Why is Kobe, on average, above west and oscar in all time rankings?

[iggymcfrack]

It’s funny, this Harden/Kobe comparison just came up on Reddit today for peaks and as much of a Kobe hater as I am, I said that gun to my head I’d have to take 2009 Kobe over 2018 Harden because that Game 6 against Golden State just lives in my head. I do think it’s close though.

[Primedeion]

Better peak

Better prime

Better longevity

Played in a more talented era

More accomplished and way more team success

Kobe surpassed those guys by about 2009.

[70sFan]

Better peak

Better prime

Better longevity

Played in a more talented era

More accomplished and way more team success

Kobe surpassed those guys by about 2009.

It would be good to justify the first 2 statements before using them as arguments.

[iggymcfrack]

Better peak

Better prime

Better longevity

Played in a more talented era

More accomplished and way more team success

Kobe surpassed those guys by about 2009.

I'd take '64 Oscar over any Kobe season and I don't know how much of an edge the era thing is when Oscar had a better TS% than Kobe in both the regular season and postseason despite having no 3-point line when he was probably the best shooter in the entire league.

[Primedeion]

I'll take the guy who was far and away the best player on one of the ten best teams ever + the best half-court offensive player in the world (better half-court efficiency than peak Wade and peak LBJ according to Synergy + anchored the #1 half-court offense in the league) + was a legit All-Defensive level guard (90% percentile ISO defender according to Synergy+ second best rim protecting SG in the league+ primary communicator)+ amazing clutch performer ( #2 in WPA behind only peak LBJ)

And yeah, the league in the late 00's was more talented than the mid 60's. That's obvious.

[Bergmaniac]

I'll take the guy who was far and away the best player on one of the ten best teams ever + the best half-court offensive player in the world (better half-court efficiency than peak Wade and peak LBJ according to Synergy + anchored the #1 half-court offense in the league) + was a legit All-Defensive level guard (90% percentile ISO defender according to Synergy+ second best rim protecting SG in the league+ primary communicator)+ amazing clutch performer ( #2 in WPA behind only peak LBJ)

And yeah, the league in the late 00's was more talented than the mid 60's. That's obvious.

2009 or 2010 Lakers were one of the ten best teams ever? Based on what?

[One_and_Done]

I'll take the guy who was far and away the best player on one of the ten best teams ever + the best half-court offensive player in the world (better half-court efficiency than peak Wade and peak LBJ according to Synergy + anchored the #1 half-court offense in the league) + was a legit All-Defensive level guard (90% percentile ISO defender according to Synergy+ second best rim protecting SG in the league+ primary communicator)+ amazing clutch performer ( #2 in WPA behind only peak LBJ)

And yeah, the league in the late 00's was more talented than the mid 60's. That's obvious.

2009 or 2010 Lakers were one of the ten best teams ever? Based on what?

Those Lakers weren't even in the top 10 teams over the last decade

[70sFan]

I'll take the guy who was far and away the best player on one of the ten best teams ever + the best half-court offensive player in the world (better half-court efficiency than peak Wade and peak LBJ according to Synergy + anchored the #1 half-court offense in the league) + was a legit All-Defensive level guard (90% percentile ISO defender according to Synergy+ second best rim protecting SG in the league+ primary communicator)+ amazing clutch performer ( #2 in WPA behind only peak LBJ)

How these things compare Kobe to West or Oscar exactly?

[Primedeion]

I'll take the guy who was far and away the best player on one of the ten best teams ever + the best half-court offensive player in the world (better half-court efficiency than peak Wade and peak LBJ according to Synergy + anchored the #1 half-court offense in the league) + was a legit All-Defensive level guard (90% percentile ISO defender according to Synergy+ second best rim protecting SG in the league+ primary communicator)+ amazing clutch performer ( #2 in WPA behind only peak LBJ)

And yeah, the league in the late 00's was more talented than the mid 60's. That's obvious.

2009 or 2010 Lakers were one of the ten best teams ever? Based on what?

Based on having the fifth highest composite ELO score in basketball history?

Based on a having a top five peak ELO score in history?

Based on having a top ten average ELO rating in NBA history?

Based on having a top five ending ELO score in history?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-best-nba-teams-of-all-time-according-to-elo/amp/



Based on the many advanced team metrics that have them in the top ten (average ELO and peak ELO? And a relative postseason net rating that tops many historically great teams? And the healthy +9.0 SRS (one of the highest marks ever)? And the 65 wins? And playing at a +12 SRS level in the postseason? And the historically great record against +.500 teams? And having the best point differential against the top ten teams of the post Jordan era outside of peak GS according to cleaning the glass? And featuring the most dominant trio of the post Jordan era outside peak GS (regular season and postseason combined) ( +17.7 net rating for Kobe/pau/ odom tops ) etc

viewtopic.php?f=64&t=2012241

This detailed list has them...11th

Either way acting like they at least don't have a case is nutty even for this place.

[One_and_Done]

They don't have a case.

Those are very arbitrary indicators. If SRS matters, what's their SRS all-time?

[penbeast0]

I'd take '64 Oscar over any Kobe season and I don't know how much of an edge the era thing is when Oscar had a better TS% than Kobe in both the regular season and postseason despite having no 3-point line when he was probably the best shooter in the entire league.

I think you may be better repping West as the best shooter in the league. West was the one known for his range and using the threat of the outside shot to set his man up for a slash into the lane.

Oscar's rep was to use his great strength and physicality to push his man in for a closer shot, and kill a double team with a textbook pass to the man left open. As one player said (paraphrase), if you give him the 20 footer, he works you for the 15, if you give him the 15 footer, he works you for the 10, if you contest him at 10, he takes it to the basket. With no 3 point line, that was the smart way to play if you had his physical skills.

Jerry Lucas was the primary outside shooter in Cincinnati; his 25 foot shot was known as a "Lucas layup," because he was so automatic if left open.

[Warspite]

Rings don't make you a better or worse player.

Then why do they keep score?

[One_and_Done]

Rings don't make you a better or worse player.

Then why do they keep score?

Championships are a team accomplishment.

[migya]

Rings don't make you a better or worse player.

Then why do they keep score?

Championships are a team accomplishment.

It does elevate a player especially if he is the main reason they won.

Lebron choked in 2007 and 2011 finals, Jordan never did and that rightfully is a big plus for Jordan.

Russell was the reason why his team won like they did and that makes him one of the best ever.

[One_and_Done]

Hard disagree. How you play is relevant. Whether it results in a ring is not.

[migya]

Hard disagree. How you play is relevant. Whether it results in a ring is not.

Yes but performing well in your team winning it all is very relevant and winning is the whole aim.

[One_and_Done]

If Duncan plays exactly the same in 03, but has to defeat the 2017 Warriors in the finals, does he become a worse player when he understandably loses? That strikes me as absurd.

[Owly]

I'd take '64 Oscar over any Kobe season and I don't know how much of an edge the era thing is when Oscar had a better TS% than Kobe in both the regular season and postseason despite having no 3-point line when he was probably the best shooter in the entire league.

I think you may be better repping West as the best shooter in the league. West was the one known for his range and using the threat of the outside shot to set his man up for a slash into the lane.

Oscar's rep was to use his great strength and physicality to push his man in for a closer shot, and kill a double team with a textbook pass to the man left open. As one player said (paraphrase), if you give him the 20 footer, he works you for the 15, if you give him the 15 footer, he works you for the 10, if you contest him at 10, he takes it to the basket. With no 3 point line, that was the smart way to play if you had his physical skills.

Jerry Lucas was the primary outside shooter in Cincinnati; his 25 foot shot was known as a "Lucas layup," because he was so automatic if left open.

Granting people can mean many different things by shooter, people do talk more about West from outside ...

If one were looking for a measure of pure shooting (i.e. not getting good shots) ft% would be a pretty good one, especially for that era. All comparable circumstances etc. Robertson versus Lucas is no contest. Versus West it's closer but Robertson has a reasonable advantage and that was pretty consistent across their careers (chronological year-by-year Oscar shot better 11 times, West 3 times and West's wins always on the narrow end).

I have my doubts on the Lucas layup ... especially as interpreted here as if the connotation "so automatic" were true (and the range/distance is assumed accurate). Maybe there was a guy who mastered a 3, whilst playing (and continuing to play) in the league that didn't have/reward it (he would have been an ABL player, granted), was precious about his numbers and shot from the line ... good for a big man ... above average ... perhaps "good" but numbers that would be typical/ordinary for a guard.

Maybe he had it as a party trick (i.e. in non-game situs) but I can't see it being something significant ...
-say he got to a 25 footer at 35% ... that's great for the time ... do you think he puts himself in positions to shoot that with any frequency (it's not a good shot early in the clock ... at the end he can take a low% shot or be under the boards ...)
-say he got it to 40% ... it's hard for me to buy that he got it that high ... IRL the line isn't 25 feet ... and yes some are more contested but Dirk was great from short or long midrange and a clearly better free throw shooter, wasn't a 40% shooter from 3, ditto Miller, Mullin, Irving, Durant, Paul, Dumars, Stockton, Lillard ... (off small midrange samples samples Abdul-Rauf and Ferry - there'd be more mid-90s player if you cut out the boost given by the shorter line years). It's very hard for me to buy he's making it at that clip with any frequency (i.e. greater attention from D and less fluky, something like an actual, impactful weapon for spacing and late clock, actually historically noteworthy).

Maybe he's a Matt Bonner like outlier that shoots it that well, despite a pedestrian free throw stroke - whilst also without the incentive to shoot it (and greater disincentive - Lucas loved accumulating rebounds, this requiring being basket adjacent).

My suspicion is he was probably good, in infrequent attempts from the outside ... for his time, and an announcer noticed some (without tracking them). And it alliterates. But he wasn't automatic. I could be wrong, but something about the guy with both a mind for numbers and a ... healthy interest in his own numbers ... with the automatic 3 in a non-3pt league, without strong pure shot indicators, with very poor impact indicators (relevant only in if this shot was actually significant, useful, used it would help him look better, rather than much worse, than his box numbers in terms of impact), with very high fg% ... it doesn't fit easily to me.

[penbeast0]

I would guess you are correct on Lucas. I saw him more in his low scoring years in New York and in my (old and quite possibly faulty) memory he did tend to hang around the top of the key more than other bigs of his day, but would fake the shot from there and drive or pass if he was covered and usually only took it if they didn't come out on him.

He didn't actually play in the ABL as the team folded before he played a game so not sure why ABL is relevant to developing his playstyle.

[Owly]

I would guess you are correct on Lucas. I saw him more in his low scoring years in New York and in my (old and quite possibly faulty) memory he did tend to hang around the top of the key more than other bigs of his day, but would fake the shot from there and drive or pass if he was covered and usually only took it if they didn't come out on him.

He didn't actually play in the ABL as the team folded before he played a game so not sure why ABL is relevant to developing his playstyle.

The fuller section is an allusion to the fact that he never chose to go to the ABA to weaponize this shot, the reference to ABL is conceding that to be fair he did choose that league ... that said, in the little I recall there's no indication the 3 was a part of his decision.

In short, in short it's not development of playstyle, it's that there's a place that should value this weapon, there's a place that he can show/weaponize this tool and he doesn't take it in terms of ABA, but I should grant maybe the ABL did value it (... or maybe Lucas was a star in the NCAA, drafted to a cheap NBA team, was gettable ...).