Peak: Kobe vs. Garnett

Moderators: Doctor MJ, trex_8063, penbeast0, PaulieWal, Clyde Frazier

User avatar
WhateverBro
Head Coach
Posts: 6,739
And1: 1,579
Joined: Jan 17, 2005
Location: Sweden
 

Re: Peak: Kobe vs. Garnett 

Post#21 » by WhateverBro » Sun Dec 2, 2012 12:54 pm

ardee wrote:
The Lakers in '08 played the 3.8 SRS Nuggets in the first round, the 7 SRS Jazz in the second round, and the 5.1 SRS defending champion Spurs in the WCF.

The Wolves in '04 played the 1.7 Nuggets, the 5.4 Kings, and the 4.4 Lakers.

So there's no question that '08 was by FAR the stronger conference, and frankly Kobe's supporting cast was only marginally better.


Since the calculated SRS is based on the whole season, I don't see why I should only use that when comparing how strong the opponents are over a playoff series. I'd also factor in how well the team actually played in the playoffs. According to SRS, '04 Lakers beat the '04 Spurs who had an SRS 7.5, for best in the league that year. Factor in that Malone missed half the season to their SRS number, it's pretty clear that Lakers during playoff mode were a much better team than their 4.4 SRS show, no?

I'd agree that Nuggets were far better than the 04 version though, it was rookie Melo for christ sake. But I much rather face Nuggets, Utah and San Antonio in 08 than go up against 04 Sactown and Lakers.

Wait, 08 Lakers supporting cast marginally better than 04 Minny? No, just no.
User avatar
WhateverBro
Head Coach
Posts: 6,739
And1: 1,579
Joined: Jan 17, 2005
Location: Sweden
 

Re: Peak: Kobe vs. Garnett 

Post#22 » by WhateverBro » Sun Dec 2, 2012 12:55 pm

OptimusOne6 wrote:
WhateverBro wrote:What? Nuggets aside, sacramento and lakers in 04 are tougher opponents than utah, N.O and spurs in 08. Is this even debatable?

Lets get this straight, the 04 Lakers were not even the favorite against the 04 Spurs, so who was better to you, the 04 Spurs or the 08 Spurs? The answer should be obvious.

The 04 Lakers look awesome on paper but they weren't that great aside from Kobe and Shaq due to how old and weak their supporting cast was.

Sacramento may have been better than Utah, but surely not on the defensive side.


04 Spurs were much better :-?
ardee
RealGM
Posts: 15,320
And1: 5,397
Joined: Nov 16, 2011

Re: Peak: Kobe vs. Garnett 

Post#23 » by ardee » Sun Dec 2, 2012 3:06 pm

WhateverBro wrote:
ardee wrote:
The Lakers in '08 played the 3.8 SRS Nuggets in the first round, the 7 SRS Jazz in the second round, and the 5.1 SRS defending champion Spurs in the WCF.

The Wolves in '04 played the 1.7 Nuggets, the 5.4 Kings, and the 4.4 Lakers.

So there's no question that '08 was by FAR the stronger conference, and frankly Kobe's supporting cast was only marginally better.


Since the calculated SRS is based on the whole season, I don't see why I should only use that when comparing how strong the opponents are over a playoff series. I'd also factor in how well the team actually played in the playoffs. According to SRS, '04 Lakers beat the '04 Spurs who had an SRS 7.5, for best in the league that year. Factor in that Malone missed half the season to their SRS number, it's pretty clear that Lakers during playoff mode were a much better team than their 4.4 SRS show, no?

I'd agree that Nuggets were far better than the 04 version though, it was rookie Melo for christ sake. But I much rather face Nuggets, Utah and San Antonio in 08 than go up against 04 Sactown and Lakers.

Wait, 08 Lakers supporting cast marginally better than 04 Minny? No, just no.


The Lakers had one borderline All-Star (Gasol, who incidentally only hit that level after he got to play with Kobe) and a good PF (Odom). Everyone else was very average, such as Farmar, Sasha, Rad, etc., judging by how they performed outside of the comfortable triangle offense.

Kobe was carrying a tremendous load on that team, to take them to the no. 1 seed in the toughest conference ever with no other stars is a ridiculous feat.

It's not like the '04 Wolves were awful, they had an All Star in Cassell, a good third option in Sprewell, and for some time the 44% 3 point shooting Wally Z. KG had good stuff to work with that year.
DJ-Master
Sophomore
Posts: 166
And1: 0
Joined: Oct 30, 2012

Re: Peak: Kobe vs. Garnett 

Post#24 » by DJ-Master » Sun Dec 2, 2012 3:33 pm

ardee wrote:The Lakers had one borderline All-Star (Gasol, who incidentally only hit that level after he got to play with Kobe) and a good PF (Odom).

How can you call 19 / 8 / 3.5apg on 65%TS "borderline All-Star"
I guess you think 00 Kobe was a roleplayer?

Gasol was easily a Top 10-20 player that year and one of the best offensive players in the league.

He didn't change much going from Memphis to LA other then his effieincy rising since he went from being the #1 on a **** team to being the #2 on a great team.

Odom was also a borderline All-Star player that year averaging 14 / 10 / 3apg on good efficiency in both the rs and playoffs.

Everyone else was very average, such as Farmar, Sasha, Rad, etc., judging by how they performed outside of the comfortable triangle offense.

Most roleplayers are "average" type players. Moot point.

Kobe was carrying a tremendous load on that team, to take them to the no. 1 seed in the toughest conference ever with no other stars is a ridiculous feat.

Not really. Outside of the Celtic's no other team had a better overall supporting cast then LA that year.
Also toughest conference ever??? What are you smoking?
The West was weak that year.
Melo led nuggets? Injured Rockets? Utah?

I'll give him credit for performing well against some good Houston defenders but beating those other two teams was far from impressive or notable and considering that Houston was injured I can't say I was overly surprised by LA beating them.

It's not like the '04 Wolves were awful, they had an All Star in Cassell, a good third option in Sprewell, and for some time the 44% 3 point shooting Wally Z. KG had good stuff to work with that year.
[/quote]
Oh please. KG made those two All-Stars.

Cassell got injured and outside of 1 game he really didn't play or contribute anything against LAL.
So in the end all Garnett had was an old inefficient Sprewell and Wally Z who was mostly just a spot-up outside shooter who averaged 12ppg.

Kobe's 08 supporting cast Post-Gasol was vastly superior.
User avatar
ShowTimeERA
Assistant Coach
Posts: 3,790
And1: 208
Joined: Feb 15, 2012
 

Re: Peak: Kobe vs. Garnett 

Post#25 » by ShowTimeERA » Mon Dec 3, 2012 12:45 am

Please tell me when did LA play HOU during the 08 playoffs? I must have fell asleep for that week...
Image
User avatar
WhateverBro
Head Coach
Posts: 6,739
And1: 1,579
Joined: Jan 17, 2005
Location: Sweden
 

Re: Peak: Kobe vs. Garnett 

Post#26 » by WhateverBro » Mon Dec 3, 2012 1:03 am

ardee wrote:The Lakers had one borderline All-Star (Gasol, who incidentally only hit that level after he got to play with Kobe) and a good PF (Odom). Everyone else was very average, such as Farmar, Sasha, Rad, etc., judging by how they performed outside of the comfortable triangle offense.

Kobe was carrying a tremendous load on that team, to take them to the no. 1 seed in the toughest conference ever with no other stars is a ridiculous feat.

It's not like the '04 Wolves were awful, they had an All Star in Cassell, a good third option in Sprewell, and for some time the 44% 3 point shooting Wally Z. KG had good stuff to work with that year.


I'm sorry but the 04 Wolves without Garnett and Cassell is damn awful. Spree wasn't a good third option, his shooting was horrendous (49 TS %) and his defense wasn't what it once was. Wally Zs season was plagued by injuries both in the regular season and during the playoffs so he wasn't really a factor that year, he came off the bench the whole year.

04 Wolves had a frontcourt rotation of, besides Garnett; Olowokandi, Ervin Johnson, Mark Madsen and Gary Trent. Seriously?

You're also neglecting the most glaring difference between the teams.. Phil Jackson vs. Flip Saunders. HUGE difference.
Doctor MJ
Senior Mod
Senior Mod
Posts: 53,685
And1: 22,632
Joined: Mar 10, 2005
Location: Cali
     

Re: Peak: Kobe vs. Garnett 

Post#27 » by Doctor MJ » Mon Dec 3, 2012 1:10 am

MrBigShot wrote:Give me the guy that outscored an entire team through 3 quarters single handedly.


I like how you make your decision based on an event that that player can do once in a thousand tries.
Getting ready for the RealGM 100 on the PC Board

Come join the WNBA Board if you're a fan!
Asianiac_24
General Manager
Posts: 8,609
And1: 4,057
Joined: Jul 28, 2008
Contact:
   

Re: Peak: Kobe vs. Garnett 

Post#28 » by Asianiac_24 » Mon Dec 3, 2012 1:15 am

DJ-Master wrote:Oh please. KG made those two All-Stars.

Cassell got injured and outside of 1 game he really didn't play or contribute anything against LAL.
So in the end all Garnett had was an old inefficient Sprewell and Wally Z who was mostly just a spot-up outside shooter who averaged 12ppg.

Kobe's 08 supporting cast Post-Gasol was vastly superior.


Gasol went from shooting 57 TS% in Memphis to 64 TS% in LA IN THE SAME SEASON. For comparisons, Sprewell went from 50 TS% in NY in the previous season to 49 TS% in Minny. Cassell had a 0.1 TS% increase by going to Minny (56.5 to 56.6).

I'd like to know your reasons behind the "KG made those two All-Stars" statement, because those two didn't even improve their efficiency or volume with KG. Gasol had a 7 TS% increase as soon as he switch teams.
Asianiac_24
General Manager
Posts: 8,609
And1: 4,057
Joined: Jul 28, 2008
Contact:
   

Re: Peak: Kobe vs. Garnett 

Post#29 » by Asianiac_24 » Mon Dec 3, 2012 1:16 am

ShowTimeERA wrote:Please tell me when did LA play HOU during the 08 playoffs? I must have fell asleep for that week...


The guy clearly has no idea what he is talking about with a clear agenda against Kobe. Dude is a Shaq-homer on his 10th account already, give him a break :lol:
GetItDone
Analyst
Posts: 3,304
And1: 212
Joined: Jan 28, 2012

Re: Peak: Kobe vs. Garnett 

Post#30 » by GetItDone » Mon Dec 3, 2012 4:19 am

Asianiac_24 wrote:
DJ-Master wrote:Oh please. KG made those two All-Stars.

Cassell got injured and outside of 1 game he really didn't play or contribute anything against LAL.
So in the end all Garnett had was an old inefficient Sprewell and Wally Z who was mostly just a spot-up outside shooter who averaged 12ppg.

Kobe's 08 supporting cast Post-Gasol was vastly superior.


Gasol went from shooting 57 TS% in Memphis to 64 TS% in LA IN THE SAME SEASON. For comparisons, Sprewell went from 50 TS% in NY in the previous season to 49 TS% in Minny. Cassell had a 0.1 TS% increase by going to Minny (56.5 to 56.6).

I'd like to know your reasons behind the "KG made those two All-Stars" statement, because those two didn't even improve their efficiency or volume with KG. Gasol had a 7 TS% increase as soon as he switch teams.

Gasol shot better with LA because of Phil and the Triangle, not Kobe.

I'm sick of people acting like Kobe "made" these role players so good when in reality it was really Phil and the system.
ThatsWhatIShved wrote:Disrespectfull thread. I would take 06 Arenas over Lebron. Other than traveling and suspected PED use, what does Lebron have over Gil?
OptimusOne6
Junior
Posts: 477
And1: 23
Joined: Nov 20, 2011
Location: Chicago

Re: Peak: Kobe vs. Garnett 

Post#31 » by OptimusOne6 » Mon Dec 3, 2012 4:24 am

GetItDone wrote:Gasol shot better with LA because of Phil and the Triangle, not Kobe.

I'm sick of people acting like Kobe "made" these role players so good when in reality it was really Phil and the system.

In 2008, Gasol's first year in LA, he relied a lot of his points/shots from Kobe creating it for him. He didn't post-up and create a lot. It is a fair assessment to say Kobe made Gasol better especially in 2008.

I don't know what the argument for KG is here. Do people really value individual defense as much as they value individual offense?
GAME TIME
Banned User
Posts: 1,595
And1: 50
Joined: Nov 04, 2012

Re: Peak: Kobe vs. Garnett 

Post#32 » by GAME TIME » Mon Dec 3, 2012 5:01 am

This is Kobe and it's not even close.

Garnett was never a #1 option on a team, he always struggled down the stretch of games.

Kobe especially in his prime was unstoppable on offense and a stout defender.

All of his accolades in his career, speak for itself.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfqmBTcF8ZE[/youtube]
jonjones
Banned User
Posts: 141
And1: 1
Joined: Sep 07, 2012

Re: Peak: Kobe vs. Garnett 

Post#33 » by jonjones » Mon Dec 3, 2012 6:06 am

OptimusOne6 wrote:
GetItDone wrote:Gasol shot better with LA because of Phil and the Triangle, not Kobe.

I'm sick of people acting like Kobe "made" these role players so good when in reality it was really Phil and the system.

In 2008, Gasol's first year in LA, he relied a lot of his points/shots from Kobe creating it for him. He didn't post-up and create a lot. It is a fair assessment to say Kobe made Gasol better especially in 2008.

I don't know what the argument for KG is here. Do people really value individual defense as much as they value individual offense?


KG's a great offensive player. Obviously he's not Kobe level offensively but he's an excellent offensive player in his own right. The difference between KG and kobe defensively is much greater than the difference between them offensively.
swag2011
Senior
Posts: 508
And1: 17
Joined: May 31, 2012

Re: Peak: Kobe vs. Garnett 

Post#34 » by swag2011 » Mon Dec 3, 2012 6:16 am

jonjones wrote:
OptimusOne6 wrote:
GetItDone wrote:Gasol shot better with LA because of Phil and the Triangle, not Kobe.

I'm sick of people acting like Kobe "made" these role players so good when in reality it was really Phil and the system.

In 2008, Gasol's first year in LA, he relied a lot of his points/shots from Kobe creating it for him. He didn't post-up and create a lot. It is a fair assessment to say Kobe made Gasol better especially in 2008.

I don't know what the argument for KG is here. Do people really value individual defense as much as they value individual offense?


KG's a great offensive player. Obviously he's not Kobe level offensively but he's an excellent offensive player in his own right. The difference between KG and kobe defensively is much greater than the difference between them offensively.


as it should be. Can someone tell me if they really expect a perimeter player to have the same impact on defense as a PF or C? I never understood people acting like a guard is supposed to impact D the same way a big can. That's just stupid thinking to me. Kobe was an awesome man to man defender in his own right as well, scoring 60 points on one end WHILE locking down his man on the other.
ardee
RealGM
Posts: 15,320
And1: 5,397
Joined: Nov 16, 2011

Re: Peak: Kobe vs. Garnett 

Post#35 » by ardee » Mon Dec 3, 2012 8:09 am

GetItDone wrote:Gasol shot better with LA because of Phil and the Triangle, not Kobe.

I'm sick of people acting like Kobe "made" these role players so good when in reality it was really Phil and the system.


It's not a coincidence that Bynum shot 47% from the field when Kobe was out as compared to 58.5% when he was playing.

It's not a coincidence that Odom left the Lakers as the reigning Sixth Man of the Year and became the scrub of scrubs after that.

It's not a coincidence that Shaq's best seasons came when Kobe was either about to enter or was in his prime (obviously Shaq helped Kobe as well).

Kobe is one of the few players in the league who can truly raise the playing level of his team-mates by an amount to make a difference. He draws so much defensive attention that someone like Gasol, who is basically a scoring low post big, becomes efficient on a historical level.
ardee
RealGM
Posts: 15,320
And1: 5,397
Joined: Nov 16, 2011

Re: Peak: Kobe vs. Garnett 

Post#36 » by ardee » Mon Dec 3, 2012 8:15 am

It was basically this monster post by tsherkin that made me question KG's postseason a lot. I won't disagree he's had some epic regular seasons, but check this out....

tsherkin wrote:
drza wrote:We know that Garnett's TS% drops a bit in the postseason and that he isn't the volume scorer that some of these all-time players are.


OK, right off of the bat I want to address this.

Garnett's TS% drops from a career 54.9% in the RS to 52.3% in the PS. That's not "a bit," that's 2.6%. That's a pretty significant drop. Now, some of that includes his very early twenties, but given that he was typically playing 4 games and then being done, it doesn't harm his overall average that much and he's still only had two postseason runs with the Celtics where he was very close to league average TS%. In the title run, he was 0.2% above league average and this past season, he was actually +1.4% over league average. Garnett has been a very, very weak scorer in the playoffs through the majority of his career at all stages thereof... and he's posted an ORTG of 110+ only three times in the PS (97, 01, 08).

Next, I want to point out that on 4-game samples during which he's playing 41-44 mpg, the data is going to be incredibly noisy, so those APM studies are going to have some significant issues. You note this somewhere around the 02-04 range, though, so that's good.

You start to argue quality of teams faced, and that's fine: I think most sensible posters realize that with crap teams, KG was dragging them into the playoffs only to get spanked... usually by the Spurs. He had little hope to beat a lot of the teams he faced and no one should really penalize him for that too harshly. But when you're trying to fashion an argument about who is the best postseason performer of the generation and you take an already second-tier scoring threat and have him decline as much as he did, well, that's less effective. His 01 run was pretty amazing, I mean he rocked a 7.5% TOV (!!!) while doing the 21/12/4 thing on ~ 57% TS. You can make a single-series claim about his efficacy there against the Spurs (who were the best defense in the league that year), but I'm not really seeing how him doing that is a ton better than what Dirk did against them in 2006.

We are, however, getting back to the root of the debate I was trying to generate before, about KG's defensive efficacy versus Dirk's scoring.

The APM data is very interesting, and squares well with his impact (primarily as a defender)... but at the same time, there is a data point that you're excluding, right? From 99-03, KG won 5 games in the postseason, then won 10 in the deep run in 04 and didn't return to the playoffs with the Wolves. Now context. Injuries, abysmal management (Cassell for Marko Jaric? REALLY? JOE SMITH!! YOU BASTARDS! and so forth), but if you're looking at his contributions and you see how one-sided KG's were angling towards the defensive element, then it starts to become an issue. You can't just defend your opponent; in a game of basketball, you can't shut an opponent down, you need to score as well. From everything I've seen, there IS a slight, small bias towards offensive value (at least where star players are concerned) that's not generated via narrative alone. Especially at the paces at which the Wolves and the Spurs/Blazers/etc were playing in the early 00s, the notion that "each possession counts" isn't just a truism, it's a major point of contention.

So I offer a counter-point. Since the number of games isn't that bad, let's look at KG's Minny postseason career and see how it played out from 99-04.

99 versus the eventual-champion Spurs.

Hard to REALLY ream him for this one because they had Duncan and Robinson, but that kind of casually back-slides KG's rep away from where you're going. In any case, he opened up with 21 points on 54.3% TS (9/18 FG, 3/3 FT), 8 boards, 1 assist, 5 blocks, 4 fouls and 5 turnovers. They lost, of course, and for the moment, we'll pretend as if KG's performance comes in isolation so that I don't have to spend 8 years discussing what his teammates did or didn't do in this post. We'll acknowledge their role tacitly. Here we're seeing, though, that Garnett was coughing it up something fierce. 20.6% TOV against 31% USG, not his best game. Game 2, they win. 23 points on 22 shots (11/22 FG, 1/2 FT). 50.3% TS, but there, I think that's a bit misleading to call that a "bad" performance. Certainly not dominant, and this time he brought the rebounding, then added 6 assists to 4 turnovers. Again, not really pushing hard on offense, and given that he didn't have any other scorers, the Wolves would have likely been better off if he'd been a little less effective on D and a little more effective on offense, since everyone and their mom knew that he was basically the only major scorer on that squad, the only real threat. Games 3 and 4, they lost of course. 9/19, 5/6 for 23 points, 12 boards, 2 AST / 3 TOV. Then here's the killer. Game 4 was a 7-point loss and he shot 6/20 FG and 8/12 at the line. Realistically, he left 7-9 points on the board from what he'd have posted just making 45% FG and around 80% FT, very normal numbers for him. This is a single-game, single-series performance at the beginning of his All-NBA era (and he's far from alone in having poor performances), but as we start to watch him coming up short in key moments and close games like that, it begins to detract from the overall picture you're painting of the "most dominant postseason performer from 99-08" kind of thing, right? That right there is a game that kind of mirrors Dirk against the Warriors.

2000, against Portland:

Opens up with a 6/20 performance, no FTAs. 12/10/11 triple-double, but the triple-double belies his overall performance. With 26.2% usage and him shooting 30% FG without any FTAs, that's a rough, rough performance. And it was a 3-point loss. The not-Garnett Wolves shot 53% FG. Meantime, Sheed played well: didn't shoot much, but was 6/10 for 15 points (3/3 FT).

Game 2. 25/10/5, 4 TOV, 4 PF. 50% FG, 7/10 FT, 56.4% TS against 31.4% USG. Really, a good game. 4-point loss. Were he a more dominant scorer, that might have mattered, but Sealy, Wally Z and Sam Mitchell were rough enough that I'll actually post that they shot a combined 7/17. Sheed was crap. So, this one stands as a contrast to the first.

Game 3. A win. Middling TS (52.3%), but actually his best offensive game of the series. 11/22 FG and 1/1 from downtown (heh), he brought the rebounding and passing from the first game (13 boards, 10 assists, 2 turnovers). He played his mind out and his teammates actually supported him a lot (Brandon was 10/16 for 28 points that night).

Game 4. Elimination game #2 in this series and KG goes for a 5/20. 1/2 3P, 6/6 FT. 17 points on 37.5% TS. 10 boards, 9 assists, 3 turnovers. But WOW was he ever bad shooting that night, and that's his second major stinker in the series and his third over two consecutive postseason matchups (e.g. his 3rd in 8 games).

2001 vs SAS:

25/13/6Game 1. , 55.8% TS, really a good game overall. Only 1 turnover, 50% FG, 70% FT (10 FTA), just looking really good. It was a loss, but it can hardly be blamed on KG.

Game 2. Welcome to Crapsville, population, YOU. 5/13 FG, but 8/8 FT gives him a 54.5% TS. 12 boards, 2 assists, 2 turnovers, 112 ORTG. Another rough shooting night for him, though, and he played only 32 minutes because of some foul trouble, but mainly because it was garbage time after 3. The Wolves shot something stupid like a tenth of a percent off of their franchise-worst in the playoffs and they committed 20 turnovers. It was embarrassing. KG was part of a team-wide failure that game. This is, I believe, the year after Sealy was killed and right around Joe Smith time.

Game 3, token win time. 22/8/4, 1 TOV. 8/10 FT. 59.8% TS. KG did a great job of getting to the line in this series, it was very atypical for him. This was a great game from Garnett though, and they won.

Game 4, elimination game. 6/13 shooting, 19/15/5, 2 turnovers, 5 fouls, 7/8 FT for 57.5% TS but they were crushed, a 13-point loss. Duncan shot terribly (8/23) and D-Rob had 4 fouls by the 3rd. Wolves were down 8 after 3, but down only 1 at halftime.

2002, 3-game sweep by Dallas.

Game 1. 6/18 FG, 6/6 FT, 46% TS. 21 rebounds, 6 assists, 3 turnovers. Dirk put 30/15 on the Wolves, shooting 10/19 from the field and 9/10 at the line.

Game 2. PHENOMENAL game from Garnett. 9/19 FG, 13/17 at the line (12-point loss), 18 boards and 4 assists. 58.5% TS. Absolutely fantastic. Wasn't enough, but it's hard to blame him. 25 a piece from Billups and Wally Z (both shooting over 52%, nearly 53% FG). 31/15 from Dirk (42.9% FG, 9/10 FT, 4 steals).

Game 3, elimination time. 9/19 FG, 4/9 FT in a 13-point loss. 47.4% TS. 17 boards, 5 assists, 6 turnovers, 5 fouls. Another weak game at the point of elimination. Minny won the 2nd and 4th quarters, but they permitted Dallas to score 40 first-quarter points and started the game in a 12-point hole from which they never recovered. Down by 10 at the half, they lost the 3rd by 8 points and then won the 4th by 5. Dirk dropped 39/17 on 11/17 FG, 14/16 FT, crushing the Wolves like a bug.

For the record, KG was 3/10 from the field in the second half, hitting his first 2 shots and then going 1/8 after that. He had 4 offensive boards, split a pair of FTs, assisted Wally Z on a 3 and a 21-footer and had a turnover. That was his contribution during the second half of the elimination game. He had a bunch of defensive boards as well, but I wasn't logging those, I was looking at offensive performance, since we've already established that he's been a very high-impact defender. But in an elimination game, to disappear that way in the second half (which raises those old ghosts that people spoke of at the time of KG being a choker in the playoffs) is... not good. And what we're seeing here is the reason that narrative came about, because this isn't the first or second bad game we've seen from him in this stretch as far as poor performance in an elimination game, and over a comparatively small sample of games, we've seen him stinking it up on offense quite a lot... more than once in a game winnable had he performed at a less-than-terrible level. It does tell us that his defense and rebounding were THAT AWESOME, though, to continually show the kind of impact they did... and it also explains that his teammates were really not helping him out a ton on the defensive end at all, as it happens. At times, Brandon (prior to his injury) and Billups (prior to him being moved) were contributors, but it's still clear that they were outmatched. Dirk's Mavs were coming at the Wolves with him, Finley, Nash and Van Exel, right? Nash was 3/9 under the arc in Game 3... but 3/7 from downtown, 10/10 at the line and had 11 assists. Billups was 5/16 and 4/7 at the line. Brandon was gone. Wally Z was 5/12 (though 9/10 at the line). Anthony Peeler was 4/7 from 3 off of the bench (but 2/6 under the arc). Garnett's terrible TS% mostly extends from 4/9 FT shooting and the 3 or 4 points he left on the board are significant but yeah, the biggest issue is how poorly he played in the second half. In his defense, the common motif of saying he's nothing but a jump shooter is at least a little harsh on his rep, because of the 10 shots he took, only one was from farther than 8 feet. Some of those were his favored turn-over-right-shoulder fades from the left block, but he got a four-footer and two shots off of offensive rebounds, one of which drew those 2 FTAs. He just hit nothing when it mattered.

OK, ramble over.

2003 vs Lakers. This is a 6-game series, the longest KG has played in the PS to this point in his career. Two wins!

Game 1. 11/21 FG, 1/4 FT. 14 boards, 7 assists, 2 turnovers, great D. 46 minutes played, loss. 19-point blowout, as it happens. There really wasn't a lot of hope for them to win this series; while the Lakers didn't repeat as champions, it was still the Shaq/Kobe Lakers coming off of their third straight title. Shaq had 32/10 and Kobe carved them up for 39. The Wolves flatly didn't have anyone who could defend either of those guys and Flip Saunders has never been a particularly good defensive coach, so there was no strong scheme in place, either. It was "here's hoping KG is magic!" I mean, they were putting Szczerbiak on Kobe, that's just asking for trouble. They were buried after the first, down 16 points. They never finished a quarter closer than 12 points.

Game 2. Explosion. 15/21 shooting, 4/6 at the line, 20 boards, 7 assists, 2 turnovers, 35 points. I don't even need to post the TS, you know it's insane. Remarkable game, and a win. Just about what was needed from him in order to beat this team. 37 points and 10 assists from Troy Hudson (!!!!!!) certainly helped, though. They were up by 13 at the half and then by 22 after an opening tear in the 3rd.

Game 3. 33/14/4, 2 steals, 4 blocks, 4 turnovers and 6 fouls. 15/31 shooting, one of the most aggressive performances of Garnett's entire career in a 4-point OT win. 27 points from Hudson. One of those "questionable officiating" nights, heh. 3 fouls in 3 minutes in the 4th for Garnett, then fouled out in the opening part of OT. Kobe got a four-point play when Wally Z apparently fouled him without touching him. Then there was that thing with Rick Fox where Wally "stepped out of bounds" as Rick grabbed his jersey, which was unique. They won, though, so it was OK.

4th quarter KG? 4 boards (2 offensive), an assist at the rim and a turnover on an offensive foul. He was 3/8 FG and 2/2 FT for 8 points. He took one shot inside of 10 feet and 4 shots from 14+ feet. Lots and lots of jumpers. Got blocked by Shaq the one time he shot around the rim.

Game 4. 10/21 FG, 1/3 3PA, 7/9 FTA. 18 boards, 5 assists, 4 turnovers. 56.1% TS in a 5-point loss. Solid performance. 34/23 from Shaq didn't help. Kobe shot like crap (7/25) but got to the line at will (16/17 FT). With about 2 minutes left in the third, the Wolves were up by 11 but then the Lakers went on an 8-0 run to close the quarter and Kobe hit a 3 early in the 4th to tie it. About halfway through the fourth, the Wolves were up by 5, but L.A. reeled off another 8-0 run. Stayed close down the wire; Shaq got an OREB off of a Kobe miss to give L.A. a 3-point lead with 19 seconds remaining... and KG missed both free throws when he was fouled. Kobe hit 2 FTs, Garnett stuck a jumper. Shaq had more offensive boards than the Timberwolves. The Lakers had 18 offensive boards and scored 29 points off of them.

Second half play from Garnett.

He had 3 assists and a turnover (Kobe stripped him) in the 3rd. He TECHNICALLY shot 1/7, but that includes a 43-foot heave at the buzzer. He was really 1/6, which is still terrible, missing his last 5 (or 6, counting the 3) shots after hitting a shot around the rim. 2 of his shots were inside of 15 feet.

In the fourth, he was 4/6, including a three, but he was 2/4 at the line, missing two big ones with about 16 seconds left, as I mentioned. He also had an assist. When he stuck the three with about a half-minute left, they were down 1.

Little rough. If he hadn't sucked in the 3rd, they might have built a better cushion and taken that game. Instead, L.A. evened the series.

Game 5. 11/23, 1/2 3P, 2/4 FT, 50.5% TS. 25/16/3, 3 TOV. 30-point blowout. KG played 43 minutes, conjuring that old thought about he gets a bunch of numbers in garbage time. Minny was down 7 at the half, down 21 after 3 and down 30 at the end of the game. We'll look at KG's second half performance, offense-only in the third and then what he did once the game was long-decided in the fourth.

In the third, he got a pass picked off by Kobe, he had an assist and he shot 4/8 for 9 points (1/2 from 3). Pretty solid performance all told, with two shots at the rim and two others within 7 feet. OK, so now we're going to look at the 4th Q, which starts with the Wolves down 21 points, and we're going to see what KG racked up in garbage time.

He played about 9.5 minutes in the fourth, leaving down 28 with about 2:38 to go. 1 offensive rebound (his own miss after getting blocked by Brian Shaw at the rim) and 4 defensive rebounds. It was the only offensive rebound he had all game and 4 of his 15 defensive boards. He split a pair of FTs and shot 1/3 from the field.

Doesn't much look like he racked up too many box score data points. He wasn't dominating and bringing them closer, they were getting pounded and Flip took him out eventually. Again though, it was the reigning champs, so the outcome wasn't really a huge surprise to anyone, especially as the team thinned from a few years prior, as scary as that is to say. They had to play some out-of-their-minds offense in order to get those two wins.

Game 6, elimination time, KG's favorite!

9/21 FG, 0/1 3P, 0/2 FT. 41.1% TS, 83 ORTG. He was terrible on O. 12 boards, 5 assists, 3 steals, 3 turnovers, 18 points. Not a good game. Good box score line, but not a good game. Played 44 minutes in a 16-point loss. Wolves were up by 5 after 1, down 4 after 2, down 6 after 3 and lost the 4th quarter by 10. Shaq had 8 offensive boards to Minny's 11. The 2nd and 4th quarters were the bad ones for Minny. The 4th was bad defensively, but the 2nd was bad offensively, with them scoring only 13 points.

Rough game. Minny went on a 9-0 run to close the third... and then Kobe opened up the fourth with 10 of the 14 points he'd score in the quarter, with L.A. opening the quarter on an 18-2 run. Shaq had 9 assists, Kobe 8 (total, not in the quarter). L.A.'s passing was just ridiculous that game. It took 6.5 minutes for the Wolves to score their first basket in the 4th.

In the 2nd, KG played the last 9 minutes. He had a pair of assists, a picked off pass and shot 2/5, scoring 4 of their 13 points... but involved in 8. Were he a more dominant scorer, that could have helped, but it's hard to nit-pick that performance in this series over much.

4th Q. An assist, two turnovers, 2/5 shooting (including Devean George blocking him), leaves with 1:56 remaining, down by 18.



For those too lazy to read such a long post, it basically outlines some flaws in KG's games that hurt his teams badly come Playoff time, i.e. his inability to create high percentage shots or get to the line.

I had almost been converted to the drza, ElGee group that consider KG a GOAT-level Playoff performer but tsherkin broke down each game really well and illustrated that KG had some serious issues come the POs. I really encourage everyone to read this before passing judgment.
User avatar
rrravenred
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 6,117
And1: 589
Joined: Feb 24, 2006
Location: Pulling at the loose threads of arguments since 2006

Re: Peak: Kobe vs. Garnett 

Post#37 » by rrravenred » Mon Dec 3, 2012 8:51 am

ardee wrote:
GetItDone wrote:Gasol shot better with LA because of Phil and the Triangle, not Kobe.

I'm sick of people acting like Kobe "made" these role players so good when in reality it was really Phil and the system.


It's not a coincidence that Bynum shot 47% from the field when Kobe was out as compared to 58.5% when he was playing.

It's not a coincidence that Odom left the Lakers as the reigning Sixth Man of the Year and became the scrub of scrubs after that.

It's not a coincidence that Shaq's best seasons came when Kobe was either about to enter or was in his prime (obviously Shaq helped Kobe as well).

Kobe is one of the few players in the league who can truly raise the playing level of his team-mates by an amount to make a difference. He draws so much defensive attention that someone like Gasol, who is basically a scoring low post big, becomes efficient on a historical level.


Could you replace nearly every incidence of "Kobe" with "Phil Jackson", there? :)

"It's not a coincidence" can have a lot of implicit answers. ;)
ElGee wrote:You, my friend, have shoved those words into my mouth, which is OK because I'm hungry.


Got fallacy?
DJ-Master
Sophomore
Posts: 166
And1: 0
Joined: Oct 30, 2012

Re: Peak: Kobe vs. Garnett 

Post#38 » by DJ-Master » Mon Dec 3, 2012 9:07 am

ardee wrote:It's not a coincidence that Bynum shot 47% from the field when Kobe was out as compared to 58.5% when he was playing.

One really bad shooting game Bynum had skewed the averages.
Remove that and he was shooting around 53-56% from the field and not far below his Pre-Kobe averages.

It's not a coincidence that Odom left the Lakers as the reigning Sixth Man of the Year and became the scrub of scrubs after that.

That was because Odom is soft mentally and leaving LA took him outside his comfort zone.
He was a perfect fit for the triangle offense.
Odom put up similar or better numbers prior to joining Kobe in LA.

It's not a coincidence that Shaq's best seasons came when Kobe was either about to enter or was in his prime (obviously Shaq helped Kobe as well).

Shaq put up better numbers when Kobe was out.
Kobe in most years put up worse numbers when Shaq was out.

Kobe is one of the few players in the league who can truly raise the playing level of his team-mates by an amount to make a difference.

Kobe in his Prime was a consistently doubled player and attracted a fair deal of defensive attention.
That combined with his reasonably decent (but not special) play-making ability did allow him to raise the playing level of his teammates.
Still his selfishness and poor decision making at times often canceled out those benefits.

You are really overrating Kobe's ability to make guys around him better.
ElGee
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,041
And1: 1,208
Joined: Mar 08, 2010
Contact:

Re: Peak: Kobe vs. Garnett 

Post#39 » by ElGee » Mon Dec 3, 2012 9:11 am

Ardee I think you need to dig a little deeper. I just read sherkin's post for the first time, and I don't really understand the basis of your conclusion.

ardee wrote:For those too lazy to read such a long post, it basically outlines some flaws in KG's games that hurt his teams badly come Playoff time, i.e. his inability to create high percentage shots or get to the line.


I didn't see a single thing in that post that outlined that. In fact, the post focuses ONLY on pre-2004 KG, notes the excellence of his 2001 and 2003 PS campaigns, and even notes his green PS run in 99. Sherkin does make some heavy claims about Garnett's elimination game performances, but this is bold narrative at best given the sample size and the exclusion of everything after 2003. (I'm supposed to make major judgments based on Garnett's 1-8 second half in 2002 in a blowout, one game against Portland in 2000 -- a team he struggled with -- of 5/20 after another of "playing his mind out?" And in 2001 a "great game" and then another solid one? Really? Have you checked out Kobe in elimination games??) Furthermore the whole post is offense-centric...is there a doubt in anyone's mind peak Kobe > peak Garnett on offense??

Your in the same territory with Bryant. Are you aware of what happened to Odom during the lockout or the circumstances surrounding his trade? Or that Shaq's best season -- a GOAT-level season -- occurred before Bryant's prime? How can there be causality there when Shaq was destroying teams at the beginning of the decade in games without Bryant?
Check out and discuss my book, now on Kindle! http://www.backpicks.com/thinking-basketball/
User avatar
MacGill
Veteran
Posts: 2,769
And1: 568
Joined: May 29, 2010
Location: From Parts Unknown...
     

Re: Peak: Kobe vs. Garnett 

Post#40 » by MacGill » Mon Dec 3, 2012 2:16 pm

ardee wrote:
It's not a coincidence that Bynum shot 47% from the field when Kobe was out as compared to 58.5% when he was playing.

It's not a coincidence that Odom left the Lakers as the reigning Sixth Man of the Year and became the scrub of scrubs after that.

It's not a coincidence that Shaq's best seasons came when Kobe was either about to enter or was in his prime (obviously Shaq helped Kobe as well).

Kobe is one of the few players in the league who can truly raise the playing level of his team-mates by an amount to make a difference. He draws so much defensive attention that someone like Gasol, who is basically a scoring low post big, becomes efficient on a historical level.


Wow man, you're offically taking this to a point of fantasy now.

So let me get this straight. You want to give Kobe (best player on the Laker team) credit for Bynum's success yet still want to give Kobe all the credit (for the winning bias) regarding Shaq (best player on LA team during 3-peat)?

Then you want to completely ignore all of the Odom drama?

Then truly, for the most part, again you want to credit Kobe with Shaq's success (as the best player on that LA squad) and link everthing to Kobe completly ignoring again the first response I made in this post? WOW!

Ardee, you can very well credit Kobe for many things, even improving teammates but you need to be honest with the facts here.

Fact #1) Shaq came into this league a 20/10+ guy his rookie season and performed at a high level without Kobe. He was in his peak form as Kobe started reaching his potential. I don't care if you rank Kobe over Shaq all-time but we need to be clear that peak Shaq is > then any version of Bryant. Certainly peak is not why you would come to this decision and none of his early 00 years would justify the ranking.

#2) Why don't you mention his trade demand? Is it not easier to make quality role players better? He sure as hell wasn't making scrubs better, right? LA as an organization has an ability where they do not need the luck factor of drafting (for the most part, as players seem to just say we are going to play there) and is the #1 destination spot. This factoid cannot be ignored as Kobe may have very well been on his 3rd team by now if player personnel was not at his liking.

#3) It is also funny how Gasol has in a way replaced early 00 Kobe. Kobe on his next 3 finals was Shaq and Gasol Kobe (using this more of an analogy). Now Kobe fans get a taste of what Shaq fans have to put up with and all you hear is the downplay of Gasol etc. Why not embrace the fact that they needed each other, know Gasol was clear #2, regardless of bad games or not, and be done with it.

It just sounds like trying to recreate Jordan-Syndrome to me and Kobe never really had to worry about the luck factor of a draft pick or players wanting to play for LA. Kobe is great enough on his own but in today's world, we know that not one superstar can successfully lead a team to a title or make shots for his teammates or give them what is needed to perform at that higher level. That is all on them and while we perceive and overvalue certain aspects of the mental game, these guys are all professionals and need to find that balance within themselves.
Image

Return to Player Comparisons