Why do advanced statistics hate Kobe Bryant? Part 1
Ed. Note: When you're done reading this post, make sure to go read Part 2, the follow-up post in which C.A. really digs into the numbers to explain why PER undervalues Kobe Bryant.
If you've got a lot of time with nothing to do, go into any NBA chat room or message board and ask the following question:
Who is the best player in the NBA?
It's a fun subject to dive into, as long as you are running with the right crowd. If people stay respectful and stick to arguing things on merit, making points based on logic, evidence and knowledge-based observation, it can be a jolly good time, with many different answers, each with their own valid points. You could go with LeBron James, the do-everything superstar. He scores, he passes, he rebounds, he makes julienne fries. If efficiency is your style, you could drop Chris Paul in the conversation. Nobody is better at turning the ball in his hands into points on the board for his team, either through extremely proficient shooting or very adept passing. If you like the big play, maybe Dwyane Wade is your man. He scores with the best of them, and does it all in a way that looks great on SportsCenter. If big men are your cup du jour, you could go with the young stud, Dwight Howard, or the old guard, Tim Duncan and Kevin Garnett. And, of course, this conversation wouldn't even be interesting if you didn't include Kobe Bryant.
There are tons of fans who put Kobe on the top of that list. Sure, lots of them are homeristic Laker lovers who create that list as much with their hearts as with their heads. But they aren't alone. There are plenty of NBA personnel who put Kobe at the top, or very near the top, of that list as well. He was second in the MVP balloting last season, behind LeBron James. A survey of NBA GMs ranked Kobe as 2nd most likely to win the MVP this season, and ranked him first in categories like "The player you'd most like to take a shot with the game on the line". In that same survey, the question was asked "If you were starting a franchise and could sign any NBA player, which player would you sign?" Kobe came in 3rd, behind LeBron and Dwight Howard, despite being more than 7 years older than some very attractive candidates like Wade and Paul. The point in all this? Kobe is very, very highly regarded in this league, both by people who think with their hearts, and people who don't.
So if I were to put a group of names in a list like this:
LeBron James, Dwyane Wade, Chris Paul, Kobe Bryant
and ask you "Which of those players doesn't belong, and why?", it might be a tough task. You might think "Kobe is older than the other players" and you'd be right. You might think "only LeBron isn't a guard." But if I were to ask you "Which player on this list is significantly worse than the other three?", you'd be hard pressed to come up with an answer. They're all incredible, right?
Not according to advanced statistical metrics, they aren't. In fact, according to advanced statistics, Kobe Bryant is a distant fourth to the other three players. According to the most well known advanced statistic, Player Efficiency Rating (PER), Kobe was the 6th most productive player in the league last year, barely registering above Brandon Roy. He wasn't even the most valuable player on his own team, according to the Win Shares method (Pau Gasol) and the Adjusted +/- method (Lamar Odom). No matter the method, Paul, Wade and James comprise the top 3. No matter the method, Kobe is not ranked in the top 5. That's a pretty big disconnect with what was described earlier. In a two part piece, I will look at one particular advanced stat (PER), break it down to its individual components, and compare Kobe to other players in an effort to fully explain the disconnect between Kobe's analytical place in the game, and his statistical place in the game.
Now, I like to think of myself as a fairly open-minded Lakers fan. I don't think Kobe is the best player in the NBA. I give that honor to LeBron James. This is not to say that Lakers fans who do think Kobe is #1 are not open-minded. They are entitled to that opinion, and many of them could give you very good reasons why they think it to be true. In the end, this is a matter of opinion and there are no right or wrong answers, only well and poorly reasoned ones. I only mention my open-mindedness, and the subsequent evidence, as justification for the point I'm trying to make. Like I said, I don't think Kobe is the best player in the NBA. But not in the top 5? That's ludicrous, blasphemous, and just plain crazy.Chris Paul and Dwyane Wade are terrific players. I'd be willing to listen to arguments that they are peers of Kobe Bryant. But for someone to suggest that, not only are they Kobe's peers, but far and away his superior, I just can't get on board with that. And yet, here come advanced statistics to tell us that Wade and Paul, along with James, aren't just better than Kobe is right now. They are better than Kobe has ever been, by a significant margin. Last season, LeBron James had a PER of 31.76. Dwyane Wade's PER totaled 30.46. Chris Paul clocked in with a round 30.04. Kobe Bryant? 24.46. In fact, the highest PER Kobe has ever had came in 2005-2006, when he topped out at 28.0. It's good, to be sure, but nowhere near as good a season, statistically, as any of these three players had last year. In order to figure out why, the first step is to get a truly thorough understanding of PER.
PER is the brain child of John Hollinger, probably the biggest name in the NBA stats world not employed by an NBA franchise. Hollinger writes for ESPN, and relies heavily on PER to determine predictions he makes about, well, everything. Which teams are going to be the most successful, which players are going to have breakout years, who the MVP is, almost all of his work is more or less related to PER. Love him or hate him, agree with him or think he's full of crap, you simply have to respect that he is probably the most successful "stat-geek" in the NBA, with the possible exception of Daryl Morey. So what, exactly, is PER?
PER is a catch-all stat which looks at every statistical aspect of an NBA player's game, and incorporates it into one simple number. Don't know how to measure the greatness of a point guard like Chris Paul against the production of a big man like Tim Duncan? That's what PER is for. It is regulated in every way that a stat can be. It is pace adjusted, so players from teams that play faster won't get inflated numbers. It's per minute, so players who play more have no advantage over players that play less. Hollinger creates these ratings for every player in the league, and then adjusts them so that the "average" NBA player in a given year has a rating of 15.00. PER has it's limitations, mainly in terms of assessing quality defense, and Hollinger himself is not blind to the fact that PER is not the "be all, end all" in terms of player evaluation. Or, at least, that's what he says, right before saying that PER clearly shows that LeBron James is having one of the greatest seasons in the history of the NBA, and is performing at a level that hasn't been seen since the days of Micheal Jordan.
After a lot of description, we're still no closer to what actually makes up PER. For that, I have to show you the formula, and I'm doing so only so that I can show off and you can know exactly how much time I've wasted preparing for this topic. You see, the formula for PER is enough to make all but the most statistically inclined very queasy. In fact, I can't even make it fit on our blog. Please click here, courtesy of Wikipedia, to see what I'm talking about. (If you don't approve of this being displayed, Mr. Hollinger, you have my sincere apologies).
Did you really look at the formula? If you tried to cheat without taking a peek, please go back and take a look. Otherwise, you will fail to be sufficiently impressed when I tell you that I manually (and by manually, I mean in Excel) calculated Kobe's PER from last season. Why would I engage in such a ridiculous task? So that I could bring you Kobe's PER, broken down by each individual component. When broken down this way, we can see that PER credits a player for the positive aspects of his production, represented by the positive numbers in the table below, and balances those against the negative aspects of his production, represented by the negative numbers below. Positive production includes field goals and free throws made, assists, rebounds, blocks and steals. Negative production includes fouls committed, turnovers and field goals and free throws attempted. FGAs and FTAs are treated as negative because they use up a team's limited number of possessions.
So, without further adieu, here is Kobe's PER from the 2008-2009 season, broken down by individual component.
| Player | 3 pt | Assist | FG | FT | TO | FGA | FTA | DRB | ORB | STL | BLK | PF | PER |
| Kobe Bryant | 2.01 | 4.53 | 22.55 | 7.43 | -3.77 | -11.99 | -0.54 | 1.63 | 1.18 | 2.15 | 0.49 | -1.16 | 24.50 |
A couple of quick notes regarding this calculation. I was unable to get any closer to Kobe's actual PER (24.46) than this. Please forgive and accept the relatively small margin of error. If you don't trust me, by all means break out your graphing calculator and add up all the factors. Or you could just trust that the numbers are real.
With that out of the way, lets take a look and find out what we see. Assists are good for roughly 20% of the overall number. 3 pointers and field goals (basically, shots from the field) account for roughly 12.5 points, or just about half of the overall score (I'm combining the positive values for FG and the negative values for FGA, if you are following along at home). Free throws account for another 7 points, so total scoring is almost 80% of the overall score. Rebounding and defensive stats basically cancel out with turnovers and personal fouls.
So, the appropriate conclusions we can gather from this are: Kobe's defense and rebounding are about as valuable as his turnovers and fouls are detrimental. Kobe's assists are only 20% of his value as a player, and the rest of his value is determined by his ability to score. Kobe's ability to get to the free throw line is worth almost as much as his ability to score from the field. Whether you agree with any of these statements is irrelevant, we're just trying to make sense of what PER is telling us about Kobe's value on the court.
If you've figured out that these numbers mean absolutely nothing unless compared to somebody else, you are 100% right. So tune in tomorrow, as I compare Kobe's individual PER components to some other players you might have heard of, and then try to bring it all together and make sense of it all. Until then, keep your feet on the ground and keep reaching for the stars.
144 comments
|
2 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Yeah and someone on Yahoo
used the argument that the Lakers were better when Odom was on the court as opposed to Kobe because of some stat…. It’s kind of hard to put any value to that.
Or is there a stat the calculates or keeps track of how Kobe being double teamed opens up the floor for everyone else even if it isn’t his pass that gets the assist.
How do you put a value on Fisher’s 2-5 shooting in game 4 of the Finals and how much more valueable those shots were then his FG% would have you believe.
Once I see a stat that calculates those aspect of the game then I really can’t put much value on them.
"When I walked into the locker room on my first day as a Laker and saw my gold uniform hanging there, I cried." - Magic Johnson (Best Laker Ever)
by PURPLE AND GOLD FOR LIFE on Nov 10, 2009 10:26 AM PST reply actions
that yahoo was Wayne Winston
Or else someone quoting Wayne Winston, in all likelihood, using his adjusted plus/minus.
As I always say, the problem is not with the statistic. The problem is attributing something to the statistic that it does not say. Neither PER nor APM nor any of the other advanced metrics are defined in terms of “talent” or “superiority” or anything abstract like that. So long as those terms are interpreted conservatively, with due attention to how they are calculated and derived, they have definite value.
In the case of APM, Winston found that when he corrected somehow for opponent mix, teammate mix, and some other factors (since his formulas are proprietary and closed, we can’t know for sure which things are corrected for), the Lakers outscore their opponents by more when Lamar is on the floor and Kobe isn’t, than vice versa. Winston then took it upon himself to conclude that Lamar was the superior player (for the Lakers). It’s the second step that’s in error, not the first.
And this is where some people don't "get it"
While the statistics are cold, hard facts, the interpretation of those statistics still needs to be evaluated.
What some of these guys are doing with the numbers is not science, but everyone else thinks it is because they used a formula to reach their conclusions!
"This is not a game for boys. This is a game for men." - Phil Jackson
by Gils_Keloids on Nov 10, 2009 4:50 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Glad someone brought this up
Because as both a die-hard Laker fan, and a die-hard believer in rationality and reason, this is something that has gnawed at me for a couple years. Of course, it’s not like the basketball media as a whole cares about these things (see Steve Nash over Kobe for 2006 MVP), but still, I don’t want to just say “Kobe’s the best because he’s the best.” I’m looking forward to seeing you compare the component PER to the other players you mentioned, and I will say that, from my own experience with it, PER is a stat that rewards efficiency over all else. That’s why it has the word Efficiency in its name. Dirk always has a very good PER, Duncan, CP3, LeBron – what these players share in common is that they generate points (for themselves or their teammates) without turnovers, and through the generation of freethrows. Steve Nash, in contrast, despite having STELLAR shooting ‘s, giving out tons of assists, and generally just looking to the eye to be a very efficient producer, suffers in PER rankings, significantly, perhaps due to his lack of FT"s, and certainly due to the turnovers he generates. Finally – Kobe has a PER up around 28 again so far this season, and to be honest, I think he’s been playing better – the things PER measures DO represent value – even the anti-stat contingent has to admit that the Lakers are more potent when Kobe is in the post, taking high looks, getting to the line, passing out of the double team, and not just dribbling on the perimeter before settling for a long jumper, like he did many times last year (not that it stopped the Lakers…). anyways great post.
p.s. Purple & Gold For Life – that person on Yahoo was referencing adjusted +/-, which, while a great measure of a player’s impact on the team as a whole, isn’t the ideal way to compare individuals – especially since Kobe, unlike Lamar, is on the floor for so long with so many different groupings. Don’t dismiss the stat because it tells you something you didn’t expect to hear though – instead, see how much Lamar helps this team, even if he’s not showing up in the boxscore, through defense, rebounding, ball movement etc.
Also, adjusted +/- is probably the closest thing to a stat to see how Kobe being doubled opened up the floor.
As for the Fisher 2/5 clutch shots thing – well, that’s why we watch the games! Doesn’t mean stats are useless. I mean, if we had a better PG through that whole game, it might not have come down to a last minute shot. Still, Fish is nails tough, and the man steps up when it matters.
by DanPossiblyTheMan on Nov 10, 2009 10:47 AM PST reply actions
I hope my post didn't indicate that I disregarded stats completely
But I just can’t put a value to it as much as everyone else does. Even if the stat is in favor of the Lakers or any lakers player.
It really has nothing to do with something I, “didn’t expect to hear”. There are so many point of views out there. I prefer to read different point of views. But, If I am not supposed to discriminate against statistics then why is it that anyone who puts so much emphasis on them doesn’t consider the intangibles. isn’t that some form of reverse discrimination?….lol but seriously, isn’t it?
"When I walked into the locker room on my first day as a Laker and saw my gold uniform hanging there, I cried." - Magic Johnson (Best Laker Ever)
by PURPLE AND GOLD FOR LIFE on Nov 10, 2009 11:04 AM PST up reply actions
PER is a garbage pseudostat invented and perpetuated by a journalist.
"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal
I'll go after it seriously sometime this season, but if you think there is a single numeric way to quantitatively compare Chris Paul and Dwight Howard, you're dreaming...
"A bizarre and extremely rare hybrid Blazer/Laker fan, Timbo has always struggled to contain the Beast Within, like Dr. Jekyll, Bruce Banner, or Ted Kennedy." — Miled Animal
Thank you!
I see I didn’t have to really post anything if I would have just waited for you to sum it up.
"When I walked into the locker room on my first day as a Laker and saw my gold uniform hanging there, I cried." - Magic Johnson (Best Laker Ever)
by PURPLE AND GOLD FOR LIFE on Nov 10, 2009 11:38 AM PST up reply actions
Exactly TIMBO I completely agree with you on
"I’ll go after it seriously sometime this season, but if you think there is a single numeric way to quantitatively compare Chris Paul and Dwight Howard, you’re dreaming… "
Forreal come on, a PG being equally compared to a C is really funny…..
There are basic Fundamentals that are needed to move forward in this game. Always keep your guard up at all times to avoid being caught in a trap. Overcome the fouls that will be commited against you REBOUND AND PRESS ON. ADJUST to the LimeLight: ALL-STAR PLAYERS ARE ALWAYS THE CENTER OF ATTENTION. Know what your role is and play your position. Find a game plan and execute it. REMEMBER YOU ONLY GET OUT OF THE GAME WHAT YOU PUT INTO IT.
well, I wouldn't go that far
It’s a real, honest-to-goodness statistic. And it has value. But it is at least somewhat arbitrary: http://thenullhypodermic.blogspot.com/2009/06/superstars-and-per.html
And APM may have theoretical liabilities: http://thenullhypodermic.blogspot.com/2009/10/adjusted-plus-or-minus-more-or-less.html
I’m sure some folks on SS&R are tired of seeing me post this again. But PER and APM do seem to get hashed around a lot, and I think it’s useful to take a closer look at how they’re constructed, to get a better handle on their strengths and weaknesses.
FYI
When first published, due to a formatting quirk, the right side of the table, displaying the final total, didn’t show up. That has been fixed. So if you were confused, take another look, it should all make sense now.
Strength & Honor
It's good to be the Champs
Is it errogant to say that...
the Lakers don’t need all frills and extras to hype up the crowd because the product on the floor is so good.
"When I walked into the locker room on my first day as a Laker and saw my gold uniform hanging there, I cried." - Magic Johnson (Best Laker Ever)
by PURPLE AND GOLD FOR LIFE on Nov 10, 2009 11:40 AM PST reply actions
Hey guys
you should check out this article by John Hollinger and Chad Ford on ESPN.com thats called Future NBA Power Rankings. Its only available to insiders but im sure if you google it, you can find it for free somewhere. But it looks into every team’s future up to the end of the 2010-13 season. We were ranked number 3 behind Portland and Orlando, respectively. They said the main reaso for that was because our core players are getting pretty old pretty fast and that we dont have that many good young players (besides Bynum) that we can build a future around. However, they did say that the Market for us to sign Free Agents is high because its L.A. lol. But I’d like to know your guys opinions on this and comment alot on it. Thanks.
No thanks.
I have no interest in reading “future” power rankings. That’s dumber than made up player ratings. They mean squat.
Wonder what Boston’s “future power ranking” would have been in ’06-07? Not too good. Then they made the trade. So much for prognostications.
If anyone is interested here is a link of a site that posted them
you have to scroll to the middle of the page to start….
http://www.sportsinferno.com/forums/showthread.php?t=52136
"When I walked into the locker room on my first day as a Laker and saw my gold uniform hanging there, I cried." - Magic Johnson (Best Laker Ever)
by PURPLE AND GOLD FOR LIFE on Nov 10, 2009 12:11 PM PST up reply actions
sure...
hope you find what you are looking for. I thinks it’s interesting to read those things. maybe can’t rely on it so much but anything lakers/basketball related is always interesting.
"When I walked into the locker room on my first day as a Laker and saw my gold uniform hanging there, I cried." - Magic Johnson (Best Laker Ever)
by PURPLE AND GOLD FOR LIFE on Nov 10, 2009 1:16 PM PST up reply actions
My Take On PER
Doesn’t discount missed shots/free throws well enough. Assists are an overrated statistic that is really all up to discretion of the individual whether it is an assist or not. Like if I pass it in to a center whose being well-defended and he pulls off a good move on the player and scores, I don’t think that is my assist. All the credit should go to him for making the move not me making a pass into him. Behind the back passes, through three defenders, alley-oops, these are assists. Not outlet passing up to a wide open player for him to shoot. Rebounds make it greatly favor big men. Few if any on the top-ten all-time list are guards of normal-size, Magic and Lebron need not apply. Jordan, Wade, Petit, and Paul are the only ones there surrounded by Wilt, Shaq, Timmie D, the Admiral, etc. Part of why I never use it.
C.A.,
Good work. Just curious though. Why do you feel LeBron is better than Kobe? Usually people think so simply because of “stats.” Something I disagree with because the stats aren’t that much better to justify the argument over actual accomplishments. If someone preferred his style, that I could agree with. Why do you think so?
I hope this doesn’t start a Kobe vs. LBJ war between commenters.
Honestly, my LeBron vs. Kobe take is pretty much gut feeling
I don’t really have a specific set of evidence to back up my assertion that LeBron is better, but, having watched both players, I’m left with the impression that LeBron has a greater impact on the court than Kobe does. My belief is not really based on LeBron’s statistical dominance. I’m not buying into the idea that LeBron is better than Kobe because he has more assists or rebounds.
I certainly think Kobe is the more accomplished of the two (and don’t see how that could possibly be argued). I think Kobe’s the more skilled of the two. But, in the end, I just can’t get past the fact that LeBron is so much more athletically gifted, and therefore more difficult to stop.
I look at it like this. LeBron is easier to game plan for, in the sense that he doesn’t have as many ways to beat you as Kobe does. You can game plan for Kobe all day, and he’ll still find a new way to punish you, and LeBron doesn’t have the sophistication to do that. But, the game plan to defend LeBron, while simpler to create, is more difficult to execute, because he is so, so athletically gifted. In the end, I definitely see them as 1 and 1a in the league, but give LeBron a slight nod because, as awesome as Kobe is, LeBron’s athleticism is truly revolutionary.
I’m basically of the opinion that LeBron might be the best athlete in the history of humanity, and that belief ends up swaying the argument in my mind, ever so slightly, in his favor.
thats a good argument
But I see this as a disadvantage to Lebron in his future if he doesnt improve his shooting and post game like Kobe does. Once that athleticism starts to decline (usually it starts around age 29 or so), i think he’ll be less and less affective every year and therefore his prime wont last very long like Kobe’s could. Just my opinion though. :)
by desecrator09 on Nov 10, 2009 4:15 PM PST up reply actions
It's tough to look that far into the future and know what will happen
But you make a very strong point. It seems naive to think that LeBron won’t begin to develope the necessary attributes to keep his game strong once he starts to decline athletically. But it’s hard to see him making as much progress with his game (in terms of improving the skill aspects of his game) as Kobe has, because it seems clear to me that Kobe has worked as hard as anybody ever to continue to develop his game.
I guess what I’m saying is, in my mind,
LeBron at 25 > Kobe at 31 (due to athleticism)
LeBron at 25 > Kobe at 25 (still due to athleticism)
but it’s very easy to see a situation where
Kobe at 31 > LeBron at 31.
Only time will tell, but LeBron has a ways to go before he can match Kobe on skill. So if his athleticism does falter to the point where he’s not clear cut, head and shoulders, above the pack, it could definitely have a more dramatic effect on his game than that same fall had/is having on Kobe’s game.
i don't doubt that Lebron will work very hard on his shooting and post game
however, i do have doubts that his skills will be as developed as kobe’s when he gets around to the age.
I agree with desecrator
I’m of the opinion that impossible to stop is better than hard to stop. Yes, it’s a lot easier to devise a plan against LeBron than it is to actually implement it — but the 2-3 best teams in the league generally CAN implement such a plan. This is because (a) LeBron’s game is narrow enough that IF you can take away his strength (getting to the hoop), you can mostly neutralize him, and (b) virtually no one actually can, except the best defensive teams in the league, but as San Antonio, Boston, Boston, and Orlando have shown, the really good defensive teams CAN do that.
This all hinges on the fact that to render him less effective, there is only one thing you need to do. For Kobe, that is not the case. Take away one or even two things, he’ll murder you with half a dozen others. Add in Kobe’s new, incredible post game, and I think that tips things back Kobe’s way for a year or two.
LeBron is the best regular season player, because only 1 or 2 teams in the league have a chance against him, and he doesn’t see them often in the regular season. The rest of the time, as C.A. mentioned, he destroys everyone.
But Kobe is the best overall, because when they meet the best defensive teams in the playoffs, LeBron’s biggest strength is taken away and there is little to fall back on, while Kobe just punishes teams countless other ways.
Also, Kobe in 2002-03: 30ppg, 7rpg, 6apg, 2.2 steals, shooting 38.3% from 3-point. These are nearly identical numbers to LeBron’s over the last couple years, but (a) Kobe did it with 50-70 fewer pounds and at least 2 fewer inches, and (b) Kobe did it despite playing next to Shaq, and with a championship caliber team around him (i.e., better players than LeBron had, especially a couple years ago). He was 24 at the time. But he was also further along, skills wise, than LeBron (jumper, post game, defense, etc.).
LeBron at 31 won’t have anything close to the post game Kobe does. I also have a very hard time imagining him developing a jumper as good as Kobe’s. Without at least one or the other, there’s no way he’s as good as Kobe at 31.
LeBron at 24 =< Kobe at 30 … but barely
LeBron at 25 < Kobe at 31 … because of the post game improvements
LeBron at 25 < Kobe at 25 … same stats, lesser accomplishments, not as skilled as Kobe was
LeBron at 31 << Kobe at 31 … just don’t see the post game or jumpers being as good as Kobe’s or MJ’s
Strength & Honor
It's good to be the Champs
Lebron won't never have that jumper because he's so big, almost like
a center so he just looks weird shooting and he has an awkward shot form and because he’s a one trick pony and we all know where he wants to go with the ball, every single possession, that right there already tells you he is not the better player over Kobe. I would want someone who can get me any shot on the floor and thats Kobe, Lebron sure is a freak of nature but basketball skill wise Kobe owns him and is the better overall player.
There are basic Fundamentals that are needed to move forward in this game. Always keep your guard up at all times to avoid being caught in a trap. Overcome the fouls that will be commited against you REBOUND AND PRESS ON. ADJUST to the LimeLight: ALL-STAR PLAYERS ARE ALWAYS THE CENTER OF ATTENTION. Know what your role is and play your position. Find a game plan and execute it. REMEMBER YOU ONLY GET OUT OF THE GAME WHAT YOU PUT INTO IT.
+1 Josh
C.A.,
If athleticism is the reason you think LeBron @ 25 > Kobe @ 25, then I think you’re forgetting just how good of an athlete Kobe is/was. Kobe’s skill level has always been superior to LeBron’s. At any stage. I’ll go so far to say that Kobe’s skill level was superior at 18 than LeBron’s is now. Not that 18 y.o. Kobe was a better player than 25 yo LBJ, but better skilled.
At this point in their respective careers, Kobe was already developing and adding aspects to his game that LeBron seems to have no interest in doing. Like footwork and posting up.
As an impact player, LeBron is awesome. As a basketball player, there’s much to be done. I don’t think LeBron’s basketball IQ is that high, and I think it’s part of the reason Cleveland sticks with their boring, predictable offense.
to LBJ's credit
Lebron’s IQ isn’t low, but it certianly hasn’t shown to match up against kobe’s (especially on offense). Having Mike Brown as coach doesn’t help his cause either.
I think LBJ’s range of skillset has always been inferior to kobe’s. However, what he can do, he is VERY good at (partly attributed to his athleticism, i suppose, but it is still his skill per say) and is a better finisher at the rim than kobe ever was. When Kobe was in his more athletic younger days, he wasn’t nearly as strong.
However, I do agree with Josh that LBJ is extremely difficult to stop, but CAN be stopped with the right execution (unless he’s on fire from beyond the three). And while he has the body to play more positions than kobe, he’s actually probably less versatile in terms of fitting into a team’s overall offense.
I'm definitely not forgetting that Kobe was an amazing athlete @ 25.
That was the beginning of my prime of basketball watching. That said, I don’t think Kobe has ever been as athletically gifted as LeBron. LeBron’s speed and agility, in a package that is 40 pounds heavier (thus significantly stronger) than Kobe’s, makes him unrivaled in the history of the NBA as an athlete, in my opinion. In the end, we don’t have any real way of confirming this one way or the other, so while I hate to do it, I think I have to pull the agree to disagree card on the subject of LeBron’s athleticism.
You make some good points, but in the end I don't agree with your conclusions
It is very difficult to slow LeBron down. As you mention, because there is less to his game than to Kobe’s, it can be done, but only by the best teams. Kobe, on the other hand, has a very sophisticated game. You can’t slow him down by taking one thing away, because he has so many different ways to beat you. I’m not arguing any of this.
But it must be acknowledged that Kobe is far more capable of slowing himself down than LeBron is. This is due to the fact that Kobe’s game comes with a higher degree of difficulty than LeBron’s does. LeBron’s superior athleticism allows him to make the game exceedingly simple. “Blow by defender, make lay up or dunk as lesser players bounce off incredibly large muscles”. Kobe, on the other hand, can not do that on every play. He’s capable of it from time to time, but he has to throw in a pull up jumper or a fade away more often, and these actions are, by very nature, more difficult and less successful. Until they start rewarding degree of difficulty, I still think LeBron is the better player at this moment.
Kobe may very well be capable of being better against the best teams in the league, but he is not going to be definitely better than LeBron against those teams every game. If you think the capability makes him the better overall player, I can live with that. But I definitely thing the ability to consistently do what you do well needs to be taken into account, and I definitely think LeBron is more consistently dominant than Kobe is, due to his athleticism allowing for a much simpler path to success.
Looks like you're just counting athleticism
Very good post about PER btw, thank you for that.
I believe Kobe has a more developed, skilled game and will produce at a consistent level for a longer period of time. Come old age, injury, or what have you, Lebron will be left out in the cold.
I know how dominant Lebron is, I’m not going to argue that, or his place as either #1 or #2 in the league right now. I’m just saying that absent his athletic ability Kobe is the much better player.
I certainly can't argue with that
I’m just saying that absent his athletic ability Kobe is the much better player.
I back this statement 100%. Kobe is clearly the more skilled player. If that’s all that counted, it wouldn’t even be an argument.
I don't think it's that simple.
LeBron’s basketball IQ is completely off the charts. He can orchestrate the floor much like Magic used to in the 80’s:
If I move 2 feet this way, I can get that guy to cross the lane, which means I can dribble to my left and then get my teammate an open 15 footer from the opposite elbow or I’ll have a dunk or two free throws.
He’s the Peyton Manning of the floor with the ball in his hands. Chris Paul is great, but I think he’s kind of limited if you take him out of the pick and roll scheme because of his lack of size. I don’t think Paul’s game is to the level of, say, Isiah Thomas yet, but he’s getting there. He just doesn’t get to the basket as well as Zeke used to.
Has anyone in this thread seen LeBron play this year? His jump shot is much improved — he’s got better balance, and smoother stroke, and he brings the ball more out front than over his head, which will make him a more accurate shooter since that is a more repeatable stroke.
I also disagree that “good defensive teams” can stop him. Most good defensive teams just take away everyone else and hope he doesn’t score 80 points. Popovich has pretty much said as much in interviews. Same with Doc Rivers. If LeBron ever develops a Kobe level jump shot, he’ll be literally impossible to defend — he can get to the rim and the line pretty much at will right now, and that’s with players dropping off his jumper. I don’t think he’ll ever win a scoring title, because he’s much better (and so is his team) when he’s making other players better.
"I just wish that the late Harry Caray were still around so I could hear him mispronounce 'Kosuke Fukudome' every fukun' night" -- Dennis Miller
Re. the improved jumper
This comes from squaring more with the basket and eliminating that little right lean he has had since he was a high school freshman (probably the result of a natural “lefty” shooting right handed)…He still falls away on uncontested jumpers so eliminating that lean means his “stroke” (muscle memory) only has to compensate for the fall away and not also drifting right at the release point of his shot.
by cavslandrocks on Nov 13, 2009 3:56 PM PST up reply actions
You just basically made an arguement which showed that Kobe is better than Lebron
Being ‘more gifted athletically’ does not make you a better player in my book.
Kobe’s skill set is way greater than LBJ, furthermore Kobe at 24 WAS much more athletic than LBJ.
If you told me Lebron is stronger physically I can agree but that only gets you so far, as I said earlier Kobes’ skill set is by far superior to LBJ.
The top 3 players in the NBA are 1)Kobe, 2)D-Wade 3) Lebron.
I can’t understand why people buy into the hype about LBJ (I’m not saying hr isn’t goof) but the media and Nike wants this guy to be the savior of the NBA, but his game isn’t as polished as Kobe’s or Wade’s so I don’t recognize him as the NBA’s best.
In fact when Kobe retire Wade will be the best not LBJ.
By the way I think Usain Bolt, Tyson Gay, Kenise Bekele and Michael Phelps, are FAR better athletes than LBJ.
As basketball players Dominique Wilkins, MJ, KB24, Penny Hardaway, were all better athletes than Lebron.
i think it depends on your definition of athleticism, though.
LBJ is not the fastest, strongest, nor biggest guy in the leauge, but he is a unique combination of size, strength, and speed. That is, no one of his size & strength can match his speed, or no one of his speed can match his strength, etc.
that said though, if LBJ doesn’t make vast improvement to add finesse to his game, he could peak out a lot faster than expected.
I think you all are forgetting
about Wilt Chamberlain, David Robinson, Ralph Sampson and Hakeem Olajuwon. These were all big men who had incredible athletic ability.
I will say this if Wilt played in todays’ NBA and had the benefit of modern training and diet he would be even more of a freak than LBJ.
Just my opinion but
but I think that athleticism can be more attributed to genes rather technology and diet. Lebron had the athleticism in high school and I doubt that he had access to modern training and I have never known a high school player who had a proper diet program. just my humble opinion.
"When I walked into the locker room on my first day as a Laker and saw my gold uniform hanging there, I cried." - Magic Johnson (Best Laker Ever)
by PURPLE AND GOLD FOR LIFE on Nov 11, 2009 6:14 AM PST up reply actions
But you are forgetting Wilt WAS already incredibly athletic
The point I was trying to make was that players then didn’t have the knowledge and structured plans like the players of today.
The average high school player does undergo some routine form of training because they already know what they want to become.
Back then players just lifted a few weights to put on some muscles, nothing like the fancy stuff the guys of today have.
I agree athleticism has to do with genes, but LBJ in high school had the benefit of growing up in an age where he was able to make use in the advances made in modern science.
Did you watch a young David Robinson, Hakeem Olajuwon or Ralph Sampson play? They were all amazing big men who could run the open floor.
I just get annoyed when people with no sense of history anoint the newest thing they see as the greatest without even considering what they’re saying. I even heard on commentator say LBJ was “a greater open court threat than Magic Johnson”
I would be hard pressed to say that a young Steve Francis wasn’t just as athletic as LBJ (i’m not talking about strength but athletic ability).
I hear what you are saying, but you are treating LBJ's athleticism like it's second rate
Steve Francis? C’mon man. I know dude could jump out of a building, but Steve Francis was “just” an elite athlete in a league filled with elite athletes.
LBJ is 260 pounds, which is bigger than some centers. He’s 6’9". His ability to jump is easily on par with anybody not named Howard. And according to some, he’s got Top 5 speed in the entire NBA. Any time you can mention the same name in an athleticism conversation with both Dwight Howard and Tony Parker, you are talking about an entirely new breed of athlete.
I get that you don’t think people are giving equal credence to the past. Maybe you are right. But, if you don’t think LeBron is one of the best atheletes ever to play this game, then we disagree on this one. Simple as that.
I agree with your last point
Lebron is ONE of the best athletes to play BASKETBALL EVER.
Not the BEST ATHLETE ever or the best athlete ever to play the nba.
How do you measure a persons’ athleticism? Most of us confuse raw and pure agility with athleticism.
Usain Bolt Kinese Bekele and Michael Phelps do the kind of stuff that would make them far better athletes than LBJ in my opinion. Most folks are going to say that Bolt and Bekele run in a straight line but what about the training involved and the stamina required.
Could most of us run flat out for 100m, 200m, 300m, 400m like Bolt or run a marathon, 10,000m, 5,000m like Bekele.
Someone beneath said if I were to put LBJ in the pool at 8 I would get Michael Phelps and to that I say sir you must give me some of what you’ve been drinking because I just don’t get those kinda hallucinations whenever I drink my vodka and cranberry juice.
Now you are speaking my language and we can debate this
I 100% agree with you that to compare athletes across sports is finicky at best. LBJ could not be a champion swimmer. He probably would never be able to beat Bekele in a long distance race. It’s possible that he could be a good sprinter, but we’ll never know. So when I say that I think LBJ is one of the best athletes in the history of humanity, I am not saying I think LBJ could do any other sport and be just as successful at it as he is at basketball. Even with a lifetime of training, I don’t think LBJ could beat anybody that you mentioned at what they do. Phelps is genetically designed to be a swimmer, Bolt a sprinter, LBJ a basketball player.
That said, it is my personal belief that basketball is the most athletic of all sports. The combination of speed, strength, jumping ability, agility, and size, required to play the game leads me to believe that the best NBA athlete is probably the same thing as the best overall athlete of any sport. If you disagree, once again, we’re just going to have to live with that, because there really isn’t a great way to compare.
And, while size by itself should not be considered as part of athleticism, I think it is a factor in determining overall athleticism. If LeBron, at 6’8" and 260 pounds, is capable of being as fast as Tony Parker, or having the same agility as Dwyane Wade, then I think you have to consider LBJ as a better athlete than the other two. (I don’t neccesarily believe these specific examples, but they are not far from the truth)
Basically, being 6’6" 250 lbs doesn’t make you athletic. But, being 6’6" 250 and just as fast or agile as someone who is 6’2" 190, does make you more athletic. Once again, this is my opinion regarding athleticism. If you don’t agree with the assessment, you won’t agree with the overall conclusion.
Another way to phrase what I'm saying
I think basketball is the most exclusive sport there is, athletically. You have to have a lot of different attributes (speed, size, agility) to be able to play the game well. I believe that less of a % of the world’s population would be able to play basketball at a competitive level than would be able to play soccer or football or any other sport, even if properly trained over an entire lifetime, and that is the basis for my claim that the best basketball athlete is the best overall athlete.
I think every generation experiences the same thing
as far as nominating the next “big thing” as the best ever. Which is why so many of people who defend Jordan grew up watching him while the younger generation argues for Kobe and Lebron.
Kobe on Shaq (2003) - "But this is his team, so it's time for him to act like it. That means no more coming into camp fat and out of shape, when your team is relying on your leadership on and off the court.....no more blaming others for our team's failure, or blaming staff members for not overdramatizing your injuries so that you avoid blame for your lack of conditioning. Also, "my team" doesn't mean only when we win; it means carrying the burden of defeat just as gracefully as you carry a championship trophy."
by PURPLE AND GOLD FOR LIFE on Nov 11, 2009 2:22 PM PST up reply actions
I disagree. LBJ is one of the best athletes ever. EVER. He is 6'8" 260lbs of pure
unadulterated athleticism. His athleticism is better than any player to lace them up. ‘Nique didn’t have nearly the speed or the ability to change direction as good as Lebron. Vertical leap they are on par, but that’s it. Athleticism is more than vertical leap. Its about projection. Lebron could add possibly another 10 to 15 lbs of muscle and still run like a gazelle. That’s crazy. Kobe has better body control than Lebron but that’s it. Solely on athleticism, Lebron has every NBA player who has played the game beat. Its not even close.
Lebron, Bo Jackson
This is why Lebron shudda played football. If he didn’t mind getting crushed every Sunday, he’d be a monster tight end or even a beast on defense. Can you imagine Lebron blocking field goals left and right?
"This is not a game for boys. This is a game for men." - Phil Jackson
by Gils_Keloids on Nov 10, 2009 7:52 PM PST up reply actions
Cept that basketball pays more
and is less debilitating to the body. I think LeBron made the wise choice.
So did Charlie Ward
"This is not a game for boys. This is a game for men." - Phil Jackson
by Gils_Keloids on Nov 10, 2009 8:20 PM PST up reply actions
Pretty sure
That he was a WR in high school, and that would be the position he would play in the pros.
To secure ourselves against defeat lies in our own hands, but the opportunity of defeating the enemy is provided by the enemy himself.
I read somewhere that Lebron was one of the fastest players in the NBA
There was a list of people, and he was in the top 5…
Wonder how that would translate to field speed?
I think there is a reason Nique was called the human highlight reel
he had incredible pace and could change direction in an instant, was a great dribbler and handled the ball extremely well.
Almost every NBA players (barring Shaq, & the entire Spurs team) can run like gazelles and can put on more muscle and still be effective. Projection does not equate to athleticism.
If you are 6’1 and able to jump as high and do things just as well as someone 6’9 does that make the 6’9 guy more athletic because he is theoretically able to put on more muscle?
Jordan in 87-88 was way more athletic than LBJ if you disagree go and watch the films of what he did.
Um
if you put LeBron James in a pool at age 8 at his size, it’s quite possible he becomes Michael Phelps.
Usain Bolt does one thing well, run in a straight line. He doesn’t even do the long jump. At least Carl Lewis was a champion long jumper as well. Tyson Gay, same thing.
Wilkins was a freak, but never had LeBron’s size. Same with MJ and Kobe. You take their athleticism and put 2-3 inches and another 40 pounds on them and you have LeBron James.
Penny Hardaway? GTFO!!! That’s ridiculous, and yes, I do remember the Penny from Memphis and his first couple of years. He was a tall guy who could shoot threes and play PG, but he wasn’t a freak athlete.
"I just wish that the late Harry Caray were still around so I could hear him mispronounce 'Kosuke Fukudome' every fukun' night" -- Dennis Miller
I think you are making someone elses point here..........
“Same with MJ and Kobe. You take their athleticism and put 2-3 inches and another 40 pounds on them and you have LeBron James.”
What you are saying is that LeBron isn’t any more athletic than Kobe or MJ, just bigger (or more physically gifted).
I don’t automatically think more physically gifted = more athletic.
I couldn’t argue that any of the people he mentioned are as physically gifted as LeBron, but some of them are just as “athletic”.
Billy Mac: "Lamar, can you see yourself actually getting in the (boxing) ring"?
Lamar Odom: "No. My face is too pretty."
Thanks for helping me to make my point
which is being physically more gifted does not equate to being more athletic.
Athleticism shows itself in many different ways and LBJ may have the ideal prototype body for an NBA player but he does not have the ideal body for a tennis player – Federer, Nadal, sprinter eg Bolt, Gay or swimmer – Phelps.
Again I say the media is painting a picture that most people don’t even realize they are being brainwashed by it. It’s now the norm for most announcers to say LBJ is the best athlete in the NBA and before you know it most folks accept it without even looking up the term in a dictionary to see what it actually means.
Having a bigger body does not mean more athletic which was why I made reference to guys such as Penny Hardaway, Steve Francis, Kobe (the number 8 verison) a young MJ, Dominique Wilkins or even a Julius Erving. All were just as if not even more athletic than Lebron.
Each sport is different in that it requires a player to show his athletic ability, endurance and stamina in different ways. I personally think it is much harder to play soccer ( call it football) than it is to play basketball. Soccer/football is a non-stop all action contact sport where you have no time outs or foul shots every few seconds to give players rest.
But that’s just my little opinion.
See above regarding my view on size and athleticism
A short summary is, I think size isn’t an athletic factor by itself, but it also can’t be ignored in a conversation about athleticism.
Soccer vs. basketball is a tough call. The stamina you need to play soccer is certainly unmatched by any other mainstream sport. However, I do tend to believe that more people can train their way into good stamina than can train their way into being super fast, agile, and be able to jump high (all neccesary qualities for basketball). I don’t think the limiting factor on becoming a good soccer player is your ability to actually play a full 90 minutes. If you are fast, quick, and skilled enough to be out there, you’ll be able to train your body to acquire the neccesary stamina. Therefore, I personally still give the nod to basketball. You need too many qualities that can’t be effectively trained.
actually, lebron wouldn't become michael phelps
michael phelps has a different type of body is build entirely differently (super long torso & long wingspan, slim, etc). Lebron’s muscles are ripped, but he’s a bit stocky. Just not the right body type.
but to be fair, rumor has it that Phelp’s coach forbid him to do running or play certain sports because he looked so awkward doing it that his coach was afraid he might hurt himself doing it :p.
same with bolt. lebron can run all day, but he might never get to bolt’s speed.
in any case, as I’ve stated before, they’re all different types of atheleticisms.
Whats the stat the measures
how many games Hollinger has actually played in an NBA game?
"When I walked into the locker room on my first day as a Laker and saw my gold uniform hanging there, I cried." - Magic Johnson (Best Laker Ever)
by PURPLE AND GOLD FOR LIFE on Nov 10, 2009 1:19 PM PST reply actions
well I think that if me or anyone else gives their opinion I doubt
that the rest of the sports media world will use it and treat it as universally as PER is quoted or used. Which I think is my main issue as well as others and which is the huge reliance on Hollinger’s PER system. I hope that makes sense.
"When I walked into the locker room on my first day as a Laker and saw my gold uniform hanging there, I cried." - Magic Johnson (Best Laker Ever)
by PURPLE AND GOLD FOR LIFE on Nov 10, 2009 1:31 PM PST up reply actions
He's got a point
I don’t play pro ball. My opinion doesn’t count for much, beyond what I can convince anyone of. But there’s no inherent authority. The same is true for John Hollinger.
But NBA players, coaches, GMs, all heavily favor Kobe. So 99.9% of people’s opinions may not count, but the flip side of that coin is that the opinions of the “real” experts should count for a lot.
Strength & Honor
It's good to be the Champs
Yeah, I know
I read it how you meant it, not how you wrote it.
I guess my point was that there has to be some extent to which the opinions of true experts — by which I mean players, GMs, coaches, NOT sports writers or ESPN talking heads — carries more weight than the opinions or insights provided by the rest of us. That means guys like you and me, and also stats experts. I’m not saying the experts’ opinions is all that should matter, but it should be given significant weight. And in this case, the stats can say what they want, they experts all say the stats fall short of capturing the full picture.
Strength & Honor
It's good to be the Champs
My opinion should be given the most weight
Obviously.
"This is not a game for boys. This is a game for men." - Phil Jackson
by Gils_Keloids on Nov 10, 2009 4:46 PM PST up reply actions
obviously!!!!!!
Billy Mac: "Lamar, can you see yourself actually getting in the (boxing) ring"?
Lamar Odom: "No. My face is too pretty."
You mean 99.9% of people's opinions don't count, right?
"This is not a game for boys. This is a game for men." - Phil Jackson
by Gils_Keloids on Nov 10, 2009 2:32 PM PST up reply actions
That has nothing to do with the topic. Josh McDaniels has never played football in the
NFL, yet he’s coaching the Denver Broncos at a high level. You don’t have to have played the sport to offer an objective opinion or make contributions to the sport.
Well I think you do have to play the sport to understand it, not to mention Josh McDaniels was under a
great coach in Bill bellicheck(spelled his name wrong and I know it but) Josh has football knowledge but baskeball wise, if you played the game, you know stats don’t matter, you know teams run different systems and plays, you know some players will be put in different positions where one might get more stats then another position and you wouldn’t dog players but only put yourself in their shoes(as I often do) so I do believe you have to play the sport to understand it fully.
There are basic Fundamentals that are needed to move forward in this game. Always keep your guard up at all times to avoid being caught in a trap. Overcome the fouls that will be commited against you REBOUND AND PRESS ON. ADJUST to the LimeLight: ALL-STAR PLAYERS ARE ALWAYS THE CENTER OF ATTENTION. Know what your role is and play your position. Find a game plan and execute it. REMEMBER YOU ONLY GET OUT OF THE GAME WHAT YOU PUT INTO IT.
*Correction
*but Basketball wise
There are basic Fundamentals that are needed to move forward in this game. Always keep your guard up at all times to avoid being caught in a trap. Overcome the fouls that will be commited against you REBOUND AND PRESS ON. ADJUST to the LimeLight: ALL-STAR PLAYERS ARE ALWAYS THE CENTER OF ATTENTION. Know what your role is and play your position. Find a game plan and execute it. REMEMBER YOU ONLY GET OUT OF THE GAME WHAT YOU PUT INTO IT.
Oh, just saw this
"This is not a game for boys. This is a game for men." - Phil Jackson
by Gils_Keloids on Nov 10, 2009 2:32 PM PST up reply actions
calm the hate
Interesting blog post. PER is an interesting stat. But you have to understand its limitations, don’t think that it measures “talent” or “interchangeable value”.
The main problem with it is that it is only as good as its inputs, which are
(1) noisy — see e.g. Friedman’s case studies of inflated assist scoring for CP3;
(2) inherently limited — e.g. Kobe draws a double team, he dishes to Pau who dishes to a cutting Lamar (one of our bread-and-butter pressure release). Pau gets an assist, Lamar gets a basket, Kobe gets nothing, but he made the play happen. Rebounds don’t differentiate between contested rebounds and uncontested. Is it a turnover because you threw the ball away, or did someone else not cut the right way on a play?
(3) and very limited. Only blocks and steals to measure defense.
Thus, the stat is intriguing, but doesn’t have a lot of precision and it does have a lot of noise in it.
Example. Ariza’s PER in the 07 playoffs (15.5) was LARGER than his PER for the 08 playoffs (14.7). I don’t think anyone who watched the series would say Ariza played better in 07.
Source: http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/a/arizatr01.html
That is a perfect example
Example. Ariza’s PER in the 07 playoffs (15.5) was LARGER than his PER for the 08 playoffs (14.7). I don’t think anyone who watched the series would say Ariza played better in 07
"When I walked into the locker room on my first day as a Laker and saw my gold uniform hanging there, I cried." - Magic Johnson (Best Laker Ever)
by PURPLE AND GOLD FOR LIFE on Nov 10, 2009 1:32 PM PST up reply actions
Sample size
Obvious discrepancy there. Can’t really blame stats for that.
To secure ourselves against defeat lies in our own hands, but the opportunity of defeating the enemy is provided by the enemy himself.
*Is the obvious disrepancy there
To secure ourselves against defeat lies in our own hands, but the opportunity of defeating the enemy is provided by the enemy himself.
well he was defenitely the faster off the floor when the Magic beat them
..lol. I just had to say that. Low-Blow. I mean he was so fast he forgot to shake hands… : )
"When I walked into the locker room on my first day as a Laker and saw my gold uniform hanging there, I cried." - Magic Johnson (Best Laker Ever)
by PURPLE AND GOLD FOR LIFE on Nov 11, 2009 6:15 AM PST up reply actions
The fact is...
…that assists is the worst stat to determine a player’s efficiency. Not only does Kobe not get the assist on the play you described, if Pau had taken the shot and missed, Kobe still doesn’t get the assist. Kobe passes to Fish, Fish takes the shot and it goes in, Kobe gets the assist. Kobe passes to Fish, Fish takes the shot and misses, no assist for Kobe. He can make all the right passes he wants, but if his teammate misses the shot, Kobe ends up with no assist. The worst stat there is.
The real problem is that getting assists isn't Kobe's "job".
His job is to score and facilitate (run) the offense. Neither of those necessarily lead to assists.
The Triangle offense will NEVER lead to one player getting a lot of assists. As I said earlier (not sure where or when), PER is flawed if it punishes players that play in a totally TEAM oriented system. And it does.
Billy Mac: "Lamar, can you see yourself actually getting in the (boxing) ring"?
Lamar Odom: "No. My face is too pretty."
e.g. Kobe draws a double team, he dishes to Pau who dishes to a cutting Lamar (one of our bread-and-butter pressure release). Pau gets an assist, Lamar gets a basket, Kobe gets nothing, but he made the play happen.
and there is the difference by using PER…on that same double team Paul, Wade, and LeBron are more likely to actually finish the play or pass to someone who will…It is an INDIVIDUAL stat not a team stat…Player Efficiency Rating= what that player does with each possession individually(adjusted for minutes played, team pace)….does THAT possession end positively for THAT player is what it measures…and that is ALL that it means…In your example, it rewards the two players who FINISH the play positively…conversely, if Pau makes a bad pass resulting in a turnover or LO misses an easy layup, Kobe is not penalized for their mistakes even though he “started the play”
by cavslandrocks on Nov 13, 2009 4:53 PM PST up reply actions
CA you I fell asleep at "I don't think Kobe is the best player in the NBA. I give that honor to LeBron James."
but I gotta give you some kudos for tackling Hollingers PER system because I never tried to understand it and as always, I’m not a stat person and don’t care for stats but nice breakdown.
There are basic Fundamentals that are needed to move forward in this game. Always keep your guard up at all times to avoid being caught in a trap. Overcome the fouls that will be commited against you REBOUND AND PRESS ON. ADJUST to the LimeLight: ALL-STAR PLAYERS ARE ALWAYS THE CENTER OF ATTENTION. Know what your role is and play your position. Find a game plan and execute it. REMEMBER YOU ONLY GET OUT OF THE GAME WHAT YOU PUT INTO IT.
***Correction
*CA I fell asleep
There are basic Fundamentals that are needed to move forward in this game. Always keep your guard up at all times to avoid being caught in a trap. Overcome the fouls that will be commited against you REBOUND AND PRESS ON. ADJUST to the LimeLight: ALL-STAR PLAYERS ARE ALWAYS THE CENTER OF ATTENTION. Know what your role is and play your position. Find a game plan and execute it. REMEMBER YOU ONLY GET OUT OF THE GAME WHAT YOU PUT INTO IT.
I'll tell you why advanced statistics hate Kobe Bryant
And it’s simple: because these advanced statistics aren’t advanced enough.
They don’t capture what makes a winning, productive player in basketball, plain and simple.
If you don’t have an input that measures drawing a double team and to what frequency, what hope do you have of capturing that in your output? What about a measure of how a player defends the pick-and-roll? Some would argue that you have some indirect reflection, but that’s still not good enough. I’ll believe what comes out when I agree with what goes in.
"This is not a game for boys. This is a game for men." - Phil Jackson
by Gils_Keloids on Nov 10, 2009 2:00 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
Right
In baseball, we don’t measure talent based on counting stats so much as we develop those counting stats and correlate them to levels of predictable performance. It’s easier to do, because all performance is individual for the most part. In basketball it’s much more difficult to quantify.
"I just wish that the late Harry Caray were still around so I could hear him mispronounce 'Kosuke Fukudome' every fukun' night" -- Dennis Miller
Bynum is expected to play Thursday Pau is doubtful
http://thelakersnation.com/blog/2009/11/10/bynum-expected-to-play-thursday-pau-doubtful/
"When I walked into the locker room on my first day as a Laker and saw my gold uniform hanging there, I cried." - Magic Johnson (Best Laker Ever)
by PURPLE AND GOLD FOR LIFE on Nov 10, 2009 2:37 PM PST reply actions
Thursday Pau is doubtful
Dang, I don’t want to lose to the Suns. It brings back bad memories – smush, kwame, brian cook – hey, you know, things are pretty good these days after all.
And yes I am a 2009 World Champion Fan.
The Lakers won't loose
Even without Pau. Before they had Bell to at least play one on one now they have to double team him. All the other players have to do is hit their open shots which it seems that they have done the last two games.
"When I walked into the locker room on my first day as a Laker and saw my gold uniform hanging there, I cried." - Magic Johnson (Best Laker Ever)
by PURPLE AND GOLD FOR LIFE on Nov 10, 2009 7:31 PM PST up reply actions
only stats that matter are these
in the last 10 years, only one player has played in 6 finals and won 4
by lakerslakerslakers on Nov 10, 2009 2:56 PM PST reply actions
Is his name Kobe Fisher...............
or Derek Bryant?
Billy Mac: "Lamar, can you see yourself actually getting in the (boxing) ring"?
Lamar Odom: "No. My face is too pretty."
The larger problem
Is the distinction between people who treat stats as the holy grail in player evaluation and people that use stats as simply another tool for the same. The former is obviously bad and the latter is how it should be applied, just as a scout’s opinion is merely one of the many things a coach or GM takes into account before making a decision. Now, the converse is also true. People who treat stats as useless trivia do so at their own peril. Daryl Morey has been pretty damn successful as a GM so far using his statistical approach considering that his hands are tied by $40 million of max contracts taking turns being injured for extended periods.
As far as PER goes, how it evaluates the best players is fairly meaningless. That said, we don’t really need it for the game’s best players, as statistical evaluation isn’t really required for us to see something so tangible. Where its true value is, at least as far as I use it, is for players who produce efficiently in limited minutes (i.e. Gortat, Landry, Speights), and PER does a fairly good job at identifying them. That’s a more efficient use of statistical analysis rather than attempting to see who’s currently the best player in the game, and probably why Morey has a team full of incredibly efficient role players around two obvious stars in Yao and T-Mac. Conversely, Cuban’s incredibly lame attempts to use stats to justify that Kidd was better than Harris last year are obviously a bad use of statistical analysis because it uses stats as the be-all-end-all argument, which it can’t be.
As far as writers go in utilizing statistics, please don’t say, “His statistics support an argument that doesn’t correlate with my preconceptions. This is bull.” It’s certainly within your capacity to dismiss an argument using a reasoned response, but general responses like railing against statistics in general is honestly a bit childish. One of the better writers that balances the two is ironically Kelly Dwyer (our favorite writer who is somehow simultaneously anti-Kobe and pro-Kobe at the same time), who uses PER and other statistical methods quite well with regular analysis.
To secure ourselves against defeat lies in our own hands, but the opportunity of defeating the enemy is provided by the enemy himself.
This blog is always surprising me
When I think of sports blogs, especially one that is for a specific team, I would not imagine that I would see the level of writing and thought that goes into the articles here. I think I expected to see stuff like “LAKERS ARE THE BEST EVER” news constantly, and am always pleasantly surprised to find myself being challenged to think about the game of basketball as opposed to only considering the Lakers and that I like them.
good stuff, keep it coming :)
When I came to this blog when it first started
I was that type of fan, “Lakers rule everyone else sucks” but the quality of talk that is in this blog changed that. I’m here daily and it is my favorite for all the reasons you mentioned.
"When I walked into the locker room on my first day as a Laker and saw my gold uniform hanging there, I cried." - Magic Johnson (Best Laker Ever)
by PURPLE AND GOLD FOR LIFE on Nov 10, 2009 4:43 PM PST up reply actions
I like basketball first
"This is not a game for boys. This is a game for men." - Phil Jackson
by Gils_Keloids on Nov 10, 2009 4:52 PM PST up reply actions
suck up.
LAKERZ RUL!!!!!
Billy Mac: "Lamar, can you see yourself actually getting in the (boxing) ring"?
Lamar Odom: "No. My face is too pretty."
I still feel that way
But I was really bad at cursing and trying to pick arguments with anyone that said the first negative thing about the Lakers. My passion has never changed but my approach has for sure.
"When I walked into the locker room on my first day as a Laker and saw my gold uniform hanging there, I cried." - Magic Johnson (Best Laker Ever)
by PURPLE AND GOLD FOR LIFE on Nov 10, 2009 7:32 PM PST up reply actions
see, I was opposite
I began watching the Lakers as a sports fan, and not specifically a basketball fan. Having never played beyond a pickup game in the park once in a while, I never really understood basketball. that being said, I don’t fully understand the ins-and-outs of many aspects, but my knowledge has been expanded in the last few years. One way that helped was watching basketball practice a few times at the school I teach at. I finally saw what running a play was like, and that stuff like that was designed. I knew that stuff before, but didn’t KNOW it. Now I can watch a game and see and enjoy new things I never experienced before.
Long explanation, haha
Not me I played bball like a mad man
On school nites I was at the park at 11 at night. But now I love doing anything but playing. I have been a fan of the Lakers but really liked other individual players. Now, that is my only hobby, basketball.
"When I walked into the locker room on my first day as a Laker and saw my gold uniform hanging there, I cried." - Magic Johnson (Best Laker Ever)
by PURPLE AND GOLD FOR LIFE on Nov 10, 2009 7:35 PM PST up reply actions
Golf?
Dats not evens a sport
"This is not a game for boys. This is a game for men." - Phil Jackson
by Gils_Keloids on Nov 10, 2009 7:50 PM PST up reply actions
Basketball player/coach 1st, Basketball fan 2nd, Football fan 3rd and Baseball Fan 4th
There are basic Fundamentals that are needed to move forward in this game. Always keep your guard up at all times to avoid being caught in a trap. Overcome the fouls that will be commited against you REBOUND AND PRESS ON. ADJUST to the LimeLight: ALL-STAR PLAYERS ARE ALWAYS THE CENTER OF ATTENTION. Know what your role is and play your position. Find a game plan and execute it. REMEMBER YOU ONLY GET OUT OF THE GAME WHAT YOU PUT INTO IT.
lakers fan, basketball fan, in n'out fan
"When I walked into the locker room on my first day as a Laker and saw my gold uniform hanging there, I cried." - Magic Johnson (Best Laker Ever)
by PURPLE AND GOLD FOR LIFE on Nov 10, 2009 7:40 PM PST up reply actions
lol....
I like your style.
Billy Mac: "Lamar, can you see yourself actually getting in the (boxing) ring"?
Lamar Odom: "No. My face is too pretty."
lol..
animal style baby!
"When I walked into the locker room on my first day as a Laker and saw my gold uniform hanging there, I cried." - Magic Johnson (Best Laker Ever)
by PURPLE AND GOLD FOR LIFE on Nov 10, 2009 7:45 PM PST up reply actions
I had in-n-out for lunch yesterday
because of the picture on the blog post from the other day
me to..
and I had it today to…
"When I walked into the locker room on my first day as a Laker and saw my gold uniform hanging there, I cried." - Magic Johnson (Best Laker Ever)
by PURPLE AND GOLD FOR LIFE on Nov 10, 2009 9:08 PM PST up reply actions
damn, I had it tonight................
for the first time all year or close to it.
Must be our sub-conscious.
Billy Mac: "Lamar, can you see yourself actually getting in the (boxing) ring"?
Lamar Odom: "No. My face is too pretty."
yup
that is exactly what happened. I felt like Pavlov’s dog…lol
"When I walked into the locker room on my first day as a Laker and saw my gold uniform hanging there, I cried." - Magic Johnson (Best Laker Ever)
by PURPLE AND GOLD FOR LIFE on Nov 11, 2009 6:16 AM PST up reply actions
All advanced statistics
Have inherent flaws, many of them gigantic. No one statistic, no matter how advanced, is ever going to tell the story of how good a player is. Some people are going to see that as an invitation to look for more information to cover those holes, and some people are going to see that as an excuse to look for less. This article was definitely an example of the former.
+/- is a good counterbalance to box-score derived metrics like PER-neither is perfect, but they compliment each other very nicely if used together. For example, Ron Artest has easily the best +/- on the Lakers right now, but instead of saying “Well, Ron’s better” and calling it a day you can do things like look at the PER (which obviously favors Kobe) and look deeper into the +/-. Like Odom’s last season, Artest’s +/- has been helped by facing more 2nd-unit players than Kobe and the fact Ron’s backup, Luke Walton, has been awful (-18.4 points per 100 possessions) so far this season.
There’s no one answer to everything sitting on an excel spreadsheet somewhere. But if you look at everything, find patterns, and match it with a healthy dose of common sense and your own observations based on what you’ve seen, it’s possible to get a lot more information that what would seem to be available.
Good PER only measures effeciency
But effeciency will never measure who is the better player solely based on PER.
"When I walked into the locker room on my first day as a Laker and saw my gold uniform hanging there, I cried." - Magic Johnson (Best Laker Ever)
by PURPLE AND GOLD FOR LIFE on Nov 10, 2009 5:07 PM PST up reply actions
Exactly
CP3 is absolutely breaking the PER stat right now, but his defensive +/- has been pretty bad-he’s got something to do with why NO has struggled so much despite Paul’s offensive brilliance. Meanwhile, Kobe’s PER isn’t as high, but his defensive +/- has been off the charts, and the Lakers are winning.
Actually, Kobe’s +/- numbers are a good microcosm IMO of how to read and not read stats-he’s actually got a slightly negative +/- offensively and and absolutely ridiculous defensive +/-. (The Lakers give up 15.3 less points per 100 possessions with Kobe on the floor, which is insane-the highest defensive +/- mark last season was 10.1)
The insane reaction would be to say that Kobe has become the best defensive player of all time but actually a slightly below average offender-clearly, those numbers are going to normalize. Nobody, especially a wing player, can possibly sustain that kind of defensive impact, and there is no freaking chance in the world that the Lakers are better offensively with Kobe off the floor.
But just throwing the numbers out because they would appear to come to impossible conclusions isn’t correct either in my opinion. Instead, you stay with the numbers and figure out how this could be possible. Even without taking the numbers at face value, you can possibly come away with Walton and Vujacic being major, major problems defensively thus far, Kobe putting in an extraordinary level of defensive effort this season, and the Laker offense having some trouble adjusting to all the personnel changes in the Laker starting lineup, even with Kobe playing absolutely out of his mind.
Stats don't tell the whole story and that's why I don't go by them
If player A hassles player B into a trap and forces player B into a bad shot after which player C gets the rebound, the stats would then say that player C made a defensive contribution because he got a rebound.
My question is what about the player who was ACTUALLY guarding his man?
People who live and die by stats use them to justify their love of LBJ and Nash, but rebounds and assists are WAY OVERRATED in my opinion.
Assists are a credit to the system one plays in, Nash was in SSOL which was bound to boost his stats, while LBJ dribbled the ball for 17-20 seconds then dishes to a player who then has to shoot, while Kobe plays in an intricate triangle offense where no one player dominates passing because the ball is shared at all times.
People who use these stats and say LBJ averaged 10 assists while Kobe averaged 5 then that must mean LBJ is a better passer are just plain SILLY.
A smart player has to recognize the system he is in and find his role in said system.
Neither MJ or Kobe dominated all aspects of the ball in a Phil Jackson/Tex Wynter system so I would have a hard time believing LBJ would have the same stats if he played in the triangle.
People then say LBJ has more rebounds, but quietly forget to mention that Kobe played on team that had a DOMINANT SHAQ as well as other tall player in the post whose roll it was to gobble up the rebound while Kobe was a PERIMETER player.
This is the one which make me laugh the most. LBJ has been the MAN on his team while Kobe was a SIDEKICK! this is just absurd. Kobe came into the league on a stacked team that had 2 all stars playing in the same position as him so who do you think would get the start? the skinny kid from high school or the all stars who were proven at NBA level?
LBJ came into a team that needed him ot go all out from day one whereas Kobe did not, and to say Kobe was a sidekick is wrong because in my opinion he was the leader by example on the 3-peat Laker team. Shaq was always out of shape and had bad work and training habits whereas Kobe had none.
Yet people say Shaq had 3 finals MVP but don’t mention that the Western Conference play-offs in those days were the REAL NBA FINALS and this is where Kobe led the team. Anyone remember game 7 of the 2000 Western Conference finals against Portland? If so please tell who was actually leading that team?
Sorry for my long rant
I usually go by whoever leads their teams to the most championships. For the most part, I read columns about advanced statistics for fun, and only pay attention to regular statistics for fantasy basketball purposes.
It is interesting to see different fans’ interpretation of what is supposedly a completely objective measurement.
Zaig............Where are you?
This is YOUR post man.
Billy Mac: "Lamar, can you see yourself actually getting in the (boxing) ring"?
Lamar Odom: "No. My face is too pretty."
I was just wondering that
We need to have a “Were is Zaig” Fan post..
But you are 100% right…stats and numbers were that dudes thing.
"When I walked into the locker room on my first day as a Laker and saw my gold uniform hanging there, I cried." - Magic Johnson (Best Laker Ever)
by PURPLE AND GOLD FOR LIFE on Nov 10, 2009 7:36 PM PST up reply actions
We need a "stat war" Fanpost for Josh and Zaig, that would be epic.
Billy Mac: "Lamar, can you see yourself actually getting in the (boxing) ring"?
Lamar Odom: "No. My face is too pretty."
omg!
that would get like 100 hits…
"When I walked into the locker room on my first day as a Laker and saw my gold uniform hanging there, I cried." - Magic Johnson (Best Laker Ever)
by PURPLE AND GOLD FOR LIFE on Nov 10, 2009 7:45 PM PST up reply actions
lol
you know he does…
"When I walked into the locker room on my first day as a Laker and saw my gold uniform hanging there, I cried." - Magic Johnson (Best Laker Ever)
by PURPLE AND GOLD FOR LIFE on Nov 11, 2009 7:24 AM PST up reply actions
you know I do..........
Billy Mac: "Lamar, can you see yourself actually getting in the (boxing) ring"?
Lamar Odom: "No. My face is too pretty."
MODERN WARFARE 2 IS OUT!!!!
For all you First Person Shooter, War game fans that is (lol, I’m sure ya’ll already knew this before anyway, but I’m just excited as hell for this game haha). Im a complete dumbass thinking that I coulda got the game today without preordering it lol. I went to basically every store in my city and it was sold out in EVERY PLACE! Now ima have to wait a week FUCK! Anyways, Go Lake Show, and lets try to get at least 1 of these next 2 tough games here!!!
what a coencidence
a friend of mine came back during his lunch and walked an hour to best buy. I asked him what he bought and he said that he bought a video game and when he showed it to me he broke out with this huge as box with night vision gogles and shit. It was 140 dollars. that is crazy. games have sure changed from when I played them…..
"When I walked into the locker room on my first day as a Laker and saw my gold uniform hanging there, I cried." - Magic Johnson (Best Laker Ever)
by PURPLE AND GOLD FOR LIFE on Nov 10, 2009 7:38 PM PST up reply actions
yes sir..
they looked real to me. He said you put them on while you play the game and you could actually use the. It looked like a DVD box set but it wasn’t. It was just a game.
"When I walked into the locker room on my first day as a Laker and saw my gold uniform hanging there, I cried." - Magic Johnson (Best Laker Ever)
by PURPLE AND GOLD FOR LIFE on Nov 11, 2009 6:17 AM PST up reply actions
i read half your post, but i think that was enough. PERS can go straight into that a**hole of whoever invented it. It’s a stupid statistic, for it doesn’t measure greatness. Something, that i admit, is impossible to measure using statistics. Kobe is the greatest player in the game right now. Can PERS measure the fire burning in his eyes, heart? His fire still burns the greatest, and couple that with his skills, and his willingness to do whatever it takes to win—lessons from hakeem—then kobe is still the best.
whoa........can you say mancrush?
Just kidding, just kidding, we all have that mancrush.
Billy Mac: "Lamar, can you see yourself actually getting in the (boxing) ring"?
Lamar Odom: "No. My face is too pretty."
kobe finally is showing signs of humility as well, something i love to see from the great ones. having the humility to learn from previous greats, a la Olajuwon, and saying there is nothing original about his own game, that it is a compilation of all the greats. our 16th championship is coming next june. i guarantee it.

by 






















