PDA

View Full Version : when kobe passes MJ in scoring tally, what's the first word that comes to mind



Chronz
12-10-2014, 02:52 PM
Honestly

goingfor28
12-10-2014, 02:54 PM
Congrats. Not surprised though. He came into the league at 18 and didn't retire mid prime.

benny01
12-10-2014, 02:56 PM
Congrats. Not surprised though. He came into the league at 18 and didn't retire mid prime.
this

bringbackfredex
12-10-2014, 02:57 PM
Games - Kobe has already played in 1267 games, Jordan only played 1072. So basically it took Kobe almost 200 more games to score more than MJ did.

truplayer199
12-10-2014, 03:00 PM
Longevity

mngopher35
12-10-2014, 03:01 PM
Longevity

Yup, same here.

PurpleLynch
12-10-2014, 03:04 PM
Longevity as its finest. Plus,I cry a lot,because Kobe is my favourite player of all time and I grew up watching and supporting him!

savvy1803
12-10-2014, 03:06 PM
Legend .

Hawkeye15
12-10-2014, 03:10 PM
Longevity of greatness

Hawkeye15
12-10-2014, 03:17 PM
1. Robert Parish* 1611
2. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar* 1560
3. John Stockton* 1504
4. Karl Malone* 1476
5. Kevin Willis 1424
6. Kevin Garnett 1394
7. Jason Kidd 1391
8. Reggie Miller* 1389
9. Clifford Robinson 1380
10. Gary Payton* 1335
11. Moses Malone* 1329
12. Buck Williams 1307
13. Elvin Hayes* 1303
14. Ray Allen 1300
15. Mark Jackson 1296
16. Derek Fisher 1287
17. Sam Perkins 1286
18. Charles Oakley 1282
19. A.C. Green 1278
20. Terry Porter 1274
21. Tim Duncan 1273
22. John Havlicek* 1270
23. Kobe Bryant 1267


so, there are 22 players ahead of Kobe today, he will probably pass everyone but Duncan and KG to get to #8 all time in games played. So, all of the above players have a ton of longevity, and I can only find 1 I would take over Kobe all time. So the longevity argument alone is not correct, as many Kobe fans take that as a negative, the argument for Kobe is that he was so good so damn long.

benny01
12-10-2014, 03:18 PM
^very nice point

ManningToTyree
12-10-2014, 03:18 PM
Determination

tredigs
12-10-2014, 03:28 PM
"Kobe!"

It's unfortunate that he's getting it in this manner, because I feel that we're seeing all the wrong sides of Kobe magnified this season. He's shooting in the 30%'s and leading the league in Field Goal Attempts by a huge margin. I mean, the guy is already approaching 500 total shots so far this season, the next closest is Monta at 398...

Hate to be "that guy", but if you're asking our opinions, that's mine. It's an embarrassing way to pass the legend. Though simultaneously, I'm still wholly in awe of how he's able to log all these minutes and still have the capability to be very effective.

Slug3
12-10-2014, 03:33 PM
1. Robert Parish* 1611
2. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar* 1560
3. John Stockton* 1504
4. Karl Malone* 1476
5. Kevin Willis 1424
6. Kevin Garnett 1394
7. Jason Kidd 1391
8. Reggie Miller* 1389
9. Clifford Robinson 1380
10. Gary Payton* 1335
11. Moses Malone* 1329
12. Buck Williams 1307
13. Elvin Hayes* 1303
14. Ray Allen 1300
15. Mark Jackson 1296
16. Derek Fisher 1287
17. Sam Perkins 1286
18. Charles Oakley 1282
19. A.C. Green 1278
20. Terry Porter 1274
21. Tim Duncan 1273
22. John Havlicek* 1270
23. Kobe Bryant 1267


so, there are 22 players ahead of Kobe today, he will probably pass everyone but Duncan and KG to get to #8 all time in games played. So, all of the above players have a ton of longevity, and I can only find 1 I would take over Kobe all time. So the longevity argument alone is not correct, as many Kobe fans take that as a negative, the argument for Kobe is that he was so good so damn long.

I can see him passing Duncan if he decides to retire after this season and Kobe plays another.

mngopher35
12-10-2014, 03:39 PM
Hawkeye that is a good point and I don't think anyone means longevity in a bad way (despite some taking offense).

When he passes Jordan longevity is the deciding factor because both were great over a long stretch. Kobe just has played more games than him leading to more points than him. Also longevity is a good thing anyways.

cmellofan15
12-10-2014, 03:43 PM
shoot!

Bruno
12-10-2014, 05:09 PM
Games - Kobe has already played in 1267 games, Jordan only played 1072. So basically it took Kobe almost 200 more games to score more than MJ did.

games isn't the right statistic. it's minutes. that's mainly because Kobe didn't play that much in his first two season.

46,346 vs 41,011

Arch Stanton
12-10-2014, 05:17 PM
Cheeseburger

Bruno
12-10-2014, 05:22 PM
and- ill probably stand up and applaud. followed by a moment of silence. too bad hell be on the road for this, i tried to go. went last night- bought them 2 weeks ago when he was on pace to break it against SAC.

Hawkeye15
12-10-2014, 05:22 PM
games isn't the right statistic. it's minutes. that's mainly because Kobe didn't play that much in his first two season.

46,346 vs 41,011

you can still do it in games played. If you want to change the context, then imagine what Jordan's numbers would be had he entered the league a full 3 seasons earlier..and would he have been ready to command big minutes?

tredigs
12-10-2014, 05:24 PM
games isn't the right statistic. it's minutes. that's mainly because Kobe didn't play that much in his first two season.

46,346 vs 41,011

Really, it's shots (with 3pt attempts taken into consideration) + Free Throws.

Mike averaged 30.1 PPG in his career on 24,537 shots (1,778 threes) with an effective field-goal % of 51%, and took 8772 Free Throws at 83.5% to get his 32,292 points.

Kobe averages 25.5 PPG in his career on 24,866 shots (5,011 threes) with an effective field-goal % of 48%, and has taken 9,671 Free Throws at 83.7% to get his 32,262 points.

The 48% is a slightly below average eFG% for a shooting guard.

Hawkeye15
12-10-2014, 05:27 PM
and- ill probably stand up and applaud. followed by a moment of silence. too bad hell be on the road for this, i tried to go. went last night- bought them 2 weeks ago when he was on pace to break it against SAC.

would have been nicer had he been at home, for sure.

JustinTime
12-10-2014, 05:27 PM
Rapist

^^Thread Won

Ariza's Better
12-10-2014, 05:38 PM
Meh

xnick5757
12-10-2014, 05:41 PM
I think this gif sums up the entire Kobe era perfectly

http://gfycat.com/DeficientCrispGodwit

PowerHouse
12-10-2014, 05:47 PM
^ The clock was running out. Was he supposed to pass it to Sacre for the 3 instead?

alexander_37
12-10-2014, 05:51 PM
Meh bout time.

Hawkeye15
12-10-2014, 06:00 PM
^ The clock was running out. Was he supposed to pass it to Sacre for the 3 instead?

actually a pass should have been made after one dribble, if he could, even before that. The whole Sac team was coming at him...

But that is Kobe. He doesn't see teammates when he gets in that mode.

Tony_Starks
12-10-2014, 06:00 PM
Historic.

Jeffy25
12-10-2014, 06:08 PM
It took him 5000 more minutes (not one word, just first thought)

Jeffy25
12-10-2014, 06:12 PM
1.Robert Parish* 1611
2.Kareem Abdul-Jabbar*1560
3.John Stockton* 1504
4.Karl Malone* 1476
5.Kevin Willis 1424
6.Kevin Garnett 1394
7.Jason Kidd 1391
8.Reggie Miller* 1389
9.Clifford Robinson 1380
10.Gary Payton* 1335
11.Moses Malone* 1329
12.Buck Williams 1307
13.Elvin Hayes* 1303
14.Ray Allen 1300
15.Mark Jackson 1296
16.Derek Fisher 1287
17.Sam Perkins 1286
18.Charles Oakley 1282
19.A.C. Green 1278
20.Terry Porter 1274
21.Tim Duncan 1273
22.John Havlicek* 1270
23.Kobe Bryant 1267


so, there are 22 players ahead of Kobe today, he will probably pass everyone but Duncan and KG to get to #8 all time in games played. So, all of the above players have a ton of longevity, and I can only find 1 I would take over Kobe all time. So the longevity argument alone is not correct, as many Kobe fans take that as a negative, the argument for Kobe is that he was so good so damn long.

Longevity isn't a bad thing.

You have to be productive for someone to allow you to even log the minutes.

In baseball, peak vs longevity is constantly debated.

Kobe has peak and longevity. Peak isn't Jordan's or several other players. But the longevity mixed with his peak is what moves him up the leaderboards.

Hawkeye15
12-10-2014, 06:16 PM
Longevity isn't a bad thing.

You have to be productive for someone to allow you to even log the minutes.

In baseball, peak vs longevity is constantly debated.

Kobe has peak and longevity. Peak isn't Jordan's or several other players. But the longevity mixed with his peak is what moves him up the leaderboards.

yeppers. It's just funny to me that some of his fans take it so personal when you point that last sentence out.

Jeffy25
12-10-2014, 06:18 PM
yeppers. It's just funny to me that some of his fans take it so personal when you point that last sentence out.

He doesn't have a top 20 peak, or a top 10 longevity.

But when you combine both factors, he becomes a top 10ish player.

Hawkeye15
12-10-2014, 06:20 PM
He doesn't have a top 20 peak, or a top 10 longevity.

But when you combine both factors, he becomes a top 10ish player.

he will end up in a top 10 longevity wise (games played), and his numbers amassed will look great, but I agree, he ends up around 10 or so.

nickdymez
12-10-2014, 06:26 PM
he will end up in a top 10 longevity wise (games played), and his numbers amassed will look great, but I agree, he ends up around 10 or so.

He's really not that good. Luckily for some of his fans he played long enough to fool people into thinking he was an all time great.

FraziersKnicks
12-10-2014, 06:27 PM
Longevity

numba1CHANGsta
12-10-2014, 06:35 PM
I don't see anyone other than LeBron who can crack the top 5 scoring list. No matter how many games it took, or how many attempts, being in the top 3 scoring list all time is an honor

Hawkeye15
12-10-2014, 06:36 PM
I don't see anyone other than LeBron who can crack the top 5 scoring list. No matter how many games it took, or how many attempts, being in the top 3 scoring list all time is an honor

of course it is, I agree.

nickdymez
12-10-2014, 06:36 PM
I don't see anyone other than LeBron who can crack the top 5 scoring list. No matter how many games it took, or how many attempts, being in the top 3 scoring list all time is an honor

You don't think Durant can get there?

leftie5
12-10-2014, 06:44 PM
First thought- How many more shots did it take Kobe to pass M.J.?

Hangin n Wangin
12-10-2014, 06:52 PM
1. Robert Parish* 1611
2. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar* 1560
3. John Stockton* 1504
4. Karl Malone* 1476
5. Kevin Willis 1424
6. Kevin Garnett 1394
7. Jason Kidd 1391
8. Reggie Miller* 1389
9. Clifford Robinson 1380
10. Gary Payton* 1335
11. Moses Malone* 1329
12. Buck Williams 1307
13. Elvin Hayes* 1303
14. Ray Allen 1300
15. Mark Jackson 1296
16. Derek Fisher 1287
17. Sam Perkins 1286
18. Charles Oakley 1282
19. A.C. Green 1278
20. Terry Porter 1274
21. Tim Duncan 1273
22. John Havlicek* 1270
23. Kobe Bryant 1267


so, there are 22 players ahead of Kobe today, he will probably pass everyone but Duncan and KG to get to #8 all time in games played. So, all of the above players have a ton of longevity, and I can only find 1 I would take over Kobe all time. So the longevity argument alone is not correct, as many Kobe fans take that as a negative, the argument for Kobe is that he was so good so damn long.

I think people take it in a bad way because it's you who is the one saying it. They know you hate Kobe and they don't really care what you have to say about him, good or bad.

Tony_Starks
12-10-2014, 07:03 PM
The great part is when it's all said and done the records will just list him as the player with the 3rd most points scored ever. Let everyone debate about how he got there, what contributed to him getting there, who cares. This guy is making history before our very eyes, enjoy it.

Honestly the way he is ballin he could very well pass Karl Malone next season.....

Hangin n Wangin
12-10-2014, 07:06 PM
Someone in here said he doesn't have a top 20 peak. That's just laughable. I wonder who he's a homer for? I'm guessing Lebron.

Tony_Starks
12-10-2014, 07:10 PM
Someone in here said he doesn't have a top 20 peak. That's just laughable. I wonder who he's a homer for? I'm guessing Lebron.

You have to ignore those classic, predictable bait traps when it comes to Kobe. It happens like clockwork....

Jeffy25
12-10-2014, 07:17 PM
Someone in here said he doesn't have a top 20 peak. That's just laughable. I wonder who he's a homer for? I'm guessing Lebron.

Don't like LeBron either.

It's that his peak isn't a top 20 peak we have ever seen.

Hangin n Wangin
12-10-2014, 07:22 PM
Don't like LeBron either.

It's that his peak isn't a top 20 peak we have ever seen.

Stick to baseball.

Jeffy25
12-10-2014, 07:22 PM
Stick to baseball.

Appreciate the contribution.

Hangin n Wangin
12-10-2014, 07:31 PM
Appreciate the contribution.

It's not worth contributing. This NBA forum is a joke and has been for a long time now. Bunch of garbage spewed here on a daily basis.

Jeffy25
12-10-2014, 08:24 PM
It's not worth contributing. This NBA forum is a joke and has been for a long time now. Bunch of garbage spewed here on a daily basis.

I find challenged posting to be examples of 'stick to baseball' in people's posts.

Kobe is an all-time great, and I didn't say he was outside of a top 20 player in the game. I said he didn't have a top 20 peak.

It depends when you define his peak.

I would say it started in the 00/01 season. First season over 25 points per game

I would say he started to fall off slightly after the 06/07 season, but he was still very dominant until after the 09/10 season.

So I am saying his peak is from 00/01 to 09/10

That's a very long peak. That's many players entire careers.

In that time period, Kobe posted:
28.5 PPG, 5.8 TRB, 5.2 APG, .456 FG%, 24.6 PER, 122.1 WS, .197 WS/48 in 29787 Minutes.



This is below guys like:

Jordan
Lebron
Shaq
Robinson
Wilt
Paul
Pettit
Wade
Barkley
Kareem
Durant
Magic
Malone
Hakeem
Garnett
Bird

That's 15 players that I know for a fact were better players for their peaks. I know I can find more.

They aren't necessarily better players all-time, but they had better peaks.

And while they had better peaks, most of them had shorter peaks.

There are also guys with better individual season(s) than Kobe, but they didn't keep it going long enough, like McGrady

I'm not putting Kobe down, which is what Hawkeye was saying. This isn't a slight on Kobe. He had a very long peak, and hasn't really shown a sharp decline like most guards do/would. Which is what propels him in the all-time rankings. He hasn't dropped like most players do.

Jeffy25
12-10-2014, 08:29 PM
Btw, 29k minutes, that's how many Melo has played his entire career already. That's how long his peak was.

Lakers + Giants
12-10-2014, 08:31 PM
IDK why some people think that longevity is a negative. Sounds like a compliment to me.

Kashmir13579
12-10-2014, 08:33 PM
Tmac

michael jordan
12-10-2014, 08:36 PM
don't mean much if you only go 20 and 62:cheers:

Jeffy25
12-10-2014, 08:42 PM
IDK why some people think that longevity is a negative. Sounds like a compliment to me.

It is.

It's Pete Rose's entire claim to fame and why he is considered and all-time great in baseball.

The greats have longevity.

jerellh528
12-10-2014, 08:48 PM
I dont think it means much, but its cool hes the leading perimeter scorer ever.

michael jordan
12-10-2014, 08:50 PM
Don't like LeBron either.

It's that his peak isn't a top 20 peak we have ever seen.

you don't like LeBron?boy don't you know he getting a third ring this year!:clap:

Jeffy25
12-10-2014, 08:51 PM
you don't like LeBron?boy don't you know he getting a third ring this year!:clap:

I just don't like his personality at all.

Bruno
12-10-2014, 09:15 PM
First thought- How many more shots did it take Kobe to pass M.J.?

At this point regardless of years in the league, minutes player or games played- Kobe has taken 329 more shots than MJ to get to this point total. he'll probably need another 20-23 shots to pass MJ, so lets call it 355 to be conservative.

MJ and Kobe at their peaks both put up around two thousand shots a season. so 355 is about 20% of that 2k figure. considering that, he really didn't need that many more shots than MJ to pass him. about 350. When comparing two careers then went 15+ years, 350 total shots is somewhat marginal, since 350 shots is about 20% of what these guys would put up in one season in their peaks.

when you spin the numbers like that, opposed to saying, it took kobe x number of more years, the perspective is altered. it seems closer. and when you look at each players career point per field goal attempt average, it reflects that as well.

MJ career point per field goal attempt: 1.31
Kobe career point per field goal attempt: 1.29

that's a 0.02 difference.

Bruno
12-10-2014, 09:19 PM
At this point regardless of years in the league, minutes player or games played- Kobe has taken 329 more shots than MJ to get to this point total. he'll probably need another 20-23 shots to pass MJ, so lets call it 355 to be conservative.

MJ and Kobe at their peaks both put up around two thousand shots a season. so 355 is about 20% of that 2k figure. considering that, he really didn't need that many more shots than MJ to pass him. about 350. When comparing two careers then went 15+ years, 350 total shots is somewhat marginal, since 350 shots is about 20% of what these guys would put up in one season in their peaks.

when you spin the numbers like that, opposed to saying, it took kobe x number of more years, the perspective is altered. it seems closer. and when you look at each players career point per field goal attempt average, it reflects that as well.

MJ career point per field goal attempt: 1.31
Kobe career point per field goal attempt: 1.29

that's a 0.02 difference.
Obviously advantage MJ. but that gap isn't as drastic as some of these comments would reflect. I think anyone who smirked at this accomplishment or is exaggerating the gap has a bias bigger than I do.

Bruno
12-10-2014, 09:33 PM
you can still do it in games played. If you want to change the context, then imagine what Jordan's numbers would be had he entered the league a full 3 seasons earlier..and would he have been ready to command big minutes?
right but imagine Kobes totals if he averaged as many field goal attempts per game as MJ did. 19.6 vs. 22.9. three shots a game, times 82, times 19 years. What I meant to say is that imo, minutes is better than games played, if we have to choose a better time based/longevity type statistic. but i gotta say I think the best overall breakdown comes when looking at the shots. like Digs does here.


Really, it's shots (with 3pt attempts taken into consideration) + Free Throws.

Mike averaged 30.1 PPG in his career on 24,537 shots (1,778 threes) with an effective field-goal % of 51%, and took 8772 Free Throws at 83.5% to get his 32,292 points.

Kobe averages 25.5 PPG in his career on 24,866 shots (5,011 threes) with an effective field-goal % of 48%, and has taken 9,671 Free Throws at 83.7% to get his 32,262 points.

The 48% is a slightly below average eFG% for a shooting guard.
I don't think 48% is below average for a SG. this year the league average for EFG% is .499. Last year it was .500, the year before that it was .499 again. considering the all the big men in the league who inflate that number, I'd say 48% would be at least middle pack, if not higher for the SG% specifically.

but then again I throw grains at shooting statistics that ignore shooting 85% from the line on 8 FTA per game if were trying to get down to accurately gauging overall scoring efficiency. i just don't know if thats below average considering that the overall league average is just slightly above it at .499- all positions included.


would have been nicer had he been at home, for sure.
he might do it in SA.

Bruno
12-10-2014, 09:45 PM
I find challenged posting to be examples of 'stick to baseball' in people's posts.

Kobe is an all-time great, and I didn't say he was outside of a top 20 player in the game. I said he didn't have a top 20 peak.

It depends when you define his peak.

I would say it started in the 00/01 season. First season over 25 points per game

I would say he started to fall off slightly after the 06/07 season, but he was still very dominant until after the 09/10 season.

So I am saying his peak is from 00/01 to 09/10

That's a very long peak. That's many players entire careers.

In that time period, Kobe posted:
28.5 PPG, 5.8 TRB, 5.2 APG, .456 FG%, 24.6 PER, 122.1 WS, .197 WS/48 in 29787 Minutes.



This is below guys like:

Jordan
Lebron
Shaq
Robinson
Wilt
Paul
Pettit
Wade
Barkley
Kareem
Durant
Magic
Malone
Hakeem
Garnett
Bird

That's 15 players that I know for a fact were better players for their peaks. I know I can find more.

They aren't necessarily better players all-time, but they had better peaks.

And while they had better peaks, most of them had shorter peaks.

There are also guys with better individual season(s) than Kobe, but they didn't keep it going long enough, like McGrady

I'm not putting Kobe down, which is what Hawkeye was saying. This isn't a slight on Kobe. He had a very long peak, and hasn't really shown a sharp decline like most guards do/would. Which is what propels him in the all-time rankings. He hasn't dropped like most players do.

this is all under the assumption that statistics as a numerical reflection of on court impact is the only gauge for measuring a subjective adjective such as peak.

*blowhard italics

Jeffy25
12-10-2014, 10:08 PM
this is all under the assumption that statistics as a numerical reflection of on court impact is the only gauge for measuring a subjective adjective such as peak.

*blowhard italics

Doesn't even need to be stats, I think subjectively, many fans of the game would tell you that several of those guys dominated the game better than Kobe did during their peaks.

Kobe has always been a top 3-5 player in any given year (and was so for a decade)....but was very rarely the best player in the game.

That is dependent of course on other players at the same time, but even if we moved Kobe to say the 80's, I don't think he would move up rankings.

Hangin n Wangin
12-10-2014, 10:12 PM
I find challenged posting to be examples of 'stick to baseball' in people's posts.

Kobe is an all-time great, and I didn't say he was outside of a top 20 player in the game. I said he didn't have a top 20 peak.

It depends when you define his peak.

I would say it started in the 00/01 season. First season over 25 points per game

I would say he started to fall off slightly after the 06/07 season, but he was still very dominant until after the 09/10 season.

So I am saying his peak is from 00/01 to 09/10

That's a very long peak. That's many players entire careers.

In that time period, Kobe posted:
28.5 PPG, 5.8 TRB, 5.2 APG, .456 FG%, 24.6 PER, 122.1 WS, .197 WS/48 in 29787 Minutes.



This is below guys like:

Jordan
Lebron
Shaq
Robinson
Wilt
Paul
Pettit
Wade
Barkley
Kareem
Durant
Magic
Malone
Hakeem
Garnett
Bird

That's 15 players that I know for a fact were better players for their peaks. I know I can find more.

They aren't necessarily better players all-time, but they had better peaks.

And while they had better peaks, most of them had shorter peaks.

There are also guys with better individual season(s) than Kobe, but they didn't keep it going long enough, like McGrady

I'm not putting Kobe down, which is what Hawkeye was saying. This isn't a slight on Kobe. He had a very long peak, and hasn't really shown a sharp decline like most guards do/would. Which is what propels him in the all-time rankings. He hasn't dropped like most players do.

Great job. You named 15 NBA players and Kobe's stats from 01-10. So those players must have had better peaks because you say so, right? This is why the NBA forum is a clown job. If you really think all 15 of those players were better at one point than Kobe Bryant at his best, I don't even know where to start with you. It's ridiculous. Dwayne Wade?? Chris Paul?? What a joke. At no point were or are Dwayne Wade and Chris Paul better than Kobe was in his prime. Statistics vary year to year. If player A puts up better statistics than player B one year, it doesn't mean he is a better player at his peak. It's one year. There are so many different variables that play a part into it. The team, the environment, the coaching, the offense, the players, winning titles, etc.

Your post proved absolutely nothing except the fact that you can name some HOFers and that you have the ability to use a keyboard. Nothing I say is going to change what you think and nothing you say is going to change what I think, so what's the point? This forum is still the same. Bunch of people with a Lebron fettish in here.

Hangin n Wangin
12-10-2014, 10:15 PM
right but imagine Kobes totals if he averaged as many field goal attempts per game as MJ did. 19.6 vs. 22.9. three shots a game, times 82, times 19 years. What I meant to say is that imo, minutes is better than games played, if we have to choose a better time based/longevity type statistic. but i gotta say I think the best overall breakdown comes when looking at the shots. like Digs does here.


I don't think 48% is below average for a SG. this year the league average for EFG% is .499. Last year it was .500, the year before that it was .499 again. considering the all the big men in the league who inflate that number, I'd say 48% would be at least middle pack, if not higher for the SG% specifically. you can take that as a compliment towards Kobe or a shot on KCP, and every New York Knick SG.

but then again I throw grains at shooting statistics that ignore shooting 85% from the line on 8 FTA per game if were trying to get down to accurately gauging overall scoring efficiency. i just don't know if thats below average considering that the overall league average is just slightly above it at .499- all positions included.


he might do it in SA.

Silly you. Don't you know? In the NBA forum, only Kobe is considered a ball hog and a selfish player, even though Jordan averaged more shot attempts per game through out his entire career.

Jeffy25
12-10-2014, 10:23 PM
Great job. You named 15 NBA players and Kobe's stats from 01-10. So those players must have had better peaks because you say so, right? This is why the NBA forum is a clown job. If you really think all 15 of those players were better at one point than Kobe Bryant at his best, I don't even know where to start with you. It's ridiculous. Dwayne Wade?? Chris Paul?? What a joke. At no point were or are Dwayne Wade and Chris Paul better than Kobe was in his prime. Statistics vary year to year. If player A puts up better statistics than player B one year, it doesn't mean he is a better player at his peak. It's one year. There are so many different variables that play a part into it. The team, the environment, the coaching, the offense, the players, winning titles, etc.

Your post proved absolutely nothing except the fact that you can name some HOFers and that you have the ability to use a keyboard. Nothing I say is going to change what you think and nothing you say is going to change what I think, so what's the point? This forum is still the same. Bunch of people with a Lebron fettish in here.

Chris Paul (obviously still in his peak)
Since his third year in the NBA, 07/08

Paul has posted:
19.2 PPG, 10.4 APG, 4.2 TRB, .484 FG%, 26.7 PER, 100.4 WS, .268 WS/48 in 18,000 minutes

So obviously, 10,000 less minutes, but clearly better production.....and he is still actively in this peak.

Wade has two peaks, much like Kobe. His top peak, from 05/06-09/10
27.4 PPG, 5.0 TRB, 7.0 APG, .485 FG%, 27.6 PER, 54.2 WS, .206 WS/48 in 12,600 minutes

But his overall career rivals Kobe's peak:
24.3 PPG, 5.0 TRB, 6.0 APG, .493 FG%, 25.3 PER, 106.4 WS, .191 WS/48 in 27,000 minutes

Again, Kobe's peak
00/01-09/10
28.5 PPG, 5.8 TRB, 5.2 APG, .456 FG%, 24.6 PER, 122.1 WS, .197 WS/48 in 29787 Minutes.

I bolded the things that Kobe was better in.

Kobe is the better overall player, like I have said, because he has played longer and he hasn't shown a sharp decline. But we are talking about two active players who are posting the same kinds of numbers, if not better during their peaks.....two players that you are just out right dismissing with no evidence other than to say it's a clown post.


So unless you want to actually stand behind your argument with literally anything other than conjecture, then there is no point in continuing a correspondence. But I do hope that you will provide a reasonable argument as to why Kobe's peak is better, I would appreciate hearing it.

Jeffy25
12-10-2014, 10:25 PM
Silly you. Don't you know? In the NBA forum, only Kobe is considered a ball hog and a selfish player, even though Jordan averaged more shot attempts per game through out his entire career.

And he made 5% more of his shots than Kobe and 15 points in true shooting

Bruno
12-10-2014, 10:34 PM
Doesn't even need to be stats, I think subjectively, many fans of the game would tell you that several of those guys dominated the game better than Kobe did during their peaks.
I agree.

I was also joking in the sense that stats are a funny thing. Look at LBJ this year. PER, WS/48 and all other advanced stats are down across the line. lets say LBJ finishes the year with an advanced line well below what we've been used to seeing since 2007. to me, that doesn't really mean LBJ has gotten worse. it means he's picking his spots, and pacing himself for what would be his 5th straight trip to the finals. we'll casually look back on those numbers and say, wow, LBJ dropped off statistically in 2014-2015. but really he just produced less, he hasn't necessarily become a worse basketball player. he had a role that changed, he adapted his body, he's conserving himself for the multi-year long hall. thats why the numbers are down. when it comes down to it we're all taking LBJ with the first pick for the post-season re-draft, no matter what his regular season advanced line tells us.

where he has to prove that is playoffs, when it's time to turn it on. but the catch is playoffs is it doesn't matter how good your numbers are in the playoffs, people only remember the winning and losing. So even if he goes on a statistical tear in the playoffs after a pedestrian regular season by his standards, and the Cavs get knocked out- the entire season will be remembered as a drop off, or moment of exhaustion (if he returns to the finals in the future).

the production isn't as high,- check, the numbers aren't as jaw dropping- check, and the field goal percentage isn't as obscene- check. So the stats are down. but is LBJ worse? no. i don't think so. I think it can be circumstantial. that's why I like a great debate with commentary around the numbers because it's more interesting if the raw lines aren't treated as sacred text, rather information that needs to be put in proper context.

For Kobe, I'm trying to argue that not having the best advanced line in any given single season doesn't necessarily disqualify Kobe . I think I'm loosening up on the year to year reflections on the numbers and paying more attention to arcs and swings. in a way, single seasons are too small of a sample size if were talking about decade long primes.


Kobe has always been a top 3-5 player in any given year (and was so for a decade)....but was very rarely the best player in the game.
But we can look at a few names on the list you provided and say the same thing. Charles, Chris Paul, Wade, Robinson, Garnett. I think you could find a fair amount of fans who try to argue that there were always 1-2 other players in front of those guys at any point in the league (I buy single year arguments for KG and maybe Robinson, I'm just saying).

Hangin n Wangin
12-10-2014, 10:35 PM
And he made 5% more of his shots than Kobe and 15 points in true shooting

Yea but Jordan pooped at a 15% higher rate than Kobe, which led to 45 points in true pooping, so he was lighter on his feet. Kobe couldn't get as much lift on his shot, so you have to take that into account.

Bruno
12-10-2014, 10:43 PM
Silly you. Don't you know? In the NBA forum, only Kobe is considered a ball hog and a selfish player, even though Jordan averaged more shot attempts per game through out his entire career.

I get it. he doesn't play basketball the right way. he's a specialist, an assassin. he stops the ball, is too good of an isolation player for his own good at times.

all I'm saying is- at the end of the day- the dudes regular season TS% is higher than Wilts, Duncans, and Hakeems. Those are the numbers, I can't alter them to fit the narrative that he's a completely inefficient chucker. a little selfish and stubborn but his individual brilliance has kept his efficiency respectable at the levels of Duncan, Hakeem and Wilt.

criticize the style of play, don't criticize the individual efficiency. the focus should be on how it impact the overall team, not that Kobe was an inefficient basketball player in his prime. but thats a tough debate to have considering his success. I'd love to see numbers on that some day.

ILLUSIONIST^248
12-10-2014, 10:44 PM
Someone in here said he doesn't have a top 20 peak. That's just laughable. I wonder who he's a homer for? I'm guessing Lebron.

Don't like LeBron either.

It's that his peak isn't a top 20 peak we have ever seen.

:facepalm:

nastynice
12-10-2014, 10:59 PM
Respect.

If anyone can't give him at least that, they just hating. Gotta respect it, outta love for the game, that true legend status right there.

FOBolous
12-10-2014, 11:05 PM
i dread the moment this happens because kobe fan boys are going to use this as "proof" that Kobe is "better" than MJ....never mind that Kobe played 200 more games than Jordan and counting. Never mind Kobe is in his 19th season while MJ only played 15. Never mind the fact that MJ averaged 30+ ppg 8 times in career vs Kobe's 2. Nevermind MJ's insane efficiency vs Kobe's slightly below average efficiency.

just like how they use the fact that Kobe has racked up more assists in his career than other top 10 scoring leaders as "proof" that Kobe passes and is unselfish (yea because, other than MJ who averaged more per game than Kobe, all the other top 10 points leaders are big man who are typically at the recieving end of passes because they need to be set up to score), they're going to use this as "proof" that he's better than MJ.

FOBolous
12-10-2014, 11:08 PM
Respect.

If anyone can't give him at least that, they just hating. Gotta respect it, outta love for the game, that true legend status right there.

no. Kobe is a great player, a living legend, and a HOF-er. but he is not the God that his fans make him out to be. people aren't hating, they're just trying to bring his fan boys back down to Earth.

Jeffy25
12-10-2014, 11:09 PM
I get it. he doesn't play basketball the right way. he's a specialist, an assassin. he stops the ball, is too good of an isolation player for his own good at times.

all I'm saying is- at the end of the day- the dudes regular season TS% is higher than Wilts, Duncans, and Hakeems. Those are the numbers, I can't alter them to fit the narrative that he's a completely inefficient chucker. a little selfish and stubborn but his individual brilliance has kept his efficiency respectable at the levels of Duncan, Hakeem and Wilt.

criticize the style of play, don't criticize the individual efficiency. the focus should be on how it impact the overall team, not that Kobe was an inefficient basketball player in his prime. but thats a tough debate to have considering his success. I'd love to see numbers on that some day.

I agree


Kobe gets put down a lot on this forum by a few of us. The main reason for it is because the praise doesn't match the numbers for him in a lot of ways.

That's okay, he is still an all-time great, top 10 player, second best shooting guard to ever play the game.

I do wonder if a different mindset could have propelled him. I think he was a better pure shooter than Jordan, but he wasn't as quick as Jordan (in terms of attacking the basket and moving with the ball) and didn't have Jordan's physicality. But because he was a better shooter, I feel like he could have been a better offensive threat. I think the only thing that stopped him from doing that was his own selfish style of play which would rear it's head at times. Mainly, taking really inefficient, unnecessary shots multiple times a game. If he had passed out even half of those shots, I think he is in a different category today because the numbers would look a lot stronger.


What's funny, is that I actually like Kobe and respect his style of play. I remember the hype of him coming up, and I remember his first matchup with Jordan and all of the comparisons that were going on. Kobe matched the 'Next MJ?' comps better than anyone else. They have the same style of play. He just wasn't as good at it as Jordan. No shame in that.

Lebron and Kobe, for the record, I don't think are very good comps to even make. They are different ball players. LeBron is like Magic (and honestly, he's better than Magic was) and Kobe is like Jordan. Different styles of players who did different things with and without the ball than the other two.





Also, Bruno, your comments about the playoffs are spot on, and are worthy of more thought from me. I do translate a lot of my discussions here from the same thought processes that exist in baseball. And I have to remember that the playoffs are a new season in the NBA, where as in the MLB, it's less than 10% of a players season.

LeBron, the last four years, played 11,000 minutes for the Heat, and an additional 3600 minutes in the playoffs. That's 25% of the guys play while in Miami.

Most any player in baseball does in the post-season is 10% of their plate appearances, and 12% of their seasons innings (with the exception of Madison Bumgarner this year, posting about 25% of his innings because he is a total freak).

PowerHouse
12-11-2014, 01:38 AM
Lebron and Kobe, for the record, I don't think are very good comps to even make. They are different ball players. LeBron is like Magic (and honestly, he's better than Magic was) and Kobe is like Jordan. Different styles of players who did different things with and without the ball than the other two.




Sorry but I have some qualms with this.

I cant agree that Lebron is better than Magic. I wont even bring rings into the conversation, we know who trumps who in that department, we'll just look at percentages and averages over their first 12 seasons.

FG% James - .496, Magic - .521
eFG% James - .530, Magic - .534
TS% James - .581, Magic - .609
assists per game James - 6.9, Magic - 11.4
rebounds per game James - 7.2, Magic 7.3 (remember he's a PG)
ppg James - 27.5, Magic - 19.7 (this is because of FGA James - 19.9, Magic - 13.3)

I know Lebron has the better PER and WS but there are some other aspects to look at too like toughness, leadership, killer instinct, etc and I believe Magic has the edge in all of those as well.

Raps18-19 Champ
12-11-2014, 01:51 AM
Longevity.

Chronz
12-11-2014, 01:52 AM
He's really not that good. Luckily for some of his fans he played long enough to fool people into thinking he was an all time great.
Not an all time great?

you really have to grasp at straws These days don't you. Lmfao

I don't know what's worse, this obvious troll post or the guy who thinks dismissing jeffys objective post is somehow an argument

Hangin n Wangin
12-11-2014, 01:53 AM
Shut up Ron.

Chronz
12-11-2014, 01:53 AM
Sorry but I have some qualms with this.

I cant agree that Lebron is better than Magic. I wont even bring rings into the conversation, we know who trumps who in that department, we'll just look at percentages and averages over their first 12 seasons.

FG% James - .496, Magic - .521
eFG% James - .530, Magic - .534
TS% James - .581, Magic - .609
assists per game James - 6.9, Magic - 11.4
rebounds per game James - 7.2, Magic 7.3 (remember he's a PG)
ppg James - 27.5, Magic - 19.7 (this is because of FGA James - 19.9, Magic - 13.3)

I know Lebron has the better PER and WS but there are some other aspects to look at too like toughness, leadership, killer instinct, etc and I believe Magic has the edge in all of those as well.

What about defense? Or quality of defenses faced?

mngopher35
12-11-2014, 01:57 AM
Sorry but I have some qualms with this.

I cant agree that Lebron is better than Magic. I wont even bring rings into the conversation, we know who trumps who in that department, we'll just look at percentages and averages over their first 12 seasons.

FG% James - .496, Magic - .521
eFG% James - .530, Magic - .534
TS% James - .581, Magic - .609
assists per game James - 6.9, Magic - 11.4
rebounds per game James - 7.2, Magic 7.3 (remember he's a PG)
ppg James - 27.5, Magic - 19.7 (this is because of FGA James - 19.9, Magic - 13.3)

I know Lebron has the better PER and WS but there are some other aspects to look at too like toughness, leadership, killer instinct, etc and I believe Magic has the edge in all of those as well.

You ignored half the game, defense. Magic seems to get a free pass on that end but he was never really a great defender. I think that there are definitely valid reasons to point to magic but lebron is the better scorer (and can shoot 3 adding spacing), defender, and rebounding is about a wash while magic was definitely the better passer.

Mostly though pointing out that defense should be considered and lebron would have the advantage there too.

jerellh528
12-11-2014, 02:00 AM
Lebron in his peak was a great defender. Thats pretty much ended though. Magics effectiveness on offense and playmaking was more impactful than the edge lebron has on defense for those 3 or 4 yrs.

LA_Raiders
12-11-2014, 02:01 AM
Goat...

mightybosstone
12-11-2014, 02:06 AM
I came in here to say "longevity," but several other posters already beat me to it. Not to diminish Kobe's greatness, but if you are a good enough player, you play enough games and you jack up enough shots, you're bound to break some records.

mightybosstone
12-11-2014, 02:07 AM
Goat...

Wait.... As in you think he's the greatest player of all time? Seriously?

jerellh528
12-11-2014, 02:15 AM
I came in here to say "longevity," but several other posters already beat me to it. Not to diminish Kobe's greatness, but if you are a good enough player, you play enough games and you jack up enough shots, you're bound to break some records.

Oh dont worry, nothing you or anyone else on here can say will diminish his greatness.

PowerHouse
12-11-2014, 02:17 AM
What about defense? Or quality of defenses faced?


You ignored half the game, defense. Magic seems to get a free pass on that end but he was never really a great defender. I think that there are definitely valid reasons to point to magic but lebron is the better scorer (and can shoot 3 adding spacing), defender, and rebounding is about a wash while magic was definitely the better passer.

Mostly though pointing out that defense should be considered and lebron would have the advantage there too.

I agree Lebron is the better defender. It was tough for Magic to keep in front of the other PGs being half his size.

blahblahyoutoo
12-11-2014, 03:53 AM
rapist.

Chronz
12-11-2014, 04:02 AM
Lebron in his peak was a great defender. Thats pretty much ended though. Magics effectiveness on offense and playmaking was more impactful than the edge lebron has on defense for those 3 or 4 yrs.

Well yeah, but we're talking about the combination of both offense and defense, Magic had a defensive peak where he was simply average, at his worst he was a detriment on that end. I also dont agree with your 3-4 year theory.

Chronz
12-11-2014, 04:05 AM
Oh dont worry, nothing you or anyone else on here can say will diminish his greatness.

Who determines greatness? We all have our opinions, its about how you defend it. To think there is a universal standing that no one can influence is ignorant. I know I've changed some peoples minds on the greatness of players just as they have changed my own perception. Thats what happens when you're not a fan of an individual player but a fan of the NBA. Dont be so extreme.

Chronz
12-11-2014, 04:10 AM
I agree Lebron is the better defender. It was tough for Magic to keep in front of the other PGs being half his size.

He started off as a Forward, he wasn't anything special on that end either. Its true that when he *****ed to have his championship PG traded, he became harder to hide defensively (IMO).

jerellh528
12-11-2014, 04:17 AM
Who determines greatness? We all have our opinions, its about how you defend it. To think there is a universal standing that no one can influence is ignorant. I know I've changed some peoples minds on the greatness of players just as they have changed my own perception. Thats what happens when you're not a fan of an individual player but a fan of the NBA. Dont be so extreme.

I determine greatness of the players i call great.. . A person saying "longevity" or "chucker" means nothing to me, kobe has helped bring me as a fan 5 championships and some of the greatest nba performances ive ever seen. Im not one to watch basketball and keep a tally on per or ws or fg%. Ill leave that for guys who make a living off it like hollinger. As far as im concerned, a players greatness is determined by what i see on the court with a mix of production and enertainment value to me personally

Chronz
12-11-2014, 04:23 AM
I determine greatness of the players i call great.. .
Hence the whole opinion thing. Whats great to you may simply be too vague to be of significant to others. Some of us consider calling a player great or not great to be too lazy to pass for any sort of analysis. You dont have to participate, but you cant hate on those of us who prefer nuance.


A person saying "longevity" or "chucker" means nothing to me
LOL. That wouldn't change the fact that the term exists for a reason, because its real.


kobe has helped bring me as a fan 5 championships and some of the greatest nba performances ive ever seen. Im not one to watch basketball and keep a tally on per or ws or fg%. Ill leave that for guys who make a living off it like hollinger. As far as im concerned, a players greatness is determined by what i see on the court with a mix of production and enertainment value to me personally

But if you dont pay attention to the same statistics as actual statisticians, why would anyone care about your biased interpretation of production? So long as you remain ignorant to the quantifiable aspects of the game, your opinion will always be based purely on emotion. Take a step back and realize these terms exist for a reason. They are not the end all be all, it doesn't mean you should be willfully ignorant.

jerellh528
12-11-2014, 04:30 AM
Hence the whole opinion thing. Whats great to you may simply be too vague to be of significant to others. Some of us consider calling a player great or not great to be too lazy to pass for any sort of analysis. You dont have to participate, but you cant hate on those of us who prefer nuance.


LOL. That wouldn't change the fact that the term exists for a reason, because its real.


But if you dont pay attention to the same statistics as actual statisticians, why would anyone care about your biased interpretation of production? So long as you remain ignorant to the quantifiable aspects of the game, your opinion will always be based purely on emotion. Take a step back and realize these terms exist for a reason. They are not the end all be all, it doesn't mean you should be willfully ignorant.

Im not ignorant of these "analytics". I choose not to value them because of too many variables.

nickdymez
12-11-2014, 04:30 AM
Not an all time great?

you really have to grasp at straws These days don't you. Lmfao

I don't know what's worse, this obvious troll post or the guy who thinks dismissing jeffys objective post is somehow an argument

Shut up

Chronz
12-11-2014, 04:34 AM
shut up
k.

Chronz
12-11-2014, 04:38 AM
Im not ignorant of these "analytics". I choose not to value them because of too many variables.

Lemme just quote your exact words.

As far as im concerned, a players greatness is determined by what i see on the court with a mix of production and enertainment value to me personally


AGAIN. Nobody gives a **** about your flawed perception of production if you willfully refuse to understand how to measure actual production.

So you may as well say entertainment is what determines greatness to you because its clear you have no idea how to even fathom production nor how those in business even attempt to account for said variables.

jerellh528
12-11-2014, 04:41 AM
Lemme just quote your exact words.

As far as im concerned, a players greatness is determined by what i see on the court with a mix of production and enertainment value to me personally


AGAIN. Nobody gives a **** about your flawed perception of production if you willfully refuse to understand how to measure actual production.

So you may as well say entertainment is what determines greatness to you because its clear you have no idea how to even fathom production nor how those in business even attempt to account for said variables.

And you do? Haha who made you king of stats? My perception of greatness is just that, mine. I think your perception of x+6y = goat is stupid as ****. And what makes tou think i dont know how to value production? I said i choose not to put too much value into it, not that i dont know how to read a damn stat, its not rocket science. Its so guys like you can pretend to be pseudo intelligent without actually knowing the game of basketball. Have you ever put a ball through the hoop in your life? If you think stats can account for the variables in the game of basketball, then you are beyond saving. Basketball isnt business, which i majored in btw

Chronz
12-11-2014, 04:49 AM
And you do?
I do what?


Haha who made you king of stats?
LMFAO King? What exactly do you think production is? Do you think its just something you make up at your whim ? If so, do yourself a favor and stop proclaiming others as kings when in reality, Im the one whos open to the peer review process.


My perception of greatness is just that, mine. I think your perception of x+6y = goat is stupid as ****

Coming from someone who claims to include production into his definition of greatness, yet doesn't understand the actual methods behind those productive values, why would anyone care? LMFAO. Again, just stick to what you think you're seeing because its clear as day you dont know the first thing about quantifying production.

Chronz
12-11-2014, 04:54 AM
And what makes tou think i dont know how to value production?
The fact that you've already admitted to leaving any sort of statistical analysis to others.


I said i choose not to put too much value into it, not that i dont know how to read a damn stat, its not rocket science.
Reading isn't understanding.


Its so guys like you can pretend to be pseudo intelligent without actually knowing the game of basketball. Have you ever put a ball through the hoop in your life? If you think stats can account for the variables in the game of basketball, then you are beyond saving. Basketball isnt business, which i majored in btw
Oh look more straws. LMFAO. If you think people in the business of basketball dont even attempt to account for those variables in statistics then you're even worse off than I imagine. AGAIN. Nobody said stats are the end all be all, but if you dont even understand them, nobody gives a **** what you make of production.

jerellh528
12-11-2014, 04:54 AM
I do what?


LMFAO King? What exactly do you think production is? Do you think its just something you make up at your whim ? If so, do yourself a favor and stop proclaiming others as kings when in reality, Im the one whos open to the peer review process.


Coming from someone who claims to include production into his definition of greatness, yet doesn't understand the actual methods behind those productive values, why would anyone care? LMFAO. Again, just stick to what you think you're seeing because its clear as day you dont know the first thing about quantifying production.

What the **** are you even talkin about? You keep saying " you cant fathom quantifyable prodution" blah blah blah. What makes you think that? Because it doesnt take priority on how i value a player? Me saying production means i do take some stats into account

jerellh528
12-11-2014, 04:57 AM
The fact that you've already admitted to leaving any sort of statistical analysis to others.


Reading isn't understanding.


Oh look more straws. LMFAO. If you think people in the business of basketball dont even attempt to account for those variables in statistics then you're even worse off than I imagine. AGAIN. Nobody said stats are the end all be all, but if you dont even understand them, nobody gives a **** what you make of production.

Hahahah youre so full of yourself man, youre full of crap. An attempt to account for variables means nothing. Omg dude ive never heard someone spew as mucch garbage as you are right now. You dont know basketball.

Chronz
12-11-2014, 04:59 AM
What the **** are you even talkin about? You keep saying " you cant fathom quantifyable prodution" blah blah blah. What makes you think that? Because it doesnt take priority on how i value a player?

I honestly dont know how to make this much clearer. The priority isn't what matters, its the fact that you claim to include it in the equation yet admit to leaving the statistical analysis to others. How can you include production yet not put stock into the APBR community? What exactly do you think statistical analysis is?


Here lets start over, HOW do YOU include production into the equation of a players greatness? I sure hope its not as vague as your " a great player is great" argument. Show me some semblance of statistical comprehension plz.

Chronz
12-11-2014, 05:07 AM
Hahahah youre so full of yourself man, youre full of crap. An attempt to account for variables means nothing. Omg dude ive never heard someone spew as mucch garbage as you are right now. You dont know basketball.

Heres what you're not getting. Its not MY attempt, I simply follow the methodologies of those in the field. Im not the genius, I simply keep up to date with all objective findings.

jerellh528
12-11-2014, 05:09 AM
I honestly dont know how to make this much clearer. The priority isn't what matters, its the fact that you claim to include it in the equation yet admit to leaving the statistical analysis to others. How can you include production yet not put stock into the APBR community? What exactly do you think statistical analysis is?


Here lets start over, HOW do YOU include production into the equation of a players greatness? I sure hope its not as vague as your " a great player is great" argument. Show me some semblance of statistical comprehension plz.

I leave it to them as in i dont create stat formulas and stay awake at night thinking about stats. Do i use what they "discover" as little tools to evaluate? Sure.
I dont know what youre trying to ask of me.. Is there a secret stat world that only you and few others know about? Or what stats would you have me include into my own analysis of a player? You keep saying that im not including stats into my analysis of a player because i dont know how to understand them as if its quantum physics, please stop flattering yourself. i use all stats ive ever come across

Chronz
12-11-2014, 05:10 AM
LOL did I just read that right. An attempt to account for variables means nothing? So then how exactly do you assign value to any statistical figure. OMG, stick to business bro because its clear when it comes to the business of basketball, you dont know jack. Either that or go all the way, get a hold of every single owner and tell them there attempts are meaningless, so says king jerrel. All their efforts are a waste of money.

Jeffy25
12-11-2014, 05:17 AM
Sorry but I have some qualms with this.

I cant agree that Lebron is better than Magic. I wont even bring rings into the conversation, we know who trumps who in that department, we'll just look at percentages and averages over their first 12 seasons.

FG% James - .496, Magic - .521
eFG% James - .530, Magic - .534
TS% James - .581, Magic - .609
assists per game James - 6.9, Magic - 11.4
rebounds per game James - 7.2, Magic 7.3 (remember he's a PG)
ppg James - 27.5, Magic - 19.7 (this is because of FGA James - 19.9, Magic - 13.3)

I know Lebron has the better PER and WS but there are some other aspects to look at too like toughness, leadership, killer instinct, etc and I believe Magic has the edge in all of those as well.

Through age 29 season (don't forget, Lebron entered the league younger, and has already passed him all time in minutes played)

Magic - 19.5 PPG, 11.2 APG, 7.4 TRB, .530 FG%, .606 TS%, 23.8 PER, 120.3 WS, .219 WS/48, 26,417 MP
Lebron - 27.5 PPG, 6.9 APG, 7.2 TRB, .497 FG%, .581 TS%, 27.8 PER, 168.5 WS, .243 WS/48, 33,276 MP

Lebron shot more, Magic passed more (Lebron took 20 shots per game to Magic's 13 and had a usage of 31.6% to Magic's 21.9%). Magic took more sure shots, and got more assists. But their styles of play are much more similar than trying to compare LeBron with Kobe or Jordan.

4 more assists, vs 8 more points per game. Different types of efficiencies by each player.




And I think the ring argument can be thrown out here, Magic joined two hall of famers right out of college immediately and won his first ring as a rookie and had two by the time he was 22. He was a 22 PER player in 4 out of 5 of his seasons where he got rings in the playoffs. LeBron has never had a post-season with that poor of a PER, and still only has two rings to show for it.

Imagine if Lebron joined Kareem and Wilkes at age 20 (and is later given Worthy). I bet he has several rings too.



Either way, the point remains. Lebron is more Magic Johnson style, than he is Kobe or Jordan style.

jerellh528
12-11-2014, 05:18 AM
LOL did I just read that right. An attempt to account for variables means nothing?So then how exactly do you assign value to any statistical figure. OMG, stick to business bro because its clear when it comes to the business of basketball, you dont know jack. Either that or go all the way, get a hold of every single owner and tell them there attempts are meaningless, so says king jerrel. All their efforts are a waste of money.

This is where my major problem with stats comes into play.. An attempt to account for variables is just that, an attempt. its not a perfect science, and although its based off numbers, its not close to being as factual as mathematics

Chronz
12-11-2014, 05:28 AM
I leave it to them as in i dont create stat formulas and stay awake at night thinking about stats. Do i use what they "discover" as little tools to evaluate? Sure.
So long as you admit that, we have no problem. I really dont care what kind of emphasis you put, we all have our opinions on that.


I dont know what youre trying to ask of me.. Is there a secret stat world that only you and few others know about?
Secret? No, everything I know is at your disposal if you take the time to research it. If you're asking me if I think I understand the methods behind statistical analysis better than you then yes, HELL YES. I've NEVER seen even a modicum of statistical comprehension from you and I've been here a long time. Here lets start with the basics, whats the theory behind the usage vs efficiency debate and how they attempt to calculate it. You've been responding fairly quickly so if you can gimme the basic rule of thumb (regardless of its efficiency) I will be thoroughly impressed, and thats just the basics.

You know what forget that, just tell me what they even call it. Just the name of the theory will suffice.


Or what stats would you have me include into my own analysis of a player? You keep saying that im not including stats into my analysis of a player because i dont know how to understand them as if its quantum physics, please stop flattering yourself. i use all stats ive ever come across
Again, being able to read isn't the same as understanding. Since you've asked, I've laid down the simplest, most practical question I could raise. If you dont even know the name of the theory, then you have nothing to stand on and should learn to drop issues while youre behind.

Chronz
12-11-2014, 05:30 AM
This is where my major problem with stats comes into play.. An attempt to account for variables is just that, an attempt. its not a perfect science, and although its based off numbers, its not close to being as factual as mathematics
LMFAO. Of course its an attempt, AGAIN. Nobody is saying they are end all be alls, this doesn't prevent the attempts. So long as you keep up with the methodologies, then your statistical analysis is somewhat credible . So long as you simply dismiss them, nobody will care about your interpretation of statistics.

Jeffy25
12-11-2014, 05:31 AM
Hahahah youre so full of yourself man, youre full of crap. An attempt to account for variables means nothing. Omg dude ive never heard someone spew as mucch garbage as you are right now. You dont know basketball.

Such a lame cop out to throw in.

Your argument tactics are so tiresome.

'I majored in business btw'

Sigh.


Dude, it's fine if you don't like statistical analysis and if you determine greatness by your subjective memory and flawed analysis based on things like entertainment value, then that's fine.

The problem is, you have a serious problem when someone uses information to debunk the assertions that you make or claim, like the other day when you said LeBron is the king of avoiding taking last second shots....then here comes information train showing you that you are wrong. Then you try to change what you said, then again, proven wrong.


Our memories are subjective. And we have a bias so long as we have anyone or team that we root for. We can't have a perfect memory, and even if we did, we are fallible and look for things to validate whatever we already perceived. If you watch a game with the inherent perception that so and so is a bad defender, true or not, you will inherently look for moments/events that prove this theory/assumption of yours while ignoring the times that the player actually did a good defensive job. We all do this.

This is a major reason why we keep track of stats and information. Because we are flawed, we have flawed memories, and we can't possibly watch every game, every night with a perfect memory, and see every thing from a perfect angle to know what is true and what isn't true. So we use information and statistics.


You don't want to use this information, than that's fine. But yes, it's you choosing to sit in ignorance, rather than bothering to learn about this. I am still a novice at a lot of this information in the NBA and understanding it's merits and measures. But I am actively trying to gain in those understandings so I am better versed in the topics. I don't have any set opinions, and can openly have mind changed when presented by information that has the ability to do that.

You don't care to do that. You protect your ego and assumptions on your favorite players and hate certain players that threaten the legacies of your favorite players and attack them mercilessly. You aren't alone, others do this too, so don't think I am actively singling you out, but the correspondence has led us here.



Magic Johnson vs LeBron, Kobe vs Jordan, Kobe vs LeBron. Whatever. Different aspects of each players games were better than anothers.

Personally, I won't be making my all-time list based on things that are out of the individuals control (chips). And I think longevity has a great value, as well peak. And when you combine both (like Kareem and Kobe) then you get an all-time great.

jerellh528
12-11-2014, 05:36 AM
So long as you admit that, we have no problem. I really dont care what kind of emphasis you put, we all have our opinions on that.


Secret? No, everything I know is at your disposal if you take the time to research it. If you're asking me if I think I understand the methods behind statistical analysis better than you then yes, HELL YES. I've NEVER seen even a modicum of statistical comprehension from you and I've been here a long time. Here lets start with the basics, whats the theory behind the usage vs efficiency debate and how they attempt to calculate it. You've been responding fairly quickly so if you can gimme the basic rule of thumb (regardless of its efficiency) I will be thoroughly impressed, and thats just the basics.

You know what forget that, just tell me what they even call it. Just the name of the theory will suffice.


Again, being able to read isn't the same as understanding. Since you've asked, I've laid down the simplest, most practical question I could raise. If you dont even know the name of the theory, then you have nothing to stand on and should learn to drop issues while youre behind.

Im not participating in your quiz because i can easily google whatever you ask and come off as more knowledgable than I really am when it comes to stats, which im sure youve spent more time and effort getting deep into. I will, however, say i did not know the name of the theory youre asking for. Do i think that your evaluation of a player is better than mine because of that? No chance.

Chronz
12-11-2014, 05:40 AM
Im not participating in your quiz because i can easily google whatever you ask and come off as more knowledgable than I really am when it comes to stats,
Thats precisely my point. I was going to gauge this on how long it took you to respond (if it took you a half hour then I would have known you took the time to finally research it) but the fact that you have to google something so basic proves my entire argument.


which im sure youve spent more time and effort getting deep into. I will, however, say i did not know the name of the theory youre asking for. Do i think that your evaluation of a player is better than mine because of that? No chance.
Why would I care? You dont even know the basic rules of thumb, a portion of which you claim to involve in your evaluations. So if the simplest part isn't even in your arsenal, why the **** would ANYONE care? Literally bro. Drop it while your behind.

Jeffy25
12-11-2014, 05:41 AM
This is where my major problem with stats comes into play.. An attempt to account for variables is just that, an attempt. its not a perfect science, and although its based off numbers, its not close to being as factual as mathematics

Have I missed something along the path here or something?

Has anyone ever tried to pretend like these statistics are perfect and the be-all, end-all of all basketball discussions and arguments?

I haven't witnessed this.

It's information, the more information you have, the better.

Sharing one stat from two different players and saying there is the comparison, it's over is mindless, and nobody should ever misuse statistics like this (for example, it would be like saying Player A averaged 30 points per game, and Player B averaged 25.5 points per game, so Player A is better, a better scorer, whatever). Well there is no context in this. What about shots per game, minutes played, games played, efficiency, free throw rate, etc?

This is one aspect of scoring, which doesn't encompass defense, rebounding, passing, etc.

So that's why when posting and using information, you share a plethora of information to compare two players.

You don't do that by the way. You just throw rhetoric back and pretend that's good enough.

Use the information that we know for a fact, rather than just spewing our judgments. Otherwise, your claims look like they are riddled in ignorance.

If you say Jordan is the greatest basketball player of all time, and I say David Robinson was. How do we determine who was actually better?

Are you just going to say, well Jordan was, or he had 6 rings?

Or should you reach into the well of information and share what all Jordan actually accomplished on the court during his career vs what Robinson accomplished on the court during his career? Shouldn't we actually use information when we want to discuss topics?

Otherwise, we are just throwing **** at a wall and expecting people to like the way our **** looks.

Jeffy25
12-11-2014, 05:42 AM
Im not participating in your quiz because i can easily google whatever you ask and come off as more knowledgable than I really am when it comes to stats, which im sure youve spent more time and effort getting deep into. I will, however, say i did not know the name of the theory youre asking for. Do i think that your evaluation of a player is better than mine because of that? No chance.

So why do you think your evaluation could be equal or better?

What do you base it on?

Your subjective and flawed memory and understanding of the game vs his?

Chronz
12-11-2014, 05:43 AM
Its funny, you keep thinking Im proclaiming myself the king when all I ask for are the basics. Im FAR from the king, I just have the humility to understand my limitations. Once you learn that, you will grow as a human. Understand your limitations, and expand on them through objective research. Not emotion, but actual debate .

jerellh528
12-11-2014, 05:44 AM
,
Thats precisely my point. I was going to gauge this on how long it took you to respond (if it took you a half hour then I would have known you took the time to finally research it) but the fact that you have to google something so basic proves my entire argument.


Why would I care? You dont even know the basic rules of thumb, a portion of which you claim to involve in your evaluations. So if the simplest part isn't even in your arsenal, why the **** would ANYONE care? Literally bro. Drop it while your behind.

Usg v efficieny theory is your rule of thumb

jerellh528
12-11-2014, 05:45 AM
Its funny, you keep thinking Im proclaiming myself the king when all I ask for are the basics. Im FAR from the king, I just have the humility to understand my limitations. Once you learn that, you will grow as a human. Understand your limitations, and expand on them through objective research. Not emotion, but actual debate .

Here you go again man, god you much **** and puke your own self with how full of yourself you are... I will grow as a human being? What a load of crock

Chronz
12-11-2014, 05:46 AM
Lemme say this so you stop thinking Im a cocky mofo.

You dont need to understand stats to know more about the game than me. You do however need to understand stats on some kind of quantitative level in order to claim to understand production, otherwise you're just making **** up.

If you just want to rely on your eye balls then leave stats out of this. When you speak of stats, you better have more than emotion at play.

Chronz
12-11-2014, 05:50 AM
Here you go again man, god you much **** and puke your own self with how full of yourself you are... I will grow as a human being? What a load of crock

Says the guy who feels the need to mention his standing as a business major. LMFAO

Cromedome
12-11-2014, 05:50 AM
Chucker.

Chronz
12-11-2014, 05:51 AM
Usg v efficieny theory is your rule of thumb

Ima play some starcraft. If you have a serious answer by then, feel free to pm me. If not, drop it while your behind

jerellh528
12-11-2014, 05:51 AM
So why do you think your evaluation could be equal or better?

What do you base it on?

Your subjective and flawed memory and understanding of the game vs his?

My understanding of the game vs his theory of stats. chronz knows more stats than me but he still has a very limited and basic understanding of stats, im sure stuff he posts on here hollinger would look at and be like uhhhh youre dumb and using these stats wrong. But through growing up playing the game and being around it and watching it my entire life, and using tools from the basic principles of stats, i think i have a good grap on the game and the evaluation of the players

Typos are because my fingers are too big for my iphone, im typing fast and have auto correct tuned off

jerellh528
12-11-2014, 05:52 AM
Ima play some starcraft. If you have a serious answer by then, feel free to pm me. If not, drop it while your behind

Playon starcraft at 2am on a weds. Lol, do you also reddit? Haha

Jeffy25
12-11-2014, 05:54 AM
Here you go again man, god you much **** and puke your own self with how full of yourself you are... I will grow as a human being? What a load of crock

Well, yeah.

I mean, one of the core components to growth is learning....always learning. And that comes from a point of humility.

Chronz
12-11-2014, 05:54 AM
My understanding of the game vs his theory of stats. chronz knows more stats than me but he still has a very limited and basic understanding of stats, im sure stuff he posts on here hollinger would look at and be like uhhhh youre dumb and using these stats wrong. But through growing up playing the game and being around it and watching it my entire life, and using tools from the basic principles of stats, i think i have a good grap on the game and the evaluation of the players

Typos are because my fingers are too big for my iphone, im typing fast and have auto correct tuned off

So now you're speaking on behalf of hollinger on something I've already alluded by claiming my inferiority, and yet somehow, IM the one whos full of himself. LMFAO

jerellh528
12-11-2014, 05:54 AM
Says the guy who feels the need to mention his standing as a business major. LMFAO

You brought up business and i changed it anyways, to nursing because business was boring as ****.

Chronz
12-11-2014, 05:57 AM
Playon starcraft at 2am on a weds. Lol, do you also reddit? Haha

I love reddit. Is there something better to do at 2am midweek? LMFAO Lemme guess, now you're going to lecture me on what a loser I am and somehow Im the guy whos full of himself. Dont make this personal bro, I've taken your personal digs in stride, all of my critiques have been basketball related. Plz dont get urself banned. Arent you the guys who openly stated to wanting to become a mod some day? U rly want to throw stones?

Jeffy25
12-11-2014, 05:57 AM
Playon starcraft at 2am on a weds. Lol, do you also reddit? Haha

I can't imagine a scenario where this slam provides any more credibility than the fact that you and I are both on here as well posting.

I take Thursday's off, what's your excuse?


Pretty dumb thing to attack a person over. Some people work nights, some people own businesses, some people are in school, some people are just lazy. Either way, it doesn't have any affect or differentiation to their ability to post, comprehend arguments, or take away credibility from what we are posting.

Chronz
12-11-2014, 05:58 AM
You brought up business and i changed it anyways, to nursing because business was boring as ****.

respect. Im in the nursing field as well.

jerellh528
12-11-2014, 06:00 AM
I love reddit. Is there something better to do at 2am midweek? LMFAO Lemme guess, now you're going to lecture me on what a loser I am and somehow Im the guy whos full of himself. Dont make this personal bro, I've taken your personal digs in stride, all of my critiques have been basketball related. Plz dont get urself banned. Arent you the guys who openly stated to wanting to become a mod some day? U rly want to throw stones?

Not theowing stones or trying to attck you. Just trying to get a sense of what kinda guy you are based on how you post. Chill out

Chronz
12-11-2014, 06:04 AM
Not theowing stones or trying to attck you. Just trying to get a sense of what kinda guy you are based on how you post. Chill out
Plz just lemme go play starcraft.

Lets just agree we're sleep deprived and acting out.

jerellh528
12-11-2014, 06:08 AM
Plz just lemme go play starcraft.

Lets just agree we're sleep deprived and acting out.

Agreed

Chronz
12-11-2014, 06:19 AM
Real men take **** in stride. Maybe we miscommunicated and tempers flared. We will disagree in the future, Im sure, but if we use today as a launching pad to an equal understanding, we'll be allright. Im sorry if I offended you, seriously, not trying to save face or anything but I know I can be a dick, especially when I come home drunk (You should have seen how I scolded my girl, I know Ima get it in the morning) and I took it out on PSD. For that, Im a loser. Ill justify it however I can in the moment but I see now how *****y that comes off. Man rag and all.

My bad bro, seriously, maybe this is the come down talking but I actually like you as a poster (for the most part). Hope you accept my apology and thanks for letting me take this full circle. Good luck in your healthcare career, I got nothing but respect for those people.

MickeyMgl
12-11-2014, 07:05 AM
Games - Kobe has already played in 1267 games, Jordan only played 1072. So basically it took Kobe almost 200 more games to score more than MJ did.

This is true, because all those games from early in his career when he played a few minutes as a sub count the same as if he'd played starter's minutes.

jerellh528
12-11-2014, 07:14 AM
Real men take **** in stride. Maybe we miscommunicated and tempers flared. We will disagree in the future, Im sure, but if we use today as a launching pad to an equal understanding, we'll be allright. Im sorry if I offended you, seriously, not trying to save face or anything but I know I can be a dick, especially when I come home drunk (You should have seen how I scolded my girl, I know Ima get it in the morning) and I took it out on PSD. For that, Im a loser. Ill justify it however I can in the moment but I see now how *****y that comes off. Man rag and all.

My bad bro, seriously, maybe this is the come down talking but I actually like you as a poster (for the most part). Hope you accept my apology and thanks for letting me take this full circle. Good luck in your healthcare career, I got nothing but respect for those people.

Wow dude, this is huge of you. I knew you were a knowledgable and respected poster, but you proved it even more. Ill try to steer clear of these beat up, old roads, and stick to actual basketball discussion. Its late, im tired and i said some stupid stuff i didnt mean. I accept your apology and can only hope that you accept mine as well. Youve been around here a long time, putting out some quality posts, next time ill try to bring more to the table because you beat me up pretty good tonight. Thanks man! Dont be so hard on yourself!

Sean Moore
12-11-2014, 08:05 AM
The word that comes to my mind is inspiring. I think we can all agree that Kobe didn't surpass MJ as a player career wise, but in determination and hard work he sure did. That to me is very inspiring. Dude came back from an achilles injury and is playing better than many said he would. We should all take off our hats to him and quit throwing salt on his legacy.

Sure he took more shots, but he also took the highest degree of difficulty ones as well. This was surely his greatest weakness and also his greatest attribute. Obviously his shot selection was very poor at times. Not giving him a pass on that one. Though how many of those shot clock buzzer beaters did he take with time expiring when his team didn't have a play set up that went in which eventually gave his team the two points or so that ended up being needed in a close game for them to win. Not every superstar does that as we all well know. Even Durant admitted that recently. Sure it came at the expense of his fg% and overall efficiency, but the main objective is to win games. Not saying it didn't necessarily translate into a win all of the time, but it sure did more often than not. He could have easily passed the ball or elected to not shoot in those situations and his fg% and or ts% could have been higher, but he didn't, and I have no doubt that his teams were better off for it.

PhillyFaninLA
12-11-2014, 08:34 AM
Still no better than 4th or 5th Laker of all time

PhillyFaninLA
12-11-2014, 08:52 AM
Cheeseburger

sure that makes sense but I was thinking baconcheeseburger

Tony_Starks
12-11-2014, 12:27 PM
i dread the moment this happens because kobe fan boys are going to use this as "proof" that Kobe is "better" than MJ....never mind that Kobe played 200 more games than Jordan and counting. Never mind Kobe is in his 19th season while MJ only played 15. Never mind the fact that MJ averaged 30+ ppg 8 times in career vs Kobe's 2. Nevermind MJ's insane efficiency vs Kobe's slightly below average efficiency.

just like how they use the fact that Kobe has racked up more assists in his career than other top 10 scoring leaders as "proof" that Kobe passes and is unselfish (yea because, other than MJ who averaged more per game than Kobe, all the other top 10 points leaders are big man who are typically at the recieving end of passes because they need to be set up to score), they're going to use this as "proof" that he's better than MJ.


I'm curious as to who are these "fan boys" you speak of because I've never seen Laker fans on here claim Kobe was a all around better player than MJ.

If you visit the Laker forum we don't even say that there.

tredigs
12-11-2014, 12:45 PM
At this point regardless of years in the league, minutes player or games played- Kobe has taken 329 more shots than MJ to get to this point total. he'll probably need another 20-23 shots to pass MJ, so lets call it 355 to be conservative.

MJ and Kobe at their peaks both put up around two thousand shots a season. so 355 is about 20% of that 2k figure. considering that, he really didn't need that many more shots than MJ to pass him. about 350. When comparing two careers then went 15+ years, 350 total shots is somewhat marginal, since 350 shots is about 20% of what these guys would put up in one season in their peaks.

when you spin the numbers like that, opposed to saying, it took kobe x number of more years, the perspective is altered. it seems closer. and when you look at each players career point per field goal attempt average, it reflects that as well.

MJ career point per field goal attempt: 1.31
Kobe career point per field goal attempt: 1.29

that's a 0.02 difference.

You're not taking into consideration that Mike only took ~1700 threes as part of those shots. Kobe's taken over 5 thousand now. He's also taken a thousand more Free Throws than Mike. Which is all fine, but that's the total picture.

ILLUSIONIST^248
12-11-2014, 01:30 PM
Still no better than 4th or 5th Laker of all time

:laugh2: and the award for worst post in the thread goes tooooooo.

JayW_1023
12-11-2014, 05:05 PM
Can I use two words?

Fool's gold.

Jamiecballer
12-11-2014, 06:52 PM
Quantity over quality

JROX213*323*310
12-11-2014, 07:25 PM
Champion

FlashBolt
12-11-2014, 07:47 PM
Sorry but I have some qualms with this.

I cant agree that Lebron is better than Magic. I wont even bring rings into the conversation, we know who trumps who in that department, we'll just look at percentages and averages over their first 12 seasons.

FG% James - .496, Magic - .521
eFG% James - .530, Magic - .534
TS% James - .581, Magic - .609
assists per game James - 6.9, Magic - 11.4
rebounds per game James - 7.2, Magic 7.3 (remember he's a PG)
ppg James - 27.5, Magic - 19.7 (this is because of FGA James - 19.9, Magic - 13.3)

I know Lebron has the better PER and WS but there are some other aspects to look at too like toughness, leadership, killer instinct, etc and I believe Magic has the edge in all of those as well.

1) How did Magic have a killer instinct? Can you provide proof of such?
2) Leadership? What the hell... LeBron is one of the best leaders in NBA. Was Magic even a leader or was it Kareem/Worthy at times?
3) Etc. = I can't think of anything else?
4) FG% means jack considering Magic was never the type of scorer James was. Isn't it crazy that James is considered more like Magic than Jordan, yet, he's THIRD in all time PPG over a span of 11 years? How many scorers are there in NBA considered better than LeBron. Yet, he still has the capability of scoring more PPG than them. I get that in his remaining years, that PPG tally will drop but Magic, Bird, and plenty of others retired 11-13 years into their NBA career. James can too.
5) TS% really means nothing. The fact that Magic>Jordan in terms of TS% already tells you how irrelevant and nonsensical it is.
6) APG = Run-and-gun style of game. Kareem/Worthy/Scott being there also made things easier. Being a 6"8 PG over the mini/unathletic PG's of their time also helped. Pace at their peak was 104. That was ranked 8th in the league that year. The highest paced team last year were the Sixers; who hit 102. That has to mean something. They didn't call them the "Showtime" for no reason; because it was a complete run-and-gun team.
7) What is the deal with this "Magic was a PG" argument? For one, he wasn't a natural PG. He could play PG but he certainly wasn't your traditional PG. Him grabbing 7.3 RPG has more to do with his height than anything. Again, I don't even see what your "he was a PG" argument comes from. It is pure garbage.
8) PPG, well, why do you use this excuse for Magic but not for James? James scored more PPG but he could have easily not taken those extra six shots and perhaps converted them into assists. So, if you want to steer your bias quarrel, you have to stop using double-standards. If you score less PPG, you can rack more APG by passing. It really isn't that difficult to analyze.

JLynn943
12-11-2014, 07:54 PM
I'm trying to think of one word for "I don't care," but I don't care enough to put more effort into it.

Kashmir13579
12-11-2014, 08:05 PM
Playon starcraft at 2am on a weds. Lol, do you also reddit? Haha lol u lose 2 chronz

michael jordan
12-11-2014, 08:34 PM
hes better than Jordan!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

PowerHouse
12-12-2014, 01:22 AM
1) How did Magic have a killer instinct? Can you provide proof of such?

There is no "proof" of something as subjective as killer instinct but I do remember the stories of Magic chewing his teammates a new a-hole right on the court if they werent hustling enough or playing to their potential ( I guess that points to leadership too). If it was late in a close game he would be the guy to give the ball to and get the hell out of his way.


2) Leadership? What the hell... LeBron is one of the best leaders in NBA. Was Magic even a leader or was it Kareem/Worthy at times?

Was Lebron even a leader or was it Wade/Bosh at times? At least he doesnt bail out and jump ship whenever he wants. Thats leadership?



4) FG% means jack considering Magic was never the type of scorer James was. Isn't it crazy that James is considered more like Magic than Jordan, yet, he's THIRD in all time PPG over a span of 11 years? How many scorers are there in NBA considered better than LeBron. Yet, he still has the capability of scoring more PPG than them. I get that in his remaining years, that PPG tally will drop but Magic, Bird, and plenty of others retired 11-13 years into their NBA career. James can too.

This whole thing started out as a comparison between the two players so the only sensible way to start comparing is by using statistical analysis to do such. Sorry man, saying James is a "different type" of scorer doesnt excuse him from statistical comparison.


5) TS% really means nothing. The fact that Magic>Jordan in terms of TS% already tells you how irrelevant and nonsensical it is.

I hope you say that to all of the respected posters here who also use that stat as part of their evaluations too. And no that doesnt prove a damn thing about nonsense. It simply shows that Magic had great efficiency which only a moron will deny.


6) APG = Run-and-gun style of game. Kareem/Worthy/Scott being there also made things easier. Being a 6"8 PG over the mini/unathletic PG's of their time also helped. Pace at their peak was 104. That was ranked 8th in the league that year. The highest paced team last year were the Sixers; who hit 102. That has to mean something. They didn't call them the "Showtime" for no reason; because it was a complete run-and-gun team.

Yea it was run and gun. Is that supposed to be a slap to Magic in some way? Who do you think built them into the best run and gun offense in the game in an era where every team was trying to do it?


7) What is the deal with this "Magic was a PG" argument? For one, he wasn't a natural PG. He could play PG but he certainly wasn't your traditional PG. Him grabbing 7.3 RPG has more to do with his height than anything. Again, I don't even see what your "he was a PG" argument comes from. It is pure garbage.

Not garbage. It basically means that Magic, being a guard, was out on the perimeter a lot so it is impressive that he was able to attack the boards as well as he did. His height helped but Penny Hardaway was a tall PG and didnt have those same capabilities so it isnt all about the height.


8) If you score less PPG, you can rack more APG by passing. It really isn't that difficult to analyze.

To automatically assume that scoring less=higher assist average is absolute absurdity. Then why arent all players who arent averaging 20 ppg averaging tons of assists? It takes incredible skill to have the assist numbers Magic did. Lebron makes some nice passes sometimes but nobody will agree that he is as good at that as Magic.

FlashBolt
12-12-2014, 01:43 AM
There is no "proof" of something as subjective as killer instinct but I do remember the stories of Magic chewing his teammates a new a-hole right on the court if they werent hustling enough or playing to their potential.

And I do remember LeBron yelling at Chalmers. I do remember James going ******* against Boston. I do remember LeBron yelling at Norris... So, unless you can show me a game of this "killer instinct", I'm going to assume you just like to make stuff up. I mean, we do have proof of Kobe's killer instinct, right? I can pull up twenty videos showing it.


Was Lebron even a leader or was it Wade/Bosh at times? At least he doesnt bail out and jump ship whenever he wants. Thats leadership?

How does that have anything to do with him being a leader while he was on that team? I don't understand your context. He was a free agent. He's a leader for his team when they are on the court. What he did was more than just about basketball. I don't know if you've noticed but those LeBron James returning home commercials aren't a coincidence.



This whole thing started out as a comparison between the two players so the only sensible way to start comparing is by using statistical analysis to do such. Sorry man, saying James is a "different type" of scorer doesnt excuse him from statistical comparison.

No clue what you're talking about. Magic was clearly not as diverse as James in scoring. He was not depended on to do so.


I hope you say that to all of the respected posters here who also use that stat as part of their evaluations too. And no that doesnt prove a damn thing about nonsense. It simply shows that Magic had great efficiency which only a moron will deny.
What? Who's denying that. Are you telling me that TS% is one of your stronger points in this debate? Magic has a higher TS% than Jordan... But, what does that even mean? He certainly wasn't the offensive player Jordan was. It's an empty stat. Doesn't really represent much.



Yea it was run and gun. Is that supposed to be a slap to Magic in some way? Who do you think built them into the best run and gun offense in the game in an era where every team was trying to do it?

... Showtime didn't begin until Worthy/Scott truly got there.. Just look at his APG numbers before Worthy/Scott were there.. Stop making excuses, you're clearly lost here. Nixon being gone might be part of the increase but Worthy was a huge part of that fast break game. Magic's potential thrived on the Showtime gunning.

Not garbage. It basically means that Magic, being a guard, was out on the perimeter a lot so it is impressive that he was able to attack the boards as well as he did. His height helped but Penny Hardaway was a tall PG and didnt have those same capabilities so it isnt all about the height.

You aren't making much sense here. You're using this "he's a PG" argument but he really wasn't your traditional PG. You're telling me Magic has just as much of a chance pulling up those rebounds if he were shorter? That's simply not true. He had height advantage and that meant a higher rate of grabbing a rebound. That's a fact.


To automatically assume that scoring less=higher assist average is absolute absurdity. Then why arent all players who arent averaging 20 ppg averaging tons of assists? It takes incredible skill to have the assist numbers Magic did. Lebron makes some nice passes sometimes but nobody will agree that he is as good at that as Magic.

I'm not assuming he'll instantly become a double digit assist threat but it's true. If you're a more willing passer instead of scorer, chances are your assists will increase.. Again, not an assumption because it's simply a fact. What is the meaning of a pass first PG.. Bingo. It's why Westbrook gets ridiculed since he plays more of a two-guard. Put Rondo there and for sure, Rondo would be racking more assists than WB with the same USG rate. I'm more than confident that it would be true.

PhillyFaninLA
12-12-2014, 08:36 AM
:laugh2: and the award for worst post in the thread goes tooooooo.

Better than Kobe:

Magic, Shaq, Wilt, Kareem...while Kobe is great he is not them...maybe better offensively than any of them but that makes him the 5th best Laker but the Kobephiles like you cannot see him as anything other the greatest of everything of all time and you get arrogant about it.

thenaj17
12-12-2014, 09:13 AM
i dread the moment this happens because kobe fan boys are going to use this as "proof" that Kobe is "better" than MJ....never mind that Kobe played 200 more games than Jordan and counting. Never mind Kobe is in his 19th season while MJ only played 15. Never mind the fact that MJ averaged 30+ ppg 8 times in career vs Kobe's 2. Nevermind MJ's insane efficiency vs Kobe's slightly below average efficiency.

just like how they use the fact that Kobe has racked up more assists in his career than other top 10 scoring leaders as "proof" that Kobe passes and is unselfish (yea because, other than MJ who averaged more per game than Kobe, all the other top 10 points leaders are big man who are typically at the recieving end of passes because they need to be set up to score), they're going to use this as "proof" that he's better than MJ.

This is the sort of crap that annoys reasonable Kobe fans. Kobe is most certainly not in his 19th season. How about the fact he missed all of last year? How about he barely played in his rookie season?

It's this sort of bias that sets off Kobe fan boys and irks reasonable Lakers fans like myself.

In no way is Kobe better than MJ, but inaccurate figures like you just gave makes the gap sound much wider than the reality

pebloemer
12-12-2014, 09:23 AM
Longevity

Same

Hawkeye15
12-12-2014, 11:51 AM
Still no better than 4th or 5th Laker of all time

eh. Magic has a case. But who else? Shaq wasn't a lifetime Laker, he had plenty of his great years in Orlando, and a couple in Miami. Wilt? He wasn't a Laker for a long time, and it was in his decline years, no way he is a top 5 Laker ever.

Magic is the only one with a case.

tredigs
12-12-2014, 11:59 AM
eh. Magic has a case. But who else? Shaq wasn't a lifetime Laker, he had plenty of his great years in Orlando, and a couple in Miami. Wilt? He wasn't a Laker for a long time, and it was in his decline years, no way he is a top 5 Laker ever.

Magic is the only one with a case.

West definitely deserves to be in the argument. Relative to his competition I'd argue he's better. So does Kareem. KAJ was easily better than Kobe in his Laker years alone to be honest.

Hawkeye15
12-12-2014, 12:07 PM
West definitely deserves to be in the argument. Relative to his competition I'd argue he's better. So does Kareem. KAJ was easily better than Kobe in his Laker years alone to be honest.

perhaps. Kobe will get kudos for being a life long Laker though too, remember that. When all is said and done, he will own so many Laker records it's hard to build up an argument other than Magic, especially if you are talking to Laker people/fans.

nickdymez
12-12-2014, 01:07 PM
So all of Kobe's first team defense awards mean nothing to you? The fact that kobe is the only shooting guard to record 30,000 points, 6,000 assist, and 6,000 rebounds just means he's decent in other areas than scoring? Oh yea, longevity.


Better than Kobe:

Magic, Shaq, Wilt, Kareem...while Kobe is great he is not them...maybe better offensively than any of them but that makes him the 5th best Laker but the Kobephiles like you cannot see him as anything other the greatest of everything of all time and you get arrogant about it.

ILLUSIONIST^248
12-12-2014, 01:07 PM
Still no better than 4th or 5th Laker of all time

eh. Magic has a case. But who else? Shaq wasn't a lifetime Laker, he had plenty of his great years in Orlando, and a couple in Miami. Wilt? He wasn't a Laker for a long time, and it was in his decline years, no way he is a top 5 Laker ever.

Magic is the only one with a case.

^

ILLUSIONIST^248
12-12-2014, 01:08 PM
eh. Magic has a case. But who else? Shaq wasn't a lifetime Laker, he had plenty of his great years in Orlando, and a couple in Miami. Wilt? He wasn't a Laker for a long time, and it was in his decline years, no way he is a top 5 Laker ever.

Magic is the only one with a case.

West definitely deserves to be in the argument. Relative to his competition I'd argue he's better. So does Kareem. KAJ was easily better than Kobe in his Laker years alone to be honest.

West said himself kobe is the greatest laker of all time. So I'll take his word over some kid on the Internet.

tredigs
12-12-2014, 01:14 PM
West said himself kobe is the greatest laker of all time. So I'll take his word over some kid on the Internet.

That's all well and good. I'll choose to formulate my own opinions (might be a scary concept for you, I realize). There are many greats who are not self absorbed and choose to deflect praise rather than fuel an argument.

nickdymez
12-12-2014, 01:19 PM
That's all well and good. I'll choose to formulate my own opinions (might be a scary concept for you, I realize). There are many greats who are not self absorbed and choose to deflect praise rather than fuel an argument.

So you personally don't like Kobe. That's fine and dandy, but don expect anyone to take your opinion serious regarding him

tredigs
12-12-2014, 01:35 PM
So you personally don't like Kobe. That's fine and dandy, but don expect anyone to take your opinion serious regarding him

I don't need you to, that's your prerogative. And as an All-PSD 1st Team Kobe fanboy, I wouldn't expect otherwise. But, if you don't think that Jerry West and his decade+ long dominance as All-NBA 1st Team on the Lakers while leading them on countless finals runs, or Kareem's clearly superior 2 way play to Kobe while in LA warrant them an argument as the top players to put on that jersey, I can't help you.

Kobe certainly has them beat in longevity, and that matters (and it's why I wouldn't include Shaq, although he was easily the superior player). But those two spent over a decade as top 3 players in the league while in LA (Kareem as the outright top player in the league for at least 3 seasons. Something Kobe can't claim). That's warrant for discussion.

basketfan4life
12-12-2014, 02:28 PM
I don't need you to, that's your prerogative. And as an All-PSD 1st Team Kobe fanboy, I wouldn't expect otherwise. But, if you don't think that Jerry West and his decade+ long dominance as All-NBA 1st Team on the Lakers while leading them on countless finals runs, or Kareem's clearly superior 2 way play to Kobe while in LA warrant them an argument as the top players to put on that jersey, I can't help you.

Kobe certainly has them beat in longevity, and that matters (and it's why I wouldn't include Shaq, although he was easily the superior player). But those two spent over a decade as top 3 players in the league while in LA (Kareem as the outright top player in the league for at least 3 seasons. Something Kobe can't claim). That's warrant for discussion.

Must be a shocker for you, but a lot of people all around the world don't agree with you on these things. Yet you talk about them like 2+2=4.

RLundi
12-12-2014, 02:35 PM
Rape.

Hawkeye15
12-12-2014, 02:36 PM
So all of Kobe's first team defense awards mean nothing to you? The fact that kobe is the only shooting guard to record 30,000 points, 6,000 assist, and 6,000 rebounds just means he's decent in other areas than scoring? Oh yea, longevity.

can I ask you an honest question? Are you going to respect all the all NBA Defense awards going forward that LeBron wins, starting with last years? Like, do you think he earned it last year, and will going forward, even though we know he will be named 3-4 more times at least?

Chronz
12-12-2014, 02:39 PM
Must be a shocker for you, but a lot of people all around the world don't agree with you on these things. Yet you talk about them like 2+2=4.

Really? Even the most die-hard of Kobe fans that I know would admit Shaq's superior peak play. You dont really think Kobe was better than KAJ and Shaq at their best do you?

If so, why?

nickdymez
12-12-2014, 02:42 PM
can I ask you an honest question? Are you going to respect all the all NBA Defense awards going forward that LeBron wins, starting with last years? Like, do you think he earned it last year, and will going forward, even though we know he will be named 3-4 more times at least?

As long as its not DPOY, I don't care.

nickdymez
12-12-2014, 02:43 PM
Really? Even the most die-hard of Kobe fans that I know would admit Shaq's superior peak play. You dont really think Kobe was better than KAJ and Shaq at their best do you?

If so, why?

Not Shaq, maybe Kareem. They played in two completely different eras.

Hawkeye15
12-12-2014, 02:50 PM
As long as its not DPOY, I don't care.

oh god that ship sailed hahaha

Hawkeye15
12-12-2014, 02:52 PM
Really? Even the most die-hard of Kobe fans that I know would admit Shaq's superior peak play. You dont really think Kobe was better than KAJ and Shaq at their best do you?

If so, why?

during his tenure there, Shaq was the superior impact. But when ranking all time Lakers, shouldn't Kobe being a Laker for 18 years or whatever, being the record holder or high up in every stat, and an additional 2 championship with another team give him that bump over Shaq? I guess I could understand an argument for Kareem, but in reality, if I am ranking all time Lakers:

Magic
Kobe
West
Kareem
Shaq

Chronz
12-12-2014, 03:09 PM
during his tenure there, Shaq was the superior impact. But when ranking all time Lakers, shouldn't Kobe being a Laker for 18 years or whatever, being the record holder or high up in every stat, and an additional 2 championship with another team give him that bump over Shaq? I guess I could understand an argument for Kareem, but in reality, if I am ranking all time Lakers:

Magic
Kobe
West
Kareem
Shaq

Thats not the argument tho. He bolded tre's remarks about their peak play. Its obvious that either Kobe or Magic are the greatest Laker of All-Time. I would include West but I know his case isn't as easy to defend considering how much people value rings. But Jerry Knows rings dont mean much in terms of individual rankings.

AIRMAR72
12-12-2014, 03:11 PM
HonestlyWATERED down Jordon

Jamiecballer
12-12-2014, 03:13 PM
So all of Kobe's first team defense awards mean nothing to you? The fact that kobe is the only shooting guard to record 30,000 points, 6,000 assist, and 6,000 rebounds just means he's decent in other areas than scoring? Oh yea, longevity.

don't get your panties in a bunch. he was incredible as a scorer and that afforded him the opportunity to play an absolutely absurd number of career minutes. but his rate stats are merely solid in those other categories. yes it was his incredible scoring ability that got him on the court so often and for so long but those other numbers are simply a matter of accumulation.

nickdymez
12-12-2014, 03:14 PM
don't get your panties in a bunch. he was incredible as a scorer and that afforded him the opportunity to play an absolutely absurd number of career minutes. but his rate stats are merely solid in those other categories. yes it was his incredible scoring ability that got him on the court so often and for so long but those other numbers are simply a matter of accumulation.
Such an incredibly silly post. Lmfaooo

lamzoka
12-12-2014, 03:16 PM
It took Jordan 13 years and it took Kobe 18 years.

If Jordan played the amount of season Kobe played he'd be the all time scoring leader

Jamiecballer
12-12-2014, 03:16 PM
Must be a shocker for you, but a lot of people all around the world don't agree with you on these things. Yet you talk about them like 2+2=4.

most of those people are probably too young to fully appreciate that basketball had a long history before Kobe came around. if i grew up watching Kobe my whole life it would probably be hard for me to imagine that anyone was better than him too. assuming i was in a coma during the shaq years obviously.

Jamiecballer
12-12-2014, 03:18 PM
Such an incredibly silly post. Lmfaooo

really? then lets hear it.

nickdymez
12-12-2014, 03:20 PM
really? then lets hear it.
Hear what?

Jamiecballer
12-12-2014, 03:26 PM
Hear what?

what makes it worthy of derision instead of actual conversation. which part do you think is wrong. and why. you know, grown up talk.

tredigs
12-12-2014, 03:26 PM
during his tenure there, Shaq was the superior impact. But when ranking all time Lakers, shouldn't Kobe being a Laker for 18 years or whatever, being the record holder or high up in every stat, and an additional 2 championship with another team give him that bump over Shaq? I guess I could understand an argument for Kareem, but in reality, if I am ranking all time Lakers:

Magic
Kobe
West
Kareem
Shaq

I didn't get the impression he was saying otherwise. He was just commenting to the guys reply to my post who disagreed with my statement that Shaq was clearly a superior player to Kobe while in LA (I won't even justify that with a debate to be honest. It's not close, but two indicative stats are that his average PER and WS/48 in that 8 year period trump Kobe's single season peaks in each).

And it surprises me that you can only "understand an argument for Kareem". I'd argue he was objectively easily more impactful as a whole. And it's not an era discussion, really. The guy was still winning Finals MVP's when he was in his late 30's and MJ/Chuck/Magic/Bird/Olajuwon, etc were playing prime ball.
His stats for his top 11 years in LA were 24.5/10.5/4 +1/2.8 on a 61% TS. Average PER of 25.0, WS/48 of .221. Led the league in PER, WinShares, VORP and Box +/- 5 times while in LA alone (Kobe's never led the league in any nor reached his levels in any). Also a 13X All Star, 3 MVP's, and 5 ships in LA.

Even throwing out arguably his peak years that occurred for the Bucks, he was just simply better than Kobe has ever been while in that uniform. Regardless of media/fans opinions on it now a days.

FlashBolt
12-12-2014, 03:34 PM
His entire career of 18 years spanned in LAL far outweighs what anyone else has done. Those broken records are already his. You can't ignore 18 years and about 14 years of sheer consistency.

nickdymez
12-12-2014, 03:35 PM
what makes it worthy of derision instead of actual conversation. which part do you think is wrong. and why. you know, grown up talk.
Lol @grown up talk. I usually have grown up talk with women on the phone before they come over my gown up house that my grown up money bought. We call it phone sex. I don't have grown up talk with men.

nickdymez
12-12-2014, 03:38 PM
His entire career of 18 years spanned in LAL far outweighs what anyone else has done. Those broken records are already his. You can't ignore 18 years and about 14 years of sheer consistency.
If you post here on psd you can ignore anything you want and focus on anything you want. If someone has a high enough per, there isn't a question or debate to be had. Which is why I've decided to stop trying to debate with people on here. I call these guys "mathletes". No real concept of the game of basketball, but can damn well tell you someone is better than someone else strictly off of per and ws.

cmellofan15
12-12-2014, 03:39 PM
so what you're saying is you have nothing to refute his point aside from calling it silly?

Jamiecballer
12-12-2014, 03:41 PM
so what you're saying is you have nothing to refute his point aside from calling it silly?

that's exactly what he is saying.

tredigs
12-12-2014, 04:00 PM
Speaking of Mathletics and Kobe's laughably overrated defense, I enjoyed seeing some eye-test confirmation in the form of Basketball-ref's inclusion of Box +/- (both offensive and defensive) this year. Some players who have somehow never registered a negative box plus/minus on the defensive end include: Shane Battier, Tony Allen, Kareem, Joakim Noah, Lebron James Shawn Marion and... Shaquille O'Neal, Pau Gasol, Andrew Bynum and Lamar Odom. There are plenty of others, those are just some names that I knew would always be + before looking it up.

Kobe's career defensive box +/- ? Negative 0.5. # of seasons he has registered a positive box +/- ? Two. 1999 and 2000.

Just more fun facts from team #mathletics.

FlashBolt
12-12-2014, 04:21 PM
If you post here on psd you can ignore anything you want and focus on anything you want. If someone has a high enough per, there isn't a question or debate to be had. Which is why I've decided to stop trying to debate with people on here. I call these guys "mathletes". No real concept of the game of basketball, but can damn well tell you someone is better than someone else strictly off of per and ws.

Not sure what you're talking about but numbers don't lie, either. Kobe didn't have the best numbers but cumulatively, he does.

tredigs
12-12-2014, 04:25 PM
If anyone is interested, some other "always positive" and "always negative"s on the defensive end according to box +/-

Always positive: Rajon Rondo, Lebron James, Kevin Garnett, Dwight Howard ( <-- coincidentally, those are the other 4 players on the 2010 All D 1st Team from 2010/11 alongside Kobe... who registered a negative that year), Dennis Rodman, Ben Wallace, Tim Duncan, etc.

Always negative: Carmelo Anthony, Kevin Martin, Steve Nash, Steph Curry until this season, Reggie Miller, etc.

D. Wade just missed the "always positive" cut due to last season and a slight negative in 2007 (the year he dislocated his shoulder + tore his labrum and missed a month+ of action). And actually, Lebron registered one negative season himself. His rookie year.

Randomly clicking through BBREF, I couldn't find one player in the last decade who was picked for the All Defensive Team that registered a negative box +/- on the defensive end that same year. Other than Kobe... he went ahead and qualified for that distinction virtually every season.

/ #mathletics

Hawkeye15
12-12-2014, 04:39 PM
Thats not the argument tho. He bolded tre's remarks about their peak play. Its obvious that either Kobe or Magic are the greatest Laker of All-Time. I would include West but I know his case isn't as easy to defend considering how much people value rings. But Jerry Knows rings dont mean much in terms of individual rankings.

peak wise, I think it is Shaq, with Magic following. West 3rd.

Hawkeye15
12-12-2014, 04:41 PM
I didn't get the impression he was saying otherwise. He was just commenting to the guys reply to my post who disagreed with my statement that Shaq was clearly a superior player to Kobe while in LA (I won't even justify that with a debate to be honest. It's not close, but two indicative stats are that his average PER and WS/48 in that 8 year period trump Kobe's single season peaks in each).

And it surprises me that you can only "understand an argument for Kareem". I'd argue he was objectively easily more impactful as a whole. And it's not an era discussion, really. The guy was still winning Finals MVP's when he was in his late 30's and MJ/Chuck/Magic/Bird/Olajuwon, etc were playing prime ball.
His stats for his top 11 years in LA were 24.5/10.5/4 +1/2.8 on a 61% TS. Average PER of 25.0, WS/48 of .221. Led the league in PER, WinShares, VORP and Box +/- 5 times while in LA alone (Kobe's never led the league in any nor reached his levels in any). Also a 13X All Star, 3 MVP's, and 5 ships in LA.

Even throwing out arguably his peak years that occurred for the Bucks, he was just simply better than Kobe has ever been while in that uniform. Regardless of media/fans opinions on it now a days.

The Kareem argument again falls under Kobe's tenure, and his stats, accolades, awards, and titles, while wearing a Laker uniform is what I mean. All time, Kareem is a top 3 player to me, but he isn't a top 2 Laker.

tredigs
12-12-2014, 04:55 PM
The Kareem argument again falls under Kobe's tenure, and his stats, accolades, awards, and titles, while wearing a Laker uniform is what I mean. All time, Kareem is a top 3 player to me, but he isn't a top 2 Laker.

To each their own. If I could draft both today knowing what I'd get from 14 years of KAJ in LA and 18 years of Kobe, it really isn't that close for me. Kareem's peak 5 years there where he was #1 in the game offensively and top 3 defensively (owning virtually every advanced stat and taking home 3 MVP's) are all arguably better than Kobe's best season. And he maintained a very high impact until age 38 without missing more than a handful of games in his career there. I want that guy as my centerpiece.

Hawkeye15
12-12-2014, 05:06 PM
To each their own. If I could draft both today knowing what I'd get from 14 years of KAJ in LA and 18 years of Kobe, it really isn't that close for me. Kareem's peak 5 years there where he was #1 in the game offensively and top 3 defensively (owning virtually every advanced stat and taking home 3 MVP's) are all arguably better than Kobe's best season. And he maintained a very high impact until age 38 without missing more than a handful of games in his career there. I want that guy as my centerpiece.

I can buy that outlook too. I am simply looking back at their careers after the fact. At the end of the day, Kobe will hold so many Laker records, have 5 rings in their uniform, and is just ALL Laker. That accounts for the gap in production to me.

If we strip both players of where they played, and what I said above, I am with you. A two way impactful big is always more important than a impactful guard anyways.

Sly Guy
12-12-2014, 05:07 PM
first word that comes to mind? Meh.

first thought : jordan retired in the middle of his career.

Malone has more points than jordan in his career but I don't regard him as the better player. Kobe has been a great player, but I still don't think he was better than jordan.

Tony_Starks
12-12-2014, 05:27 PM
All I know is the Spurs are catching 40 from Kobe tonight, probably 25 from Nick Young, and a Laker victory.

Hawkeye15
12-12-2014, 05:41 PM
first word that comes to mind? Meh.

first thought : jordan retired in the middle of his career.

Malone has more points than jordan in his career but I don't regard him as the better player. Kobe has been a great player, but I still don't think he was better than jordan.

nobody is saying Kobe is the better player between the two. At least I hope nobody is haha

tredigs
12-12-2014, 06:05 PM
Was waiting for someone to counter the B +/- defensive talk with, "well, defensive box-score stats are limited in what it takes to account for true defensive ability". And I'd have agreed with that. Overall it's better served as an offensive stat. That said, the trends are fairly telling.

So, does Kobe pass him against SAS tonight? I'm going to say Kawhi shuts him down for the most part and he only gets to log 27 minutes, scoring ~21 points on 18 shots before the game is too out of hand to warrant keeping him in.

Hawkeye15
12-12-2014, 06:19 PM
Was waiting for someone to counter the B +/- defensive talk with, "well, defensive box-score stats are limited in what it takes to account for true defensive ability". And I'd have agreed with that. Overall it's better served as an offensive stat. That said, the trends are fairly telling.

So, does Kobe pass him against SAS tonight? I'm going to say Kawhi shuts him down for the most part and he only gets to log 27 minutes, scoring ~21 points on 18 shots before the game is too out of hand to warrant keeping him in.

oh Kobe's ranking as a defender is something that makes me scratch my head. When he had his mind into it in your younger days (1998-2004), he could be a great defender at times. But how he was named to that many all defensive teams, I will never, ever understand.

Hangin n Wangin
12-12-2014, 06:21 PM
All I know is the Spurs are catching 40 from Kobe tonight, probably 25 from Nick Young, and a Laker victory.

I really hope the Lakers don't get a fluke win tonight. I know I'm hoping for a nice big L. It's in their best interest to lose games to tank their way to get their draft pick back. Kobe can score 40 all he wants, as long as they lose the game.

Tony_Starks
12-12-2014, 06:25 PM
All I know is the Spurs are catching 40 from Kobe tonight, probably 25 from Nick Young, and a Laker victory.

I really hope the Lakers don't get a fluke win tonight. I know I'm hoping for a nice big L. It's in their best interest to lose games to tank their way to get their draft pick back. Kobe can score 40 all he wants, as long as they lose the game.

You might get disappointed tonight my friend. With Kobe firing everybody up in practice + the rest that they've had the stage is set for a big win....

tredigs
12-12-2014, 06:49 PM
You might get disappointed tonight my friend. With Kobe firing everybody up in practice + the rest that they've had the stage is set for a big win....
If everything goes right for LA and everything goes wrong for SAS, I still don't think that this is a possibility.



oh Kobe's ranking as a defender is something that makes me scratch my head. When he had his mind into it in your younger days (1998-2004), he could be a great defender at times. But how he was named to that many all defensive teams, I will never, ever understand.

For sure, and to Kobe's credit he was definitely better in the playoffs, especially in his early/mid twenties. That said, the gift awards for a player who was so clearly coasting (younger) and/or just plain bad for huge stretches of the season (past ~6-8 years) always cracked me up.

Tony_Starks
12-12-2014, 07:16 PM
[QUOTE=Tony_Starks;29380584]You might get disappointed tonight my friend. With Kobe firing everybody up in practice + the rest that they've had the stage is set for a big win....

If everything goes right for LA and everything goes wrong for SAS, I still don't think that this is a possibility.



All good, just be man enough to admit you were wrong when it's over without taking jabs. Lakers win, Kobe 40, Young 25 +

jerellh528
12-12-2014, 07:17 PM
It's a bit difficult to put everything you have on defense every night when you're counted on so much to shoulder the offensive load. Probably why most of the great defenders weren't particularly prolific on the offensive end. I think throughout his career kobe has done a masterful job balancing both, more specifically, rising his defensive level in the playoffs and taking on the opposing team's hot hand for stretches.

%%%%
12-12-2014, 07:20 PM
Jordan after his 1998 retirement had a little above 29,000. Without Jordan's useless Wizards run, Kobe would have been well past him by now.

tredigs
12-12-2014, 07:30 PM
It's a bit difficult to put everything you have on defense every night when you're counted on so much to shoulder the offensive load. Probably why most of the great defenders weren't particularly prolific on the offensive end. I think throughout his career kobe has done a masterful job balancing both, more specifically, rising his defensive level in the playoffs and taking on the opposing team's hot hand for stretches.
Well, we're comparing him to the GOATs here jerell. Those negative Defensive BPM #'s aren't a phenomena you find with Duncan/Lebron/Bird/KAJ/Wilt/Shaq/Jordan, etc etc. Or even with legends who were considered "OK" defenders for much of their career: Magic, Chuck, etc. So, it does sort of pop out to see such a consistent average to negative trend there when it comes to Bryant.


Jordan after his 1998 retirement had a little above 29,000. Without Jordan's useless Wizards run, Kobe would have been well past him by now.
As opposed to Kobe's super relevant Lakers run right now? lol

IBleedPurple
12-12-2014, 07:47 PM
First word? MambaMcRapistGrin

jerellh528
12-12-2014, 07:48 PM
Well, we're comparing him to the GOATs here jerell. Those negative Defensive BPM #'s aren't a phenomena you find with Duncan/Lebron/Bird/KAJ/Wilt/Shaq/Jordan, etc etc. Or even with legends who were considered "OK" defenders for much of their career: Magic, Chuck, etc. So, it does sort of pop out to see such a consistent average to negative trend there when it comes to Bryant.


As opposed to Kobe's super relevant Lakers run right now? lol

That is wierd, do you believe kobe is a below average defender for his career? Are you bringing that stat up just for fun or are you using it as evidence for something? Just wondering your take on it.

tredigs
12-12-2014, 08:08 PM
That is wierd, do you believe kobe is a below average defender for his career? Are you bringing that stat up just for fun or are you using it as evidence for something? Just wondering your take on it.

I think he's an average to below average regular season defender. When he was younger, he wasn't below average, and in the playoffs he was solid to elite when he was younger. Past half decade, I've always thought he was below average in the regular season defensively and only solid for spurts in the post season. As a whole, I think he's the most overrated defender I've ever seen.

Hawkeye15
12-12-2014, 08:45 PM
It's a bit difficult to put everything you have on defense every night when you're counted on so much to shoulder the offensive load. Probably why most of the great defenders weren't particularly prolific on the offensive end. I think throughout his career kobe has done a masterful job balancing both, more specifically, rising his defensive level in the playoffs and taking on the opposing team's hot hand for stretches.

he hasn't put everything into consistent defense ever though. Kobe has picked his spots in the regular season, and had a 6ish year stretch where he was excellent defensively in the playoffs. But the notion he was ever a consistent lockdown defender are b.s.

Hawkeye15
12-12-2014, 08:46 PM
Jordan after his 1998 retirement had a little above 29,000. Without Jordan's useless Wizards run, Kobe would have been well past him by now.

well yeah, but it would have been the same impressive level....

jerellh528
12-13-2014, 12:46 AM
If everything goes right for LA and everything goes wrong for SAS, I still don't think that this is a possibility.



I sure hope you're right. About a minute left, let's go Spurs!!

Tony_Starks
12-13-2014, 01:25 AM
If everything goes right for LA and everything goes wrong for SAS, I still don't think that this is a possibility.



I sure hope you're right. About a minute left, let's go Spurs!!

Where's tredigs?

jerellh528
12-13-2014, 01:27 AM
Where's tredigs?

He ate his crow in the game thread lol

tredigs
12-13-2014, 01:31 AM
Where's tredigs?

Oh I was watching/posting, not to mention hanging out with a cutty and his KB24 jersey.

I think I called 21 points on 18 shots though, right? What'd he have -- 22 points on 22 shots? Not bad.

Also I had no idea Kawhi was a question mark. Very different team without him. They struggled mightily without him last year.

That said, as jerell said, crow eaten. Great game. Lakers 2nd 5 was amazing; best bench performance from a squad all year.

mngopher35
12-13-2014, 01:33 AM
Where's tredigs?

You were right on about young and the win. Not so much Kobe but he was doing more facilitating than I thought he would too. That last shot by young was unreal.

Now I really wish I could go to the game Sunday...

slashsnake
12-13-2014, 01:46 AM
Jordan after his 1998 retirement had a little above 29,000. Without Jordan's useless Wizards run, Kobe would have been well past him by now.

Yeah but Jordan's impact isn't really measured by his longetivity actively playing the game. He's what? Barely top 100 in NBA in games played? Barely top 200 if he hadn't come back with the Wizards.

Kobe would have been about 60th all time in games played when he broke Jordan's non-Wizards total, Jordan would have been 185th in games played then.

Chavacano
12-13-2014, 07:30 AM
Chucker.

PurpleLynch
12-13-2014, 08:17 AM
It's game like this that make me proud about my sig.

Azzacadabra
12-13-2014, 09:09 AM
Gamer.

avengedchaos5
12-13-2014, 10:28 AM
my one word?.... "So". meaning i do give a crap! how many of his points are from freethrows? i bet way more than MJ's

sammyvine
12-13-2014, 12:15 PM
no. Kobe is a great player, a living legend, and a HOF-er. but he is not the God that his fans make him out to be. people aren't hating, they're just trying to bring his fan boys back down to Earth.

your whole avi is about kobe bryant so your obviously bias

Goose17
12-17-2014, 02:59 AM
my one word?.... "So". meaning i do give a crap! how many of his points are from freethrows? i bet way more than MJ's

Getting to the line is a negative now?

Andrew32
12-17-2014, 06:39 AM
The fact that he can still create a high volume of shots and make enough of them to put up volume stats coming off a serious injury, at his age and with his mileage is very impressive.
I can't help but respect his individual work ethic and ability even if the role he took at this point of his career is larger then he can handle and doesn't let him consistently be a high value player (so far).

Still I scoff at people who act like reaching this mile stone should add value to his career.
It should not since he has not been a high value player this year.

Jeffy25
12-17-2014, 10:08 AM
Jordan after his 1998 retirement had a little above 29,000. Without Jordan's useless Wizards run, Kobe would have been well past him by now.

Plus kobe got to start out of high school

avengedchaos5
12-18-2014, 06:52 PM
not saying unimportant just "easier" kobe is nowhere near MJ in any aspect. what if MJ played another 3-5 seasons? kobe wouldnt dream of coming close to his points total