Last four years: Dirk v. Kobe, who's better?

[TheSecretWeapon]

This is an example of a minor change in emphasis couple with some misdirection. No question that Kobe's offensive rebounding went way down in the playoffs -- probably due to the emphasis on getting back that you describe. To suggest that this affected his scoring is absurd. In fact, he shot more frequently in the series against Phoenix than he did during the regular season, and scored about as many points. What he did against Phoenix was get fewer assists and commit more turnovers -- up nearly a full turnover per 40 minutes.

1. Not sure where you got your stats from but:

2005-2006 Regular season against the Suns:
Game 1: 11 for 28 43 points
Game 2: 19 for 33 - 51 points
Game 3: 12 for 33 - 37 points
Game 4: 13 for 26 39 points

In the playoffs he had 145 shots in 7 games which is only about 20 shots per game vs 30 shots in the regular season. Just under 4 apg in the regular season vs 5.1 in the playoffs. fg% was 45.8 in the regular season and 49.7% in the playoffs. Defensive rebounding went up, offensive rebounding went down. Overall scoring went down from 42.5 per game in the regular season to about 28ppg. FTA's were 14 per game in the regular season and 7 per game in the playoffs.

He shot the ball less frequently but more efficiently. His assists and turnovers went up. Obviously the strategy to shift the scoring to the frontline affected Kobe's box score production.

2. The entire series is on Youtube so there's no need to speculate about what happened based on the box score. You can actually witness it for yourself. Game footage > box score + calculator anyday.
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_q ... arch_type=

I was talking about the regular season/playoffs from last season -- 2006-2007.

For LAST SEASON, here's the breakdown on Kobe's shooting attempts.

Regular season -- 26.9 fga per 48 minutes
Reg. season vs. PHX -- 28.9 fga per 48 minutes
Playoffs vs. PHX -- 29.2 fga per 48 minutes

29.2 is MORE than 26.9 or 28.9 (albeit 29.2 and 28.9 are pretty close to each other). This would suggest that in 2006-2007, Kobe's role did not change from regular season to playoffs.

In 05-06, Kobe did indeed take significantly fewer shots (31.8 per 48 in the regular season vs. 22.2 per 48 in the playoffs). He shot the ball better in the playoffs than he did in the regular season (except from the free throw line), but grabbed more rebounds and had more assists. His turnovers also went up while steals and blocks declined. And (kinda interesting), this was one of his better playoffs according to Win Score. His Win Score in 05-06 was 83% of his regular season mark -- a lesser decline in his overall production than he normally has in the playoffs.

[TheSecretWeapon]

Where can I find evidence other than your word that this is the case?

The best place, game footage. Feel free to talk to people who make those Laker videos on youtube, download them from bittorrent, make requests on forums or to watch games on ESPN classic. Around this time they start playing all those old playoff games.
You can search for Phil Jackson quotes from 2003 as well. He made it public when people were asking him about the reasoning for the 40-point streak.

Kobe's usage numbers from regular season to playoffs are basically the same during the Shaq era. During the regular season when the team's plan was to "ride Kobe offensively", he had 19.7 FGA per 40 minutes. During the playoffs when "role players would pick up their scoring and Shaq would turn it on again", Kobe had 19.6 FGA.

I think you're missing the bigger picture, I didn't say he took less shots. I said the offense was different. Go look at Shaq's splits by month. Every year from 1999 to 2003 Shaq had the highest ppg (for a month) in either March or April... sometimes he hit highs in both months. Usually, there was an increase in FGA as well. If we exclude the strike shortened season that makes 5 straight seasons where this happens.
To put it simply, the Laker offense changes as the seasons progresses. Correspondingly, the shots (and shot selection) of other Lakers change as well.

His overall usage (using Hollinger's usage estimator) went from 27.9 per 40 to 27.0 -- a drop of just 3%. If the team's pace slowed during the playoffs (I don't have time to collect and run the numbers), this would mean that Kobe's share of possession usage actually INCREASED in the playoffs.

I would imagine it would have increased dramatically. Watch the games. In the 4th quarter of close games the offense changes again and Shaq doesn't get the ball due to hack-a-shaq (among other reasons). Kobe's got it on every play. The playoffs naturally have more close games on average than the regular season so it follows logic.
Try watching the Lakers-Portland or Lakers-Mavs games on youtube. Shaq basically turns into Tyson Chandler on most possessions.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FXEq19VK2pk

Why do you think you never heard about Shaq dominating the 4th quarter instead of Kobe?

The Iverson example similarly misses the mark. In the run to the Finals, Iverson's scoring dropped 1.1 points per 40 minutes. It wasn't because Iverson stopped being a volume shooter, however. Iverson had more per minute FGA and more True Shooting Attempts in the playoffs than he did in the regular season that year. The reason Iverson lost 1.1 points per 40 is that he shot the ball worse -- both from 2pt range and the FT line.

I'm was referring to the Sixers strategy change resulting in Iverson having a different role and lesser stats (but more team success) because of it's an illustration of my point. Maybe you didn't watch Iverson at all back then but I was taking it for granted that you understood the change was season to season and not regular season to playoffs (anyone who watched that season knows the strategy didn't change for the playoffs).

My point is that it's not 'romaticized crap'. Players asked to do one important job at the expense of another job that would yield better box score stats happens on every team in league.

Someone's gotta be the first guy back on D and he's obviously sacrificing rebounds to do it. Someone's gotta set the pick and screens, play decoy etc. Someone's gotta play off the ball when they'd be better on it. Someone's coming off the bench instead of starting (Ginobili, Calderon, Mo Evans, Farmar etc). Some PG is being individually restricted by his offense (Nash in Dallas), some forward is playing point too much or not enough (AK47, KG, Odom, Diaw), someone is running a slow paced offense for defensive purposes instead of a faster one (T-Mac), some PG is playing SG because of a lack in personnel (AI)....

No team's strategy is ever to have all their players maximizing their individual box score stats. It's not even possible. So it's pointless to compare box score stats as if that were the case. That's all I'm getting to.

I'm not quite how to respond to this because I watched all the games you're talking about -- I've been a serious NBA fan since 1978. I'm interested enough to study offensive systems, to hand-track individual defensive stats. What I saw bears very little resemblance to what you're describing.

Re the bolded statement. Of course I've been talking about same season regular season to playoff changes. Of course players change roles from season to season. But that has NOTHING to do with the point I've been making. Very rarely are players asked to play a significantly different role from regular season to playoffs within the same season.

Fact is that Kobe played fundamentally the same role with the Lakers from regular season to playoffs (with the exception of 05-06). He just didn't do it as well. There's no crime in that -- it won't even hurt much for a Kobe backer to admit it. The guy was still a very good playoff performer, he was good enough to help his team win 3 championships, and he had some sensational clutch performances. He doesn't need anyone to make excuses for him or come up with some "insight" to make his performance look better than it was. The guy was very good in the regular season, and not quite as good in the playoffs. It's okay.

[Bgil]

Re the bolded statement. Of course I've been talking about same season regular season to playoff changes. Of course players change roles from season to season. But that has NOTHING to do with the point I've been making. Very rarely are players asked to play a significantly different role from regular season to playoffs within the same season.

You made the point that players giving up box score stats for team success was a romanticized notion and didn't happen in real life. It surely does happen from one set of data to the next (reg. season to playoffs, season to season, lineup to lineup, coach to coach, opponent to opponent etc.). Individual Box score stats are not the goal of play so I don't see what makes you think it's so inconceivable that one could forgo them in favor of something else.

Fact is that Kobe played fundamentally the same role with the Lakers from regular season to playoffs (with the exception of 05-06).

Now you've amended your earlier statement with the parenthetical but before you were ridiculing the idea that it happened at all:

That said, I agree with your basic point that the game is not about accumulating individual stats, it's about winning. However, the notion of a star sacrificing his "stats" to help his team win is a bunch of romanticized claptrap. The "stats" referred to in that sort of rubbish is scoring. I've never heard anyone suggest a player grab fewer rebounds to help his team win.

Fact is that Kobe played fundamentally the same role with the Lakers from regular season to playoffs (with the exception of 05-06). He just didn't do it as well.

The issue here is that you're determining "as well" as a function of box score stats with absolutely no context of strategy or purpose (basically the "why"). Your assumption in all of you statistical judgments is that everything else is the same. It's not and rarely ever is.
You can dance around the idea by excluding one season but the point still stands that if you were using context in the first place you wouldn't have missed that blatant example.

He just didn't do it as well. There's no crime in that -- it won't even hurt much for a Kobe backer to admit it. The guy was still a very good playoff performer, he was good enough to help his team win 3 championships, and he had some sensational clutch performances. He doesn't need anyone to make excuses for him or come up with some "insight" to make his performance look better than it was. The guy was very good in the regular season, and not quite as good in the playoffs. It's okay.

It's not about Kobe. I'm in another thread basically arguing the same thing about Peja. It's about the massive hole in your analytical process that allows you to completely miss things like Kobe's 05-06. I applaud you on your very deep (and original) statistical analysis but it's still completely hollow without context.
You're taking two sets of calculations and claiming the greater one is an effect of the player doing better. By nature you're assuming the goal of the player is to get a higher number in your calculation. That's just a false assumption.

For the record, I have not (in this thread) been making an claims or inferences into how well Kobe played in any of those data sets. I personally think his biggest fault in 05-06 (and many other seasons) was in not keeping any balance in the Laker attack. But saying he didn't play well because he stats aren't as good is a farce. He changed his game (and team strategy) so much that even the NBA on-air personalities that provide little in-depth analysis in favor of jokes had to comment on it.

Very rarely are players asked to play a significantly different role from regular season to playoffs within the same season.

The Lakers and Spurs do it in very obvious ways almost every year. For example, Pop will change the style of offense that Tony Parker plays in every series if he has to. Peja was a very obvious one who did it every year as well. For as much as people said he wasn't clutch (he wasn't) a lot of it had to do with the Kings turning him into more of a role player in the post season. They'd base their offense on Bibby and Webber more than in the regular season.
KG did it many years too.
I'm just naming stars and very obvious examples (if you watched the games) but role players do it all the time too. Teams usually adjust the way they play against different teams and often that affects their players stats. It's just how things work.

[TheSecretWeapon]

I'm officially at the agree to disagree point. You're inflating minor strategic adjustments -- game planning -- with fundamental role changes. That inflation is incorrect. It's as incorrect as simply looking at stats and making assumptions (something I'm not doing in this thread, despite your assertion that I am). So, whatever. Agree to disagree.

[Jordan23Forever]

-= original quote snipped =-



And what's the optimum placement/angle for an entry passer when passing to a fronted post player?
What's the basic concept of a flex offense?
How does the Lakers triangle differ from the Bulls triangle?

You know **** about basketball so don't pretend like you could even recognize an objective fact when you see one.

Whatever you say, my friend. Your tactics are pretty transparent. You attempt to rationalize and explain away every one of Kobe's statistical shortcomings when measured against other great players. It's plain to see.

[eatyourchildren]

J23F you're not even adding anything to this statistical/meta-statistical analysis other than to throw ad-hominem poop at bgil. (not that I am either but just to comment on your argument strategy)

My view of this: I don't think that Kobe's statistical gaps are so large that you can definitively say that Kobe's downward performance is a result of playing worse and not due to BGil's hypothesis of changed roles (which have been clearly delineated in interviews of Phil Jackson and Tex Winter ex post facto).

I mean, are we talking 2-3 standard deviations from his norm? No, right? It is reasonable to go either way (to say that Kobe plays slightly worse or to say that Kobe's role changes enough to impact his box score), but I tend to put some reasonable amount of weight in what Tex Winter says about Kobe's play (not even so much his 'role') from regular season to the playoffs. If anything, Tex has consistently criticized Bryant's play in the regular season and applauded his ability to 'play the right way' in the post-season, so much so that Kobe was hardly reprimanded for his tantrums or non-team optimal play in the regular season (ever wonder how the Shaq/Kobe Lakers hardly ever finished with historically great records, despite being a historically great team?) because of the trust Phil/Winters had in Bryant's ability to get his head right in time for the playoffs.

[Bgil]

I'm officially at the agree to disagree point. You're inflating minor strategic adjustments -- game planning -- with fundamental role changes. That inflation is incorrect.

Your statistical differences are "minor", at best. Just a couple pages ago you were noting that Kobe's rebounding dropped 11% and his assists by 8%. 11% and 8% of 5 apg or rpg is definitely 'minor'.
Calling the changes minor is just underrating the importance and impact they have on the game. Let's not forget this is the issue reported to be the main point of argument between Shaq and Kobe in the later years. Even between Kobe, Payton, and the coaching staff. Several times it prompted Shaq to publicly gripe about changing the offense back or he wasn't going to play defense or rebound ("if you don't feed the dog then he won't guard the yard").

It's as incorrect as simply looking at stats and making assumptions (something I'm not doing in this thread, despite your assertion that I am).

Given what you've posted, there is no reason to believe you used any other process to come to your conclusion. It's rather disingenious for you to deny it now after defending it earlier.

[Mavs41]

i think we should end this thread with something we can all agree on!
Kobe, despite worse statistics, is a very good player in the playoffs, not quite as good as Dirk, but still very good!

[abarl]

I think we can also agree that Dirk is scared shhhh of playing Kobe and his Lakers in the playoffs which is shocking since you seem to think he is a better playoff performer

[MicrOLak3R]

Dirk by a mile.

[Doctor MJ]

My quick take on last 4 years, if no more basketball were to be played this year:

Kobe
Years at #1 - 1
Years in top 5 - 3
Years in top 10 - 3

Dirk
Years at #1 - 0
Years in top 5 - 2
Years in top 10 - 4

I'd say Kobe at this point, however its definitely close enough that if the Lakers lose in the first round and Dallas wins the title this year dirk would get nod.

Just for the hell of it, other top players in that time:

Tim Duncan
Years at #1 - 1
Years in top 5 - 2
Years in top 10 - 4

Steve Nash
Years at #1 - 1
Years in top 5 - 3
Years in top 10 - 4

Dwyane Wade
Years at #1 - 1
Years in top 5 - 2
Years in top 10 - 2

LeBron James
Years at #1 - 0
Years in top 5 - 3
Years in top 10 - 4

[Bgil]

Spurs vs Suns Game 1 = proof that the Spurs change the roles of their players in the post season.

[Heat3]

04-05 Kobe >= Dirk
05-06 Dirk gets to finals = Kobe has crazy stats....draw
06-07 Dirk (mvp) > Kobe
07-08 Kobe > Dirk

Draw

[Doctor MJ]

04-05 Kobe >= Dirk
05-06 Dirk gets to finals = Kobe has crazy stats....draw
06-07 Dirk (mvp) > Kobe
07-08 Kobe > Dirk

Draw

How on earth do you see 04-05 Kobe as ahead of Dirk but even or behind in other years? Kobe shot 43% as his team won 34 games, do you remember this?

[shawngoat23]

Definitely Kobe. I'd vote the other way though if Dirk won two more games in 2006.

[ILikeTheGrizz]

My quick take on last 4 years, if no more basketball were to be played this year:

Kobe
Years at #1 - 1
Years in top 5 - 3
Years in top 10 - 3

Dirk
Years at #1 - 0
Years in top 5 - 2
Years in top 10 - 4

I'd say Kobe at this point, however its definitely close enough that if the Lakers lose in the first round and Dallas wins the title this year dirk would get nod.

Just for the hell of it, other top players in that time:

Tim Duncan
Years at #1 - 1
Years in top 5 - 2
Years in top 10 - 4

Steve Nash
Years at #1 - 1
Years in top 5 - 3
Years in top 10 - 4

Dwyane Wade
Years at #1 - 1
Years in top 5 - 2
Years in top 10 - 2

LeBron James
Years at #1 - 0
Years in top 5 - 3
Years in top 10 - 4

Awesome breakdown.

Always fun to see Bgil squirm and play with facts to try to make Kobe look good, too.