All Jemele Hill is doing is re-hashing the argument of "The Next MJ". The dislike and hatred for Kobe is so massive, people forget or rather insist on turning a blind eye to his talent. It's a simple reminder. While the league and it's fans and the media consistently scrutinze him, they love crowning players who do not deserve it. (ie: Lebron, Wade, etc.) There is no doubt that these two specific players are much easier to like and market, they DO have tons of talent and one of them has even won a title, but giving them accolades and praise is pre-mature. The same thing happened to Kobe. You cannot fault these players, however, if there was an argument, Kobe is absolutely the closest.
I definetly do not agree with everything Jemele Hill has stated, but she does put up good points in Kobe's case. Cases that I also believe in. Kobe WAS better than Michael at 22. Kobe WAS better than Michael at 26. The question is, will Kobe be better than Michael at 32? Call me if this happens.
I really don't think Hill truly believes that Kobe is better than Michael. Her arguments against Michael are based on personality and image. (...like being an ideal husband. Hardly a legit point.) The first 5 lines show me that she doesn't believe it. She's simply reminding people that although the hate for Kobe runs deep, the expectations for him are high. Space-like, even.
|