liamliam1234 wrote:Well, I lost my post right before it was ready. So here are the bullet points:
1. Consistently ignoring the fact I rate Kobe’s peak over Nash.
2. Citing box score metrics as an argument for Kobe... when Kobe is hardly a legendary box score metrics guy in his own right. Also, not something you seemed to care about with David Robinson.
3. Offensive impact analysis is impact analysis.
4. Nash may not have had Kobe’s success, but he was clearly good enough to lead title contenders, and we are nearing the point where basically all the title winners are off the board (Pistons and 1970s guys aside). Also, not sure how much I buy this being a serious concern considering your support for a Durant-less Westbrook.
5. Citing Harden and Rose and Boozer speaks to my point: guard defence has historically not been that important.
6. Because of that, Kidd’s defensive advantage is unlikely something which outweighs Nash’s offensive advantage. I will grant peak Kidd was a solid playoff performer, and I am willing to take a second look at 2003, but, you know, “leastern” conference.
7. Missed games point is fair to a degree, but does not seems to have the effect you suspect it does:
However, APM considers Kobe one of the game’s best offensive players; his five-year average of scaled offensive APM ranks eighth, nestled behind Chris Paul and ahead of Russell Westbrook, Kevin Durant and Dirk Nowitzki. Nine of Bryant’s 11 seasons from 2001-11 fall in the 98th percentile or better in offensive APM, enough to post five of the top-150 overall APM scores between 2006 and 2010. All told, he left the footprint of an offensive superstar who fell a hair short of the all-time greats.
His team results correlated positively with his presence, — among players on this list, he finished 18th in these game-level studies — and he scales well for a medium-efficiency volume scorer, as evidenced by his massive role on multiple high-end lineups. His team offenses were also successful in the playoffs, consistent with his own resilience against stingier defenses. Because of all this, he has a top-10 offensive peak and a top-20 overall peak in my estimation
E-Balla wrote:
1. Well the question was originally for HHera187.
I was arguing as if you put Nash over him because I wanted to hear what the argument for Nash over Kobe was.
2. I put them because I knew you and other would care. It was mainly to get my point across that Kobe tops him by all metrics.
3. It is, but it's only one side of the ball and our whole conclusion needs to take more than just that into account.
4. That comment was mostly a response to you saying Nash has proven that he can lead teams to a ceiling Kobe hasn't, as if Kobe hasn't been on better teams.
5. Boozer isn't a guard. My whole point was that no matter what position bad defense can be covered for. That doesn't mean it doesn't matter.
6. If Kidd is the best PG defender ever (or top 3 with GP and Clyde) and Nash is a negative that can mean Kidd's defense more than makes up for the offensive gap. I mean it's not like Kidd isn't a great offensive player already. He was a borderline top 5 offensive player through his best seasons. That's why Kidd's best seasons by RAPM are just as good as Nash's.
7. Hmm. Interesting.
I get you're still Kobe over Nash, but I just was going to see if you could formulate an argument for him over Kobe since you answered my post asking someone to.
Honestly I'm more interested in Kidd/Nash as a debate, because I feel like Kidd is really underappreciated and it will get him higher on here if I make his case but like you I'm not getting into it yet because I'm not close to voting for either guy. We'll get there when we get there.
With that said I looked up playoff RAPM (98-19).
Kidd is 50th with a +0.8 ORAPM, +1.7 DRAPM.
Kobe is 53rd with a +2.9 ORAPM, -0.4 DRAPM.
Dirk is 55th with a +3.7 ORAPM, -1.3 DRAPM.
Nash is 58th with a +3.6 ORAPM, -1.3 DRAPM.
Nash and Dirk are both top 10 offensive players and bottom 100 defensive players (this is out of over 1000 players).
And I'm just saying, Kidd's defense is a big deal. It's the only reason he's up there with those guys despite entering the league before all of them and having more postseason runs as an old man than the rest here. There's no reason he should be consistently left out when people discuss the second tier greats of the era (under Shaq and Duncan) when his success, numbers, and at the time his reputation was just as good as those guys. He just happened to do it when Shaq was still Shaq and Duncan was still Duncan. They all did it once Shaq got old and Duncan was dealing with tendonitis.
