Kobe Bryant Breaks Down James Harden's Game

[J-Wolves]

KING CLUTCH KOBE made 40 out of 151 game winners @ 26.4% FG% = MAMBA BRICK MENTALITY!
https://youtu.be/60AgKUPlC3I?t=171

[dhsilv2]

What about them? Every advanced number is against Kobe. You can take that and either 1) think the numbers all conspired to make Kobe look bad or 2) people's perception of him doesn't match the reality.

Advanced numbers aren't wrong. Go look at the career leaders in them. They're all all-time greats at the top. Kobe just isn't quite there.

Lets not go so extreme as to say they're "against him". The stats paint a picture that is less than the rose colored glasses that his fans and the media (who love la) painted. Lets not act like stats don't consider Kobe a great great player. They just show him a bit lower than many of his fans want him to be.

I think pro-kobe people and not-so-pro-kobe people focus on different aspects.
Trying to be as objective as possible:

-PER, WS etc..: underrate Kobe
-RAPM and family rate Kobe well
- accolades overrate Kobe (best player on a championship tream only 2/5, undeserved all-defensive selections)

How does PER/WS rank Kobe differently than RAPM?

[J-Wolves]

Really miss Kobe, shame these analytic warriors continue to bring down his legacy.

Its awful. People don't seem to understand that in the real world of hypothesis testing with statistics, you don't just cherry pick stats that support an argument. Picking stats that ONLY prove Kobe isn't as good as people think is a bias, and an error in the scientific method. In order to reach a conclusion, multiple datasets need to be provided as well as statistics that DISPROVE your argument. Only then you can say that your argument is supported, but not defined.

Anyone who has worked around the scientific method knows this.

Also, these analytics provide language and date for specific contexts. That said, these statistics still are NOT enough to reach a conclusion even within that context because there is no cross analysis. If people want to make player vs player comparisons backed up by advanced statistics, only the people who do the work can actually make the claim.

I can't help but role my eyes when people here cling to analytics without experience with/knowledge of statistical research and analysis. It just isn't to be taken seriously.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Not one stat paints the high rankings kobe fans have of him....while you could argue it isn't conclusive there isn't ONE metric that loves Kobe enough to rank him like kobe fans do.

Kobe was a great player but lots of people cant stand the fake news that he was clutch - i know i used to watch and bet on a lot of games eg lakers to win 1-10 points and the amount of game winners he missed was ridiculous - 40 out of 151 game winning shots at 26.4% is the complete opposite of clutch or maybe i am just bitter i lost some bets on kobes bricks (also won on his game losing bricks as well) and 26.4% FG is super mamba clutch.

[AdagioPace]

Lets not go so extreme as to say they're "against him". The stats paint a picture that is less than the rose colored glasses that his fans and the media (who love la) painted. Lets not act like stats don't consider Kobe a great great player. They just show him a bit lower than many of his fans want him to be.

I think pro-kobe people and not-so-pro-kobe people focus on different aspects.
Trying to be as objective as possible:

-PER, WS etc..: underrate Kobe
-RAPM and family rate Kobe well
- accolades overrate Kobe (best player on a championship tream only 2/5, undeserved all-defensive selections)

How does PER/WS rank Kobe differently than RAPM?

because he was so much better offensively than his efficiency showed. His PER numbers are in line with the profile of a very good all-star player while his RAPM depicted him as an MVP caliber player during his best years, maybe not the best but certainly top 5.
Aside from Lebron, KG, Duncan (and Shaq*)he was up there with anybody including players depicted in a better light by the the box-score perspective like Dirk, Durant, CP3

[dhsilv2]

I think pro-kobe people and not-so-pro-kobe people focus on different aspects.
Trying to be as objective as possible:

-PER, WS etc..: underrate Kobe
-RAPM and family rate Kobe well
- accolades overrate Kobe (best player on a championship tream only 2/5, undeserved all-defensive selections)

How does PER/WS rank Kobe differently than RAPM?

because he was so much better offensively than his efficiency showed. His PER numbers are in line with the profile of very good all-star player while his RAPM depicted him as an MVP caliber player during his best years, maybe not the best but certainly top 5.
Aside from Lebron, KG, Duncan he was up there with anybody.

He was top 5 in PER fairly often, peaking 3rd. 10 times in 11 year he was top 10 in PER. PER painted him as an MVP candidate just not a strong one.

Meanwhile RAPM seems to lower his value. Season and RAPM ranking. So again at his peak an MVP candidate but not a strong one, just seems to think less of his early years (which I don't really fully understand).

03 18th
04 55
05 123
06 6
07 8
08 6
09 5
10 4
11 32
12 (NPI) 55

[The_Hater]

Its awful. People don't seem to understand that in the real world of hypothesis testing with statistics, you don't just cherry pick stats that support an argument. Picking stats that ONLY prove Kobe isn't as good as people think is a bias, and an error in the scientific method. In order to reach a conclusion, multiple datasets need to be provided as well as statistics that DISPROVE your argument. Only then you can say that your argument is supported, but not defined.

Anyone who has worked around the scientific method knows this.

Also, these analytics provide language and date for specific contexts. That said, these statistics still are NOT enough to reach a conclusion even within that context because there is no cross analysis. If people want to make player vs player comparisons backed up by advanced statistics, only the people who do the work can actually make the claim.

I can't help but role my eyes when people here cling to analytics without experience with/knowledge of statistical research and analysis. It just isn't to be taken seriously.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Not one stat paints the high rankings kobe fans have of him....while you could argue it isn't conclusive there isn't ONE metric that loves Kobe enough to rank him like kobe fans do.

What about 5 rings and 2 NBA Final MVP's?

So wait, somebody else was the Finals MVP the other 3 times?!? Holy riding coattails Batman!

[AdagioPace]

How does PER/WS rank Kobe differently than RAPM?

because he was so much better offensively than his efficiency showed. His PER numbers are in line with the profile of very good all-star player while his RAPM depicted him as an MVP caliber player during his best years, maybe not the best but certainly top 5.
Aside from Lebron, KG, Duncan he was up there with anybody.

He was top 5 in PER fairly often, peaking 3rd. 10 times in 11 year he was top 10 in PER. PER painted him as an MVP candidate just not a strong one.

Meanwhile RAPM seems to lower his value. Season and RAPM ranking. So again at his peak an MVP candidate but not a strong one, just seems to think less of his early years (which I don't really fully understand).

03 18th
04 55
05 123
06 6
07 8
08 6
09 5
10 4
11 32
12 (NPI) 55

aside from his 06 season (where he went full westbrook mode), his PER seasons between 08-10, for example, don't do him justice.
Take for example '09,he didn't make the top 5 in either PER, WS, WS/48 and BPM (he was 5th in OBPM) despite these metrics often favouring great offensive players.
People see these numbers and compare them with today's box score inflation: even though we're comparing different "eras" his impact was not worse than HArden's, Durant's, Dirk's.
I would say, this phenomenon (PER underrrating Kobe) is more marked when you compare him with players accross eras I have to say.

In conclusion: I appreciated Kobe thanks to RAPM and also +/- and on-off (because I thought he was way overrated) but I probably don't represent the majority in this regard.

[thebigbird]

because he was so much better offensively than his efficiency showed. His PER numbers are in line with the profile of very good all-star player while his RAPM depicted him as an MVP caliber player during his best years, maybe not the best but certainly top 5.
Aside from Lebron, KG, Duncan he was up there with anybody.

He was top 5 in PER fairly often, peaking 3rd. 10 times in 11 year he was top 10 in PER. PER painted him as an MVP candidate just not a strong one.

Meanwhile RAPM seems to lower his value. Season and RAPM ranking. So again at his peak an MVP candidate but not a strong one, just seems to think less of his early years (which I don't really fully understand).

03 18th
04 55
05 123
06 6
07 8
08 6
09 5
10 4
11 32
12 (NPI) 55

aside from his 06 season (where he went full westbrook mode), his PER seasons between 08-10, for example, don't do him justice.
Take for example '09,he didn't make the top 5 in either PER, WS, WS/48 and BPM (he was 5th in OBPM) despite these metrics often favouring great offensive players.
People see these numbers and compare them with today's box score inflation: even though we're comparing different "eras" his impact was not worse than HArden's, Durant's, Dirk's.
I would say, this phenomenon (PER underrrating Kobe) is more marked when you compare him with players accross eras I have to say.

In conclusion: I appreciated Kobe thanks to RAPM (because I thought he was way overrated) but I probably don't represent the majority in this regard.

It doesn't have anything to do with today's "box score inflation"

Career Top 5 in PER: Jordan, LeBron, Anthony Davis, Shaq, David Robinson.

Career Top 5 in Win Shares: Kareem, Wilt, Karl Malone, LeBron, Jordan.

Career Top 5 in BPM: LeBron, Jordan, Charles Barkley, David Robinson, Chris Paul.

Career Top 5 in VORP: LeBron, Jordan, Karl Malone, Kevin Garnett, Charles Barkley.

Kevin Garnett was drafted a year before Kobe and he's fourth in VORP, and Kobe is 17th. It's not an era problem. It's just a Kobe problem.

[G-Mamba]

KING CLUTCH KOBE made 40 out of 151 game winners @ 26.4% FG% = MAMBA BRICK MENTALITY!
https://youtu.be/60AgKUPlC3I?t=171

Puts some context those stats lol Clutch isn't define by the game winning shots.

https://www.reddit.com/r/nba/comments/6lhlcj/kobe_vs_lebron_in_clutch_situations/

In the playoffs last 2 mins with game decided by 3 points

Kobe is 40/96 42& fg 85%ft

Lebron is 40/ 106 38% fg 73%FT

In the finals last 2 mins decide by 3 points

Kobe : 10/20 50 fg 80% ft

Lebron 4/23 17% fg 71% ft

Finals Last 5 mins decided by 5 pts

Kobe : 28/63 44% fg

Lebron : 17/62 27% fg

In the playoffs Kobe is way more clutch than Lebron but according to other stats Lebron is better at hitting game winners. There is many ways to weigh a clutch player.

[ajdontwatchthat]

KING CLUTCH KOBE made 40 out of 151 game winners @ 26.4% FG% = MAMBA BRICK MENTALITY!
https://youtu.be/60AgKUPlC3I?t=171

Puts some context those stats lol Clutch isn't define by the game winning shots.

https://www.reddit.com/r/nba/comments/6lhlcj/kobe_vs_lebron_in_clutch_situations/

In the playoffs last 2 mins with game decided by 3 points

Kobe is 40/96 42& fg 85%ft

Lebron is 40/ 106 38% fg 73%FT

In the finals last 2 mins decide by 3 points

Kobe : 10/20 50 fg 80% ft

Lebron 4/23 17% fg 71% ft

Finals Last 5 mins decided by 5 pts

Kobe : 28/63 44% fg

Lebron : 17/62 27% fg

In the playoffs Kobe is way more clutch than Lebron but according to other stats Lebron is better at hitting game winners. There is many ways to weigh a clutch player.

Funny how these specific stats here don't get brought up, only the ones that discredit Kobe go viral.

Thank you for showing people the light, deserves much more AND-1s

[G-Mamba]

He was top 5 in PER fairly often, peaking 3rd. 10 times in 11 year he was top 10 in PER. PER painted him as an MVP candidate just not a strong one.

Meanwhile RAPM seems to lower his value. Season and RAPM ranking. So again at his peak an MVP candidate but not a strong one, just seems to think less of his early years (which I don't really fully understand).

03 18th
04 55
05 123
06 6
07 8
08 6
09 5
10 4
11 32
12 (NPI) 55

aside from his 06 season (where he went full westbrook mode), his PER seasons between 08-10, for example, don't do him justice.
Take for example '09,he didn't make the top 5 in either PER, WS, WS/48 and BPM (he was 5th in OBPM) despite these metrics often favouring great offensive players.
People see these numbers and compare them with today's box score inflation: even though we're comparing different "eras" his impact was not worse than HArden's, Durant's, Dirk's.
I would say, this phenomenon (PER underrrating Kobe) is more marked when you compare him with players accross eras I have to say.

In conclusion: I appreciated Kobe thanks to RAPM (because I thought he was way overrated) but I probably don't represent the majority in this regard.

It doesn't have anything to do with today's "box score inflation"

Career Top 5 in PER: Jordan, LeBron, Anthony Davis, Shaq, David Robinson.

Career Top 5 in Win Shares: Kareem, Wilt, Karl Malone, LeBron, Jordan.

Career Top 5 in BPM: LeBron, Jordan, Charles Barkley, David Robinson, Chris Paul.

Career Top 5 in VORP: LeBron, Jordan, Karl Malone, Kevin Garnett, Charles Barkley.

Kevin Garnett was drafted a year before Kobe and he's fourth in VORP, and Kobe is 17th. It's not an era problem. It's just a Kobe problem.

According to this KG Anthony Davis Charles Karl Malone are all better than TD.. but no they are not other than KG who has legit argument. I don't see Hakkem, magic or Bird so according to these stats Barkely KG Malone are all better than them. Do you agree ? David Robinson over Tim ?

[thebigbird]

aside from his 06 season (where he went full westbrook mode), his PER seasons between 08-10, for example, don't do him justice.
Take for example '09,he didn't make the top 5 in either PER, WS, WS/48 and BPM (he was 5th in OBPM) despite these metrics often favouring great offensive players.
People see these numbers and compare them with today's box score inflation: even though we're comparing different "eras" his impact was not worse than HArden's, Durant's, Dirk's.
I would say, this phenomenon (PER underrrating Kobe) is more marked when you compare him with players accross eras I have to say.

In conclusion: I appreciated Kobe thanks to RAPM (because I thought he was way overrated) but I probably don't represent the majority in this regard.

It doesn't have anything to do with today's "box score inflation"

Career Top 5 in PER: Jordan, LeBron, Anthony Davis, Shaq, David Robinson.

Career Top 5 in Win Shares: Kareem, Wilt, Karl Malone, LeBron, Jordan.

Career Top 5 in BPM: LeBron, Jordan, Charles Barkley, David Robinson, Chris Paul.

Career Top 5 in VORP: LeBron, Jordan, Karl Malone, Kevin Garnett, Charles Barkley.

Kevin Garnett was drafted a year before Kobe and he's fourth in VORP, and Kobe is 16th. It's not an era problem. It's just a Kobe problem.

According to this KG Anthony Davis Charles Karl Malone are all better than TD.. but no they are not other than KG who has legit argument. I don't see Hakkem, magic or Bird so according to these stats Barkely KG Malone are all better than them. Do you agree ? David Robinson over Tim ?

Being better in one statistic doesn't make player A better than player B. But when every single statistic points to player A being better than player B, it's a good sign that they're better.

Kobe is 24th in PER, 16th in win shares, 57th in WS/48, 36th in BPM, and 16th in VORP.

The numbers aren't going to be that wrong. They don't have it out for Kobe. They don't "hate" Kobe. The fact is that the reality of Kobe as a player doesn't match the mystique that his fans created around him.

[dhsilv2]

because he was so much better offensively than his efficiency showed. His PER numbers are in line with the profile of very good all-star player while his RAPM depicted him as an MVP caliber player during his best years, maybe not the best but certainly top 5.
Aside from Lebron, KG, Duncan he was up there with anybody.

He was top 5 in PER fairly often, peaking 3rd. 10 times in 11 year he was top 10 in PER. PER painted him as an MVP candidate just not a strong one.

Meanwhile RAPM seems to lower his value. Season and RAPM ranking. So again at his peak an MVP candidate but not a strong one, just seems to think less of his early years (which I don't really fully understand).

03 18th
04 55
05 123
06 6
07 8
08 6
09 5
10 4
11 32
12 (NPI) 55

aside from his 06 season (where he went full westbrook mode), his PER seasons between 08-10, for example, don't do him justice.
Take for example '09,he didn't make the top 5 in either PER, WS, WS/48 and BPM (he was 5th in OBPM) despite these metrics often favouring great offensive players.
People see these numbers and compare them with today's box score inflation: even though we're comparing different "eras" his impact was not worse than HArden's, Durant's, Dirk's.
I would say, this phenomenon (PER underrrating Kobe) is more marked when you compare him with players accross eras I have to say.

In conclusion: I appreciated Kobe thanks to RAPM and also +/- and on-off (because I thought he was way overrated) but I probably don't represent the majority in this regard.

08 he was 6th in RAPM and 8th in PER. 09 he was 5th in RAPM and 6th in PER. 2010 is the only year that there's a gap of any size...but that's one single year and 03 which is often seen as a near peak Kobe season the story is completely flipped (PER>RAPM).

They're telling the exact same narrative as best I can tell here. A bit of noise in a couple of seasons but the overall story is verbatim.

[G-Mamba]

It doesn't have anything to do with today's "box score inflation"

Career Top 5 in PER: Jordan, LeBron, Anthony Davis, Shaq, David Robinson.

Career Top 5 in Win Shares: Kareem, Wilt, Karl Malone, LeBron, Jordan.

Career Top 5 in BPM: LeBron, Jordan, Charles Barkley, David Robinson, Chris Paul.

Career Top 5 in VORP: LeBron, Jordan, Karl Malone, Kevin Garnett, Charles Barkley.

Kevin Garnett was drafted a year before Kobe and he's fourth in VORP, and Kobe is 16th. It's not an era problem. It's just a Kobe problem.

According to this KG Anthony Davis Charles Karl Malone are all better than TD.. but no they are not other than KG who has legit argument. I don't see Hakkem, magic or Bird so according to these stats Barkely KG Malone are all better than them. Do you agree ? David Robinson over Tim ?

Being better in one statistic doesn't make player A better than player B. But when every single statistic points to player A being better than player B, it's a good sign that they're better.

Kobe is 24th in PER, 16th in win shares, 57th in WS/48, 36th in BPM, and 16th in VORP.

The numbers aren't going to be that wrong. They don't have it out for Kobe. They don't "hate" Kobe. The fact is that the reality of Kobe as a player doesn't match the mystique that his fans created around him.

According to your stats David Robinson and Karl Malone are better than TD. Do you agree with that ?

[thebigbird]

According to this KG Anthony Davis Charles Karl Malone are all better than TD.. but no they are not other than KG who has legit argument. I don't see Hakkem, magic or Bird so according to these stats Barkely KG Malone are all better than them. Do you agree ? David Robinson over Tim ?

Being better in one statistic doesn't make player A better than player B. But when every single statistic points to player A being better than player B, it's a good sign that they're better.

Kobe is 24th in PER, 16th in win shares, 57th in WS/48, 36th in BPM, and 16th in VORP.

The numbers aren't going to be that wrong. They don't have it out for Kobe. They don't "hate" Kobe. The fact is that the reality of Kobe as a player doesn't match the mystique that his fans created around him.

According to your stats David Robinson and Karl Malone are better than TD. Do you agree with that ?

Sure, maybe? We're not talking about scrubs here vs. Tim Duncan. Robinson and Malone are two of the best players in NBA history.

[G35]

Not one stat paints the high rankings kobe fans have of him....while you could argue it isn't conclusive there isn't ONE metric that loves Kobe enough to rank him like kobe fans do.

What about 5 rings and 2 NBA Final MVP's?

1 is rewarded for just being on a team, the other is an award. Neither are stats.

What about them? Every advanced number is against Kobe. You can take that and either 1) think the numbers all conspired to make Kobe look bad or 2) people's perception of him doesn't match the reality.

Advanced numbers aren't wrong. Go look at the career leaders in them. They're all all-time greats at the top. Kobe just isn't quite there.

This is the reality that people can't reconcile:

Stats do not win games. Not one game was one with TS%, PER, VORP, or regression methods.

The other reality is that the NBA is a sport that has a winner and a loser. Its competitive and the goal is to win games. If the goal was to see who accumulated the most stats then there would be a viable argument for putting stats at the top.

But lately, I hear everyone wants to be on the right side of history...history is written by winners not statkeepers......

[kamby12]

KING CLUTCH KOBE made 40 out of 151 game winners @ 26.4% FG% = MAMBA BRICK MENTALITY!
https://youtu.be/60AgKUPlC3I?t=171

Puts some context those stats lol Clutch isn't define by the game winning shots.

https://www.reddit.com/r/nba/comments/6lhlcj/kobe_vs_lebron_in_clutch_situations/

In the playoffs last 2 mins with game decided by 3 points

Kobe is 40/96 42& fg 85%ft

Lebron is 40/ 106 38% fg 73%FT

In the finals last 2 mins decide by 3 points

Kobe : 10/20 50 fg 80% ft

Lebron 4/23 17% fg 71% ft

Finals Last 5 mins decided by 5 pts

Kobe : 28/63 44% fg

Lebron : 17/62 27% fg

In the playoffs Kobe is way more clutch than Lebron but according to other stats Lebron is better at hitting game winners. There is many ways to weigh a clutch player.

Isn’t Kobe one of the worst finals shooters of all time ? If I’m not mistaken I came across an article he shoots something like 37% in the finals lol. Be clutch all you want if bron shooting 37% first 3 quarters his team not even in the game for the “clutch” to matter

[thebigbird]

KING CLUTCH KOBE made 40 out of 151 game winners @ 26.4% FG% = MAMBA BRICK MENTALITY!
https://youtu.be/60AgKUPlC3I?t=171

Puts some context those stats lol Clutch isn't define by the game winning shots.

https://www.reddit.com/r/nba/comments/6lhlcj/kobe_vs_lebron_in_clutch_situations/

In the playoffs last 2 mins with game decided by 3 points

Kobe is 40/96 42& fg 85%ft

Lebron is 40/ 106 38% fg 73%FT

In the finals last 2 mins decide by 3 points

Kobe : 10/20 50 fg 80% ft

Lebron 4/23 17% fg 71% ft

Finals Last 5 mins decided by 5 pts

Kobe : 28/63 44% fg

Lebron : 17/62 27% fg

In the playoffs Kobe is way more clutch than Lebron but according to other stats Lebron is better at hitting game winners. There is many ways to weigh a clutch player.

Kobe's elimination game stats are terrible. LeBron's are the best ever. It doesn't get more clutch than performing well when facing elimination.

[thebigbird]

KING CLUTCH KOBE made 40 out of 151 game winners @ 26.4% FG% = MAMBA BRICK MENTALITY!
https://youtu.be/60AgKUPlC3I?t=171

Puts some context those stats lol Clutch isn't define by the game winning shots.

https://www.reddit.com/r/nba/comments/6lhlcj/kobe_vs_lebron_in_clutch_situations/

In the playoffs last 2 mins with game decided by 3 points

Kobe is 40/96 42& fg 85%ft

Lebron is 40/ 106 38% fg 73%FT

In the finals last 2 mins decide by 3 points

Kobe : 10/20 50 fg 80% ft

Lebron 4/23 17% fg 71% ft

Finals Last 5 mins decided by 5 pts

Kobe : 28/63 44% fg

Lebron : 17/62 27% fg

In the playoffs Kobe is way more clutch than Lebron but according to other stats Lebron is better at hitting game winners. There is many ways to weigh a clutch player.

Isn’t Kobe one of the worst finals shooters of all time ? If I’m not mistaken I came across an article he shoots something like 37% in the finals lol. Be clutch all you want if bron shooting 37% first 3 quarters his team not even in the game for the “clutch” to matter

I don't know if he's the worst, but he's not in the top 100 in field goal percentage, despite being 10th in attempts and 11th in made field goals. He's a career 41.2% shooter in the Finals.

[dhsilv2]

What about 5 rings and 2 NBA Final MVP's?

1 is rewarded for just being on a team, the other is an award. Neither are stats.

What about them? Every advanced number is against Kobe. You can take that and either 1) think the numbers all conspired to make Kobe look bad or 2) people's perception of him doesn't match the reality.

Advanced numbers aren't wrong. Go look at the career leaders in them. They're all all-time greats at the top. Kobe just isn't quite there.

This is the reality that people can't reconcile:

Stats do not win games. Not one game was one with TS%, PER, VORP, or regression methods.

The other reality is that the NBA is a sport that has a winner and a loser. Its competitive and the goal is to win games. If the goal was to see who accumulated the most stats then there would be a viable argument for putting stats at the top.

But lately, I hear everyone wants to be on the right side of history...history is written by winners not statkeepers......

The stats keepers are the ones winning though. Teams that embrace stats win. Teams who have refused to or were slow to are behind.

And remember every game is decided by stats and stats alone. The team with the most points (a stat) wins.