tkb wrote:
Any my stats prove otherwise. You don't score over 27 points per game on great efficiency against the players I listed if you struggle heavily against them.
I never said struggle heavily - simply that Shaq didn't dominate against them. Shaq doesn't dominate quality centers, but Kobe dominates despite the ubiquitous defensive specialist in this era, all who exist to shut him down. Nearly every night, Kobe faces a defensive specialist on one end, as well as needing to break down defenses by virtue of his role. His 35 PPG season was ridiculous, considering that opponents' strategy was to shut him down by swarming him with defenders, both elite individual defenders and team defenses.
Imagine if Shaq had to play against elite defenders every night. Would he have been as dominant? Let me ask you, how many Todd MacColloughs, Rasho Nesterovics, Greg Ostertags, Shawn Bradleys, did Kobe face?
There are no stiffs who play 2-guard or 3-guard. These are elite athletes with much talent.
Kobe battles these guys EVERY game, breaks down team defenses every game, scores from every angle in the game, and does it at an unbelievable level.
Speaking of offensive roles, I don't see the point of comparing scoring efficiency between centers and guards. They have DIFFERENT roles. You're dismissing Kwame's efg% due to his low scoring average - but what's so different from his role as any other post man? Establish position in the post and finish when his teammates find him - this is what centers do, from Shaq to Kwame. Even a klutz like Kwame can dunk one out of two times when he's three feet from the basket.
Also, Hakeem with low bball IQ? No. If he can score inside so well, why doesn't he do it all the time? Because it may not be good for the offense. The fact that Hakeem could take his defender outside did open up the floor made it harder for defenses to counter him. It also opened up the lanes for the guards. It contributes to a more dynamic offense. Yes, it would lower his shooting percentage, but it was good for the team.
All of Shaq's baskets came within 10 feet, but that wasn't always good for the team. Dumping the ball to Shaq at times cost the team. Shaq's "feed the dog" mentality was good, but doing something predictable over and over again did set up opportunities for the opponent to beat us. Our offense would become stagnant, shooters could get cold after simply dumping the ball possession after possession.
Bigs like Duncan, Amare, Kevin Garnett all developed a midrange shot to help open up the floor for their teammates, to create a more dynamic offense. Is it best for their percentages? No, but it helps the offense.
On the other hand, one of Kobe's roles as a perimeter player is to stretch defenses with his shooting - and his proficiency at doing so ALLOWS Shaquille to operate with less traffic in the paint. By virtue of the difficulty of outside shooting, perimeter shooting WILL fall at a lower percentage than interior shooting. This is obvious. No team can win just by dunking. Bigs generally take interior shots, guards take outside shots, and this is basketball.
1. He didn't face as much competition in his position as Kobe, consistently every night for his career. Shaq was dominant, and he was certainly skilled and powerful in the post, but the competition was just not that stiff, because there were a lot of stiffs in an era of weak big men.
2. Directly comparing scoring efficiency is illogical, imo. It's comparing apples to apples, oranges to oranges. Bigs and guards have different roles. Guards shoot and pass, bigs catch and dunk. The difficulty in shooting jump shots (which is a necessary component of basketball) results in lower shooting percentage, but this is more of a function of guards and bigs having different roles. Bigs will generally be more efficient than guards, regardless of talent level.
3. I see nothing wrong in claiming Shaq's offense was comparable limited. He has no 3-point shooting, he has no midrange, and he is a MAJOR liability at the free-throw line. Don't think Hack-a-Shaq is effective? Tell that to the Suns as the Spurs eliminated them last year.
I'm not underrating Shaq. I don't think it's necessary for me to express my appreciation for him to validate my arguments, which should stand on their own logic. I also don't think it's necessary for you to tout Kobe as your favorite player of all time.
I don't think Kobe's a better scorer than Shaq because I harbor ill will towards Shaq. A charge like that would be disrespecting all the well-thought out discussion that occurred so far in this thread.
I think Kobe's a better scorer than Shaq because of the variety of factors that i mentioned above. I don't emphasize on anything in particular, no one or two statistics.
-Kobe has faced tougher competition at his position, in an era when most of the talent has been consolidated at guard, including the rise of perimeter defensive specialists
-Kobe's scoring average was limited by his early years and his role as primary facilitator
-Kobe's lower scoring efficiency is inherently explained by his being a guard
-Kobe has a incomparably bigger range of moves
-Kobe is at least proficient, mostly excellent at every aspect of scoring
-Kobe is not a liability, let alone a game-changing liability in any aspect of scoring
-Kobe is clutch
-Kobe has accomplished many more impressive scoring feats (81 point game, 50-point streak, 40-point month, 35 ppg season, long free-throw streaks, record 3-pointers in a game, etc.)
Put succinctly, he has a complete offensive game and has shown us things that we've never seen before, at a nearly unparalleled mastery. Again, the only player who really equals or betters Kobe in scoring is Michael Jordan, for all the same reasons (and I think it's close).
“OH! Caruso parachutes in! You cannot stop him - you can only hope to contain him!” -Kevin Harlan, LAL-GSW 4/4/19