LA Bird wrote:...
Your current series of posts has to be my favourite on the board right now. You've assured yourself of a guaranteed And1 on each of these (unless I'm having one of my week long absences, and fail to notice your post).
Senior wrote:Great stuff man. I'm honestly surprised that Pau alone wasn't better. Even the 08-11 split of 3886/+2.5 seems inflated given his +8.8 in 2011 (felt his peak was either 2010/2011) but it's telling that those 10/11 Lakers were quite a bit worse than 08/09. They rose and fell with Kobe.
Fun stat bonus: Pau's BPM/WS/VORP/PER/whatever are super close to or beat Kobe's...but his WOWY/RAPM/other impact stats aren't. Can we please stop pretending that Kobe supporters are just blinded by homerism/emotions when they say box-scores don't capture everything?
I wonder if some of Gasol's woes are due to spending more time with bench lineups. Taking a cursory look at the top lineups from Basketball-Reference, I find the following for 2008-09 -
Most commonly used lineups with Kobe and without GasolT. Ariza | K. Bryant | A. Bynum | J. Farmar | L. Odom LAL 46:06:00
T. Ariza | K. Bryant | A. Bynum | D. Fisher | L. Odom LAL 44:59:00
T. Ariza | K. Bryant | A. Bynum | L. Odom | S. Vujacic LAL 42:07:00
Kobe's top 7 most "used" lineups all contain Gasol. The above 3 lineups ranked 8-10th in 2008-09, and even without Gasol, it seems like Kobe played with non-bench heavy lineups. All 3 lineups were positive (+26.3, +2.2, +34.4). Kobe obviously deserves massive credit for helping enable Bynum extremely well, but those are hardly bad lineups. Kobe played very few minutes with "scrub" lineups.
Most commonly used lineups with Gasol and without KobeT. Ariza | J. Farmar | P. Gasol | L. Odom | S. Vujacic LAL 143:53:00
T. Ariza | J. Farmar | P. Gasol | J. Powell | S. Vujacic LAL 96:53:00
J. Farmar | P. Gasol | J. Powell | S. Vujacic | L. Walton LAL 87:35:00
These 3 lineups ranked 5th, 9th and 10th most frequent for Gasol, and were +5.7, -17.1 and -7.2 respectively. Those are clearly more bench orientated lineups (2 of the 3 didn't even have Odom) and this likely impacted his raw +- numbers quite a bit. A much larger proportion of Pau's lineups without Kobe were alongside scrubs than they were for Kobe.
Plus, I'd also hazard a guess that Kobe's role was more
important than Gasol's. That Lakers team had an impressive frontline, and having Bynum replacing Gasol off the bench was probably a better option than replacing Kobe with Saša Vujačić. If you swap Bynum with a big of Saša's quality, and Saša with a big of Bynum's quality, and the results probably look even closer. And this highlights one of the problems with the +- family of statistics - the quality of reserves can manipulate the results to an extent, so using them as a strict measure of player quality comes with its caveats.
That being said, although the gap between Kobe/Pau is probably more pronounced in this data than it should be, I wholly agree that the box score stats are misleading, and Kobe was clearly a better player than Pau.
There are quite a few things that most box score stats don't capture that undermine his offensive value as a player -
Kobe's ability to score from anywhere - I don't think it's too controversial to acknowledge that Kobe's offensive arsenal was
immense. He was an excellent shot creator and at this point of his career, was extremely resilient against any offence. His combination of individual shot creation
and shot making ability had multiple effects.
His offensive gravity made things easier for the other players on the court, and his ability to make ridiculous shots is naturally effective against better defences (that are more likely to force players into "tough" shots) was immense. Unlike a guy like, say, Dwight Howard (who relied on others to create, and interior shots are a limited commodity)
Kobe was able to scale his scoring up quite a bit whilst maintaining above-average league efficiency (his career clutch numbers can attest to this).
Most box score stats don't fully acknowledge his shot creation (USG% can be used as a proxy, but it's far from resolute), nor do they acknowledge the completeness of his offensive game. In particular,
it allows Kobe to be an excellent scorer no matter who he is paired with (and it's partially why he's so good at enabling his big men).Kobe's passing ability - almost any catch-all box score stat factors in both assists and turnovers as an attempt to model passing ability, but it's also worth mentioning that
Kobe is one of the better SGs of all time at passing to the interior. Passing to the interior has a higher risk/reward than other types of passing - Willard's modelling showcased that passes to dunks/layups are worth more (a player with a tendency to pass successfully to the interior is providing a higher percentage shot), and my own work has shown that passing turnovers are primarily linked to interior passes. Most box score stats look at raw assist and turnover totals, and this is likely to underrate players that are terrific at providing high percentage shots (e.g. Steve Nash) and overrate players that accrue gaudy assist totals, but mainly assist jump shots (e.g. Stephon Marbury).
Tying in with the turnover theme, Kobe is also shown (through +- analysis) to be one of the best players ever at reducing turnovers through his own ball handling and dominance, so even though his TOV numbers aren't bad at all, they're still probably better than the pure box score showcases.