasol, and Lamar Odom, and he might also be below Trevor Ariza, Andrew Bynum and maybe even Derek Fisher. Anderson Varejao might not crack the Lakers front-court rotation, but he was the Cavs #1 big, averaging nearly 30 minutes per game against Orlando, a number limited only by his inability to stay out of foul trouble.

The Lakers without Kobe would still be a playoff-caliber squad. Certainly not world-beaters, but no slouches, either. Without LeBron, the Cavs would be one of the worst teams in the league. And that -- and not some personal failing -- is why their teams had such disparate playoff results.

Secondly, the rings. Are Tom Sanders and Jim Loscutoff (who?) better than Michael Jordan? Well, as members of those great Red Auerbach Celtics teams those two won eight and seven championships, respectively, to Jordan's six. Sure, some whacked-out stathead will claim that both men -- with their career scoring averages in the single digits -- merely had the good fortune to have been teamed with several Hall-of-Famers, and should be placed a notch or two below Jordan, but that's poppycock. More rings = better player.

Perhaps that logic might be a tad problematic.

Kobe now has four rings, LeBron zero. Which not only tells us very little about how they played this year, but also reinforces the notion that not all situations are created equal. Had LeBron played his early 20's with an in-his-prime Shaquille O'Neil, don't you think he'd have earned a handful of titles too? Remember, Shaq was the Finals MVP for each of Kobe's first three championships. Because a player can't control his teammates, judging a career by the number of rings is largely a fool's errand. To say that LeBron is the lesser player because Kobe had already been on three NBA championship teams by the time he was LeBron's age would be as ridiculous as judging them solely by their career averages through their age 24 seasons for scoring. (Advantage LeBron, 27.5-21.5.). Or rebounding. (Lebron leads 7.0-5.0.) Or assists. (LeBron again, 6.7-4.2) Or field goal percentage... aw, you get the picture.

Finally -- and I'm cutting this short because I'm probably boring the hell out of anyone who's still reading (and I kind of covered it here to boot) -- LeBron's season blew Kobe's away. He won one more game (66 vs. 65) with a team that was far worse. His combination of numbers -- 28.4 ppg, 7.6 rpg, 7.2 apg, 1.7 steals, 1.2 blocks, 3.0 TO, .489 FG%, .344 3pt%, .780 FT% in 37.7 minutes -- tops anything that Kobe has ever done statistically, nevermind what he did this year. Kobe has never shot better than .469 in a single season, his career high for rebounds per game is 6.3, his best assist average is 6.0, and his high in blocks is 1.0. And none of those marks came in the same season, let alone this year. The only area where Kobe has an advantage is in free-throw shooting. But this year, even though Kobe shot 85.6% from the line, LeBron actually had more made free throws per game (7.3 vs 5.9) because he got to the stripe at a significantly higher rate.

For the record, Kobe's numbers for the season: 26.8 ppg, 5.2 rpg, 4.9 apg, 1.5 steals, 0.5 blocks, 2.6 TO, .467 FG%, .351 3pt%, .856 FT% in 36.1 minutes. Nothing to scoff at, certainly. But LeBron had the better statistical season, and he carried lesser teammates to a better record. That makes him the better player.

Now that was a long aside. What was this post supposed to be about, anyway? Oh yeah, Kobe's place in history. Unfortunately, I think I'm going to have to continue this later, as I just heard the totally shocking news Sammy Sosa used steroids. It looks like I've got a little somber bloggin' to do.