PDA

View Full Version : Westy 16/17 vs. Kobe 05/06



JasonJohnHorn
04-06-2017, 05:22 PM
With his careem high 35 points per game, many point to the 05/06 season as Kobe's best. And it was impressive. Extremely.


However, he also got 41 minutes a game.


Westy's 30-point-triple-double by itself is likely more impressive than 35 a game (percentages aside of course), but what's crazy is that he's not even getting 35 minutes a game!

Were West getting as many minutes as Kobe got that year, Westbrook would be averaging 37 points per game! As well as about 12 boards and 12 assists a game.


I gotta say, I respect the Hurdy Gurdy man for being mellow yellow enough to not dump 40+ minutes a game on Westy, but still... could you imagine if he was running that many minutes a game?

Bruno
04-06-2017, 05:30 PM
would westbrook be capable of the same supporting stats and current efficiency if he had the larger minute load? not saying he couldn't, but its worth considering. his per 36 numbers probably go down slightly with the bigger minute load.

WaDe03
04-06-2017, 05:43 PM
Neither are 08-09 or 06-07 pre-injury Wade (GOAT) though.

europagnpilgrim
04-06-2017, 05:44 PM
His minutes per game are actually helping him stay fresh/focused

people don't really get how hard it is to play minutes per game like those in the old school days and as recent as AIverson did for those pathetic built Philly teams, but also those players didn't like to come out as well, so I am pretty sure if Russ wanted to get 40mpg it wouldn't be a problem, he is the franchise shot caller car driver at this very moment, maybe in the playoffs he accepts that challenge and goes for 45mpg to give us a small sample size

europagnpilgrim
04-06-2017, 05:45 PM
I would probably roll with Westbrook 16/17 because it hasn't been done since 62', its been plenty of 30+ppg scorers since 62' but Kobe put in work no doubt about it

Scoots
04-06-2017, 06:23 PM
would westbrook be capable of the same supporting stats and current efficiency if he had the larger minute load? not saying he couldn't, but its worth considering. his per 36 numbers probably go down slightly with the bigger minute load.

I doubt he could. He's already sacrificing effort on some parts of the game to keep the activity level he's got ... if he had to play more minutes he'd either have to slow his pace earlier or his game would fall off late, and he'd be more susceptible to fatigue injuries.

I think Westbrook is getting enough plaudits ... I think his lack of efficiency is a significant negative on him, and if the team had managed to get a backup PG or another ball handler for him he might be having a better season.

mrblisterdundee
04-06-2017, 06:47 PM
Neither are 08-09 or 06-07 pre-injury Wade (GOAT) though.

Not really. More like:

1. 2016-17 Westbrook
2. 2008-09 Wade
3. 2005-06 Bryant
4. 2006-07 Wade

FlashBolt
04-06-2017, 07:01 PM
hate to be the bearer of bad news but Kobe's 05-06 season is overrated. Westbrook by far is having a better season.. what the hell kinda question?

Quinnsanity
04-06-2017, 07:47 PM
So many different threads in here. Ok. I'll bite.

- If Westbrook played 40 minutes per game he might not have made it 40 games, period. You can't play that many minutes with that high an energy expenditure. Donovan knows this. Either Westbrook could play this many minutes and put up the numbers he has, or he could play 40 and slow himself down a bit, which takes away the appeal of him as a player to begin with. If he played 40 at this rate his knees would explode on the court. What really happened was the best possible option.

- I don't think Kobe's '05-'06 season is necessarily overrated, but he should've won MVP simply on the basis of there not being any other worthy candidates. Nash winning that year was laughable. But Kobe's '05-'06 season is absolutely, unequivocally worse than '16-'17 Westbrook's season. It is not remotely a contest. The same goes for Harden, LeBron and Kawhi.

- This is going to be an unpopular opinion, but I would probably take '08-'09 Wade as the MVP over this season's Westbrook. People really forget how insanely good Wade was that year. Wanna guess how many people have ever put up 30-7-5 and made an All Defensive Team? It's two. One was Michael Jordan. The other was Dwyane Wade. Westbrook has flashier numbers, but he's also a miserable defender. Wade had worse teammates than Westbrook and still shot 49% from the field. The only reason he didn't win MVP is because LeBron put up basically the same numbers on similar defense with equally bad teammates... and won 66 games. The lesson here is that Westbrook, Harden and Kawhi are only in the MVP race because LeBron allows them to be in the race. If he wanted to play every night and be the defensive nightmare he is in the playoffs, this wouldn't be a conversation. As for '06-'07 Wade? Nothing historic there. A great year by a great player, but his output wasn't as great and his efficiency was no better, his team was better and he was not the defensive menace he'd later become.

FOXHOUND
04-06-2017, 07:53 PM
Have to dock WB some points for efficiency, extremely high turnovers, lining up in the paint on FT attempts to pad rebounds and giving very crappy effort in terms of contesting shots on D. People say what they want about Kobe's D, but you don't get voted on All-Defense 1st team by the coaches without earning it. If it was a reputation thing then LeBron wouldn't have been left off period the last few years after falling to 2nd team first. He is far more beloved than Kobe was.

I would say that Westbrook's supporting cast is better, and easily at that. Victor Oladipo, Steven Adams, Enes Kanter and Andre Roberson may not be all that much to write home about, and they have had their injuries, but that 05-06 Laker team was dreadful. Lamar Odom, Smush Parker and a combination of Chris Mihm, Kwame Brown and Brian Cook were the starters. Odom was good but that was literally it. Dipo, Adams, Kanter and Roberson are all good at what they do. Nobody on that Laker team after Odom would be coveted by anyone for any reason.

Kobe also achieved the greatest individual feat since Wilt, and possibly the greatest of all time. No, I'm not talking about 81-points - I'm talking about outscoring the 60-win Mavs and all-time great Dirk Nowitzki by himself through 3 quarters while dropping 62 points in just 32 minutes. He scored 40 or more points 27 times with 6 of them being for 50+. He had 3 separate streaks of scoring 40+ in 4 straight games with two of them including a 50 and one them of going for 5 straight. He averaged 40 PPG for two months, 43.4 PPG in January on .470/.397/.897 and 41.6 PPG in April on .509/.413/.824. April is a short month of just 8 games, but he scored 40+ in 5 of the 8 including one 50+ and another that was 38. He also scored 43 in the last game of March, for good measure lol. He played 80 games and played 40+ minutes in 56 games. Westbrook has played 40+ minutes in just 5 games. Kobe played 29 or less minutes in just 2 of his 80 games. Westbrook has played 29 minutes or less in 13 games.

What Westbrook is doing is remarkable, and hasn't been done since Oscar. The thing is, Kobe achieved multiple scoring feats that season that hadn't been done since Wilt (81, outscoring a team through 3 quarters, 40-point streaks that reached 5 and 4, 40 PPG for a month) and his 35 PPG hadn't been done since Jordan's 37 PPG in 86-87. Passing is great but ultimately you have to rely on your teammate hitting the shot. Still, Westbrook is great at creating shots for his teammates. It's not like the 4.5 APG that Kobe averaged as the secondary playmaker in the triangle was bad either.

One last thing is pace. The 05-06 Lakers played at a pace of 90.9 possessions per game. The Thunder play at a pace of 97.9 possessions per game. Kobe led the 05-06 Lakers to a 45-37 record while finishing 8th in offensive rating and 15th in defensive rating. Westbrook has led the Thunder to a 45-33 record so far while being 15th in offensive rating and 9th in defensive rating. That defensive rating says a lot about Westbrook's help, since we know he has played pretty poor defense. While only having two teammates who are offensively gifted in Dipo and Kanter, who plays limited minutes at that, his team is full of good defenders to greatly help Wes on that end. Kobe had just Odom on offense in terms of good offensive players and no good defenders besides him.

At the end of the day, you're talking about two of the greatest individual seasons of all time. Sadly, Westbrook will likely not win MVP like Kobe didn't but both deserve/d it.

FlashBolt
04-06-2017, 08:03 PM
So many different threads in here. Ok. I'll bite.

- If Westbrook played 40 minutes per game he might not have made it 40 games, period. You can't play that many minutes with that high an energy expenditure. Donovan knows this. Either Westbrook could play this many minutes and put up the numbers he has, or he could play 40 and slow himself down a bit, which takes away the appeal of him as a player to begin with. If he played 40 at this rate his knees would explode on the court. What really happened was the best possible option.

- I don't think Kobe's '05-'06 season is necessarily overrated, but he should've won MVP simply on the basis of there not being any other worthy candidates. Nash winning that year was laughable. But Kobe's '05-'06 season is absolutely, unequivocally worse than '16-'17 Westbrook's season. It is not remotely a contest. The same goes for Harden, LeBron and Kawhi.

- This is going to be an unpopular opinion, but I would probably take '08-'09 Wade as the MVP over this season's Westbrook. People really forget how insanely good Wade was that year. Wanna guess how many people have ever put up 30-7-5 and made an All Defensive Team? It's two. One was Michael Jordan. The other was Dwyane Wade. Westbrook has flashier numbers, but he's also a miserable defender. Wade had worse teammates than Westbrook and still shot 49% from the field. The only reason he didn't win MVP is because LeBron put up basically the same numbers on similar defense with equally bad teammates... and won 66 games. The lesson here is that Westbrook, Harden and Kawhi are only in the MVP race because LeBron allows them to be in the race. If he wanted to play every night and be the defensive nightmare he is in the playoffs, this wouldn't be a conversation. As for '06-'07 Wade? Nothing historic there. A great year by a great player, but his output wasn't as great and his efficiency was no better, his team was better and he was not the defensive menace he'd later become.

08-09 Wade beats any SG season not named MJ, IMO.

FlashBolt
04-06-2017, 08:08 PM
Have to dock WB some points for efficiency, extremely high turnovers, lining up in the paint on FT attempts to pad rebounds and giving very crappy effort in terms of contesting shots on D. People say what they want about Kobe's D, but you don't get voted on All-Defense 1st team by the coaches without earning it. If it was a reputation thing then LeBron wouldn't have been left off period the last few years after falling to 2nd team first. He is far more beloved than Kobe was.

I would say that Westbrook's supporting cast is better, and easily at that. Victor Oladipo, Steven Adams, Enes Kanter and Andre Roberson may not be all that much to write home about, and they have had their injuries, but that 05-06 Laker team was dreadful. Lamar Odom, Smush Parker and a combination of Chris Mihm, Kwame Brown and Brian Cook were the starters. Odom was good but that was literally it. Dipo, Adams, Kanter and Roberson are all good at what they do. Nobody on that Laker team after Odom would be coveted by anyone for any reason.

Kobe also achieved the greatest individual feat since Wilt, and possibly the greatest of all time. No, I'm not talking about 81-points - I'm talking about outscoring the 60-win Mavs and all-time great Dirk Nowitzki by himself through 3 quarters while dropping 62 points in just 32 minutes. He scored 40 or more points 27 times with 6 of them being for 50+. He had 3 separate streaks of scoring 40+ in 4 straight games with two of them including a 50 and one them of going for 5 straight. He averaged 40 PPG for two months, 43.4 PPG in January on .470/.397/.897 and 41.6 PPG in April on .509/.413/.824. April is a short month of just 8 games, but he scored 40+ in 5 of the 8 including one 50+ and another that was 38. He also scored 43 in the last game of March, for good measure lol. He played 80 games and played 40+ minutes in 56 games. Westbrook has played 40+ minutes in just 5 games. Kobe played 29 or less minutes in just 2 of his 80 games. Westbrook has played 29 minutes or less in 13 games.

What Westbrook is doing is remarkable, and hasn't been done since Oscar. The thing is, Kobe achieved multiple scoring feats that season that hadn't been done since Wilt (81, outscoring a team through 3 quarters, 40-point streaks that reached 5 and 4, 40 PPG for a month) and his 35 PPG hadn't been done since Jordan's 37 PPG in 86-87. Passing is great but ultimately you have to rely on your teammate hitting the shot. Still, Westbrook is great at creating shots for his teammates. It's not like the 4.5 APG that Kobe averaged as the secondary playmaker in the triangle was bad either.

One last thing is pace. The 05-06 Lakers played at a pace of 90.9 possessions per game. The Thunder play at a pace of 97.9 possessions per game. Kobe led the 05-06 Lakers to a 45-37 record while finishing 8th in offensive rating and 15th in defensive rating. Westbrook has led the Thunder to a 45-33 record so far while being 15th in offensive rating and 9th in defensive rating. That defensive rating says a lot about Westbrook's help, since we know he has played pretty poor defense. While only having one teammate who is truly offensively gifted in Kanter, and one who plays limited minutes at that, the team is full of good defenders to greatly help Wes on that end.

At the end of the day, you're talking about two of the greatest individual seasons of all time. Sadly, Westbrook will likely not win MVP like Kobe didn't but both deserve/d it.

Kobe's 35 PPG isn't all that impressive. Like, I mean, he took 27 shots, you know? Stephen Curry could have easily gotten 35 PPG last season but it just wasn't something he has to do. Kobe is Kobe and he had the ultimate green light. Westbrook probably won't go and get 35 but I do think LeBron and KD could have gotten it if they really had to. No one is grabbing a triple double the way Westbrook can. I'm sorry but it's much easier to say "im going to average 35 and shoot 27 shots doing so" than "I'm averaging a triple double while scoring 31 points per game." It's unheard of. And the pace thing I get but Kobe played WAY more minutes. The difference in pace would not even be comparable if we include the minutes played. Offensively/defensively, I'm not sure how you can judge it with how the game has changed. Teams are scoring more now because of the quicker pace/three point shooting so it's a totally different scheme of things if we're comparing Kobe's team to Westbrook's. Not to mention the teams are just better right now.

FOXHOUND
04-06-2017, 08:34 PM
Kobe's 35 PPG isn't all that impressive. Like, I mean, he took 27 shots, you know? Stephen Curry could have easily gotten 35 PPG last season but it just wasn't something he has to do. Kobe is Kobe and he had the ultimate green light. Westbrook probably won't go and get 35 but I do think LeBron and KD could have gotten it if they really had to. No one is grabbing a triple double the way Westbrook can. I'm sorry but it's much easier to say "im going to average 35 and shoot 27 shots doing so" than "I'm averaging a triple double while scoring 31 points per game." It's unheard of. And the pace thing I get but Kobe played WAY more minutes. The difference in pace would not even be comparable if we include the minutes played. Offensively/defensively, I'm not sure how you can judge it with how the game has changed. Teams are scoring more now because of the quicker pace/three point shooting so it's a totally different scheme of things if we're comparing Kobe's team to Westbrook's. Not to mention the teams are just better right now.

Eh, I think that's a cop out. If it was that easy then Iverson would have done it because it's not like he was shy about chucking away. Can Curry do that? I don't know. I think you're overlooking the element of stamina and how much his help helped him in that regard on top of it. Curry no doubt can get hot like few all time but it's another thing to do it for 80 games. Durant has the WB excuse, I guess, but he didn't go and average 40 PPG for a month the year WB got hurt and there wasn't much help around him. LeBron had years in Cleveland with offensive role players so he had plenty of opportunity to do so. Why couldn't I use the same logic to discredit the scoring/passing output that Westbrook and Harden are doing with their insane ball dominance and usage rate?

This is the same type of argument to try and discredit things like 81-points. No, not anyone is capable of doing that. To maintain a high efficiency while taking 27 shots per game, and having the stamina to do that while playing 40 MPG and All-NBA defense, is not something to take lightly. There's a reason nobody scored 35 PPG in close to two decades at the time and there's a reason he achieved multiple scoring feats not seen since Wilt. It's not because players haven't tried.

The talk of pace is just simply another factor to take into account. It's interesting that you view Kobe playing many more minutes as a negative of sorts, when it should be the opposite. Kobe being able to maintain such a high level of play on both ends while playing almost the entire game is only a plus and why he was able to carry such a pathetically weak team. The quicker pace/more shots is more in line with talking about Westbrook in terms of averaging a triple double. Those greatly help him get those rebounds and assists to 10+ in less minutes, and as mentioned him lining up in the paint on FT's is shameless rebound hunting that should be taken into account. At the same time, a higher pace means playing more minutes can be more difficult. This of course would mean more if WB didn't have to give such little effort on D to play like he has.

The thing is, how much do we get caught up in the fun of a triple double? Would WB not be having a better season if he, say, shot 45% instead of 42% while averaging 9.7 REB instead of 10.7? It's an incredible feat but at the end of the day a triple double is ultimately an arbitrary achievement that doesn't necessarily mean that it's a better game. WB is having a tremendous season but I do get annoyed when people like Chris Broussard say he wouldn't get his vote for MVP if he averaged 9.9 rebounds. That's way overthinking that arbitrary threshold, IMO.

FlashBolt
04-06-2017, 08:48 PM
Eh, I think that's a cop out. If it was that easy then Iverson would have done it because it's not like he was shy about chucking away. Can Curry do that? I don't know. I think you're overlooking the element of stamina and how much his help helped him in that regard on top of it. Curry no doubt can get hot like few all time but it's another thing to do it for 80 games. Durant has the WB excuse, I guess, but he didn't go and average 40 PPG for a month the year WB got hurt and there wasn't much help around him. LeBron had years in Cleveland with offensive role players so he had plenty of opportunity to do so. Why couldn't I use the same logic to discredit the scoring/passing output that Westbrook and Harden are doing with their insane ball dominance and usage rate?

This is the same type of argument to try and discredit things like 81-points. No, not anyone is capable of doing that. To maintain a high efficiency while taking 27 shots per game, and having the stamina to do that while playing 40 MPG and All-NBA defense, is not something to take lightly. There's a reason nobody scored 35 PPG in close to two decades at the time and there's a reason he achieved multiple scoring feats not seen since Wilt. It's not because players haven't tried.

The talk of pace is just simply another factor to take into account. It's interesting that you view Kobe playing many more minutes as a negative of sorts, when it should be the opposite. Kobe being able to maintain such a high level of play on both ends while playing almost the entire game is only a plus and why he was able to carry such a pathetically weak team. The quicker pace/more shots is more in line with talking about Westbrook in terms of averaging a triple double. Those greatly help him get those rebounds and assists to 10+ in less minutes, and as mentioned him lining up in the paint on FT's is shameless rebound hunting that should be taken into account. At the same time, a higher pace means playing more minutes can be more difficult. This of course would mean more if WB didn't have to give such little effort on D to play like he has.

The thing is, how much do we get caught up in the fun of a triple double? Would WB not be having a better season if he, say, shot 45% instead of 42% while averaging 9.7 REB instead of 10.7? It's an incredible feat but at the end of the day a triple double is ultimately an arbitrary achievement that doesn't necessarily mean that it's a better game. WB is having a tremendous season but I do get annoyed when people like Chris Broussard say he wouldn't get his vote for MVP if he averaged 9.9 rebounds. That's way overthinking that arbitrary threshold, IMO.

1) Curry could have done it. Dude, he shot 20 shots per game and averaged 30. Do you really think he'll be worn out because of taking 5 more shots? stop. Sometimes the only reason a player scores more is simply because they take more shots. I'm not buying this notion that if they take five more shots, they're going to end up in the hospital after..
2) Iverson didn't do it because he hogged the ball and because of his size, it still wasn't enough. Efficiency matters, you know? It was totally common for Iverson to take 27 shots per game. I value the guy who does it efficiently despite knowing they can just hog the damn ball and go for 35+ every night.
3) Actually.. KD did average 35 points when Westbrook was out in 2013-2014 because of an injury.. also did it while shooting 56% and while leading his team to one of the best records and literally won games by double digits in Westbrook's absence.. so yes, it's entirely possible. With Westy's absence and with our record without Westy, that's why KD won MVP despite LeBron having an amazing year as well.
4) LeBron could have scored 35.. He's not interested in doing so. I hate having to say it but there's nothing you can say about it that he can't. He plays the minutes and he's injury-free his entire career.
5) I'm not using the minutes argument against Kobe but there's clearly a correlation between staying on the court = higher production. It's arbitrary but it's definitely more impressive than scoring 35 ppg and that's not even debatable.

FOXHOUND
04-06-2017, 09:58 PM
1) Curry could have done it. Dude, he shot 20 shots per game and averaged 30. Do you really think he'll be worn out because of taking 5 more shots? stop. Sometimes the only reason a player scores more is simply because they take more shots. I'm not buying this notion that if they take five more shots, they're going to end up in the hospital after..
2) Iverson didn't do it because he hogged the ball and because of his size, it still wasn't enough. Efficiency matters, you know? It was totally common for Iverson to take 27 shots per game. I value the guy who does it efficiently despite knowing they can just hog the damn ball and go for 35+ every night.
3) Actually.. KD did average 35 points when Westbrook was out in 2013-2014 because of an injury.. also did it while shooting 56% and while leading his team to one of the best records and literally won games by double digits in Westbrook's absence.. so yes, it's entirely possible. With Westy's absence and with our record without Westy, that's why KD won MVP despite LeBron having an amazing year as well.
4) LeBron could have scored 35.. He's not interested in doing so. I hate having to say it but there's nothing you can say about it that he can't. He plays the minutes and he's injury-free his entire career.
5) I'm not using the minutes argument against Kobe but there's clearly a correlation between staying on the court = higher production. It's arbitrary but it's definitely more impressive than scoring 35 ppg and that's not even debatable.

1) Could have means nothing, though. You're basically discrediting an achievement based on nonsense. Jason Kidd could have averaged a triple double if he worried less about contesting shots and getting more defensive rebounds while being in the paint on FTs on top of it. Harden could be averaging a triple double right now if he did the same. Fair? I'm guessing you think that it's not, as you should.

It's not as simple as you're trying to make it sound. Five shots is a lot, in reality. Unless they are five shots that he gets easily as spot ups just standing there, and obviously they wouldn't be since he would have taken them if he had them, then that means many more than five possessions spent dribbling to try and create those shots. Let alone, you know, maintaining his great efficiency since part of doing that was him being as selective as he was to begin with. He already took plenty of crazy shots, adding more to his output and multiplying that over 82 games means his efficiency would likely go down a healthy amount. How much? I don't know, but you don't give the benefit of the doubt that easily. In that case, why can't I say Kobe could have shot 5 more times to score 40 PPG?

2) I'm aware that efficiency matters. That's kind of the point and why averaging 35 PPG is such an incredible achievement. Do you know how many players have averaged 40 PPG for an entire month?


Kobe Bryant averaged 43.4 ppg in 13 games in January, the highest scoring calendar month by an NBA player since Wilt Chamberlain averaged 45.8 ppg in March 1963. Bryant also averaged 40-plus ppg (40.6) in February 2003, when he had nine straight 40-plus point games, the fourth longest such streak in NBA history

Bryant is the only player other than Chamberlain to average 40-plus ppg in two different calendar months; Chamberlain did it 11 times. Elgin Baylor had one such calendar month--and no other NBA player has ever done this even once: not Iverson, not Jordan, not Gervin, not Kareem, not Barry, not Oscar, not West.

http://20secondtimeout.blogspot.com/2006/02/kobes-january-performance-is-one-for.html

This was written after his January of 06. He also averaged 40 PPG in April of the 05-06 season and in March of the 06-07 season. It seems much more like you just don't want to give Kobe credit, while ignoring that the reality of his scoring ability far exceeds your opinion of it.

I need to make corrections on my previous post on those Wilt feats. I forgot that Baylor scored 40 PPG in a month, and that it wasn't the first for Kobe. It was also more specifically the scoring feat of 43 PPG and scoring 40 PPG more than once - and he ended up doing it twice that season alone. It also wasn't the 40-point streak that I was thinking of, but the 4 straight 50-point games he had in the 06-07 season. So, disregard that 40-point streak talk.

3) I didn't say that Durant didn't average 35 while WB was out, I said he didn't average 40 PPG in a month while he was out. Durant averaged 35 or better in one month of the 13-14 season, 35.9 PPG in January. Could he have potentially pushed the issue that month to average 40? Sure, I don't see why not. Does that mean he could have averaged 35 PPG all year? Again, why couldn't I say the same for Kobe pushing for 40 PPG if he really wanted to? If it were that easy, of course.

4) No, he could not have. LeBron is not a high volume scorer on Kobe's level. Nobody is, besides Wilt and Jordan. He has never broke 33 PPG for a single month, let alone a year. He has 10 50-point games in his career with one of them being a 60. Kobe had 10 50-point games in the 06-07 season alone with two of them being 60+ just 6 days apart from each other. He scored 81 and 62 in 3 quarters a month apart from each other in 05-06.

To reiterate, just because it's so ridiculous - Kobe's 50-point game and 60-point game resume in the 06-07 season exceeds LeBron's entire career. You may have a better chance arguing that LeBron could average a triple double if "he really wanted to", but he's never come all that close to that either.

5) I would find it more impressive if the results were better. You see, Kobe playing more and being more dominant led to much better results despite less help. The Lakers had the 8th best offense, the Thunder are just 15th. Kobe's off the ball ability, something greatly underrated about his game, allowed Odom to do his thing and average 5.5 APG and Smush to do a bit and average 3.7 APG to go with his 4.5 APG. As a result, the Lakers averaged 21.1 APG, which was good for 9th in the NBA that season. The Thunder, despite Westbrook averaging 10.4 APG, average the exact same 21.1 APG which in today's NBA is good for 24th. Oladipo averaged 4 APG 3 Orlando seasons so it's not like he's not capable of doing more than the 2.6 he averages in OKC.

Kobe's impact was greater because he could impact the game on a big level with or without the ball. He also brought great defense, while Westbrook has played poor defense. WB does get a good amount of steals though, and is at least good on some hustle stats like deflections. Still, it's nothing close to Kobe's impact on D.

And ultimately that's the point, isn't it? Westbrook may have a more fun stat line, maybe something better for fantasy sports, but isn't overall impact what we should be looking at? Again, talking about two of the best individual seasons of all time so there is no loser. You really need to give Kobe far more credit than you do though. Way overlooking an all-time great, for whatever reason.

WaDe03
04-06-2017, 10:20 PM
Not really. More like:

1. 2016-17 Westbrook
2. 2008-09 Wade
3. 2005-06 Bryant
4. 2006-07 Wade

Ehhhh give me top 3 in MVP voting and DPOY (Jordan the only other guard to ever do this) voting over Westbrooks season. The team goes in a full out effort to give him his rebounds, I watched about a 5 minute video on it the other day. Still very impressive what he's doing and he should be MVP and I hope he wins it.

On 06-07 Wade are you looking at pre injury?

https://instagram.com/p/BJGNMmTAOKa/

This would've been better than 08-09 and he was leading the MVP race, proababky headed to back to back championships and Finals MVPs.

29-5-8-2-1 50% with great defense.

Jamiecballer
04-06-2017, 11:23 PM
The two players are comparable in their approach, but I don't think it's really particularly close. I'll take Westbrook here and the amazing thing is its not even the best performance this season.

Sent from my SM-T530NU using Tapatalk

FlashBolt
04-07-2017, 12:47 AM
I refuse to debate someone who genuinely thinks that scoring 5 extra points and taking a few extra shots would be a deal-breaker but yet Kobe can play 40 minutes and shoot 27 shots and we applaud him for scoring 35. Yes, Kobe scored lots of points. And despite those insane high scoring games, he still only averaged 35. No matter how many times you say he scored 81, he didn't average 81. The fact is, Curry+KD are more efficient scorers than Kobe ever was and if they truly cared about scoring the way Kobe did, they would have averaged 35. I don't wanna play with hypotheticals but simple mathematication debunks anything you say regarding whether or not they could do it. "LeBron is not a volume scorer." Yeah, he just scores more PPG than Kobe. Dude.. stop. What you're referring to is Kobe is a better scorer when he's "hot" but there is no evidence suggesting Kobe truly is a more capable scorer. The facts show LeBron is much more efficient while scoring more points. The same applies with KD/Curry vs Kobe as well. The facts prove that if some of these guys had a more ballhoggish mentality, they could reach 35. The only difference is Kobe took more shots. Kobe's 2005-2006 season was not better than Curry's last season.. not even close. So your 35 PPG number is irrelevant here. We all know Curry's 30 PPG > Kobe's 35 PPG by virtue of how efficiently Curry got it. 7 less shots.

IKnowHoops
04-07-2017, 12:54 AM
Eh, I think that's a cop out. If it was that easy then Iverson would have done it because it's not like he was shy about chucking away. Can Curry do that? I don't know. I think you're overlooking the element of stamina and how much his help helped him in that regard on top of it. Curry no doubt can get hot like few all time but it's another thing to do it for 80 games. Durant has the WB excuse, I guess, but he didn't go and average 40 PPG for a month the year WB got hurt and there wasn't much help around him. LeBron had years in Cleveland with offensive role players so he had plenty of opportunity to do so. Why couldn't I use the same logic to discredit the scoring/passing output that Westbrook and Harden are doing with their insane ball dominance and usage rate?

This is the same type of argument to try and discredit things like 81-points. No, not anyone is capable of doing that. To maintain a high efficiency while taking 27 shots per game, and having the stamina to do that while playing 40 MPG and All-NBA defense, is not something to take lightly. There's a reason nobody scored 35 PPG in close to two decades at the time and there's a reason he achieved multiple scoring feats not seen since Wilt. It's not because players haven't tried.

The talk of pace is just simply another factor to take into account. It's interesting that you view Kobe playing many more minutes as a negative of sorts, when it should be the opposite. Kobe being able to maintain such a high level of play on both ends while playing almost the entire game is only a plus and why he was able to carry such a pathetically weak team. The quicker pace/more shots is more in line with talking about Westbrook in terms of averaging a triple double. Those greatly help him get those rebounds and assists to 10+ in less minutes, and as mentioned him lining up in the paint on FT's is shameless rebound hunting that should be taken into account. At the same time, a higher pace means playing more minutes can be more difficult. This of course would mean more if WB didn't have to give such little effort on D to play like he has.

The thing is, how much do we get caught up in the fun of a triple double? Would WB not be having a better season if he, say, shot 45% instead of 42% while averaging 9.7 REB instead of 10.7? It's an incredible feat but at the end of the day a triple double is ultimately an arbitrary achievement that doesn't necessarily mean that it's a better game. WB is having a tremendous season but I do get annoyed when people like Chris Broussard say he wouldn't get his vote for MVP if he averaged 9.9 rebounds. That's way overthinking that arbitrary threshold, IMO.

To be Fair Iverson put up 33/7. He passed more than Kobe so.

IKnowHoops
04-07-2017, 12:56 AM
Nobody will consistently go 1 on 4 like Kobe did. Not even Iverson was as shot happy as Kobe. Kobe made his mind up to shoot way before plays develop. Iverson would at least get open to take his shots.

FlashBolt
04-07-2017, 01:00 AM
exactly.. this narrative that Kobe scored 35 because he's unstoppable and this gibberish is laughable. Do any of you truly think Kobe's 2005-2006 season was more unstoppable offensively than what we've seen from KD/Curry/LeBron? The difference between these three guys and Kobe is simply shot selection. Those three look to get others involved for a better shot. Granted, Kobe was on a very bad team in 05-06 but that meant he could take 27 shots. Was Kobe a worse scorer the year after? What about two years later? It's the same kobe. one thing changed and that was the amount of shots. I've seen enough from Curry to know that if he TRULY wanted. Truly truly truly, he could have went for 35 easily every night. The dude sat out so many fourth quarters because he just blew every team out.

FOXHOUND
04-07-2017, 02:24 AM
To be Fair Iverson put up 33/7. He passed more than Kobe so.

To be fair, Iverson never led the 76ers to a top 10 offense because he was inefficient. The year he put up 33 and 7, the 76ers went 38-44 with an orating of 106.0 which was good for 15th in the NBA. This was despite having Chris Webber, Andre Iguodala and Kyle Korver on the team with him. The year he won MVP, they ranked 13th in orating.

Assists are also not a barometer of actual passing. Kawhi Leonard averages 3.6 assists per game while Carmelo Anthony averages 2.9 assists per game. Yet, Kawhi passes 32 times a game while Carmelo passes 36 times a game.

Iverson averaged 25 FGA, 9.9 FTA, 6 APG and 3.7 TO per game from 2000-2006. You have to shoot the ball to draw a shooting foul and, thus, gain FTAs. The fact that Iverson was able to take 25 FGA and average 10 FTA while still being able to dish 6 APG and have 3.7 TO only means that he had the ball far more than Kobe did, not that he passed more per touch. For Iverson to average 35 PPG he would have had to take over 30 FGA a game and he already shot as much as he could.

FOXHOUND
04-07-2017, 04:36 AM
I refuse to debate someone who genuinely thinks that scoring 5 extra points and taking a few extra shots would be a deal-breaker but yet Kobe can play 40 minutes and shoot 27 shots and we applaud him for scoring 35. Yes, Kobe scored lots of points. And despite those insane high scoring games, he still only averaged 35. No matter how many times you say he scored 81, he didn't average 81. The fact is, Curry+KD are more efficient scorers than Kobe ever was and if they truly cared about scoring the way Kobe did, they would have averaged 35. I don't wanna play with hypotheticals but simple mathematication debunks anything you say regarding whether or not they could do it. "LeBron is not a volume scorer." Yeah, he just scores more PPG than Kobe. Dude.. stop. What you're referring to is Kobe is a better scorer when he's "hot" but there is no evidence suggesting Kobe truly is a more capable scorer. The facts show LeBron is much more efficient while scoring more points. The same applies with KD/Curry vs Kobe as well. The facts prove that if some of these guys had a more ballhoggish mentality, they could reach 35. The only difference is Kobe took more shots. Kobe's 2005-2006 season was not better than Curry's last season.. not even close. So your 35 PPG number is irrelevant here. We all know Curry's 30 PPG > Kobe's 35 PPG by virtue of how efficiently Curry got it. 7 less shots.

Uh, that's fine you don't have to debate anyone...

What is a deal breaker, exactly? I'm not sure what you're trying to say. Scoring 5 extra points and taking a few extra shots? I don't think you understand how basketball works in real life. Maybe it's time to stop looking so hard at numbers and look more at what actually happens on the court and how it works?

The inherent flaw in this idea that someone can just "take a few extra shots" is thinking in some weird way that these players aren't already shooting as much as they think they can. Do you think players have a counter in their head when they play? Do you think they say to themselves, "uh oh, I'm at 23 shots right now. I better stop shooting or else someone will think that I'm a chucker." Every time Curry comes down the court, or LeBron, or Durant or anyone, they are playing basketball. If they think they have an opening to take a good shot then they will do so because that's how you play basketball. And remember, a good shot for one player is not a good shot for another. For example, nobody consistently takes the shots that Curry is able to take and hit from 3. Those are horrendously bad shots for any other player and only bad for Curry sometimes.

But yet Kobe can play 40 minutes and take 27 shots and score 35 PPG and we applaud him. Um... yes? The year Wilt scored 50 PPG, he averaged 48.5 MPG and 39.5 FGA per game. Should we not applaud his 50? Did he play and shoot too much? What the hell are you talking about?

What kind of pathetic era of basketball have we entered where a player is knocked for playing more minutes? Yes, the fact that Kobe was able to play at a higher level for more minutes is an absolute plus. And what is this talk about taking 27 FGA to score 35 PPG as if it's automatic? You need to do a much better job researching history before you say stuff that makes you look foolish.

There have been 17 NBA seasons where a player averaged 27 FGA or more. Of those 17, 9 averaged 35 PPG. Of the players who took some fraction of 27 FGA (aka, leaving out seasons where Wilt and Baylor averaged well over 30), only 2 of the 7 averaged even 32 PPG - let alone 35 PPG. Who are the two? Michael Jordan and Kobe Bryant. If you extend that to players who took 27-30 FGA, you have 4 of 14 who hit 35 PPG - Wilt, Jordan, Kobe, Barry. The only seasons of 35 PPG since Barry's in 1966-67 were Jordan in 86-87 and 87-88 and Kobe in 05-06. Those account for 2 of the 6 seasons of a player taking 27 FGA or more in that time frame, with Jordan averaging 24.4 FGA in 87-88. Although, technically, Jordan's 87-88 is 34.97.

So yes, despite just doing things like scoring 81, Kobe only averaged 35 PPG. Such an easily attainable feat, as history has proven. But don't let simple mathematics get in the way of your clear anti-Kobe agenda.

The fact is, Kobe has scored 35 PPG while Curry and Durant have not even come close. To say that Kevin Durant, the four time scoring champ, doesn't truly care about scoring as much as anyone is as asinine as anything that you've said and that's quite a feat. You say you don't want to play with hypothetical scenarios, and yet, that's all you're doing. I don't see how simple mathematics debunks what I've said about them. Simple mathematics say that Durant's career high is 32 PPG while Curry's is 30 PPG. You claiming that these guy are somehow leaving 5 or more shots on the floor when they play is anything but simple.

Yes, there is plenty of evidence that states that Kobe is a more capable scorer than LeBron. Kobe has scored 50 or more points 25 times vs 10 times for LeBron. Kobe has scored 60 or more points 6 times vs 1 time for LeBron. LeBron's career high is 61 in 41 minutes. Kobe has scored 62 points in 33 minutes, and he outscored a 60-win Mavs team with Dirk by himself while doing so.

LeBron also has a far less refined game and relies far more on his athleticism to score buckets. He has routinely led or been near the very top in the NBA in transition scoring ranging from 6-7 PPG and he's always by far the most efficient. Take this year, for example. He is tied for first with Westbrook at 6.8 PPG, shooting 71%. He is the only player in the top 10 in scoring to shoot 70%, and only 1 of 3 to shoot 60% or better. Last year he was 3rd with 6.3 PPG and shot 73%, being the only player in the top 6 over 60% - let alone 70%.

Now I'm sure a master mathematician like yourself can put two and two together, right? Take away his transition scoring this year, for example, and you have 19.5 PPG on 7.4-14.7 shooting. That drops his .545 FG% down to .503%. Not that there's anything wrong with transition scoring, but I'm sure you understand that it's a completely different ball game than half court scoring, right? And not one that translates to this ideology that you can just "take 5 more shots". This is something that has given him a big PPG and FG% boost his entire career because he's by far the best/most efficient at it due to his incredible athletic gifts.

Furthermore, his shooting chart %'s tell another story. LeBron has made a living at the rim, shooting .729 from 0-3 feet over his career. However, in the zones leading up to the 3, he's been bad. He has shot .428 from 3-10, .363 from 10-16 and .386 from 16 < 3. In those zones for Kobe, pre-achilles injury of course, he shot .452, .444 and .407. While LeBron has a slight edge in 3PT range - .341 vs .336, his main advantage over Kobe or any scorer has clearly been his work at the rim and that has made up for all of his other scoring short comings. This is why only 44% of LeBron's FGA's come from those three zones combined, where as 58% of Kobe's does.

Now, like transition points, I'm sure you realize the flaw in your ideology of him being able to just "take 5 more shots" at the rim, right? If LeBron could get just 1 more shot from 0-3 feet a game than he does, what makes you think he wouldn't do it? The reality is that if LeBron tried to take 27 FGA a game, almost all of those shots would be coming from those 3 zones that he shoots poorly from. This would - you guessed it! - cause his efficiency to plummet like a rock because he doesn't shoot good from any of them on his limited and selective shots from there as it is. LeBron doesn't do this, not because he doesn't want to, but because he isn't good at it and thus would be hurting his team.

Is that enough evidence for you on the basic surface level differences between Kobe and LeBron as scorers? Simple mathematics, right?

Curry had a great year last year, yeah. Not sure why you keep bringing up these other things. Did I ever say that Kobe's 35 PPG was more efficient than Curry's 30 PPG? Pretty sure the thread is about Kobe's 05-06 season vs this current season for Westbrook. Do you know that there have been better seasons than Westbrook's this year, including Curry last year? I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, but the fact that you keep going wildly off topic to try and discredit Kobe only shows that deep down you know the truth... ;)


exactly.. this narrative that Kobe scored 35 because he's unstoppable and this gibberish is laughable. Do any of you truly think Kobe's 2005-2006 season was more unstoppable offensively than what we've seen from KD/Curry/LeBron? The difference between these three guys and Kobe is simply shot selection. Those three look to get others involved for a better shot. Granted, Kobe was on a very bad team in 05-06 but that meant he could take 27 shots. Was Kobe a worse scorer the year after? What about two years later? It's the same kobe. one thing changed and that was the amount of shots. I've seen enough from Curry to know that if he TRULY wanted. Truly truly truly, he could have went for 35 easily every night. The dude sat out so many fourth quarters because he just blew every team out.

I guess if Curry truly wanted to, truly truly truly did, he should have done that then. I'm not sure how bringing up his super stacked 73-win Warriors and how much help he had is a good argument for how much more he had to do for them. Curry was by far the most efficient scorer last year and had one of the most efficient scoring years ever. In what universe does Curry upping his scoring from 30 PPG to 35 PPG not help the Warriors be a better team if he could maintain his efficiency while doing so? How do you not realize the basic logic fallacy in this thinking? Maybe if he didn't have so much help, and had to do even more on a ****** team like those 05-06 Lakers, he isn't nearly as efficient? Ever think of that?

Speaking of which, why isn't Curry as efficient as last year? Why is he having a worse shooting year than the previous two years and why is his 3pt shooting at a career low by a whole 3%? It's only been one year and he's only 28, is he not the same scorer as last year? Is this not the same Stephen Curry!? Imposter alert!

Now, about that Russell Westbrook guy. You know, the other player the thread is actually about...

This post has been long enough, so I'll keep it simple. Back to those transition points. You know, with Westbrook tying for the lead with 6.8 PPG while shooting 59%? Take away those FGA and you have 25 PPG on 7.9-20.0 FGA for a FG% of .395. Now, I know there isn't a whole lot of help here, but what evidence is there in any universe that taking 20 FGA at .395 helps their team more than letting other players do more in the half court?

Maybe this is why the Thunder's offense ranks just 15th in efficiency and 24th in assists per game despite having a player who averages 31.8 PPG and 10.4 APG on it? Maybe a slightly scaled back WB who can be more efficient and average less TO's, which would be nice for a team who is 24th in TO/game, would actually be better for the Thunder? Wouldn't this give him more energy for defense, so he can actually contest shots again? Shooting .395 on 20 FGA isn't very good and far below the team average of .454. But then, he may not be averaging a triple double and we couldn't have that.

Westbrook has been assisted on just 13% of his 2PT FGs and 35% of his 3PT FGs, both career lows by a healthy margin. Oladipo is a good passer, why isn't he allowed to do more? In the 05-06 season, Kobe was assisted on 37% of his 2PT FGs and 70% of his 3PT FGs. This ability to be so strong off the ball, as well as being by far the best scorer in the NBA that year, is what allowed the Lakers to be a top 10 efficient offense and rank top 10 in assists despite only having two good offensive players on the entire roster.

I've said my piece on this matter plenty now, with these novellas lol. At the end of the day, it's apparent to me that Kobe ultimately had more impact on both ends of the floor in 05-06 than Westbrook has had this season. Westbrook has had many incredible games, but maybe that W-L record in his triple doubles games vs non triple double games says more about his flaws than anything? Maybe he isn't helping nearly enough between his inefficiency, his record crushing TO's if not for Harden and his horrible D unless he's having an enormous triple double? Still a tremendous individual season, because yeah he does have all of those enormous triple doubles, but the season is 82 games - not 41. When compared to Kobe's consistent two-way dominance, and plenty of enormous games himself, I don't think it compares. Sorry, Kobe haters, just my opinion.

kingsdelez24
04-07-2017, 10:02 AM
^ Your argument is right but "five more shots, five more shots" is a lot shorter to read, and psd is all about short attention spans

mngopher35
04-07-2017, 02:38 PM
Now, about that Russell Westbrook guy. You know, the other player the thread is actually about...

This post has been long enough, so I'll keep it simple. Back to those transition points. You know, with Westbrook tying for the lead with 6.8 PPG while shooting 59%? Take away those FGA and you have 25 PPG on 7.9-20.0 FGA for a FG% of .395. Now, I know there isn't a whole lot of help here, but what evidence is there in any universe that taking 20 FGA at .395 helps their team more than letting other players do more in the half court?

Maybe this is why the Thunder's offense ranks just 15th in efficiency and 24th in assists per game despite having a player who averages 31.8 PPG and 10.4 APG on it? Maybe a slightly scaled back WB who can be more efficient and average less TO's, which would be nice for a team who is 24th in TO/game, would actually be better for the Thunder? Wouldn't this give him more energy for defense, so he can actually contest shots again? Shooting .395 on 20 FGA isn't very good and far below the team average of .454. But then, he may not be averaging a triple double and we couldn't have that.

Westbrook has been assisted on just 13% of his 2PT FGs and 35% of his 3PT FGs, both career lows by a healthy margin. Oladipo is a good passer, why isn't he allowed to do more? In the 05-06 season, Kobe was assisted on 37% of his 2PT FGs and 70% of his 3PT FGs. This ability to be so strong off the ball, as well as being by far the best scorer in the NBA that year, is what allowed the Lakers to be a top 10 efficient offense and rank top 10 in assists despite only having two good offensive players on the entire roster.

I've said my piece on this matter plenty now, with these novellas lol. At the end of the day, it's apparent to me that Kobe ultimately had more impact on both ends of the floor in 05-06 than Westbrook has had this season. Westbrook has had many incredible games, but maybe that W-L record in his triple doubles games vs non triple double games says more about his flaws than anything? Maybe he isn't helping nearly enough between his inefficiency, his record crushing TO's if not for Harden and his horrible D unless he's having an enormous triple double? Still a tremendous individual season, because yeah he does have all of those enormous triple doubles, but the season is 82 games - not 41. When compared to Kobe's consistent two-way dominance, and plenty of enormous games himself, I don't think it compares. Sorry, Kobe haters, just my opinion.

Don't want to get into the rest with you, I think you have a point on the scoring more by shooting more talk. At the very least it could easily hurt efficiency just adding/forcing volume. Kobe was a very good scorer in tough situations which made him more capable of adding scoring volume imo. We also probably disagree a little about Kobe's defense and impact on that end during the season (although we agree Kobe>Westy there still) but I will focus a little more on Westy.

When it comes to Westbrook though as far as I can find they are at about 78% win when he gets the triple double and 35% when he doesn't. That seems to go against what you are arguing to an extent but I think just the players around him make the need for his usage pretty clear. The players next to him are not great at creating and I think he overall does a good job of making sure he does enough while not overdoing it too much. Obviously holding back some times would be perfect but no one is and that is a flaw he likely always has to an extent. I feel the same about Kobe on those post shaq Laker teams too, he had to shoot that much and it is impressive what he was able to do scoring wise at that volume. He could have looked to create more and been more efficient and team oriented but overall given the talent around him you can't fault him much at all to me.

If you want to equalize the pace/minutes/time etc we can use per 100 possessions where Westbrook has about 1 less point and 8 or 9 more assists/rebounds. His volume is just insane all around and his efficiency isn't that far off either. http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.fcgi?request=1&sum=0&player_id1_hint=Russell+Westbrook&player_id1_select=Russell+Westbrook&y1=2017&player_id1=westbru01&player_id2_hint=Kobe+Bryant&player_id2_select=Kobe+Bryant&y2=2006&player_id2=bryanko01

I think Kobes has been more impressive just from a scoring standpoint for sure, but overall with the insane usage for Westy all around I give him a slight edge. You can find some arguments either way and I mostly am responding to just parts of the discussion. I think you make some good points above to counter less credible arguments for Westy, I just think there are also parts that matter more and favor Westy.

FOXHOUND
04-07-2017, 08:22 PM
Don't want to get into the rest with you, I think you have a point on the scoring more by shooting more talk. At the very least it could easily hurt efficiency just adding/forcing volume. Kobe was a very good scorer in tough situations which made him more capable of adding scoring volume imo. We also probably disagree a little about Kobe's defense and impact on that end during the season (although we agree Kobe>Westy there still) but I will focus a little more on Westy.

When it comes to Westbrook though as far as I can find they are at about 78% win when he gets the triple double and 35% when he doesn't. That seems to go against what you are arguing to an extent but I think just the players around him make the need for his usage pretty clear. The players next to him are not great at creating and I think he overall does a good job of making sure he does enough while not overdoing it too much. Obviously holding back some times would be perfect but no one is and that is a flaw he likely always has to an extent. I feel the same about Kobe on those post shaq Laker teams too, he had to shoot that much and it is impressive what he was able to do scoring wise at that volume. He could have looked to create more and been more efficient and team oriented but overall given the talent around him you can't fault him much at all to me.

If you want to equalize the pace/minutes/time etc we can use per 100 possessions where Westbrook has about 1 less point and 8 or 9 more assists/rebounds. His volume is just insane all around and his efficiency isn't that far off either. http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.fcgi?request=1&sum=0&player_id1_hint=Russell+Westbrook&player_id1_select=Russell+Westbrook&y1=2017&player_id1=westbru01&player_id2_hint=Kobe+Bryant&player_id2_select=Kobe+Bryant&y2=2006&player_id2=bryanko01

I think Kobes has been more impressive just from a scoring standpoint for sure, but overall with the insane usage for Westy all around I give him a slight edge. You can find some arguments either way and I mostly am responding to just parts of the discussion. I think you make some good points above to counter less credible arguments for Westy, I just think there are also parts that matter more and favor Westy.

Yes, Kobe's ability to take so many shots and maintain that level of efficiency is certainly underrated. If it was so easy, more star players would do it. Unless you're on a stacked team, your shot is always going to be better than one from some role player in those situations. Other than a wide open spot up shot, what shot from almost any player is preferable to a shot from Kevin Durant, for example?

The debate about how good Kobe's defense was is a fair one to have, but yes ultimately it far exceeds Westbrook's. Still, he was the only defender on that 05-06 Laker team that you can say was good. Maybe a guy or two was solid, like Smush and Odom, but certainly not all that good on D. They ranked 15th in defensive rating, despite that. Kobe had a lot to do with that even if he couldn't focus on D enough to be his ultimate lock down younger self. The idea that coaches would vote for him to be 1st Team All-Defense based on some weird respect thing as if they're fanboys has never made sense to me. They certainly didn't seem to care about that when they left him off the teams completely in 04-05. Seems like anti-Kobe conspiracy nonsense, to me. The coaches know who they are game planning to deal with each game on both ends. It being coach voted makes it the most legit award there is, IMO.

To clarify what I meant about the W-L differences in triple double, I certainly didn't mean that WB wasn't always helping them. My question is - what does that 35% really say? Is it possible that him being such an inefficient scorer taking so many shots while averaging so many TO's and playing such horrid D isn't helping them as much as he could be? That was more my point. There are people who think that the Thunder would be way worse if you put Curry in Westbrook's place, but would this really be true? Would having a far more efficient scorer leading the heavy lifting make up for the things that WB does that Curry cannot?

One thing that's clear is that Oladipo can be doing more that he is. This sort of feels like LeBron teammate syndrome to me, when everyone gets amnesia about a players career once they start playing with him and act like the form you see on that team is what that player has always been. The thing is why though? I think this comes down to more of Westbrook's limitations than Oladipo's. What can Westbrook do off the ball, really? The answer is not much. Oladipo? He can definitely shoot far better, at the least. So yes, with Westbrook being much better than Oladipo, it does make sense for him to handle the ball more and for Dipo to play off the ball more than he did in Orlando. The kicker is though - if Stephen Curry is there that is no longer true and Dipo can be more of a playmaker since Curry is arguably the best off the ball scorer in the NBA.

This is what I mean, and it applies to Kobe in 05-06 too. Kobe dominated the ball and did ISO damage plenty, but he also got a nice chunk in there as an off the ball scorer. This added ability that he had, at an underrated high level due to so much focus on his ISO scoring, is what allowed the Lakers team offense to really flourish despite having less. It allowed for Odom to handle the ball enough as the lead playmaker in the triangle. It later allowed for Pau Gasol to do his thing in the post and be the best he could be while still having Odom do his. This is such an underrated aspect of Kobe's game that I have never understood. You see the same type of gift in guys like Durant and Curry, who can dominate with and without the ball.

It comes back to the team talent. This Thunder team has more talent than that 05-06 Lakers team, and I don't think it's all that close. Offensively, both are stunted yes. While Kobe had Odom as his wing man, Westbrook has Oladipo. However, back to that previous point, Kobe was able to get more out of Odom because of what he can do off the ball where as Westbrook has to have Dipo do less because he himself can't do much off the ball. The Thunder also have Kanter, who plays limited minutes due to his terrible D but also does a lot of offensive damage while he's on. That begs the question - why isn't the Thunder's offense better than it is? Why is it only 15th in offensive efficiency despite having WB doing all of the high damage output that he is? I think you can point to Westbrook shrinking Dipo's game, making him less effective than he can be, while also shooting way too many shots at an inefficient clip and also averaging 5.4 TO per game.

On the defensive side of the ball, the talk is easy. Kobe, no matter what level you view his D in 05-06 compared to his other years, was by far the best defender in the that Laker team. That's fair to say, no? So when you see that 15th ranked D for those Lakers, you know that it is mostly due to Kobe as he is the clear best on the team. Westbrook has played horrible D this year while guys like Adams and Roberson are very good defenders and Oladipo is pretty good himself. This has led to the Thunder having the 9th most efficient defense, despite WB's shortcomings.

That combination makes me think we are comparing Westbrook to the wrong player. We should not be comparing Russell Westbrook to Kobe Bryant - but to Allen Iverson. Westbrook is certainly having a tremendous individual season, but his inefficiencies on offense while being so ball dominant has led to the Thunder being just an average offensive team overall. 15th in orating, 24th in assists per game and 24th in turnovers per game are not what you want to see from your offense. Really, they are able to win more due to their defense while Westbrook is counted on to lead to them to just enough on offense. This is the same formula utilized by the Larry Brown 76ers with Iverson, who were of course much better on D which is why they won so many games.

Here's a question - if you put that 05-06 Kobe on this Thunder team, who with Adams, Roberson and Dipo have had the 9th best D despite Westbrook's shortcomings on D, what happens? Add in Kobe's D, far more efficient scoring and ability to play off the ball which will allow for Oladipo to maximize his overall ability on offense. Are they not a better team? I honestly think that they are a way better team. They're definitely much better on defense, at the very least.

mngopher35
04-08-2017, 02:59 PM
Yes, Kobe's ability to take so many shots and maintain that level of efficiency is certainly underrated. If it was so easy, more star players would do it. Unless you're on a stacked team, your shot is always going to be better than one from some role player in those situations. Other than a wide open spot up shot, what shot from almost any player is preferable to a shot from Kevin Durant, for example?

The debate about how good Kobe's defense was is a fair one to have, but yes ultimately it far exceeds Westbrook's. Still, he was the only defender on that 05-06 Laker team that you can say was good. Maybe a guy or two was solid, like Smush and Odom, but certainly not all that good on D. They ranked 15th in defensive rating, despite that. Kobe had a lot to do with that even if he couldn't focus on D enough to be his ultimate lock down younger self. The idea that coaches would vote for him to be 1st Team All-Defense based on some weird respect thing as if they're fanboys has never made sense to me. They certainly didn't seem to care about that when they left him off the teams completely in 04-05. Seems like anti-Kobe conspiracy nonsense, to me. The coaches know who they are game planning to deal with each game on both ends. It being coach voted makes it the most legit award there is, IMO.

We will just disagree on the all defensive team voting, it has gotten better (not necessarily good but better) but overall I do not take those awards as truth if my eyes and the stats disagree. Kobe stopped putting effort into his defense in the regular season post shaq imo. If you look at advanced metrics like RAPM and on/off he regularily had little impact on that end at all in the RS. Again though we don't need to focus on this because I think your current stance is going to be difficult to change (either you value the award or you don't). Been down this road before many times but I will say most seem to understand he was "gifted" a few of the awards despite not earning them in the RS (yes even laker fans have agreed on this many times on here). Now there is discussion on if his actual ability and what he showed from time to time and moreso in the playoffs was that level but since we are talking RS award I will just stop there.


To clarify what I meant about the W-L differences in triple double, I certainly didn't mean that WB wasn't always helping them. My question is - what does that 35% really say? Is it possible that him being such an inefficient scorer taking so many shots while averaging so many TO's and playing such horrid D isn't helping them as much as he could be? That was more my point. There are people who think that the Thunder would be way worse if you put Curry in Westbrook's place, but would this really be true? Would having a far more efficient scorer leading the heavy lifting make up for the things that WB does that Curry cannot?

So we cannot assume players will be able to add volume scoring and agree it isn't that simple right? Same thing with Curry trying to match the usage and do everything Westy does on the court. If your point is just that another all time great/top talent can come in and still have major impact on the team then I agree but that works in both cases. I think to imply Curry could carry this load (even just physically) without seeing it happen is as bad as saying Lebron could score 37 or whatever if he really wanted without seeing it happen.

Yes the negatives that come along with it are definitely things you can question and point to. Just like when everyone called Kobe a chucker and not a team player back in the day due to his issues. Every player will have their flaws, my point is that when you put people in situations where they need to carry a major load it can make them more glaring no matter who it is.


One thing that's clear is that Oladipo can be doing more that he is. This sort of feels like LeBron teammate syndrome to me, when everyone gets amnesia about a players career once they start playing with him and act like the form you see on that team is what that player has always been. The thing is why though? I think this comes down to more of Westbrook's limitations than Oladipo's. What can Westbrook do off the ball, really? The answer is not much. Oladipo? He can definitely shoot far better, at the least. So yes, with Westbrook being much better than Oladipo, it does make sense for him to handle the ball more and for Dipo to play off the ball more than he did in Orlando. The kicker is though - if Stephen Curry is there that is no longer true and Dipo can be more of a playmaker since Curry is arguably the best off the ball scorer in the NBA.

Well we agree on that last part but overall I think you are off base some. Oladipo has his highest ORTG of his career playing next to Westy (highest EFG and more of his shots assisted than any other year). It still is not as good as Westys despite it being the lowest volume of his career but it is still his most efficient (108 ortg). So while I agree that it might not be a great fit it is not as though Westbrook is killing him or the team by taking a bigger load as the more efficient player/creator. We both agree Curry is a better fit next to him though, but overall he has been more efficient next to Westy still.


This is what I mean, and it applies to Kobe in 05-06 too. Kobe dominated the ball and did ISO damage plenty, but he also got a nice chunk in there as an off the ball scorer. This added ability that he had, at an underrated high level due to so much focus on his ISO scoring, is what allowed the Lakers team offense to really flourish despite having less. It allowed for Odom to handle the ball enough as the lead playmaker in the triangle. It later allowed for Pau Gasol to do his thing in the post and be the best he could be while still having Odom do his. This is such an underrated aspect of Kobe's game that I have never understood. You see the same type of gift in guys like Durant and Curry, who can dominate with and without the ball.

It comes back to the team talent. This Thunder team has more talent than that 05-06 Lakers team, and I don't think it's all that close. Offensively, both are stunted yes. While Kobe had Odom as his wing man, Westbrook has Oladipo. However, back to that previous point, Kobe was able to get more out of Odom because of what he can do off the ball where as Westbrook has to have Dipo do less because he himself can't do much off the ball. The Thunder also have Kanter, who plays limited minutes due to his terrible D but also does a lot of offensive damage while he's on. That begs the question - why isn't the Thunder's offense better than it is? Why is it only 15th in offensive efficiency despite having WB doing all of the high damage output that he is? I think you can point to Westbrook shrinking Dipo's game, making him less effective than he can be, while also shooting way too many shots at an inefficient clip and also averaging 5.4 TO per game.

On the defensive side of the ball, the talk is easy. Kobe, no matter what level you view his D in 05-06 compared to his other years, was by far the best defender in the that Laker team. That's fair to say, no? So when you see that 15th ranked D for those Lakers, you know that it is mostly due to Kobe as he is the clear best on the team. Westbrook has played horrible D this year while guys like Adams and Roberson are very good defenders and Oladipo is pretty good himself. This has led to the Thunder having the 9th most efficient defense, despite WB's shortcomings.

I think you overrate the effect a guard has on overall defense in general but again we will also disagree on Kobes level of impact there in the RS on top of it. I think Phil and Odom were the only truly good things next to Kobe that year so we can agree somewhat there on his cast. However you keep mention Kanter but Kanter took off offensively once he got to OKC next to Westy, his ORTG on the Jazz was 104 and 102 in his last year and a half and this year is at 117 next to Westy (over 120 with Westy/Durant together). A big reason for this jump in efficiency is playing off Westbrook and the attention he takes (not to mention the direct assists). Same with Adams who also generally relies on Westbrook creating. I will get into it more later but this entire team has guys who are not really creators, they can try and handle it on bad teams and hurt their efficiency but overall need help to create. Westbrook taking this volume allows the others to jump their own efficiency and again compared to Kobe he isn't that far off.

Despite you harping on efficiency of these guys the offensive rating is still only a couple off 06 Kobe despite the crazy volume he takes on to help guys like Kanter bump their own efficiency. 112 ortg to 114 ortg for Kobe. You can mention turnovers, shooting efficiency etc for only one guy but in the end the efficiency you keep harping on is pretty close for these two, and the guy slightly below has a slightly higher volume to make up for it. Overall statistically Westbrook will have the better overall case imo. I get a lot of your reasoning, it just seems to be a major point for you and I don't see it as some huge difference at all in their own efficiency (especially considering as I pointed out how Westy helps others efficiency by setting them up/taking the load).



That combination makes me think we are comparing Westbrook to the wrong player. We should not be comparing Russell Westbrook to Kobe Bryant - but to Allen Iverson. Westbrook is certainly having a tremendous individual season, but his inefficiencies on offense while being so ball dominant has led to the Thunder being just an average offensive team overall. 15th in orating, 24th in assists per game and 24th in turnovers per game are not what you want to see from your offense. Really, they are able to win more due to their defense while Westbrook is counted on to lead to them to just enough on offense. This is the same formula utilized by the Larry Brown 76ers with Iverson, who were of course much better on D which is why they won so many games.

Here's a question - if you put that 05-06 Kobe on this Thunder team, who with Adams, Roberson and Dipo have had the 9th best D despite Westbrook's shortcomings on D, what happens? Add in Kobe's D, far more efficient scoring and ability to play off the ball which will allow for Oladipo to maximize his overall ability on offense. Are they not a better team? I honestly think that they are a way better team. They're definitely much better on defense, at the very least.

Hmmm I mean sure you can make the argument style wise but we don't always need same setting to judge people and this seems much better if we wanna talk impact which we are.

I mentioned this earlier but I think that team struggles a lot without someone creating for them. That Lakers team had Odom and a Phil system but they couldn't handle Kobe sitting either though. The hypotheticals get tough to judge and don't always translate well due to fit etc that has nothing to do with our actual conversation. I will say I can see other players having a drop in efficiency for volume in those situations.

It is interesting because despite these better team stats you reference it seems OKC is on track for the better record (need one win only). Are they winning more close games and is that related to Westbrook? If you look at NBA.com advanced stats he has the highest PIE for legit players in crunch time (higher ORTG too). I looked up their EFG% and it had Kobe under 40% and Westy at 47% or so in final 6 minutes of close games. Something to consider about their seasons as well although nothing I would say changes the discussion, just helps show that while those team stats are great Westy has still helped convert his play into wins despite not having quite the same team numbers.

I think this is actually a good topic/comparison. I think there are many reasons you can argue for Westbrook here and individually it is backed up statistically and his team is not behind in the winning department either. You make some good points as well because I think Kobe has a case too. Like I said to me this is one you can argue for either way and have some good points. I still think Kobe in his prime was the better player but I am a little more impressed with Westys season probably personally.

FOXHOUND
04-08-2017, 06:19 PM
condensed for space

Lots of good points, gopher.

The thing I'll say about some of those stats, particularly things like on/off and box score differential things, is that the context is different for every team. Kobe played 41 MPG. You have to think about who was on the court for the other team for those 7 minutes that he wasn't on. Probably nobody good, right? Odom played 40 MPG so they were mostly together. You also have to think about Smush Parker, who played 34 MPG. The backup PG that year was Sasha Vujacic. So, you've got a nice chunk of Kobe's minutes out there when he has to play with a PG like Vujacic. And guys like Devean George and Luke Walton at SF with Odom sliding to PF next to Kwame or Mihm. After Smush, the highest MPG players were Kwame at 27.5 and Mihm at 26.1, then a drop to George at 21 MPG. I think you can see how all of these different lineups could have compromised the defense during those minutes.

You look at the Thunder, and their minute distribution is not so wild. WB plays 34.8 MPG, Dipo plays 33.3 and Roberson and Adams play a bit over 30. So, really, WB is mostly playing on the court with these guys and not having to cover for crappy bench players nearly as much. The Thunder's top 3 played lineups feature all 4 of those guys,

W/ Sabonis - 629:06 minutes
W/ Taj - 160:50 minutes (that didn't take long, huh? lol)
W/ Grant - 124:40 minutes

Their next two feature those three minus Dipo, from his injury time, at 119:53 and 104:12, and the next after that features all four again, at 90:29.

You look at the 05-06 Lakers lineups and their top played lineup that year played just 395 minutes together.

Kobe, Odom, Parker, Mihm, Cook - 395:10
Kobe, Odom, Parker, Kwame, Cook - 370:21
Kobe, Odom, Parker, Kwame, Mihm - 325:50 (Kwame and Mihm together? What was Phil smoking? lol)
Kobe, Odom, Parker, Kwame, Walton - 222:50
Kobe, Odom, Parker, Kwame, George - 174:21
Kobe, Odom, Parker, Mihm, George - 167:19

That's it for the 100+ minute lineups. It's easy to see the lack of cohesion available to that Lakers team vs what this Thunder team has. Also, it's easy to see how much they had to rely on Smush Parker playing 34 MPG lol. That's insane. The names listed there after Odom are all insane. That's what I mean when I say that you also have to consider how much better this Thunder team is, because again I don't think it's even close.

For Curry, of course his efficiency would drop if he was in Westbrook's shoes but it would always be way better than Westbrook's, right? I think I'd be more worried about Curry staying healthy for 82 having to play more minutes while doing more per minute, but that's a different point.

I do agree with most of your points though, like I said lots of good ones. One I would like to point out is Kanter's work in the PnR with Westbrook, but he's also a very talented scorer in his own right. He was 22 when he got traded to OKC and wasn't drafted 3rd overall by accident. Still, WB definitely helps him with his efficiency plenty.

One last thing about Westbrook is the fact that he's always been a double edged sword kind of player. Games like he had last night, going 6-25 with 8 TO's, are not an entirely new thing for him. He may be more prone to them now because of how much is on his plate, but we're talking about a career .433/.314 shooter who averages 3.9 TO a game and that's with playing with Durant all up to now. He averaged 4.3 and 4.4 TO the last two years. Two years ago when Durant got hurt, and WB got his first scoring title, his shooting efficiency was in a similar range of .426/.299/.835.

I agree that Westbrook is better than Iverson, and his impact this season is much more Kobe-like than Iverson-like, but I have a hard time seeing the apples to apples in this threads comparison because of the vast difference in roster quality. Smush Parker was the 3rd or 4th best player on that Laker squad, with the other being Kwame Brown. It's just impossible for me to ignore something so important to this discussion.

I think the level of how bad this Thunder team is has been greatly played up, in general and especially by the media, and people probably don't remember just how bad that 05-06 Lakers team was.

mngopher35
04-09-2017, 10:36 AM
On my phone but I think you have a point and that is what my main argument for kobe would probably be based on. It's close and I could probably be talked into either season depending on the day.

I think I looked it up yesterday and saw smush had an outlier year that year (at least efficiency I think it was). Still him being relied on that much is obviously a negative for a playoff team lol. I was just surprised when I saw that, like his only solid season.

Chronz
04-09-2017, 01:35 PM
There is no anti Kobe conspiracy with regards to his plethora of unearned All Defensive selections. Its been widely known many coaches just pass the voting process down the totem pole and even if that werent the proliferated case. You know whos opinion would matter more than an anonymous head coach who sees Kobe play 1 or 4 games depending on the conference/availability ( keep in mind elite coaches like Pop admit they don't focus or scout regular season matchups because it's simply not as important). The ONE coach who sees Kobe every ****ing day. HES the one with more credibility on the matter than the rest of the leagues uninterested coaches. Kobe has coasted off of rep since his 3peet days as far as the regular season goes.

That said gimme Kobe cuz rwb is even worse defensively

europagnpilgrim
04-10-2017, 06:54 PM
To be fair, Iverson never led the 76ers to a top 10 offense because he was inefficient. The year he put up 33 and 7, the 76ers went 38-44 with an orating of 106.0 which was good for 15th in the NBA. This was despite having Chris Webber, Andre Iguodala and Kyle Korver on the team with him. The year he won MVP, they ranked 13th in orating.

Assists are also not a barometer of actual passing. Kawhi Leonard averages 3.6 assists per game while Carmelo Anthony averages 2.9 assists per game. Yet, Kawhi passes 32 times a game while Carmelo passes 36 times a game.

Iverson averaged 25 FGA, 9.9 FTA, 6 APG and 3.7 TO per game from 2000-2006. You have to shoot the ball to draw a shooting foul and, thus, gain FTAs. The fact that Iverson was able to take 25 FGA and average 10 FTA while still being able to dish 6 APG and have 3.7 TO only means that he had the ball far more than Kobe did, not that he passed more per touch. For Iverson to average 35 PPG he would have had to take over 30 FGA a game and he already shot as much as he could.

To be ever more fair to The Answer is that I don't think anybody has had a worse 7yr stretch of sidekicks in nba history, not Kobe not Westbrook not no other franchise level superstar, if you go look at the career PPG of Snow/Mckie combined it is really mind boggling that they scored the biggest contracts in their careers playing with The Answer for 7yrs, only when he got Iggy/Korver did he pass more since one was a finisher/dunker and the other was a 3pt sniper

how in the world of basketball can you have a top 5-10(or top 20) offense when both of your sidekicks are avg. a career high of 10ppg? either you know basketball or you don't, its nothing in between

Mckie avg 7ppg for his entire career
Snow avg 6.8ppg for his

they put up career years with The Answer between 10-12ppg each, its amazing that they were even a top 25 offense because its only so much a 5'10'' scorer can do on that end alone, no matter how many attempts he was forced to take carrying such a heavy load

his surrounding cast were inefficient but the burden fell on him because he was the best player/big name, but none of those surrounding players were efficient, they just weren't that good on that side of the ball no matter how you slice it