Moderators: Clyde Frazier, Doctor MJ, trex_8063, penbeast0, PaulieWal
Texas Chuck wrote:OhayoKD wrote:NO-KG-AI wrote:Lolol. Everything I said, case in point in real time.
What is it with you and constantly trying to put down those who disagree with you
I don't know that he was trying to put anyone down.
tsherkin wrote:MyUniBroDavis wrote:
Long twos by years
1997 45.5%
1998 42.6%
1999 41.3%
2000 42.8%
2001 40%
2002 39.7%
2003 38.9%
2004 38.8%
2005 40%
2006 40.5%
2007 40.4%
2008 40.9%
2009 40.7%
2010 40.2%
Not as much as I thought actually, but of course we don’t have early 90s data
You also have to consider that they clipped some of the longer twos because in 97 the 3pt line was pulled in.
I wasn’t making an appeal to the majority as much as just saying that it does seem at times that many people take their criteria as an objective criteria everyone should follow rather than a subjective opinion.
I understand you weren't making that argument. I was noting that the casual fan doesn't know enough to have an opinion worth discussing much on a board like this.Unironically supporting Kobe being 5-8 is hard here though since whenever I try to actually argue for him it gets drowned out though lol. More so by the pro-Kobe side lmao
Yes, one of the tragedies of Kobe fandom is that some of his more ardent fans are so illogical that it undermines the case for him to be represented higher than, say, 10-15 or what have you. Bryant is an interesting space where there's a somewhat wide range of rankings which might be reasonable for him depending on individual criteria. It wouldn't be horrible to make an argument for, like, #7, and it wouldn't be inappropriate to make one for 15, or anywhere in between.
MyUniBroDavis wrote:
Yeah, forgot about that lol. Still think it was probably a tad bit higher. All things considered you’d expect 97 to have a decent higher 2 point percentage than early 90s which isn’t the case
I mean individual criteria you can argue him over bron on bag Twitter lol. There are prolly guys that drop older guys more because they wouldn’t be as successful today too lol.
For me I have him pretty solidly in the 5-8 spot somewhere, although I’ve been higher on him as of late.
OhayoKD wrote:Erving probably is probably the biggest challenge Kareem faced for "best of his era" even though the aba/nba split didn't let them directly compete much. I'm somewhat surprised he doesn't get more top 10 shouts considering what he's accomplished though I suppose there's a era-penalty there. Didn't really get that close but still.
Getting to the larger point though, even using erving(who, by this specific method of analysis looks like an easy top tenner), Kobe's resume is perfectly competitive. And if you're elevating erving based on these accomplishments, someone like kd, hakeem, west, or robertson naturally drops by comparison. Finding a bunch of individual cases that could be made vs Kobe isn't too difficult, the challenge is those cases holding up by a consistent criterion.
The truth is, relative to top 15 candidates, Kobe had exceptional team success, exceptional consistency, exceptional longevity, and very strong resiliency, and, even if you go by the apm stuff that supposedly hates him, his peak is perfectly fine here. There's no real statistical means to claim his peak wasn't good enough at this level besides a rather irresponsible use of playoff aupm(the more you play, averages go down, kobe played lots and lots of playoff games per season and in total). He's led the league in RAPM, he's posted +20 WOWY, he scores pretty high on box-stuff, and he graded out at the top 20% or top 10% of basically every offensive measure if you go by synergy.
He also played in one of the more talented eras, and in a system which, I think as Unibrodavis has quite successfully advocated, probably depressed his impact.
Putting 15 coherent cases that follow a consistent standard is honestly pretty difficult all things considered, unless it's a, as you say, "one sentence" one like "Here's a bunch of players i might take over kobe at his best". Even from an "informed fan" standpoint, it's completely understandable why leaving off a player who has a pretty strong argument as a top 10 career out of the top 15 entirely is controversial.
tsherkin wrote:MyUniBroDavis wrote:
Yeah, forgot about that lol. Still think it was probably a tad bit higher. All things considered you’d expect 97 to have a decent higher 2 point percentage than early 90s which isn’t the case
I dunno, there were a bunch of high-volume guys in the league at the time whose jumpers had matured by then as well, right? Malone, Ewing, Robinson, etc, etc.I mean individual criteria you can argue him over bron on bag Twitter lol. There are prolly guys that drop older guys more because they wouldn’t be as successful today too lol.
Twitter and Instagram and Facebook are all cesspools of idiocy where good conversation goes to die, though, especially on subjects such as sports, lol.For me I have him pretty solidly in the 5-8 spot somewhere, although I’ve been higher on him as of late.
Would be interesting to see the justification for him as high as the upper bound of that range, especially over some other guys. I suppose you have to depreciate actual awards won, look at several of his seasons higher than conventional examination holds and such, but it would be an interesting discussion for sure. I might not agree, but it's not like saying "Kobe's the GOAT." That can't be substantially argued, but 5-8 is at least semi-workable for the sake of conversation.
Jaivl wrote:Texas Chuck wrote:OhayoKD wrote:What is it with you and constantly trying to put down those who disagree with you
I don't know that he was trying to put anyone down.
Oh, there was a very bad (deleted) post right after. Absolutely was, lol.
Doctor MJ wrote:I don't understand why people jump in a thread and say basically, "This thing you're all talking about. I'm too ignorant to know anything about it. Lollerskates!"
MyUniBroDavis wrote:tsherkin wrote:MyUniBroDavis wrote:
Yeah, forgot about that lol. Still think it was probably a tad bit higher. All things considered you’d expect 97 to have a decent higher 2 point percentage than early 90s which isn’t the case
I dunno, there were a bunch of high-volume guys in the league at the time whose jumpers had matured by then as well, right? Malone, Ewing, Robinson, etc, etc.I mean individual criteria you can argue him over bron on bag Twitter lol. There are prolly guys that drop older guys more because they wouldn’t be as successful today too lol.
Twitter and Instagram and Facebook are all cesspools of idiocy where good conversation goes to die, though, especially on subjects such as sports, lol.For me I have him pretty solidly in the 5-8 spot somewhere, although I’ve been higher on him as of late.
Would be interesting to see the justification for him as high as the upper bound of that range, especially over some other guys. I suppose you have to depreciate actual awards won, look at several of his seasons higher than conventional examination holds and such, but it would be an interesting discussion for sure. I might not agree, but it's not like saying "Kobe's the GOAT." That can't be substantially argued, but 5-8 is at least semi-workable for the sake of conversation.
For
1. Aren’t we in agreement there then? What I meant more so is that if a shorter three point line increases shooting percentages for long twos as significantly as it does you’d expect it to increase in general from 2 point range because of that when the opposite is true, of course like you said pace slowed down and everything.
2. What about Tiktok lol, but yeah you’re right social media convo is kinda dumb when it comes to sports
3. I think I’ve made my case for Kobe before somewhere, but it’s mostly that I view him as quite great in an absolute sense, and I value rings a lot. I’ve kind of gone on about his synergy/cpoe or whatever being absolutely fantastic before, and how those specific skills he has translates really well when you go backwards.
Beyond that, while not as good as Wade/lebron/nash in this regard, I do believe that he would have been able to see some success if he was in an offense where he leaned towards pick and roll a bit more, while still utilizing his ability as an transcendant 1 on 1 scorer most of the time. In 2007 and 2008 he posted elite effeciency and high volume in that regard, very comparable with wade’s effeciencies, although his effeciencies across the board declined a bit in 2009 while still being very good overall. 06 he was quite good as well. Of course, his 1v1 scoring ability would still be the main force.
I’ve posted his synergy profile before, but essentially it’s kind of ridiculous, his raw halfcourt effeciency compared favorably to lebron and Wade, and he was just crazy effecient in the halfcourt in general. More than that, he didn’t really have any weaknesses either in that regard.
So mainly, I think his in era impact would have been higher had he played in an offense like that in the sense the offense would be more dependent on him. I do think he’s shown an ability to deliver in that type of offense, and even 2013 Kobe who was far declined had one of his best offensive years in a more ball screen heavy role despite him not doing nearly as good at it as you’d expect prime Kobe to do.
I think there were more factors than just that, for example that 01-05 was probably the worst era in an absolute sense for iso scoring wings specifically, and that he played with one of the most dominant half court scoring forces of all time in Shaq meant his impact was always going to be muted since he’s taking away from the best option. Of course, the beef that they both were at fault for, etc etc.
In any case I do think his impact could have been higher even in era given those situations, even if it was of course was great. On the other hand, I do think his situations were generally good and three chips with Shaq and two with a good Lakers cast in 08-10 meant he could still get 5 chips, so as I’ve said before I think it evens out
Now the main thing that hurts his effeciency specifically is the fact that isolation basketball was kind of the least effecient play style during 1998-2016, and we’ve kind of seen how that’s not so much the case for offenses that are designed around maximizing that skillset post three point revolution, while it would seem like a similar thing was the case pre illegal D as well. Kobe was good enough at this that it still led to an extremely effective halfcourt offense, but it would still hurt him. But for me, the argument essentially goes -
- Kobe in an absolute sense would have been more impactful in other eras vs his peers
- kobes in era impact was still fantastic, and of course he was 5 titles, and was a key contributor in all of them, esp 01/09/10.
Evaluating Kobe on offense
- he’s a great if at times unwilling passer, but he became better at this over his 24 prime (08-10). He’s shown great ability to pass out of pick and roll, and overall he’s probably a very good passer with great but not incredible vision at his peak if you think it’s 2008 or 2009. If you think it’s 06 or 07 it’s more him being a stupid scorer
- while his synergy profile paints a picture of a incredibly versatile halfcourt scorer without any weakness (while still being great in transition of course), diving deeper, while he was extremely effective in the pick and roll or off ball etc etc, it’s clear that his 1 on 1 game stands out
- there’s a tendency to believe that Kobe wasn’t that effecient of an 1 on 1 player, and he’s more decent effeciency wise but high volume. That’s not really the case during his best years though.
- his isolation play stats are less impressive than his post up stats, but are still quite great. Among high iso players, here are his rankings from 06-09, >200 isolations
05) 2nd/31
06) 12th/45
07) 1st/37
08) 4th/36
09) 12th/45
10) 12th/41
11) 5th/39
12) 18th/41 (>130, lockout)
13) 8th/27
For reference, here is KDs ranking over a similar criteria (isos are down a bit so made it >100)
16) 6th/51
17) 7th/46
18) 6th/36
19) 3rd/38
21) 2nd/42 (did >100 since he didn’t qualify)
22) 4th/45
Kawhis also for reference
16) 7/51
17) 21/46
19) 5/38
20) 6/51
21) 27/42
Of course, when it comes to synergy stuff you’re generally gonna have guys above you.
Kawhis percentiles are quite good to be clear, so this isn’t a knock on him at all he’s generally 70th percentile ish on those “bad” years.
Of course, there’s a huge gap in volume: Kobe averaged more isolations over those 4 years than double durant and Kawhi combined. Of course, this wasn’t through an offense that emphasizes high leverage isos like the harden rockets for example either, a lot of them we’re triangle actions not creating much at times. Of course, I think his 06 mark considering his absurd volume and how much he hated his teammates (lol) is insane as well
. His 09 mark a tad low but still very elite.
In any case, the raw rankings in stuff like this undersell guys a bit, but Kobe was a transcendent isolation player with a combination of elite effeciency and ridiculous volume. This isn’t taking to account how hard teams tried to stop him either.
To be clear, yes isolation wasn’t a very effecient play from 2000-2016 for various reasons, but it was effecient in regards to when Kobe used it: his halfcourt scoring effeciency in terms of ppp was elite iirc, I had it earlier this thread
So as an isolation player - fantastic.
To be clear, even with the huge volume edge I still take Durant in this regard, although kobes playoff resiliency in that regard is quite good too so maybe then I take him there. Durants my #1 scorer ever in the RS in terms of his ability to do so I think though, so that doesn’t say much. I’m a lot higher on Durant than most. Though
But Kobe does look like a pretty damn good isolation player.
To be very clear these rankings heavily undersell his ability, because to conclude he was a 70-80th percentile guy in that regard isn’t really the right conclusion.
Booker and Tatum ranked 36th and 38th out of 42 in 2021 and 27th and 28th out of 46 in 2022 (>120). They were above 50th percentile in 2022 and just under in 2021. When you do stuff like this you always get guys that are randomly high or a few suprise names over who you’d expect at times
While one could make an argument that Kobe not being elite from three might hurt him if he played a similar today, it should be noted that for all his other flaws as a player derozans actually been the best at this for awhile lol, so I think it’s a non issue.
So in terms of isolation scoring, he was incredibly effective. His effeciency was genuinely fantastic in the context of synergy data, as you can see by him comparing very favorably to a guy like Kawhi and somewhat holding his own against a guy like KD in raw effeciency.
So the isolation data is impressive. Of course, keep in mind that a typical Kobe isolation was far more like a Kawhi isolation than a harden one or even most Kd ones. Most these isolation opportunities were made by necessity rather than by design like today.
How that gauges today or back then I’m not sure, but we have players complaining about how 1v1 basketball died out a bit in the 2000s as illegal d rules got taken away. Beyond the rule changes being lightened in 06 we do see a trend towards, as you said it, more effecient pick and roll basketball, less long twos, etc etc.
I was curious to see vs the other high scoring wings that were effecient inside the arc, and it seems like Kobe just ended up having a much larger majority of his possessions come from on ball halfcourt scoring than his contemporaries.
Just off a look through in 08 it seems like it comes from either them having more off ball possessions or running more pick and roll.
There’s a middle ground between Kobe had okay effeciency because he took stupid shots and Kobe had great effeciency taking all the teams hard shots.
The idea of value add comes from opportunity cost. On one hand, it is valid that at times esp 06 and 07 Kobe was a ball hog and took some dumb shots
At the same time, he was still effecient overall, his half court offense overall in ppp was better than Wade and brons every year from 06-09 for example, and 09 specifically he’s even above Dirk.
Beyond that, I don’t think kobes limitations are why he played the way he did, he was incredibly effecient and intelligent off ball and his pick and roll offense was genuinely great as well, even if not quite as good as the Wade/bron/nash of that time in that regard
There’s I think a middle ground there, the idea of opportunity cost and all of that. Kobe took harder shots both because he needed to and because his role in the offense in general meant he had to.
Otherwise, his offensive impact during his offensive apex doesn’t make sense, it was obviously incredibly high and probably could be argued higher than some signals based off of pretty strong evidence of noise.
Got a bit off track there. Overall, I would say in terms of since we’ve had synergy, outside of situations where these situations were specifically leveraged, prime Kobe is probably the best isolation player in terms of the combination of elite isolation effeciency and ridiculous volume and defensive attention. This of course would be in line to how he’s viewed by other players as well, and intuitively makes sense
It’s hard to evaluate him versus guys in generations because the quality of data we have simply isnt as high since we don’t have synergy data.
I would argue Durant even with a fourth of his volume is a better isolation scorer, but Durants kind of #1 for me in the RS in that regard anyway.
It’s hard to gauge because nowadays it’s much more the top end of isolation scoring is higher rather than it being higher universally, and I’d assume it was a similar trend during illegal D times even if maybe it wasn’t nearly as absurd as now. We see that players were complaining about this as well.
So generational isolation scorer and quite great in the halfcourt effeciency on its own.
Of course, post scoring was a bit more emphasized for wings the more you go back. This one is a lot more straight forward, Kobe averaged around 200 possessions from 06-09 (300 in 09 and 450 in 10)
Kobe as a post scorer averaged more ppp than Dirk, duncan, Yao (hehe) from 07-09. KG beat him out in 07, but not the other two years.
Using a same criteria to get 50 ish players, >150 pos
06. 20th/60
07. 5th/51
08. 3rd/44
09. 3rd/46
10. 7th/48
I mean especially with volume that’s as much as some centers today (not an exaggeration either, 450 is more than Jokic the last 2 years lmao). 200 is about 12th in the nba the past few years
Kobe is just kind of ridiculous as a post scoring wing with his combination of effeciency and volume at that size, especially taking into account how much teams defend him. In this regard he does come out with better effeciency than KD or Kawhi I think, who both are fantastic of course at this (KD does have a few insane years though).
All of his other scoring stuff are usually 90th percentile per synergy, so nba.com I think that’s 80-90 but I’m not sure.
So what we have here is a mega versatile scorer that’s intelligent and effective off ball. His ability as a wing to score in isolation throughout his offensive apex is generational and arguably the best combination of volume + effeciency we have on record since isolations have been tracked, outside of offenses which are designed to create high leverage offensive situations. (I do think Durants raw effeciency wins out). Finally, despite being generational in his isolation/face up 1 on 1 offense, his post game was arguably even more phenomenal, with a level of consistent effeciency that was higher than a guy who was arguably one of the most effecient post players ever at the time in Dirk for 3 years straight, on volume comparable to bigs today let alone wings.
That translates back tremendously well I think. When you think of the impact he had as a primarily 1v1 player (with very good if not always willing passing) I think it makes sense to argue that in an absolute sense playing in eras where that skill goes from being the least effecient type of offense to a main type of offense would drastically boost his impact.
Kobe played an ineffecient style (isolation and 1v1 basketball) in an ineffecient way (kooobeeeee) so efficiently that it was effecient overall, essentially. Push him back and it’s no longer an ineffecient style and he probably gets saved from himself a bit as well
So when I throw him forward, I see guys who are somewhat similar in terms of being great 1v1 but having alotnof overall offensive versatility and more so utilizing the pick and roll to get into good situations 1v1 with switch mismatch basketball, or being part of an offense with off ball movement and cutting and still running pick and roll and making good reads or just getting situations with isolations and help beaters. Post help beaters esp are pretty simple nowadays. Of course you could reference certain high impact offensive guys who arguably don’t do a single thing on the court offensively better than Kobe did
A guy like Booker for example in 2022, wasn’t better relatively speaking than Kobe in any synergy play type, except miscallenous which doesn’t really count lol
Of course, one could argue Kobe would not want to run pick and roll that much, but he did so in 2013, I think he had more pick and roll possessions than Booker did including passes overall. (He did, 960 vs 876).
Per synergy, Kobe was in the 92nd percentile including passes (90th without). 11th/73 for pick and roll possessions including passes, >350 possessions, right above Curry lol (2013 of course).
Why I’m mentioning Booker is that he’s someone that someone I kind of know has mentioned is in a role that Kobe would be interesting in (obviously not exactly, Kobe would score more and do more on ball ofc)
I feel saying super saiyan Kawhi on offense makes me feel stupid because Kawhi a beast even though it might be valid, but no one is gonna say he’s not a super saiyan Booker in that regard.
Well Booker is third in offensive rapm for the past 3 years, his offensive net rtg is usually quite great, +8-12 ish as a range, and we have now seen a Suns team that was a top 3 offense when he was healthy (not on court rtg), and has been a bottom 10 one since he got hurt. A guy like Tatum is also high up there in offensive rapm, and hell kawhis first lmao.
Luck adjustments make their rankings a bit less generous
(Tatum 5, Kawhi 7, booker 10) although Idk if that is good for multi year samples
The archetype of great versatile wing scorer with great playmaking is absolutely great on offense, we see these guys having incredible impact.
When we look at how they play, see their synergy profiles, etc etc etc, I don’t think it calls for a re evaluation of how good they are, I think it calls for the fact that this archetype is better now relative to how it was in the 2000s.
Especially since he’s going to be a solid situational wing stopper, I would certainly pick him above some guys that had higher in era impact in an absolute sense.
Moving backwards, similar situation where Kobe’s transcendent strengths translate far better, whereas his other strengths such as scoring versatility remain as effective if not even more effective. I’ll admit ignorance to the 70s, but then bye 60s I think it’s just a huge gap between him and 1960s guards that’s not really fair at all.
Overall when I rank Kobe it’s three things
First of all, it’s cheesy but yeah, rings are a big deal for me. He has 5, and the 01/09/10 ones are all pretty lit. Beating the Celtics with the last one too.
I don’t think it’s invalid to have rings be a large part of the argument, I also don’t think it means I have to rank Russell to be #1 either since that’s not the only thing, but it’s pretty big for me.
It makes some guys like KG are a complete non starter for me. I do understand that he could easily be argued to have one of the best in era cumulative career value impacts in nba history, sure. He also in an absolute sense is amazing. But like KG has like 4 real relevant seasons from a practical historic perspective, losing in 6 to a better LA team (which he should get no blame for of course), the 08 championship, and then losing in 2010 and it kind of being a cool final chip for Kobe, and then 2012 losing to bron when he went demon mode on them.
I don’t think it’s objectively wrong to view it that way or anything, that his objective career value is top 10 and maybe even higher so he should be there, but for me my opinion is very much just “yeah that’s tough oh well”
Circumstances suck sometimes but it is what it is for me, so other guys like west are a non starter for me as well
It’s ditto for wilt, he’s not a non starter to the same extent of course, but like, yeah I can’t lie if ur in what’s called the best nba player to player rivalry ever and you lose 9/10 times that’s tough lol but ur out for me. I think wilts a much better player than Russell in all honesty even if his impact wasn’t as high in era
Second of all, I’m a bit higher on his in era ability or in era impact than most. I think 01/06/08/09/10 are all fantastic years in their own ways.
01 and 10 are a bit more controversial, I think in 2001 his playoff run esp WCF run was absurd for that time, esp considering his great defense that year, while in 2010 I think in the playoffs he was back to his 08/09 levels mostly (more post less iso), and I think him going clutch for mode for that year with them game winners overcame any difference from the prior seasons in terms of his per game impact.
I have 08/09/10 all as insane years, and insane playoff runs where he was unlucky to run into the number one defense each finals. The Celtics def especially. I’ve heard that the refs swallowed their whistles relatively for what it’s worth too, but I’d have to rewatch. I’d be curious to see his playoff defense if it upped in intensity at all, but being a situaional wing stopper is big on a night to night basis even if it’s not something you see on aggregate.
Finally, I do think in an absolute sense he translates fantastically going back or forward, for the reasons I said above. 1 on 1 play was more effective back then, especially if you were a good passer, Kobe’s 1 on 1 play I do think is as good as his peers say it was and I do think the data supports him being historic in that regard even with him admittedly biting off more than he could chew at times with some of them shots in 06 and 07 especially (although if someone told me he didn’t want the ball cuz he’d drop it I’d take that shot too lol), he still looks incredible with his isolation effeciency let alone his volume, and forget about his post offense. Beyond that, the sheer versatility of his scoring repertoire and everything makes me view him as a guy that had tier 1.5 offensive impact during his time while being a tier 1 offensive player that could have that level of impact in other eras. I do agree that you usually need a transcendent talent to be a tier 1 guy but his talent happened to coincide with it not being a good time for that to be his talent. Beyond that, the rest of his offensive game was incredible too.
I’d be curious to see if someone ever breaks down his playoff defense from 08-10, I feel it would be good during important moments, but that’s mainly what drops his peak lower for me, I view him as a pretty good but not incredible wing defender, although he had the ability to lock up and take a matchup or be part of a great defense if that’s what a particular series or matchup demanded more focus towards IG. Beyond that it’s hard to criticize him for not doing well in the role he was in against the top 1 defense. In any case though, 08 he sucked against the Celtics, 09 was good vs the magic, and in 2010 he was solid against the Celtics, 4 very good games 3 very bad ones imo, against a defense that clamped up 2010 bron I don’t think that’s bad esp given how he plays. Not having a “that” finals series drops him a tad for me altho it makes sense and the magic one was good ofc.
I 100% rank bron/Jordan/Kareem above him
Duncan probably too I just don’t know that much about him in terms of his whole career, Russell goes from being a goat candidate to like 10 for me. Magic’s career cut too short for me. I see Shaq too being above him but similar with Duncan, but probably more open to this one. Not high on bird
In any case I don’t think it’s that deep of someone has Kobe top three or something, I know guys that don’t rate bigs that highly or have different rankings for perimeter players and inside players, it’s valid even if I don’t agree with it
YesEmbiid711 wrote:MyUniBroDavis wrote:tsherkin wrote:
I dunno, there were a bunch of high-volume guys in the league at the time whose jumpers had matured by then as well, right? Malone, Ewing, Robinson, etc, etc.
Twitter and Instagram and Facebook are all cesspools of idiocy where good conversation goes to die, though, especially on subjects such as sports, lol.
Would be interesting to see the justification for him as high as the upper bound of that range, especially over some other guys. I suppose you have to depreciate actual awards won, look at several of his seasons higher than conventional examination holds and such, but it would be an interesting discussion for sure. I might not agree, but it's not like saying "Kobe's the GOAT." That can't be substantially argued, but 5-8 is at least semi-workable for the sake of conversation.
For
1. Aren’t we in agreement there then? What I meant more so is that if a shorter three point line increases shooting percentages for long twos as significantly as it does you’d expect it to increase in general from 2 point range because of that when the opposite is true, of course like you said pace slowed down and everything.
2. What about Tiktok lol, but yeah you’re right social media convo is kinda dumb when it comes to sports
3. I think I’ve made my case for Kobe before somewhere, but it’s mostly that I view him as quite great in an absolute sense, and I value rings a lot. I’ve kind of gone on about his synergy/cpoe or whatever being absolutely fantastic before, and how those specific skills he has translates really well when you go backwards.
Beyond that, while not as good as Wade/lebron/nash in this regard, I do believe that he would have been able to see some success if he was in an offense where he leaned towards pick and roll a bit more, while still utilizing his ability as an transcendant 1 on 1 scorer most of the time. In 2007 and 2008 he posted elite effeciency and high volume in that regard, very comparable with wade’s effeciencies, although his effeciencies across the board declined a bit in 2009 while still being very good overall. 06 he was quite good as well. Of course, his 1v1 scoring ability would still be the main force.
I’ve posted his synergy profile before, but essentially it’s kind of ridiculous, his raw halfcourt effeciency compared favorably to lebron and Wade, and he was just crazy effecient in the halfcourt in general. More than that, he didn’t really have any weaknesses either in that regard.
So mainly, I think his in era impact would have been higher had he played in an offense like that in the sense the offense would be more dependent on him. I do think he’s shown an ability to deliver in that type of offense, and even 2013 Kobe who was far declined had one of his best offensive years in a more ball screen heavy role despite him not doing nearly as good at it as you’d expect prime Kobe to do.
I think there were more factors than just that, for example that 01-05 was probably the worst era in an absolute sense for iso scoring wings specifically, and that he played with one of the most dominant half court scoring forces of all time in Shaq meant his impact was always going to be muted since he’s taking away from the best option. Of course, the beef that they both were at fault for, etc etc.
In any case I do think his impact could have been higher even in era given those situations, even if it was of course was great. On the other hand, I do think his situations were generally good and three chips with Shaq and two with a good Lakers cast in 08-10 meant he could still get 5 chips, so as I’ve said before I think it evens out
Now the main thing that hurts his effeciency specifically is the fact that isolation basketball was kind of the least effecient play style during 1998-2016, and we’ve kind of seen how that’s not so much the case for offenses that are designed around maximizing that skillset post three point revolution, while it would seem like a similar thing was the case pre illegal D as well. Kobe was good enough at this that it still led to an extremely effective halfcourt offense, but it would still hurt him. But for me, the argument essentially goes -
- Kobe in an absolute sense would have been more impactful in other eras vs his peers
- kobes in era impact was still fantastic, and of course he was 5 titles, and was a key contributor in all of them, esp 01/09/10.
Evaluating Kobe on offense
- he’s a great if at times unwilling passer, but he became better at this over his 24 prime (08-10). He’s shown great ability to pass out of pick and roll, and overall he’s probably a very good passer with great but not incredible vision at his peak if you think it’s 2008 or 2009. If you think it’s 06 or 07 it’s more him being a stupid scorer
- while his synergy profile paints a picture of a incredibly versatile halfcourt scorer without any weakness (while still being great in transition of course), diving deeper, while he was extremely effective in the pick and roll or off ball etc etc, it’s clear that his 1 on 1 game stands out
- there’s a tendency to believe that Kobe wasn’t that effecient of an 1 on 1 player, and he’s more decent effeciency wise but high volume. That’s not really the case during his best years though.
- his isolation play stats are less impressive than his post up stats, but are still quite great. Among high iso players, here are his rankings from 06-09, >200 isolations
05) 2nd/31
06) 12th/45
07) 1st/37
08) 4th/36
09) 12th/45
10) 12th/41
11) 5th/39
12) 18th/41 (>130, lockout)
13) 8th/27
For reference, here is KDs ranking over a similar criteria (isos are down a bit so made it >100)
16) 6th/51
17) 7th/46
18) 6th/36
19) 3rd/38
21) 2nd/42 (did >100 since he didn’t qualify)
22) 4th/45
Kawhis also for reference
16) 7/51
17) 21/46
19) 5/38
20) 6/51
21) 27/42
Of course, when it comes to synergy stuff you’re generally gonna have guys above you.
Kawhis percentiles are quite good to be clear, so this isn’t a knock on him at all he’s generally 70th percentile ish on those “bad” years.
Of course, there’s a huge gap in volume: Kobe averaged more isolations over those 4 years than double durant and Kawhi combined. Of course, this wasn’t through an offense that emphasizes high leverage isos like the harden rockets for example either, a lot of them we’re triangle actions not creating much at times. Of course, I think his 06 mark considering his absurd volume and how much he hated his teammates (lol) is insane as well
. His 09 mark a tad low but still very elite.
In any case, the raw rankings in stuff like this undersell guys a bit, but Kobe was a transcendent isolation player with a combination of elite effeciency and ridiculous volume. This isn’t taking to account how hard teams tried to stop him either.
To be clear, yes isolation wasn’t a very effecient play from 2000-2016 for various reasons, but it was effecient in regards to when Kobe used it: his halfcourt scoring effeciency in terms of ppp was elite iirc, I had it earlier this thread
So as an isolation player - fantastic.
To be clear, even with the huge volume edge I still take Durant in this regard, although kobes playoff resiliency in that regard is quite good too so maybe then I take him there. Durants my #1 scorer ever in the RS in terms of his ability to do so I think though, so that doesn’t say much. I’m a lot higher on Durant than most. Though
But Kobe does look like a pretty damn good isolation player.
To be very clear these rankings heavily undersell his ability, because to conclude he was a 70-80th percentile guy in that regard isn’t really the right conclusion.
Booker and Tatum ranked 36th and 38th out of 42 in 2021 and 27th and 28th out of 46 in 2022 (>120). They were above 50th percentile in 2022 and just under in 2021. When you do stuff like this you always get guys that are randomly high or a few suprise names over who you’d expect at times
While one could make an argument that Kobe not being elite from three might hurt him if he played a similar today, it should be noted that for all his other flaws as a player derozans actually been the best at this for awhile lol, so I think it’s a non issue.
So in terms of isolation scoring, he was incredibly effective. His effeciency was genuinely fantastic in the context of synergy data, as you can see by him comparing very favorably to a guy like Kawhi and somewhat holding his own against a guy like KD in raw effeciency.
So the isolation data is impressive. Of course, keep in mind that a typical Kobe isolation was far more like a Kawhi isolation than a harden one or even most Kd ones. Most these isolation opportunities were made by necessity rather than by design like today.
How that gauges today or back then I’m not sure, but we have players complaining about how 1v1 basketball died out a bit in the 2000s as illegal d rules got taken away. Beyond the rule changes being lightened in 06 we do see a trend towards, as you said it, more effecient pick and roll basketball, less long twos, etc etc.
I was curious to see vs the other high scoring wings that were effecient inside the arc, and it seems like Kobe just ended up having a much larger majority of his possessions come from on ball halfcourt scoring than his contemporaries.
Just off a look through in 08 it seems like it comes from either them having more off ball possessions or running more pick and roll.
There’s a middle ground between Kobe had okay effeciency because he took stupid shots and Kobe had great effeciency taking all the teams hard shots.
The idea of value add comes from opportunity cost. On one hand, it is valid that at times esp 06 and 07 Kobe was a ball hog and took some dumb shots
At the same time, he was still effecient overall, his half court offense overall in ppp was better than Wade and brons every year from 06-09 for example, and 09 specifically he’s even above Dirk.
Beyond that, I don’t think kobes limitations are why he played the way he did, he was incredibly effecient and intelligent off ball and his pick and roll offense was genuinely great as well, even if not quite as good as the Wade/bron/nash of that time in that regard
There’s I think a middle ground there, the idea of opportunity cost and all of that. Kobe took harder shots both because he needed to and because his role in the offense in general meant he had to.
Otherwise, his offensive impact during his offensive apex doesn’t make sense, it was obviously incredibly high and probably could be argued higher than some signals based off of pretty strong evidence of noise.
Got a bit off track there. Overall, I would say in terms of since we’ve had synergy, outside of situations where these situations were specifically leveraged, prime Kobe is probably the best isolation player in terms of the combination of elite isolation effeciency and ridiculous volume and defensive attention. This of course would be in line to how he’s viewed by other players as well, and intuitively makes sense
It’s hard to evaluate him versus guys in generations because the quality of data we have simply isnt as high since we don’t have synergy data.
I would argue Durant even with a fourth of his volume is a better isolation scorer, but Durants kind of #1 for me in the RS in that regard anyway.
It’s hard to gauge because nowadays it’s much more the top end of isolation scoring is higher rather than it being higher universally, and I’d assume it was a similar trend during illegal D times even if maybe it wasn’t nearly as absurd as now. We see that players were complaining about this as well.
So generational isolation scorer and quite great in the halfcourt effeciency on its own.
Of course, post scoring was a bit more emphasized for wings the more you go back. This one is a lot more straight forward, Kobe averaged around 200 possessions from 06-09 (300 in 09 and 450 in 10)
Kobe as a post scorer averaged more ppp than Dirk, duncan, Yao (hehe) from 07-09. KG beat him out in 07, but not the other two years.
Using a same criteria to get 50 ish players, >150 pos
06. 20th/60
07. 5th/51
08. 3rd/44
09. 3rd/46
10. 7th/48
I mean especially with volume that’s as much as some centers today (not an exaggeration either, 450 is more than Jokic the last 2 years lmao). 200 is about 12th in the nba the past few years
Kobe is just kind of ridiculous as a post scoring wing with his combination of effeciency and volume at that size, especially taking into account how much teams defend him. In this regard he does come out with better effeciency than KD or Kawhi I think, who both are fantastic of course at this (KD does have a few insane years though).
All of his other scoring stuff are usually 90th percentile per synergy, so nba.com I think that’s 80-90 but I’m not sure.
So what we have here is a mega versatile scorer that’s intelligent and effective off ball. His ability as a wing to score in isolation throughout his offensive apex is generational and arguably the best combination of volume + effeciency we have on record since isolations have been tracked, outside of offenses which are designed to create high leverage offensive situations. (I do think Durants raw effeciency wins out). Finally, despite being generational in his isolation/face up 1 on 1 offense, his post game was arguably even more phenomenal, with a level of consistent effeciency that was higher than a guy who was arguably one of the most effecient post players ever at the time in Dirk for 3 years straight, on volume comparable to bigs today let alone wings.
That translates back tremendously well I think. When you think of the impact he had as a primarily 1v1 player (with very good if not always willing passing) I think it makes sense to argue that in an absolute sense playing in eras where that skill goes from being the least effecient type of offense to a main type of offense would drastically boost his impact.
Kobe played an ineffecient style (isolation and 1v1 basketball) in an ineffecient way (kooobeeeee) so efficiently that it was effecient overall, essentially. Push him back and it’s no longer an ineffecient style and he probably gets saved from himself a bit as well
So when I throw him forward, I see guys who are somewhat similar in terms of being great 1v1 but having alotnof overall offensive versatility and more so utilizing the pick and roll to get into good situations 1v1 with switch mismatch basketball, or being part of an offense with off ball movement and cutting and still running pick and roll and making good reads or just getting situations with isolations and help beaters. Post help beaters esp are pretty simple nowadays. Of course you could reference certain high impact offensive guys who arguably don’t do a single thing on the court offensively better than Kobe did
A guy like Booker for example in 2022, wasn’t better relatively speaking than Kobe in any synergy play type, except miscallenous which doesn’t really count lol
Of course, one could argue Kobe would not want to run pick and roll that much, but he did so in 2013, I think he had more pick and roll possessions than Booker did including passes overall. (He did, 960 vs 876).
Per synergy, Kobe was in the 92nd percentile including passes (90th without). 11th/73 for pick and roll possessions including passes, >350 possessions, right above Curry lol (2013 of course).
Why I’m mentioning Booker is that he’s someone that someone I kind of know has mentioned is in a role that Kobe would be interesting in (obviously not exactly, Kobe would score more and do more on ball ofc)
I feel saying super saiyan Kawhi on offense makes me feel stupid because Kawhi a beast even though it might be valid, but no one is gonna say he’s not a super saiyan Booker in that regard.
Well Booker is third in offensive rapm for the past 3 years, his offensive net rtg is usually quite great, +8-12 ish as a range, and we have now seen a Suns team that was a top 3 offense when he was healthy (not on court rtg), and has been a bottom 10 one since he got hurt. A guy like Tatum is also high up there in offensive rapm, and hell kawhis first lmao.
Luck adjustments make their rankings a bit less generous
(Tatum 5, Kawhi 7, booker 10) although Idk if that is good for multi year samples
The archetype of great versatile wing scorer with great playmaking is absolutely great on offense, we see these guys having incredible impact.
When we look at how they play, see their synergy profiles, etc etc etc, I don’t think it calls for a re evaluation of how good they are, I think it calls for the fact that this archetype is better now relative to how it was in the 2000s.
Especially since he’s going to be a solid situational wing stopper, I would certainly pick him above some guys that had higher in era impact in an absolute sense.
Moving backwards, similar situation where Kobe’s transcendent strengths translate far better, whereas his other strengths such as scoring versatility remain as effective if not even more effective. I’ll admit ignorance to the 70s, but then bye 60s I think it’s just a huge gap between him and 1960s guards that’s not really fair at all.
Overall when I rank Kobe it’s three things
First of all, it’s cheesy but yeah, rings are a big deal for me. He has 5, and the 01/09/10 ones are all pretty lit. Beating the Celtics with the last one too.
I don’t think it’s invalid to have rings be a large part of the argument, I also don’t think it means I have to rank Russell to be #1 either since that’s not the only thing, but it’s pretty big for me.
It makes some guys like KG are a complete non starter for me. I do understand that he could easily be argued to have one of the best in era cumulative career value impacts in nba history, sure. He also in an absolute sense is amazing. But like KG has like 4 real relevant seasons from a practical historic perspective, losing in 6 to a better LA team (which he should get no blame for of course), the 08 championship, and then losing in 2010 and it kind of being a cool final chip for Kobe, and then 2012 losing to bron when he went demon mode on them.
I don’t think it’s objectively wrong to view it that way or anything, that his objective career value is top 10 and maybe even higher so he should be there, but for me my opinion is very much just “yeah that’s tough oh well”
Circumstances suck sometimes but it is what it is for me, so other guys like west are a non starter for me as well
It’s ditto for wilt, he’s not a non starter to the same extent of course, but like, yeah I can’t lie if ur in what’s called the best nba player to player rivalry ever and you lose 9/10 times that’s tough lol but ur out for me. I think wilts a much better player than Russell in all honesty even if his impact wasn’t as high in era
Second of all, I’m a bit higher on his in era ability or in era impact than most. I think 01/06/08/09/10 are all fantastic years in their own ways.
01 and 10 are a bit more controversial, I think in 2001 his playoff run esp WCF run was absurd for that time, esp considering his great defense that year, while in 2010 I think in the playoffs he was back to his 08/09 levels mostly (more post less iso), and I think him going clutch for mode for that year with them game winners overcame any difference from the prior seasons in terms of his per game impact.
I have 08/09/10 all as insane years, and insane playoff runs where he was unlucky to run into the number one defense each finals. The Celtics def especially. I’ve heard that the refs swallowed their whistles relatively for what it’s worth too, but I’d have to rewatch. I’d be curious to see his playoff defense if it upped in intensity at all, but being a situaional wing stopper is big on a night to night basis even if it’s not something you see on aggregate.
Finally, I do think in an absolute sense he translates fantastically going back or forward, for the reasons I said above. 1 on 1 play was more effective back then, especially if you were a good passer, Kobe’s 1 on 1 play I do think is as good as his peers say it was and I do think the data supports him being historic in that regard even with him admittedly biting off more than he could chew at times with some of them shots in 06 and 07 especially (although if someone told me he didn’t want the ball cuz he’d drop it I’d take that shot too lol), he still looks incredible with his isolation effeciency let alone his volume, and forget about his post offense. Beyond that, the sheer versatility of his scoring repertoire and everything makes me view him as a guy that had tier 1.5 offensive impact during his time while being a tier 1 offensive player that could have that level of impact in other eras. I do agree that you usually need a transcendent talent to be a tier 1 guy but his talent happened to coincide with it not being a good time for that to be his talent. Beyond that, the rest of his offensive game was incredible too.
I’d be curious to see if someone ever breaks down his playoff defense from 08-10, I feel it would be good during important moments, but that’s mainly what drops his peak lower for me, I view him as a pretty good but not incredible wing defender, although he had the ability to lock up and take a matchup or be part of a great defense if that’s what a particular series or matchup demanded more focus towards IG. Beyond that it’s hard to criticize him for not doing well in the role he was in against the top 1 defense. In any case though, 08 he sucked against the Celtics, 09 was good vs the magic, and in 2010 he was solid against the Celtics, 4 very good games 3 very bad ones imo, against a defense that clamped up 2010 bron I don’t think that’s bad esp given how he plays. Not having a “that” finals series drops him a tad for me altho it makes sense and the magic one was good ofc.
I 100% rank bron/Jordan/Kareem above him
Duncan probably too I just don’t know that much about him in terms of his whole career, Russell goes from being a goat candidate to like 10 for me. Magic’s career cut too short for me. I see Shaq too being above him but similar with Duncan, but probably more open to this one. Not high on bird
In any case I don’t think it’s that deep of someone has Kobe top three or something, I know guys that don’t rate bigs that highly or have different rankings for perimeter players and inside players, it’s valid even if I don’t agree with it
I get your list is your list but I am curious.
You say Wilt didn't win enough to be considered higher than Kobe. But Bill Russell won 11 championships and 8 in a row. Basically no one but people on Bill's team won during Russell's playing career. I suppose you could argue this makes the legend of Russell even greater because he won so much and prevented other greats (guys like Wilt who you consider better albeit maybe less valuable to their teams).
Is it fair to penalize guys like Wilt, West, and Oscar for not winning as much? Or in the same vain, couldn't Russell winning so consistently be used to boost him, in the sense, he kept other guys from boosting their legacies and maybe he is astronomically better at "winning" then the guys who played against him?
NO-KG-AI wrote:Jaivl wrote:Texas Chuck wrote:
I don't know that he was trying to put anyone down.
Oh, there was a very bad (deleted) post right after. Absolutely was, lol.
I didn't delete anything, and his comment came before I said anything about a certain someone hiding his IP because he's a banned user (which he's admitted to another user already). Nothing conspiracy about it, can't ban people for using a proxy, but I'm not going to play dumb and go back and forth with these guys that come back multiple times, especially when they try to put words in your mouth and attack, and then act like "Oh well, im new around here, I have no clue what you're talking about." You can really tell because they can never let their beef go, and they'll follow and quote certain people over and over because they're still mad about it.
MyUniBroDavis wrote:
1. Aren’t we in agreement there then? What I meant more so is that if a shorter three point line increases shooting percentages for long twos as significantly as it does you’d expect it to increase in general from 2 point range because of that when the opposite is true, of course like you said pace slowed down and everything.
3. I think I’ve made my case for Kobe before somewhere, but it’s mostly that I view him as quite great in an absolute sense, and I value rings a lot. I’ve kind of gone on about his synergy/cpoe or whatever being absolutely fantastic before, and how those specific skills he has translates really well when you go backwards.
Beyond that, while not as good as Wade/lebron/nash in this regard, I do believe that he would have been able to see some success if he was in an offense where he leaned towards pick and roll a bit more,
I’ve posted his synergy profile before, but essentially it’s kind of ridiculous, his raw halfcourt effeciency compared favorably to lebron and Wade, and he was just crazy effecient in the halfcourt in general. More than that, he didn’t really have any weaknesses either in that regard.
So mainly, I think his in era impact would have been higher had he played in an offense like that in the sense the offense would be more dependent on him.
I think there were more factors than just that, for example that 01-05 was probably the worst era in an absolute sense for iso scoring wings specifically, and that he played with one of the most dominant half court scoring forces of all time in Shaq meant his impact was always going to be muted since he’s taking away from the best option. Of course, the beef that they both were at fault for, etc etc.
But for me, the argument essentially goes -
- Kobe in an absolute sense would have been more impactful in other eras vs his peers
- kobes in era impact was still fantastic, and of course he was 5 titles, and was a key contributor in all of them, esp 01/09/10.
- he’s a great if at times unwilling passer, but he became better at this over his 24 prime (08-10). He’s shown great ability to pass out of pick and roll, and overall he’s probably a very good passer with great but not incredible vision at his peak if you think it’s 2008 or 2009. If you think it’s 06 or 07 it’s more him being a stupid scorer
- his isolation play stats are less impressive than his post up stats, but are still quite great. Among high iso players, here are his rankings from 06-09, >200 isolations
05) 2nd/31
06) 12th/45
07) 1st/37
08) 4th/36
09) 12th/45
10) 12th/41
11) 5th/39
12) 18th/41 (>130, lockout)
13) 8th/27
For reference, here is KDs ranking over a similar criteria (isos are down a bit so made it >100)
16) 6th/51
17) 7th/46
18) 6th/36
19) 3rd/38
21) 2nd/42 (did >100 since he didn’t qualify)
22) 4th/45
Kawhis also for reference
16) 7/51
17) 21/46
19) 5/38
20) 6/51
21) 27/42
Of course, when it comes to synergy stuff you’re generally gonna have guys above you.
How that gauges today or back then I’m not sure, but we have players complaining about how 1v1 basketball died out a bit in the 2000s as illegal d rules got taken away. Beyond the rule changes being lightened in 06 we do see a trend towards, as you said it, more effecient pick and roll basketball, less long twos, etc etc.
At the same time, he was still effecient overall, his half court offense overall in ppp was better than Wade and brons every year from 06-09 for example, and 09 specifically he’s even above Dirk.
Beyond that, I don’t think kobes limitations are why he played the way he did, he was incredibly effecient and intelligent off ball and his pick and roll offense was genuinely great as well, even if not quite as good as the Wade/bron/nash of that time in that regard
Of course, post scoring was a bit more emphasized for wings the more you go back. This one is a lot more straight forward, Kobe averaged around 200 possessions from 06-09 (300 in 09 and 450 in 10)
Kobe as a post scorer averaged more ppp than Dirk, duncan, Yao (hehe) from 07-09. KG beat him out in 07, but not the other two years.
Kobe played an ineffecient style (isolation and 1v1 basketball) in an ineffecient way (kooobeeeee) so efficiently that it was effecient overall, essentially.
Push him back and it’s no longer an ineffecient style and he probably gets saved from himself a bit as well
A guy like Booker for example in 2022, wasn’t better relatively speaking than Kobe in any synergy play type, except miscallenous which doesn’t really count lol
Of course, one could argue Kobe would not want to run pick and roll that much, but he did so in 2013, I think he had more pick and roll possessions than Booker did including passes overall. (He did, 960 vs 876).
I feel saying super saiyan Kawhi on offense makes me feel stupid because Kawhi a beast even though it might be valid, but no one is gonna say he’s not a super saiyan Booker in that regard.
When we look at how they play, see their synergy profiles, etc etc etc, I don’t think it calls for a re evaluation of how good they are, I think it calls for the fact that this archetype is better now relative to how it was in the 2000s.
It’s ditto for wilt, he’s not a non starter to the same extent of course, but like, yeah I can’t lie if ur in what’s called the best nba player to player rivalry ever and you lose 9/10 times that’s tough lol but ur out for me.
Russell goes from being a goat candidate to like 10 for me.
In any case I don’t think it’s that deep of someone has Kobe top three or something, I know guys that don’t rate bigs that highly or have different rankings for perimeter players and inside players, it’s valid even if I don’t agree with it
tsherkin wrote:It's a wonder, but it'd be matched off to some extent by slowing pace lowering shooting percentages in close, I'd expect. Worth examining/
Yes, Kobe's halfcourt individual scoring game was very strong. His shot selection was his own greatest enemy, and of course he didn't have quite the athletic gifts that some of his peers/predecessors enjoyed (which is a little whack to say when he was himself a very impressive athlete, they were just nutso physical specimens).
I don't necessarily think that's true, if I"m reading that correctly. I don't think he'd have benefited too much from having the ball run into/through him MORE in his own era, because there's a cap on exactly how efficient he could be. I think he could have surely benefited from some better offensive teams post-Shaq, certainly once they downgraded from Ariza to Artest, though. But as you say, had they used him in a somewhat more PnR-heavy fashion for the same volume of possessions, that might have worked out better, so if that's what you meant, that makes sense. That's what Lebron and Wade were doing, and it worked pretty well, for sure.
I mean, he hit the league as a kid, right? THere are only a couple of years where playing with Shaq was any kind of limitation on him, and in some, he forced the issue anyway. And then in some, like 2004, he got in his own way (though of course the Lakers that year were missing Horry, running Old Payton at the point and weren't healthy, so...). I think they did very well regardless, being one of three teams in league history to three-peat, after all. And still making another NBA Finals appearance, that aside.
Mmm. I don't really agree that he'd be MORE effective outside of his own era, certainly not backwards in time. MAYBE moving forward would help him, because of course things moving faster is always good for scoring efficiency and not getting loaded down against a set defense. Certainly being on teams more specifically geared to pace and space would open things up. I don't know that he would get to the level that would be required blending passing, foul pressure and individual scoring, but it's certainly possible.
I'd probably cut Kobe some slack on 06 and 07, given what he was working with. There were stretches where Chris Mihm and Kwame Brown and Smush Parker were his best running mates, and it would be hard for ANYONE to do anything with that roster, let alone trust them not to build a house with all their bricks. xD
Is worthwhile to post the appropriate PPP of those, since the relative rankings are nice, but seeing what was actually being accomplished per possession does matter some. And would be nice to see the arc of isolation player rising, or not, across time.
There was tons and tons of 1v1 basketball in the 2000s, it's a big part of why I hated the first half-decade, lol. So frustrating and ineffective. There are some specific sets that became less common, of course. There was one I recall where the Raptors used to line Vince up basically at the elbow for a clear-out and he could just swing through and use his first step to blow past a defender and get a dunk. These days, that's an elbow post-up because if a player faces up there for long, there's usually a double, for sure.
Yes, people forget that in all the talk about Kobe, he was a +2.4 rTS guy from 2000-2013, peaking at +3.9 (seven seasons of +3.0 or better). It's not insane, but that's reasonably strong, especially given his proclivity for some of the stupidest shots you ever yelled at the TV about, xD His issues were more situational than they were hugely problematic. Yeah, he wasn't MJ, of course, and so stuff like that really reinforced the issue where he couldn't create that same degree of separation from the league, but he was actually still an efficient volume scorer. Shaq was a +6.1 rTS guy from 2000-2006, which highlights why people were always complaining about Kobe shooting too much (Except when he was crushing it in the WCFs, heh), and why he dovetailed nicely with Wade over those last two seasons.
It's true, Kobe's overall efficiency at volume was pretty striking for the era, shy of 03 McGrady and until Lebron got going. Ray Allen was always more efficient, but shy of like a year or two with Seattle, he didn't bring similar volume, either. That might be part of the mistake, of course, trying to overshoot instead of focusing more on facilitation. Kobe's trigger to shoot was a bit overdeveloped IMHO, which is part of the mentality which limited his upper bound as an offensive force until later on in his career. It's been said, but I think not having the ability to shoot it out of his system and lose early on probably made it harder for him to curb his own scoring impulse. Then 06 happened and such and he began to appreciate things a little differently, because you can't win on your own as a volume scorer.
That surprises me, leastwise with Dirk, given his difference in shooting ability and so forth.
I don't think he didn't want to, I think it just wasn't that common outside of Utah for a long while. Like, the play has existed forever, but spamming the play wasn't really a thing apart for the Jazz until comparatively recently. You started to see it a little more with other, lesser PG/PF combinations, and then we started to see it emerge a lot more post-2008 (as a rough guideline). I doubt very much Kobe would have had HUGE issues doing it, though he did have that old-school mentality of wanting to beat his man specifically, which was emblematic of him taking on a lot of the older, "macho" type mentalities which contributed to when he had those weaker/frustrating performances.
Healthy Kawhi, that most mythical of beasts, had some physical tools on Kobe and was a notably better a shooter (though at least some of that is from volume differences). Perhaps his best attribute, though, likely extended from spending so much time with Pops coupled to his own basic mentality: he liked to get to his spots and he had generally good shot selection. Moved well without the ball, didn't NEED to spam isolations but was good at them when required. He was quite a sensible player.
It certainly makes sense that if you space the floor and open up the interior, guys who can get into the interior with finishing and passing threat will be more effective. That's about as basic as when the Rockets started using Horry to open things up for Olajuwon, or even the way the Bulls used Ho Grant or the Knicks used Kurt Thomas. Flare to the baseline, draw a defender, create more space closer to the basket. It's elementary stuff, but extended to the latest iteration of play, for sure. Kobe would love to have more space, for sure.
I see what you're saying, though context in those older playoff battles does matter some. There is a degree to which individual play means nothing in the face of a better team (witness Jordan versus the Celtics), and of course the playoffs were shorter, the talent pool smaller, the season somewhat shorter, buys through the first round for some, etc, etc, etc. It really wasn't the same environment at all. Making any kind if accounting for that becomes relevant.
With Wilt versus Kobe, there's a ton of stuff which can be effectively argued, though I get that it doesn't really match your criteria, which is cool.
Follow-on Kobe question, since I haven't seen you address it yet. How do you approach his fairly limp play in the Finals across the bulk of his career?
That seems a bit much for me. 5-time MVP, won more than anyone else (couldn't but play the games in his own career, so era changes are still relevant to raise in terms of ring counts, but still). First player-coach, won two more rings. 10th all-time seems something like a slap in the face, particularly when you put guys like Shaq and Duncan above him.
I think it requires a lot of mental gymnastics and inconsistency to rank him quite that high, personally. I don't think you can make a competent #3 all-time argument for Kobe without hypocrisy involved, even if one makes weighted arguments for stuff like rings and what have you. That's a separate conversation, though, since that's not what you're saying.
Regardless, I think the most important thing here is that was a bloody essay, so thanks for taking the time to write that. It was an enjoyable read. we may not agree on several things, but it's always fun seeing someone deep-dive a topic like this, especially with a divergent opinion. Makes me think of stuff from different angles!
Mmm. I don't really agree that he'd be MORE effective outside of his own era, certainly not backwards in time. MAYBE moving forward would help him, because of course things moving faster is always good for scoring efficiency and not getting loaded down against a set defense. Certainly being on teams more specifically geared to pace and space would open things up. I don't know that he would get to the level that would be required blending passing, foul pressure and individual scoring, but it's certainly possible.
But again, as we discussed, that's a weird narrative from people who wanted to crack on him. He was NOT inefficient, he just wasn't as efficient as Shaq (or, later, Lebron and Wade). He was actually pretty clearly the best volume scoring wing in the game until probably 07 or 08 or so, when Lebron and Durant really got going (maybe more like 09 for Durant). The issue with him, properly addressed, was never raw inefficiency so much as situational decision-making and the way he interacted with teammates and coaches.