RealGM

this guy completely attacks kobe's reputation as a crunch time player, going as far as quoting phil's book, comparing kobe's "reputation" to the "safety" of SUV's, and throwing out basic stats.


here's how he ends his article:

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_ ... runch-time

And let's be clear: The numbers that doom Bryant's campaign as the king of crunch time are not really statistics. They're not formulas, or algorithms. They're really just counting -- both makes and misses for the player and the team.

If you're asking me to pick one guy to make a shot with the game on the line, there's nothing complex about peeking at the record to see how well he has done that job in the past. Every number in that chart is a real moment of NBA basketball, with ten players on the court, and Bryant in a Laker uniform, rising, firing, and -- most of the time -- missing. These things really happened, and as much as you might want to ignore opinion, or theory, there's no real reason to ignore 79 misses, broken plays, a shocking lack of passing, a coaching staff eager for more team play, and an elite team that gets below-par results with the game on the line.

As long as your mind is open to all that, it has to be closed to the idea that Kobe Bryant is the king of crunch time.

He lost me when he pointed out Karl Malone and Chris Webber over Kobe in his list.

He has a sample value of 115 shots when he analyzes Kobe's crunch time stats and few other players come close to half the sample size and did much better % wise. Obviously the percentages are going to vary wildly one way or the other with that kind of discrepancy.

i'm still trying to digest just how random and out of left field the timing of this article is.

also have no idea why someone would define clutch as down 1-2 pts or tied with 24 seconds left. there's more to being clutch than that.

Crunch time encompasses a lot more than just desperate heaves in the closing seconds. It's about maintaining your composure when the stakes are the highest (the playoffs -- regular season doesn't really matter as far as clutch reputations are concerned) and being able to play through adversity. It's the poise a player must have to help his team come back from a 15-point deficit in a game 7 of the conference finals when the odds are against you, or having the confidence to overcome a truly horrid shooting performance and help bring a team back by other means in a game 7 of the NBA Finals.

Statistics are good to look at and compare and it makes for some interesting debate, but to claim that a player doesn't perform well in crunch situations based on a cherry-picked set of data is kind of absurd.

What I don't particularly like about this article is that it points out all the failures that Kobe has had, but mentions none of the great performances. It talks about the air balls against Utah in 97' as a friggin' rookie and an air ball in 99' against the Spurs, but you don't hear anything about the game-winning shot in 2000 against the Suns, or how he kept his poise against the Blazers that same year in a highly improbable 4th quarter game 7 comeback. What about the game-saving block in game 4 or 5 (can't remember which one) of that same series? It talks about how he missed a game-tying shot in 2002 against the Kings, but doesn't talk about the game-winner he hit against the Spurs in the very next series. The good crunch performances far out-weigh the bad and that's fairly evident to anyone who has followed the Lakers over the years.

The article is fairly bias against Kobe, so I'd say pay it no mind. It's an article meant for the mental midgets who have an extremely narrow view of what constitutes a crunch time performer. I also don't particularly like how they combined regular season/playoff numbers to draw the conclusion that he's not a good crunch time performer. The numbers, in terms of scoring efficiency, are VERY different. In the playoffs Kobe has generally been one of the top performers over the years, but in the regular season he's been anything but. I kind of think that's a good thing...

If anyone is interested in "clutch time" playoff numbers, here's some work I did on that a while ago: viewtopic.php?f=64&t=943463&start=0

It's important to keep in mind the differences in how the game was played prior to 2004/05 when more physical play was allowed. Efficiency was considerably lower back then as compared to now, and players weren't bailed out quite as often as sent to the line unless there was a considerable amount of contact.

Good points Semi, I posted your Playoffs clutch thread on the GB for distinction between Regular Season & Post Season.

You'll have to let me know how that goes since I've made it a point since late December to not read/post anything on the General/Player Comparison board.

BTW, the reason a lot of GM's vote for Kobe year after year is because he's been put in that situation many more times than any current wing player. I suspect that experience in pressure situations matters a great deal to them, as does the ability to get off a difficult shot with very little time remaining. Who else are they going to vote for though? In those situations you need a guy who has range, can pentrate and draw defense, can finish, hit free throws, etc. The ability to do all of that narrows the list of choices greatly. Since Wade hasn't gotten much burn the past few years and his playoff experiences are somewhat limited (due to injuries and whatnot), I don't think GM's would really side with him. LeBron had a reputation for shying away from those moments his first couple of years and lacking a killer instinct, and while he certainly picked it up, what he did last year against the Celtics doesn't exactly inspire confidence as a guy you want with the ball in winner-take-all environment.

Something else that the article touches on was the lack of assists that Kobe has in the closing moments of games. I think this is kind of a nonsense point because I can think of countless situations where guys like Odom, Walton, and more recently Ron Artest have blown wide open game-winning/tying opportunities. Remember that wide open shot that Horry missed in 2002 against the Spurs that would have given us a 3-2 series lead? Guess who set that one up after collapsing the defense.

dcash4 wrote:i'm still trying to digest just how random and out of left field the timing of this article is.

A bad game from Lebron is Abbott's bat signal to cue up a piece bashing Kobe.

I didn't take a whole lot out of this except for the nugget about Bryant having a 56-1 ratio from shot attempts to assists during one five-year span. That's pretty...interesting.

semi-sentient wrote:Something else that the article touches on was the lack of assists that Kobe has in the closing moments of games. I think this is kind of a nonsense point because I can think of countless situations where guys like Odom, Walton, and more recently Ron Artest have blown wide open game-winning/tying opportunities. Remember that wide open shot that Horry missed in 2002 against the Spurs that would have given us a 3-2 series lead? Guess who set that one up after collapsing the defense.

Decent points. I think you can do this kind of qualifying with the general point of the article, particularly that Kobe usually has to create his own shot in the face of a defense that knows what's coming, often without a whole lot of clock to work with. No kidding your % is going to suffer with that.

But regarding that ratio, that's pretty black and white, isn't it? I mean, you can come qualifications here as well, but at the end of the day, 56-to-1 is pretty oceanic. Assuming teammates are going to make/miss at similar rates to the rest of the game, you're looking at a jump from about 4-1 to 11-1 in these situations.

Maybe that's standard. I'd like to see other guys' stuff. But that seems like a pretty gigantic jump.

Atmanne wrote:

dcash4 wrote:i'm still trying to digest just how random and out of left field the timing of this article is.

A bad game from Lebron is Abbott's bat signal to cue up a piece bashing Kobe.

yup lspn . day after day i lose respect for espn. Chris brosauard had this litte segment how lebron going down to the post was good thing and his shots were close.. good god... i finding my self watching less espn each day. i dont considerd hitting the left side of the backboard close.

Does anyone remember the post about Kobe dunking instead of passing a while back? At that point, I quit reading TrueHoop. I used to read it every day, but I was done after that post. I eventually stopped going to ESPN.com, although now I go to to the LA ESPN because of the Kamenetzky Brothers since I followed them when they were in the LA Times.

Long story short, Henry Abbot has been a long time Portland homer, known Kobe hater, and just pushing the typical ESPN agenda.


And after a certain point, as a fan, I don't give a **** about what other people say about Kobe. I've watched plenty of games, and fine, he has airballed a few, but it doesn't remotely take away from his ability, confidence, and dominance in the game. You can point numbers to me, do some basic analysis, but I don't give a ****. We're watching someone remarkable, who puts every ounce of effort into his game, and pushes forward.

Remember the first airballs vs. Utah? I think he came back with a vengeance. We grow from our mistakes.

Long story short, Henry Abbot lost a reader in me. Probably doesn't matter in the long run, but I also watch SportsCenter less, and tend to only put on ESPN when there's a good game on.

Sedale Threatt wrote:But regarding that ratio, that's pretty black and white, isn't it? I mean, you can come qualifications here as well, but at the end of the day, 56-to-1 is pretty oceanic. Assuming teammates are going to make/miss at similar rates to the rest of the game, you're looking at a jump from about 4-1 to 11-1 in these situations. .

More to the point, the majority of those statistics come from numbers that were compiled post-Shaq and pre-Gasol, so while that's a staggering ratio, it's not particularly surprising. I think I'd take my chances with Kobe shooting as opposed to Odom, Walton, Kwame, or Smush Parker. Wouldn't anyone?

We all know what happens when and idiot criticizes Kobe... This is just ridiculously funny !

Here's some more nitpicking because it's Friday and I'm bored:

He hasn't hit such a shot in a playoff game, in fact, since 2008, including key misses in the closing moments against the Jazz and Magic in 2009, and the Thunder and Suns last spring.

Jazz (2009): Kobe fired up a 30-foot shot at the buzzer. There was basically 1 second left on the clock (inbounds play after Williams scored with <2 seconds left) so it was a desperation heave. It's really stupid to point out those types of shots because they are extremely low percentage and don't have anything to do with whether or not a player is a great crunch time performer. This is not the same thing as Chauncie Billups or Robert Horry missing a wide open shot created via someone elses penetration; it's a pathetic attempt at making it seem like Kobe missed yet another shot under pressure.

Magic (2009): I remember that particular shot, and you just have to tip your hat to Hedo for playing great defense and blocking Kobe's shot. Again though, it's pointing out a blocked shot as a key miss as if it that has anything to do with performing in crunch time, which is really stupid. What's missed with the total lack of analysis (which is the goal -- troll food) is that Kobe actually scored 7 points in the final 5 minutes of regulation to keep us in the game, hitting 5-6 FT's along the way. If nothing else you could probably criticize him for not kicking it out to Ariza for a game-winning shot, but he was getting calls that game so he attacked the defense.

Thunder (2010): A legit beef. He performed poorly down the stretch in game 6 and missed a very makeable game-winning shot that Artest ended up tipping in. It does blatantly ignore Kobe's late game performance in game 2 though which was the reason we pulled out that victory. The article talks about "whether you define crunch time as the last 5 minutes or not" but then continually ignores his overall performance during that period of time over the years, which is precisely why I did my research on that very subject. Yet, people continue posting these articles that are doing nothing more than distorting reality. Sadly, this guy gets paid to do just that, and clowns on RealGM are only too eager to repost that garbage without the least bit of effort at analyzing any of it.

Suns (2010): Fair enough. He missed another very makeable shot that Artest cleaned up on the putback. How about the closeout game though? The one where the Suns were storming back in the 4th which forced Kobe to take over in the final 5 minutes to seal the deal? That's what you call a great crunch time performance (3-4 fg, 5-6 ft), and that was in Phoenix against a team that had all the momentum. Does that make Kobe the best crunch time performer? Certainly not, but did anyone else deserve votes over Kobe this past year for their playoff performances? Nope, and that's really saying something about everyone else because I didn't think Kobe had that great of a post-season as far as 4th quarter performances are concerned (he played very selfish at times).

He made one of his four shots in the fourth quarter of Game 7 of last year's Finals.

This is rich, it really is. Kobe did indeed only make 1 of 4 FIELD GOAL ATTEMPTS, but what he also did was get the Celtics in the penalty early by attacking the basket. He scored 10 points in the quarter and went 8-9 from the foul line, and lest we forget, he assisted Artest on the crucial 3-point basket. Oh, and he got more rebounds in the 4th quarter (4) than Garnett got the entire game.

In a grind it out style game -- a game 7 against your arch rival in the biggest game of your career -- this is a ridiculous criticism all things considered. He performed quite well under pressure, and I can't imagine there being any more pressure on him than there was in that game in the 4th quarter. If it were me, I'd have surely **** on myself.

Great post Semi!

stats just don't tell the whole story. To me Kobe is the best crunchtime player by far. If you take virtually every shot in the last minutes of a close game, it's pretty clear that you won't have the highest FG %.

I just want to quickly point out one thing.

1. Abbott's article was predicated on how he defines clutch. Like others in here have already said, clutch is not just defined by what you do in the last seconds..if that's the case, didn't Carmelo Anthony (a couple of years ago) have the highest percentage of makes in the last seconds of games? So, does that make Melo the most clutch, even if throughout the whole game in tight situations he lays an egg?

That's crazy talk.

I was watching a video of Kobe versus Indiana (one of his greatest games on youtube)hit jumper after jumper in the Finals. Because this was not in the final seconds, does it mean it wasn't clutch? This was in the 4th quarter and the guy was hitting J after J, and grab a rebound (mid-air)and reserved the layup to seal a Finals win.

How many games have we (Laker fans) watched Kobe kill teams in tough stretches where without him the game slips a way? How many games has Kobe played great in the 4th? How many games did he rise to the occasion with 2, 3, 4, 5, minutes left to make sure we EVEN HAD A SHOT AT A LAST SECOND OPPORTUNITY?

There are so many ways to look at it. But to say Kobe isn't clutch is just intellectual dishonesty and bad writing. Honestly, I wanted to stop reading when the guy failed to deliver a concise paper. If he had something to say, just say it. It was more like reading a rant and this is what "so called" journalism amounts to today...sensationalism. Abbot might as well be a blogger.

semi-sentient wrote:

Sedale Threatt wrote:But regarding that ratio, that's pretty black and white, isn't it? I mean, you can come qualifications here as well, but at the end of the day, 56-to-1 is pretty oceanic. Assuming teammates are going to make/miss at similar rates to the rest of the game, you're looking at a jump from about 4-1 to 11-1 in these situations. .

More to the point, the majority of those statistics come from numbers that were compiled post-Shaq and pre-Gasol, so while that's a staggering ratio, it's not particularly surprising. I think I'd take my chances with Kobe shooting as opposed to Odom, Walton, Kwame, or Smush Parker. Wouldn't anyone?

Absolutely. It would be very interesting to break it down with more specific details like that. Such as the time element that you mentioned.

Taking a shot with a couple of seconds left should be automatically excluded, because it's simply impossible to run anything of structure in that instance, and everyone knows where the ball is going. Which is why I take most of this info with a grain of salt.

Even as I talk about the fact he rarely does anything but shoot in these situations, I don't think the Pho/Artest winner being used on the GB is a particularly good one. Yeah, Fish was open, but there was what, three seconds left? Even Magic would have been hard-pressed to make an instant read like that.

The ones that are tough to swallow are the isolation 1-on-2 or 3 plays. And I'm just going to abstain from the discussion if anyone honestly thinks that hasn't been a real tendency of Kobe's throughout his career.

Furthermore, this is a pretty massive body of work here, pretty much his entire career. People can complain about the narrow parameters and all of that, but despite the lack of sophistication, everyone is being judged by the same general measure. So I guess that's what I mean by black and white.

It has to have some value, not to be blown off as some agenda-driven smear.