Is SGA an underrated scorer or was Kobe overrated?

[meekrab]

Kobe is the most overrated greatest player of all time. I know he's an all time great but so many folks put him in the GOAT convo when he's actually right outside the top 10 of all time. Hope that's not seen as a knock as I understand Kobe's greatness.

He's literally just a less good version of Jordan in a lower paced era, it's ridiculous anybody could have him close to #1

[One_and_Done]

Kobe is the most overrated greatest player of all time. I know he's an all time great but so many folks put him in the GOAT convo when he's actually right outside the top 10 of all time. Hope that's not seen as a knock as I understand Kobe's greatness.

NAh he's the most disrespected great player, by a subset group of Gen Z'ers, who grew up on EPSN Lebron slurping. To them empty stats ( in league geared that it) > than a GOAT level alpha who did on at the highest levels without having to team up with top ten players.

Making 10 finals is now empty stats

Kobe had also shaq in the first 8 years and Shaq was at his peak...Imagine Lebron with a player better that him in his team for most of the time in the first 8 years....

It's impossible to imagine Lebron having a team mate better than him for the first 8 years of his career, because no such player has ever existed. Certainly they'd have had alot more titles than just 3.

[benson13]

Shai is a better shooter who takes higher quality shots. Kobe also had five games in 2006 where he attempted more threes than Shai's career high. He's just better at getting a lot of shots off.

In other words, the comparison here is apples to Buicks.

[SkyBill40]

Who's the GOAT level alpha that didn't need to team up with a top 10 player? Hope you're referring to Jordan there and not Kobe lol.

Jordan > LeBron >> Kobe is how I see it.

I'm referring to Kobe (jordan is obvious) who never team hopped and still won several rings post Shaq. The next best players was Paul Gasol who was not a top ten player- even though Im sure you will insist that he was

It's hilarious how y'all put Le overrated right behind Jordan when in fact its more like

Jordan>Kobe>Kareem>Duncan>Hakeem>Magic>Bird>Curry>...then maybe Lebron, if you want to discount Isaiah Thomas. None of those guys team hopped or needed last second theatrics from more courageous players to save their buts for rings . Kobe certainly didn't.

Kobe refused to let Calipari and the Nets draft him. His camp told them straight up he wouldn't sign and even said he'd play in Italy before signing with NJ. He basically passed up the starting SG role in NJ so he could ride the pine in LA who was coming off the 4 seed.

Safe to say Kobe would want no part of a 17 win team unlike James who had no problem signing with the 2003 Cavs.

That's not entirely accurate as Bryant himself was okay with the Nets but preferred to play somewhere further away from near his home:

The draft was being held at the Continental Airlines Arena in East Rutherford, and John Calipari, the Nets' new coach, was leaning toward Kobe at No. 8, but he was naive in the ways of pre-draft subterfuge. Tellem called and warned Calipari that Kobe was headed to L.A. and he'd hold out, or go play in Italy, if the Nets called his name. Don't mess this up, he told Calipari, or you'll pay. Kobe also called to reiterate the message. The best he could come up with, though, was he didn't want to play near home. Part of Calipari's new $3 million a year contract was final say on all basketball decisions. The Nets' front office begged him to call Kobe's bluff. And all the while, another powerhouse agent, David Falk, was pressuring Calipari to take his client, Kerry Kittles.

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/30957423/kobe-bryant-jerry-west-draft-workout-changed-nba-history

Bryant called to reiterate at the behest of his agent. That's it.

[meekrab]

NAh he's the most disrespected great player, by a subset group of Gen Z'ers, who grew up on EPSN Lebron slurping. To them empty stats ( in league geared that it) > than a GOAT level alpha who did on at the highest levels without having to team up with top ten players.

Making 10 finals is now empty stats

Kobe had also shaq in the first 8 years and Shaq was at his peak...Imagine Lebron with a player better that him in his team for most of the time in the first 8 years....

It's impossible to imagine Lebron having a team mate better than him for the first 8 years of his career, because no such player has ever existed. Certainly they'd have had alot more titles than just 3.

I think that was the point.

Heck just give LeBron Shaq, not even a player better than him, and they'd probably only not win titles in years one of them was injured.

[sashaturiaf]

Who's the GOAT level alpha that didn't need to team up with a top 10 player? Hope you're referring to Jordan there and not Kobe lol.

Jordan > LeBron >> Kobe is how I see it.

I'm referring to Kobe (jordan is obvious) who never team hopped and still won several rings post Shaq. The next best players was Paul Gasol who was not a top ten player- even though Im sure you will insist that he was

It's hilarious how y'all put Le overrated right behind Jordan when in fact its more like

Jordan>Kobe>Kareem>Duncan>Hakeem>Magic>Bird>Curry>...then maybe Lebron, if you want to discount Isaiah Thomas. None of those guys team hopped or needed last second theatrics from more courageous players to save their buts for rings . Kobe certainly didn't.

Kobe refused to let Calipari and the Nets draft him. His camp told them straight up he wouldn't sign and even said he'd play in Italy before signing with NJ. He basically passed up the starting SG role in NJ so he could ride the pine in LA who was coming off the 4 seed.

Safe to say Kobe would want no part of a 17 win team unlike James who had no problem signing with the 2003 Cavs.

I'd say that's more noble than James who had no problem ditching the Cavs not once but twice when they no longer offered him any benefit.

[The4thHorseman]

I'm referring to Kobe (jordan is obvious) who never team hopped and still won several rings post Shaq. The next best players was Paul Gasol who was not a top ten player- even though Im sure you will insist that he was

It's hilarious how y'all put Le overrated right behind Jordan when in fact its more like

Jordan>Kobe>Kareem>Duncan>Hakeem>Magic>Bird>Curry>...then maybe Lebron, if you want to discount Isaiah Thomas. None of those guys team hopped or needed last second theatrics from more courageous players to save their buts for rings . Kobe certainly didn't.

Kobe refused to let Calipari and the Nets draft him. His camp told them straight up he wouldn't sign and even said he'd play in Italy before signing with NJ. He basically passed up the starting SG role in NJ so he could ride the pine in LA who was coming off the 4 seed.

Safe to say Kobe would want no part of a 17 win team unlike James who had no problem signing with the 2003 Cavs.

I'd say that's more noble than James who had no problem ditching the Cavs not once but twice when they no longer offered him any benefit.

He played out his contracts and was a UFA, unlike Kobe who demanded to be traded while under contract cause he had to work a lot harder.

[sashaturiaf]

Kobe refused to let Calipari and the Nets draft him. His camp told them straight up he wouldn't sign and even said he'd play in Italy before signing with NJ. He basically passed up the starting SG role in NJ so he could ride the pine in LA who was coming off the 4 seed.

Safe to say Kobe would want no part of a 17 win team unlike James who had no problem signing with the 2003 Cavs.

I'd say that's more noble than James who had no problem ditching the Cavs not once but twice when they no longer offered him any benefit.

He played out his contracts and was a UFA, unlike Kobe who demanded to be traded while under contract cause he had to work a lot harder.

Mercenaries do what mercenaries do. That's why the NBAs ratings are what they are now.

Kobe stuck with the Lakers till the end despite all the ups and downs on the way. Functional families also have their ups and downs but at the end of the day they are still family and are in it together.

[Homer38]

I'd say that's more noble than James who had no problem ditching the Cavs not once but twice when they no longer offered him any benefit.

He played out his contracts and was a UFA, unlike Kobe who demanded to be traded while under contract cause he had to work a lot harder.

Mercenaries do what mercenaries do. That's why the NBAs ratings are what they are now.

Kobe stuck with the Lakers till the end despite all the ups and downs on the way. Functional families also have their ups and downs but at the end of the day they are still family and are in it together.

Kobe was drafted by the hornets...

[Pelly24]

Kobe Bryant averaged 30 or more ppg 3x in his career.
- The average TEAM ppg those years was 95.1 / 97.2 / 97.0.

In 2003... 2 players averaged 30+ and only 6 averaged 25+ ppg.
In 2006... 3 players averaged 30+ and 10 averaged 25+ ppg.
In 2007... only Bryant averaged 30+ and 9 players averaged 25+ ppg.

How have NBA scoring trends changed 20ish years later?

SGA is on his 3rd straight season of 30+ ppg.
- The average TEAM ppg those years has been 114.7 / 114.2 / 113.0.

2023... 4 guys averaged over 30. 12 guys over 25 ppg.
2024... 3 guys averaged over 30. 14 guys over 25 ppg.
2025... 6 guys are averaging 30+ and 14 are over 25+ ppg.

If you expand it to 20 ppg... the difference is even more stark.

-----------------------------

Obviously, as many have stated many different ways... pace has something to do with it. The onslaught of the three pointer. Et al. It just depends on whether this is a real thread looking for context or not.  

precisely. I remember when getting 25 ppg used to be a big deal.

[Pelly24]

Love this video

:

Watch on YouTube

[SpreeChokeJob]

Kobe, Carmelo, Iverson, TMAC, Carter. They all came in the era of post Jordan. This was the trashiest era of guard forward play I ever had the privilege to witness as a basketball fan. All these wannabes grew up wanting to be like Mike. They were all pale imitations. I was watching MJ as a rookie vs Magic Lakers on YouTube yesterday and his BBIQ was better than all these wannabe chuckers at the end of their careers. At some point on this board there was even a Kobe LeBron debate while they were playing. That’s how dumb the conversations were.

[AbeVigodaLive]

Kobe Bryant averaged 30 or more ppg 3x in his career.
- The average TEAM ppg those years was 95.1 / 97.2 / 97.0.

In 2003... 2 players averaged 30+ and only 6 averaged 25+ ppg.
In 2006... 3 players averaged 30+ and 10 averaged 25+ ppg.
In 2007... only Bryant averaged 30+ and 9 players averaged 25+ ppg.

How have NBA scoring trends changed 20ish years later?

SGA is on his 3rd straight season of 30+ ppg.
- The average TEAM ppg those years has been 114.7 / 114.2 / 113.0.

2023... 4 guys averaged over 30. 12 guys over 25 ppg.
2024... 3 guys averaged over 30. 14 guys over 25 ppg.
2025... 6 guys are averaging 30+ and 14 are over 25+ ppg.

If you expand it to 20 ppg... the difference is even more stark.

-----------------------------

Obviously, as many have stated many different ways... pace has something to do with it. The onslaught of the three pointer. Et al. It just depends on whether this is a real thread looking for context or not.  

This isn't really relevant context, though. It just notes that Kobe shot a lot. There is more to scoring than volume.

EDIT: Obviously, Kobe wasn't just a chucker, I"m just saying, an examination which ONLY discusses volume is useless.

To be fair, it's not only examining volume... it's more about hinting at a contextual discussion about eras. We can bring TS%, three-point volume, or whatever metrics we want... but today's game is a lot different than 20 years ago. Or 30. Or 40.

Some efficiency stats are going to largely look better with how the game is played today.

Heck, for most of the NBA's history, Larry Bird was considered one of the most efficient/best shooters. But if we're comparing him to today's players... he's pedestrian. Heck, even a guy like Anthony Edwards routinely surpasses Bird's career TS%. I'd guess (as many others would) that Bird in 2025 would be shooting a lot more three pointers. He was certainly capable of it. Heck, in a hyper-stats-focused era... we'd probably see a lot of changes. Maybe Bird wouldn't go a game taking a bunch of left handed shots if stats were a bigger issue.



[Note: Relevant or not... I hated Kobe Bryant as a player. Doesn't dismiss the fact that he was a legendary scorer.]

[sashaturiaf]

Kobe, Carmelo, Iverson, TMAC, Carter. They all came in the era of post Jordan. This was the trashiest era of guard forward play I ever had the privilege to witness as a basketball fan. All these wannabes grew up wanting to be like Mike. They were all pale imitations. I was watching MJ as a rookie vs Magic Lakers on YouTube yesterday and his BBIQ was better than all these wannabe chuckers at the end of their careers. At some point on this board there was even a Kobe LeBron debate while they were playing. That’s how dumb the conversations were.

Troll post. Kobe - 5 rings. Carmelo, Iverson, tmac, Vince - 0 rings combined. They are not the same.

[Hair Jordan]

Kobe Bryant averaged 30 or more ppg 3x in his career.
- The average TEAM ppg those years was 95.1 / 97.2 / 97.0.

In 2003... 2 players averaged 30+ and only 6 averaged 25+ ppg.
In 2006... 3 players averaged 30+ and 10 averaged 25+ ppg.
In 2007... only Bryant averaged 30+ and 9 players averaged 25+ ppg.

How have NBA scoring trends changed 20ish years later?

SGA is on his 3rd straight season of 30+ ppg.
- The average TEAM ppg those years has been 114.7 / 114.2 / 113.0.

2023... 4 guys averaged over 30. 12 guys over 25 ppg.
2024... 3 guys averaged over 30. 14 guys over 25 ppg.
2025... 6 guys are averaging 30+ and 14 are over 25+ ppg.

If you expand it to 20 ppg... the difference is even more stark.

-----------------------------

Obviously, as many have stated many different ways... pace has something to do with it. The onslaught of the three pointer. Et al. It just depends on whether this is a real thread looking for context or not.  

This isn't really relevant context, though. It just notes that Kobe shot a lot. There is more to scoring than volume.

EDIT: Obviously, Kobe wasn't just a chucker, I"m just saying, an examination which ONLY discusses volume is useless.

To be fair, it's not only examining volume... it's more about hinting at a contextual discussion about eras. We can bring TS%, three-point volume, or whatever metrics we want... but today's game is a lot different than 20 years ago. Or 30. Or 40.

Some efficiency stats are going to largely look better with how the game is played today.

Heck, for most of the NBA's history, Larry Bird was considered one of the most efficient/best shooters. But if we're comparing him to today's players... he's pedestrian. Heck, even a guy like Anthony Edwards routinely surpasses Bird's career TS%. I'd guess (as many others would) that Bird in 2025 would be shooting a lot more three pointers. He was certainly capable of it. Heck, in a hyper-stats-focused era... we'd probably see a lot of changes. Maybe Bird wouldn't go a game taking a bunch of left handed shots if stats were a bigger issue.



[Note: Relevant or not... I hated Kobe Bryant as a player. Doesn't dismiss the fact that he was a legendary scorer.]

Bird is one of only 3 players ever to have multiple 50/40/90 seasons. That makes him a pedestrian shooter in this era? TS% is such a garbage statistic.

[SpreeChokeJob]

Kobe, Carmelo, Iverson, TMAC, Carter. They all came in the era of post Jordan. This was the trashiest era of guard forward play I ever had the privilege to witness as a basketball fan. All these wannabes grew up wanting to be like Mike. They were all pale imitations. I was watching MJ as a rookie vs Magic Lakers on YouTube yesterday and his BBIQ was better than all these wannabe chuckers at the end of their careers. At some point on this board there was even a Kobe LeBron debate while they were playing. That’s how dumb the conversations were.

Troll post. Kobe - 5 rings. Carmelo, Iverson, tmac, Vince - 0 rings combined. They are not the same.

Not a troll post. Just call it like I see it. Prime Shaq was an absolute beast. Any of the top 5 guard forwards could have partnered with him and won rings.

That was the short bus MJ clone era. Nothing beats the original, but that doesn’t mean they will try and hype the guard forwards during that era. A lot of people bought into the hype because there wasn’t a legit star till LeBron and Curry came into the picture. That’s why all those chuckers were overrated.

It’s like all the players that followed after Curry. All these posers jacking up threes now, but they were nothing like Curry in their prime. And now there is a generation of kids heaving threes from half court in the gym.

[AbeVigodaLive]

This isn't really relevant context, though. It just notes that Kobe shot a lot. There is more to scoring than volume.

EDIT: Obviously, Kobe wasn't just a chucker, I"m just saying, an examination which ONLY discusses volume is useless.

To be fair, it's not only examining volume... it's more about hinting at a contextual discussion about eras. We can bring TS%, three-point volume, or whatever metrics we want... but today's game is a lot different than 20 years ago. Or 30. Or 40.

Some efficiency stats are going to largely look better with how the game is played today.

Heck, for most of the NBA's history, Larry Bird was considered one of the most efficient/best shooters. But if we're comparing him to today's players... he's pedestrian. Heck, even a guy like Anthony Edwards routinely surpasses Bird's career TS%. I'd guess (as many others would) that Bird in 2025 would be shooting a lot more three pointers. He was certainly capable of it. Heck, in a hyper-stats-focused era... we'd probably see a lot of changes. Maybe Bird wouldn't go a game taking a bunch of left handed shots if stats were a bigger issue.



[Note: Relevant or not... I hated Kobe Bryant as a player. Doesn't dismiss the fact that he was a legendary scorer.]

Bird is one of only 3 players ever to have multiple 50/40/90 seasons. That makes him a pedestrian shooter in this era? TS% is such a garbage statistic.

People say the same thing about FG%. In fact, it can be amusing how quickly that stat gets shot down in discussions as a laughable statistic to use.

I'm not saying it should. My point with this topic is that players play very differently in 2025 than in 2005 or 1985. Likewise how fans judge how those players play (and which statistics are relevant in judging them) has also changed significantly.

In fact, with so many statistics to choose from... it's often one person picking-and-choosing which ones make their guy look better compared to another player.

[One_and_Done]

That 2006 lakers team was *bad* and they were five or six games over .500. I remember watching. Just a very bad team and their offensive rating was 92.8 when he was off the court.

lol saying Kobe is the GOAT SG ballhandler is not absurd. his turnover rate was at about 3 per game at a 33% usage rate in his prime (2000 to 2010). That's pretty great considering all the time he dominated the rock and the types of defenses he faced. With Harden it's a bit hard to tell the line between athleticism and handle. Kobe to me looked like Kyrie with how seamlessly he could do spin moves and change direction while in complete control of the ball. I would say Michael Jordan has an argument for better handle, but harden had less range of motion with the rock in his hand, but his crossover was better. But Kobe was an amazing ballhandler.

I don't think Kobe had a top 15 peak ever. More like a top 20-25 peak ever. What makes him special was that he maintained that performance for about 13 years. He was a top 3 to top 8 or so player for over 12 years. That's a big deal. personally, I would have kobe in my top 13 to 20 players ever.

I guess I'd have to see who you chose above kobe outside of those guys. I don't see an argument for Tatum, Anthony Davis, Steph or KD this season. I love Brunson, but Kobe still relatively more efficient with better defense and more scoring volume. Ant should've never been in these convos since he's not even more efficient than Kobe was 11 years ago *now*. Donovan Mitchell? Nope. LeBron isn't there. Shai might have a better peak, but not career so far. Maybe that's just a matter of time. Idk.

As for the Tim Duncan stuff, it's not as though Kobe was just along for the ride lol. He averaged like 28/5/5 and played good defense. Also, he beat Tim Duncan in 2008 (still prime) while averaging 29/6/4 on 58 TS% in 2008.

Like i understand using advanced numbers and stuff, and I even do think Kobe is a bit overrated. But we can't just sweep his championships, scoring output and consistency in the regular season and playoffs, ability to play on and off ball, and then just things like his elite athleticism and length and high IQ. Like ... Kobe was an incredible player. I don't think players are just magically way better now. I could see if Kobe's production didn't hold up in the playoffs, but it did, which again says something.

Duncan's prime was 98-07. By 08 the injuries had started to wear him down, which was obvious by a number of statistical and observational measures. His knees were bone on bone.

The Lakers 06 team had Kobe and Odom. That due shouldn't have needed much around them to easily make the playoffs if Kobe is the player his fans make him out to be.

As for guys who are better than Kobe right now, I'd say Tatum for sure. Based on his recent play, Wemby too. I'd still take KD and Curry, and yeh probably AD too. Kobe is in that next group with guys like Ant and Booker. I'd likely take Mitchell over him as well

13 to 20 all-time isn't insane, but at this point I don't think he cracks my top 20 all-time.

Kobe outperforms Tatum and all these guys in the playoffs. Wemby? We at least gotta see him do it in the postseason.

I just don't see how you're taking guys that barely even score more efficiently than Kobe literally did 20 years ago (Ant, Mitchell) *now* when the balance has been swung completely in the favor of offensive players. Like looking at their games, especially Booker, Mitchell and Ant, Kobe is basically a better player in every conceivable way lol. Tatum I can kind of understand, but Kobe just does way bettr in the postseason and especially in the finals.

It feels like you've done research and stuff, but idk. I think you might just have some unconscious Kobe bias, because none of these guys really belong in the same sentence as him at this point. Like a guy averaging 25/4/5 on 57 TS% in 2024 should never be compared to Kobe Bryant.

It’s fair to say “well, we need to see Wemby in the playoffs, etc”. I agree that how he finishes the season is important. Based on right now though, it’s hard to see Kobe’s argument against him. Even if Wemby’s offense still isn’t playoff ready, his defense is already among the best of all-time. I don’t think Kobe would have this Spurs team at 500. in today’s NBA. They were predicted by most to be at the bottom of the West.

As for the claim that Kobe “outperforms all these guys, especially in the playoffs”, I disagree. I noted some of the numbers for this on pages 1 and 2, and explained why I don’t think Kobe will be much better today. His playstyle has a lot of drawbacks in the modern game, whereas guys like Tatum and Mitchell thrive on it (not that they wouldn’t have been great in the 00s too, if utilised properly with the right shot diet, etc).

I think the claim that Kobe is a big playoffs performer is also dubious. Fans like to remember all the good playoff games Kobe had, and forget the bad ones. Kobe was putrid in the 04 finals, and the 2011 Mavs series, and the 00 finals. He couldn’t hit the side of a barn in game 7 of the 2010 finals, and needed Pau to bail him out. In game 7 of the 2006 Suns series, with their season on the line, he deliberately refused to shoot to “make a point” to his critics (he took 15 shots in the first three quarters, and only 1 in the final quarter, despite playing over 43 minutes). Kobe was completely outplayed by KD in the 2012 OKC series. I could go on to name other examples.

One such forgotten example is the 2008 finals, where Kobe clearly shot too much, which was a key factor in his team losing. While Kobe insisted on taking 22 shots a game on a pedestrian 505 TS%, the team as a whole was shooting 537 TS% (including Pau at 572, Odom at 560, Fisher 571, etc). Pau had a comically low 62 shots that series against Kobe’s 131. Often it felt like the Lakers support cast was so talented, they were winning despite his suboptimal playstyle (and certainly not because of it). In today’s much more sophisticated game Kobe would never have that kind of luxury, teams would exploit it more. Today the team is trying to give up the shots Kobe liked, and the % he converts them on would no longer be above league average.

There are numerous clutch stats that show Kobe’s ‘clutch’ ability to be very overrated, and well behind guys like Lebron, Curry, etc. It’s confirmation bias, with fans using the shots they see go in to justify their pre-existing view, and ignoring all the ones that don’t.

To describe Kobe as “better in every conceivable way” than guys like Ant, Booker, Tatum, Mitchell, etc, is ridiculous. Not just because of the stats I cited already, but because it’s plainly untrue. Firstly, all those guys are deadly from 3 point land, whereas Kobe was a meh shooter from outside. In today’s game, that is a vital skill for a guard, especially a shooting guard who can’t run an offense.

Where are the star guards who can neither run the offense like a point guard, and are also not great 3pt shooters? They don’t exist. Even the star guards who run an efficient, low TO offense are almost always great 3pt shooters (e.g. Harden, Curry, SGA, etc). SGA doesn’t take a lot of them, but he hits at a good % which is key. If he didn’t, then teams could guard him differently (e.g. give him more cushion in the PnR, bring over more help, etc). It’s SGA’s reliable 3 that forces teams to guard him close, which lets him use his otherworldly speed and moves to blow by them. Kobe can’t play like that today. He was a deliberate player who liked to post up and make a variety of fakes and moves.

There are of course other ways Kobe is clearly inferior to those players. SGA is faster, Ant is stronger with a thicker base, Tatum is bigger, Mitchell and Booker are vastly better shooters, etc. Of course, some of these guys are better in a lot of ways. Ant is better or equal to Kobe in pretty much everything, which I highlighted in the stat comparison on page 1. He’s also a better, bigger defender who can handle tougher assignments, a better shot blocker, a better 3pt shooter by far, etc. What does Kobe have an advantage in? He’s not a better passer, he’s certainly a less willing one. I guess he shoots midrangers better, but in today’s game that’s much less valuable than 3pt shooting. Teams want you to take that contested 2. If anything, his contested midranger would be less effective today, because there are more perimeter oriented defensive players on the court now who are harder to take advantage of.

In Kobe’s era, he got to cheat a lot on D. The wings didn’t have much to do on D, and could coast a lot. Today Kobe would have to run all over the court for most of the game. That would reduce the energy he could still exert on offense. Tsherkin commented that “if Luka can still be good, so can Kobe”. I think that’s getting things backwards. The better framing is “how much better would Luka be in the 00s, when he could slack off on defense and conserve even more energy for offense?”

[tsherkin]

To be fair, it's not only examining volume... it's more about hinting at a contextual discussion about eras. We can bring TS%, three-point volume, or whatever metrics we want... but today's game is a lot different than 20 years ago. Or 30. Or 40.

You're right. It doesn't only discuss volume; it fails to account for changes in transition possession proportion. It isn't really useful, either, because there were cultural, movements AWAY from single-point-of-failure offenses with huge volume scorers after the 60s. It wasn't worth it to go to guys like that, and wasn't seen as good strategy... basically until Jordan showed what it COULD look like.

Some efficiency stats are going to largely look better with how the game is played today.

That's generally why you see more rTS instead of raw TS%. Deviation from league average is a pretty decent baseline for examination.

Heck, for most of the NBA's history, Larry Bird was considered one of the most efficient/best shooters. But if we're comparing him to today's players... he's pedestrian.

No he isn't. That's violently inaccurate. He had 40% 3pt shooting seasons, was frequently a 90%+ FT shooter (and led the league 4x) and clearly developed his 3pt shot rapidly having joined the league the year the 3pt shot was introduced. Yes, his volume isn't the same as some contemporary guys due to the difference in how the 3pt shot was used, but his shooting ability was very clearly and statistically top-end. There is nothing about his shooting which was, by any definition, "pedestrian."

Heck, even a guy like Anthony Edwards routinely surpasses Bird's career TS%.

Sure, but again, you're quoting me and talking to me and I wasn't using raw TS%. I was using relative markers for a reason, precisely because league average drifts over time. It was reasonably stable for a long time but there's a nadir in the late 90s/early 2000s and it's been rising the last 4 or 5 years in particular. And that is important to acknowledge.

[Note: Relevant or not... I hated Kobe Bryant as a player. Doesn't dismiss the fact that he was a legendary scorer.]

There is no question that Kobe was an excellent scorer, yes. He wasn't in the first tier of scorers in league history, but surely the second. The first tier is, of course, exceptionally small, and marked by a very tiny number of guys who excelled on a whole other level.

This thread shouldn't be about tearing Kobe down. It should be about discussing his strengths and weaknesses, and doing the same for SGA. So we're mindful of longevity as a scorer. We're mindful of good habits and bad. We're mindful of skill differences. We're mindful of approach issues. We're mindful of physical tools and styles. We're mindful of the years where Kobe was playing alongside Shaq and not the first option. We're mindful of when he excelled in the playoffs and when he didn't... and how Shai doesn't really have a playoff sample we're capable of reasonably evaluating at this stage of his career. Etc, etc.

But it should be in reasonably good faith, because we're talking about two very good players.

[Hair Jordan]

SGA - 15-23 FG tonight after going 14-19 FG in his last game!!!!!