SGA vs Kobe

[durantbird]

Who do you think is the better player?

[One_and_Done]

It's SGA and it's not terribly close.

[TheGOATRises007]

I'd go SGA.

He had a better RS than any of Kobe's.

Interestingly enough, his playoffs still show a decline from his RS numbers. I imagine after game 5, this will look better, but it's still a noticeable decline.

While waiting for the update of game 5 to his numbers, his playoff run doesn't look clearly ahead of Kobe's in 2008 nor 2009. In fact, they look pretty similar.

Someone could prove me wrong with some impact metrics though.

[One_and_Done]

SGA per 100 RS: 45.9/7/9 on 637 TS%

SGA per 100 PS: 39.4/7.5/9.2 on 580 TS%

Shai has been putting up these numbers while leading a 68 win team with the highest SRS of all-time, the 2nd highest differential of all-time, and the highest PS differential of all-time, in a far tougher era than any Kobe ever played in, all while missing his 2nd best player for 13 games, his 3rd best player for 50 games, and his starting 5 man for 25 games, none of whom were 100% in some of the games they did play when coming back from injury. The Thunder are prohibitive favourites to win the title from here, and Shai’s stats are going to go up playing the fast-paced Pacers.

That’s more impressive than anything Kobe ever did. Shai is also just a better and more talented player, which the stats and team success bear out. Better on offense and better on defence. Kobe doesn’t have a single season which compares favourably to the one I just described.

[TheGOATRises007]

Day 1000 of One_and_done not using rTS.

[One_and_Done]

Day 1000 of One_and_done not using rTS.

Because a flat TS% adjustment is not appropriate, for obvious reasons.

[TheGOATRises007]

Day 1000 of One_and_done not using rTS.

Because a flat TS% adjustment is not appropriate, for obvious reasons.

Using non-relative TS to compare players across different eras is flawed.

[One_and_Done]

As I've explained in depth before, I don't think Kobe would be any more efficient today.

[SlimShady83]

It's SGA and it's not terribly close.

Thanks for making me laugh. Someone mentions Kobe, knew you'd jump on it

[rand]

As I've explained in depth before, I don't think Kobe would be any more efficient today.

I missed that explanation but I'd be interested in hearing the case for it because I think virtually everyone would be more efficient today unless they refused to play any differently than they did in their day.

[penbeast0]

As I said in another thread, if you have a problem with One and Done, put him on ignore. If you are posting here, comment on the posts rather than the poster. It's fine to say that using flat ts% is far less accurate than using rts%. Avoid posts about how another poster doesn't understand this.

[eminence]

It's SGA.

Assuming you use an era-relative approach - Magic/MJ/Steph are the 3 guards we should be discussing him with.

[tsherkin]

This specific version of SGA looks better than Kobe. He's a notably superior shooter, he's got full 3-level scoring, he doesn't have the same issues with shot selection and his output is insane compared to his peers, never mind compared to what Kobe did in his own time. Even rTS blows Kobe out of the water. Kobe was a +3, +3.5% rTS guy in his day, but Shai put down 63.7% TS this year (63.6% last year, too), which was +6.1% rTS. That's insane, that's like some Ray Allen / Reggie Miller-level rTS, not usually what you see out of perimeter guys, even in today's environment. That's 111 TS+ (he was at 110 last year), which is comparable to Shaq's career average, or Giannis in his AS seasons, to lend some perspective.

Kobe was very talented, and quite accomplished. Had he been less, to borrow O+D's word, "inelastic" in his time, he might have been more efficient with his specific tools. But Shai is something else.

[Ian Scuffling]

Excuse my ignorance (and being off topic), but rTS%, I assume is "relative TS%", correct? Also, where can I find that number? Thanks in advance.

[JLei]

I need more sample.

Leaning SGA since Kobe was never +8 and regular season wise I’d say definitely SGA.

Playoff wise 08 and 09 Kobe is similar to this level.

And there’s things about Kobe’s skillset that I do like a lot. His post game and off ball skill set I tend to find valuable in a playoff setting and I think I’d still have him over SGA offensively slightly but clearly in the playoffs.

Add in defense and hmmm

[eminence]

Excuse my ignorance (and being off topic), but rTS%, I assume is "relative TS%", correct? Also, where can I find that number? Thanks in advance.

Yes, it's just personal TS % - league average TS%.

Not sure if you can find it anywhere in particular or if you have to do it yourself.

Similar - TS+ is personal TS%/League average * 100 and that's on BBref under advanced shooting. Probably a bit more useful as a stat.

[EmpireFalls]

Kobe has a much larger volume of these performances. If SGA keeps this up for a few years it will be him though.

[tsherkin]

Kobe has a much larger volume of these performances. If SGA keeps this up for a few years it will be him though.

The OP explicitly states this particular season, so there's no need for more seasons.

[One_and_Done]

As I've explained in depth before, I don't think Kobe would be any more efficient today.

I missed that explanation but I'd be interested in hearing the case for it because I think virtually everyone would be more efficient today unless they refused to play any differently than they did in their day.

viewtopic.php?t=2357707#p111495067

Also worth noting that the argument isn't that TS% captures everything, the argument has always been that you should look at a guys actual numbers then apply context with logic and reasoning. Relative TS% is inherently flawed because it rewards guys for playing in worse leagues where nobody could shoot well.

As someone noted, Kobe often loses rTS% comps too, as he would here, I'm just not going to legitimise a stat that is clearly a dud. Nobody thinks a guy who is 1% above average TS% in say 1950 would by 1% above average today.

[tsherkin]

Relative TS% is inherently flawed because it rewards guys for playing in worse leagues where nobody could shoot well.

Ignoring it, though, means failing to account for era-related differences which have changed TS% for guys who have bridged the era gap. It's demonstrably true that the league finds it considerably easier to finish at the basket now compared to in Kobe's prime, for example. The difference in FG% from 0-3 is like +10% compared to 2004, and that's not because guys are any better at making those shots while contested. The nature of team strategy is quite a bit different as well, as is the spacing, even in the areas where Kobe liked to operate.

Ignoring the fact that he'd be contested a lot less on his favorite shots, and on money shots close to the basket, seems like intentionally-disingenuous discourse rather than anything legitimate, to be blunt.