The Ongoing Crucifixion of Kobe Bryant

Sometimes, a star burns so bright that there is an instinct among the masses to grab and tear at it in hopes that they too will become illuminated. Such is the fate of L.A. Lakers guard Kobe Bryant, who has been vilified by former teammates, the sports media and unruly fans in every way imaginable.

For example, when Bryant scored a whopping 62 points against the Dallas Mavericks, he was criticized for resting the fourth quarter. When he poured in a jaw-dropping 81 against the Toronto Raptors– good for the second-most in any game in NBA history – the pundits pointed to his high shot count and paltry assist total as proof of his selfishness.

At the time of the Shaquille O’Neal’s trade to Miami, Bryant’s detractors were quick to tell us that he was nothing without Shaq. And when he continued to play at a high level after the big man’s exodus, they blasted him for being unable to lead his team to victory (never mind the coaching changes, the mediocre supporting cast or the fact that O’Neal, playing with the ubertalented Dwayne Wade in Miami, couldn’t secure a title either). It seems that there is nothing that Bryant can do right, which should say more about his critics than it should about him.

First, a caveat: Bryant probably is, as Phil Jackson claimed in his book, a difficult player to coach. Jackson would know, having coached the likes of Dennis Rodman in the past. But when offered the chance to coach Bryant a second time, Jackson took the cash and came out of retirement. So let’s not mistake ‘difficult’ with ‘Terrell Owens-level cancer’ just yet.

Bryant is also a selfish player on the court, which would make him no different than many others in the league. Allen Iverson had the same reputation, even while putting up 30+ points a game. Now that A.I. has learned to pass, he no longer gets bashed by the critics. But the 76ers aren’t contenders anymore than the Lakers (and possibly even less so). The moral here: if you can put up points and you’re stuck with mediocre teammates who won’t help you win, then forget trying to make them better and start shooting the lights out.

So why are people so down on Bryant? Some blame him for putting pressure on Lakers management to ship Shaq out of L.A. This, they claim, exacerbated the Lakers’ fall from contention. The facts, however, point to other culprits. At the time of the trade, Jerry West, the architect of those Lakers championship teams, was long gone and Phil Jackson had recently thrown in the towel. Gary Payton was unhappy, Karl Malone was contemplating retirement and the draft prospects were bleak. In other words, the team was already falling apart.

Shaq also played as big a role in the trade as Bryant did, if not a bigger one. After all, it takes two to have a war of words and the animosity Bryant had toward him was more than reciprocated. Shaq was also seeking an extension at the time and willing to raise hell if he didn’t get one. Given his inability to stay healthy, the Lakers didn’t want to give him anything long-term (they did, however, throw a generous short-term offer his way, which he rejected). Plus – and this is far too often dismissed as idle chatter on his part – the big man actually demanded a trade. With or without Bryant, he would have been gone. Trading him when they did at least enabled the Lakers to get something of value (Lamar Odom) in return.

Of course, when they aren’t blaming him for the Shaq trade, Bryant-bashers will point to his off-court behavior: namely, sexual assault allegations. And while these allegations are to be taken seriously, it would appear that a double standard is at play. Bryant is not Ruben Patterson, the Portland Trailblazers forward who attempted to rape his child’s babysitter and has a reputation as a violent thug on and off the court. Nor is Bryant NFL players Ray Lewis and Leonard Little, both of whom have been implicated in various forms of homicide and both of whom, inexplicably, have better reputations than Kobe.

Perhaps the number one reason why Bryant is vilified is that he no longer fits today’s “new” NBA. Bryant came into the league in the mid-to-late 1990s, a time when individual prowess reigned supreme. A whole generation of brash young players wanting to be the next Michael Jordan stormed the NBA, and the league, the fans, and the media were there to stroke their egos. This was the era of the marijuana-toking Portland Jailblazers, led by technical foul king Rasheed Wallace. This was the era when high-flying Vince Carter and Big Dog Glenn Robinson could make All-Star teams despite having no defensive commitment and no sense of team chemistry, respectively. This was an era when outright headcases like J.R. Rider could still find employment on the basis of sheer scoring ability alone.

And in this NBA, Bryant fit perfectly. Coming directly from high school, he was young, inexperienced, a touch immature, but God was he talented. Most who revile him now were perfectly happy to buy into him then. Everyone was too busy anointing him the next prodigy to point out his shortcomings. If you take a snapshot of Bryant in 2000, you would see a player destined to be among the greatest who ever played the game.

But then a funny thing happened. The Lakers dynasty collapsed. Injuries and diminished production made talented-but-troublesome players more of a pain than they were worth. Teams like the Spurs and the Pistons began winning championships. The NBA, in other words, had changed.

It is debatable what lead to this transformation, but what has become abundantly clear is that it does not favor players like Kobe Bryant. The stars of the new NBA are Tim Duncan, a fundamentally skilled big man with a bland personality, Ben Wallace, a hard-working defender with little offensive game and Steve Nash, a team-oriented, pass-first point guard. All three are a far cry from the electrifying dunkmasters of just a few short years ago.

This change, coupled with Commissioner David Stern’s new get-tough stance (which has included, to date, a controversial dress code and very stiff penalties for players who venture into the stands), have resulted in making Bryant a pariah. The message to him is clear: either change your game and your attitude or you will continue to be vilified. Never mind what your scoring average is (nearly 36 points as of this posting, best in the league and a career high as well), how many rings you have (3) or how suspect your teammates are (Kwame Brown, anyone?), if you are not with the program, you’re a goner.

Need more proof? Ask yourself: five years ago, would the Pacers have benched then traded Ron Artest – an absolute demon on the court despite his attitude – or would they have tried to placate him and smooth things over?

I can’t really say I miss the attitude of the old NBA. Watching a bunch of near-30 millionaires gallivanting about like mischievous adolescents is enough to make your eyes roll and your stomach turn. But as much as it’s fallen out of favor now, that NBA was supported by Stern, by fans, by the sports media. For them to turn around now and attempt to disown it is an exercise in hypocrisy. So go ahead, boo Bryant. Call him selfish. Try to drag him down. But just remember: his celebrity is a child of your making.