Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 391 of 489 FirstFirst ... 291341381389390391392393401441 ... LastLast
Results 5,851 to 5,865 of 7332
  1. #5851
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    9,793
    Quote Originally Posted by IKnowHoops View Post
    Lebron warps the floor way more than Kobe
    I really don't think so. Just about all of the elite defenders who have guarded both say kobe was much tougher to guard because kobe can beat you in so many different ways. A measure of how much a player warps the floor though would be much more valuable than any of the measures I've seen out there so far. This is the type of measure we need to really start to determine a player's impact on the game.
    Last edited by Big Moves03; 05-30-2020 at 01:58 AM.

  2. #5852
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    10,700
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    Well we disagree on that. See, with his drop off in efficiency it amounts to what is really a very negligible difference in the game. I don't want to go look it up right now, but it's probably going to end up being something like .2-.3 additional misses per game. I mean, sure that can be the difference between winning a playoff game or losing, but it's also still a pretty minimal difference in terms of his performance and that's why I don't think that numbers are all that meaningful.
    Alright we do disagree if you think efficiency that might be the difference in winning/losing isn't that important. I think more missed shots and turnovers hurts your team and the efficiency matters for sure in the overall game/team performance.

    I guess that must be our main difference then.

  3. #5853
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    3,938
    Quote Originally Posted by flea View Post
    Whoever someone considers the 2nd best Bad Boy is probably a good candidate too (either Laimbeer or Dumars). Maybe Dennis Johnson as the #2 to Sikma early (very arguably DJ was the #1) and the #2 to Bird in the 84 championship team. Gasol obviously is a candidate (maybe someone said that already).

    Maybe Dr. J if we count his 2 ABA titles as equivalent to 1 NBA ring as a #2, though that's some mental gymnastics that I generally don't like to engage in considering I didn't watch any ABA live. I'm not sure Manu qualifies since he was only a #2 for the 05 ring, and a #3 in 07 and a role player in 2003 and 2014.
    Dennis Johnson was a good catch. Winning with the Sonics is completely overshadowed by his time in Boston.

    Laimbeer was a #2 for Detroit at one point but it wasn’t in the championship years. So that is more of technical because yes he was a #2 numbers numbers wise for a playoff Detroit team and of course he has 2 rings.

  4. #5854
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    9,793
    Quote Originally Posted by mngopher35 View Post
    Alright we do disagree if you think efficiency that might be the difference in winning/losing isn't that important. I think more missed shots and turnovers hurts your team and the efficiency matters for sure in the overall game/team performance.

    I guess that must be our main difference then.
    Yep, I do think that is where we disagree. I think efficiency matters (not all that much though), but I think the differences that can seem quite large when comparing players like Kobe and LBJ are actually pretty minimal (in the impact they have on the game) when we actually translate that to the game to see what it amounts to in an actual game. For instance, LBJ has what most what consider a considerably higher fg% than Kobe, yet when we translate that to the game it amounts to a little over an additional shot per game that Kobe misses (and when we factor in the differences in ft% this becomes more like a half shot difference per game; this of course doesn't take into account the differences in the rules during their playing careers, which would likely make this difference in how many additional shots Kobe misses per game even smaller).

    While I know this can be the difference between winning and losing a key playoff game or even winning and losing a championship, I think there are other far more important factors that are not accounted for or measured at all (e.g., the extent to which a player warps the floor, how they control the tempo and rhythm of the game). As far as I know, I don't think there's any metrics out there to account for these other types of factors, which I personally consider far more important than something like efficiency.
    Last edited by Big Moves03; 05-30-2020 at 10:30 AM.

  5. #5855
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    18,485
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    I really don't think so. Just about all of the elite defenders who have guarded both say kobe was much tougher to guard because kobe can beat you in so many different ways. A measure of how much a player warps the floor though would be much more valuable than any of the measures I've seen out there so far. This is the type of measure we need to really start to determine a player's impact on the game.
    It depends. I would role with Kobe too but it depends. Kobe can squeeze and finesse his way through traffic and his bag of tricks run a little deeper. Lebron on the other hand is much stronger can over power the smaller guys and get around bigger guys. while not as skilled as kobe still have some skills of his own so when you combine the two its very close. With all that when defending lebron its 50/50 hes looking to score or pass. This plays a factor in the two players % Kobe was a relentless scorer that wont be denied no matter what. It will seem like hes more difficult to guard because he was committed to getting the shot off and sometimes those difficult shots went in leaving you in i cant believe he made that. Lebron on the other hand is not committed in taking the shot and can be bait into passing to ball. People knock Lebron for passing and not being more like Kobe and MJ.
    Last edited by ldawg; 05-30-2020 at 11:50 AM.

  6. #5856
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    9,793
    Quote Originally Posted by ldawg View Post
    It depends. I would role with Kobe too but it depends. Kobe can squeeze and finesse his way through traffic and his bag of tricks run a little deeper. Lebron on the other hand is much stronger can over power the smaller guys and get around bigger guys. while not as skilled as kobe still have some skills of his own so when you combine the two its very close. With all that when defending lebron its 50/50 hes looking to score or pass. This plays a factor in the two players % Kobe was a relentless scorer that wont be denied no matter what. It will seem like hes more difficult to guard because he was committed to getting the shot off and sometimes those difficult shots went in leaving you in i cant believe he made that. Lebron on the other hand is not committed in taking the shot and can be bait into passing to ball.
    The reason why I say Kobe is harder to guard is because of is skillset, not necessarily because he's a better scorer. LBJ has developed his skillset a lot since coming into the league, but Kobe is the most offensively skilled player in the history of the game (at least in my view) and this makes it incredibly difficult for defenses to prepare for him. LBJ's not easy to guard, but offensively he's not going to beat you in as many ways as Kobe can.

  7. #5857
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    18,485
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    Yep, I do think that is where we disagree. I think efficiency matters (not all that much though), but I think the differences that can seem quite large when comparing players like Kobe and LBJ are actually pretty minimal (in the impact they have on the game) when we actually translate that to the game to see what it amounts to in an actual game. For instance, LBJ has what most what consider a considerably higher fg% than Kobe, yet when we translate that to the game it amounts to a little over an additional shot per game that Kobe misses (and when we factor in the differences in ft% this becomes more like a half shot difference per game; this of course doesn't take into account the differences in the rules during their playing careers, which would likely make this difference in how many additional shots Kobe misses per game even smaller).

    While I know this can be the difference between winning and losing a key playoff game or even winning and losing a championship, I think there are other far more important factors that are not accounted for or measured at all (e.g., the extent to which a player warps the floor, how they control the tempo and rhythm of the game). As far as I know, I don't think there's any metrics out there to account for these other types of factors, which I personally consider far more important than something like efficiency.
    if its minimal, Have any team kobe played on was the most efficient team in the league in any season? Lakers lead the league in shooting percentage Miami held it twice with Lebon and 2nd in another. Thats 4 times in top 3. GSW, Spurs also held it as well. I will say anytime Lakers were good they were in top 10. To put it in perspective NO lead the league in fg attempts but 14th in fg% and sits outside the playoff window. They would need to make up for that in other places like defense, rebounds, 3 point shots etc so you are right fg% is only one thing and its not a must to be the most efficient but you have to be efficient. In short you wont lead in every category. So even if you clam Kobe warp the floor you have to make up for a lower efficiency like offensive rebounds. In todays 3 point game are you going to shoot that shot or will you pass to the open guy standing on the 3 point line? Do teams want you taking that shot. Stef Curry shoots the 3 almost at the same percentage as Kobe mid range and that did not include Durant and Klay do you want to exchange a two with a 3 roughly at the same percentage?

    It also have other factors like getting the other team in foul trouble so it have so many other factors at play while trying to win.
    Last edited by ldawg; 05-30-2020 at 01:34 PM.

  8. #5858
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    10,700
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    Yep, I do think that is where we disagree. I think efficiency matters (not all that much though), but I think the differences that can seem quite large when comparing players like Kobe and LBJ are actually pretty minimal (in the impact they have on the game) when we actually translate that to the game to see what it amounts to in an actual game. For instance, LBJ has what most what consider a considerably higher fg% than Kobe, yet when we translate that to the game it amounts to a little over an additional shot per game that Kobe misses (and when we factor in the differences in ft% this becomes more like a half shot difference per game; this of course doesn't take into account the differences in the rules during their playing careers, which would likely make this difference in how many additional shots Kobe misses per game even smaller).

    While I know this can be the difference between winning and losing a key playoff game or even winning and losing a championship, I think there are other far more important factors that are not accounted for or measured at all (e.g., the extent to which a player warps the floor, how they control the tempo and rhythm of the game). As far as I know, I don't think there's any metrics out there to account for these other types of factors, which I personally consider far more important than something like efficiency.
    I have no idea what your statistical analysis ever means but that's unrelated yet again to what I pointed out and not what I was comparing overall career efficiency I specifically mentioned 03/04 series for Kobe and how his fell off when the focus of the defense. In game 5 against the Spurs in 03 they lost by 5 points and Kobe had 37 points on 38 shots with 5 turnovers and no assists. I think this would be a pretty clear example where if Kobe had played more efficiently as the lead guy they could have won but did not and they lost a key game. As I said the issue was his efficiency dropped compared to just a couple years ago as he started getting more attention from defenses like the spurs (it was a progression where as you noted by 03 he was closer to Shaq by then and not clearly 2nd option). I shared his ortg for Detroit series too but that series was even worse the SA one was just a bit of a drop off as he became the man. The key is when he didn't have a #1 to rely on and take that attention instead it becoming him the team just wasn't quite as strong anymore and his efficiency is part of it.

    I disagree, I think when teaching the game of basketball making a shot vs. missing one and passing to an open teammate instead of turning it over are very fundamental and important aspects to the game. I think almost every NBA level coach understands the basics of efficiency and how much it matters in the game. I mean that is part of how you get a competitive advantage and so on is figuring out how to maximize overall efficiency. Great teams often rely on their best player to create and so on and being inefficient in doing so can hurt in many ways (turnover can lead to easy buckets on other end for example and Kobe had more than he had assists for the series). There are just so many ways efficiency plays into the game of basketball and I think it was pretty clearly an issue for those Lakers when he tried taking over as the man but was not efficient enough to lead as that guy yet while taking on more defensive attention.

  9. #5859
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    18,485
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    The reason why I say Kobe is harder to guard is because of is skillset, not necessarily because he's a better scorer. LBJ has developed his skillset a lot since coming into the league, but Kobe is the most offensively skilled player in the history of the game (at least in my view) and this makes it incredibly difficult for defenses to prepare for him. LBJ's not easy to guard, but offensively he's not going to beat you in as many ways as Kobe can.
    .

    Skill wise i Agree Kobe is a true guard Lebron is not. So the way he moved around on the floor was different. I looked at Lebron rookie season highlights and was surprised to see him doing MJ fade, posting up and his shot was not bad. I am starting to think he drove to the lane so much because it was easy for him and was always looking to pass.
    Last edited by ldawg; 05-30-2020 at 01:41 PM.

  10. #5860
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    9,793
    Quote Originally Posted by mngopher35 View Post
    I have no idea what your statistical analysis ever means but that's unrelated yet again to what I pointed out and not what I was comparing overall career efficiency I specifically mentioned 03/04 series for Kobe and how his fell off when the focus of the defense. In game 5 against the Spurs in 03 they lost by 5 points and Kobe had 37 points on 38 shots with 5 turnovers and no assists. I think this would be a pretty clear example where if Kobe had played more efficiently as the lead guy they could have won but did not and they lost a key game. As I said the issue was his efficiency dropped compared to just a couple years ago as he started getting more attention from defenses like the spurs (it was a progression where as you noted by 03 he was closer to Shaq by then and not clearly 2nd option). I shared his ortg for Detroit series too but that series was even worse the SA one was just a bit of a drop off as he became the man. The key is when he didn't have a #1 to rely on and take that attention instead it becoming him the team just wasn't quite as strong anymore and his efficiency is part of it.

    I disagree, I think when teaching the game of basketball making a shot vs. missing one and passing to an open teammate instead of turning it over are very fundamental and important aspects to the game. I think almost every NBA level coach understands the basics of efficiency and how much it matters in the game. I mean that is part of how you get a competitive advantage and so on is figuring out how to maximize overall efficiency. Great teams often rely on their best player to create and so on and being inefficient in doing so can hurt in many ways (turnover can lead to easy buckets on other end for example and Kobe had more than he had assists for the series). There are just so many ways efficiency plays into the game of basketball and I think it was pretty clearly an issue for those Lakers when he tried taking over as the man but was not efficient enough to lead as that guy yet while taking on more defensive attention.
    This completely misses the point I made, which was that the impact, based on the differences in their efficiencies is minimal, and that these other factors I pointed out are likely having a much larger impact. Again, the difference between Kobe and LBJ in their shooting amounts to about half a missed shot per game (once ft% is factored in).

    No one is arguing that missed shots and turnovers are a good thing. What I am arguing is that the way the metrics are presently measured miss massive aspects of the true impact a player is having on the game and can outright distort it and lead to really misleading conclusions. At present, there is no real penalty for passing the ball. If player dribbles around most of the possession and then passes it off to a teammate late in the clock for a low percentage shot, there is no penalty on the passer's effeciency rating. Said passer's rating can only increase if his teammate makes that shot, but if he misses it, there's not going to be penalty to the passer's efficiency, even though that play would have been entirely the passer's fault. Not only does the passer not risk any efficiency penalty, but he stands to increase it if his teammate is able to make a tough shot. Now consider a different example where a player breaks down the defense and draws in a double team. The player then takes a shot and misses, but the rebound goes to his teammate who gets an easy put back, as the result of his man leaving to help against the shooter. The shooter here gets no credit for that bucket and his efficiency takes a hit, even though that player was the reason that his team just got an easy bucket. These things don't get accounted for in present efficiency ratings, but they do matter in wins and losses, which is the point of the game.

    Kobe missing what amounts to an extra half shot per game or so isn't all that meaningful if in the process he is opening up more opportunities for his teammates both in that possession and on future possessions (because the defense has to work harder to stop him).
    Last edited by Big Moves03; 05-30-2020 at 02:02 PM.

  11. #5861
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    9,793
    Quote Originally Posted by ldawg View Post
    if its minimal, Have any team kobe played on was the most efficient team in the league in any season? Lakers lead the league in shooting percentage Miami held it twice with Lebon and 2nd in another. Thats 4 times in top 3. GSW, Spurs also held it as well. I will say anytime Lakers were good they were in top 10. To put it in perspective NO lead the league in fg attempts but 14th in fg% and sits outside the playoff window. They would need to make up for that in other places like defense, rebounds, 3 point shots etc so you are right fg% is only one thing and its not a must to be the most efficient but you have to be efficient. In short you wont lead in every category. So even if you clam Kobe warp the floor you have to make up for a lower efficiency like offensive rebounds. In todays 3 point game are you going to shoot that shot or will you pass to the open guy standing on the 3 point line? Do teams want you taking that shot. Stef Curry shoots the 3 almost at the same percentage as Kobe mid range and that did not include Durant and Klay do you want to exchange a two with a 3 roughly at the same percentage?

    It also have other factors like getting the other team in foul trouble so it have so many other factors at play while trying to win.
    Offensive efficiency is always going to correlate with winning, because it is partly measuring offensive production and teams that score more points are also generally going to win more. The champs are usually not the most efficient team offensively and are often behind numerous teams, many of which are not anywhere near being contenders.
    Last edited by Big Moves03; 05-30-2020 at 02:03 PM.

  12. #5862
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    18,485
    what is so funny about the who League promote scoring and defense sucks is GSW still dont hold the record for most ppg in Playoffs. Not even in top 10. What kind of defense did they play back then. 4 of them from the 80s. I am sorry but defense back then is way way overrated.
    Last edited by ldawg; 05-30-2020 at 02:10 PM.

  13. #5863
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    10,700
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    This completely misses the point I made, which was that the impact, based on the differences in their efficiencies is minimal, and that these other factors I pointed out are likely having a much larger impact. Again, the difference between Kobe and LBJ in their shooting amounts to about half a missed shot per game (once ft% is factored in).

    No one is arguing that missed shots and turnovers are a good thing. What I am arguing is that the way the metrics are presently measured miss massive aspects of the true impact a player is having on the game and can outright distort it and lead to really misleading conclusions. At present, there is no real penalty for passing the ball. If player dribbles around most of the possession and then passes it off to a teammate late in the clock for a low percentage shot, there is no penalty on the passer's effeciency rating. Said passer's rating can only increase if his teammate makes that shot, but if he misses it, there's not going to be penalty to the passer's effeminacy, even though that play would have been entirely the passer's fault. Not only does the passer not risk any efficiency penalty, but they stand to increase it if his teammate is able to make a tough shot. Now consider a different example where a player comes in the game, breaks down the defense and draws in a double team. The player then takes a shot that misses, but the rebound goes to his teammate who gets an easy put back, as the result of his man leaving to help. The shooter here gets no credit for that bucket and his efficiency takes a hit, even though that player was the reason that his team just got an easy bucket. These things don't get accounted for in present efficiency ratings, but they do matter in wins and losses, which is the point of the game.

    Kobe missing what amounts to an extra half shot per game or so isn't all that meaningful if in the process he is opening up more opportunities for his teammates both in that possession and on future possessions.
    This isn't ignoring the point, I have long stated that is not a good way to look at statistics and use context when evaluating. I also have seen your miscalculations before and don't necessarily trust your breakdowns.

    I was making a specific point about Kobe not being able to lead a team as the man and his efficiency dropping off in 03/04 and you have completely tried to twist the argument away from that context so weirdly look at career stats/metrics without context. This has always been true and we have tracking data to see if players were to be holding the ball extra and so on in this manner too. Now it wasn't around back for Kobe of course but I am not even denying some basics you say here it just adds to what I brought up about how efficiency matters. You seem to be backing up my point just ranting in a defensive manner to defend Kobe's inefficiency while acknowledging now it obviously matters.

    This is why he wasn't getting credit back then in the same way is he had never proven capable of being that guy and the team stopped winning/he dropped off in efficiency/specific games like the one I covered were big in series result and so on. The context at the time is why as I have been saying it wasn't peak Kobe yet in 01 and he hadn't been that 1st option getting full attention from the defense as it was Shaq and so on. When he started to try being that guy in 03/04 his efficiency fell off and they lost against SA/Det in part because he was trying to be the man but was not ready/able yet.

  14. #5864
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    18,485
    Quote Originally Posted by Big Moves03 View Post
    Offensive efficiency is always going to correlate with winning, because it is partly measuring offensive production and teams that score more points are also generally going to win more. The champs are usually not the most efficient team offensively and are often behind numerous teams, many of which are not anywhere near being contenders.
    True its so much at play. Spurs and Pistons are examples of grind it out teams they did not want high scoring output Shaq Lakers also did that to a point with teams that wanted to run. Its so much at play in winning a title. That why comparing stars will look different. What work for Kobe will not work for Lebron they are two different type of players. You have to go with what works best for your top talent. If you got Curry you want to speed it up if you got Shaq you want to slow it down.

  15. #5865
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    9,793
    Another factor to consider when looking at something like efficiency and saying if Player X had played more efficiently his team would've won, is that missed shots and turnovers are naturally correlated with winning and losing (never said they weren't), in that the team that loses will typically end up missing more shots and turning the ball over more than the team that wins. The problem with saying the issue with a given player is his efficiency, is that there is often a reason for those missed shots and those turnovers, which is that the defense is stopping not just that player, but typically the entire team.

    I certainly don't think that if Kobe would've been more efficient and passed it to his teammates more so that they could take those shots that they would've won the series against Detroit. The lakers had a lot of issues that year and there were a ton of chemistry issues (Kobe and shaq were not getting along, shaq was out of shape and mad at the laker organization, the veterans on the team were not happy with Phil for playing Payton and Malone over them, and Payton didn't really fit with that team). I watched everyone of those games against the pistons in 04 and I remember Detroit's defense being stifling and many offensive possessions simply leading nowhere. In a lot of those cases, the ball simply ended up back in Kobe's hands late in the clock and he had to take a shot. If he instead he gave it to one of his teammates to take that shot, do I think they would've won? No, they likely would've missed more of those than Kobe did. That laker team also had a ton of injuries and the lakers were forced to play guys who wouldn't normally crack the rotation significant minutes in crucial games (e.g., Slava Medvedenko). That's not to say that Kobe couldn't have played a better series and I think he learned a lot from that series. My point though is that there was a reason why those shots were so tough and it wasn't simply because Kobe was deciding to take tough shots (that was part of it, but there were various other elements that contributed to this occurring).

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •