Full Transcript of Kobe's Initial Statement to Detectives

Also consider Horace Grant's position in the book. He was unhappy with MJ's "selfishness" because he wanted a bigger role in the offense and more shots himself. Is this not also selfishness? Grant still wanted to take more shots himself, something that he was criticising MJ for.

you can say the same about the things said about krause but that's a different story. but as far as the sources go, i remember smith being interviewed back when the book came out, and he pointed out horace as being source of the bulk information, as well as jackson and johnny bach about jordan's tactics as well the crazy shit krause was doing/crazy shit the jordan and pippen did to him. oh wait i may be getting mixed up with another jordan book.

ahh i love reading those books on jordan showing the behind scenes monkey business. the nba is full of bastards!

There certainly were more sources than Grant alone, but Grant seemed to be one of the most outspoken, at least in the information he provided to Grant. Consider also that Pippen was skipping practice because he was unhappy with his contract, while Hodges and Levingston were unhappy with their playing time. Not to say that the allegations were completely false, but they certainly had reason to dislike MJ on principle alone.

I think much of the problem was the lack of confidence he had in his teammates. He should have had more belief in them and been more understanding of the fact they did not all possess some of the talents he did. It isn't an excuse, of course, but patience and tolerance might have made him more of a team player.

You're right about Charles Barkley, and I myself like him. But it is an example of how players are judged differently. As I said, there a many double standards when it comes to pro athletes. Take MJ and Wilt for example. Both were known primarily for their scoring abilities, yet one is often labelled a selfish ballhog and the other is labelled an unstoppable, dominant offensive force. They should both be one or the other.

MJ's play at times certainly was counter-productive to the team, but again I think this decreased as he gained more confidence in his teammates, his teammates gained more confidence in themselves and their games matured.

I'd call a fan a "hater" when it crosses the line into a vehement attack upon Kobe as a person, devoid of any sound reasoning or basketball references. I'd say the same for whoever did the same to MJ.

Probably the best, if not the best definition I've seen of a "hater". As you know, these days it is a term that is used much more loosely.

I have love for MJ, I really do. How could I not? But I stand firmly by the notion that this league of individualistic superstars (Kobe, Tracy, Vince, Allan, Francis, Baron, etc. etc.) would have been better served idolizing Magic and Bird as opposed to Michael Jordan. Did Jordan do alot for the NBA? No DOUBT! But let's not also forget who truly resurrected the league with their team first mindsets as well as scoring acumen.

Quite possibly, but I don't think MJ ruined the NBA in any way (I know that's not what you're suggesting). Also, is Magic necessarily the right player to idolise? I know in another thread it was suggested that MJ might have influenced more players to play on the perimeter or abandon the traditional style of play for their position (which I don't actually agree with, but I covered my thoughts on that in the other thread).

But what about Magic himself? He was a 6'9" point guard, certainly much taller than average. Could he be partly responsible for all these big guys putting the ball behind their back and trying to be playmakers? Shawn Kemp admitted that he once walked out of a practice in high school because his coach wanted him to play in the post, but the Reignman (approaching 6'10") "wanted to be like Magic Johnson", as he "didn't want to play in the paint". (Source: Becket Pro Basketball 96/97 Season Preview)

Magic's ballhandling wizardry and flashy passes aren't necessarily a great example for impressionable young point guards either, who might easily ignore the fact Magic had solid fundamentals as well as a knack for making the spectacular pass.

Also, let's not forget Magic didn't always put the team first:

Johnson and the Lakers rebounded in 1981–82, winning their division and defeating the 76ers in another six-game NBA Finals in which Johnson repeated as MVP. The season also had its share of ugliness. Early on, Westhead wanted to restructure the offense in a way that Johnson believed would have reduced his role. In a widely reported incident, Johnson exploded in the locker room after a game in Utah. “I can’t play here anymore. I want to leave. I want to be traded.” Reporters waited for the signal that Johnson was joking. It didn’t come.

Westhead was fired the next day and replaced with Assistant Coach Pat Riley. At Riley’s first home game, fans at the Forum booed Johnson during introductions. In Seattle he was jeered whenever he touched the ball. He paid the price in the All-Star balloting and was not selected as a starter for the only time in his career other than his injury season. It took Johnson’s stellar playoff performance to silence the hecklers.

(Source: Microsoft Complete Basketball CD-ROM 1994/1995 Edition

But that again is a chapter of Magic's career that is generally forgotten while MJ's faults seem to get much more attention. I guess most of these stars do have traces of selfishness and I'm sure that pride and desire to be the best that they can results in bigger egos and selfish demands.

Like I said, I certainly deny or disprove all the criticisms and allegations exposed in the Jordan Rules and other media, but I still feel there's an element of smear in there. It doesn't question or highlight MJ's motives, nor the motives or position of his teammates like Hodges and Levingston.

I personally think that the second comming of Jordan (95-98) showed a very different Jordan to the one described by Sam Smith in that book. That's irrelevant of course, but I thought I'd throw it in there

I meant to bring that up in my previous post, but I forgot. Even though it would have been nice to see MJ remain active through 93/94 and all of 94/95 and the Bulls perhaps build an even more memorable Dynasty, his attempt at a career in baseball might have been for the best.

These stories didn't seem so rampant in his second stint with the Bulls. There was an incident with Steve Kerr that Kerr has admitted he instigated, and MJ apologised for it almost immediately. I think his maturity as a person, as well as his experiences in baseball where he was truly just one of the team and was trying to live up to expectations beyond his reach changed his attitude for the better. You might say it was the humbling experience that he needed. His relationship with his teammates from 95-98 seemed to be much better.

Lol geez lets just make an MJ forum

Andrew, I understand that Magic Man was no saint himself. People actually still remember or make reference to him getting Westhead fired, especially when the whole Jason kidd/Byron Scott debacle occurred.

But my talks of selfishness have to do strictly with the game of basketball and how it's played. Sure there were players who idolized Magic and maybe attempted the same flashy passes but guess what? At least they were passing! That's a good thing anyway you look at it. Today's player simply refuses to move the ball, preferring to do everything off the dribble instead. This goes against the very principles of smart 5 man team basketball, a ball will always move faster than a human being.

MJ is indirectly responsible for this travesty by playing selfish basketball and being championed for it. He was so great, dominant and fundamentally sound (Dean Smith baby!) that he wasn't criticized for it as harshly as he should have. Watching the evolution of the game is so indicative of this, he's absolutely eclipsed the Great Bambino in my eyes as the most influential athlete in team sports history. But I stand by my claim that this is absolutely not a good thing for the game of basketball.

Magic and Bird in my eyes, epitomized what it meant to play the game the right way but when compared to the amazing athleticism and scoring prowess of Mike, players decided that Mike was the standard. So now we have a league chock full of mini-Jordans who want to hold the ball for how many seconds at a time, or dribbling incessantly, reading the defense until they prepare to make a drive toward the basket. Splitting double-teams, taking on three defenders, etc. just isn't condusive to good team play. Yeah Mike was able to pull it off, but do you really think in your heart of hearts that his teammates enjoyed playing with a dude like that? Sam Smith absolutely got the truth out of these guys about how they felt to play with him at times.

So we can talk about Jordan version 1.0 and Jordan version 2.0 all day, but it still doesn't change the fact that he changed the way the game of basketball was played forever. Some may say that's great, I say: No way Jose, no way.

Now to clarify, you're a very knowledgable fan so I wouldn't try to sell you the idea that he invented the wheel in that regard. One on One play was present when he couldn't make the Varsity at Laney high. Cats in the ABA like Julius and others were great at One on One play, the Big O, Elgin and Earl the Pearl were adept at this as well. But it was Mike who took is past One on One, with him it was One on 5. further establishing his dominace over the basketball world and quite a spectacle too.

I whole-heartedly acknowledge that his game changed and matured by or around his second comeback but by then the damage was done. Hehehe, I now my views are very radical and maybe seemingly intent at garnering shock value but I'm dead serious. To me, Mike destroyed the NBA's beauty as I used to know it.....

That's certainly true, Bird and Magic were unselfish players (though they both had games where they took over) in ways that Jordan was not, especially earlier on his career. But consider Jordan's assist numbers. He's at about 5.2 or 5.3 for his career, with a few years above six assists per game. That's not too bad for a scorer, especially one who scored as he did.

Bird and Magic were also playmakers, whereas MJ was primarily a scorer. His playmaking was mostly drawing the attention of the defense, and that was certainly effective especially when he realised his teammates could finish if he gave him the ball.

But I still think there's a common misconception that MJ just took the ball up and fired it every play. Again, somewhat true earlier in his career but not so much by the time the Jordan Rules describes. MJ certainly passed to his teammates and worked within the offense - admittedly, not as much as Phil might have liked - but passing to MJ didn't mean the play was about to be over.

Getting back to the Kobe comparison for a moment, I think this is one of the main differences that seperates them right now. Kobe still tends to try to do something every time he gets the ball, whereas MJ used to pass off to a teammate if he didn't like his position. I think MJ was a more patient player on offense. Take the 2004 Finals for example. Kobe was wheeling and firing over Prince pretty much as soon as he got the ball. I think MJ would have kept Prince guessing while utilising all the moves at his disposal, something I think Kobe should have done and will most probably do in the future.

But my point is, MJ certainly passed the ball. His assist numbers are just too high for him to be hogging the ball all game, rarely passing to a teammate.

Going one on five and so forth is something I can't really defend, except to say that he didn't all the time and playing the way he did, he managed to achieve a lot.

The reason I don't agree that it ruined the NBA or the concept of team play is...well, partly because I'm an MJ fan, but also because the league isn't full of MJ wannabes. You might see kids trying to emulate his moves but when it comes to organised basketball, it isn't condoned or taught.

How many MJ-like players are in the league at the moment? Kobe, Vince and T-Mac. I wouldn't say the style of play has infected the league because you still have your unselfish players, your competent playmakers (though they're coming in all shapes and sizes now) and team play is obviously very important.

I can't deny that MJ's example might have a bad influence on some players, but I feel that crediting him with destroying the league (or at least a certain aspect of it) is a little drastic. After all, Wilt was a scorer who seemed to make a one man show look like a decent idea, and Dominique Wilkins passed the ball even less than MJ (though he remains underrated and it's a little unfair to pin blame on him). I don't think MJ alone popularised his style of play.

But don't get me wrong. I'm just calling it as I see it, and being a fan of MJ is clearly going to taint my view, no matter how objective I try to be. I certainly respect your point of view, and must admit that I agree on some counts. I just think it's a little drastic to agree with every assertion.

Believe me, it was disheartening to read the Jordan Rules, because I know that at least some of it has to be true and the picture that it paints isn't always positive. But there were some events that I couldn't really blame MJ for.

As you may recall, the book gave some insight into the great moment in 1989, "The Shot". Doug Collins originally wanted Jordan to be a decoy while Brad Sellers took the winning shot. Not a bad idea per se, in such a situation MJ makes a pretty decoy. But MJ wanted to take the final shot, demanded it, made Collins change his plan. Always wanting to take that game winning shot is selfish, but Larry Bird had that quality too. In a weird way, I think that kind of selfishness is actually noble.

But selfish or not, it was a pretty stupid idea. Letting MJ take that shot looks pretty good because as the history books show, it went in and the Bulls advanced, and who knows what Sellers might have done. But I have a fairly good idea of what Sellers probably would have done, and I think entrusting a decisive game to Brad Sellers is a bad idea, just a plain bad idea. I'm not sure I'd trust him to win the game with a layup in the open floor.

Obviously not all the examples are like that, but that's one where I thought MJ had a reasonable excuse.

"As you may recall, the book gave some insight into the great moment in 1989, "The Shot". Doug Collins originally wanted Jordan to be a decoy while Brad Sellers took the winning shot. Not a bad idea per se, in such a situation MJ makes a pretty decoy. But MJ wanted to take the final shot, demanded it, made Collins change his plan. Always wanting to take that game winning shot is selfish, but Larry Bird had that quality too. In a weird way, I think that kind of selfishness is actually noble."


imo, some players just have to take the final shot. now i dont mean the best player or the best shooter on a team, what i mean is true greats. i am talking about people like jordan and bird. imo bird was the best at the last second shot with mj being second. now i also want people to remember that he did pass off the last shot to kerr and that won them the game. takes alot of faith for a player of jordans talent to give kerr the last shot. i mean back when miller was at his prime, was there anyone else who even deserved to look at the ball in the last seconds?

That's certainly true, Bird and Magic were unselfish players (though they both had games where they took over) in ways that Jordan was not, especially earlier on his career. But consider Jordan's assist numbers. He's at about 5.2 or 5.3 for his career, with a few years above six assists per game. That's not too bad for a scorer, especially one who scored as he did.

Bird and Magic were also playmakers, whereas MJ was primarily a scorer. His playmaking was mostly drawing the attention of the defense, and that was certainly effective especially when he realised his teammates could finish if he gave him the ball.

But I still think there's a common misconception that MJ just took the ball up and fired it every play. Again, somewhat true earlier in his career but not so much by the time the Jordan Rules describes. MJ certainly passed to his teammates and worked within the offense - admittedly, not as much as Phil might have liked - but passing to MJ didn't mean the play was about to be over.

Getting back to the Kobe comparison for a moment, I think this is one of the main differences that seperates them right now. Kobe still tends to try to do something every time he gets the ball, whereas MJ used to pass off to a teammate if he didn't like his position. I think MJ was a more patient player on offense. Take the 2004 Finals for example. Kobe was wheeling and firing over Prince pretty much as soon as he got the ball. I think MJ would have kept Prince guessing while utilising all the moves at his disposal, something I think Kobe should have done and will most probably do in the future.

But my point is, MJ certainly passed the ball. His assist numbers are just too high for him to be hogging the ball all game, rarely passing to a teammate.

Going one on five and so forth is something I can't really defend, except to say that he didn't all the time and playing the way he did, he managed to achieve a lot.

The reason I don't agree that it ruined the NBA or the concept of team play is...well, partly because I'm an MJ fan, but also because the league isn't full of MJ wannabes. You might see kids trying to emulate his moves but when it comes to organised basketball, it isn't condoned or taught.

How many MJ-like players are in the league at the moment? Kobe, Vince and T-Mac. I wouldn't say the style of play has infected the league because you still have your unselfish players, your competent playmakers (though they're coming in all shapes and sizes now) and team play is obviously very important.

I can't deny that MJ's example might have a bad influence on some players, but I feel that crediting him with destroying the league (or at least a certain aspect of it) is a little drastic. After all, Wilt was a scorer who seemed to make a one man show look like a decent idea, and Dominique Wilkins passed the ball even less than MJ (though he remains underrated and it's a little unfair to pin blame on him). I don't think MJ alone popularised his style of play.

But don't get me wrong. I'm just calling it as I see it, and being a fan of MJ is clearly going to taint my view, no matter how objective I try to be. I certainly respect your point of view, and must admit that I agree on some counts. I just think it's a little drastic to agree with every assertion.

Believe me, it was disheartening to read the Jordan Rules, because I know that at least some of it has to be true and the picture that it paints isn't always positive. But there were some events that I couldn't really blame MJ for.

As you may recall, the book gave some insight into the great moment in 1989, "The Shot". Doug Collins originally wanted Jordan to be a decoy while Brad Sellers took the winning shot. Not a bad idea per se, in such a situation MJ makes a pretty decoy. But MJ wanted to take the final shot, demanded it, made Collins change his plan. Always wanting to take that game winning shot is selfish, but Larry Bird had that quality too. In a weird way, I think that kind of selfishness is actually noble.

But selfish or not, it was a pretty stupid idea. Letting MJ take that shot looks pretty good because as the history books show, it went in and the Bulls advanced, and who knows what Sellers might have done. But I have a fairly good idea of what Sellers probably would have done, and I think entrusting a decisive game to Brad Sellers is a bad idea, just a plain bad idea. I'm not sure I'd trust him to win the game with a layup in the open floor.

Obviously not all the examples are like that, but that's one where I thought MJ had a reasonable excuse.

Yes Andrew moments like "the Shot" in 1989 are exactly why I love Michael Jordan. That's the kind of selfishness I applaud and you're so right about Kobe. He's taken selfishness and impatience to a whooooooolllee new level, even though as a fan it hurts to admit as such.

Regardless, don't think for a second that I was never on the playground sticking my tongue out, while attempting an acrobatic reverse lay-up (Don't let my race and Brooklyn roots fool you, I'm so terrible my nickname should be Air Gminski! ) I too am an MJ fan, but I suppose I am a bit of an idealist when it comes to the game and can be awfully tough on players, even MJ...... Peace.

imo, some players just have to take the final shot. now i dont mean the best player or the best shooter on a team, what i mean is true greats. i am talking about people like jordan and bird. imo bird was the best at the last second shot with mj being second. now i also want people to remember that he did pass off the last shot to kerr and that won them the game. takes alot of faith for a player of jordans talent to give kerr the last shot. i mean back when miller was at his prime, was there anyone else who even deserved to look at the ball in the last seconds?

I think MJ, Bird, Magic and Zeke were some of the greatest clutch players of all time. I think where we rank them is often attributed to what player we love the most. But as a HUGE Larry Legend fan, I certainly agree that they don't make 'em like Larry Joe Bird from French Lick anymore!

Yes Andrew moments like "the Shot" in 1989 are exactly why I love Michael Jordan. That's the kind of selfishness I applaud and you're so right about Kobe. He's taken selfishness and impatience to a whooooooolllee new level, even though as a fan it hurts to admit as such.

I think we'll see less of it in time, though. With Shaq gone, the defense will be able to pressure Kobe much more than they have done in the past (that's not to say he hasn't faced defensive challenges, of course ). I think he'll become much more patient, keeping his opponents guessing and utilising all the tools at his disposal.

i've always wanted to know about the steve kerr/mj incident.. anyone care to elaborate it in depth? thanks

Basically, Jordan and Kerr were guarding each other during a practice and it was getting a little too physical with some elbows and so forth. Jordan made some contact that Kerr didn't appreciate, so he started swinging. Kerr left the practice with a black eye, but when he got home there was an apology from Jordan on his answering machine. They patched up their differences and there was no further incident.