RealGM Top 100 List #10

Moderators: Doctor MJ, trex_8063, penbeast0, PaulieWal, Clyde Frazier

User avatar
Texas Chuck
Senior Mod - NBA TnT Forum
Senior Mod - NBA TnT Forum
Posts: 92,800
And1: 99,387
Joined: May 19, 2012
Location: Purgatory
   

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #10 

Post#121 » by Texas Chuck » Wed Jul 23, 2014 2:31 pm

The Infamous1 wrote:Bird got into a bar fight in the middle of the 85 playoffs which hurt his hand and causes him to shoot poorly from then on out which resulted in the celtics losing in the finals with HCA for the first time in their history. Could you imagine if that was Kobe(or any modern superstar to be honest)?

Lol there would be all the media talk about how he's not a leader and a poor teammate etc.


this simply isnt true. Mike would be out all night gambling and what not and never got criticized because people are smart enough to look at your body of work as a whole. Bird getting in a fight isnt enough to block out the rest of his career. A guy like Kobe tho who has shown time and again that he has personal agendas that at times took precedence over the team would and should be looked at differently for things like the situation in Colorado.

Its not becasue people like Bird and don't like Kobe. Track Record matters.
ThunderBolt wrote:I’m going to let some of you in on a little secret I learned on realgm. If you don’t like a thread, not only do you not have to comment but you don’t even have to open it and read it. You’re welcome.
penbeast0
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Posts: 30,565
And1: 10,035
Joined: Aug 14, 2004
Location: South Florida
 

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #10 

Post#122 » by penbeast0 » Wed Jul 23, 2014 2:31 pm

Baller2014 wrote:
ardee wrote:This is such a racist post. Are you trying to imply that the Hawks were somehow worse because they had only Caucasian players?

I come here to debate basketball and I see this crap about ethnicity?

Sent from my GT-I9300 using RealGM Forums mobile app

No, I'm saying the previous exclusion of black players, who would represent over 50% of all players less than 10 years later, clearly reduced the quality of the league as a whole. I have no idea how you think such an observation is "racist". If we prevented all white players and foreigners playing in today's NBA the effect would be much the same.

Anyway, done explaining this for now. I have to go to work.


I do actually agree with this point. It's one of the main arguments against Mikan, and to a lesser degree Pettit (because up through 1995, Pettit was still the best forward in the league over black stars like Baylor, Walker, Green, etc.) . . . being a star in the 50s does bring on serious issues of restricted player pool which do not exist in terms of stars by the mid 60s (bottom of the bench still tended to be disproportionately white because the league thought that "marketed" better).
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
The Infamous1
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,733
And1: 1,025
Joined: Mar 14, 2012
   

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #10 

Post#123 » by The Infamous1 » Wed Jul 23, 2014 2:36 pm

Chuck Texas wrote:
The Infamous1 wrote:Bird got into a bar fight in the middle of the 85 playoffs which hurt his hand and causes him to shoot poorly from then on out which resulted in the celtics losing in the finals with HCA for the first time in their history. Could you imagine if that was Kobe(or any modern superstar to be honest)?

Lol there would be all the media talk about how he's not a leader and a poor teammate etc.


this simply isnt true. Mike would be out all night gambling and what not and never got criticized because people are smart enough to look at your body of work as a whole. Bird getting in a fight isnt enough to block out the rest of his career. A guy like Kobe tho who has shown time and again that he has personal agendas that at times took precedence over the team would and should be looked at differently for things like the situation in Colorado.

Its not becasue people like Bird and don't like Kobe. Track Record matters.


The difference is Gambling never affected Jordan's play come playoff time. The fight at the bar with bird did
We can get paper longer than Pippens arms
The Infamous1
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,733
And1: 1,025
Joined: Mar 14, 2012
   

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #10 

Post#124 » by The Infamous1 » Wed Jul 23, 2014 2:40 pm

http://www.celticslife.com/2012/08/than ... 5.html?m=1

"In his other two MVP seasons (84 and 86), when the Celtics won the championship, he shot 52 percent each year. However after that apparent incident, [b]the final 8 games of the playoffs, Bird shot just 40 percent (63-156)."
We can get paper longer than Pippens arms
User avatar
An Unbiased Fan
RealGM
Posts: 11,746
And1: 5,724
Joined: Jan 16, 2009
       

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #10 

Post#125 » by An Unbiased Fan » Wed Jul 23, 2014 2:48 pm

fpliii wrote:Yeah, as I said in the other thread, I'm not comfortable just assuming Kobe's defense is better than Bird's. I feel like I have a good feel for Kobe's defense from watching him since he came into the league, but not Bird's.

I can't comment on Bird's defense personally since I've only seen a bunch of his playoff games, after the fact. If we're going to use defense as the separating factor, we'd better be damn sure that Kobe is a higher impact player than Bird was. The defensive rebounding difference is substantial (and we can't hand-wave it away due to positional differences, since we're not handicapping players on the basis of height), and Bird would be playing the four today (and I know at least a few posters, including myself, are weighting heavily how a guy's game would look today), so I'd be very interested in hearing how he'd stack up on that end at the position.

But yeah, if we are going to mention Kobe at this point in the project on the basis of his defensive advantage over Bird, we really need some in-depth analysis before we can establish that if that was actually the case.

(Note: I don't have a problem with Kobe coming up this early, I just want to be very precise about putting his case together. Tons of new knowledge has been contributed so far, and part of what makes this project so great is the fact that the panel isn't afraid to challenge preconceived notions. ;) )

Fair enough, I think we have to look at a few things.

1) Peer Review - Kobe is regarded by NBA greats, coaches, players, GMs, analysts as one the best perimeter defenders of his era. Bird was generally regarded as a hustle/scrappy defender, but never view elite defensively.

2) Defensive ability - Kobe was a superior horizontal & vertical defender. His man defense had greater utility in that Phil could switch him onto 3 positions depending on matchups. His transition defense was also elite.

Was Bird a bad defender, no. Was he a great defender, no also. Most stars back in the 80's didn't' focus on defense that heavily. It was a more "you score on me, I score on you" type thing, and the bangers would handle D. The Nique vs Bird duels are a perfect example of this. I can't think of anyone who was stifled by Bird's defense, nor him guarding multiple positions effectively. You brought up defensive rebounding, but I don't really consider that defense. Guys like Boozer bear that out.

I've posted these a few times already. Kobe was able to do things defensively due to his physical tools and timing, Bird simply couldn't .
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aG7Mj5Mifqs[/youtube]

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kk9SRxMQs1k[/youtube]
7-time RealGM MVPoster 2009-2016
Inducted into RealGM HOF 1st ballot in 2017
DannyNoonan1221
Junior
Posts: 350
And1: 151
Joined: Mar 27, 2014
         

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #10 

Post#126 » by DannyNoonan1221 » Wed Jul 23, 2014 2:56 pm

Warspite wrote: Most of todays players couldnt play in the 60s. They lack the stamina to play at that pace and they cant dribble the basketball per 60s rules. All players from today would automaticly be terrible 3pt shooters as well.

[cut]

How players play translate from one era to another is worthless. You can only compare what they did vs their own peers. Im not sure Pettit is a top 20 player but I believe Mikan is.


Couldn't disagree more. Mikan a top 20 and pettit not? Most of today's players couldn't play in the 60s? Can you please explain why they couldn't, other than "they lack stamina"?
Okay Brand, Michael Jackson didn't come over to my house to use the bathroom. But his sister did.
User avatar
Clyde Frazier
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 20,248
And1: 26,130
Joined: Sep 07, 2010

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #10 

Post#127 » by Clyde Frazier » Wed Jul 23, 2014 3:10 pm

Kobe's advantage in longevity and more impact seasons defensively doesn't sway me over bird. Kobe hit a point with the media where an all defensive selection was almost a given regardless of merit. Independent of the eye test, the below RAPM breakdown suggests that kobe has merely been an average defender for much of his career:

http://asubstituteforwar.wordpress.com/ ... maginable/

(As I've mentioned in previous threads, I've really only been following RAPM for the last 6 months or so, so someone with more knowledge feel free to discredit the above link -- with reasoning, of course)

This trend of "how many all stars did he play with?" as a way to boost up or lessen a player's accomplishments is a little overdone. We can't just ignore that playing alongside a #1 guy as good as bird or kobe will help fringe AS players make AS teams, right?

This also brings me back to great players needing good players to help them win. As talented as kobe was, he couldn't do anything in the playoffs without help. There's no glory in dragging bad teams to a 1st round exit. Bird didn't really experience that until the end of his career, but he did seem to adapt well to the changes the celtics were making, if only he were healthier.

I'm not saying it isn't close as Kobe clearly deserves to be in the conversation. I just think bird's edge in prime and peak production is enough to put him over kobe all time.
DQuinn1575
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,954
And1: 713
Joined: Feb 20, 2014

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #10 

Post#128 » by DQuinn1575 » Wed Jul 23, 2014 3:13 pm

An Unbiased Fan wrote:
1) Peer Review - Kobe is regarded by NBA greats, coaches, players, GMs, analysts as one the best perimeter defenders of his era. Bird was generally regarded as a hustle/scrappy defender, but never view elite defensively.



A little unfair on the peer review for Bird - coaches voted him second team all-defense a few times - the same group who voted Kobe 1st team numerous times.

3 time 2nd team all-defense

Paul Silas
Dwayne Wade
Eddie Jones

So, the coaches who viewed Kobe as excellent rated Bird fairly high.

So the defense advantage here isn't a canyon - the Celtics improved a lot defensively in 1980 when Bird joined the team.
ElGee
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,041
And1: 1,208
Joined: Mar 08, 2010
Contact:

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #10 

Post#129 » by ElGee » Wed Jul 23, 2014 3:15 pm

acrossthecourt wrote:Plus ... from 1990 to 1998 his TS% in the regular season is 59. Why are the stats you posted so low?

Check again.


Man I hate troubleshooting. Found my error. We are completely aligned now. Robinson 90-98

EDIT: These should be correct now.

    vs. +3 defenses: 26.9 pts/36 | 63.8% TS 3.5 ast/36
    vs. -3 defenses: 23.1 pts/36 | 56.4% TS 2.5 ast/36

Duncan 99-08 is

    vs. +3 defenses: 22.5 pts/36 | 58.7% TS | 3.4 ast/36
    vs. -3 defenses: 20.6 pts/36 | 53.0% TS | 2.5 ast/36

Garnett 99-08 is

    vs. +3 defenses: 21.0 pts/36 | 56.8% TS | 4.8 ast/36
    vs. -3 defenses: 20.0 pts/36 | 52.5% TS | 4.2 ast/36

Robinson stays at about 10 FTA/36. TD around 7. Garnett just under 5.5. Keep in mind, Robinson plays significantly easier defenses than KG or Duncan. If we ran the same numbers but vs. 109/103 defenses...

Robinson
    vs. 109 (221g) 25.9 pts/36 | 61.8% TS | 3.1 ast/36
    vs. 103 (46g) 22.5 pts/36 | 55.5% TS | 3.2 ast/36

Duncan
    vs. 109 (89g) 21.8 pts/36 | 57.5% TS | 3.3 ast/36
    vs. 103 (219g) 20.6 pts/36 | 53.4% TS | 2.9 ast/36

KG
    vs. 109 (89g) 20.8 pts/36 | 57.4% TS | 4.4 ast/36
    vs. 103 (244g) 20.5 pts/36 | 53.4% TS | 4.5 ast/36
Check out and discuss my book, now on Kindle! http://www.backpicks.com/thinking-basketball/
Reservoirdawgs
Starter
Posts: 2,013
And1: 966
Joined: Dec 21, 2004
Location: Stuck in the middle with you.
     

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #10 

Post#130 » by Reservoirdawgs » Wed Jul 23, 2014 3:18 pm

An Unbiased Fan wrote:Fair enough, I think we have to look at a few things.

1) Peer Review - Kobe is regarded by NBA greats, coaches, players, GMs, analysts as one the best perimeter defenders of his era. Bird was generally regarded as a hustle/scrappy defender, but never view elite defensively.


As has been shown in the past, players and coaches have surprisingly been shown to be pretty poor evaluators when it comes to rankings or evaluating talent. Why are they poor? I am going to speculate because they are too close to what is going on and deal with perception bias more than the common fan (*points to the surveys that players would rather have Kobe taking the last shot with the game on the line even though Kobe has objectively been proven to be terrible in the "clutch"*). I'm not going to say that we shouldn't outright dismiss what is said, but it shouldn't be taken as the gospel either. We have plenty of objective evidence that shows that outside of a few years, Kobe has actually been a pretty poor defender for most of his career. That tracks well with the eye test as well, particularly when Kobe became the #1 option and put all of his effort into offense and allowed his defense to slack. Unfortunately, we don't have the same data available for Bird so any kind of objective analysis is lacking when comparing the two. The comment of "Bird being regarded as a hustle/scrappy defender" very well could be authentic, or it could be another unfortunate stereotype due to his skin color that he dealt with in the 1980s.

An Unbiased Fan wrote:Was Bird a bad defender, no. Was he a great defender, no also. Most stars back in the 80's didn't' focus on defense that heavily. It was a more "you score on me, I score on you" type thing, and the bangers would handle D.


Ironically enough, that pretty much describes Kobe Bryant. When Kobe had team success from 2008-10, his team was in the Top 6 in DRtg, which coincided with pairing Pau Gasol with a much more developed Andrew Bynum, forming the best frontcourt in the NBA.

Kobe certainly had the tools to be a great defender throughout his career, but we never really saw it consistently applied outside of a few of his early seasons because he put much more effort into his offensive game (particularly his own scoring). I'm not confident in saying that Bird was a better defender because I don't know and we don't have the same objective data that we do for Bryant. However, I don't find the arguments from UBF as to why Kobe is a better defender than Bird to be very satisfactory.
So when is this plane going down? I'll ride it til' it hits the ground!
User avatar
An Unbiased Fan
RealGM
Posts: 11,746
And1: 5,724
Joined: Jan 16, 2009
       

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #10 

Post#131 » by An Unbiased Fan » Wed Jul 23, 2014 3:24 pm

Clyde Frazier wrote:This trend of "how many all stars did he play with?" as a way to boost up or lessen a player's accomplishments is a little overdone. We can't just ignore that playing alongside a #1 guy as good as bird or kobe will help fringe AS players make AS teams, right?

This also brings me back to great players needing good players to help them win. As talented as kobe was, he couldn't do anything in the playoffs without help. There's no glory in dragging bad teams to a 1st round exit. Bird didn't really experience that until the end of his career, but he did seem to adapt well to the changes the celtics were making, if only he were healthier.

I'm not saying it isn't close as Kobe clearly deserves to be in the conversation. I just think bird's edge in prime and peak production is enough to put him over kobe all time.

1) Kobe's prime production was actually higher in both the reg, season & playoffs than Bird's.

2) Kobe's success rate in the playoffs is higher than Bird's, despite having lesser casts. I don't see how the "he couldn't do anything in the playoffs without help" argument can be applied to Kobe in a comparison to Bird. Bird had 3 HOFers in their primes around him.
7-time RealGM MVPoster 2009-2016
Inducted into RealGM HOF 1st ballot in 2017
colts18
Head Coach
Posts: 7,434
And1: 3,255
Joined: Jun 29, 2009

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #10 

Post#132 » by colts18 » Wed Jul 23, 2014 3:34 pm

Baller2014 wrote: and b) because they were recovering from a series of bad moves (some of which Kobe forced on them. Want to know how not to rebuild? Keep Shaq, or at least take your time trading him after you get a bidding war going- Kobe forced them to trade him right after the 04 season with little leverage, because he wouldn't re-sign until Shaq was gone).

Why do you keep spreading lies? Shaq wasn't traded because of Kobe. He was traded because the Lakers didn't want to pay him a max deal. Shaq even said that himself. Shaq wanted to get paid and the Lakers didn't want to pay that much for a 30+ player. Turns out the Lakers were right in not giving him that max deal.
Reservoirdawgs
Starter
Posts: 2,013
And1: 966
Joined: Dec 21, 2004
Location: Stuck in the middle with you.
     

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #10 

Post#133 » by Reservoirdawgs » Wed Jul 23, 2014 3:39 pm

colts18 wrote:Why do you keep spreading lies? Shaq wasn't traded because of Kobe. He was traded because the Lakers didn't want to pay him a max deal. Shaq even said that himself. Shaq wanted to get paid and the Lakers didn't want to pay that much for a 30+ player. Turns out the Lakers were right in not giving him that max deal.


I believe I read it in "The Last Season" (which should also be taken with a grain of salt since it's written by known spinster Phil Jackson) that Kobe did give an ultimatum of "it's either Shaqor me" to Jerry Buss (examples given in the book as to something that was weighing on Buss's mind was that Kobe got 4X as many fan letters as Shaq did). Ultimately, though, the Lakers chose to stick with Kobe because he was younger, more profitable for the team, did not have the nagging injuries that Shaq had, and that Shaq was asking more than they believed he was worth. A max deal definitely would not have been worth it, although Shaq still played at a very high level for the subsequent two years before falling off a cliff. I don't think anyone can blame the Lakers for choosing the younger player over the player who's best years were behind him.
So when is this plane going down? I'll ride it til' it hits the ground!
User avatar
Clyde Frazier
Forum Mod
Forum Mod
Posts: 20,248
And1: 26,130
Joined: Sep 07, 2010

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #10 

Post#134 » by Clyde Frazier » Wed Jul 23, 2014 3:43 pm

An Unbiased Fan wrote:
Clyde Frazier wrote:This trend of "how many all stars did he play with?" as a way to boost up or lessen a player's accomplishments is a little overdone. We can't just ignore that playing alongside a #1 guy as good as bird or kobe will help fringe AS players make AS teams, right?

This also brings me back to great players needing good players to help them win. As talented as kobe was, he couldn't do anything in the playoffs without help. There's no glory in dragging bad teams to a 1st round exit. Bird didn't really experience that until the end of his career, but he did seem to adapt well to the changes the celtics were making, if only he were healthier.

I'm not saying it isn't close as Kobe clearly deserves to be in the conversation. I just think bird's edge in prime and peak production is enough to put him over kobe all time.

1) Kobe's prime production was actually higher in both the reg, season & playoffs than Bird's.

2) Kobe's success rate in the playoffs is higher than Bird's, despite having lesser casts. I don't see how the "he couldn't do anything in the playoffs without help" argument can be applied to Kobe in a comparison to Bird. Bird had 3 HOFers in their primes around him.


Outside of a longer prime, I don't see how he has the edge in production. Again it's close, but i think bird has a clear edge.

For kobe's first 3 titles, he was the #2 next to one of the most dominant offensive forces in NBA history. For his last 2, he was the #1, but still had an all NBA level big who was one of the best passers in the game alongside him. Gasol also had a very good case for finals MVP in 2010, but we know he had no chance of actually winning it. Odom was an excellent 3rd option in 09 specifically.

Without those guys, he never made it out of the first round of the playoffs. I wasn't trying to discredit him. It was more of a comment about people touting guys who won with "(little to) no help", although hopefully we won't hear as much about that since hakeem's been voted in.
shutupandjam
Sophomore
Posts: 101
And1: 156
Joined: Aug 15, 2012

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #10 

Post#135 » by shutupandjam » Wed Jul 23, 2014 3:48 pm

rico381 wrote:
shutupandjam wrote:Getting to the line is very valuable on the surface, but when you consider the other factors - e.g., foul trouble and future bonus situations, it's even more valuable than it seems. Every study I have done with regressing stats onto rapm, apm, etc. support this as well.

What seems odd about this to me is that these benefits are some of the most notable examples of things that the APM family of stats can't measure:
-Getting your team closer to the bonus or penalty has ramifications later on in the quarter, and might boost or hurt the point differential of the guys who come in later on. They'll end up being credited with that point differential, not the guys who got the team into the bonus in the first place. Sometimes this won't be a problem, if a player stays in for the remainder of the quarter, but it's definitely an area that RAPM doesn't capture completely. For what it's worth, I've seen J.E. discuss this issue on the APBR board and say he found that team fouls at times of substitutions didn't have a significant effect, which would undermine the theory that it's valuable, but I'm not sure I trust that 100% without seeing more data.
-Getting opposing players out of the game due to foul trouble won't give your RAPM a boost, because the strength of opposing players is accounted for. All that matters is how well you do relative to your opponent's strength; you don't get bonus points even if you're the reason your opponent puts a less strong lineup out there. (On the other hand, if your opponent keeps their best player in there but he plays worse defense because of foul trouble, then you will get credit for that in RAPM.)


Really good points, and I think you're right that rapm probably isn't capturing the full effect of foul trouble/bonus situations. Regardless, I think my points about the value of getting to the line still hold true. For some reason, and I bet if we brainstorm we can think of a lot of reasons, regressions against rapm consistently show that getting to the line is more valuable than one would expect given how much of a possession ftas use. And whether or not rapm catches it, I think the bonus situation/foul trouble effect does make drawing (shooting) fouls extra valuable.

A question for Garnett supporters (and ftr I'll be voting for Garnett very soon), are you at all concerned by his relatively low free throw rates over the course of his career?


acrossthecourt wrote:If you value ASPM, then you're implicitly trusting RAPM.

So I compared Garnett's ASPM and his RPI RAPM year to year from 1998 to 2010 (no 2001.) The average rank disparity was 10.8, meaning ASPM was underrating him. I even took the natural log of the rank because even with one season ranked 34th can have a big effect on the numbers. The log disparity is 0.7.

For David Robinson the numbers are -4.25 and -0.4. ASPM is overrating him a little, so I'd say if we had 2001 the results would be a little closer to 0.

Besides the mid-00's when he had crazy numbers, ASPM consistently underrates Garnett. Thus you cannot use the ASPM argument to pick Robinson over Garnett, as Garnett is underrated and does more to contribute outside of the box score than Robinson, in my opinion.


I don't think it's quite fair to do this with PI RAPM because Garnett has the huge benefit of having his prime in the prior for his later years while Robinson doesn't.

Looking at the rapm/spm disparity with npi rapm (and this makes sense because npi rapm was the dv in my spm), Garnett's spm overrates his ranking by 13 spots on average (and overrates his production by 0.3 on average) while Robinson's spm overrates his ranking by 4 spots on average (and overrates his production by 0.2). Now npi rapm is more volatile and since Garnett has more seasons, he has more chances with a large disparity because of randomness, but even if I take out the big outliers in terms of (rapmrank - spmrank), he's still overrated by my spm on average.
User avatar
An Unbiased Fan
RealGM
Posts: 11,746
And1: 5,724
Joined: Jan 16, 2009
       

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #10 

Post#136 » by An Unbiased Fan » Wed Jul 23, 2014 3:50 pm

Reservoirdawgs wrote:
An Unbiased Fan wrote:Fair enough, I think we have to look at a few things.

1) Peer Review - Kobe is regarded by NBA greats, coaches, players, GMs, analysts as one the best perimeter defenders of his era. Bird was generally regarded as a hustle/scrappy defender, but never view elite defensively.


As has been shown in the past, players and coaches have surprisingly been shown to be pretty poor evaluators when it comes to rankings or evaluating talent. Why are they poor? I am going to speculate because they are too close to what is going on and deal with perception bias more than the common fan (*points to the surveys that players would rather have Kobe taking the last shot with the game on the line even though Kobe has objectively been proven to be terrible in the "clutch"*). I'm not going to say that we shouldn't outright dismiss what is said, but it shouldn't be taken as the gospel either. We have plenty of objective evidence that shows that outside of a few years, Kobe has actually been a pretty poor defender for most of his career. That tracks well with the eye test as well, particularly when Kobe became the #1 option and put all of his effort into offense and allowed his defense to slack. Unfortunately, we don't have the same data available for Bird so any kind of objective analysis is lacking when comparing the two. The comment of "Bird being regarded as a hustle/scrappy defender" very well could be authentic, or it could be another unfortunate stereotype due to his skin color that he dealt with in the 1980s.


Ok...so this is where I have ask what exactly you're looking for to decide. If NBA players, coaches, analysts hold no sway do their opinions, then what will? It would be like someone saying, 'What proof is their that MJ or Lebron are better defenders than Bird?". Other than the overwhelming viewpoint of people actually participating in game action, we don't have much.

And "Bird being regarded as a hustle/scrappy defender" relates to the common view of that era. I'm old enough to have seen him play. It seems all the questions are on Kobe, yet Bird gets the benefit of the doubt despite the common viewpoint from those who watched him, that he was an average defender.

Ironically enough, that pretty much describes Kobe Bryant. When Kobe had team success from 2008-10, his team was in the Top 6 in DRtg, which coincided with pairing Pau Gasol with a much more developed Andrew Bynum, forming the best frontcourt in the NBA.

Kobe certainly had the tools to be a great defender throughout his career, but we never really saw it consistently applied outside of a few of his early seasons because he put much more effort into his offensive game (particularly his own scoring). I'm not confident in saying that Bird was a better defender because I don't know and we don't have the same objective data that we do for Bryant. However, I don't find the arguments from UBF as to why Kobe is a better defender than Bird to be very satisfactory.

I disagree here. Kobe's defense wasn't Frobe level, but still very good even when he had big scoring loads. The major difference with 08-10 was dumping guys like Smush/Cook and pushing Luke to the bench.

Question, why would you even suspect Bird to be a better defender if you don't know much about him? I'm just trying to wrap my head around the concept that Bird's defense is being elevated like this, because he was routinely burned on D. I'm sure Bird himself would acknowledge Kobe as the better defender, so I'm just not sure where we're going with this. I heard people say bird was a great help defender, but he was good..at times in that regard, but not great. Bird was a weak man defender, and average in transition. Again, tons of hustle, but not on Kobe's level defensively.
7-time RealGM MVPoster 2009-2016
Inducted into RealGM HOF 1st ballot in 2017
User avatar
An Unbiased Fan
RealGM
Posts: 11,746
And1: 5,724
Joined: Jan 16, 2009
       

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #10 

Post#137 » by An Unbiased Fan » Wed Jul 23, 2014 4:05 pm

Clyde Frazier wrote:Outside of a longer prime, I don't see how he has the edge in production. Again it's close, but i think bird has a clear edge.

Regular Season per 100:
80-88 Bird: 31/8/13 on 57% TS 24.2 PER
01-10 Kobe: 38/7/7 on 56% TS 24.6 PER

Playoffs:
80-88 Bird: 28/7/14 on 56% TS 21.9 PER
01-10 Kobe: 36/7/7 on 55% TS 23.5 PER

Kobe's production was higher than Bird's, and he did it for more seasons.

For kobe's first 3 titles, he was the #2 next to one of the most dominant offensive forces in NBA history. For his last 2, he was the #1, but still had an all NBA level big who was one of the best passers in the game alongside him. Gasol also had a very good case for finals MVP in 2010, but we know he had no chance of actually winning it. Odom was an excellent 3rd option in 09 specifically.

Without those guys, he never made it out of the first round of the playoffs. I wasn't trying to discredit him. It was more of a comment about people touting guys who won with "(little to) no help", although hopefully we won't hear as much about that since hakeem's been voted in.

I see what your'e saying. I think in comparison to Bird, Kobe maximized his support better.

Career with SRS Advantage:
00-12 Kobe: 20-1
80-90 Bird: 20-5

Kobe's one loss to to a lesser SRS team was in 2011 to Dallas, the eventual champs. Kobe didn't play well dropping 23 ppg on 52% TS.

Bird however lost to a team with lesser SRS 5 out the the 10 years.

1980: The #1 seed Celtics lose 1-4 to the 76ers in the ECF, with Dr. J dropping 25 ppg in the series. Can't blame rookie Bird here that much, and game 3 was pretty epic.

1982: Again, the #1 seed Celtics lose to the 76ers. Bird's shooting was off the mark, 18.3 ppg on 45% TS. He did board & assist well though.

1983: Boston swept by the Bucks. Bird shoots 18.7 ppg, on 45% TS

1988: Detroit finally upsets Boston. McHale drops 27 ppg on 63% TS. Bird shoots 19.8 ppg on 45% TS.

1990: Knicks upset Boston in the 1st round. Bird was good though dropping 24/9/9 on 54% TS.

^
Kobe did more with his support than Bird.
7-time RealGM MVPoster 2009-2016
Inducted into RealGM HOF 1st ballot in 2017
shutupandjam
Sophomore
Posts: 101
And1: 156
Joined: Aug 15, 2012

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #10 

Post#138 » by shutupandjam » Wed Jul 23, 2014 4:09 pm

fpliii wrote:Do you happen to have his, Dirk's and Duncan's PPP and #possessions on post-ups each year from 05-09 (just for a comparison)? Would love to see how they compare. :)


No problem, here are those numbers for Garnett Dirk and Duncan 2005-2009 (this is their offense from post-ups only - i.e., it doesn't include pass outs):


2005: Garnett 1.005ppp (588 poss), Dirk 0.868ppp (164 poss), Duncan 0.904ppp (502 poss)
2006: Garnett 1.024ppp (606 poss), Dirk 1.014ppp (281 poss), Duncan 0.870ppp (663 poss)
2007: Garnett 1.059ppp (474 poss), Dirk 0.983ppp (232 poss), Duncan 0.993ppp (695 poss)
2008: Garnett 1.019ppp (481 poss), Dirk 1.009ppp (319 poss), Duncan 0.937ppp (615 poss)
2009: Garnett 0.934ppp (259 poss), Dirk 0.970ppp (474 poss), Duncan 0.971ppp (579 poss)


Really interesting to me that, as they got older, Garnett started abandoning the post game and Dirk embraced it. I wonder to what extent that affected Dirk's ability to remain extremely effective on offense and Garnett's sharp offensive decline.


ronnymac2 wrote:Interesting data, I wouldn't have expected that. Questions:

1. Does that mean points scored by the team per possession when KG is involved in a post-up, or just KG's scoring per possession on a post-up?
2. Does it differentiate between face-up moves on the block vs. back-to-the-basket post-ups?


1. The stat I cited (top 2 those years) is true for both KG's offense only and derived offense (i.e., when KG passes out of the post and that pass out leads to a bucket, but not situations where they reset the offense after he passes out)

2. It includes face-ups in situations where he caught the ball on the block with his back to the basket and then faced up.
ardee
RealGM
Posts: 15,320
And1: 5,397
Joined: Nov 16, 2011

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #10 

Post#139 » by ardee » Wed Jul 23, 2014 4:15 pm

It makes me sick to my stomach that I'll be voting for Bird to be out of the top 10, but such were the results prior to this...

Vote: Kobe Bryant

A look at Kobe's relevant career: 2000-2013:

Early years and emergence as a superstar: 2000-2003

Spoiler:
ardee wrote:
But in any case, let's take a look at an overview of Kobe's relevant career, which starts in 2000. Warning, this'll be a long post.

2000: Played the sidekick role perfectly to one of the GOAT peaks. Averaged 23-6-5 on +2.4% TS in a very slow and inefficient era. Doubled up as one of the top perimeter defenders in the league: it's hard to call anyone but Payton definitely better. He torched the Kings in the first round to 28 ppg on 50% from the floor. This was the only series that went the distance so they definitely needed it. In the next round he locked up Jason Kidd: badly. The guy had one good game where he shot 8-13, other than that he went 1-6, 5-9, 1-9, and 3-13. Along with a 25% TOV. Kobe was a beast on defense that year. We all know his heroic games 6 and 7 performances against the Blazers. The Finals were poor, admittedly, but the ankle injury is obvious, and he still won the Lakers a game by himself in game 4 OT.

Overall, I'd say this is on par with any Pippen year outside of '92, '94, and '95. The only players I'd definitely take ahead of him that year were Shaq, Duncan, Malone, KG and Mourning.

2001: The birth of superstar Kobe. I feel everyone knows how good his Playoffs were that year, but his regular season is underrated. Especially in the start of the season, he was outplaying Shaq. Shaq was having trouble with fouls and free-throw shooting (REALLY bad, was going through a sub 40% stretch), so Kobe took over early and averaged 32-5-5 on a 117 ORtg for about 30 games, while Shaq was at about 24-13-4 on 106 ORtg. For the first half of the season before the AS Break, it's arguable Kobe was the best player in the league, considering if you remember Kobe was still ELITE on defense that year.

He then began suffering some niggling injuries, and the team suffered. Then Shaq got his groove back, and once Kobe was healthy as well the team was clicking on all cylinders. They were both more or less on cruise control against the Blazers, and then took turns dropping 40/15 games on the poor Kings. Kobe had his best ever series against the Spurs, and was 32-7-6 on 121 ORtg against the entire Western conference. He really was playing better than Shaq at that point. If someone wants to use the Finals gap (Kobe still did play well after game 1, 27-9-6 on 55% TS) to rank Shaq ahead for the whole Playoffs, I guess its fair, but Kobe WAS the driving force for the offense for the majority of the Playoffs for the best Playoff team ever.

He was undoubtedly second to only Shaq that year. I can't see any reason to rank Duncan over him that year, not when Duncan had a real solid team around him with a D-Rob who led the league in WS/48, and got so badly trounced and destroyed by the Lakers.

2002: A bit of a down-year for him. He still had a good regular season, 25/6/6 on a 112 ORtg, but didn't hit the heights of 2001. Worth noting he had to carry the team more with Shaq missing 15 games. The supporting cast was pretty poor by that point. Fisher played the whole season for a change, but Grant was gone, Horry was aging, and the Lakers were dependent on guys like Samaki Walker and Devean George for reliable contributions. It was impressive the way Shaq and Kobe got the team to a title that year. Kobe was the best player in a beatdown of the Spurs and MVP Duncan, and against the Kings he put up 31/11/6 in games 6 and 7, him and Shaq dragging the Lakers back from the abyss. He also had his best Finals of the Shaq era, 27/6/6 on 62% TS against the best defensive team in the league.

I'd rank Shaq/Duncan over him (hard choice between those two that year), and I can see some kind of argument for Garnett but don't buy it. This was the best supporting cast KG ever had before 2004, and they still finished with a below average defense and got roasted by the Mavs. I'm not seeing the impact that year. In 2003 I'll rank KG ahead because of his improved offensive game and he really did do less with more. This year I think Kobe's value as an offensive constant able to put consistent pressure on the defense. beats out whatever KG was doing.... especially since I really don't like his defense that year. I have no clue what 2002 KG was doing against the Mavs, it looked like he was playing some kind of crazy one man zone. Furthers my point I made earlier that Minny KG is overrated on defense. So, Kobe is third.

2003: One of the best years of his career. Perfect storm, his all-around game really came together. His 3-point shot was like a pull-up 5 footer at that point, had it almost on automatic. He averaged 28-8-7 for the first 40 games, almost LeBron-like. He really had to carry a pretty awful team for some time with Shaq out. Still, the team was dysfunctional and plodding by the half-way point, 19-23 through 42 games. Phil asked Kobe to take a bigger role in the offense, and he did. 41-5-3 on 59% TS over the next 14 games, leading the Lakers to a 12-2 record over that stretch, putting them over .500 for good and into the thick of the Playoff seedings. He closed the year out with several more monster games, including the 55 point one against Jordan with 9 threes, 42 in the first half.

At the close of the regular season, I'd say Kobe was right there with Duncan and KG for the best player in the league. He was very effective against the Wolves, but I will admit that the injury + shot selection a little out of control in the Spurs series harmed the Lakers. Still, if Horry's shot had gone in in game 5, Kobe would have successfully made up for it all by leading the Lakers back from 25 down, and was anyone stopping a 4th straight title then?

I have him 3rd this year, behind Duncan and KG. Shaq and McGrady battling it out for 4th/5th. I can't see Shaq over him this year, not when the Lakers season turned around after it was KOBE who took a bigger role and put the team on his back.

So far, we're looking at a very good sidekick year where he was in the 6-7 range in the league, and 3 top 3 years, one of which he was the second best player in the league.



The in-between years: 2004-2005

Spoiler:
Going onto the rest of his career:

2004/2005: The two worst years of his prime, I'm clubbing them together. 2004 in particular really smarts. He's coming off an epic season that propelled him into the MJ discussion, and now his raw numbers and efficiency drop across the board, plus he misses 17 games. The raw numbers are explainable, he was now splitting possessions with three other HOFs, and it's possible that all of them were affected by a system that just did not fit the roster very well. Still, it was a notch below '01 and '03, and even '02. He still kept it up defensively though. He had a terrible Rockets series efficiency-wise, but then killed the Spurs (30/6/6 over the four comeback games). Average against the Wolves and had the worst series of his career in the Finals. He played well defensively though, locking down Rip, converse to Shaq who killed it offensively and was a sieve on defense. I place equal responsibility on those two for the Finals loss. In any normal year, it'd be enough for me to rank both out of the top 5, but this was such a weak year that after KG/Duncan I have to rank Shaq and Kobe at nos. 3 and 4. I'll say this, Kobe is probably the weakest number 4 as far as I can remember, in 2004.

2005 is an underestimated year. 28-6-6 on 56% TS, 109 On-Court ORtg with a truly terrible supporting casts. I've seen several nonsensical posts about how good guys like Brian Grant and Chucky Atkins were and it makes me shake my head. If Kobe and Odom had been healthy they'd have still made the Playoffs (32-29 through 61 games), but Rudy's retirement and the injuries just really took their toll. Kobe still performed well individually, started the season averaging 29-7-7 with a bunch of triple doubles in the first 30 games, with the Lakers at 16-12. I still have no problem ranking him possibly near the end of the top 10, this was a very strong year for the league. Nash, Duncan, KG, Dirk, Wade, Shaq, McGrady, and Stoudemire would all be over him.

Now we enter Kobe's true prime. Right now we have a top 2 year, two top 3 years, a top 4 year (admittedly very weak), and two years where he's close to the bottom of the top 10. Not bad for a pre-prime guy.


The volume years: 2006/2007

Spoiler:
2006: What a season. What a player. I'm going to leave this to the best poster on the board, ShaqAttack, because he had a GOAT level post on '06 Kobe.

ShaqAttack3234 wrote:In hindsight, I think Nash was a good choice for 2005, though I was in the "Shaq was robbed" crowd at the time. However, I don't think Nash was the right choice in 2006. I'd go with Kobe in 2006.

First I will say that since the MVP is the closest things the NBA has to a best player award, I try to keep best player in mind to some degree, though of course, I don't always think it should go to the best player since games played and record are factors. But to me, 2006 was the most obvious year he was the best player in the league. I think he was the best in '07 as well, but you could at least make the case for Duncan in '07 and Paul in '08.

Anyway, not only were Kobe's individual feats exceptional in 2006, but they led to the Lakers overachieving and exceeding most expectations following a 34-48 season. Phil asked Kobe to carry the offense because many of the players didn't know the triangle and probably due to their lack of talent as well, and he did so in a remarkable way.

Warning, this will be a LONG post since I will look over their entire supporting casts.

Kobe only had one other player on the roster you could call a legit NBA starter, and that was Lamar Odom who was inconsistent throughout the first half. Odom averaged just 14/9/5 on 45% shooting and just 53 TS% in the first half, though Kobe still carried the Lakers to a .500 record at 26-26 while averaging 35/5/4 on 44/34/84 shooting and 55 TS%. Odom was obviously a good player, but he shouldn't be your second best player by a huge margin as he was on the 2006 Lakers when he was relied on to play 40.3 mpg. We saw how valuable Odom could be when he became the 3rd guy after Gasol was acquired and he was noticeably more comfortable playing his game. His versatile skill set can obviously be an asset with his strong rebounding, ball-handling skills at 6'10" and the ability to get the rebound and create or finish the fast break by himself. This was also the last year Lamar played a lot of the 3 which had been his position as a young player with the Clippers and when Phil tried Odom in the Scottie Pippen point forward role with mixed results, though passing has always been one of Lamar's strengths and he did lead the Lakers with 5.5 apg while averaging just 2.7 turnovers. Lamar did have talent as a scorer as evidenced by his transition game, he could be a threat to create off the dribble, had the length to finish, and while I wouldn't say he was ever a good shooter, he did shoot 37.2% on 3s in 2006 while making one per game. However, Odom couldn't go right which made him predictable, as mentioned, he wasn't a great shooter, and perhaps most importantly, he lacked the consistent focus and aggressiveness to be a really good scorer so scoring really wasn't his forte as evidenced by the fact that his season high was 27 points in 2006. However, Odom became more consistent late in the year and played like a borderline all-star averaging 16/9/6 on 53% shooting in the second half as well as 43% on 3s and 60 TS%. Kobe also raised his game during this time averaging 36/5/5 on 46/36/87 shooting and 57 TS% as the Lakers went 19-11, a 52 win pace. Pretty impressive to win at that pace with just one legitimately good, but not great teammate.

As for the rest of the team, they had Smush Parker starting at PG and playing 33.8 mpg. Smush was a bit of a surprise for LA this year, but to put things in perspective, despite being just 24 at the time, Smush didn't even last 2 more years in the NBA. Then there was Kwame Brown whose only legitimate asset was his post defense, and he can only be described as a liability at the offensive end. Of course there's the infamous small hands which prevented him from being a reliable catch and finish player around the rim, one of the more basic skills asked of a big man offensively, his footwork and shooting touch were horrible leaving him without a single decent post move, he was a terrible free throw shooter at 54.5% and he could get rattled very easily. Chris Mihm was another starter for most of the year, and while he had a decent offensive skill set, he wasn't much of a defender or rebounder, and the Lakers played their best ball by far after Mihm's injury so he wasn't an impact player. Devean George was one of the few holdovers from the champion Lakers, and while he was a decent defender, he was a poor offensive player who didn't shoot particularly well at just 40 FG% and 31.2 3P% and couldn't create. Then there was Luke Walton whose only real skill was passing. Brian Cook's only value could be as a stretch 4, but he wasn't a good defender, rebounder or post player. Finally, Sasha Vujacic was in the rotation getting 19 mpg despite the fact that he shot a horrendous 34.6% from the floor for the season and even his 3 point shooting was underwhelming at 34.3%.

That's the team Kobe made 7th in scoring and 8th in offensive rating, and I'd bet they were near the top in the second half when Odom finally played more consistently.

Nash's Suns were obviously a more potent offense, and they were 1st in scoring and 2nd in offensive rating, but they had a lot more talent to work with, and had a team who not only fit well in D'Antoni's system, but played off of Nash well as almost all of them were dangerous 3 point shooters, slashers or good open court players. Shawn Marion had a much better year than Odom and made the all-nba 3rd team. Marion averaged 22/11 on 53% shooting with 2 spg, 1.7 bpg and just 1.5 turnovers per game. Obviously, Marion benefited from playing with Nash since his strengths offensively were his finishing in the open court, his slashing and he liked the corner 3, but Marion was already a 20 ppg scorer before he played with Nash so Nash just made him more efficient. Of course, Marion's versatility, particularly defensively was very valuable as well. Boris Diaw was also voted the Most Improved Player as he averaged 13/7/6 on 53% shooting. Diaw has always been a great passer, he had a nice post game, made his mid-range shots, and despite playing a different style, he gave the Suns something similar to what Odom gave the Lakers with his versatility. Diaw was a forward who had entered the league as a guard with the Hawks and was often the Suns' biggest player on the court as the de facto center while being an excellent secondary facilitator. Diaw also didn't start the year as a starter, but played his way into that role and like Odom, got better as the year went on averaging 16/7/7 on 57% shooting in the second half. Nash also got a great year out of Raja Bell who in addition to his defense, shot lights out from 3. No question he capitalized on Nash's passing, but you still have to make the shots, and Bell did just that averaging 14.7 ppg while making 2.5 threes per game while shooting 44.2%, which was 5th best in the NBA, and he was 3rd in made 3s with 197, just behind Gilbert Arenas who only made 2 more, but took one more game to do it. Bell was also 3rd in eFG% at 56.3%. Leandro Barbosa was one of the fastest players in the league and averaged 13 ppg while coming off the bench most of the year. He complemented his speed with a very dangerous 3 point shot as evidenced by his 44.4 3P%, which was 3rd best in the league and his 55.8 eFG%. They also had Tim Thomas late in the year, and he was always a talented offensive player at 6'10" who averaged 11 ppg in just 24 mpg for them while shooting 43% on 3s and had even more shooters in Eddie House and James Jones who averaged between 9-10 ppg, shot about 39% on 3s, made 1.5 of them per game and did it in just 17.5 and 23.6 mpg, respectively. To round out the cast was Kurt Thomas who was one of their few big men, but a good defender and rebounder with a consistent mid-range shot who was definitely better than any of the Lakers' big men excluding Odom. Not surprisingly, Phoenix finished first at 39.9% and led the league with 837 made 3s, 212 more than the Warriors who were 2nd.

Given the enormous disparity in the talent, I'd argue the Lakers having the 8th best offense was more impressive than Phoenix having the 2nd best offense. Kobe's cast was really bad lacking a legit 2nd option, being surrounded by fringe players other than Odom, lacking shooters as evidenced by the fact that they were in the bottom half in 3P% and a pretty mediocre defense(which was actually virtually identical to the Suns' defense statistically.) The only thing you can really say is that the Lakers were a solid rebounding team outrebounding opponents by 2 rpg. Nash's cast certainly lacked size, but there's no question they had loads of offensive talent with more shooters than anyone could hope for, versatile forwards like Marion and Diaw and if you look at their sixth man Leandro Barbosa, he was definitely a more dangerous scorer than any of Kobe's teammates.

There's so many things to look at, but aside from how impressive it is to lead your team to a very productive offensive season while being asked to play 41 mpg and take over 27 shots per game, just look at how each of these team's offenses fared with and without the stars. The Suns offensive rating was a phenomenal 114.8 with Nash on the court, but still respectable without him at 106.4, which was just above league average. Meanwhile, the Lakers had an excellent 112.6 offensive rating with Kobe on the court, but it was horrendous with him off the court at 93.7. Finally, it's worth noting that Nash played 35.4 mpg, while Kobe played 41 mpg as mentioned before. What it comes down to is there's no question in my mind that Kobe was a better player and had a better season, and there's also no question in my mind that the disparity in team success was not nearly as great as the disparity in talent, and Kobe's success was more impressive considering their situations.

The more I think about this season, the more I'm leaning towards it as Kobe's peak over 2008.


Historical stuff from Bryant. This is a year, offensively, I'd rank only slightly below peak Magic/Bird/Jordan/LeBron. He was at his peak athleticism wise, jumper was there, he could basically do whatever he wanted to any defense he wanted.

Undoubtedly the best in the league. To me, when I was watching back then, it wasn't even close. Only Dirk really had an argument. Once Odom started playing at a decent level for the last 30 games, Kobe had the Lakers at a 111.5 ORtg, 0.1 behind the Mavs for the league lead. Kobe was anchoring a league-best offense with ONE other serviceable offensive player. This says it all I think.

2007: The most efficient season of Kobe's career. It also gave a good glance of the game-management and facilitation skills that Kobe would show in 2008-10.

Through 39 games, he had the Lakers at 26-13. In fact, they were 14-6 through the first 20 games before Odom got hurt. Odom was playing like a near AS, averaging 18-9-5 on good efficiency. This should really dispell notions that Kobe at that era couldn't play with good teammates. Walton was benefiting too, averaging 12-5-4 on 50-43-75 through that good start. Kobe was playing steady basketball as the captain of a ship that was cruising along at a 112.2 ORtg, with 28-6-6 on 59% TS.

Then the injuries really took their toll. As soon as Odom returned, Walton got injured. And Odom was playing far worse than he was pre-injury. Kobe continued to play his part-facilitator role, but the team was just too bad for it to be effective. With Kobe, a broken Odom, and a D-League roster, the Lakers stumbled to a 7-18 record over the next 25 games. They were going to be out of the Playoffs, until Phil told Kobe to completely take over the offense. He did, to the tune of 40-6-5 on 58% TS. The Lakers managed to crack .500 for that stretch at 9-8, showing the difference between Kobe taking a step back (like his detractors love him to) and actually taking control of the offense on a terrible team.

His Playoffs were good by his own standards, but not spectacular. His team was so outmatched there really wasn't much he could do. It is memorable for that 45-6-6 game 3 when he threw the kitchen sink at the Suns and somehow came away with a win despite the Lakers getting 86% of their points from him, Odom and Kwame.

He probably was better than in '06 when he really got going, but for the whole season, probably just slightly worse. I'd put him behind Duncan for second best in the league.


The MVP and repeat years: 2008-10
Spoiler:
2008: The promised land. People love to claim that it was just Pau that turned the franchise around but Kobe had the Lakers at 25-11 through 36 games with his second option, Bynum, averaging 13-10. That's one of the worse second options in the league, and Kobe still had them comfortably in the middle of the WCF standings, flitting between the 2-4 seeds.

The Bynum injury, by all rights, should have killed the Lakers season. Possibly scared of the prospect of being the second option again, Odom went into a funk and averaged 12-10 on 42% shooting over the next 11 games. Kobe refused to let the team slip, going into supernova, averaging 34-8-6 on 61% TS in the same stretch, somehow keeping Fisher, Sasha, Turiaf, Farmar and Walton at a 6-5 record until the front office found a way to replace Bynum's production.

The Gasol trade was the best thing to happen to Kobe's career. It showed just how effective he could make a team with one other truly reliable offensive player. Kobe increased his efficiency, rebounding, facilitation and played better defense, with his volume remaining pretty much the same. Gasol's efficiency jumped up from 50.1% FG to 58.9% FG playing with Kobe, and the Lakers went 22-5 in the games that both played.

Overall, Kobe averaged 28-6-5 with elite defense, on 57% TS. The Lakers finished with a 7.3 SRS, and this was on a team with another truly reliable player for less than a third of the season. This was an underestimated carry job by Kobe. The Lakers could have slipped into oblivion at any time but he didn't let them.

The Playoffs were the cherry on the cake. ShaqAttack again:

ShaqAttack3234 wrote:
The Lakers were virtually unbeatable with Gasol at 22-4 excluding the 2-3 minute game and then dominated the West including the defending champion Spurs in 5 during the WCF. The Spurs were no joke either since they had Duncan who was only slightly past his prime and 2 other all-star caliber players in Parker and Ginobili who was at his peak and probably the 2nd best shooting guard behind only Kobe that year. What was so impressive about Kobe's playoff run is that he almost seemed to be toying with his West opponents as he averaged 31.9 ppg, 6.1 rpg and 5.8 apg on 50.9 FG% in 15 games during the 3 West rounds playing that team-oriented style. Despite the finals loss, I still consider this Kobe's best playoff run. He had that game vs Denver when he shot 18/27 overall, 5/9 on 3s and 8/9 from the line for 49 points, and while I haven't seen the game since, I remember him being so hot that it looked like he could have had 60+ early had he pushed the issue, but LA won easily by 15 points.



32-6-6 on 61% TS against 3 top 6 defenses and 50 win teams. The Finals against the Cs was underwhelming, but as good as the Lakers were the Celtics were just so loaded they were clearly outmatched. I'm not one of those Laker fans that think Bynum would've made a difference. The big 3 were playing at a historic level at that point. Hold it against him if you wish, but remember, make sure to hold KG's failures against him too when his team is lacking in comparative talent.

I have Kobe no. 1 again, the last year he will be at this spot. I do think he was the best overall player for '06-'08, and in terms of three-year peaks it's not quite in the '91-'93 MJ, '63-'65 Russell or '66-'68 Wilt level but I think it matches up fairly well with guys like Bird and Hakeem.

2009: I summed this up with a post in a thread I made a few months ago:

ardee wrote:I was watching parts of the Lakers '09 Playoffs and it just occurred to me that 2009 doesn't get brought up enough when talking about Kobe's best seasons, and indeed some of the best seasons by a wing, ever.

The Lakers had a 10 game lead on one of the toughest conferences in history. Not to say Kobe didn't have a great cast, but this was a 7.8 SRS team and he was +11.1 on/off for the +/- guys. For an elite team, it doesn't get too much higher, because they aren't going to be putrid when the star is off, they wouldn't be elite then. His +116.1 On-Court ORtg is among the highest we've seen from a player not on the Suns dynasty.

He was also still quite elite on defense, probably the last year he was consistently up there.

The Lakers cruised to a 37-9 record, and then Bynum got injured. Many people feared a slowdown, but Kobe took on the extra load and averaged a 32-5-5 over the next 12 games, leading the Lakers to a 11-1 record. That stretch shows he was still absolutely capable of scoring how many ever points he needed to, just like '06 and '07, he just took it easy to get the team-mates into the game as well.

That stretch put the Lakers in the driving seat for the conference and they cruised from then on. They beat every other contender, home or away. Snapped the Celtics' 19 and 12 game winning streaks, and the Cavs' 23 game home winning streak. Kobe kept them focused as hell, this was probably when his team-mates' fear of him transformed into a determination to please. His leadership had real, tangible impact on the Lakers that season.

Then in the Playoffs, the Lakers stomped. The Houston series was a minor blip where they were losing focus from time to time, but every time they lost they responded with a blowout. After that 118-78 result, did they ever look like losing that series? Kobe was still consistent enough in that series, it was the supporting cast who couldn't keep it together mentally. He did, however, along with Phil, keep getting them back on track and winning all the statement games. He did so while dealing with Battier and Artest tag-teaming him on defense.

The Denver series was his magnum opus. Has anyone forgotten that 'bad mofo' face? Has anyone forgotten all the insane shots he hit with a hand in his face, Dahntay and the other Nuggets playing picture perfect defense? Has anyone forgotten the way he pulled a team that was struggling to close game 1 to a victory by scoring or assisting 13 of the last 15 points? Has anyone forgotten that game 6 when he basically looked untouchable, going for a 35/10 and ripping the Nuggets to shreds while the Lakers won by 30? Has anyone forgotten the ridiculous 35/6/6 overall performance he put together?

I'm not saying he was better than LeBron that year, but this should be considered one of the best seasons by a wing ever. His numbers weren't as good as they used to be, but what was he supposed to do, put up nicer stats when he had Odom/Gasol and lose instead? He did everything his team needed him to, and when his guys were sagging, he picked up all the slack and dominated, as we saw in multiple stretches throughout the season.

Really, I think the only Playoff run by a wing definitely better than this (after Jordan) is '12 LeBron. What do you guys think?


LeBron was definitely better this year. No question in my mind. But Kobe was a deserved no. 2. I can get ranking Wade over him, but I think Kobe played just as well in the later Playoff rounds as Wade did in the regular season, and Wade really didn't have a good Playoffs at all.

2010: A very underrated year for Kobe.

This was the year he completed the development of his post-game, and it was more effective than Jordan's ever was. Here's Bill Simmons on Kobe during the first half of the season, a stretch when Bryant had the Lakers at 25-6 through 31 games (more than half of which Pau missed by the way), averaging 30-6-5 on 57% TS.

Bill Simmons wrote:
I can't remember anyone reinventing himself historically as well as Kobe did these past 16 months. The Olympics, then the 2009 Finals, then the media victory lap that everyone ate up … and then, when it seemed as if we were headed for a decline, he reinvented himself as the second coming of post-baseball Jordan and developed an even nastier, more physical post-up game than MJ had. I can't believe what I am watching. It's staggering. He's like a 6-foot-6 Hakeem Olajuwon. I went into this season thinking Kobe would be able to last just one or two more seasons at a high level; now I'm wondering whether he could play like this well into his late 30s. Why not? I mean, Karl Malone did it. Like Malone, Kobe is a workout freak who takes care of his body and seems predisposed to staying healthy, anyway. Malone averaged a 26-10 and made second-team All-NBA in the 1999-2000 season when he was 36 years old … and then he played four years after that. Kobe is only 31. Could he replicate Malone's longevity and consistency?



He did get injured later on, yes, no one is disputing that. But before that, he was playing as well as he ever had, and picked up at that level in the Playoffs. I don't know why people were shocked in the Playoffs, he played just as well in the first half... For 9 games before his injury, he averaged 37-7-5 on 58% TS!

I'm not going to lie and say the second half of the regular season was pretty. Coming out of the regular season one could argue he was behind LeBron, Durant and Howard all.

But then he went and had one of his best Playoffs ever. He still struggled with his knee for a bit at the beginning of the OKC series, but after game 5 had his knee drained and then ripped off an all-time hot streak. He averaged 31-7-6 on 59% TS over the last 18 games of the regular season. He was easily the best player in the Playoffs that year, and I think it should boost him over Durant and Howard. I'd still give LeBron the edge that year, with Kobe 2nd. Wade, Nash, Durant and Howard fight it out for spots 3-5.

He had that historic Phoenix series, averaging 34-7-8 on a 135 ORtg, 64% TS!!! People don't appreciate how dominant he was in that series.

His Finals got marred by game 7, but before that he was doing 30/7/4 on 56% TS. Against the kind of defense he was facing, that's remarkable to say the least.

It's hard to argue against what Kobe did in the Playoffs that year.

Overall, I think Kobe from 2008-10 was more impressive than second threepeat Jordan in the Playoffs... But that's just me.


I know that was a ridiculously long post, lemme give it to you in cliffs:

-2000 was a great second option year, comparable to prime Pippen. Got the Lakers out of several tight situations (game 7 Portland, game 4 Indy), and doubled up as the best perimeter defender in the league. Perfect second option to Shaq.

-2001: Underrated regular season, historical Playoffs. Carried the Lakers while Shaq was less than his usual self at the start, combined with him for the best run by a duo in NBA history in the Playoffs, was Jordan-esque in the WC Playoffs (32-7-6 on 60% TS).

-2002: Slightly underwhelming regular season but still solid. Killed the Spurs in the Playoffs, came up big in games 6 and 7 against the Kings with Shaq, and had the best finals of the threepeat part of his career.

-2003: Became a complete player. Arguably his best defensive year, added the 3 point shot. Had an all-time 35/40 point game streak to drag the Lakers back into Playoff contention

-2006/2007: All-time offensive years. Dragged garbage to top 7-8 offenses, and when Odom actually played well and gave him a good second option he took the team to the best offense in the league for that same stretch, in both seasons.

-2008: Peak year. Got his defense back. Showed that he could make a bad team decent as well as make a decent team elite, as soon as Pau arrived. What's impressive is the Lakers had a 7.3 SRS with Pau only playing 27 games for them that year. Historically dominant in the Playoffs.

-2009: lead one of the best Laker teams ever despite Bynum getting injured AGAIN, with Pau again his only real reliable teammate. Dominated in the Playoffs, had possibly his best series ever against Denver, and was decisive in the Finals against Orlando.

-2010: Killed it for the first two months in the regular season, clearly the second best player behind LeBron for that stretch. Developed the post-game. Slipped into injuries, but shook them off in the Playoffs to dominate again. Killed the Jazz and Suns, had a good series against Boston considering the level of defense he was facing.

-From 2000 to 2010, here's how I'd rank Kobe in the league year by year: 8, 2, 3, 3, 4, 9, 1, 2, 1, 2, 2. Other than the blip of 2005, that is stunning consistency over a long stretch. Comparable to prime Bird easily.

-In terms of peak play, Bird was better at his absolute zenith, but Kobe gives you 7 years at that level: 2001, 2003, 2006-10, while Bird has 1984-88. The two extra years make a real difference, at that level.

I don't think I can do more talking about the meat of Kobe's career. I'll answer any questions anyone has, and expand more on 2011-13 later.
User avatar
MacGill
Veteran
Posts: 2,770
And1: 568
Joined: May 29, 2010
Location: From Parts Unknown...
     

Re: RealGM Top 100 List #10 

Post#140 » by MacGill » Wed Jul 23, 2014 4:35 pm

ardee wrote:It makes me sick to my stomach that I'll be voting for Bird to be out of the top 10, but such were the results prior to this...


Ardee, you had Bird over Kobe in your pre-list:

8. Larry Bird
9. Kobe Bryant

What has changed here?
Image

Return to Player Comparisons