PDA

View Full Version : Why do stats hate Kobe?



Chronz
08-21-2012, 09:49 PM
Seems like hes the one player among the 10-15 best players of all time who needs the most excuses aka context to ignore all statistical insight.

So I ask you, what do stats hate about Kobe's game? Why do they never agree with him having a great PEAK in any given year, that doesn't hold true for guys like Wilt, Shaq, MJ, Kareem, Bird, Magic, Moses, LeBron, Wade

StarvingKnick22
08-21-2012, 09:50 PM
explain to me who are your top ten players of all time.

albertc86
08-21-2012, 09:53 PM
I hate stats, period.

I think too many factors and variables come into play. I hate them just as much as the people who lean on them entirely to make a comparison or prove a point :mad:

Chronz
08-21-2012, 09:54 PM
explain to me who are your top ten players of all time.

Shaq, Wilt, Duncan, Hakeem, MJ, Magic, Moses, Kobe, Bird and Kareem in some order.

Chronz
08-21-2012, 09:54 PM
I hate stats, period.

I think too many factors and variables come into play. I hate them just as much as the people who lean on them entirely to make a comparison or prove a point :mad:

So you just hate them but you cant explain them somewhat?

Raidaz4Life
08-21-2012, 09:56 PM
Because a lot of his value comes from intangibles :shrug:

I really don't think his stats are as terrible as people make them out to be.

xxplayerxx23
08-21-2012, 09:56 PM
Whats this term Stats you speak of mean?

Raps18-19 Champ
08-21-2012, 09:57 PM
I hate stats, period.

I think too many factors and variables come into play. I hate them just as much as the people who lean on them entirely to make a comparison or prove a point :mad:

Do you hate it because you can't understand them?

Also, all the stats freak on this site don't rely on them the way you make it sound to be. They also use achievements and other stuff as well.

Mr_Jones
08-21-2012, 09:57 PM
I hate vaginas.

And I hate some statistics.

knightstemplar
08-21-2012, 09:58 PM
Kobe's peak regular season ('06): 28.0 PER
Magic's peak regular season ('87): 27.0 PER
Bird's peak regular season ('88): 27.8 PER
Russell's peak regular season ('58): 22.8 PER

Kobe's peak playoffs ('09): 26.8 PER
Magic's peak playoffs ('87): 26.2 PER
Bird's peak playoffs ('84): 26.3 PER
Russell's peak playoffs ('62): 22.8 PER

You are talking about PER, right?

Eg714
08-21-2012, 10:00 PM
Stats hate Kobe to all stat guys. But one of the ways we can actually tell how good he really is by his individual game.

On Kobe's best nights he was better than any one else ever arguably.

Chronz
08-21-2012, 10:01 PM
Because a lot of his value comes from intangibles :shrug:
Moreso than Jordan, Magic, Bird, Shaq, KAJ etc...


I really don't think his stats are as terrible as people make them out to be.
I think that depends on what you have heard but Im comparing the best season Kobe ever had with the best other GOAT contenders ever had. What is it about Kobe that makes up that gap, has he?


Kobe's peak regular season ('06): 28.0 PER
Magic's peak regular season ('87): 27.0 PER
Bird's peak regular season ('88): 27.8 PER
Russell's peak regular season ('58): 22.8 PER

Kobe's peak playoffs ('09): 26.8 PER
Magic's peak playoffs ('87): 26.2 PER
Bird's peak playoffs ('84): 26.3 PER
Russell's peak playoffs ('62): 22.8 PER

You are talking about PER, right?

Sure, any and all metrics that account for league averages.

Can you elaborate on the case your making?



Stats hate Kobe to all stat guys. But one of the ways we can actually tell how good he really is by his individual game.

On Kobe's best nights he was better than any one else ever arguably.
Can you explain how you rate and rank "individual game"? Isnt basketball a team sport so how they make use of their talent remains relevant doesn't it?

And are you suggesting we should rate players peaks by how they played in their absolute best game? If not what do you mean by at his best, how long does that moment last?

justinnum1
08-21-2012, 10:02 PM
he's just not efficient

knightstemplar
08-21-2012, 10:04 PM
he's just not efficient

Kobe's career TS%: .554
Duncan's career TS%: .551
Hakeem's career TS%: .553

So I guess they are not either.

TS% is a great indicator of efficiency because it factors in Field Goals, 3 pointers, and Free-throws.

MintBerryCrunch
08-21-2012, 10:05 PM
Bait

LaLa_Land
08-21-2012, 10:06 PM
2002 - 30 ppg, 7 rpg, 6 apg, 2.2 stl, 1 block

2004 - 27.6 ppg, 6 rpg, 6 apg, 1.3 stl, 1 block

2005 - 35.4 ppg, 5.5 reb, 4.5 apg, 2 stl

2006 - 31.6 ppg, 5.7 rpg, 5.4 apg, 1.4 stl

2007 - 28.3 ppg, 6.3 rpg, 5.4 apg, 1.8 stl

It's safe to say that Kobe's stats are otherworldly.

The only knock people have on him, and it is a fair one, is his field goal percentage. Though he is top 10 all-time baller, he is quite the jacker.

Raps18-19 Champ
08-21-2012, 10:07 PM
Kobe's career TS%: .554
Duncan's career TS%: .551
Hakeem's career TS%: .553

So I guess they are not either.

TS% is a great indicator of efficiency because it factors in Field Goals, 3 pointers, and Free-throws.

Great?

Why not try something like PER if you want efficiency?

Chronz
08-21-2012, 10:07 PM
Bait

Ill take your bait. What are you talking about?

ThunderousDemon
08-21-2012, 10:07 PM
Hawkeye.................come out to plaaaaaayyy!!!!

Chronz
08-21-2012, 10:12 PM
2002 - 30 ppg, 7 rpg, 6 apg, 2.2 stl, 1 block

2004 - 27.6 ppg, 6 rpg, 6 apg, 1.3 stl, 1 block

2005 - 35.4 ppg, 5.5 reb, 4.5 apg, 2 stl

2006 - 31.6 ppg, 5.7 rpg, 5.4 apg, 1.4 stl

2007 - 28.3 ppg, 6.3 rpg, 5.4 apg, 1.8 stl

It's safe to say that Kobe's stats are otherworldly.

The only knock people have on him, and it is a fair one, is his field goal percentage. Though he is top 10 all-time baller, he is quite the jacker.

Yea if you ignore efficiency and pace I suppose those stats look otherworldly, I guess the question I should be asking is why does efficiency mean so little when it comes to Kobes stats?

Because when you look at the best seasons of just about every contender they put up superior numbers while still winning chips. Kobe doesnt seem to have that same combination. Hes always either winning on pedestrian efficiency overall or losing while putting up higher usage.

If you ask me I think Kobe was incapable of being a lower usage, highly efficient player. But he could maintain a stable rate of efficiency under any circumstance.

knightstemplar
08-21-2012, 10:12 PM
Sure, any and all metrics that account for league averages.

Can you elaborate on the case your making?


Kobe from 2001-2010 (Prime)
Season: 28.5 ppg, 5.8 rpg, 5.2 apg, 1.7 spg, 45.6 FG%, 34.2 3PT%, 55.9 TS%
Playoffs: 28.8 ppg, 5.7 rpg, 5.4 apg, 1.5 spg, 45.2 FG%, 34.1 3PT%, 54.8 TS%

How is that 10 year stretch not in the level as the other 9 GOATs in the Top 10?

Raidaz4Life
08-21-2012, 10:15 PM
he's just not efficient

I actually kind of agree with this.

The term "streaky shooter" is used a lot but kobe is one of the all time examples of a "streaky player".


Kobe is one of the most "skilled" players to ever play the game. From his text book jumper, to his superior footwork, his mastery of the post game etc. He doesn't physically dominate the way a lot of other players have in league history. That being said he is also a hot head and will make stupid play after stupid play, refusing to play within the flow of the game in order to make a point (primarily that he should be acknowledged as the best). I think that is what hurts him statistically. He throws the idea of efficiency and team play out the window a lot in order to wow people with a flashy fade away hand in the face jumper.

The reason he is acknowledged as one of the all time greats is because intangibles like work ethic, and competitiveness combined with the overall skill of his game have allowed him to reach that level. Ultimately though he could be considered a statistical underachiever because his skill set should theoretically allow for him to put up more efficient offensive numbers than he does. A lot of untapped potential there due to stubbornness on his part.

knightstemplar
08-21-2012, 10:18 PM
Yea if you ignore efficiency and pace I suppose those stats look otherworldly, I guess the question I should be asking is why does efficiency mean so little when it comes to Kobes stats?

Because when you look at the best seasons of just about every contender they put up superior numbers while still winning chips. Kobe doesnt seem to have that same combination. Hes always either winning on pedestrian efficiency overall or losing while putting up higher usage.

If you ask me I think Kobe was incapable of being a lower usage, highly efficient player. But he could maintain a stable rate of efficiency under any circumstance.

Kobe's career TS% in the Playoffs: .541
Bird's career TS% in the Playoffs: .551
Duncan's career TS% in the Playoffs: .549

Chronz
08-21-2012, 10:20 PM
Kobe from 2001-2010 (Prime)
Season: 28.5 ppg, 5.8 rpg, 5.2 apg, 1.7 spg, 45.6 FG%, 34.2 3PT%, 55.9 TS%
Playoffs: 28.8 ppg, 5.7 rpg, 5.4 apg, 1.5 spg, 45.2 FG%, 34.1 3PT%, 54.8 TS%

How is that 10 year stretch not in the level as the other 9 GOATs in the Top 10?

I should reiterate Im talking about a PEAK performance, I have no doubt the greater the minimum prime years you want to look at, the better Kobe does. But I could try debunking that claim if you would rather have that conversation.

Teeboy1487
08-21-2012, 10:20 PM
Kobe's stats are fine to me. Also, you have to consider the fact he did not play as much as he should in the first two seasons. He did not come into the NBA with a starting position and minutes waiting on him. He had to earn it. Also, don't forget the ultimate stat, 5 rings. This is a "team award", but we all know that superstars are judged by rings.

Chronz
08-21-2012, 10:21 PM
Perhaps it would help if I gave my PEAK seasons as examples.

championships
08-21-2012, 10:22 PM
Troll threads :laugh2:

Keep on Hatin and I'll just sit back and watch L.A. win another championship.

Don't some of you wish you knew what that felt like?

Raidaz4Life
08-21-2012, 10:23 PM
Perhaps it would help if I gave my PEAK seasons as examples.

Probably because it would seem most of us have no idea what you are referring to specifically.

Chronz
08-21-2012, 10:24 PM
Troll threads :laugh2:

Keep on Hatin and I'll just sit back and watch L.A. win another championship.

Don't some of you wish you knew what that felt like?

Read the thread

knightstemplar
08-21-2012, 10:26 PM
I should reiterate Im talking about a PEAK performance, I have no doubt the greater the minimum prime years you want to look at, the better Kobe does. But I could try debunking that claim if you would rather have that conversation.

Kobe PEAK regular season: (2006-2008): 31.7 ppg, 5.8 rpg, 5.1 apg, 1.7 spg, 45.7 FG%, 35.1 3PT%. 57.1 TS%
Kobe PEAK Playoffs (2006-2010): 29.8 ppg, 5.6 rpg, 5.0 apg, 1.6 spg, 45.9 FG%, 34.8 3PT%, 56.5 TS%

Mr_Jones
08-21-2012, 10:27 PM
Troll threads :laugh2:

Keep on Hatin and I'll just sit back and watch L.A. win another championship.

Don't some of you wish you knew what that felt like?

Stfu.


And you wonder why people hate laker fans. Ive always been a fan of LA, but damn. Just don't freaking talk.

Hawkeye15
08-21-2012, 10:29 PM
Because Kobe has never had the peak of those players, but his prime, or length of dominance, is so much longer then most, he enters the top 10 convo.

Hawkeye15
08-21-2012, 10:30 PM
I am struggling to think of another top 10 player who doesn't have a clearly best player in the league statistical season at any point during his career.

knightstemplar
08-21-2012, 10:31 PM
Because Kobe has never had the peak of those players, but his prime, or length of dominance, is so much longer then most, he enters the top 10 convo.

What are you going off of to determine that?

b@llhog24
08-21-2012, 10:31 PM
Wouldn't his value come up in what Laker fans call the "Kobe effect" players routinely see career years while playing next to Bryant. I honestly don't know why that is exactly but its been a thread of his in his career.

StarvingKnick22
08-21-2012, 10:33 PM
Shaq, Wilt, Duncan, Hakeem, MJ, Magic, Moses, Kobe, Bird and Kareem in some order.

in order:
Jordan, Kareem, Magic, Lebron, Hakeem, Shaq, wilt, Kobe, Duncan, Stockton. it late at night i may have forgotten someone.

kmoneyjuice
08-21-2012, 10:34 PM
Rapist

b@llhog24
08-21-2012, 10:34 PM
Stockton is good, but not top 10 all time good.

blastmasta26
08-21-2012, 10:36 PM
in order:
Jordan, Kareem, Magic, Lebron, Hakeem, Shaq, wilt, Kobe, Duncan, Stockton. it late at night i may have forgotten someone.
Stockton's not top 10. And LeBron hasn't cemented himself in it yet, let alone entered top 5. I think LeBron could certainly end up that high, but it's premature to say so.

aman_13
08-21-2012, 10:38 PM
The only knock I ever had on Kobe was his efficiency but that's because he never cared about efficiency or at least I dont think he ever did. In the end of the day winning is the ultimate goal and Kobe did everything possible to make sure he accomplished that goal.

Aust
08-21-2012, 10:43 PM
You really go out of your way to hate Kobe huh?

Chronz
08-21-2012, 10:46 PM
Probably because it would seem most of us have no idea what you are referring to specifically.

Yea, its confusing now that I think about what Im trying to say. Im not just talking about 1 peak year, but basically career baselines.

Like how MJ was more productive than Kobe at every point in his career, no matter the age, role, wins and losses, MJ was more productive.

Like the year the Bulls made a mockery of the playoff competition, MJ was at the absolute apex of his career, both in terms of production and winning. When MJ wasnt winning he still put up stats. Whereas Kobe only put up big numbers when he wasn't winning and putting up stats when he was. In both cases hes inferior to to most peak seasons from star players.

Shaq is another, he had the most dominant statistical seasons on route to a title (pick any of his 3-peat years), several of the seasons he didnt he was still producing at a higher rate than Kobe at ANY point.


Kobe on the other hand has only had 1 truly historical season but it came on a .500 team, and statistically, it wasnt even on par with what CP3, Wade, Tmac, Bron have done without winning titles. So when you look at his championship seasons, his numbers drop pretty significantly.

What do you make of this? Why is Kobe so unique when it comes to stats and winning? Why is there never a dominant combination of the 2?



But if it clears anything up, these are the statistically superior championship seasons Im talking about.

MJ in 91
KAJ in 71
Shaq 3-peat
LeBron last year
Wilt 67
Bird in 86
Magic in 87
Moses in 83
Wade in 06
Duncan in 03


This isnt the same argument as absolute best seasons, a first glance look at the numbers.

When you look at seasons when they dont win titles, the list grows longer.

What do we make of Kobes statistical worth?

Shkelqim
08-21-2012, 10:48 PM
Kobe wants to win not be efficient he doesn't care about those stats. Kobe is not top 10 tho thats just too much neither is LeBron.

Chronz
08-21-2012, 10:51 PM
Wouldn't his value come up in what Laker fans call the "Kobe effect" players routinely see career years while playing next to Bryant. I honestly don't know why that is exactly but its been a thread of his in his career.

Good point, so how would you differentiate the players from that? These are intangible qualities that show how valuable the player was to his team right? Could you qualify that as how much a player meant to his team by how they play without him?

Like back when Shaq and Kobe were together, Shaq didn't just have the better stats, it was clear how reliant the Lakers were on his presence. The Lakers could win at high rate when Kobe was gone so long as Shaq was around, when both were gone they were trash, but when it was just Kobe, they struggled to stay at .500.

Would you say Kobe has more intangible worth than Magic, Shaq, Bird, MJ, Kareem, etc...

albertc86
08-21-2012, 11:15 PM
So you just hate them but you cant explain them somewhat?

I just said stats don't tell the whole story. For example, Kobe's assist numbers... They may be on the average/lower end but that's not due to him not passing the ball but his teammates inability to make a shot or tendency to defer to him at the last second.

For comparative purposes, I think stats are weak.

b@llhog24
08-21-2012, 11:16 PM
Good point, so how would you differentiate the players from that? These are intangible qualities that show how valuable the player was to his team right? Could you qualify that as how much a player meant to his team by how they play without him?

In essence I don't think you can accurately separate players statistical worth from their intangibles because at some level they're correlated. The biggest problem is defining what actually causes the team to play better without "Player A." For instance the main reason why the Nuggets team did so well (at least statistically) when they lost Melo is because they replaced his touches with players that were super efficient and had low usage rates, in Gallo and Ty which allows them to co-exist together.


Like back when Shaq and Kobe were together, Shaq didn't just have the better stats, it was clear how reliant the Lakers were on his presence. The Lakers could win at high rate when Kobe was gone so long as Shaq was around, when both were gone they were trash, but when it was just Kobe, they struggled to stay at .500.


Don't bigs generally have more intangible impact that perimeter players right? I don't have access (or at least know where to find them) to those stats but I'm guessing the Lakers defense turned into straight **** whenever Shaq went down.


Would you say Kobe has more intangible worth than Magic, Shaq, Bird, MJ, Kareem, etc...

Not in my opinion, maybe Magic and Bird because they weren't quite the defenders that Kobe was, but I'd lean closer to their side on that issue.

LoveMeOrHateMe
08-21-2012, 11:30 PM
Stats hate Kobe to all stat guys. But one of the ways we can actually tell how good he really is by his individual game.

On Kobe's best nights he was better than any one else ever arguably.

This!!! And u can only say this for Kobe and Jordan though others also have a small case

C-Style
08-21-2012, 11:43 PM
Great numbers as a starter 28/6/5 46%

Mr_Jones
08-21-2012, 11:44 PM
What are you going off of to determine that?

His huge *** brain.

tredigs
08-21-2012, 11:45 PM
This!!! And u can only say this for Kobe and Jordan though others also have a small case

A small case? I'd argue Kobe has a small case against the best individual performances of all time. Though a pre-req to my list is that it happens in the playoffs - preferably a later round playoff matchup.

Magic as a rookie had a better game than Kobe has ever had. Maybe than anyone's ever had. Hell James Worthy has Kobe trumped on 'best individual performance' given the circumstances of his game 7 Finals triple double (36/16/10 on 15/22 for Finals MVP).

LoveMeOrHateMe
08-21-2012, 11:46 PM
Kobe wants to win not be efficient he doesn't care about those stats. Kobe is not top 10 tho thats just too much neither is LeBron.

Why do Philly fans hate Kobe so much? Kobe is absolutely top 10 possibly top 5

LoveMeOrHateMe
08-21-2012, 11:48 PM
Good point, so how would you differentiate the players from that? These are intangible qualities that show how valuable the player was to his team right? Could you qualify that as how much a player meant to his team by how they play without him?

Like back when Shaq and Kobe were together, Shaq didn't just have the better stats, it was clear how reliant the Lakers were on his presence. The Lakers could win at high rate when Kobe was gone so long as Shaq was around, when both were gone they were trash, but when it was just Kobe, they struggled to stay at .500.

Would you say Kobe has more intangible worth than Magic, Shaq, Bird, MJ, Kareem, etc...


Maybe shaq never had a sub .500 team as a leader because his teams were always talented, Kobe's from 04-07 teams were absolute trash

b@llhog24
08-22-2012, 12:00 AM
Good point, so how would you differentiate the players from that? These are intangible qualities that show how valuable the player was to his team right? Could you qualify that as how much a player meant to his team by how they play without him?

Like back when Shaq and Kobe were together, Shaq didn't just have the better stats, it was clear how reliant the Lakers were on his presence. The Lakers could win at high rate when Kobe was gone so long as Shaq was around, when both were gone they were trash, but when it was just Kobe, they struggled to stay at .500.

Would you say Kobe has more intangible worth than Magic, Shaq, Bird, MJ, Kareem, etc...


Maybe shaq never had a sub .500 team as a leader because his teams were always talented, Kobe's from 04-07 teams were absolute trash

He means when they were teammates.

DODGERS&LAKERS
08-22-2012, 12:17 AM
Yea, its confusing now that I think about what Im trying to say. Im not just talking about 1 peak year, but basically career baselines.

Like how MJ was more productive than Kobe at every point in his career, no matter the age, role, wins and losses, MJ was more productive.

Like the year the Bulls made a mockery of the playoff competition, MJ was at the absolute apex of his career, both in terms of production and winning. When MJ wasnt winning he still put up stats. Whereas Kobe only put up big numbers when he wasn't winning and putting up stats when he was. In both cases hes inferior to to most peak seasons from star players.

Shaq is another, he had the most dominant statistical seasons on route to a title (pick any of his 3-peat years), several of the seasons he didnt he was still producing at a higher rate than Kobe at ANY point.


Kobe on the other hand has only had 1 truly historical season but it came on a .500 team, and statistically, it wasnt even on par with what CP3, Wade, Tmac, Bron have done without winning titles. So when you look at his championship seasons, his numbers drop pretty significantly.

What do you make of this? Why is Kobe so unique when it comes to stats and winning? Why is there never a dominant combination of the 2?



But if it clears anything up, these are the statistically superior championship seasons Im talking about.

MJ in 91
KAJ in 71
Shaq 3-peat
LeBron last year
Wilt 67
Bird in 86
Magic in 87
Moses in 83
Wade in 06
Duncan in 03


This isnt the same argument as absolute best seasons, a first glance look at the numbers.

When you look at seasons when they dont win titles, the list grows longer.

What do we make of Kobes statistical worth?

I don't think these things directly coincide with one another. Kobe spent his first 8 years in the league as Shaqs set up man. We all know for whatever reason that hurt Kobe's efficiency. So Kobe had 4 to 5 years left of what can be considered prime years to win a ring while playing as he is capable of. And we all know that he was not going to win a ring with the squad they had the first three years. Maybe if he had been on a team that was built around him from his first years in the league, they may have been able to contend for a ring by the time he was 23 while having more years in his physical prime to accrue stats.

You may be right about him not being able to be a low usage high efficiency player. I don't like how he plays off the ball when he is on team USA. You would think his efficiency would rise with all the easy looks but it's the opposite. I guess he is correct when he says he is a one on one player at heart. Because it seems he is a better individual player when he has less talent around him. Shaq hurt his efficiency, and so did playing with Gasol to an extent.

lakers4sho
08-22-2012, 12:24 AM
1) Kobe is/was not a physical or athletic freak.

Let's face it, relative to those guys (OP's initial list, plus a few others), Kobe is actually a below average athlete. Certainly not much of a "freak" like an MJ or LeBron. Phil always said that what Michael clearly had over Kobe was a better body (for basketball) and athleticism. I'm sure most people here have seen this pic:

http://grind365.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/Michael-Jordan-and-Kobe-Bryant.jpg

Just look at Kobe's hands. They are miniature compared to Mike's.

Basketball is essentially an athlete's game. Inherent athleticism puts you in an advantage already against the rest of the field. Combine that with at least an above average basketball mind, which clearly guys like MJ and Lebron surpass, and thus the game comes even easier for them than it does for Kobe. Even Wade is a better athlete than Kobe.

And no one can deny that height also a certain edge. So guys like Kareem and Duncan are able to dominate especially with their elite basketball IQ. No further explanation needed for the Shaqs and the Wilts.

2) Kobe's greatest strength is also his biggest weakness.

He is a very adamant person. When he has his eyes set on a certain goal, nothing can stop him from trying to achieve that goal. Obviously that trait has made him great, 5 championships and a whole bunch of accolades. However, one can say that such unyielding attitude is a double edged sword.

To prove a certain point, Kobe will veer outside the game plan in order to make his case. For example, due to his alpha dog mentality, he refuses to back down from anyone. If someone, for one or two possessions, has prevented Bryant from scoring, or at least from doing what he wants, Kobe will make sure to "get revenge" on that guy. Maybe sometimes as a detriment to the team, but he will certainly make it known that he will simply not admit defeat. Somehow, he will come out victorious one way or another, but many times with his efficiency being compromised.

--------

I think Kobe's "inefficiency" ultimately results from those 2 things I listed above. I am sure Kobe sometimes wishes he could just barrel down the lane against the defense with a physique like LeBron's, or work down the block with a supreme upper body like MJ's.

Hawkeye15
08-22-2012, 12:30 AM
What are you going off of to determine that?

uh, statistics.

TboneM3
08-22-2012, 12:31 AM
If his hands are that much smaller than Mike's, doesn't that make him that much more amazing?:confused:

You can make these different arguements about why or why not OR you can just watch him play to see how baller he is. I mean there are a ton of games in ever season of his where he just lights everybody up and goes into video game mode. His footwork alone is unbelievable. How can people say he's not top 10 with a straight face?

kblo247
08-22-2012, 12:32 AM
@ Chronz

Stats hate him cause they are his *****, while winning and longevity are his bros. At the end of the day this is what every stat guy can't stand, because all he does is look at you show you a career page and his accolades and then laugh and say oh he mad

He has better longevity than Duncan, KG, and the like. He's won more than Tim, Shaq, and the like. Even as opposed to MJ, he has been in the game longer, did more for his team, and as one man acts he won more as more of his teams without Shaq/Pau finished at let alone over 500 which MJ never did without Scottie in his career.

Can you name one player who has had a longer prime? Played more and multiple roles on ever title and finals team he has been on including MJ?

Hawkeye15
08-22-2012, 12:33 AM
@ Chronz

Stats hate him cause they are his *****, while winning and longevity are his bros.

He has better longevity than Duncan, KG, and the like. He's won more than Tim, Shaq, and the like. Even as opposed to MJ, he has been in the game longer, did more for his team, and as one man acts he won more as more of his teams without Shaq/Pau finished at let alone over 500 which MJ never did without Scottie in his career.

Can you name one player who has had a longer prime? Played more and multiple roles on ever title and finals team he has been on including MJ?

I think that has been mentioned, I mention it all the time. Kobe's length of prime is what makes him great. It's not any of his peak seasons, because they simply don't stack up against the other players in the top 10.

lakers4sho
08-22-2012, 12:42 AM
If his hands are that much smaller than Mike's, doesn't that make him that much more amazing?:confused:

You can make these different arguements about why or why not OR you can just watch him play to see how baller he is. I mean there are a ton of games in ever season of his where he just lights everybody up and goes into video game mode. His footwork alone is unbelievable. How can people say he's not top 10 with a straight face?

I didn't say he wasn't. But that wasn't the point of my post, or the thread.

shep33
08-22-2012, 12:48 AM
Unlike some of the top 10 perimeter players who have played with other great perimeter players, really Kobe hasn't played with anyone in his career... Heck in his prime he's never played with anybody close to the level of MJ, Bird, or Magic.

Having another top notch perimeter player gets players easy buckets (mostly off of fast break points), Kobe has never played with anyone like that, or someone who can get him easier buckets. In fact the two best perimeter players he's ever played with are probably Eddie Jones when he was a teenager (don't think this should count at all), and maybe Nick Van Exel or Gary Payton? But the Payton year was a disaster... trial, injury, and Gary never fully fit into the triangle offense (He was also at the end of his career).

Look at some of the great perimeter players in the top 10 though:

Magic- The style of play and the ridiculous talent on that team helped elevate his efficiency. In my opinion the 80s Lakers were arguably the most talented team ever. B-Scott, Worthy, etc. Magic had great help on the perimeter/wing.

Larry Bird- Also played on a heavily talented roster. Perimeter players like Dennis Johnson, Danny Ainge, Gerald Henderson, Nate Archibald, Quinn Bucknor.

Michael Jordan- Played with Scottie... how many times has Scottie created a defensive play that led to an MJ dunk? Scottie was a great passer as well, and could create for Michael at times.

I'm not trying to say that Kobe is better than any of these guys, but unlike the players above, Kobe's efficiency may be lower because he's never played with someone who can actually create a play for him. Shaq was great at times, he'd get him open jumpers, but he also severely clogged the lane (dude wouldn't move outside of the paint.... and I'll admit as a Laker fan, he got away with a ton of 3 second violations lol).

beliges
08-22-2012, 01:47 AM
Lol..because people use new age, made up.statistics like PER instead of observing how much the player dominates individually and in a team. But that would be nothing more than just my opinion.

KB-Pau-DH2012
08-22-2012, 01:48 AM
I got a stat for ya...


6 rings...coming soon, to a theatre near you!!!! JUNE 2013!!!!!








You're Welcome.

#kobesystem

Bruno
08-22-2012, 02:05 AM
Seems like hes the one player among the 10-15 best players of all time who needs the most excuses aka context to ignore all statistical insight.

Bird?


So I ask you, what do stats hate about Kobe's game? Why do they never agree with him having a great PEAK in any given year, that doesn't hold true for guys like Wilt, Shaq, MJ, Kareem, Bird, Magic, Moses, LeBron, Wade

it seems that most value overall career more than peak.

MadBomber
08-22-2012, 02:05 AM
i actually kind of agree with this.

The term "streaky shooter" is used a lot but kobe is one of the all time examples of a "streaky player".


Kobe is one of the most "skilled" players to ever play the game. From his text book jumper, to his superior footwork, his mastery of the post game etc. He doesn't physically dominate the way a lot of other players have in league history. That being said he is also a hot head and will make stupid play after stupid play, refusing to play within the flow of the game in order to make a point (primarily that he should be acknowledged as the best). I think that is what hurts him statistically. He throws the idea of efficiency and team play out the window a lot in order to wow people with a flashy fade away hand in the face jumper.

The reason he is acknowledged as one of the all time greats is because intangibles like work ethic, and competitiveness combined with the overall skill of his game have allowed him to reach that level. Ultimately though he could be considered a statistical underachiever because his skill set should theoretically allow for him to put up more efficient offensive numbers than he does. A lot of untapped potential there due to stubbornness on his part.

+1

MadBomber
08-22-2012, 02:08 AM
I got a stat for ya...


6 rings...coming soon, to a theatre near you!!!! JUNE 2013!!!!!








You're Welcome.

#kobesystem

More like the #Mitchsystem and the upper management's willingness to acquire talent.....you're welcome.

odiz
08-22-2012, 02:22 AM
I am struggling to think of another top 10 player who doesn't have a clearly best player in the league statistical season at any point during his career.

Do you put Tim Duncan in the Top 10? He has never had the type of year you are talking about. Ever since he came in the league Garnett has pretty much matched him year for year statistically. Not to mention what Shaq was doing early in Duncans career. And Kobe for that matter. That doesn't take away from either of their careers though IMO. I think the longevity they've both displayed is more impressive.

EDIT: Olajuwon aswell for that matter. He was overshadowed by MJ and then Robinson IMO. You definitely cant say he was 'clearly the best player in the league' any season he played.

Incublime24
08-22-2012, 02:30 AM
+1

+2

Incublime24
08-22-2012, 02:32 AM
+2


i actually kind of agree with this.

The term "streaky shooter" is used a lot but kobe is one of the all time examples of a "streaky player".


Kobe is one of the most "skilled" players to ever play the game. From his text book jumper, to his superior footwork, his mastery of the post game etc. He doesn't physically dominate the way a lot of other players have in league history. That being said he is also a hot head and will make stupid play after stupid play, refusing to play within the flow of the game in order to make a point (primarily that he should be acknowledged as the best). I think that is what hurts him statistically. He throws the idea of efficiency and team play out the window a lot in order to wow people with a flashy fade away hand in the face jumper.

The reason he is acknowledged as one of the all time greats is because intangibles like work ethic, and competitiveness combined with the overall skill of his game have allowed him to reach that level. Ultimately though he could be considered a statistical underachiever because his skill set should theoretically allow for him to put up more efficient offensive numbers than he does. A lot of untapped potential there due to stubbornness on his part.


+1

+2

DODGERS&LAKERS
08-22-2012, 02:33 AM
I'm not sure if Kobe even knows what PER or WS/48 is. It doesn't seem he cares too much about being the most efficient scorer. If he did, he would not have taken the 7th most 3 point attempts in NBA history. And when he goes on a mini streak of making 3 in a row, he ALWAYS does the heat check thing where he takes another three pointer from 6 to 7 feet behind the line. That does not tell me he is thinking about his FG%

I think when he was younger, he could have gotten to the rim a lot more. But it seems he was always trying to make a highlight play by faking the defender out and doing some sort of fadeaway since it looks prettier than a layup. Kobe is as much about flash and style as he is about anything in he game.

Bruno
08-22-2012, 02:47 AM
Like the year the Bulls made a mockery of the playoff competition, MJ was at the absolute apex of his career, both in terms of production and winning. When MJ wasnt winning he still put up stats. Whereas Kobe only put up big numbers when he wasn't winning and putting up stats when he was. In both cases hes inferior to to most peak seasons from star players.

Kobe put up big numbers in the 2009 playoffs on his way to a title and Finals MVP:
PER: 26.8
WS: 4.7
WS/48: .238
TS%: .564
30.2-5.3-5.5-1.7-.9-46%.
-2009 Championship, 2009 Finals MVP, 2nd in regular season MVP voting.
-Met the leagues top defense in the NBA Finals, 4-1 Lakers.


But if it clears anything up, these are the statistically superior championship seasons Im talking about.

MJ in 91
KAJ in 71
Shaq 3-peat
LeBron last year
Wilt 67
Bird in 86
Magic in 87
Moses in 83
Wade in 06
Duncan in 03


1967 Playoffs:
Wilt-PER: 25.3 , WS: 3.8, WS/48: .253, TS%: .546.
Kobe '09-PER: 26.8, WS: 4.7, WS/48: .238, TS%: .564.

This is regarded as Wilts greatest playoff run, and was a consensus top three Center peak season of all-time in your thread from last week. What about that statline puts Kobes from 2009 to shame? Kobe had higher PER, higher TS% and comparable WS numbers.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/chambwi01.html

1986 Playoffs:
Bird-PER: 23.9, WS: 4.2, WS/48: .263, TS%: .615
Kobe '09-PER: 26.8, WS: 4.7, WS/48: .238, TS%: .564.

Birds greatest playoff run. Comparable to Bryants run in 2009. Bird with superior WS/48 and TS%, Kobe with more WS and a notable higher PER. who was the better defender, Kobe in 2009 or Bird in 1986?
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/birdla01.html

1971 Playoffs:
KAJ-PER: 25.3, WS: 3.3, WS/48: .271, TS%: .548
Kobe '09-PER: 26.8, WS: 4.7, WS/48: .238, TS%: .564.

Also considered one of the peak center seasons of all-time. Not any more statistically dominant that Bryants 2009 run.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/a/abdulka01.html

1987 Playoffs:
Magic-PER: 26.2, WS: 3.7, WS/48: .265, TS%: .607
Kobe '09-PER: 26.8, WS: 4.7, WS/48: .238, TS%: .564.

Totally comparable to Kobes line in 2009. Who was the better defender, Kobe 2009 or Magic 1987?
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/johnsma02.html

1983 Playoffs:
Moses-PER: 25.7, WS: 2.8, WS/48: .260, TS%: .587
Kobe '09-PER: 26.8, WS: 4.7, WS/48: .238, TS%: .564.

Also comparable to Kobes 2009 line.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/m/malonmo01.html

2006 Playoffs:
Wade- PER: 26.9, WS: 4.8, WS/48: .240, TS%: .593
Kobe '09-PER: 26.8, WS: 4.7, WS/48: .238, TS%: .564.

very comparable.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/w/wadedw01.html



Kobes line from 2009 belongs in the same category as each season I bolded, so say the stats.

kblo247
08-22-2012, 02:51 AM
Stu Lantz on Pau two seasons ago
"Pau will protect his percentages and not force a bailout shot or work against the clock"

Stu on Kobe
"Kobe has never and will never care about his percentages which means he will always be the best tough shot and bail out maker the league has seen"

Stu summed that up vs the Pacers two years ago basically in one quote. Kobe could hav been a 50% shooter if he cared to not bailout the offense and guys or force up game winners/tying shots versus buzzers out of nowhere. He literally has always gotten looks vs the clock from his te and Phil acknowledged it before too and he turns the most awkward angles and lack of space into something that he has a chance to make or his team can rebound as he doesn't care about that.

We can say he's a stat guy but he isn't in the traditional sense. You will never see him rebound pad like Love or Moses. You will never see him steal an assist or board for a 3x2 like cavs bron or gamble over n over for steals like Paul to keep a record. You will see him shoot because he likes to score but you'll never see him pull a shot to protect his own percentage as much as you will see him take 3-7 every game of his career as guys protect theirs and force it to him. He is very much an accolade guy, guy who takes pride in his own words as he told Max and Marcelles "being the bad mf who can look at any guy from MJ to Tracy to AI to Bron to Wade and saying I'm still here going strong"

I mean let's be real here, if the guy wanted to protect his percentages he wouldn't have played with broken fingers, torn wrist ligaments, and even fir one stretch of his career shot left handed while his separated shooting shoulder was in a pad. Likewise if he was consumed by stats alone he would have gas the scoring title lad year by sitting out the end of the season all together or playing the last game but he didn't care about it over playoff position

kblo247
08-22-2012, 03:00 AM
Let me just put it like this.

MJ, Kobe, Bron, Wade, Paul, Deron, Kidd, Payton, Allen, Pippen, McGrady, Arenas, Iverson, Ginobili, JO, Tim, KG

On that list Kobe has played the most. He's the arthritic guy with the small hands and not great peak, but his longevity of being elite passes many of them by easy. I mean with all respect to Bron he's got a long way to go to get to 50k minutes and still be elite. Wade still has never truly distances himself from Kibe and actually is less durable despite being younger so he won't age as gracefully when the minutes get up there. You just can never take it from a guy when he's still going hard 50k minutes in and has been a 1/1b scorer on every title team, primary facilitator, main defender, elite rebounder for a g, is a perennial 25/5/5 guy despite never having a perimeter creator beside him. Kobe has always been LAs perimeter and even Mutch said it introducing Bash, that Kobe asked for perimeter help all last year

Bruno
08-22-2012, 03:02 AM
I think when he was younger, he could have gotten to the rim a lot more. But it seems he was always trying to make a highlight play by faking the defender out and doing some sort of fadeaway since it looks prettier than a layup. Kobe is as much about flash and style as he is about anything in he game.

plus, why would you constantly attack the rim when you have the most dominant center in league history on the box? there's just not enough room or space for that in the half-court set. kobe was destined to develop a sharp outside game due to being paired with a guy like Shaq for eight seasons. kobe already played eight seasons and had major knee surgery before Shaq ever left town.

Bruno
08-22-2012, 03:04 AM
Let me just put it like this.

MJ, Kobe, Bron, Wade, Paul, Deron, Kidd, Payton, Allen, Pippen, McGrady, Arenas, Iverson, Ginobili, JO, Tim, KG

On that list Kobe has played the most. He's the arthritic guy with the small hands and not great peak, but his longevity of being elite passes many of them by easy. I mean with all respect to Bron he's got a long way to go to get to 50k minutes and still be elite. Wade still has never truly distances himself from Kibe and actually is less durable despite being younger so he won't age as gracefully when the minutes get up there. You just can never take it from a guy when he's still going hard 50k minutes in and has been a 1/1b scorer on every title team, primary facilitator, main defender, elite rebounder for a g, is a perennial 25/5/5 guy despite never having a perimeter creator beside him. Kobe has always been LAs perimeter and even Mutch said it introducing Bash, that Kobe asked for perimeter help all last year

ive always said kobe is about longevity. but check out my post comparing his 2009 season against those other players peak seasons. he's in the statistical discussion for post-season comparisons with many other top 10-15 talents, and everyone knows that legacies and long term perceptions are built in the post-season. i think that answers the question of the thread.

LaLa_Land
08-22-2012, 03:07 AM
Yea if you ignore efficiency and pace I suppose those stats look otherworldly, I guess the question I should be asking is why does efficiency mean so little when it comes to Kobes stats?

Because when you look at the best seasons of just about every contender they put up superior numbers while still winning chips. Kobe doesnt seem to have that same combination. Hes always either winning on pedestrian efficiency overall or losing while putting up higher usage.

If you ask me I think Kobe was incapable of being a lower usage, highly efficient player. But he could maintain a stable rate of efficiency under any circumstance.

His efficiency has always come into question. His FG% has never been that impressive. I mean even in his 81 point game he missed 18/46 shots, but yet he was still able to bring his team from 18 down in the 3rd quarter.

I think that with Kobe, it's all about timing. When he's playing "bad" he has a knack for still coming up with big shots and game-changing plays when it counts. I watch EVERY game the lakers play, and it's so crazy how even in games where he goes 3-20 through 3 quarters, he flips the switch when it counts. What I'm trying to say is that even though he sometimes brings his team down with his jacking, he almost always seems to find a way to still come up clutch and benefit the team in the end.

There have been so many moments where I'd be so down on him for his play in stretches, but then almost magically, he seems to fix everything. As his career has gone on, and as the mileage has piled up, these "fixes" are harder to come by. But this year, I don't think he'll need to be a magician at all. Just dominate through 3 quarters, and relax on the bench in the 4th :cool:

kblo247
08-22-2012, 03:10 AM
plus, why would you constantly attack the rim when you have the most dominant center in league history on the box? there's just not enough room or space for that in the half-court set. kobe was destined to develop a sharp outside game due to being paired with a guy like Shaq for eight seasons. kobe already played eight seasons and had major knee surgery before Shaq ever left town.

Shoulder and ankle surgery too before he and Shaq broke up.

Kobe, Eddie, and Nick all were paint centric under Harris but Phil preached balance. Shaq had the inside, Fish/Fox/Horry/George/Shaw the outside, and Kibe worked the middle with some 3s and dunks.

I think people often forget that he was a traffic dunker as 8 unlike Vince and Tracy who had the occasional ones that were but, but Kibe when he got there went over Yak, Todd, Dwight, Tim, David, KG/Rasho and the like.

Plus he didn't waste his jumps to be kinda point blank once Tex got a hold of him as he used to always try to dunk pre- Winters by his own admission until Tex started askin him why

DODGERS&LAKERS
08-22-2012, 03:12 AM
plus, why would you constantly attack the rim when you have the most dominant center in league history on the box? there's just not enough room or space for that in the half-court set. kobe was destined to develop a sharp outside game due to being paired with a guy like Shaq for eight seasons. kobe already played eight seasons and had major knee surgery before Shaq ever left town.

Yes, Kobe was there to stretch the floor and find seems to slash. But there are not many driving lanes when your center won't go 3 feet from the basket.


This is true. He was essentially a 25 year old rookie. That was the first year he was without Shaq. The wear and tear on his body from the 8 seasons plus all the playoff games had an effect on his athleticism for sure. But even still his efficiency went up as soon as Shaq left and before Gasol came. It seems he changes his game when he has a low post presence. It huts his efficiency, but Shaq and Pau had careeer years along side Kobe so he was doing something right.

kblo247
08-22-2012, 03:13 AM
His efficiency has always come into question. His FG% has never been that impressive. I mean even in his 81 point game he missed 18/46 shots, but yet he was still able to bring his team from 18 down in the 3rd quarter.

I think that with Kobe, it's all about timing. When he's playing "bad" he has a knack for still coming up with big shots and game-changing plays when it counts. I watch EVERY game the lakers play, and it's so crazy how even in games where he goes 3-20 through 3 quarters, he flips the switch when it counts. What I'm trying to say is that even though he sometimes brings his team down with his jacking, he almost always seems to find a way to still come up clutch and benefit the team in the end.

There have been so many moments where I'd be so down on him for his play in stretches, but then almost magically, he seems to fix everything. As his career has gone on, and as the mileage has piled up, these "fixes" are harder to come by. But this year, I don't think he'll need to be a magician at all. Just dominate through 3 quarters, and relax on the bench in the 4th :cool:

This too. Kobe couldn't hit **** vs the Hineys last for example, kept shooting and won the game with it on the line.

OKC game 6 years ago saw Jim struggling that series and then rattling off what seemed like close to 30 in the second half because he kept coming. Hell Boston game 7 saw him close with 10pts, 5rebs, an assist, and a steal in the last 8 mins

kblo247
08-22-2012, 03:15 AM
Yes, Kobe was there to stretch the floor and find seems to slash. But there are not many driving lanes when your center won't go 3 feet from the basket.


This is true. He was essentially a 25 year old rookie. That was the first year he was without Shaq. The wear and tear on his body from the 8 seasons plus all the playoff games had an effect on his athleticism for sure. But even still his efficiency went up as soon as Shaq left and before Gasol came. It seems he changes his game when he has a low post presence. It huts his efficiency, but Shaq and Pau had careeer years along side Kobe so he was doing something right.

That and Rudy asking him to put on weight. Kobe had never had weight on his frame until that season and it ended up with him being hurt feet and ankles wise.

i.got.the.nutz
08-22-2012, 03:23 AM
Damn where did everyone go

Chronz
08-22-2012, 05:39 AM
@ Chronz

Stats hate him cause they are his *****, while winning and longevity are his bros. At the end of the day this is what every stat guy can't stand, because all he does is look at you show you a career page and his accolades and then laugh and say oh he mad
This doesn't apply here because Im talking about what he has shown in both victory and defeat and what we can gather in terms of PEAK ability. I have already agreed with the fact that Kobe's longevity strengthens his resume, but this isnt about that side of the argument. Im just focusing on singularly dominant seasons.


He has better longevity than Duncan, KG, and the like. He's won more than Tim, Shaq, and the like. Even as opposed to MJ, he has been in the game longer, did more for his team, and as one man acts he won more as more of his teams without Shaq/Pau finished at let alone over 500 which MJ never did without Scottie in his career.
I disagree, Shaq/MJ/TD always had a greater influences on their respective teams throughout their primes. KG is debatable.


Can you name one player who has had a longer prime? Played more and multiple roles on ever title and finals team he has been on including MJ?
Can you tell me where Kobes best championship seasons rank among the all time best? Like among the players you mentioned, how would you rank the best seasons?

Chronz
08-22-2012, 05:47 AM
Bird?



it seems that most value overall career more than peak.

Prolly right on both ends, as far as Bird, Id argue his 86 campaign but the overall longevity ends the argument regardless. But out of curiosity what do you make of the comparison?

NYKalltheway
08-22-2012, 07:57 AM
stats suck

NBAfan4life
08-22-2012, 09:08 AM
Kobe put up big numbers in the 2009 playoffs on his way to a title and Finals MVP:
PER: 26.8
WS: 4.7
WS/48: .238
TS%: .564
30.2-5.3-5.5-1.7-.9-46%.
-2009 Championship, 2009 Finals MVP, 2nd in regular season MVP voting.
-Met the leagues top defense in the NBA Finals, 4-1 Lakers.



1967 Playoffs:
Wilt-PER: 25.3 , WS: 3.8, WS/48: .253, TS%: .546.
Kobe '09-PER: 26.8, WS: 4.7, WS/48: .238, TS%: .564.

This is regarded as Wilts greatest playoff run, and was a consensus top three Center peak season of all-time in your thread from last week. What about that statline puts Kobes from 2009 to shame? Kobe had higher PER, higher TS% and comparable WS numbers.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/chambwi01.html

1986 Playoffs:
Bird-PER: 23.9, WS: 4.2, WS/48: .263, TS%: .615
Kobe '09-PER: 26.8, WS: 4.7, WS/48: .238, TS%: .564.

Birds greatest playoff run. Comparable to Bryants run in 2009. Bird with superior WS/48 and TS%, Kobe with more WS and a notable higher PER. who was the better defender, Kobe in 2009 or Bird in 1986?
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/birdla01.html

1971 Playoffs:
KAJ-PER: 25.3, WS: 3.3, WS/48: .271, TS%: .548
Kobe '09-PER: 26.8, WS: 4.7, WS/48: .238, TS%: .564.

Also considered one of the peak center seasons of all-time. Not any more statistically dominant that Bryants 2009 run.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/a/abdulka01.html

1987 Playoffs:
Magic-PER: 26.2, WS: 3.7, WS/48: .265, TS%: .607
Kobe '09-PER: 26.8, WS: 4.7, WS/48: .238, TS%: .564.

Totally comparable to Kobes line in 2009. Who was the better defender, Kobe 2009 or Magic 1987?
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/johnsma02.html

1983 Playoffs:
Moses-PER: 25.7, WS: 2.8, WS/48: .260, TS%: .587
Kobe '09-PER: 26.8, WS: 4.7, WS/48: .238, TS%: .564.

Also comparable to Kobes 2009 line.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/m/malonmo01.html

2006 Playoffs:
Wade- PER: 26.9, WS: 4.8, WS/48: .240, TS%: .593
Kobe '09-PER: 26.8, WS: 4.7, WS/48: .238, TS%: .564.

very comparable.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/w/wadedw01.html



Kobes line from 2009 belongs in the same category as each season I bolded, so say the stats.

I love when Bruno drops knowledge and defends Bryant.

Something that has been mentioned in this thread is Kobe really does take many shots that bails out his team, at the end of the shot clock or quarter. When he does that he is trying to put points on the board rather than worrying about his FG percentage. I am not saying he doesn't create bad shot opportunities, but he does a lot of bail outs too.

Heatcheck
08-22-2012, 09:30 AM
while we're talking about advanced stats. how the **** did they decide the formula for TS%? real question. who came to the conclusion that 3pt shots are specifically that much harder than 2's?

IndyRealist
08-22-2012, 09:31 AM
What is "a lot" of bailout shots compared to how many total shots Kobe takes in a season? Last year he took 23 shots per game. Even if he took a bailout shot every quarter, that'd only be 17% of his shots, which he's supposed to be good at. And that small percentage still ignores the fact that often there are better options for those bailout shots. The 20ft contested fadeaway jumper is the worst shot in basketball, I don't care how much you practice it.

But honestly, this whole conversation has been framed wrong from the beginning. Stats do not hate Kobe. Stats LOVE Kobe. They just don't think he's one of the greatest of all time. Because the things that people use to place him in that group are things that don't have a huge statistical impact across an entire career, i.e. hitting big shots, getting 81 points in one game, playing through injuries, number of rings, being the only reasonable successor to MJ for a decade, etc.

waveycrockett
08-22-2012, 09:34 AM
stats suck

Truth Hurts

IndyRealist
08-22-2012, 09:40 AM
while we're talking about advanced stats. how the **** did they decide the formula for TS%? real question. who came to the conclusion that 3pt shots are specifically that much harder than 2's?

A 3pt shot is worth 50% more than a 2pt shot, so it's valued 50% more. That's counteracted by the generally lower shooting percentages on 3's.

DaLakerz Rulz
08-22-2012, 09:44 AM
If you take MJ out of the picture, most of the GOAT players on peoples' lists are big men. I think it's quite obvious that Kobe will not be as efficient offensively...

BobbyHillSwag
08-22-2012, 09:48 AM
too bad people know how to watch the game. Stats will never tell the whole story. It maybe a fact, but one of the most flawed facts ever when it comes to sports or atleast basketball.

BobbyHillSwag
08-22-2012, 09:49 AM
Also, op should never say anything about people using excuses. He is in fact the biggest excuse maker on this board. Atleast, when it fits his agenda.

lakers4sho
08-22-2012, 09:57 AM
His efficiency has always come into question. His FG% has never been that impressive. I mean even in his 81 point game he missed 18/46 shots, but yet he was still able to bring his team from 18 down in the 3rd quarter.

I think that with Kobe, it's all about timing. When he's playing "bad" he has a knack for still coming up with big shots and game-changing plays when it counts. I watch EVERY game the lakers play, and it's so crazy how even in games where he goes 3-20 through 3 quarters, he flips the switch when it counts. What I'm trying to say is that even though he sometimes brings his team down with his jacking, he almost always seems to find a way to still come up clutch and benefit the team in the end.

There have been so many moments where I'd be so down on him for his play in stretches, but then almost magically, he seems to fix everything. As his career has gone on, and as the mileage has piled up, these "fixes" are harder to come by. But this year, I don't think he'll need to be a magician at all. Just dominate through 3 quarters, and relax on the bench in the 4th :cool:

If you take an inordinate number of shots at least a few is bound to go in, especially if you're as skilled as Kobe.

Heatcheck
08-22-2012, 10:00 AM
A 3pt shot is worth 50% more than a 2pt shot, so it's valued 50% more. That's counteracted by the generally lower shooting percentages on 3's.

i think i understand. so its a measurement of the value of the shot not the difficulty?

C-Style
08-22-2012, 10:26 AM
In the 80's there was a lot players putting numbers that would make u think they were better players than Kareem BIrd and Magic for a season here or there, like T-mac, A.I, & Wade did but that never meant they were the better players

KnicksorBust
08-22-2012, 10:28 AM
I think that has been mentioned, I mention it all the time. Kobe's length of prime is what makes him great. It's not any of his peak seasons, because they simply don't stack up against the other players in the top 10.

I actually agree with Hawkeye here. He's been a top 5 player for over a decade. Without interruption for injuries, off-years, batting .200 as a minor league baseball player.


plus, why would you constantly attack the rim when you have the most dominant center in league history on the box? there's just not enough room or space for that in the half-court set. kobe was destined to develop a sharp outside game due to being paired with a guy like Shaq for eight seasons. kobe already played eight seasons and had major knee surgery before Shaq ever left town.

If you look at his numbers his free throws shot up right away in 2005-2006. I'm not saying you'd rather NOT have an elite big but it's interesting to note that Kobe's most effecient seasons were post-Shaq and that Jordan never had anyone clogging the paint...

Heatcheck
08-22-2012, 10:45 AM
In the 80's there was a lot players putting numbers that would make u think they were better players than Kareem BIrd and Magic for a season here or there, like T-mac, A.I, & Wade did but that never meant they were the better players

wade doesnt fit in that category because he outproduces kobe almost every year statistically.

Hawkeye15
08-22-2012, 11:03 AM
too bad people know how to watch the game. Stats will never tell the whole story. It maybe a fact, but one of the most flawed facts ever when it comes to sports or atleast basketball.

Do you really think the people on this board that use stats don't watch the games? Where would the context be without watching?

I find that excuse (it is one) far more pathetic than any stat head defending their claims. If you either don't understand advanced statistics, or discard them because they don't shine a pretty light on your favorite player(s), which is a common theme amongst those who refuse to embrace them at this point, despite nearly every NBA team now using them, that is on you.

Hawkeye15
08-22-2012, 11:05 AM
Do you put Tim Duncan in the Top 10? He has never had the type of year you are talking about. Ever since he came in the league Garnett has pretty much matched him year for year statistically. Not to mention what Shaq was doing early in Duncans career. And Kobe for that matter. That doesn't take away from either of their careers though IMO. I think the longevity they've both displayed is more impressive.

EDIT: Olajuwon aswell for that matter. He was overshadowed by MJ and then Robinson IMO. You definitely cant say he was 'clearly the best player in the league' any season he played.

Yes Duncan's robotic stat line has been good enough, long enough, and his numbers have also raised in the playoffs, so he is top 10.

whitemamba33
08-22-2012, 11:16 AM
Is there some new kind of stat that was just released that makes Kobe look like the worst player of all time? I'm looking at his stats - what are we complaining about here?

Da Knicks
08-22-2012, 11:36 AM
I have my take on Kobe eventhough i dont care for him, but i cannot say the man is not great or elite. Kobe is one of the smartest players in the game, he had goals in my mind coming into the league and knew that driving the lane and getting the best stats would not help his knees and ankles in the long run. He knew that developing the mid range game would help him out moreso in his later years. He started trying to post up early in his career to save his body and his goal is accomplished by not taking a beating. Has he being lucky to have great teamates? the answer is yes but how many superstars have won by themselves? Only one comes to mind and it is the Dream, no coincidence that most stars seek help from him.

Kobe and Melo are the players that people will always hate because this guys do not give a crap about stats. They play to win and do whatever is possible to do so while at the same time preserving the body that makes the money. Meaning more jumpshots that equal to sorrier percentage and makes them look bad. Also wanting to take the last shot eventhough they know the defenses will be out to get them and give them a very hard shot. Pass the ball some might say? Well Lebron tried that and got burned for it, Melo will continue the trend that stats dont tell the whole story...

GREATNESS ONE
08-22-2012, 11:37 AM
Good read guys :) instead of jumping in the conversation, I'm gonna sit back and enjoy this legendary player finish his career the way it's supposed to finish and appreciate this man for what he brings everyday. He won't get truly appreciated until he retires.

Bring on the Season!!! :box:

KnicksorBust
08-22-2012, 11:45 AM
Seems like hes the one player among the 10-15 best players of all time who needs the most excuses aka context to ignore all statistical insight.

So I ask you, what do stats hate about Kobe's game? Why do they never agree with him having a great PEAK in any given year, that doesn't hold true for guys like Wilt, Shaq, MJ, Kareem, Bird, Magic, Moses, LeBron, Wade

Kobe's best PER > Bird's Best PER > Magic's best PER > Moses's best PER

Hawkeye15
08-22-2012, 12:00 PM
Is there some new kind of stat that was just released that makes Kobe look like the worst player of all time? I'm looking at his stats - what are we complaining about here?

oh god no, even arbitrary stats make him look great, the OP is asking why doesn't he have the peak seasons some of the other top 10 players have. No matter how many you look at, Kobe is an all-timer according to them.

lpdunks8
08-22-2012, 12:20 PM
Seems like hes the one player among the 10-15 best players of all time who needs the most excuses aka context to ignore all statistical insight.

So I ask you, what do stats hate about Kobe's game? Why do they never agree with him having a great PEAK in any given year, that doesn't hold true for guys like Wilt, Shaq, MJ, Kareem, Bird, Magic, Moses, LeBron, Wade

What is your definition of a peak season?

06-07 31.6ppg 46%fg 87%ft 5.7rpg 5.4apg 58%ts

Play-offs? Age 22 (15-1 Lakers run) postseason is one example:

29.4ppg 7.3rpg 6.1apg 47%fg 82%ft 55.5%ts

PrettyBoyJ
08-22-2012, 12:29 PM
I think the biggest knock on Kobe's career is his FG% if he shot 50 or over we wouldn't be having this debate.. I honestly think his shooting percentage is pretty good if you take into account the difficult shots he takes the double and triple teams he gets on a nightly basis

JordansBulls
08-22-2012, 12:51 PM
Kobe put up big numbers in the 2009 playoffs on his way to a title and Finals MVP:
PER: 26.8
WS: 4.7
WS/48: .238
TS%: .564
30.2-5.3-5.5-1.7-.9-46%.
-2009 Championship, 2009 Finals MVP, 2nd in regular season MVP voting.
-Met the leagues top defense in the NBA Finals, 4-1 Lakers.



1967 Playoffs:
Wilt-PER: 25.3 , WS: 3.8, WS/48: .253, TS%: .546.
Kobe '09-PER: 26.8, WS: 4.7, WS/48: .238, TS%: .564.

This is regarded as Wilts greatest playoff run, and was a consensus top three Center peak season of all-time in your thread from last week. What about that statline puts Kobes from 2009 to shame? Kobe had higher PER, higher TS% and comparable WS numbers.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/chambwi01.html

1986 Playoffs:
Bird-PER: 23.9, WS: 4.2, WS/48: .263, TS%: .615
Kobe '09-PER: 26.8, WS: 4.7, WS/48: .238, TS%: .564.

Birds greatest playoff run. Comparable to Bryants run in 2009. Bird with superior WS/48 and TS%, Kobe with more WS and a notable higher PER. who was the better defender, Kobe in 2009 or Bird in 1986?
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/birdla01.html

1971 Playoffs:
KAJ-PER: 25.3, WS: 3.3, WS/48: .271, TS%: .548
Kobe '09-PER: 26.8, WS: 4.7, WS/48: .238, TS%: .564.

Also considered one of the peak center seasons of all-time. Not any more statistically dominant that Bryants 2009 run.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/a/abdulka01.html

1987 Playoffs:
Magic-PER: 26.2, WS: 3.7, WS/48: .265, TS%: .607
Kobe '09-PER: 26.8, WS: 4.7, WS/48: .238, TS%: .564.

Totally comparable to Kobes line in 2009. Who was the better defender, Kobe 2009 or Magic 1987?
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/johnsma02.html

1983 Playoffs:
Moses-PER: 25.7, WS: 2.8, WS/48: .260, TS%: .587
Kobe '09-PER: 26.8, WS: 4.7, WS/48: .238, TS%: .564.

Also comparable to Kobes 2009 line.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/m/malonmo01.html

2006 Playoffs:
Wade- PER: 26.9, WS: 4.8, WS/48: .240, TS%: .593
Kobe '09-PER: 26.8, WS: 4.7, WS/48: .238, TS%: .564.

very comparable.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/w/wadedw01.html



Kobes line from 2009 belongs in the same category as each season I bolded, so say the stats.

I understand your point, however PER is only based on how everyone else is doing. Looking at MJ's PER in the finals, can anyone really say MJ was better in the 1998 finals than he was in 1992 and 1993 when his PER is 3+ higher? Hell no.
Or even if MJ at 28.1 PER in 1998 playoffs was better than MJ 1992 Playoffs at 27.2 PER?

LoveMeOrHateMe
08-22-2012, 12:53 PM
wade doesnt fit in that category because he outproduces kobe almost every year statistically.

Your joking right?

kblo247
08-22-2012, 01:28 PM
Yeah I got to ask it too ... What do you guys consider peak?

I'd say his athleticism peaked in 02-03, his scoring peaked skill wise in 05-06, his floor general game pealed in 00-01, his d in 99-00 when he shut AI clean down, and his iq in 07-08 when he too the youngest core in the past two decades to the finals.

Kobe never had everything peak all at once IMO watching him all these years due to injuries (as he has played with separated shoulders, broken fingers and knuckles, knees that need surgery, back spasms, ankles with bone spurs, strained groins, concussions, ivs, broken nose, sprained thumb), general youth, or his role as a starter evolving under Phil

Even the season he scored 81, he knew he was going to get knee surgery thus the brace and tights as he battle tendu this all that year. In 07-08 he still had a bit of his athleticism to go with his iq and then he ****ed his hand over. In 02-03 he was a legit MVP candidate and athletically a monster but he managed to Hirt both his shoulder and knee dunking on Rasho and KG to the point he needed surgery. His d was huge in 99/00 but he got hurt in the finals where he could have possibly shut Reggie down. I have never really seen a season where he has had health and athleticism fully together since probably the last year of the first 3 pear

kblo247
08-22-2012, 01:35 PM
What is "a lot" of bailout shots compared to how many total shots Kobe takes in a season? Last year he took 23 shots per game. Even if he took a bailout shot every quarter, that'd only be 17% of his shots, which he's supposed to be good at. And that small percentage still ignores the fact that often there are better options for those bailout shots. The 20ft contested fadeaway jumper is the worst shot in basketball, I don't care how much you practice it.

But honestly, this whole conversation has been framed wrong from the beginning. Stats do not hate Kobe. Stats LOVE Kobe. They just don't think he's one of the greatest of all time. Because the things that people use to place him in that group are things that don't have a huge statistical impact across an entire career, i.e. hitting big shots, getting 81 points in one game, playing through injuries, number of rings, being the only reasonable successor to MJ for a decade, etc.

Take Boston for example when la plated them. In game 3, Kobe took 7 shots with 7 seconds or less. It's a normal thing for him

whitemamba33
08-22-2012, 01:48 PM
oh god no, even arbitrary stats make him look great, the OP is asking why doesn't he have the peak seasons some of the other top 10 players have. No matter how many you look at, Kobe is an all-timer according to them.

Didn't peak? What was 2005/2006 then? How many players in NBA history have put up 35.4 ppg on 45% shooting, with over 5 rbg and 4.5 apg, and a PER of 28?

Perhaps I'm still missing the argument, but I don't see the downside of any of this. He's been so consistantly productive that it makes a significant peak hard to find..and that's a bad thing? Should I have hoped for more of a T-Mac curve to his career? Peak at 23 and then take it downhill from there?

Chronz
08-22-2012, 02:07 PM
Well said Bruno, Kobe has had a few comparable playoff runs at first glance, but hes never combined it with the regular season domination, and when you break down the years those players didnt win titles the separation is compounded.




1967 Playoffs:
Wilt-PER: 25.3 , WS: 3.8, WS/48: .253, TS%: .546.
Kobe '09-PER: 26.8, WS: 4.7, WS/48: .238, TS%: .564.

This is regarded as Wilts greatest playoff run, and was a consensus top three Center peak season of all-time in your thread from last week. What about that statline puts Kobes from 2009 to shame? Kobe had higher PER, higher TS% and comparable WS numbers.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/chambwi01.html

The key difference being that Wilt played 47.9 MPG on a historic offensive team, thats pretty valuable. Wilt also went up against Bill and Nate Thurmond that run, Kobe didnt face scrubs but he didnt go up against these caliber of defensive behemoths in the post either.

Aside from PER being a rough estimate, its harder to maintain optimal per minute output when you never sit, Wilt still led the league in RS/PS PER/WS while being a 2-way anchor. WinShares favor Wilt, I tend to side with the efficiency side of the argument when it comes to this offensive team. Wilt had already proven capable of putting up monster numbers before but he focused on distributing and defending, he was basically the orchestrator behind one of the first teams to crack an efficiency rate of 1Pt per possession. The Sixers had a 103 offensive RTG, +6.6 above league average. He was optimizing the team, facing HOF counterpart in every series. Wilt simply did not rest, he was tireless in his domination, sustaining it and destroying clubs with all around brilliance. Wilt has proven to be the more dominant player (regular season + playoff). Both in defeat and success throughout his career.


1986 Playoffs:
Bird-PER: 23.9, WS: 4.2, WS/48: .263, TS%: .615
Kobe '09-PER: 26.8, WS: 4.7, WS/48: .238, TS%: .564.

Birds greatest playoff run. Comparable to Bryants run in 2009. Bird with superior WS/48 and TS%, Kobe with more WS and a notable higher PER. who was the better defender, Kobe in 2009 or Bird in 1986?
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/birdla01.html
This comparison is much more valid because we have complete statistical breakdowns. Here again you have to ignore the regular season output and again comes down to efficiency or usage, defensively Kobe probably has the edge, Bird played masterful help defense the very next series, his traps on Hakeem helped in containing him. Bird has other intangibles working in his favor but overall I would agree the 2 are equal and that Kobes longevity puts him ahead of Bird rather easily.


1971 Playoffs:
KAJ-PER: 25.3, WS: 3.3, WS/48: .271, TS%: .548
Kobe '09-PER: 26.8, WS: 4.7, WS/48: .238, TS%: .564.

Also considered one of the peak center seasons of all-time. Not any more statistically dominant that Bryants 2009 run.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/a/abdulka01.html
Yea look at the obliteration in the regular season and the superb WS rate. If you just want to isolate his highest raw statistical playoffs then check out 1980. Bests Kobe in every way. The different from the 2 is that in 71 KAJ took on Wilt, Thurmond and Unseld. Again the HOF counterpart had a noticeable effect on his efficiency. Wilt in particular played KAJ to a statistical draw, he was so impressive in defeat that the crowd began chanting his name in the final game, and this in Milwaukee. Thurmond was an ******* to a players rate of a production so its not surprising what he did to Kareem. Also check out the regular season leaders the years KAJ didint win.

[
B]1987 Playoffs:[/B]
Magic-PER: 26.2, WS: 3.7, WS/48: .265, TS%: .607
Kobe '09-PER: 26.8, WS: 4.7, WS/48: .238, TS%: .564.

Totally comparable to Kobes line in 2009. Who was the better defender, Kobe 2009 or Magic 1987?
Except in the regular season and efficiency in the playoffs. But yea comparable. You could argue both Bird and Magic are Kobe's statistical equals, they were more efficient, Kobe had higher usage, intangibles probably separate them but are they in favor of Kobe over 2 guys renowned for making players better?



1983 Playoffs:
Moses-PER: 25.7, WS: 2.8, WS/48: .260, TS%: .587
Kobe '09-PER: 26.8, WS: 4.7, WS/48: .238, TS%: .564.

Also comparable to Kobes 2009 line.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/m/malonmo01.html

Except Moses led the league in both PER/WS during the regular season and post season. Also bests Kobe in playoff efficiency. Kobe higher PER.



2006 Playoffs:
Wade- PER: 26.9, WS: 4.8, WS/48: .240, TS%: .593
Kobe '09-PER: 26.8, WS: 4.7, WS/48: .238, TS%: .564.

very comparable.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/w/wadedw01.html
Superior regular season numbers, on top of slightly superior playoff stats. Then look at the years Wade didnt win and his stats become absurd.



Kobes line from 2009 belongs in the same category as each season I bolded, so say the stats.
Kobes playoff line yes, his overall season (regular season + playoffs) no. He usually falters in efficiency and wins with usage. The debate continues but I notice the absence of Duncan, Hakeem, MJ, Bron and Shaq. And the lack of recognition in the years he didnt win titles.

Chronz
08-22-2012, 02:13 PM
What is "a lot" of bailout shots compared to how many total shots Kobe takes in a season? Last year he took 23 shots per game. Even if he took a bailout shot every quarter, that'd only be 17% of his shots, which he's supposed to be good at. And that small percentage still ignores the fact that often there are better options for those bailout shots. The 20ft contested fadeaway jumper is the worst shot in basketball, I don't care how much you practice it.

Kobe fans assume that he takes an inordinate amount of those shots compared to his peers. When in actuality he may take more than a guy like CP3, but CP3 scores an identical per game amount, just with higher efficiency. It represents a greater% of his last second shots. This doesnt prevent him from posting efficient numbers.



But honestly, this whole conversation has been framed wrong from the beginning. Stats do not hate Kobe. Stats LOVE Kobe. They just don't think he's one of the greatest of all time. Because the things that people use to place him in that group are things that don't have a huge statistical impact across an entire career, i.e. hitting big shots, getting 81 points in one game, playing through injuries, number of rings, being the only reasonable successor to MJ for a decade, etc
Thats considered hate around here

Chronz
08-22-2012, 02:20 PM
while we're talking about advanced stats. how the **** did they decide the formula for TS%? real question. who came to the conclusion that 3pt shots are specifically that much harder than 2's?

They simply account for the possessions required to score the same amount of points. Like if 2 players take 6 shots but one guy took mid range shots and the other guy took 3pt shots getting their, they would have different FG% but the TS% would be the same.

Chronz
08-22-2012, 02:22 PM
too bad people know how to watch the game. Stats will never tell the whole story. It maybe a fact, but one of the most flawed facts ever when it comes to sports or atleast basketball.
LOL at your hyperbole, in my time with PSD has anyone ever claimed stats tell the entire story, certainly no one I respect.


Also, op should never say anything about people using excuses. He is in fact the biggest excuse maker on this board. Atleast, when it fits his agenda.
Nope, pretty consistent here.

Bruno
08-22-2012, 02:27 PM
Prolly right on both ends, as far as Bird, Id argue his 86 campaign but the overall longevity ends the argument regardless. But out of curiosity what do you make of the comparison?

i wouldn't argue B-86/K-09 with any certainty until i go back and watch those '86 finals, which i haven't done.

but strictly by the numbers, it's a great comparison. i've always loved the Bryant/Bird comparison, their stats are strangely similar, and I think they come from a similar place mentally as well. i think bryants greatest most honest comparison is to Larry Bird.

Chronz
08-22-2012, 02:28 PM
If you look at his numbers his free throws shot up right away in 2005-2006.
Everyones did, rule changes and all remember.


I'm not saying you'd rather NOT have an elite big but it's interesting to note that Kobe's most effecient seasons were post-Shaq and that Jordan never had anyone clogging the paint...
He also had the absolute worst regular season his career the year right after Shaq left and some pretty pedestrian playoffs without a post presence. He never really hiked his efficiency up, even with more talent around he just seemed to throttle up/down his usage with minimal gains in efficiency. Maybe hes just not a hyper efficient player but I do wish we could have saw him in his athletic youth under these rules without Shaq.

Chronz
08-22-2012, 02:29 PM
Yes Duncan's robotic stat line has been good enough, long enough, and his numbers have also raised in the playoffs, so he is top 10.
Are you saying Duncan didnt have a dominating peak vs Kobe? I think thats what hes asking

Chronz
08-22-2012, 02:31 PM
Kobe's best PER > Bird's Best PER > Magic's best PER > Moses's best PER
Moses? I can understand the others somewhat but Moses led the league in both PER/WS for both the regular and post season on route to some ridiculous levels of team success.



Is there some new kind of stat that was just released that makes Kobe look like the worst player of all time? I'm looking at his stats - what are we complaining about here?
Just that guys have a tendency to put up better stats in different environments (winning, losing, regular season, post season).

Chronz
08-22-2012, 02:33 PM
What is your definition of a peak season?

06-07 31.6ppg 46%fg 87%ft 5.7rpg 5.4apg 58%ts

Play-offs? Age 22 (15-1 Lakers run) postseason is one example:

29.4ppg 7.3rpg 6.1apg 47%fg 82%ft 55.5%ts

Are you one of the few that considers that Kobe's absolute best? I know I am but few people agree with me, still we would all agree that this would rank in the top peak seasons.

whitemamba33
08-22-2012, 02:42 PM
Moses? I can understand the others somewhat but Moses led the league in both PER/WS for both the regular and post season on route to some ridiculous levels of team success.



Just that guys have a tendency to put up better stats in different environments (winning, losing, regular season, post season).

...so..elaborate?

Kobe doesn't put up good playoff numbers?

Kobe hasn't put up good numbers when he was winning?

Kobe hasn't put up good numbers when he was losing?

Kobe hasn't had a good regular season?

I mean..there are 8 pages full of people objecting, so perhaps something is lost in the translation?

Chronz
08-22-2012, 02:59 PM
...so..elaborate?

Kobe doesn't put up good playoff numbers?

Kobe hasn't put up good numbers when he was winning?

Kobe hasn't put up good numbers when he was losing?

Kobe hasn't had a good regular season?

I mean..there are 8 pages full of people objecting, so perhaps something is lost in the translation?

Good yes, top of the food chain? No

Those objecting have corrected me on quite a few players, so I take back the Top-10 peak label thing, Kobe definitely makes it interesting.

What Im focusing now on is his difference in his play in those situations.

Like Kobe had his greatest statistical season the year he was on a .500 team. But you look at a guy like Kareem who also put up insane numbers when he didnt win but also boasted superior numbers when he won as well.

Shaq, Wade, Bron, Duncan, Hakeem, Wilt seem to be more productive in victory but also in non-title years. I was wrong about Bird and Magic and maybe Moses.

Hawkeye15
08-22-2012, 03:03 PM
Didn't peak? What was 2005/2006 then? How many players in NBA history have put up 35.4 ppg on 45% shooting, with over 5 rbg and 4.5 apg, and a PER of 28?

Perhaps I'm still missing the argument, but I don't see the downside of any of this. He's been so consistantly productive that it makes a significant peak hard to find..and that's a bad thing? Should I have hoped for more of a T-Mac curve to his career? Peak at 23 and then take it downhill from there?

His peak wasn't as strong as many of the other top 10 guys is the whole point of this exercise. That is exactly WHY Kobe would never have a chance at making my top 5-6. Look at it like this. If Kobe had the normal timeline of a prime, or roughly 5-6 seasons, he never had a peak that would put him in the top 15 conversation. Only BECAUSE of his 12 year long prime does he now climb up yet another 7-8 spots for me.

Do you see what I mean? I am trying to explain myself properly, hopefully I am not confusing you at all dude.

Hawkeye15
08-22-2012, 03:09 PM
Are you saying Duncan didnt have a dominating peak vs Kobe? I think thats what hes asking

Duncan did have a more dominating, and consistent peak. 9/10 seasons over .200 WS/48, where Kobe bounced back and forth. Seasons hovering at the 27 PER area, where as Kobe bounced back and forth. Duncan was clearly the best defender in the game for 2.5 seasons imho, Kobe never touched that. I simply meant Duncan also falls in line with never having a peak that just blew you away compared to the rest of his usual numbers, until his decline a couple years ago. Part of that may very well be Pops realizing around 2004 that playing Tim 39 mpg going forward would only lower his efficiency, where as the Lakers rode Kobe for nearly 40 minutes a night when they shouldn't have been.

Gibby23
08-22-2012, 03:20 PM
Duncan did have a more dominating, and consistent peak. 9/10 seasons over .200 WS/48, where Kobe bounced back and forth. Seasons hovering at the 27 PER area, where as Kobe bounced back and forth. Duncan was clearly the best defender in the game for 2.5 seasons imho, Kobe never touched that. I simply meant Duncan also falls in line with never having a peak that just blew you away compared to the rest of his usual numbers, until his decline a couple years ago. Part of that may very well be Pops realizing around 2004 that playing Tim 39 mpg going forward would only lower his efficiency, where as the Lakers rode Kobe for nearly 40 minutes a night when they shouldn't have been.


Right, because the lakers should have been worried about Kobe's numbers going forward instead of getting the championships. But I understand, when your team doesn't put up title runs, there is nothing to watch, so you might as well look up a bunch of stats and say stuff like although Kobe won 5 rings, he didn't have a great peak.... What do you think Kobe plays for?

Chronz
08-22-2012, 03:21 PM
Yeah I got to ask it too ... What do you guys consider peak?


Strictly from a statistical perspective of regular season, playoffs, on championship teams and not.

That said I still wouldnt know how to answer that, I dont know what I'm trying to say anymore but one thing Im not arguing is his stature among the games best, that requires alot more effort. Just talking about peak season(s).

Can you elaborate on which you feel were his top5 seasons both subjectively and statistically?

Chronz
08-22-2012, 03:23 PM
Right, because the lakers should have been worried about Kobe's numbers going forward instead of getting the championships. But I understand, when your team doesn't put up title runs, there is nothing to watch, so you might as well look up a bunch of stats and say stuff like although Kobe won 5 rings, he didn't have a great peak.... What do you think Kobe plays for?
I think you confused on his argument, but we're trying to get away from that talk. These players all played to win, they also produced at a higher rate while winning. And in the years they didnt win, remained more productive. Shouldnt that play into PEAK ability?

Hawkeye15
08-22-2012, 03:24 PM
Right, because the lakers should have been worried about Kobe's numbers going forward instead of getting the championships. But I understand, when your team doesn't put up title runs, there is nothing to watch, so you might as well look up a bunch of stats and say stuff like although Kobe won 5 rings, he didn't have a great peak.... What do you think Kobe plays for?

so the point of the thread just went straight over your head. Good deal.

Bruno
08-22-2012, 03:29 PM
I love when Bruno drops knowledge and defends Bryant.

Something that has been mentioned in this thread is Kobe really does take many shots that bails out his team, at the end of the shot clock or quarter. When he does that he is trying to put points on the board rather than worrying about his FG percentage. I am not saying he doesn't create bad shot opportunities, but he does a lot of bail outs too.

he does take a lot of bail-outs. probably 2-4 a game, depending on the game. it's fair to bring it up. the devils advocate argument would be that he chucks too many threes. that's been my biggest complaint over the past year or two. I think Kobe would have ended up closer to 48% or 49% for his career if he didn't fall in love with the three, and if he hadn't been taking bailout shots his entire career. as we know- he just didn't care about that (%). but is important, Phil has alluded to his FG%. He was quoted saying that one of the biggest differences between MJ and Kobe was FG%, and that Kobe has never found a way to get to 50%.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_WNTx3gG_s

With that being said, how accurate of an overall scoring metric is FG%? Has anyone ever built a decent argument against the validity of points per field goal attempted? I've never seen it done.

Career Point Per Field Goal Attempt Average:
MJ-1.316
KB-1.298

That makes the difference in scoring efficiency look a lot less drastic than the typical 50%>45% argument that has been discussed into the ground. if Kobe is that close to the GOAT in average point per field goal attempted, is he really that inefficient of a scorer? I don't think so. To expand...


Career TS%

1. Magic- .610%
2. Kareem- .592%
3. Shaq- .586%
4. MJ- .569%
5. Bird- .564%
6. Kobe- .554%
7. Hakeem- .553%
8. Duncan- .551%
9. Wilt- .547%
10. Russell- .471%

The typical mantra seems to be something like, "yeah, he scored a ton of points, but he chucked to get there". It's a ludicrous argument when you actually dig into the stats. TS% (the most accurate metric gauging overall scoring efficiency) tells us that Kobe is right there with the other elites. If Kobe Bryant was an inefficient scorer, then what does that make Duncan, Hakeem, Wilt and Russell? Because he has a superior career TS% than all four of them.

when fans only mention his FG%, they're ignoring the fact that he is a career 84% free-throw shooter (on 7.6 attempts per game). if people want to criticize Bryants scoring efficiency, then they'd need to do the same thing with Wilt, Hakeem, Duncan and Russell to be fair. i've never seen anyone every question the scoring efficiency of Wilt, Hakeem or Duncan. seems like kobe is unaccuratley criticized compared to other players in this respect.



I understand your point, however PER is only based on how everyone else is doing.
So we shouldn't use PER in any future comparisons of any players because its only based on how everyone else is doing?

ive seen you use PER to compare everything, yet when I do so to express Bryant as a fair comparison to other top ten talents, its no longer valid? Doesn't seem fair JB. If your point was true, then how do you explain Magic never once putting up a higher post-season PER than Kobe in 2009? Are you saying that Magics 80's showtime roster (KAJ, Worthy, Cooper, Wilkes, Nixon) were inferior to Bryants late 2000's help (Gasol, Bynum, Odom)? PER isn't only based on how everyone is doing.



Looking at MJ's PER in the finals, can anyone really say MJ was better in the 1998 finals than he was in 1992 and 1993 when his PER is 3+ higher? Hell no.
you have PER numbers for individual playoff series? I'd love to see them (Did you find those numbers on that ESPN top 50 finals Performances link?). Here is what basketball reference lists for overall post-season:

1998 post-season PER: 28.1
1992 post-season PER: 27.2
1993 post-season PER: 30.1

with these numbers his '98 run isn't really any more dominant than what he did in '92 or '93.


Or even if MJ at 28.1 PER in 1998 playoffs was better than MJ 1992 Playoffs at 27.2 PER?
you need to compare those seasons within the given context of each post-season run JB. portland in '92 had a much better defense than Utah in '98. shouldn't we expect MJ to do better against a much worse defensive team? couldn't that explain the difference in playoff PER?

In the 1998 playoffs MJ and the Bulls faced:
Utah Jazz- (17th out of 29 in Defensive Rating).
Indiana Pacers- (5th out of 29 in Defensive Rating).
Charlotte Hornets- (15th out of 29 in Defensive Rating).
New Jersey Nets- (21st out of 29 in Defensive Rating).

In the 1992 playoffs MJ and the Bulls faced:
Portland Trailblazers- (3rd out of 27 in Defensive Rating).
Cleveland Cavaliers- (11th out of 27 in Defensive Rating).
New York Knicks- (2nd out of 27 in Defensive Rating).
Miami Heat- (25th out of 27 in Defensive Rating).

It would make sense for Jordan to have a slightly lower PER in 1992, because he faced off against far superior defenses in the post-season than he did in 1998. Yes, they got to play Miami in the first round of 1992, but that was only three games. MJ and the Bulls had 13 games against the 2nd and 3rd ranked defenses in the NBA during the '92 run, of corse his numbers will be lower than in '98 when he played against three mediocre at best defenses, along with Indiana (5th).

Bigbadmoffo
08-22-2012, 03:31 PM
At least do some research before going to war about Kobe with something called google and a bunch of Laker fans.

Bigbadmoffo
08-22-2012, 03:34 PM
I say to host stop reaching for something that doesn't exist.

Bruno
08-22-2012, 03:46 PM
Well said Bruno, Kobe has had a few comparable playoff runs at first glance, but hes never combined it with the regular season domination, and when you break down the years those players didnt win titles the separation is compounded.

You're absolutely right. Ultimately no one really remembers that though. that seems to be the key point in regards to legacies- they're established and solidified in the playoffs. People aren't going to go back to Kobes 2009 regular season PER, they're going to see that he was 2nd in MVP voting, on his way to the title and finals MVP. fair or not, that just seems to be how things are done. you know what i mean? nerds like us might sit around a dissect the numbers but 95% of fans just aren't going to do that- so how would they know otherwise?


The key difference being that Wilt played 47.9 MPG on a historic offensive team, thats pretty valuable. Wilt also went up against Bill and Nate Thurmond that run, Kobe didnt face scrubs but he didnt go up against these caliber of defensive behemoths in the post either.

Aside from PER being a rough estimate, its harder to maintain optimal per minute output when you never sit, Wilt still led the league in RS/PS PER/WS while being a 2-way anchor. WinShares favor Wilt, I tend to side with the efficiency side of the argument when it comes to this offensive team. Wilt had already proven capable of putting up monster numbers before but he focused on distributing and defending, he was basically the orchestrator behind one of the first teams to crack an efficiency rate of 1Pt per possession. The Sixers had a 103 offensive RTG, +6.6 above league average. He was optimizing the team, facing HOF counterpart in every series. Wilt simply did not rest, he was tireless in his domination, sustaining it and destroying clubs with all around brilliance. Wilt has proven to be the more dominant player (regular season + playoff). Both in defeat and success throughout his career.
I agree with everything you say here. and don't get me wrong, i wasn't arguing that Bryants run in 2009 was better than Wilts in 1967, I'm just saying that it is close enough on paper for Bryant to at least be in the discussion.



This comparison is much more valid because we have complete statistical breakdowns. Here again you have to ignore the regular season output and again comes down to efficiency or usage, defensively Kobe probably has the edge, Bird played masterful help defense the very next series, his traps on Hakeem helped in containing him. Bird has other intangibles working in his favor but overall I would agree the 2 are equal and that Kobes longevity puts him ahead of Bird rather easily.
i'm a big fan of this comparison. they're very close on paper and in mentality. they also have the same number of finals MVPs, conveniently enough.


Yea look at the obliteration in the regular season and the superb WS rate. If you just want to isolate his highest raw statistical playoffs then check out 1980. Bests Kobe in every way. The different from the 2 is that in 71 KAJ took on Wilt, Thurmond and Unseld. Again the HOF counterpart had a noticeable effect on his efficiency. Wilt in particular played KAJ to a statistical draw, he was so impressive in defeat that the crowd began chanting his name in the final game, and this in Milwaukee. Thurmond was an ******* to a players rate of a production so its not surprising what he did to Kareem. Also check out the regular season leaders the years KAJ didint win.
totally.



Except in the regular season and efficiency in the playoffs. But yea comparable. You could argue both Bird and Magic are Kobe's statistical equals, they were more efficient, Kobe had higher usage, intangibles probably separate them but are they in favor of Kobe over 2 guys renowned for making players better?
right



Except Moses led the league in both PER/WS during the regular season and post season. Also bests Kobe in playoff efficiency. Kobe higher PER.
totally.



Superior regular season numbers, on top of slightly superior playoff stats. Then look at the years Wade didnt win and his stats become absurd.right.




Kobes playoff line yes, his overall season (regular season + playoffs) no. He usually falters in efficiency and wins with usage. The debate continues but I notice the absence of Duncan, Hakeem, MJ, Bron and Shaq. And the lack of recognition in the years he didnt win titles.

I guess this sums up the angle of all my posts. what you say is true, Kobe was never able to string along a most dominant regular season showing with a most dominant Finals showing. But to my point, we know how legacies are built. it seems like his inferior regular season runs just don't carry as much weight as his playoff showings, or given MVP recognition. ultimately, it's the playoffs that define a players success, and kobe was fortunate enough to step up big as the indisputable top dog in 2009.

I'd also argue that Kobe has been a very fortunate player. He's played with Shaq, Glen Rice, Pau Gasol, Andrew Bynum and Lamar Odom (along with 3-4 of the greatest role players of all-time). With that being said, Bryant was dealt one band hand. He is one of the few top ten talents to not be given a championship roster at his absolute physical peak (26, 27, 28). I think that might perhaps explain why he never combined a truly dominant regular season with a truly dominant post-season. When he was at his most dominant physically, he never had the roster support to get past the first round. petty point, but maybe worth mentioning.

Bruno
08-22-2012, 04:27 PM
If you look at his numbers his free throws shot up right away in 2005-2006. I'm not saying you'd rather NOT have an elite big but it's interesting to note that Kobe's most effecient seasons were post-Shaq and that Jordan never had anyone clogging the paint...

it is weird. Bryants best TS% came in 2007 when the starting lineup consisted of himself, Smush Parker, Luke Walton, Lamar Odom, and Kwame/Bynum (age 19). he shot 46.3% from the field.

but that season kobe was getting to the line 10 times a game while shooting 87% from the strike. it would make sense for his TS% to be so great considering how dominant he was from the line, and how often he visited. but hey, that's being 28 years old for ya. he still had the knees to attack the paint at a dominant level. this is also around the time his jump shot became truly dominant (27-28 years old). he was at his apex and impossible to defend 1 v. 1.

Chronz
08-22-2012, 05:22 PM
With that being said, how accurate of an overall scoring metric is FG%? Has anyone ever built a decent argument against the validity of points per field goal attempted? I've never seen it done.

Career Point Per Field Goal Attempt Average:
MJ-1.316
KB-1.298

Just a poor mans version of TS%.


That makes the difference in scoring efficiency look a lot less drastic than the typical 50%>45% argument that has been discussed into the ground. if Kobe is that close to the GOAT in average point per field goal attempted, is he really that inefficient of a scorer? I don't think so. To expand...
Check out the Offensive RTG and TS%. Gap widens yet again



Career TS%

1. Magic- .610%
2. Kareem- .592%
3. Shaq- .586%
4. MJ- .569%
5. Bird- .564%
6. Kobe- .554%
7. Hakeem- .553%
8. Duncan- .551%
9. Wilt- .547%
10. Russell- .471%

The typical mantra seems to be something like, "yeah, he scored a ton of points, but he chucked to get there". It's a ludicrous argument when you actually dig into the stats. TS% (the most accurate metric gauging overall scoring efficiency) tells us that Kobe is right there with the other elites. If Kobe Bryant was an inefficient scorer, then what does that make Duncan, Hakeem, Wilt and Russell? Because he has a superior career TS% than all four of them.

Inefficient isnt the word, just not dominating efficiency. As for your comparisons well Russ was ****, Hakeem was somewhat overrated up until his peak years, Duncan Im not sure of but who says Wilt's wasnt a volume scorer? Early in his career he was downright Iversonian, but at his best his TS% for his league was more dominant than Kobe. When you translate his stats to today hes more efficient. Even without the translated rates his TS% with greater minutes/possession use makes him superior.


when fans only mention his FG%, they're ignoring the fact that he is a career 84% free-throw shooter (on 7.6 attempts per game). if people want to criticize Bryants scoring efficiency, then they'd need to do the same thing with Wilt, Hakeem, Duncan and Russell to be fair. i've never seen anyone every question the scoring efficiency of Wilt, Hakeem or Duncan. seems like kobe is unaccuratley criticized compared to other players in this respect.

True, they make it seem like Hakeem was unstoppable in the post.

Chronz
08-22-2012, 05:37 PM
You're absolutely right. Ultimately no one really remembers that though. that seems to be the key point in regards to legacies- they're established and solidified in the playoffs. People aren't going to go back to Kobes 2009 regular season PER, they're going to see that he was 2nd in MVP voting, on his way to the title and finals MVP. fair or not, that just seems to be how things are done. you know what i mean? nerds like us might sit around a dissect the numbers but 95% of fans just aren't going to do that- so how would they know otherwise?
Yea but the main players I mentioned solidified that season with a championship at the end of it as well, so how do you separate them by just the chip? What about the years they didnt win?



I agree with everything you say here. and don't get me wrong, i wasn't arguing that Bryants run in 2009 was better than Wilts in 1967, I'm just saying that it is close enough on paper for Bryant to at least be in the discussion.

Ignoring the regular season and minutes played sure, but when you break down the stats its not really a discussion. Then you check out the years they failed to win and Wilt was clearly more potent individually.


I guess this sums up the angle of all my posts. what you say is true, Kobe was never able to string along a most dominant regular season showing with a most dominant Finals showing. But to my point, we know how legacies are built. it seems like his inferior regular season runs just don't carry as much weight as his playoff showings, or given MVP recognition. ultimately, it's the playoffs that define a players success, and kobe was fortunate enough to step up big as the indisputable top dog in 2009.
So what do you look at when the players in question have all stepped up to win a title in dominant fashion? Dont you continue scanning the numbers to differentiate them?


I'd also argue that Kobe has been a very fortunate player. He's played with Shaq, Glen Rice, Pau Gasol, Andrew Bynum and Lamar Odom (along with 3-4 of the greatest role players of all-time). With that being said, Bryant was dealt one band hand. He is one of the few top ten talents to not be given a championship roster at his absolute physical peak (26, 27, 28).
This is probably the most interesting point, do you think a young Kobe was capable of matching/exceeding his most dominant individual season had he been required to carry more of the burden? Seems more like your saying that you feel Kobe could have put up the combination Im looking for had he had the team at ages 26-28.


I think that might perhaps explain why he never combined a truly dominant regular season with a truly dominant post-season. When he was at his most dominant physically, he never had the roster support to get past the first round. petty point, but maybe worth mentioning.
Yea, what are your thoughts on his playoff production dwindling in his 2-first round exits against what was perceived as a mediocre defensive team?

C-Style
08-22-2012, 07:17 PM
His peak wasn't as strong as many of the other top 10 guys is the whole point of this exercise. That is exactly WHY Kobe would never have a chance at making my top 5-6. Look at it like this. If Kobe had the normal timeline of a prime, or roughly 5-6 seasons, he never had a peak that would put him in the top 15 conversation. Only BECAUSE of his 12 year long prime does he now climb up yet another 7-8 spots for me.

Do you see what I mean? I am trying to explain myself properly, hopefully I am not confusing you at all dude.

Are you comparing Kobe's peak with Centers?

C-Style
08-22-2012, 07:35 PM
Kobe in his career has taken 4,472 3 pointers!!! To put that into context, Jordan, Bird and Magic combined for 4,579 3 pointer attempts between all Three of them!

I think that has a lot to do with his FG% being 46% instead of 49%. His career avg is 33%, even though that's average, I think it does hurt his overall FG percentage

Evolution23
08-22-2012, 08:08 PM
81 points bro. Stop trolling on the mamba. U stupid?

i.got.the.nutz
08-22-2012, 08:21 PM
Great thread guys.

kblo247
08-22-2012, 08:24 PM
Strictly from a statistical perspective of regular season, playoffs, on championship teams and not.

That said I still wouldnt know how to answer that, I dont know what I'm trying to say anymore but one thing Im not arguing is his stature among the games best, that requires alot more effort. Just talking about peak season(s).

Can you elaborate on which you feel were his top5 seasons both subjectively and statistically?

Since I have seen his (and Fishs) first SL game to now, I remember the context of most seasons too but I'll give it a try

Regular Season
-----------------

1) 2002-2003

I know many will say 05/06 first but I still say its 02/03. He was athletically at his best. He was the guy leaping over the likes of KG, Yao, Tim, and the like effortlessly. This was the first year he went on a binge of 40t pt games. His 3 ball was money. He remained injury free throughout the regular season, and the interesting thing is this was the first true minimal Shaq season as he "healed on company time" was overweight and Phil had Shaq take the proverbial backseat by his own admission and said its your team, get us in the playoffs.

30ppg, 5.9apg (closest to Pippen a guy could come), 6.9 RPG, 8.7fta, 38% from three, and roughly playing 42 minutes a night. He had a hell of a season IMO.

It just goes overlooked because of the playoffs versus the Spurs without the context of the fact he tore his shoulder up versus Minny in the last game and even then he almost won the series by sheer will had Horry hit the 3 in game 5 in that comeback he led.


2) 05-06

I won't lie it was a hell of year. He scored like mad. He carried a lot of with all due respect to Lamar, dead weight especially early as they tried to make Lamar-Kwame-Mihm a starting front line and Odom as just so passive at SF that on many nights they relied on Mihm or Smush for 10ppg.

It was probably his most awe inspiring from a sheer offense standpoint with 81 and the way he out scored Dallas singlehandely.

The thing is Kobe himself admitted that very summer, he didn't consider it his best because he couldn't defend at the level he wanted to that year within that scoring load.

His jumper was probably its best though from a form standpoint as he could literally rose over anyone, two, or three out wretched hands and hit. The team lacked so much talent though that they werent even 500 without Walton who was the unanimous 3rd best player on the teams Kobe had in 05-06 and 06-07.


3) 06-07

It was a slow start off knee surgery mostly because he couldn't participate in camp or preseason.

As the season progressed, Kobe got a lot out of guys you wouldn't expect despite Odom getting hurt in probably his best start of a year ever as a Laker. Luke Walton was the second best guy on the team for a stretch and they were the best Team in their division, even over Phoenixx. Then injuries mounted and Kwame, Lamar, and Luke were all out. Smush had a beef with Phil and Bynum got benched for his attitude.

Then Kobe started to rally off big scoring games to force his team in the playoffs and to finish over 500 once again. This season arguably could be better than 05-06 IMO because his defense was overall better as the season grew longer while it was opposite the year before. That said his offense just started slow that year so I have it 3rd.

4) Tie between 07-08 and 08-09 for me. They both had different contexts with the trade demand and losing to Boston, but he was dominant. He had less athleticism but his numbers were still elite and had him as the MVP or top 3. The thing is his hands started causing the turnovers to pile up, him not sticking his hands out for steals, and the demise of his 3 ball. Traditionally the age and mileage he was at these years should have marked the end of his prime if he were any other player as he did damage more by skill with post games, fakes, and the like than speed, vert, or strength

--------

Playoffs

1) 00-01

I just can't ever think of a more dominant run for his as mentioned. He just for lack of a better phrase finally got it as a young guy. He knew how to get his, get others theirs, when to watch Shaq and make Shaq watch him, and still was incredible on the glass and D. His numbers versus the Spurs and the Kings were just woah for a guy that young.

2) 01-02

He was very good. People overlook what he did versus the Nets having a very efficent t finals while defending Kidd as well which slowed Jersey much like it slowed those Suns teams Kidd was on. His western run was good versus the so called Kobe stopper and the Spurs. He even had a huge game along with Shaq to extend the Kings series before h got poisoned. I would probably rank this playoff run this high solely because of how he played Kidd and the moments he had on the road such as setting up Horrys game winner in Portland, taking th Spurs win from their hands on the road, and so on.

3) this is always the tricky one for me as I value 07/08 and 08/09 equally.

The sheer fact he meshed so quickly with Pau without a camp, the team didn't have Bynum, and they were so young and inexperienced while gettin to the finals was remarkable to watch from start to bitter end with Boston. He was just smart in 07/08. He would use the right fake hit, the right step under there, the right pass here, and he ran pick and roll with Pau so seamlessly you would think they played together for years. He also still had some, not all but some of that great athleticism as he would give you the occasional highlight like a 360 or long 4ft play.

That said 08/09 he literally went from a sheer basketball standpoint of losing in the finals, to winning a gold medal, Not missing a game, and getting to a second straight finals. This season was harder because Farmar/Vujacic/Radmanovic/Walton struggled So the team that relied on their youth to play two different tempos had no depth or consistent bench play with Odom having to start for an injured Bynum that year as well. Then the playoffs came and he had a remarkable series vs Utah which was the norm, a hell of a competing wcf with Denver, and a longer than expected Rockets series before the finals where he played the Magic. I mean raw fg% vs Orlando was bad, but only two GS in the leagues history have put up the numbers he did that finals and they are West and Jordan.

5) I'm going to get flack for this, but I really can't tell you. I look at 1 successful run and two failed ones each with their own impressive and bad moments that stop them from separating themselves from one another.

99-00 he was young, learning to grow as a full time starter, but he was huge out west. There were the blocks on Saboinis with the series on the line, the game 7 comeback where he told Dhaq and the team in the huddle "he had this" and backed up his words, the game 4 overtime vs Indy with Shaq fouled out, and the Phoenix game winner. There was also the fact his finals numbers were bad injured ankle or not which was a big ugh as I get he was hurt but he just couldn't compensate for it fully outside that OT.

03-04 people remember that ****** Finals versus Detroit that was downright horrible. They seem to forget that Kobe got the team out the west though and his value to them getting there was far more than Shaq, Malone, or Payton as he willed them over SA in that game 4 where he just literally kept coming and chipping away. There was the Houston series where Shaq showed he was human as he couldn't really guard or go at Yao how he would kill a Mutumbo and the like. Then he was also good vs Minny (still say that was Karl's series). That detorit debacle though just leaves a bad taste

05-06 Kobe was damned if eh did, damned if he didn't. They went up 3-1 with him changing how he had played all year because 40+ wouldn't beat the Suns. He gets criticized heavily for game 7 but at the half, him scoring wasn't keeping the game close either. Likewise he got **** for Game 6 which was a 50pt game they would have won had Kwame not bobbled a rebound. This to me is probably the playoff run we would all remember if they won game 6 with that rebound as it capped a 35ppg season, but the fact is he lost up 3-1 and it got hung over his head that they lost and gone got damned for not trying to carry the O after getting damned the game before for scoring too much by the LA media.

I guess I would say that there is no 5th run to me that truly says oh boy.

I mean there is one that had more sentiment over all the others, and that is the one they beat Boston in because it is Boston, and how dominant he was versus Phoenix and Utah, but I'm being honest when I say the OKC series was rough before game 6 as he dragged that leg around and the Boston series was rough too as he couldn't have his knee drained again to give him that bounce so he had to win it on sheer old man will rewatching that run in those finals. He had his moments that were damn he's good and wtf is he thinking vs Boston, so I won't say that run stands out to me outside I'm a Laker fan and hate the Celtics


-----

Conclusion

I think his career features two interesting what ifs.

What if, Kobe had a perimeter player who could actually create for him or even create for themselves to draw away attention? Would his efficency go up when he was younger if you knew Fisher, Fox, George, Smush, Luke could create for themselves off the dribble let alone for others and go off for 15-20 a night? I mean MJ had Scottie, Bird had Dennis, Maic has Scort and Worthy, Wade has Bron, Melo has had Billups and AI, Manu and Tony had and have one another.

What if, Kobe was actually given what he was promised all those years before? He was told he was getting Boozer to go with he, Lamar,mand Caron by his own admission and it didn't happen. He was told he would be getting Baron to go with him, Caron, and Lamar but that didn't go down by his own admission. He thought he would be getting Kidd for a then Bynum who had been benched by Phil, and Kidd still had game to go with Kobe being very potent, Lamar being good, and Luke having his best year. The years he should have been at his peak by normal standards just saw him with what consists of d league or out the league talent outside Lamar, which means LA literally in his opwords "sold him as a one man circus"

Hotone1401
08-22-2012, 08:26 PM
The only real knock on Kobe's stats is his efficiency. And it's quite clear he takes more jumpshots when compared to other players who attack the basket more.

I think it's fair to say Kobe is the greatest "tough shot" maker of all-time because the degree of difficulty on most of his shots are pretty wild.

Andrew32
08-22-2012, 08:56 PM
Nice revisionist history kblo247.
Most of what you posted isn't true including some of those quotes which you just made up.

Phil Jackson never told Kobe it was his team in (03) and Shaq was light years better then Kobe that year especially in the playoffs.
Shaq only missed 15 games that year and was in very good shape by the start of the playoffs.

03 Playoffs
Shaq : (30.6 PER) : 27 / 15 / 4apg / 3bpg on 57%TS
Kobe : (22.2 PER) : 32 / 5 / 5apg / 1spg on 53%TS

Kobe got injured in the 1st round that year and his poor & selfish play VS the Spurs kept LAL from advancing to the cnfinals and cruising to an easy title.

Kobe in 2002 wasn't even better then Prime Pippen.
He was just an All-Star that year... nothing special.

2010 Gasol >>> 2002 Kobe

That was one of his least impressive playoff runs and he was carried by Shaq (clear sidekick) just like in 2000.

2002 Kobe : (20.5 PER) 26 / 6 / 4.5 on 48%TS prior to the Finals. (51 TS% with Finals)

You are insane to rank that over his 09 Run.

kblo247
08-22-2012, 10:36 PM
Nice revisionist history kblo247.
Most of what you posted isn't true including some of those quotes which you just made up.

Phil Jackson never told Kobe it was his team in (03) and Shaq was light years better then Kobe that year especially in the playoffs.
Shaq only missed 15 games that year and was in very good shape by the start of the playoffs.

03 Playoffs
Shaq : (30.6 PER) : 27 / 15 / 4apg / 3bpg on 57%TS
Kobe : (22.2 PER) : 32 / 5 / 5apg / 1spg on 53%TS

Kobe got injured in the 1st round that year and his poor & selfish play VS the Spurs kept LAL from advancing to the cnfinals and cruising to an easy title.

Kobe in 2002 wasn't even better then Prime Pippen.
He was just an All-Star that year... nothing special.

2010 Gasol >>> 2002 Kobe

That was one of his least impressive playoff runs and he was carried by Shaq (clear sidekick) just like in 2000.

2002 Kobe : (20.5 PER) 26 / 6 / 4.5 on 48%TS prior to the Finals. (51 TS% with Finals)

You are insane to rank that over his 09 Run.

Know your history. Phil admits openly to going in the Laker locker room in front of Shaq and telling Kobe this is your team lead us. Kobe would then go on a 9 game binge of 40+ and vault the Lakers up the standing. Phil has even reflected on that in Philosophy 101. Kobe very much carried the team that season. Phil even admits he did it to see what Kobe was made of and piss off Shaq who was overweight and out of shape at the time still, and Kobe answered with wins and great play

And Shaq couldn't guard Duncan those playoffs. He even went on a tirade and blamed Horry, Fisher, and Fox for their defeat and had LA bring in his guys in Malone, Payton, and Russel .

------

The 2002 playoff Kobe wasn't better than Pippen?

26/6/5 vs Portland
26/5/5 vs SA
27/7/4 vs Sac
27/6/5 vs NJ

Really? Those are his series numbers!

---------
And what was made up? The fact is Kobe was at his athletic peak in 02-03 for anyone who watched him attack the basket with reverse windmills effortlessly? The fact that Kobe was told he would get Boozer/bAron/Kidd and recruited all of them only to not be given them thus his frustration growing? The fact Luke was the 3rd best player for what should have been his peak years and the team was sub 500 without him? The fact Kobe down 1-2 in Game 4 of the 04 playoffs came from court, dropped 40 plus and led La back in a comeback and then was the best guy out there for game 5 and why it was close enough for .4? The fact Kobe led the youngest core of the past two decades to multiple finals consecutively? The fact he played better D in 06/07 than 05/06? The fact Kobe had his best run when the team went 15-1 and he dominated SA and Sac? The fact LA would have eliminated Phoenix had Kwame held a rebound to stop a Tim Thomas 3?

Tell me what's revisionist

Andrew32
08-23-2012, 03:13 AM
Phil Jackson never said any of that.
You are just making up storys... its hilarious.

The 03 Lakers started 3-9 without Shaq and with Kobe leading the team.

Shaq came back and led them to a good record and he had a much better regular season once again carrying the team.
He was far better then Kobe that year (who did have a nice regular season).

Shaq played excellent defense against Duncan when they matched up even though Horry guarded him more. He was just unstoppable and at his peak.

Shaq had a great series against the Spurs and was by far the MVP in the playoffs for the Lakers.

Kobe disregarded Phil who wanted him to defer to Shaq and shot .47% TS in the first 2 games with 5TO's per game and only 1.5apg.

Then in the Final game of the series he drops 20 / 6 on 47% with 7 turnovers...

So really not only was he selfish but he played terribly costing them the series.
Horry was also terrible in that series and injury's to Fox and George hurt but Kobe's poor play was also a big reason why they lost.

Kobe was a 25 / 5 / 5 player on 50%TS in 2004.
His poor and selfish play in the Finals was the main reason they lost.

1992 Pippen > 2002 Kobe

92 Pippen : 20 / 9 / 7 on 54%TS (far greater defensive impact)
02 Kobe : 26 / 6 / 4.5 on 51%TS

26 / 4.5 on 51%TS is not that impressive of an offense.

He was just an All-Star sidekick to Shaq that year like in 00.

Keep pushing your revisionist history. :facepalm:

"Kobe had one big game in the 00 Finals so he was just as important as Shaq" lol.

GREATNESS ONE
08-23-2012, 03:19 AM
Kobe sucks and even after he win another title or two and retires he'll still barely make the top 10.

MickeyMgl
08-23-2012, 03:57 AM
Seems like hes the one player among the 10-15 best players of all time who needs the most excuses aka context to ignore all statistical insight.

A couple of very simple factors. The team he joined, his age when he joined them. Also, none of the other top 10 teamed with another during their peak. The closest was Magic and Kareem, but besides having games that complemented one another, Kareem was on the clear decline. Physical peak is about 25 or so. Great players either have a team built around them by then, or are on non-contending teams flexing their statistical muscle.

Bryant had basically one or two seasons to "let it out" after O'Neal was traded and the Lakers were saddled with a lot of dead weight. He was injured the first season. This also was around the time he had a couple of years more or less hijacked by that wackaloo in Colorado, during which he not coincidentally had a precipitous dip in his efficiency, which bounced back immediately when the matter was over.

Also, regardless of the circumstances, Bryant just doesn't get the benefit of the doubt from a lot of fans that other greats do. Because excuses are made for ALL OF THEM.

But it also reflects the fickleness of many fans. They criticize a guy for being selfish and not a team player while he is winning championships and demonstrably sacrificing his stats to do so. Kobe didn't suddenly become capable of 81-point games at the age of 27. They give his teammate ALL the credit for three championships, a logic which suggests Bryant would have had to compete AGAINST his teammate to get any credit. Some people don't know what they want. Team play and championships, or individual awards and Finals MVP?

Anyway, the pairing of Shaq and Kobe is unique in the history of the NBA. I think that is part of it. Off-court issues were part of it. The team and his age were part of it.



So I ask you, what do stats hate about Kobe's game? Why do they never agree with him having a great PEAK in any given year

81 points is a stat, right? If he had followed through the half dozen or so other times he was pacing 75+ points, we'd probably easily recognize that as a great peak.

Also, being the only player ever to score 30 points in a quarter TWICE is a stat. 55 points in a half is a stat. 12 3-pointers in a game is a stat.

Maybe you should explain which stats is it that YOU are choosing to focus on that YOU wish to interpret as "stats hating Kobe"? 'Cause they have cousins that seem to like him a lot.



that doesn't hold true for guys like Wilt, Shaq, MJ, Kareem, Bird, Magic, Moses, LeBron, Wade

:) You flatter Wade.

MickeyMgl
08-23-2012, 04:22 AM
The 03 Lakers started 3-9 without Shaq and with Kobe leading the team.

Shaq came back and led them to a good record and he had a much better regular season once again carrying the team.
He was far better then Kobe that year.

The MVP voters that year disagree.



Shaq had a great series against the Spurs and was by far the MVP in the playoffs for the Lakers.

Kobe disregarded Phil who wanted him to defer to Shaq and shot .47% TS in the first 2 games with 5TO's per game and only 1.5apg.

Then in the Final game of the series he drops 20 / 6 on 47% with 7 turnovers...

So really not only was he selfish but he played terribly costing them the series.

Too bad Shaq let his team down by choosing to heal on company time, costing the Lakers home court in those first two games. By the way, Game 2 was a blowout, so you'd be hard-pressed to single out any one guy, including Kobe, for that loss. Shaq's +/- was worse than Kobe's in each of those games.

NYKalltheway
08-23-2012, 05:58 AM
too bad people know how to watch the game. Stats will never tell the whole story. It maybe a fact, but one of the most flawed facts ever when it comes to sports or atleast basketball.

;)

fact and truth don't really go along ;)

thenaj17
08-23-2012, 06:38 AM
Shaq, Wilt, Duncan, Hakeem, MJ, Magic, Moses, Kobe, Bird and Kareem in some order.

Good list but i wouldn't have Moses in there.

As to your question, stats can be very misleading at times. Look at Wilt - biggest stats of all time in every category, but they don't take into context the opposition, speed of play (possessions per game), teammates.

Granted Kobe takes a lot of stupid shots and infuriates a lot of us real fans but watching his career, especially since Shaq left, he has been the only player on his team capable of creating his own shot in 1 on 1 matchups.

Pau Gasol has been the best at helping that with some quality post moves but has been very inconsistent.
Caron Butler was a good player for a year but not a top scorer.
Odom was never consistent game to game and rarely created his own shot more than 2 or 3 times a game.
Bynum gets the majority of his points from oops, easy dunks from Kobe/Pau setups but 1 on 1 post ups, doesn't really do a lot.
Sessions is the only PG Kobe had in his career who could get his own.

So that's a lot of work for Kobe. He gets the ball numerous times a game with 4 seconds or less on the shot clock so has to hoist no hopers.

I'm not defending his shot choice but his stats do make him look worse than his real talent and production levels.

Love you signature by the way. Jordan Bulls is an idiot!

3ballbomber
08-23-2012, 07:07 AM
Happy 34th Birthday to Kobe Bryant :)

beliges
08-23-2012, 01:29 PM
What's funny about this thread is some people stating that kobes stats were not as good as Shaq.or wilt or Duncan or whoever when.in reality he has them all beat in the most important state of all in championships. All those players mentioned have had just as good, if not better, teams than Kobe has had but yet they were unable to win and dominate as much. And some of you are trying to support that argument by saying kobes w/s was not as high? Here's a thought, if you have to stretch and look at PER or W/S as your only justification to diminish a player's success, that Guy was probably beyond great.

Chronz
08-23-2012, 03:34 PM
What's funny about this thread is some people stating that kobes stats were not as good as Shaq.or wilt or Duncan or whoever when.in reality he has them all beat in the most important state of all in championships. All those players mentioned have had just as good, if not better, teams than Kobe has had but yet they were unable to win and dominate as much. And some of you are trying to support that argument by saying kobes w/s was not as high? Here's a thought, if you have to stretch and look at PER or W/S as your only justification to diminish a player's success, that Guy was probably beyond great.

Not really because everyone knows winning is a team function and we are examining years in which all the players won and separating them when they lose. Kobe having more rings was never questioned, just comparing all the winning seasons.

Still, its not the only stat that matters. If it were, then Elvin Hayes would be widely considered above Karl Malone and Charles Barkley. Good luck selling that one, and thats between 2 guy who NEVER won a ring. So when you get to lofty numbers like 3, 4, 5, I dont see much difference. Im not going to boil down a players career simply by rings, Im more interested on the impact he had on the team throughout his career.

DaLakerz Rulz
08-23-2012, 03:51 PM
Are you comparing Kobe's peak with Centers?

Exactly, this is one of the problems - everyone here is comparing Kobe's stats with centers and bigs. Completely different games, and that factors into to their "efficiency". Michael was just on another level so we can get any comparison there. But how many other shooting guards can anyone really argue are in the top 10-20? Yea not many...

Hawkeye15
08-23-2012, 03:51 PM
Kobe in his career has taken 4,472 3 pointers!!! To put that into context, Jordan, Bird and Magic combined for 4,579 3 pointer attempts between all Three of them!

I think that has a lot to do with his FG% being 46% instead of 49%. His career avg is 33%, even though that's average, I think it does hurt his overall FG percentage

Then perhap Kobe shouldn't take so many low percentage shots.....

Hawkeye15
08-23-2012, 03:53 PM
Exactly, this is one of the problems - everyone here is comparing Kobe's stats with centers and bigs. Completely different games, and that factors into to their "efficiency". Michael was just on another level so we can get any comparison there. But how many other shooting guards can anyone really argue are in the top 10-20? Yea not many...

So please explain why some of the great perimeter players still compare to bigs when it comes to offensive ratings, win shares, TS%, APER, and many other metrics to measure statistical performance? I can. Do you understand why?

DaLakerz Rulz
08-23-2012, 03:58 PM
So please explain why some of the great perimeter players still compare to bigs when it comes to offensive ratings, win shares, TS%, APER, and many other metrics to measure statistical performance? I can. Do you understand why?

Kobe takes a tons of bad shots. Everyone here knows that. But at least in terms of TS% - Kobe's is not that different from anyone in the top 10. Its already been posted in here in previous pages, so I am not going to do that again. Just curious, which other great perimeter players are you speaking of?

C-Style
08-23-2012, 04:20 PM
Then perhap Kobe shouldn't take so many low percentage shots.....

No need to, he's not below average from the 3pt line. Or any part of the floor for that matter.

Hawkeye15
08-23-2012, 04:22 PM
Kobe takes a tons of bad shots. Everyone here knows that. But at least in terms of TS% - Kobe's is not that different from anyone in the top 10. Its already been posted in here in previous pages, so I am not going to do that again. Just curious, which other great perimeter players are you speaking of?

Jordan, Magic, Bird, for instance (LeBron or Paul would be modern guys that fit the criteria). Wing players dominate in other facets of statistics, as well as shoot free throws at a stronger rate, hit three's (which is weighed in TS% to offset bigs getting nothing but interior shots), which lets wing players who totally dominate achieve the same offensive ratings, win shares, PER, APER, and most other metrics that give statistical ratings of dominance. The advanced stat movement has done a great job equalizing different positions against each other so, yes, we CAN compare a center and a point guard.

Kobe takes dumb shots, it kills his efficiency, therefore he will not have a peak season from game 1 to game 100 that stack up with many of the other top 10 players. That is why stats hate Kobe. That is the answer. High volume scorers eventually run into a wall of a combination of overusage and overshooting. The most efficient players, ie, kings of the stat world, know what they are not good at, and avoid it, because, well they are no good at it and it doesn't help their team.

Hawkeye15
08-23-2012, 04:23 PM
No need to, he's not below average from the 3pt line. Or any part of the floor for that matter.

You guys wanted to know why his stats don't hold up to Jordan, Wilt, Kareem, and some of the other top 10 players. Well that is your answer. He is not a good three point shooter. Stop taking them.

Lakersfan2483
08-23-2012, 04:30 PM
he does take a lot of bail-outs. probably 2-4 a game, depending on the game. it's fair to bring it up. the devils advocate argument would be that he chucks too many threes. that's been my biggest complaint over the past year or two. I think Kobe would have ended up closer to 48% or 49% for his career if he didn't fall in love with the three, and if he hadn't been taking bailout shots his entire career. as we know- he just didn't care about that (%). but is important, Phil has alluded to his FG%. He was quoted saying that one of the biggest differences between MJ and Kobe was FG%, and that Kobe has never found a way to get to 50%.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_WNTx3gG_s

With that being said, how accurate of an overall scoring metric is FG%? Has anyone ever built a decent argument against the validity of points per field goal attempted? I've never seen it done.

Career Point Per Field Goal Attempt Average:
MJ-1.316
KB-1.298

That makes the difference in scoring efficiency look a lot less drastic than the typical 50%>45% argument that has been discussed into the ground. if Kobe is that close to the GOAT in average point per field goal attempted, is he really that inefficient of a scorer? I don't think so. To expand...


Career TS%

1. Magic- .610%
2. Kareem- .592%
3. Shaq- .586%
4. MJ- .569%
5. Bird- .564%
6. Kobe- .554%
7. Hakeem- .553%
8. Duncan- .551%
9. Wilt- .547%
10. Russell- .471%

The typical mantra seems to be something like, "yeah, he scored a ton of points, but he chucked to get there". It's a ludicrous argument when you actually dig into the stats. TS% (the most accurate metric gauging overall scoring efficiency) tells us that Kobe is right there with the other elites. If Kobe Bryant was an inefficient scorer, then what does that make Duncan, Hakeem, Wilt and Russell? Because he has a superior career TS% than all four of them.

when fans only mention his FG%, they're ignoring the fact that he is a career 84% free-throw shooter (on 7.6 attempts per game). if people want to criticize Bryants scoring efficiency, then they'd need to do the same thing with Wilt, Hakeem, Duncan and Russell to be fair. i've never seen anyone every question the scoring efficiency of Wilt, Hakeem or Duncan. seems like kobe is unaccuratley criticized compared to other players in this respect.



So we shouldn't use PER in any future comparisons of any players because its only based on how everyone else is doing?

ive seen you use PER to compare everything, yet when I do so to express Bryant as a fair comparison to other top ten talents, its no longer valid? Doesn't seem fair JB. If your point was true, then how do you explain Magic never once putting up a higher post-season PER than Kobe in 2009? Are you saying that Magics 80's showtime roster (KAJ, Worthy, Cooper, Wilkes, Nixon) were inferior to Bryants late 2000's help (Gasol, Bynum, Odom)? PER isn't only based on how everyone is doing.



you have PER numbers for individual playoff series? I'd love to see them (Did you find those numbers on that ESPN top 50 finals Performances link?). Here is what basketball reference lists for overall post-season:

1998 post-season PER: 28.1
1992 post-season PER: 27.2
1993 post-season PER: 30.1

with these numbers his '98 run isn't really any more dominant than what he did in '92 or '93.


you need to compare those seasons within the given context of each post-season run JB. portland in '92 had a much better defense than Utah in '98. shouldn't we expect MJ to do better against a much worse defensive team? couldn't that explain the difference in playoff PER?

In the 1998 playoffs MJ and the Bulls faced:
Utah Jazz- (17th out of 29 in Defensive Rating).
Indiana Pacers- (5th out of 29 in Defensive Rating).
Charlotte Hornets- (15th out of 29 in Defensive Rating).
New Jersey Nets- (21st out of 29 in Defensive Rating).

In the 1992 playoffs MJ and the Bulls faced:
Portland Trailblazers- (3rd out of 27 in Defensive Rating).
Cleveland Cavaliers- (11th out of 27 in Defensive Rating).
New York Knicks- (2nd out of 27 in Defensive Rating).
Miami Heat- (25th out of 27 in Defensive Rating).

It would make sense for Jordan to have a slightly lower PER in 1992, because he faced off against far superior defenses in the post-season than he did in 1998. Yes, they got to play Miami in the first round of 1992, but that was only three games. MJ and the Bulls had 13 games against the 2nd and 3rd ranked defenses in the NBA during the '92 run, of corse his numbers will be lower than in '98 when he played against three mediocre at best defenses, along with Indiana (5th).

Good insight and a legitimate answer to a lot of people's questions around here.

C-Style
08-23-2012, 04:39 PM
You guys wanted to know why his stats don't hold up to Jordan, Wilt, Kareem, and some of the other top 10 players. Well that is your answer. He is not a good three point shooter. Stop taking them.

You guys?? I never asked, I'm not the one who is obsessed on hating on this guy for not shooting 2% higher for his career. IF his career was 48% we coulnt even be talking about this BS.

All because he misses about 1.5 shots less than the GOAT

Chronz
08-23-2012, 04:45 PM
The MVP voters that year disagree.
But you agree that Shaq was more productive and that the Lakers still sucked without Shaq, a trend that has lasted throughout their partnership. Lakers compete at a high level with or without Kobe, Lakers without Shaq tread .500.


Too bad Shaq let his team down by choosing to heal on company time, costing the Lakers home court in those first two games.
He shouldn't have put it that way but he didn't let the Lakers down, he said what he did in frustration, people were griping on what to him was a significant injury, one that he had been weighing his options on. He chose the option that would have him on the court sooner, imagine if he had actually done what was best for his career, he would have missed the majority of the year and the Lakers would have likely missed the playoffs altogether considering their poor play when Kobe was by himself.


By the way, Game 2 was a blowout, so you'd be hard-pressed to single out any one guy, including Kobe, for that loss. Shaq's +/- was worse than Kobe's in each of those games.

Shaq's +/- all year was better, and a few games can be meaningless, its why the sample size still matters.

Hawkeye15
08-23-2012, 04:48 PM
You guys?? I never asked, I'm not the one who is obsessed on hating on this guy for not shooting 2% higher for his career. IF his career was 48% we coulnt even be talking about this BS.

All because he misses about 1.5 shots less than the GOAT

I meant many of the people in this thread bashing stats because it doesn't show Kobe on par peak wise with some others. Don't take it personally, I should have worded differently.

It has nothing to do with archaic FG%. It has to do with much more depth.

Lakersfan2483
08-23-2012, 04:52 PM
When I look at Kobe's career, the thing that catches my attention the most is his sustained greatness. He has continued to play at a very high level for 10 plus years now. His longevity and ability to perform/sustain great play is what separates him from a lot of players past and present. And while he may not have top 5 stats of all time, there is something to be said about what he has accomplished over his career thus far.

His stats in terms of efficiency and shooting pct.... aren't as high as Jordan, Magic, Kareem, Shaq, etc... however what he has done in terms of winning while still putting up very good numbers and a top 10 true shooting pct..... amongst the all time greats is one of the many reasons he is considered a top 10 player of all time. He, along with Michael Jordan are the only guards to be ranked in the top 5 in terms of career pts., which says something about how great these two men were considering basketball has always been a quote, "big man's game."

Piggybacking on some of the things that have been said by posters like Bruno87, and others, I don't think people realize that Kobe's shooting pcts... and stats aren't as bad as they are making them out to be. As Bruno mentioned, his ts% is one of the highest all time and above such greats like Duncan, Russell and Olajuwon ( big men) who don't get criticized like that of Bryant. When you look at Kobe's peak and prime years they stack up with most all time greats not named Jordan, Kareem or Magic in terms of efficiency, shooting pct., PER, etc..... BTW, I am not saying they are better than Oscar's, Wilt's, Duncan's, etc... but that his measures up with those guys.....

DaLakerz Rulz
08-23-2012, 04:52 PM
Jordan, Magic, Bird, for instance (LeBron or Paul would be modern guys that fit the criteria). Wing players dominate in other facets of statistics, as well as shoot free throws at a stronger rate, hit three's (which is weighed in TS% to offset bigs getting nothing but interior shots), which lets wing players who totally dominate achieve the same offensive ratings, win shares, PER, APER, and most other metrics that give statistical ratings of dominance. The advanced stat movement has done a great job equalizing different positions against each other so, yes, we CAN compare a center and a point guard.

Kobe takes dumb shots, it kills his efficiency, therefore he will not have a peak season from game 1 to game 100 that stack up with many of the other top 10 players. That is why stats hate Kobe. That is the answer. High volume scorers eventually run into a wall of a combination of overusage and overshooting. The most efficient players, ie, kings of the stat world, know what they are not good at, and avoid it, because, well they are no good at it and it doesn't help their team.

Except none of those players you mentioned plays a traditional shooting guard role like Kobe does (other than Jordan - who he is not close to at all) Magic, Paul, and James are also had/have a large role as playmakers for their team in terms of assisting. I'll give you Bird, although he doesn't really blow Kobe's stats out of the water. If what you are saying is true and that everything equals out, we should see equivalent stats on average amongst bigs playing inside and all perimeter players. Maybe that is true, I can't say for sure.

What you say about Kobe's inefficiency is true, and its really not a big secret at all. But I still think its ridiculous to nitpick at these stats when the playing styles are so different. Not to mention, his advanced stats aren't even that different from some of the names I have seen mentioned on here as top 10. Advanced stats may help but they still aren't a perfect method of comparing players. If they were there would be no reason to debate on the top nba players. Lets put all these calculations for each player down on a spreadsheet and sort by highest ratings.

LoveMeOrHateMe
08-23-2012, 04:55 PM
Kobe haters always making excuses smh
I've heard it all now! So just because he never had great peak seasons as some of the others that means he's inferior to them, so therefore no matter if he wins 1-2 more rings with finals mvps included you he can't move up into the top 5 smh some of your peoples logics are flawed,biased,and embarrassing... But as far as I'm concerned and many others as well Kobe is a top 5 player ever

MetroMan
08-23-2012, 05:08 PM
so many people hate kobe. he can never win with the haters.

Chronz
08-23-2012, 05:08 PM
A couple of very simple factors. The team he joined, his age when he joined them.
He came off the bench and was a top 6th man, sounds like a pretty good position to be in for someone his age. Kobe has NEVER been gun shy, the Lakers did a masterful job in whatever part they played in developing Kobe.


Also, none of the other top 10 teamed with another during their peak. The closest was Magic and Kareem, but besides having games that complemented one another, Kareem was on the clear decline. Physical peak is about 25 or so. Great players either have a team built around them by then, or are on non-contending teams flexing their statistical muscle.
You dont think we have various examples of all of these situations playing out for a number of players comparable to Kobe?


Bryant had basically one or two seasons to "let it out" after O'Neal was traded and the Lakers were saddled with a lot of dead weight. He was injured the first season.
He got injured mid season and was certainly in no worse shape than he was the year prior when he came into the year out of shape and nursing injuries on top of dealing with those allegations. That first year without Shaq and outside of the triangle were suppose to free Kobe up, and show case his all around skills. Well he did average 6 assists but it came with career worst passing efficiency, and low scoring efficiency.

It wasnt until the Lakers tried to instill the triangle that his numbers recovered, coincidentally that came around the time he got injured. When he came back, Odom went down shortly after, that along with a road heavy schedule finally tightening up, the Lakers were truly done. They were the worst defensive team in the league, very little Kobe could do about that so I dont blame him. But I dont see the point in discarding his performance as too injured to count. Long before synergy hinted at Kobe's relatively limited efficiency in the PnR, I pointed to the 05 season as a sign of how Kobe was best utilized in motion offenses where could attack from the wing/mid post, anywhere where he doesn't have to create everything off the dribble.


This also was around the time he had a couple of years more or less hijacked by that wackaloo in Colorado, during which he not coincidentally had a precipitous dip in his efficiency, which bounced back immediately when the matter was over.

Lots of coincidences, kind of hard to make sense of all the different circumstances revolving around those years, were the previous 2 years just mentally exhausting to the point where he couldn't perform at his peak? Lets not forget this was right around the time the rule changes were made too.


Also, regardless of the circumstances, Bryant just doesn't get the benefit of the doubt from a lot of fans that other greats do. Because excuses are made for ALL OF THEM.

I should have made the point when a troll earlier had called me out on making excuses. Excuses CAN be legitimate


But it also reflects the fickleness of many fans. They criticize a guy for being selfish and not a team player while he is winning championships and demonstrably sacrificing his stats to do so. Kobe didn't suddenly become capable of 81-point games at the age of 27. They give his teammate ALL the credit for three championships, a logic which suggests Bryant would have had to compete AGAINST his teammate to get any credit. Some people don't know what they want. Team play and championships, or individual awards and Finals MVP?
Yea I like to compare a player in every situation possible. How productive they were in different caliber of teams.


81 points is a stat, right? If he had followed through the half dozen or so other times he was pacing 75+ points, we'd probably easily recognize that as a great peak.

Also, being the only player ever to score 30 points in a quarter TWICE is a stat. 55 points in a half is a stat. 12 3-pointers in a game is a stat.

Maybe you should explain which stats is it that YOU are choosing to focus on that YOU wish to interpret as "stats hating Kobe"? 'Cause they have cousins that seem to like him a lot.

Season marks of usage/efficiency, gauging the combination of dominance in both with the help of PER/WS and the how well the teams offense flourished with his production.



:) You flatter Wade.
Seriously, check out Wade's regular seasons the years he was on subpar teams, they were monstrous statistically for a few years. Then the year he won Finals MVP.

Lakersfan2483
08-23-2012, 05:09 PM
By the way, not sure if this has been answered, but what do you all consider peak for a player? In Kobe's case, I still believe he was at his absolute best during the 02-03 season. He didn't score as much as say 05-6 or 06-07, however he was at his peak in terms of athleticism and overall ability to put a team on his back and play at the very best he could play. 02-03 was his best season in my opinion (regular season wise). During that year, he had something like 9 straight 40 point games, who knows how many times he had over 30 plus pts, and still grabbed around 7 boards a night and handed out over 5 assts per night.

smith&wesson
08-23-2012, 05:10 PM
I think that depends on what you have heard but Im comparing the best season Kobe ever had with the best other GOAT contenders ever had. What is it about Kobe that makes up that gap, has he?

he may not have had the same stats in a peak year but i think the reason why he can be put in the same breath as some of these guys is because he has been playing at a high level for such a long time. maybe its the longgevity

Hawkeye15
08-23-2012, 05:10 PM
Kobe haters always making excuses smh
I've heard it all now! So just because he meet had great peak seasons as some of the others that means he's inferior to them, so therefore no matter if he wins 1-2 more rings with finals mvps included you he can't move up into the top 5 smh some of your peoples logics are flawed,biased,and embarrassing... But as far as I'm concerned and many others as well Kobe is a top 5 player ever

Who said he was inferior?

Hawkeye15
08-23-2012, 05:12 PM
When I look at Kobe's career, the thing that catches my attention the most is his sustained greatness. He has continued to play at a very high level for 10 plus years now. His longevity and ability to perform/sustain great play is what separates him from a lot of players past and present. And while he may not have top 5 stats of all time, there is something to be said about what he has accomplished over his career thus far.

His stats in terms of efficiency and shooting pct.... aren't as high as Jordan, Magic, Kareem, Shaq, etc... however what he has done in terms of winning while still putting up very good numbers and a top 10 true shooting pct..... amongst the all time greats is one of the many reasons he is considered a top 10 player of all time. He, along with Michael Jordan are the only guards to be ranked in the top 5 in terms of career pts., which says something about how great these two men were considering basketball has always been a quote, "big man's game."

Piggybacking on some of the things that have been said by posters like Bruno87, and others, I don't think people realize that Kobe's shooting pcts... and stats aren't as bad as they are making them out to be. As Bruno mentioned, his ts% is one of the highest all time and above such greats like Duncan, Russell and Olajuwon ( big men) who don't get criticized like that of Bryant. When you look at Kobe's peak and prime years they stack up with most all time greats not named Jordan, Kareem or Magic in terms of efficiency, shooting pct., PER, etc..... BTW, I am not saying they are better than Oscar's, Wilt's, Duncan's, etc... but that his measures up with those guys.....

2 things- I agree on your first sentence of the post, 10000000%. That is why I have him top 10, no doubt.

Next, who the hell is saying Kobe's stats are bad? Seriously, is that what Laker/Kobe fans see anytime there is slight criticism of Kobe? His stats are ELITE, all time worthy. But the other guys inside the top 10, many of them simply have better PEAK seasons statistically. Not many have the length of prime however, which offsets the argument as a whole, the question of the thread was asking us to simply explain why Kobe's PEAK didn't match up with his assumed peers.

Hawkeye15
08-23-2012, 05:14 PM
Except none of those players you mentioned plays a traditional shooting guard role like Kobe does (other than Jordan - who he is not close to at all) Magic, Paul, and James are also had/have a large role as playmakers for their team in terms of assisting. I'll give you Bird, although he doesn't really blow Kobe's stats out of the water.

What you say about Kobe's inefficiency is true, and its really not a big secret at all. But I still think its ridiculous to nitpick at these stats when the playing styles are so different. Not to mention, his advanced stats aren't even that different from some of the names I have seen mentioned on here as top 10. Advanced stats may help but they still aren't a perfect method of comparing players. If they were there would be no reason to debate on the top nba players. Lets put all these calculations for each player down on a spreadsheet and sort by highest ratings.

I don't disagree with all of this, and isn't that why we are here? To debate at a higher level than sitting around the water cooler talking to the dude who is repeating what the local sports radio analysts told him that morning?

Hawkeye15
08-23-2012, 05:16 PM
By the way, not sure if this has been answered, but what do you all consider peak for a player? In Kobe's case, I still believe he was at his absolute best during the 02-03 season. He didn't score as much as say 05-6 or 06-07, however he was at his peak in terms of athleticism and overall ability to put a team on his back and play at the very best he could play. 02-03 was his best season in my opinion (regular season wise). During that year, he had something like 9 straight 40 point games, who knows how many times he had over 30 plus pts, and still grabbed around 7 boards a night and handed out over 5 assts per night.

Kobe's peak is tough to identify. He bounced up and down too much. All of it great, but no 2-3 year period that stands alone as "wow, that was it". He also doesn't have a period of years where you say, "dude seriously declined here".

Lakersfan2483
08-23-2012, 05:16 PM
2 things- I agree on your first sentence of the post, 10000000%. That is why I have him top 10, no doubt.

Next, who the hell is saying Kobe's stats are bad? Seriously, is that what Laker/Kobe fans see anytime there is slight criticism of Kobe? His stats are ELITE, all time worthy. But the other guys inside the top 10, many of them simply have better PEAK seasons statistically. Not many have the length of prime however, which offsets the argument as a whole, the question of the thread was asking us to simply explain why Kobe's PEAK didn't match up with his assumed peers.

Maybe 'bad' was a poor choice of words, I meant that some people say that his stats aren't comparable to the other all time greats and I think Bruno did a great job of refuting that point. In no way did I take this as baiting thread or a diss thread to Kobe.:cool:

DaLakerz Rulz
08-23-2012, 05:20 PM
I don't disagree with all of this, and isn't that why we are here? To debate at a higher level than sitting around the water cooler talking to the dude who is repeating what the local sports radio analysts told him that morning?

Haha yea for sure man....just felt the need to step in and defend Kobe for once. Believe it or not I have criticized him more often than not in the Lakers forum. Dude is frustrating as hell to watch.

Hawkeye15
08-23-2012, 05:20 PM
Maybe 'bad' was a poor choice of words, I meant that some people say that his stats aren't comparable to the other all time greats and I think Bruno did a great job of refuting that point. In no way did I take this as baiting thread or a diss thread to Kobe.:cool:

I know I come off hard on Kobe many times on this site. But I try and make sure and balance it by stating as often as possible that I truly believe he is a top 10 player ever. No way you could say Kobe's numbers are anything BUT special. There have just been a few other players (and I mean no more than 10-20) that have had a few seasons individually, statistically speaking, better than Kobe. But 2/3 of those get knocked away when the longevity of Kobe's dominance not only equalizes their potential advantage, but pushes them aside completely.

Lakersfan2483
08-23-2012, 05:21 PM
Kobe's peak is tough to identify. He bounced up and down too much. All of it great, but no 2-3 year period that stands alone as "wow, that was it". He also doesn't have a period of years where you say, "dude seriously declined here".

I can understand what you are saying. In terms of his best individual years, he had the 02-03, 05-06, 06-07, and 07-08 campaigns that come to mind. Also, in 01 his career really took off and he went to another level during this year.

Hawkeye15
08-23-2012, 05:21 PM
Haha yea for sure man....just felt the need to step in and defend Kobe for once. Believe it or not I have criticized him more often than not in the Lakers forum. Dude is frustrating as hell to watch.

He is even more frustrating to watch when he is playing against your team...

****er, he kills my team every time we play them.

smith&wesson
08-23-2012, 05:23 PM
2 things- I agree on your first sentence of the post, 10000000%. That is why I have him top 10, no doubt.

Next, who the hell is saying Kobe's stats are bad? Seriously, is that what Laker/Kobe fans see anytime there is slight criticism of Kobe? His stats are ELITE, all time worthy. But the other guys inside the top 10, many of them simply have better PEAK seasons statistically. Not many have the length of prime however, which offsets the argument as a whole, the question of the thread was asking us to simply explain why Kobe's PEAK didn't match up with his assumed peers.

i think that says it all right there.

kobe's longgevity is what stands out to ppl. not one or two peak seasons in his prime. while kobes numers are still elite he is more known for how long he has sustained those numbers..

Lakersfan2483
08-23-2012, 05:27 PM
I know I come off hard on Kobe many times on this site. But I try and make sure and balance it by stating as often as possible that I truly believe he is a top 10 player ever. No way you could say Kobe's numbers are anything BUT special. There have just been a few other players (and I mean no more than 10-20) that have had a few seasons individually, statistically speaking, better than Kobe. But 2/3 of those get knocked away when the longevity of Kobe's dominance not only equalizes their potential advantage, but pushes them aside completely.


I can respect that and I agree with a lot of what you have said regarding Kobe.:cool::)

Chronz
08-23-2012, 05:35 PM
Good list but i wouldn't have Moses in there.

As to your question, stats can be very misleading at times. Look at Wilt - biggest stats of all time in every category, but they don't take into context the opposition, speed of play (possessions per game), teammates.
Yeah I might be overrating Moses right now, still when we talk about Wilt's stats, its best to focus on possession based analysis, that way we are considering the pace, just never losing sight of the minutes. His usage and efficiency give us the % of the offense he accounted for and how well he did individually.
Granted some stats cant be accounted for simply because they didn't track them, so in their case those stats are estimates but taking them as what they are, Wilt falls behind MJ.


I'm not defending his shot choice but his stats do make him look worse than his real talent and production levels.

This is the crux of the debate, to make up for a statistical gap of any magnitude, which players would you say dont have a comparable intangible worth to Kobe? Just out of players who have won titles of significant note (statistically)

Shaq, Wilt, MJ, KAJ, Bron, Duncan, Hakeem, to a lesser degree Magic, Moses and Bird?

If this seems like an impossible question to answer its because it is, but take a guess anyways.

BULLSFAN0810
08-23-2012, 05:57 PM
There are lies , Damn lies , And statistics (ACTUAL QUOTE)...ask any economy major or politician, you can make numbers say whatever you want. SEEING IS BELIEVING.

MickeyMgl
08-23-2012, 06:10 PM
Then perhap Kobe shouldn't take so many low percentage shots.....

For a large chunk of his career, that was a function of playing with a 350-lb behemoth occupying the lane.

MickeyMgl
08-23-2012, 06:34 PM
But you agree that Shaq was more productive and that the Lakers still sucked without Shaq, a trend that has lasted throughout their partnership. Lakers compete at a high level with or without Kobe, Lakers without Shaq tread .500.

When Shaq was absent from those teams, it wasn't suddenly a team built around Kobe. It was a team built around Shaq... without Shaq. Kobe took up much of the statistical slack... but it was still a team built around Shaq. It should come as little surprise that the team just scuffled through.

Hawkeye15
08-23-2012, 07:51 PM
For a large chunk of his career, that was a function of playing with a 350-lb behemoth occupying the lane.

b.s. It's a decision on shot selection, an arrogance. "Me taking a fallaway 22 footer is better than the rest of these idiots can get".

beliges
08-23-2012, 09:16 PM
For a large chunk of his career, that was a function of playing with a 350-lb behemoth occupying the lane.

b.s. It's a decision on shot selection, an arrogance. "Me taking a fallaway 22 footer is better than the rest of these idiots can get".

Why do you knock Kobe for this when he's achieved more success and dominance in terms of winning than anyone in the modern.era of the NBA? I mean if anything that just goes to show that the way u look.at "efficiency" is not the best way to determine greatness. No matter how inefficient you may say he was as compared to other players, he was able to lead his teams to championships. That's al that should matter, especially since the rest of the players on the top.10 list him.similar or even better talent around them as Kobe did.

Chronz
08-24-2012, 12:21 AM
When Shaq was absent from those teams, it wasn't suddenly a team built around Kobe. It was a team built around Shaq... without Shaq. Kobe took up much of the statistical slack... but it was still a team built around Shaq. It should come as little surprise that the team just scuffled through.

Odd that the voters would miss the value of a players team when considering the Most VALUABLE Player, isnt it?

seikou8
08-24-2012, 03:22 AM
man this thread is best in a llong time no trolling actual discussion about my favorite non knick player.

kblo247
08-24-2012, 03:25 AM
This is the crux of the debate, to make up for a statistical gap of any magnitude, which players would you say dont have a comparable intangible worth to Kobe? Just out of players who have won titles of significant note (statistically)

Shaq, Wilt, MJ, KAJ, Bron, Duncan, Hakeem, to a lesser degree Magic, Moses and Bird?

If this seems like an impossible question to answer its because it is, but take a guess anyways.

Intangible Value? Duncan is easily inferior

There comes a point you have to go straight to the fact he has never been enough of a leader to defend his title. Now the crux of the problem with him defending said titles are Kobe has knocked him off more times than most, but it is still an intangible value Kobe holds over him

Whether you call it stubbornness, will to win, pride, whatever .... Kobe has the fact he has 3 peated, went to 4 finals in 5 years, and then went to 3 finals straight and repeated once more. We can talk situation or whatever, but the fact is the second 3 straight finals run from Kobe shows a mentality difference Duncan and him have.

Duncan wants to win, ultimate pro, nice guy, bit boring for the casual. The thing is Kobe led the youngest core to a Finals by beating his team in 08, led said team back once again in 09 despite really having 0 time off with the Olympics, no bench production since Odom had to take over for Bynym getting hurt, and then in 10 led them back to yet another finals and helped his team win another ring all on a knee that was shot.

Duncan just doesn't have the same engine as him. He wears down far quicker especially after a title run which is interesting too as Pop has always paced his and Tony/Manu minutes better and the fact of the matter being that Tim has played less ball than Kobe. The is a certain point you have to literally will your body thru it all and Kobe has did just that to defend his titles hurt and all and get to multiple finals consecutively.

Even you have to have admit it's harder to defend rings than it is to win them and that it even harder to make 3 finals trips consecutively twice in your career than one offs like 99 03 05 07, where you basically recharge your batteries each time after being eliminated by you guessed it, Kobe in most of your repeat years

Speaking strictly intangible value

kblo247
08-24-2012, 03:29 AM
Odd that the voters would miss the value of a players team when considering the Most VALUABLE Player, isnt it?

Pretty much.

Shaq goes out and he has Madsen starting. Funny enough it got Madsen MLE money from Minny but still.

The fact is the variation of the triangle they ran with Shaq was more in tune with surfing Kobe missing a couple games. Phil and Tex had to really tweak it for Shaq. Inversely, even if hey wanted to use the Bulls triangle sets it wasn't really viable with Fisher, Fox, Shaw, George as the rest of the perimeter and Horry as PF.

I think what would have been intriguing was seeing the record of those teams if they had hypothetically kept Eddie and he was the third member of that core. For all we know the record could have changed with a guy who had more perimeter skills, heck probably the first or second best perimeter skills Kobe has played with depending on how you value Van Exel

basketfan4life
08-24-2012, 06:44 AM
Chronz; stats don't hate Kobe, hate is a really strong word to use. Also it seems like some people ignore all the great stuff BRUNO pulls out and come up with other things.

Stats are important, actually very important. But do you guys Micheal's greatness comes off of his stats? I don't.

What makes Kobe so great is not his stats either. It's his competitive level, his approach to the game, most of all his longetivity and his unstoppableness. He may be the most unstoppable player of all time when completely on.(Actually i made a thread about this and most people put him number 1 or number 2 after MJ)

What makes LeBron So great is not his stats either. He wasn't that great to me until this year. But this year, he simply refused to not winning the title. Every single series. He came up big every single series. He could lose Boston in game 6 say going 30-10-12, and some of you could still say how he is the best player in the world, head and shoulders above the rest of the league. But no, not to me, he came out, poured in 45, refused to lose the game in the most hated enviroment, won the hardware, and now because of that, he is an all-time great and the best player in the game.

b@llhog24
08-24-2012, 02:35 PM
A ton of people missed the entire argument in this thread.

Hawkeye15
08-24-2012, 02:46 PM
A ton of people missed the entire argument in this thread.

Well, Kobe and Laker fans have an instant defensive mechanism that kicks in anytime you criticize him in the slightest, despite the fact that many of these same fans pick him apart in the Laker forum.

That being said, you tend to defend a player who was instrumental in 5 championships for the team you support.

kblo247
08-24-2012, 02:49 PM
Well, Kobe and Laker fans have an instant defensive mechanism that kicks in anytime you criticize him in the slightest, despite the fact that many of these same fans pick him apart in the Laker forum.

That being said, you tend to defend a player who was instrumental in 5 championships for the team you support.

See we treat him like a sibling. We can talk **** about him and pick on him, but anyone else gets an *** whuppin :p

Hawkeye15
08-24-2012, 02:56 PM
See we treat him like a sibling. We can talk **** about him and pick on him, but anyone else gets an *** whuppin :p

hahaha, never thought of it that way. So true though. I rip Love apart in the Wolves forum with the following:

"Get back on defense you fat bum and stop whining"
"Stop shooting so many ****ing 3's Kevin"
"Will you ever block a shot in your career"

But if he gets criticized out here, I am on it. :superman:

kblo247
08-24-2012, 05:23 PM
hahaha, never thought of it that way. So true though. I rip Love apart in the Wolves forum with the following:

"Get back on defense you fat bum and stop whining"
"Stop shooting so many ****ing 3's Kevin"
"Will you ever block a shot in your career"

But if he gets criticized out here, I am on it. :superman:

Guilty of it while watching.

Kobe rotate your lazy chucking *** over. Pau you soft *****. Derek your slow *** couldn't keep a turtle in front of you. Metta World Peace more like it shouldve been I build a brick house. Bynum I can't even get past the filter on the site last year.

But see if another friend says it we have to argue.

Same way with a little brother or sister

Probably doesn't help that I've seen Kobe play since he was 17-18 all for my team lol, and him and Fish in SL was my first pro game

LAKERMANIA
08-24-2012, 06:10 PM
See we treat him like a sibling. We can talk **** about him and pick on him, but anyone else gets an *** whuppin :p

True that

b@llhog24
08-24-2012, 06:35 PM
Well, Kobe and Laker fans have an instant defensive mechanism that kicks in anytime you criticize him in the slightest, despite the fact that many of these same fans pick him apart in the Laker forum.

That being said, you tend to defend a player who was instrumental in 5 championships for the team you support.

:laugh2: so true.