Replace ANT with '08 Kobe

[OhayoKD]

Are we doing a "relative TS% doesn't matter" thing now?

2025 James is much better scorer than 2009 version, you just can't argue otherwise.

I would say 2009 LeBron would scale up to today's game but I'm not a hagiographer.

Thinking he would be better today is hagiography. But thinking his raw ts goes up is common sense.

[jjgp111292]

2025 James is much better scorer than 2009 version, you just can't argue otherwise.

I would say 2009 LeBron would scale up to today's game but I'm not a hagiographer.

He isn't being serious; he's taking a crack at the ludicrous idea that you can compare a guy's raw TS% in 2025 and use that as any sort of benchmark against someone who's career started more than a quarter century ago.

Neither was I lmao. I had actually worded it a much more direct way but edited it because it was too obvious I was joking . At leats it worked apparently *shrug*

Thinking he would be better today is hagiography. But thinking his raw ts goes up is common sense.

I am not actually being serious

[One_and_Done]

Ant is shooting 587 TS% this year. Kobe has never has a TS% above 580.

Sure, in very different league environments, though. With very different team strategies. Comparing their raw TS% is sort of ridiculous.

Ant is averaging 4.7 TOs per 100, which is the worst mark of his career. Over his career it's 4.0 per 100. Kobe's career TOs per 100 is 4.3. I'm not seeing much difference.

Yeah, this is fair. Kobe's an 11.6 TOV% guy, compared to Ant at 12.2% (12.9% this year). It isn't a HUGE difference.

Meanwhile, Ant could score more efficiently

Wake me when he does. This is his first season of 100 TS+ or better, let's not forget. You're a big fan of saying we shouldn't presume about what a player MIGHT do, only looking at what they did, so...

Ant is already scoring more efficiently, because a flat TS% adjustment is an absurd way to compare efficiency. As I've noted before, I flat out disagree that Kobe would be better or more efficient today; primarily due to his inelastic offensive game, his mediocre 3pt shooting, and his terrible attitude.

[OhayoKD]

I would say 2009 LeBron would scale up to today's game but I'm not a hagiographer.

He isn't being serious; he's taking a crack at the ludicrous idea that you can compare a guy's raw TS% in 2025 and use that as any sort of benchmark against someone who's career started more than a quarter century ago.

Neither was I lmao. I had actually worded it a much more direct way but edited it because it was too obvious I was joking . At leats it worked apparently *shrug*

Thinking he would be better today is hagiography. But thinking his raw ts goes up is common sense.

I am not actually being serious

I didn't think you were. Still wanted to draw the distinction. 2025 is vastly more talented league than 2009. Lebron would not be a 40-win lift outlier today barring low probability fan-fics

[One_and_Done]

Are we doing a "relative TS% doesn't matter" thing now?

It doesn't.

If a guy was 5% above league average TS% in 1957, does it follow he would also be 5% above average in 2025? Obviously not. Relative TS% is a garbage stat. People can make their case as to why player X would be more/less efficient today, but a flat adjustment that ignores all context is not appropriate.

[tsherkin]

Ant is already scoring more efficiently, because a flat TS% adjustment is an absurd way to compare efficiency. As I've noted before, I flat out disagree that Kobe would be better or more efficient today; primarily due to his inelastic offensive game, his mediocre 3pt shooting, and his terrible attitude.

I mean, you're wrong. We know this. There would be an adjustment due to the nature of FG% in today's environment. More transition opportunities, easier time in the paint, etc. Would he maintain his specific rTS? That's a legitimate question, but expecting him to post an identical TS% in a non-identical league environment would be fairly foolish, at best.

[One_and_Done]

Ant is already scoring more efficiently, because a flat TS% adjustment is an absurd way to compare efficiency. As I've noted before, I flat out disagree that Kobe would be better or more efficient today; primarily due to his inelastic offensive game, his mediocre 3pt shooting, and his terrible attitude.

I mean, you're wrong. We know this. There would be an adjustment due to the nature of FG% in today's environment. More transition opportunities, easier time in the paint, etc. Would he maintain his specific rTS? That's a legitimate question, but expecting him to post an identical TS% in a non-identical league environment would be fairly foolish, at best.

Some players would shoot better, some would shoot worse. A flat adjustment is not the way to determine this. I think Kobe might actually be worse offensively today given his play style.

[TheGOATRises007]

Kobe is way better than ANT.

ANT is genuinely the most overrated player in the league. He's been anointed to superstar status when he's nowhere near it.

He's not even a top 10 player in the league.

The way One_and_done feels about Kobe is exactly what ANT actually is.

And constantly ignoring relative TS isn't just silly. It's flat out stupid.

[MiamiBulls]

Are we doing a "relative TS% doesn't matter" thing now?

It doesn't.

If a guy was 5% above league average TS% in 1957, does it follow he would also be 5% above average in 2025? Obviously not. Relative TS% is a garbage stat. People can make their case as to why player X would be more/less efficient today, but a flat adjustment that ignores all context is not appropriate.

Wow!

So this means you think 2000 MVP Shaquille O'Neal was a low efficiency scorer, correct?

The League Average in True Shooting Percentage in 2025 is 57.5%, the year Shaq won MVP his TS% 57.8. That's only +0.3% above the 2025 League Average which makes Shaq a low efficiency scorer by today's standards.

In Shaq's 14 year prime from 1992-2006 he has never had a 60% TS outside just 2 Seasons & in 11 out of the 14 year stretch from 1992 to 2006 his TS% was never above 58.8% which is lower than Anthony Edwards' right now in 2025.

This must mean you think Shaquille O'Neal was a grossly overrated low efficiency scorer, correct?

[One_and_Done]

Are we doing a "relative TS% doesn't matter" thing now?

It doesn't.

If a guy was 5% above league average TS% in 1957, does it follow he would also be 5% above average in 2025? Obviously not. Relative TS% is a garbage stat. People can make their case as to why player X would be more/less efficient today, but a flat adjustment that ignores all context is not appropriate.

Wow!

So this means you think 2000 MVP Shaquille O'Neal was a low efficiency scorer, correct?

The League Average in True Shooting Percentage in 2025 is 57.5%, the year Shaq won MVP his TS% 57.8. That's only +0.3% above the 2025 League Average which makes Shaq a low efficiency scorer by today's standards.

In Shaq's 14 year prime from 1992-2006 he has never had a 60% TS outside just 2 Seasons & in 11 out of the 14 year stretch from 1992 to 2006 his TS% was never above 58.8% which is lower than Anthony Edwards' right now in 2025.

This must mean you think Shaquille O'Neal was a grossly overrated low efficiency scorer, correct?

Did you read what I wrote? I said a flat adjustment is not appropriate, not that context is irrelevant.

I don't think Kobe would be better today, for the reasons set out here:
viewtopic.php?t=2357707#p111495067

Shaq is a different player to Kobe, with different context.

[cupcakesnake]

You misunderstand me. I never said Ant was better than Kobe. I think his fit on the Wolves is very awkward. We're a team with very little spacing, scraping by with a league average offense.

This makes me wonder, though, because the spacing isn't any worse than it was in Kobe's career. The Wolves are shooting 34.7% on 39.3 3PA/g.

In 2013, the Lakers were 3rd in 3PAr while rocking 24.6 3PA/g at 35.5%.

Naz Reid has been great; Randle has been a shade above average on O. Gobert is a fine ORB/lob threat/transition guy.

All that to say, Kobe has operated in that environment and was a 57% TS guy at 94.4 poss/g (Minny's at 97.2), without the 10% increase in FG% from 0-3 feet we've seen since 2004. League average there was 63.1% in 2013, and 69.4% so far this season. Kobe would be thriving even with the weaker league-relative spacing in this league, particularly with his array of mid-range moves and shooting proficiency.

I think he's actually quite well-suited to navigate this environment without a strong 3. Now, the degree to which he could distance himself from league average with that style remains to be seen, of course, but I think that worrying about the spacing on the Wolves isn't really the thing. Kobe wasn't a savant virtuoso with the PnR, but he could run it, and that's a big part of today's game which makes his life easier.

Food for thought, anyway. I don't think the Wolves would suddenly be the best O in the league, but I suspect they'd be better than 13th, and they might be a little more consistent on O as a result of Kobe's play. Maybe not too much, given how well Ant has been shooting and how much Kobe loved his long twos, but a little.

My responses have more been about the Wolves than they have been about Ant vs. Kobe. I'm not any kind of absolutist about pristine spacing, but if you downgraded our shooting at another position, I think eventually the ecosystem completely collapses. We need spacing from somewhere in order for Gobert to be a lob threat and for Randle to be a shade above average on O. A big part of our offensive efficiency has come from taking a ton of threes and making them at a good clip. That's almost entirely Ant. Sure you're replacing Ant's shooting with lots of other good stuff that Kobe would bring (superior playmaking, cutting) but I think the spacing downgrade obviously affects the other players on this roster. Gobert and McDaniels the most severely, but also Randle. I'd really want to trade a lot of these players to suit Kobe. Having passers around Kobe was always really important because Kobe got his easy buckets off cuts in the triangle. Passing is one of the things the Wolves are worst at.

I'm not sure what comparing the 2025 Wolves shooting numbers to the 2008 Lakers does (or 2013 if that's what you're referencing). They played against different opponents. I think I'm missing your point here.

Kobe thriving in that environment in a different era is all well and good, but does it mean his team (the Wolves in this topic) would thrive in this era against the opponents of this era?

i'd much rather have Kobe than Ant in a vacuum.

[carlquincy]

Man, that 06 Lakers sure is great at passing. Easy buckets to 35ppg.

[LakerLegend]

Even ANT will tell you Kobe is better

https://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/team-usas-anthony-edwards-wasnt-cool-with-idea-of-coming-off-bench-we-dont-have-a-kobe/

[One_and_Done]

Even ANT will tell you Kobe is better

https://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/team-usas-anthony-edwards-wasnt-cool-with-idea-of-coming-off-bench-we-dont-have-a-kobe/

Players say dumb and contradictory stuff all the time, depending on what they think will get them applause at any given moment. Ant is the same guy who said Jordan was the only athletic guy back when he played. We shouldn't base our analysis on what players feel a need to say publicly.

[tsherkin]

My responses have more been about the Wolves than they have been about Ant vs. Kobe. I'm not any kind of absolutist about pristine spacing, but if you downgraded our shooting at another position, I think eventually the ecosystem completely collapses. We need spacing from somewhere in order for Gobert to be a lob threat and for Randle to be a shade above average on O. A big part of our offensive efficiency has come from taking a ton of threes and making them at a good clip. That's almost entirely Ant. Sure you're replacing Ant's shooting with lots of other good stuff that Kobe would bring (superior playmaking, cutting) but I think the spacing downgrade obviously affects the other players on this roster. Gobert and McDaniels the most severely, but also Randle. I'd really want to trade a lot of these players to suit Kobe. Having passers around Kobe was always really important because Kobe got his easy buckets off cuts in the triangle. Passing is one of the things the Wolves are worst at.

I hear you; the specific shooting around Ant isn't amazing right now, but it's still better than nothing.

I'm not sure what comparing the 2025 Wolves shooting numbers to the 2008 Lakers does (or 2013 if that's what you're referencing). They played against different opponents. I think I'm missing your point here.

Open shots are still open shots. They're shooting in higher volume, they're present above the arc more frequently than were Kobe's guys, the interior is more open than it was in Kobe's time. My point was that the spacing in an absolute sense is superior to what Kobe was working with when the 3 was less emphasized. I think, as a result, there would be space for Kobe to operate at least as well as he did in his own time.

Again, though, whether or not that ends up being a lot BETTER than Minny with Ant is another story, wholly dependent upon whether or not Kobe would rise relative to league average or stay around where he was in 2013. I figure he'd rise, because he was older and had tons of mileage on him by the time the team started to open up like that under D'Antoni. And the Triangle, whilst effective with Shaq and in the 90s, is essentially proto-offense compared to a lot of what's run now. Concepts which were comparatively advanced at the time are basic stuff in most offenses today, you know?

Anyway, Minny has guys who shoot well enough to be better than the 2013 Lakers. That's more than enough to give Kobe room to do his thing. So the question is basically "do we get league-average efficiency Kobe, or do we get +3% rTS Kobe from the higher finishing rates in the RA?" I lean toward the latter, and I think he'd be able to drive their offense reasonably well.

[One_and_Done]

I don't see how the Wolves having better shooters than the 2013 Lakers matters. This isn't 2013.

[tsherkin]

Ant is already scoring more efficiently, because a flat TS% adjustment is an absurd way to compare efficiency. As I've noted before, I flat out disagree that Kobe would be better or more efficient today; primarily due to his inelastic offensive game, his mediocre 3pt shooting, and his terrible attitude.

I mean, you're wrong. We know this. There would be an adjustment due to the nature of FG% in today's environment. More transition opportunities, easier time in the paint, etc. Would he maintain his specific rTS? That's a legitimate question, but expecting him to post an identical TS% in a non-identical league environment would be fairly foolish, at best.

Some players would shoot better, some would shoot worse. A flat adjustment is not the way to determine this. I think Kobe might actually be worse offensively today given his play style.

I agree that you can't just look at rTS and assume that would directly translate. I have said as much ITT a couple times, including in the post which you quoted.

That said, Kobe was a pretty good slasher in his day, and it's easier to finish at higher percentages in the RA today than it used to be in his day. His mid-range game wouldn't magically get worse, nor would his FT shooting. Nor, for that matter, his ability to draw fouls. I have every confidence that he would remain largely in love with his jumper, which would prevent him from reaching rTS heights such as we see from Shai, for example, but that doesn't matter too much.

Even in 2013, Kobe was getting to the RA on over 20% of his attempts.

You can see older guys finishing better than they did in their earlier seasons in the RA, so it's safe to assume that at least that zone would see improvement, even if everything else stayed the same. Norman Powell is 31 and 6'3, and he's shooting 72.7% in the RA. DeRozan's also 35 and shooting 74.1% there. It isn't unreasonable to think a younger, more athletic Kobe would do well there.

That said, such a change does only so much to Kobe's efficiency. It raises him from 57% to 57.6%, which is a mere +0.2% rTS. That's using the 21.1% proportion in the RA we saw from 34 year-old Kobe, though. In his 20s, he averaged 24.1% and had a season of nearly 32% as well. It's quite likely that he'd be there more, which opens the door to him getting back to that +2, +3% rTS type of range.

No doubt, his lack of quality 3pt shooting limits him... but it's also important to remember that his 3pt shooting fell off a cliff in his 30s and is heavily influenced by his post-Achilles years. He was a 34.1% 3pt shooter from 97-2009. So if you toss that in there, he hops up to 58.2%. You sneak him up to 24% of his FGA in the RA, and now we're at 58.9%. So now we're talking +1.5% rTS. And that's assuming that his trade-off comes from reducing shots in the 3-10 space instead of the 16-23 space. If you switch that around and steal some of his long jumpers for that increase at the basket, then he hits 59.0% TS.

It's very clear that Kobe wouldn't come in and be an efficiency monster, but it IS important to remember how he actually played. There wouldn't be a huge, meaningful difference in the individual scoring efficiency between Ant and Kobe in this league. And that's embarrassing, given how well Ant has been clicking from 3 this season. There's a pretty good chance Kobe would be slightly more efficient, while driving things with his slashing and mid-range game, all of which would be that much more effective because teams don't game for it today so much.

Food for thought.

[One_and_Done]

If we just invent numbers like that sure, but they're just imaginary stats of your making. If we're just speculating, then Kobe could also do worse, and actually hurt his team by refusing to adapt his playstyle.

One thing you fail to mention in your musings above is that perimeter D has gotten much better. Most teams start 4 guys who are mobile on the perimeter now. In Kobe's day teams hoped you'd take a 3, today teams gear their D around stopping 3s. That's not going to help his efficiency. Another factor completely ignored is how much extra energy Kobe will have to expend running around the perimeter on D, and the extent to which that'll reduce his offensive effectiveness.

The stuff about 'some of Kobe's bad 3pt shooting was post achilles' strikes me as entirely disingenuous. Kobe wasn't shooting 34% from 3 at volume on any sort of consistent basis pre-injury. His 3pt shooting was all over the place. In 02 it was 250, in 04 it was 327, other pre-achilles years it was 305, 303, 319, 323, 324, etc. He was not a consistent 3pt shooter before or after his achilles.

[70sFan]

Kobe shot at 34% or above in all but one season (2004) in 2003-09 period.