RealGM

Welp, there goes another PC board theory about Lebron, Dirk, Wade, Harden, Curry being better scorers.

What are the PC Board's thoughts on this? This guy looks to have only adjusted for pace... but hasn't adjusted for the gravity of depth (among other things). Gravity of depth, meaning that team's rosters today consist of more and better floor-spacers than on the 1987 Bulls and the 2006 Lakers, who would create even more space for these two to their thing.



PS: Please direct questions at the Tweeter. I'm just having some fun and gloating.

I mean if all that matters is scoring a bunch of points then great let's worship Kobe and Wilt and Mike.

For those of us who think basketball goes beyond this? Yawn.

Texas Chuck wrote:I mean if all that matters is scoring a bunch of points then great let's worship Kobe and Wilt and Mike.

For those of us who think basketball goes beyond this? Yawn.

Following on Chuck's point, those were seasons where the Bulls won 40 games and the Lakers 45. Volume gunning isn't the way to go, and we've known this since at least Wilt, most certainly since the late 70s, since that was a large part of the reason behind the narrative that Jordan wasn't going to win. "Scoring champions don't win titles" was the prevailing notion at the time.

Since then, Jordan (all 6 times), Shaq (2000) and Kareem (71) are the only ones to actually win the scoring title during a title year. Naturally, guys who have won the title have won scoring titles in the past and on averages similar to what they posted during title seasons. Curry nearly did it in 2016, Lebron comes to mind, but you can at least see the trend. To shoot that much, you generally need to be on a team with insufficient talent/cohesion for contention.

So celebrating these huge-volume seasons is like, eh. Harden was at 34.3 ppg for a 44-win team and 36.1 ppg for a 53-win team. They were at 103.7 and 97.9 possessions per game, but because you pace-adjusted those don't come up because you're looking only at the given threshold of 38 ppg.

Anyway, this one's kind of arbitrary, right? Pace-adjusted to 38 PPG/g, but what about PTS75? 60+ GP, 30+ MPG, qualified for PTS/g Leaderboard:

1) 2019 Harden, 36.2 PTS75
2) 1987 Jordan, 34.8 PTS75
3) 2006 Kobe, 34.2 PTS75
4) 2022 Embiid, 33.9 PTS75
5) 2017 Westbrook, 33.6 PTS75
6) 2020 Giannis, 33.2 PTS75
7) 2021 Steph, 33.0 PTS75
8) 2022 Giannis, 32.7 PTS75
9) 1988 Jordan, 32.7 PTS75
10) 2020 Harden, 32.6 PTS75
11) 1993 Jordan, 32.3 PTS75
12) 1990 Jordan, 32.0 PTS75
13) 1991 Jordan, 32.0 PTS75
14) 2016 Steph, 31.9 PTS75
15) 1996 Jordan, 31.9 PTS75

Just some other thoughts on the subject, right?

If I wasn't too lazy to do it, I'd look at the percentage of a team's scoring opportunities (shots/FTA) a single player uses when he is on the court and compare it to the team's winning %. But, not feeling up to the effort today.

Texas Chuck wrote:I mean if all that matters is scoring a bunch of points then great let's worship Kobe and Wilt and Mike.

For those of us who think basketball goes beyond this? Yawn.

Jordan and Kobe are the GOAT and baby GOAT.

Wilt wasn't mentioned in the tweet but I guess he could be the billy GOAT.
That's a good enough NBA GOAT trinity if we're playing 3-on-3, altho I'd rather have Hakeem.

Hope you and your fantasy trio said your prayers.

Harden as a better offensive player than Jordan/Kobe might be a take that becomes more reasonable over time

tsherkin wrote:

Texas Chuck wrote:I mean if all that matters is scoring a bunch of points then great let's worship Kobe and Wilt and Mike.

For those of us who think basketball goes beyond this? Yawn.

Following on Chuck's point, those were seasons where the Bulls won 40 games and the Lakers 45. Volume gunning isn't the way to go, and we've known this since at least Wilt, most certainly since the late 70s, since that was a large part of the reason behind the narrative that Jordan wasn't going to win. "Scoring champions don't win titles" was the prevailing notion at the time.

Since then, Jordan (all 6 times), Shaq (2000) and Kareem (71) are the only ones to actually win the scoring title during a title year. Naturally, guys who have won the title have won scoring titles in the past and on averages similar to what they posted during title seasons. Curry nearly did it in 2016, Lebron comes to mind, but you can at least see the trend. To shoot that much, you generally need to be on a team with insufficient talent/cohesion for contention.

So celebrating these huge-volume seasons is like, eh. Harden was at 34.3 ppg for a 44-win team and 36.1 ppg for a 53-win team. They were at 103.7 and 97.9 possessions per game, but because you pace-adjusted those don't come up because you're looking only at the given threshold of 38 ppg.

Anyway, this one's kind of arbitrary, right? Pace-adjusted to 38 PPG/g, but what about PTS75? 60+ GP, 30+ MPG, qualified for PTS/g Leaderboard:

1) 2019 Harden, 36.2 PTS75
2) 1987 Jordan, 34.8 PTS75
3) 2006 Kobe, 34.2 PTS75
4) 2022 Embiid, 33.9 PTS75
5) 2017 Westbrook, 33.6 PTS75
6) 2020 Giannis, 33.2 PTS75
7) 2021 Steph, 33.0 PTS75
8) 2022 Giannis, 32.7 PTS75
9) 1988 Jordan, 32.7 PTS75
10) 2020 Harden, 32.6 PTS75
11) 1993 Jordan, 32.3 PTS75
12) 1990 Jordan, 32.0 PTS75
13) 1991 Jordan, 32.0 PTS75
14) 2016 Steph, 31.9 PTS75
15) 1996 Jordan, 31.9 PTS75

Just some other thoughts on the subject, right?

i wouldnt go so far as saying wild volume scoring seasons shouldnt be celebrated, they may not lead to rings but they are impressive examples of making weaker teams competitive and are individual accompmishment that become part of basketball "lore" or storytelling

not everythingh or every accomplishment is down to one variable "how much did it contribute to winning rings" that one is already the most valued of all, but there is space for other ones imo to be given their space

Let's take a look at the PS, looking at some 3-year scoring peaks from some guys you mentioned, (adjusted to a 110 league average).

Kobe (07-09)-Inflation Adjusted 30.5 pts per 75 (rTS% of 4.1%)

Kobe (08-10)-Inflation Adjusted 30.4 pts per 75 (rTS% of 3.9%)

Kobe (06-08)-Inflation Adjusted 29.2 pts per 75 (rTS% of 4.8%)


Lebron (08-10)-Inflation Adjusted 32 pts per 75 (rTS% of 5.6%)

Lebron (16-18)-Inflation Adjusted 30.6 pts per 75 (rTS% of 7.9%)

Lebron (17-20)-Inflation Adjusted 30.5 pts per 75 (rTS% of 8.3%)

Lebron (12-14)-Inflation Adjusted 30.3 pts per 75 (rTS% of 9%)

Lebron (14-16)-Inflation Adjusted 30.1 pts per 75 (rTS% of 5.9%)

Lebron (13-15)-Inflation Adjusted 29.7 pts per 75 (rTS% of 6%)

Lebron (09-11)-Inflation Adjusted 29 pts per 75 (rTS% of 6%)


Dirk (10-12)-Inflation Adjusted 30.2 pts per 75 (rTS% of 8.2%)

Dirk (09-11)-Inflation Adjusted 29.8 pts per 75 (rTS% of 9.2%)

Dirk (08-10)-Inflation Adjusted 28.4 pts per 75 (rTS% of 9.5%)


Dwyane Wade (07-10)-Inflation Adjusted 30.6 pts per 75 (rTS% of 4%)

Dwyane Wade-Inflation (09-11)- Inflation Adjusted 29.5 pts per 75 (rTS% of 5.5%)

Dwyane Wade (06-09)- Inflation Adjusted 29.1 pts per 75 (rTS% of 5%)

Dwyane Wade (05-07)- Inflation Adjusted 28.4 pts per 75 (rTS% of 5%)


Curry (15-17)-Inflation Adjusted 28.8 pts per 75 (rTS% of 8.6%)

Lebron is a better scorer than Kobe.

Kobe might be a better volume scorer in the RS, but in the playoffs, Lebron is a clear level ahead of him in volume + efficiency.

It's not even close.

Ooh, now do Lebron.

It's funny because 1987 MJ probably isn't a top 8 season for him. Kobe's season is a bit trickier because I think he did have a lot of impact floor-raising a team that had little offensive firepower outside him and Odom. But it's still arguably not even a top-3 season for him.
Tserkin is right on the money, in both their cases, they were more effective players shooting/scoring less and playing within the flow of the offense. Outside of rare circumstances like Curry in 2016 or Kareem in 1971 high volume scoring (gunning) rarely works within the context of championship level teams, which is borne out by both MJ and Kobe's careers lol.

capfan33 wrote:I. Outside of rare circumstances like Curry in 2016 or Kareem in 1971 high volume scoring (gunning) rarely works within the context of championship level teams, which is borne out by both MJ and Kobe's careers lol.

[/quote]

Keep in mind the difference, though:

2016 Steph took 20.2 FGA/g to score 30.1 ppg. That's not really a wild high-volume season. That's a pretty normal level of shooting. 32.6% usage, which is a little high, but not CRAZY high.

Bryant's 06 season was a 38.7% USG season and Jordan in 87 was at 38.3% USG.

There are only so many qualifying seasons of 30+ mpg and 37%+ usage. There are 9 of them, in fact.

41.7% from 2017 Westbrook
40.5% from 2019 Harden
38.7% from 2006 Kobe
38.4% from 2015 Westbrook
38.3% from 1987 Jordan
37.8% from 2001 Iverson
37.5% from 2020 Giannis
37.4% from 2022 Luka
37.2% from 2022 Embiid

LAL1947 wrote:What are the PC Board's thoughts on this?

Well, honestly, my immediate thought is that if Kobe has the lead on this metric in PPG, imagine his lead if you went by shot attempts.

Doctor MJ wrote:

LAL1947 wrote:What are the PC Board's thoughts on this?

Well, honestly, my immediate thought is that if Kobe has the lead on this metric in PPG, imagine his lead if you went by shot attempts.

He would then be the leader in the coveted Kobe Assist

Doctor MJ wrote:

LAL1947 wrote:What are the PC Board's thoughts on this?

Well, honestly, my immediate thought is that if Kobe has the lead on this metric in PPG, imagine his lead if you went by shot attempts.

I knew the tweet would tickle Chuck and a few others, so I just HAD to post it.

We're allowed to have a little good natured fun on the PC board, right?

LAL1947 wrote:

Doctor MJ wrote:

LAL1947 wrote:What are the PC Board's thoughts on this?

Well, honestly, my immediate thought is that if Kobe has the lead on this metric in PPG, imagine his lead if you went by shot attempts.

I knew the tweet would tickle Chuck and a few others, so I just HAD to post it.

We're allowed to have a little good natured fun on the PC board, right?

Im pretty high on kobe but pace isn’t the best way to adjust scoring I feel

I feel an argument on kobe would have to be more so like, based on how the era kobe played in basically sucked for perimeter iso wings, Kobe’s effeciency in the halfcourt being great but him not taking as many transition opportunities as other players (by other players I mean bron and Wade) without stopping his team from transition or anything either, and despite him playing during a time where his archetype of a player doesn’t succeed all too much from an impact standpoint he still was an absolutely top tier offensive impact player

MyUniBroDavis wrote:
Im pretty high on kobe but pace isn’t the best way to adjust scoring I feel

The way it is done in the OP is flatly bad. There is a range of pace in any given season, so obviously if there are teams in a given season who played at a pace where a player accomplished a given feat, adjusting to a pace different than at which they achieved their feat is nonsense.

tsherkin wrote:The way it is done in the OP is flatly bad. There is a range of pace in any given season, so obviously if there are teams in a given season who played at a pace where a player accomplished a given feat, adjusting to a pace different than at which they achieved their feat is nonsense.

It also doesn't make sense to adjust for higher pace and point to differences in spacing across eras but take MPG from previous eras as something that doesn't need to be adjusted accordingly. This just isn't a valuable and honest thread and everyone – including the OP I hope – can see that clearly.

The-Power wrote:

tsherkin wrote:The way it is done in the OP is flatly bad. There is a range of pace in any given season, so obviously if there are teams in a given season who played at a pace where a player accomplished a given feat, adjusting to a pace different than at which they achieved their feat is nonsense.

It also doesn't make sense to adjust for higher pace and point to differences in spacing across eras but take MPG from previous eras as something that doesn't need to be adjusted accordingly. This just isn't a valuable and honest thread and everyone – including the OP I hope – can see that clearly.

Yes, that's another good point.