Is James Harden More Talented Than Kobe?

Moderators: penbeast0, trex_8063, PaulieWal, Doctor MJ, Clyde Frazier

User avatar
rebirthoftheM
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,766
And1: 1,847
Joined: Feb 27, 2017
 

Re: Is James Harden More Talented Than Kobe? 

Post#81 » by rebirthoftheM » Thu Mar 23, 2017 10:36 am

Quotatious wrote: Getting back to Kobe vs Harden - I don't want to sound condescending, but I don't think any other player's fanbase shows such a massive pushback against box-score metrics as Kobe's fans. Let's face it- the reason for that is because Kobe's box-score metrics are not quite as great as his reputation, so his fans dismiss those stats as nonsense to trivialize the fact that he doesn't measure as a fringe top 10 all-timer based on that. Kobe was never the best in the league based on plus/minus, either. Many people think it's crazy to take Garnett over Bryant (not so much on this board, but outside of it, you would be looked at as a weirdo if you took Garnett over Bryant), but KG was the league-leader in box-score metrics in '04, AND the league leader in plus/minus. There are pretty much no rational reasons to say that anybody other than Garnett was the best player in the NBA in 2004. Kobe never approached that level of separation from his peers, yet he's considered a better player than Garnett by most people. Actually, Kobe never gained any separation from his peers, at all, considering that in 2006, which was one of Kobe's finest season, and his magnum opus offensively, he wasn't even the best player at his own position - Wade was better. He's just as good as Kobe (or slightly better) in terms of box-score metrics, and he obliterates Kobe in single year RAPM (almost doubles Bryant's rating). Wade also has a better on/off because of his massive defensive advantage (which is bigger than Kobe's offensive advantage, based on on/off net rating). Notice that I didn't even mention the playoffs, where Wade was so dominant in '06. I just focused on the regular season. .


There are normal and natural reasons for this push back. Obviously there are some Kobe fans who pushed the delusion that Kobe was better than/ on the same level as MJ, although this was patently false. However, there were a lot of Kobe/Laker fans, as well as basketball fans in general who watched games and had the perception that Kobe was having elite seasons (as good as anyone on offense in particular- I will get to this later) during his prime years (05-09). On top of that, coaches in general and other ATGs rated Kobe’s impact and ability on the court very very highly, and much more highly than folks on this forum do.

But then, this almost universal consensus amongst folks who actually watched Kobe play, and did not let their dislike get the best of their objectivity, was supposedly undermined by these metrics that said otherwise. So of course there will be a push back, because what these metrics suggest is that all those folks who agreed on Kobe’s game were fooled. They were fooled by his narrative, and by his spectacular moments. No one wants to be in this position, and so evidently on a human level, there will be a push back. When you’ve invested much energy on something, and then some “evidence” comes out to undermine it, your reaction is to get defensive.

Now there were two responses to this- Kobe fans who just completely ignored dealing with these metrics, and went on with their narrative that Kobe was GOAT/near MJ level. You would see this type of fan on laker forums such as lakersground. Conversely however, there were Kobe fans who whilst taking these metrics into account, suspected that they severely underrated Kobe’s play and impact. I would put myself into this latter category, and I will discuss this position further below.

The card that was most often used against Kobe back in 05-09 was that his PER was often underwhelming in comparison to how he was perceived as a player. ‘He never led the league in PER… never got close to 30, and was being beat out by a number of his contemporaries’ it was said.

I often found this argument pitiful, because PER (and also win shares and pretty much most box score derived metrics) said relatively little about a player’s abilities and his impact on a game. It said nothing about how a player was accumulating these statistics, or what his efficiency meant in real terms. Kobe could for example go for 7-21 but having extraordinary offensive impact on the game, yet his PER would suffer as a result. When you’re comparing superstar to superstar, it is their impact that is the major barometer, with box score production and other offensive metrics coming into serious play when it appears their impact is relatively equal, or when their impact requires further analysis. PER when properly utilised should thus act as a filter of who is a star and who isn’t. If a guy is putting up top 10 in PER in 35mpg then most probably he is having a star season. However, this is where PER analysis reaches exhaustion- it doesn’t tell you too much beyond this, and to go any further, you need to analyse games in context and utilise better metrics. Then if everything looks decently equal, you can then return to PER and other box score metrics. This IMO is the most sensible approach.

Kobe in 05-09’s PER (which is the time period here that I will discuss) was obviously in the star category, although you really didn’t need to refer to PER to know that he was having star seasons. All you needed to know is watch games and have a quick glance at his basic per game averages to know this.

Now where does one go from here? There are two avenues here- tracking games and examining the “impact” metrics. The former is obviously more subjective than the latter (although the latter must be understood within context of the former), however what is amusing to me that a lot of the people who try and undermine Kobe’s play during those years didn’t really watch too many of his games (particularly in 05-07, when they probably only caught the games on national TV/TNT & ESPN).
This is why they do not suspect Kobe’s defensive metrics in 06 and 07, which implies that Kobe playing worse d and having worse impact in the former than the latter, although anyone who seriously watched Kobe play during those years would tell you otherwise (when Kobe earned all D honours in 06-07, many a laker fan, including yours truly were confused because Kobe’s D was bad that year, in large part to being relatively out of shape, lacking the stamina he did the previous year, and being slower in general- Kobe in 05-06 played at worst, average D, based on my own and other laker fan assessments- the same ones who decried Kobe’s bad D in 06-07. Hopefully one day I’ll get my hands on the game tape to prove this once and for all).

We get to the impact metrics (RAPM specifically) and it’s here that things get interesting. Prior to coming on this forum, I honestly thought that it was a consensus point in basketball that the impact ceiling is far higher for one player on offense than it is on defense. The adage went “good offense beats great defense” and I always understood this as meaning that whilst great defensive teams require an all rounded defensive effort, an elite offensive anchor can literally offensively will his team on his own.

My thoughts on this were obviously challenged, when I kept on reading posters put DRAPM and ORAPM on some equal footing, as if they equally tell you something about the impact a player is having on a game. So I went away and did some research, and as it turns out, this research backed up the former belief that in most, if not all cases, an elite offensive player’s impact will trump an elite defensive player’s impact significantly. I will use one example here to illustrate this point.

KG in 06-07 in terms of defensive metrics lead the league by a clear margin. IIRC correctly, he was posting something like +4 on DRAPM on some sets, on evidently defensively challenged teams. In any case, he was clearly having a very good-elite defensive season. Kobe meanwhile in 06 and 07 was posting +5-6 on ORAPM on equally offensively challenged teams (the 07 team was slightly better offensively, but were decimated by injuries). Obviously Kobe had a raw advantage in terms of the + he was coming with, but does this advantage explain the fact that Kobe anchored his team to 8th and 7th on offense during those years, whilst KG that season anchored his team to 21st in defense?

Why was the gap so large in terms of impact on the broader team’s play?

I would strongly contend that it is because an elite offensive player’s ability to impact his team’s offense is far higher than it is for an elite defensive player to his impact his team D. This makes logical basketball sense- an elite offensive player, particularly a perimeter player can create offense from anywhere on the court, and can in fact impact his team’s offense whilst being on the opposite side of where the ball is at. Conversely, there is only so much ground 1 defensive player can cover. An offensive player also had the added advantages of being able to act proactively, whilst on defense, you’re always being reactive, thus limiting what one player can do on the latter on a common sense level. This is why KG could have a great defensive season in 03 but his team did pretty poorly on D- he lacked the defensive structure and talent needed that year, but yet Tmac in 03 could lead an offensively challenged team to top 10 in O during the very same season. You put KG on the Spurs that year, and they are top 5 on D still. Conversely, Kobe lifted offensively challenged offensive teams to top 7-8 on offense during his peak.

To summarise again, what this tell me is an elite offensive player’s ability to impact his team’s offense is far higher than it is for an elite defensive player to his impact his team D, which means that the former will overall have a much bigger individual impact on the game than the latter. This is why KG +/- against Kobe never really got to me, because in the most impactful aspect of the game, Kobe outshined KG significantly. KG was the master of all roundness, but he was doing a lot of things that simply didn’t have the biggest of impacts.
User avatar
rebirthoftheM
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,766
And1: 1,847
Joined: Feb 27, 2017
 

Re: Is James Harden More Talented Than Kobe? 

Post#82 » by rebirthoftheM » Thu Mar 23, 2017 10:46 am

To continue with the above...


Now how do this all relate to your post? Well you brought up that Kobe never led the league in +/- impact stats, however you implicitly are suggesting that the impact a player can bring on offense and defense is equal, which I strongly disagree with for the reasons above. Kobe’s offensive impact stats (which do not tell the whole story, and as I suggested earlier, is only one, but indeed a large aspect, of judging a player) was as below.

A note here: I have excluded players like Manu Ginobli who played lower than 30mpg for obvious reasons. Also, I have excluded players like Baron Davis, Jason Terry or even Lamar Odom, who were obviously not on “superstar” level as the other guys I list below. There are other aspects of the game of basketball that they are clearly inferior in, and render them not superstar worthy in the same vein as the guys below. I chose the 05-09 time period, because Kobe was the man during that period, he was relatively healthy and he was at his peak powers.

Single Year NPI - Superstars who played >30mpg
#2 in 05-06 (Wade #1 by +0.32 over Kobe. Kobe +0.35 over #3 Nash here)
#3 in 06-07 (Nash #1, +2.07 over Kobe, and Dirk #2, +1.54 over Kobe, Kobe +0.44 over Wade who played 50 games)
#4 in 07-08 (Nash #1, +1.62 over Kobe, Dirk, +0.32 over Kobe, CP3 +0.6 over kobe here)
#3 in 08-09 (Lebron #1, Nash #2 and Kobe #3- all very close that year. Kobe +0.26 over CP3).

Multi Year - Superstars who played >30mpg

#2 in 05-06 (Nash #1, +1.1 over Kobe. Kobe over #4 Wade here by +1.39 )
#3rd in 06-07 (Nash #1, +2.17 over Kobe. Kobe #2, +1 over #4 Dirk )- Wade +0.15 over Kobe but onlu played 50 games here
#2 in 07-08 (Nash #1, +0.97 over Kobe. Kobe #2, +1.46 over Dirk and is far far superior than CP3).
#4 in 08-09 (Nash #1, +2.06 over Kobe, Lebron #2, +1.23 over Kobe and cp3 +0.2 over Kobe)

05-06

In 06, and if you take into consideration both of the above categories, it really was a neck and neck race between Nash and Kobe as the most impactful offensive superstar in the league that season. Wade comes third here.

Nash comes across slightly better, but IMO further analysis is required here. First, Kobe and Nash occupied different positions on their respective team. Although both players carried their teams offensively, literally the entire suns offense, from coaching to offensive talent was constructed around Nash’s talent as an offensive player. They had great cutters to the rim and great shooters, who looked absolutely elite in that offense, but really wouldn’t be as good outside of it.

Kobe conversely played on a team whose offensive talent was not geared to maximise his own offensive impact. Frankly, they did not mesh well with Kobe’s offensive style, as the lakers neither had great shooters, nor did they have great cutters or good post players/bigmen (the area in which Kobe’s offensive impact really shines). Second, Kobe played in the triangle offense, and thus in comparison to Nash, the offense was less reliant on Kobe. This evidently reduced Kobe’s impact here as compared to Nash, as the lakers possessed some form of offensive structure beyond Kobe, and could sustain itself relatively better without Kobe. This again says nothing about Nash being inferior to Kobe, or Kobe being inferior to Nash, but you need to take this into consideration when discussing a player’s impact. Context does matter.

IMO, Kobe and Nash were overall at worst, a wash offensively that season, with Kobe if anything, coming out over Nash overall due to his superior ability and production in other offensive areas. If you take reg+playoffs into consideration, Wade might have been #1 that year, but again, there is no reason to believe that the same Kobe Bryant who tore up the mavericks on O that year couldn’t have done what Wade did, if he had more support. Overall, Kobe was tied #1 this season IMO.


06-07

Nash comes out #1 year... Still, the gap IMO shouldn’t be considered as large as appears for the reasons above. Dirk was slightly better than Kobe here, but I don’t find the gap very meaningful. In addition, Kobe was coming off knee surgery here and started the season off somewhat slowly, and this might have factored into some of the numbers seen during that season. Kobe’s superior production in other areas of offense also IMO puts him slightly over Nash that season IMO. When all things considered, I think Dirk comes out on #1 on offense that year (reg season particularly). Kobe comes out at worst here #2nd, although I have him slightly over Nash overall due to Kobe’s superior production in other offensive areas.

07-08

Nash comes out #1 that year, but for the reasons mentioned above, I don’t find the gap too damning, and for the reasons listed above, I think Kobe’s superior production in other areas of offense IMO puts him slightly over Nash that season IMO.

Interestingly, this was the year Kobe was surrounded by some offensive talent suited to his offensive game, but he was obviously not at his individual peak here, and again, for the same reasons listed under the 05-06 heading, his offensive impact ceiling simply couldn’t reach the heights a Nash could reach.

08-09

The year of Lebron’s ascent, and so I won’t comment much here, but Kobe comes out 2nd/3rd best overall here on offense.

Analysis: In 2 out of the above seasons (05-06 and 07-08), Kobe has a very strong claim to being the #1 offensive player in the league. In 1 of the seasons (06-07), he comes out at worst tied 2nd (Wade played 50 games here), and in one season (08-09), he comes out 2nd/3rd best (Nash’s production in other areas of offense counts against him here). When you consider offensive impact+ production, no one was better on offense than Kobe during those years. Not many players can claim to have done that.

I also think for the reasons above (refer to the above discussion about defensive impact), Kobe was the best player in the league in 08, and tied best with Wade in 06 (refer to my thoughts on defensive metrics on why I’m not very high on them, and why I find Kobe’s 06 D metrics puzzling). For a player with underwhelming box score stats, Kobe does really shine yeah?

Now, you might repeat again, that even if we take what I stated above for granted, Kobe still didn’t get much separation from peers. My response to this would be: so what? It is not Kobe’s fault that when Kobe was at his peak, Steve Nash finds himself in the perfect position to peak offensively, and Dirk, one of the ATGs on offense, also peaks during that period. Kobe peaked in a very tough era in terms of offensive competition, and he shouldn’t be punished for it, whilst other players (like KG) are awarded extra praise for having better separation in a weaker year.

So to sum it up, I think Kobe fans are completely justified in dismissing box score metrics as the defining barometer to dismiss Kobe’s play during his prime. Kobe was the right there as the best offensive player in the league from 05-09 and this puts him in strong competition as being the best player in a four year stretch of insane competition. I haven’t even discussed playoffs here, where Kobe had two amazing back to back runs in 08 and 09.

He might be overrated by the casual fan, but amongst basketball heads around here, he is most defs underrated.

Lemme know when Harden can pull of the above...
thekdog34
Starter
Posts: 2,354
And1: 782
Joined: Jul 13, 2009
     

Re: Is James Harden More Talented Than Kobe? 

Post#83 » by thekdog34 » Thu Mar 23, 2017 12:00 pm

Doctor MJ wrote:
Rerisen wrote:Harden goes for the efficient score areas, paint, FT, volume 3s.

Kobe took a lot of long tough 2s.

The ranges Kobe has Harden beat % wise, is 3-10, 10-16, and 16-23, and Kobe spent much of each game displaying his arsenal in these areas, which leaves a big mental impression, but ultimately, mid-range shots just aren't that great.

So IDK if its necessarily more talent, as just talent in more meaningful, bigger payoff, areas.

I think the progression of the game, and Houston building a team on the leading edge of that, also helps Harden's numbers. Put him back on some of those LA teams, even him having to dump it into Shaq most of the game, Harden might not put up the same crazy all around numbers.


This doesn't make sense. Harden is not simply doing what one does nowadays, he's the FACE of playing like this, and he always has been back to his time at OKC when people thought he couldn't possibly do this while volume scoring. You're essentially saying "I'd like to see Harden put up these numbers if he wasn't consistently outsmarting the defense playing with an approach we've never seen before."


Well the reason to credit D'Antoni is that the team plays really well with Harden on the bench, in fact where hasn't been much difference in outscoring opponents. And harden put up box score numbers last year with poor impact.
User avatar
eminence
RealGM
Posts: 15,694
And1: 10,617
Joined: Mar 07, 2015
 

Re: Is James Harden More Talented Than Kobe? 

Post#84 » by eminence » Thu Mar 23, 2017 12:00 pm

rebirthoftheM wrote:
Spoiler:
To continue with the above...


Now how do this all relate to your post? Well you brought up that Kobe never led the league in +/- impact stats, however you implicitly are suggesting that the impact a player can bring on offense and defense is equal, which I strongly disagree with for the reasons above. Kobe’s offensive impact stats (which do not tell the whole story, and as I suggested earlier, is only one, but indeed a large aspect, of judging a player) was as below.

A note here: I have excluded players like Manu Ginobli who played lower than 30mpg for obvious reasons. Also, I have excluded players like Baron Davis, Jason Terry or even Lamar Odom, who were obviously not on “superstar” level as the other guys I list below. There are other aspects of the game of basketball that they are clearly inferior in, and render them not superstar worthy in the same vein as the guys below. I chose the 05-09 time period, because Kobe was the man during that period, he was relatively healthy and he was at his peak powers.

Single Year NPI - Superstars who played >30mpg
#2 in 05-06 (Wade #1 by +0.32 over Kobe. Kobe +0.35 over #3 Nash here)
#3 in 06-07 (Nash #1, +2.07 over Kobe, and Dirk #2, +1.54 over Kobe)
#3 in 07-08 (Nash #1, +1.62 over Kobe, Dirk #2, +0.32 over Kobe)
#3 in 08-09 (Lebron #1, Nash #2 and Kobe #3- all very close that year).

Multi Year - Superstars who played >30mpg

#2 in 05-06 (Nash #1, +1.1 over Kobe. Kobe over #4 Wade here by +1.39 )
#3rd in 06-07 (Nash #1, +2.17 over Kobe. Kobe #2, +1 over #4 Dirk )- Wade #3 played 50 games here
#2 in 07-08 (Nash #1, +0.97 over Kobe. Kobe #2, +1.46 over #5 Dirk).
#3 in 08-09 (Nash #1, +2.06 over Kobe, Lebron #2, +1.23 over Kobe)

05-06

In 06, and if you take into consideration both of the above categories, it really was a neck and neck race between Nash and Kobe as the most impactful offensive superstar in the league that season. Wade comes third here.

Nash comes across slightly better, but IMO further analysis is required here. First, Kobe and Nash occupied different positions on their respective team. Although both players carried their teams offensively, literally the entire suns offense, from coaching to offensive talent was constructed around Nash’s talent as an offensive player. They had great cutters to the rim and great shooters, who looked absolutely elite in that offense, but really wouldn’t be as good outside of it.

Kobe conversely played on a team whose offensive talent was not geared to maximise his own offensive impact. Frankly, they did not mesh well with Kobe’s offensive style, as the lakers neither had great shooters, nor did they have great cutters or good post players/bigmen (the area in which Kobe’s offensive impact really shines). Second, Kobe played in the triangle offense, and thus in comparison to Nash, the offense was less reliant on Kobe. This evidently reduced Kobe’s impact here as compared to Nash, as the lakers possessed some form of offensive structure beyond Kobe, and could sustain itself relatively better without Kobe. This again says nothing about Nash being inferior to Kobe, or Kobe being inferior to Nash, but you need to take this into consideration when discussing a player’s impact. Context does matter.

IMO, Kobe and Nash were overall at worst, a wash offensively that season, with Kobe if anything, coming out over Nash overall due to his superior ability and production in other offensive areas. If you take reg+playoffs into consideration, Wade might have been #1 that year, but again, there is no reason to believe that the same Kobe Bryant who tore up the mavericks on O that year couldn’t have done what Wade did, if he had more support. Overall, Kobe was tied #1 this season IMO.


06-07

Nash comes out #1 year... Still, the gap IMO shouldn’t be considered as large as appears for the reasons above. Dirk was slightly better than Kobe here, but I don’t find the gap very meaningful. In addition, Kobe was coming off knee surgery here and started the season off somewhat slowly, and this might have factored into some of the numbers seen during that season. Kobe’s superior production in other areas of offense also IMO puts him slightly over Nash that season IMO. When all things considered, I think Dirk comes out on #1 on offense that year (reg season particularly). Kobe comes out at worst here #2nd, although I have him slightly over Nash overall due to Kobe’s superior production in other offensive areas.

07-08

Nash comes out #1 that year, but for the reasons mentioned above, I don’t find the gap too damning, and for the reasons listed above, I think Kobe’s superior production in other areas of offense IMO puts him slightly over Nash that season IMO.

Interestingly, this was the year Kobe was surrounded by some offensive talent suited to his offensive game, but he was obviously not at his individual peak here, and again, for the same reasons listed under the 05-06 heading, his offensive impact ceiling simply couldn’t reach the heights a Nash could reach.

08-09

The year of Lebron’s ascent, and so I won’t comment much here, but Kobe comes out 2nd/3rd best overall here on offense.

Analysis: In 2 out of the above seasons (05-06 and 07-08), Kobe has a very strong claim to being the #1 offensive player in the league. In 1 of the seasons (06-07), he comes out at worst tied 2nd (Wade played 50 games here), and in one season (08-09), he comes out 2nd/3rd best (Nash’s production in other areas of offense counts against him here). When you consider offensive impact+ production, no one was better on offense than Kobe during those years. Not many players can claim to have done that.

I also think for the reasons above (refer to the above discussion about defensive impact), Kobe was the best player in the league in 08, and tied best with Wade in 06 (refer to my thoughts on defensive metrics on why I’m not very high on them, and why I find Kobe’s 06 D metrics puzzling). For a player with underwhelming box score stats, Kobe does really shine yeah?

Now, you might repeat again, that even if we take what I stated above for granted, Kobe still didn’t get much separation from peers. My response to this would be: so what? It is not Kobe’s fault that when Kobe was at his peak, Steve Nash finds himself in the perfect position to peak offensively, and Dirk, one of the ATGs on offense, also peaks during that period. Kobe peaked in a very tough era in terms of offensive competition, and he shouldn’t be punished for it, whilst other players (like KG) are awarded extra praise for having better separation in a weaker year.

So to sum it up, I think Kobe fans are completely justified in dismissing box score metrics as the defining barometer to dismiss Kobe’s play during his prime. Kobe was the right there as the best offensive player in the league from 05-09 and this puts him in strong competition as being the best player in a four year stretch of insane competition. I haven’t even discussed playoffs here, where Kobe had two amazing back to back runs in 08 and 09.

He might be overrated by the casual fan, but amongst basketball heads around here, he is most defs underrated.

Lemme know when Harden can pull of the above...


Any chance you could hit me up with where you're pulling those NPI numbers from? Because those numbers do not agree with what I'm seeing in JE's Single-Year NPI 01-15 stuff.

Edit: Never mind, I misread a part of your post, whoops. All good :)
I bought a boat.
User avatar
Leslie Forman
RealGM
Posts: 10,119
And1: 6,297
Joined: Apr 21, 2006
Location: 1700 Center Dr, Ames, IA 50011

Re: Is James Harden More Talented Than Kobe? 

Post#85 » by Leslie Forman » Thu Mar 23, 2017 12:04 pm

Quotatious wrote:Would anybody seriously consider taking guys like Artest or Kirilenko over '06 Iverson, Arenas, Pierce, Ray Allen, guys like that? I certainly wouldn't (let alone players like Dirk, LeBron, Wade, Kobe).

A bit off-topic, but…hell yes.

Peak, healthy Kirilenko dragged a roster of total garbage to 42 wins in the West - I don't think any one of those high scoring but not so all-around players could have done any better than that. When he was healthy and not stuck playing out of position with Boozer next to him, Kirilenko was absolutely amazing. That roster wasn't actually any better than what Kobe had in the time between Shaq and Gasol. Only an all-time great level guy like LeBron or Larry Bird probably would have made that team noticeably better.
User avatar
rebirthoftheM
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,766
And1: 1,847
Joined: Feb 27, 2017
 

Re: Is James Harden More Talented Than Kobe? 

Post#86 » by rebirthoftheM » Thu Mar 23, 2017 12:12 pm

eminence wrote:
rebirthoftheM wrote:
Spoiler:
To continue with the above...


Now how do this all relate to your post? Well you brought up that Kobe never led the league in +/- impact stats, however you implicitly are suggesting that the impact a player can bring on offense and defense is equal, which I strongly disagree with for the reasons above. Kobe’s offensive impact stats (which do not tell the whole story, and as I suggested earlier, is only one, but indeed a large aspect, of judging a player) was as below.

A note here: I have excluded players like Manu Ginobli who played lower than 30mpg for obvious reasons. Also, I have excluded players like Baron Davis, Jason Terry or even Lamar Odom, who were obviously not on “superstar” level as the other guys I list below. There are other aspects of the game of basketball that they are clearly inferior in, and render them not superstar worthy in the same vein as the guys below. I chose the 05-09 time period, because Kobe was the man during that period, he was relatively healthy and he was at his peak powers.

Single Year NPI - Superstars who played >30mpg
#2 in 05-06 (Wade #1 by +0.32 over Kobe. Kobe +0.35 over #3 Nash here)
#3 in 06-07 (Nash #1, +2.07 over Kobe, and Dirk #2, +1.54 over Kobe)
#3 in 07-08 (Nash #1, +1.62 over Kobe, Dirk #2, +0.32 over Kobe)
#3 in 08-09 (Lebron #1, Nash #2 and Kobe #3- all very close that year).

Multi Year - Superstars who played >30mpg

#2 in 05-06 (Nash #1, +1.1 over Kobe. Kobe over #4 Wade here by +1.39 )
#3rd in 06-07 (Nash #1, +2.17 over Kobe. Kobe #2, +1 over #4 Dirk )- Wade #3 played 50 games here
#2 in 07-08 (Nash #1, +0.97 over Kobe. Kobe #2, +1.46 over #5 Dirk).
#3 in 08-09 (Nash #1, +2.06 over Kobe, Lebron #2, +1.23 over Kobe)

05-06

In 06, and if you take into consideration both of the above categories, it really was a neck and neck race between Nash and Kobe as the most impactful offensive superstar in the league that season. Wade comes third here.

Nash comes across slightly better, but IMO further analysis is required here. First, Kobe and Nash occupied different positions on their respective team. Although both players carried their teams offensively, literally the entire suns offense, from coaching to offensive talent was constructed around Nash’s talent as an offensive player. They had great cutters to the rim and great shooters, who looked absolutely elite in that offense, but really wouldn’t be as good outside of it.

Kobe conversely played on a team whose offensive talent was not geared to maximise his own offensive impact. Frankly, they did not mesh well with Kobe’s offensive style, as the lakers neither had great shooters, nor did they have great cutters or good post players/bigmen (the area in which Kobe’s offensive impact really shines). Second, Kobe played in the triangle offense, and thus in comparison to Nash, the offense was less reliant on Kobe. This evidently reduced Kobe’s impact here as compared to Nash, as the lakers possessed some form of offensive structure beyond Kobe, and could sustain itself relatively better without Kobe. This again says nothing about Nash being inferior to Kobe, or Kobe being inferior to Nash, but you need to take this into consideration when discussing a player’s impact. Context does matter.

IMO, Kobe and Nash were overall at worst, a wash offensively that season, with Kobe if anything, coming out over Nash overall due to his superior ability and production in other offensive areas. If you take reg+playoffs into consideration, Wade might have been #1 that year, but again, there is no reason to believe that the same Kobe Bryant who tore up the mavericks on O that year couldn’t have done what Wade did, if he had more support. Overall, Kobe was tied #1 this season IMO.


06-07

Nash comes out #1 year... Still, the gap IMO shouldn’t be considered as large as appears for the reasons above. Dirk was slightly better than Kobe here, but I don’t find the gap very meaningful. In addition, Kobe was coming off knee surgery here and started the season off somewhat slowly, and this might have factored into some of the numbers seen during that season. Kobe’s superior production in other areas of offense also IMO puts him slightly over Nash that season IMO. When all things considered, I think Dirk comes out on #1 on offense that year (reg season particularly). Kobe comes out at worst here #2nd, although I have him slightly over Nash overall due to Kobe’s superior production in other offensive areas.

07-08

Nash comes out #1 that year, but for the reasons mentioned above, I don’t find the gap too damning, and for the reasons listed above, I think Kobe’s superior production in other areas of offense IMO puts him slightly over Nash that season IMO.

Interestingly, this was the year Kobe was surrounded by some offensive talent suited to his offensive game, but he was obviously not at his individual peak here, and again, for the same reasons listed under the 05-06 heading, his offensive impact ceiling simply couldn’t reach the heights a Nash could reach.

08-09

The year of Lebron’s ascent, and so I won’t comment much here, but Kobe comes out 2nd/3rd best overall here on offense.

Analysis: In 2 out of the above seasons (05-06 and 07-08), Kobe has a very strong claim to being the #1 offensive player in the league. In 1 of the seasons (06-07), he comes out at worst tied 2nd (Wade played 50 games here), and in one season (08-09), he comes out 2nd/3rd best (Nash’s production in other areas of offense counts against him here). When you consider offensive impact+ production, no one was better on offense than Kobe during those years. Not many players can claim to have done that.

I also think for the reasons above (refer to the above discussion about defensive impact), Kobe was the best player in the league in 08, and tied best with Wade in 06 (refer to my thoughts on defensive metrics on why I’m not very high on them, and why I find Kobe’s 06 D metrics puzzling). For a player with underwhelming box score stats, Kobe does really shine yeah?

Now, you might repeat again, that even if we take what I stated above for granted, Kobe still didn’t get much separation from peers. My response to this would be: so what? It is not Kobe’s fault that when Kobe was at his peak, Steve Nash finds himself in the perfect position to peak offensively, and Dirk, one of the ATGs on offense, also peaks during that period. Kobe peaked in a very tough era in terms of offensive competition, and he shouldn’t be punished for it, whilst other players (like KG) are awarded extra praise for having better separation in a weaker year.

So to sum it up, I think Kobe fans are completely justified in dismissing box score metrics as the defining barometer to dismiss Kobe’s play during his prime. Kobe was the right there as the best offensive player in the league from 05-09 and this puts him in strong competition as being the best player in a four year stretch of insane competition. I haven’t even discussed playoffs here, where Kobe had two amazing back to back runs in 08 and 09.

He might be overrated by the casual fan, but amongst basketball heads around here, he is most defs underrated.

Lemme know when Harden can pull of the above...


Any chance you could hit me up with where you're pulling those NPI numbers from? Because those numbers do not agree with what I'm seeing in JE's Single-Year NPI 01-15 stuff.


https://www.dropbox.com/sh/11181n4avq5wefk/AAAZ4muMkVh3aNDYIzq_NNHEa?dl=0
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/11181n4avq5wefk/AAAZ4muMkVh3aNDYIzq_NNHEa?dl=0

These were JE's data sources IIRC, and was the source Quotatious used to suggest that Wade's single year RAPM doubled Kobe's in 06, and so I decided to keep the references consistent.
User avatar
mieshpal
Veteran
Posts: 2,664
And1: 2,003
Joined: Jul 25, 2010
       

Re: Is James Harden More Talented Than Kobe? 

Post#87 » by mieshpal » Thu Mar 23, 2017 2:15 pm

No no no no no, Kobe was also an incredible defender and has won 5 rings. NOOOOOOOO

Sent from my D6603 using RealGM mobile app
Krodis
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,876
And1: 599
Joined: Nov 28, 2009

Re: Is James Harden More Talented Than Kobe? 

Post#88 » by Krodis » Thu Mar 23, 2017 3:51 pm

Another note on Harden's on/off, especially when people use the "since Jan 1" qualifier: The Rockets normal starting lineup has an ORTG of 118 and a netrtg of +13 since Jan 1. The lineup they trotted out in January with Capela injured (with Harrell at center) instead had an ORTG of 99 and a netrtg of -15. Now either Montrezl Harrell is the worst player ever or we have to admit the problems with using on/off, especially in smaller sample sizes. That January stretch is essentially tanking the on/off of the Rockets starters (sans Capela).

Sent from my SM-N910V using RealGM mobile app
User avatar
bondom34
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 66,580
And1: 50,199
Joined: Mar 01, 2013

Re: Is James Harden More Talented Than Kobe? 

Post#89 » by bondom34 » Thu Mar 23, 2017 3:56 pm

Krodis wrote:Another note on Harden's on/off, especially when people use the "since Jan 1" qualifier: The Rockets normal starting lineup has an ORTG of 118 and a netrtg of +13 since Jan 1. The lineup they trotted out in January with Capela injured (with Harrell at center) instead had an ORTG of 99 and a netrtg of -15. Now either Montrezl Harrell is the worst player ever or we have to admit the problems with using on/off, especially in smaller sample sizes. That January stretch is essentially tanking the on/off of the Rockets starters (sans Capela).

Sent from my SM-N910V using RealGM mobile app

It gets worse if you start in February.

http://stats.nba.com/team/#!/1610612745/onoffcourt-advanced/?Season=2016-17&SeasonType=Regular%20Season&sort=NET_RATING&dir=1&DateFrom=02%2F01%2F2017&DateTo=03%2F24%2F2017

Starting 2/1, 19 games played:

On court: 114.0 Offense, 106.2 defense, 7.8 Net

Off court: 115.3 Offense, 103.4 defense, 11.9 Net
MyUniBroDavis wrote: he was like YALL PEOPLE WHO DOUBT ME WILL SEE YALLS STATS ARE WRONG I HAVE THE BIG BRAIN PLAYS MUCHO NASTY BIG BRAIN BIG CHUNGUS BRAIN YOU BOYS ON UR BBALL REFERENCE NO UNDERSTANDO
Krodis
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,876
And1: 599
Joined: Nov 28, 2009

Re: Is James Harden More Talented Than Kobe? 

Post#90 » by Krodis » Thu Mar 23, 2017 4:04 pm

But it gets worse because the bench started eviscerating people. The on court still gets a lot better when you take out January. They're an elite team with Harden on the floor. The fact that over the last 20 games his bench has killed the opposing benches doesn't really change that. The Rockets starting lineup is +19 with a 120 ORTG in that stretch.

Sent from my SM-N910V using RealGM mobile app
User avatar
bondom34
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 66,580
And1: 50,199
Joined: Mar 01, 2013

Re: Is James Harden More Talented Than Kobe? 

Post#91 » by bondom34 » Thu Mar 23, 2017 4:10 pm

Harden himself isn't that high though, that's been the argument.

And a lineup of Bev/Capela/Harden/Ryno/Ariza at that point now ranks 2nd in the NBA in net rating for lineups over 100 minutes. Don't want to get into this whole worm hole again but the first place is OKC with Taj.
MyUniBroDavis wrote: he was like YALL PEOPLE WHO DOUBT ME WILL SEE YALLS STATS ARE WRONG I HAVE THE BIG BRAIN PLAYS MUCHO NASTY BIG BRAIN BIG CHUNGUS BRAIN YOU BOYS ON UR BBALL REFERENCE NO UNDERSTANDO
Doctor MJ
Senior Mod
Senior Mod
Posts: 50,604
And1: 19,355
Joined: Mar 10, 2005
Location: Cali
     

Re: Is James Harden More Talented Than Kobe? 

Post#92 » by Doctor MJ » Thu Mar 23, 2017 5:25 pm

deezerweeze wrote:There is far more than just some hypocrisy involved, and the commonalities aren't really there at all. You certainly want them to be... you and your fellow Harden supporters would certainly look a lot less hypocritical if they were, but they're not.


Are you seriously trying to suggest that there's a high correlation between Nash & Harden support and it's based entirely on randomness?
Getting ready for the RealGM 100 on the PC Board

Come join the WNBA Board if you're a fan!
User avatar
K_chile22
RealGM
Posts: 15,760
And1: 7,899
Joined: Jul 15, 2015
   

Re: RE: Re: Is James Harden More Talented Than Kobe? 

Post#93 » by K_chile22 » Thu Mar 23, 2017 5:31 pm

bondom34 wrote:Harden himself isn't that high though, that's been the argument.

And a lineup of Bev/Capela/Harden/Ryno/Ariza at that point now ranks 2nd in the NBA in net rating for lineups over 100 minutes. Don't want to get into this whole worm hole again but the first place is OKC with Taj.

One has played over 4x as many minutes as the other. Barley over 100 minutes is not a good enough sample. That lineup has totaled less than 3 full games together and has appeared in 8. I get what you're saying, and it may turn out to be right, but let's see if that sustains first.

Giannis-Brogdan-Monroe-Telly-Terry have only played about 25 minutes less than that lineup (85)and have a +37 net rating. That sample is too small


Edit:
Unrelated but I started looking at lineup things because of this, and the top 2 lineups for the season with at least 300 minutes are the Warriors and Rockets starting 5s. The Warriors have a 23.1 net rating, the Rockets 13.7. That's gap is so ridiculous lol
User avatar
bondom34
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 66,580
And1: 50,199
Joined: Mar 01, 2013

Re: RE: Re: Is James Harden More Talented Than Kobe? 

Post#94 » by bondom34 » Thu Mar 23, 2017 5:49 pm

K_chile22 wrote:
bondom34 wrote:Harden himself isn't that high though, that's been the argument.

And a lineup of Bev/Capela/Harden/Ryno/Ariza at that point now ranks 2nd in the NBA in net rating for lineups over 100 minutes. Don't want to get into this whole worm hole again but the first place is OKC with Taj.

One has played over 4x as many minutes as the other. Barley over 100 minutes is not a good enough sample. That lineup has totaled less than 3 full games together and has appeared in 8. I get what you're saying, and it may turn out to be right, but let's see if that sustains first.

Giannis-Brogdan-Monroe-Telly-Terry have only played about 25 minutes less than that lineup (85)and have a +37 net rating. That sample is too small


Edit:
Unrelated but I started looking at lineup things because of this, and the top 2 lineups for the season with at least 300 minutes are the Warriors and Rockets starting 5s. The Warriors have a 23.1 net rating, the Rockets 13.7. That's gap is so ridiculous lol

The gap isn't nearly that big. Those numbers were filtered from 2/1 on, so it's a 108 minute gap. That same lineup for Houston runs at plus 13.7 for the season, which is a way lower rating than we were talking about.
MyUniBroDavis wrote: he was like YALL PEOPLE WHO DOUBT ME WILL SEE YALLS STATS ARE WRONG I HAVE THE BIG BRAIN PLAYS MUCHO NASTY BIG BRAIN BIG CHUNGUS BRAIN YOU BOYS ON UR BBALL REFERENCE NO UNDERSTANDO
User avatar
K_chile22
RealGM
Posts: 15,760
And1: 7,899
Joined: Jul 15, 2015
   

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Is James Harden More Talented Than Kobe? 

Post#95 » by K_chile22 » Thu Mar 23, 2017 5:55 pm

bondom34 wrote:
K_chile22 wrote:
bondom34 wrote:Harden himself isn't that high though, that's been the argument.

And a lineup of Bev/Capela/Harden/Ryno/Ariza at that point now ranks 2nd in the NBA in net rating for lineups over 100 minutes. Don't want to get into this whole worm hole again but the first place is OKC with Taj.

One has played over 4x as many minutes as the other. Barley over 100 minutes is not a good enough sample. That lineup has totaled less than 3 full games together and has appeared in 8. I get what you're saying, and it may turn out to be right, but let's see if that sustains first.

Giannis-Brogdan-Monroe-Telly-Terry have only played about 25 minutes less than that lineup (85)and have a +37 net rating. That sample is too small


Edit:
Unrelated but I started looking at lineup things because of this, and the top 2 lineups for the season with at least 300 minutes are the Warriors and Rockets starting 5s. The Warriors have a 23.1 net rating, the Rockets 13.7. That's gap is so ridiculous lol

The gap isn't nearly that big. Those numbers were filtered from 2/1 on, so it's a 108 minute gap. That same lineup for Houston runs at plus 13.7 for the season, which is a way lower rating than we were talking about.


Yeah, it's way higher for the Rockets and Thunder because the sample size is too small to be all that significant. I'm not saying it's impossible that that Thunder lineup is better than the Rockets', I'm saying using 118 minutes is too small to say that. A 20+ net rating is clearly unsustainable for any lineup that isn't the Warriors.

Also, a 108 minutes gap is still nearly double lol
User avatar
bondom34
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 66,580
And1: 50,199
Joined: Mar 01, 2013

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Is James Harden More Talented Than Kobe? 

Post#96 » by bondom34 » Thu Mar 23, 2017 6:05 pm

K_chile22 wrote:
bondom34 wrote:
K_chile22 wrote:One has played over 4x as many minutes as the other. Barley over 100 minutes is not a good enough sample. That lineup has totaled less than 3 full games together and has appeared in 8. I get what you're saying, and it may turn out to be right, but let's see if that sustains first.

Giannis-Brogdan-Monroe-Telly-Terry have only played about 25 minutes less than that lineup (85)and have a +37 net rating. That sample is too small


Edit:
Unrelated but I started looking at lineup things because of this, and the top 2 lineups for the season with at least 300 minutes are the Warriors and Rockets starting 5s. The Warriors have a 23.1 net rating, the Rockets 13.7. That's gap is so ridiculous lol

The gap isn't nearly that big. Those numbers were filtered from 2/1 on, so it's a 108 minute gap. That same lineup for Houston runs at plus 13.7 for the season, which is a way lower rating than we were talking about.


Yeah, it's way higher for the Rockets and Thunder because the sample size is too small to be all that significant. I'm not saying it's impossible that that Thunder lineup is better than the Rockets', I'm saying using 118 minutes is too small to say that. A 20+ net rating is clearly unsustainable for any lineup that isn't the Warriors.

Also, a 108 minutes gap is still nearly double lol

So if the argument Houston's lineup is that good then would be too small a sample. Which bears back to the original on/off thing that brought up the lineups.
MyUniBroDavis wrote: he was like YALL PEOPLE WHO DOUBT ME WILL SEE YALLS STATS ARE WRONG I HAVE THE BIG BRAIN PLAYS MUCHO NASTY BIG BRAIN BIG CHUNGUS BRAIN YOU BOYS ON UR BBALL REFERENCE NO UNDERSTANDO
User avatar
K_chile22
RealGM
Posts: 15,760
And1: 7,899
Joined: Jul 15, 2015
   

Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Is James Harden More Talented Than Kobe? 

Post#97 » by K_chile22 » Thu Mar 23, 2017 6:12 pm

bondom34 wrote:
K_chile22 wrote:
bondom34 wrote:The gap isn't nearly that big. Those numbers were filtered from 2/1 on, so it's a 108 minute gap. That same lineup for Houston runs at plus 13.7 for the season, which is a way lower rating than we were talking about.


Yeah, it's way higher for the Rockets and Thunder because the sample size is too small to be all that significant. I'm not saying it's impossible that that Thunder lineup is better than the Rockets', I'm saying using 118 minutes is too small to say that. A 20+ net rating is clearly unsustainable for any lineup that isn't the Warriors.

Also, a 108 minutes gap is still nearly double lol

So if the argument Houston's lineup is that good then would be too small a sample. Which bears back to the original on/off thing that brought up the lineups.

A little over 200 minutes? Yeah, that's still on the smaller side, but significantly larger than 118. For the whole season that lineup is at around 450 though, and the second best in the league. If that OKC lineup gets to about 300 (hopefully more) and they're still better than the Rockets then it's worth a whole lot more
User avatar
K_chile22
RealGM
Posts: 15,760
And1: 7,899
Joined: Jul 15, 2015
   

Re: Is James Harden More Talented Than Kobe? 

Post#98 » by K_chile22 » Thu Mar 23, 2017 6:13 pm

I also don't get why after X date matters so much when his overall season numbers, the ones that actually matter in a discussion that is about the overall season, both in this threads case and the MVP case, are still good. Did James Harden get worse because the team added Lou Williams to the bench?
deezerweeze
Junior
Posts: 397
And1: 574
Joined: Apr 20, 2016

Re: Is James Harden More Talented Than Kobe? 

Post#99 » by deezerweeze » Thu Mar 23, 2017 7:47 pm

Yeah, that +1.9 on/off for the season as a whole is just amazing.
User avatar
bondom34
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 66,580
And1: 50,199
Joined: Mar 01, 2013

Re: Is James Harden More Talented Than Kobe? 

Post#100 » by bondom34 » Thu Mar 23, 2017 7:48 pm

The overall season does matter. Problem is even then there's not a huge gap, and it was a massively hot start that fell off about a month in by those numbers.

He didn't get worse, but it's pretty significant when the knock on others has been their team doesn't falter without them and it seems like that's the case here.
MyUniBroDavis wrote: he was like YALL PEOPLE WHO DOUBT ME WILL SEE YALLS STATS ARE WRONG I HAVE THE BIG BRAIN PLAYS MUCHO NASTY BIG BRAIN BIG CHUNGUS BRAIN YOU BOYS ON UR BBALL REFERENCE NO UNDERSTANDO

Return to Player Comparisons