Greater: Kobe Bryant vs Stephen Curry

[GeorgeMarcus]

Curry definitely peaked higher. They are neck and neck as far as careers go, with maybe a slight edge to Kobe (for now). Even that is debatable.

How?

Curry's all star/superstar seasons are: 2013-2019 with missing a ton of games in 2018, and several playoff games from 2016-2018.

Kobe has basically 2000-2013, with an average of 74 games played per season.

If you don't care at all about durability/missed games then sure Curry has a case.

And I'll tell you this, for most of Kobe's prime there's no way Kobe could miss a whole playoff series and his team still advance. Curry's had the luxury of missing playoff games and his team still wins anyway.

Curry has played in 112/124 playoff games, and the ones he missed were early rounders. Not really a smudge on his reputation.

The Lakers easily would have won playoff series without Kobe when they had peak Shaq so I don't get your argument there. Genereally speaking, my answer to your question "how?" is that I favor longevity less than most people and value Curry's peak/prime decidedly above Kobe's.

[clyde21]

ehhh, Kobe always gets mentioned like this because the Kobe myth is bigger and better than the actual player...there are plenty of people that mention Kobe in the GOAT discussion and that's far far far away from being reality tbh.

and really...what makes Kobe better than Steph even in finals?

Kobe in 7 finals: 25.3ppg / 5.7rpg / 5.0apg / 1.7spg

Steph in 5 finals: 26.8ppg / 5.7rpg / 6.4apg / 1.6spg

with better efficiency across the board...so it's either Kobe is an overrated finals performer or Steph is an underrated finals performer...which is it?

even overall in the playoffs Steph has a better BPM, TS%, WS/48, PER, On/Off, etc.

again, other than longevity, Kobe doesn't really have an argument...Steph has him equaled in the box scores, dwarfed in advanced metrics both in the RS and PS, and is an infinitely more portable and versatile player to play with and build around.

You are listing stats again and I'm just going to point out 1) you are comparing stats across eras, not taking into account scoring inflation or other systemic differences which are NOT just attributable to one player's skill, and 2) Kobe's finals range from age 21-31 (which stretches before his prime to the downward part of his prime), and Curry's finals are all from age 26-30, the heart of his prime.

But my post was specifically about something beyond stats which was getting to the heart of Kerr's statements. I think Harden can run a more efficient offense in the regular season than Kobe. Harden's offensive stats blow Kobe out of the water. I can even make a case that Harden's playoff stats are comparable to Kobe's. I might still take Kobe, on offense, over Harden in the playoffs. Why? Because Kobe is less predictable, and is less dependent on running any kind of offensive system. I think there is something similar going on with Curry.

Here is Curry's shot chart from 2016 regular season:

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/curryst01/shooting/2016

Here is Kobe's shot chart from 2009:

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/bryanko01/shooting/2009

These are pretty representative of all their prime seasons. Steph has a much better shot selection. 3s and lay-ups, the most efficient shots in the game, and it's very similar to Harden's shot chart. In comparison, Kobe's shot chart is all over the place. Plenty of long 2s in there. Of course the stats are going to show that Curry is more efficient and is leading more efficient offenses. But which player is going to be easier to take out of their game? Kobe may not be the best at any individual kind of shot, but he has a million tools at his disposal, and there really is no predicting what he is going to do. You can hope he gets cold and shoots himself out of the game with bad shots, and that is indeed what teams would try to do, but basically you can only hope. This is extremely important in those games where you just don't have a plan left. And I don't care how good you are, how efficient an offense you run, those games are going to come deep in the playoffs. That is what Kerr is talking about, and this is one of Kobe's greatest strengths. I don't see it as Curry's strength at all.

Don't take what I am saying as "Steph only is good when he plays his system and is useless when you take him out of his game," or "Kobe is unstoppable and there is nothing you can do to slow him down." Obviously this is not black and white. Aside from the clear aantage Kobe has on defense and longevity, this is also a real thing, but you seem to just think this is some closed case or something.

well yea, it's not 1:1 to compare stats across era, but we're not comparing 2019 to 1940 here...they're not meaningless and we can draw a lot of conclusions from it, and Steph is an infinitely more efficient player than Kobe by almost any standard or measure, even if you adjust for era.

and I'm not really sure what Harden has to do with this, I get the premise, but the analog is bad...we should probably wait until we get more sample size from Harden into the PS (specifically finals) before using Harden as a benchmark here...and to bring up the stats again...Steph's stats are better in the RS, better in the PS and better in the finals...so where/when exactly is Kobe supposed to be better? i think it's a facade narrative because Kobe is better in 1:1 ISO situations I guess, but that's just one element of an overarching offense/scheme.

as for the shot charts...don't really understand the point here either...doesn't really prove anything other than Kobe took a lot of low-percentage shots...look at DeRozan's short chart...looks like Kobe's pretty much and that's in this era:

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/d/derozde01/shooting/2017

so if your opinion is that Kobe's short chart would change had he played in this era instead, not really buying it.

and I already conceded that Kobe has an advantage on defense and longevity, but as I stated, on-ball defense is overrated for guards and I think the longevity gap is only going to get smaller considering Steph is still 31 and in his prime.

[No-more-rings]

Curry definitely peaked higher. They are neck and neck as far as careers go, with maybe a slight edge to Kobe (for now). Even that is debatable.

How?

Curry's all star/superstar seasons are: 2013-2019 with missing a ton of games in 2018, and several playoff games from 2016-2018.

Kobe has basically 2000-2013, with an average of 74 games played per season.

If you don't care at all about durability/missed games then sure Curry has a case.

And I'll tell you this, for most of Kobe's prime there's no way Kobe could miss a whole playoff series and his team still advance. Curry's had the luxury of missing playoff games and his team still wins anyway.

Curry has played in 112/124 playoff games, and the ones he missed were early rounders. Not really a smudge on his reputation.

The Lakers easily would have won playoff series without Kobe when they had peak Shaq so I don't get your argument there. Genereally speaking, my answer to your question "how?" is that I favor longevity less than most people and value Curry's peak/prime decidedly above Kobe's.

With Shaq sure, but what about from 08-2010 when they were facing 50ish win teams in the first round? Do you think they beat the Melo Nuggets, D will Jazz, and OKC without Kobe? i would really doubt it, and i bring those years up because that's when he was contending without Shaq.

[GeorgeMarcus]

Curry has won 70% of his playoff games vs Kobe's 61.4%. Curry has averaged more playoff points on way better efficiency. I'm just not seeing why Kobe is the superior playoff performer other than narrative.

Which means nothing because Curry has played 110 playoff games to Kobes 220. Kobe has played twice as many games and it is highly unlikely Curry even catches Kobe in playoff games played or maintains his winning %.

Which is also something that is going to decrease as Curry gets over is....everything. Your numbers only decline as you age.

The narrative is the whole point. Kobe saved the Lakers multiple times in winning titles. Not just playoff games, but titles. You can't point to any series and say Curry was the turning point to why the Warriors won a title.

Which is why you don't want to argue the narrative......[/quote]

Because it's a false narrative, and technically I have argued the narrative with facts. There are plenty of times when Curry saved his team in the playoffs. It literally just happened in the Houston series, for instance.

You're a Lakers fan and I can appreciate you defending your guy, but Curry is wayyyy better than my man Iverson was. Iverson would get the Kobe type creds for "carrying his team" yada yada yada, but Curry is just better. Plain and simple.

[levon]

Maybe not as high a ceiling for the offense, but a more resilient offense. And that's exactly what I want in those games where you just don't have a plan left, a resilient offense. And I don't care how good you are, how efficient an offense you run, those games are going to come deep in the playoffs. That is what Kerr is talking about, and this is one of Kobe's greatest strengths. I don't see it as Curry's strength at all..

This is exactly it. I'm extremely skeptical that the Warriors win a title post-2015 without Durant. Especially with how erratic Klay performs in the Finals. Durant's addition put them way over the top, but that doesn't mean they were over the top without him. When the going got tough and defenses were allowed to bully Steph coming off of screens, he wasn't able to deliver at the level we're used to or at the level Durant is capable of.

Without Durant, the counter-strategy should have been having Curry play initiator and setting very high screens. At that point you've turned Steph into a less strong James Harden, who's also garnered his fair share of criticism about not being able to get it done at the highest levels.

The problem is this argument is really anecdotal and prone to bias, while averages fail. Breaking down generally by clutch stats doesn't work nearly as well as it should either in capturing this phenomenon.

[GeorgeMarcus]

How?

Curry's all star/superstar seasons are: 2013-2019 with missing a ton of games in 2018, and several playoff games from 2016-2018.

Kobe has basically 2000-2013, with an average of 74 games played per season.

If you don't care at all about durability/missed games then sure Curry has a case.

And I'll tell you this, for most of Kobe's prime there's no way Kobe could miss a whole playoff series and his team still advance. Curry's had the luxury of missing playoff games and his team still wins anyway.

Curry has played in 112/124 playoff games, and the ones he missed were early rounders. Not really a smudge on his reputation.

The Lakers easily would have won playoff series without Kobe when they had peak Shaq so I don't get your argument there. Genereally speaking, my answer to your question "how?" is that I favor longevity less than most people and value Curry's peak/prime decidedly above Kobe's.

With Shaq sure, but what about from 08-2010 when they were facing 50ish win teams in the first round? Do you think they beat the Melo Nuggets, D will Jazz, and OKC without Kobe? i would really doubt it, and i bring those years up because that's when he was contending without Shaq.

In that scenario, no I don't think they get past some of those teams without Kobe. But if they replace Kobe with Curry, they still would.

[levon]

In that scenario, no I don't think they get past some of those teams without Kobe. But if they replace Kobe with Curry, they still would.

Prime Curry in the triangle in that spacing against physical, team defenses like the Celtics'. I think that's a dream basketball hypothetical. I'm personally skeptical.

He would probably win in 2012 in place of Lebron in Miami though.

[GeorgeMarcus]

In that scenario, no I don't think they get past some of those teams without Kobe. But if they replace Kobe with Curry, they still would.

Prime Curry in the triangle in that spacing against physical, team defenses like the Celtics'. I think that's a dream basketball hypothetical. I'm personally skeptical.

He would probably win in 2012 in place of Lebron in Miami though.

We agree on your last point anyway Not that the triangle is ideal for Curry, but he is versatile and instinctual enough to make it work.

[levon]

In that scenario, no I don't think they get past some of those teams without Kobe. But if they replace Kobe with Curry, they still would.

Prime Curry in the triangle in that spacing against physical, team defenses like the Celtics'. I think that's a dream basketball hypothetical. I'm personally skeptical.

He would probably win in 2012 in place of Lebron in Miami though.

We agree on your last point anyway Not that the triangle is ideal for Curry, but he is versatile and instinctual enough to make it work.

Yeah, I guess that's kind of my problem; you would probably have to not run the triangle, or run it less prominently, so at what point does it stop becoming the 08-10 Lakers? They would probably win in 09.

[Strepbacter]

Unless he’s thrown onto a team like the Spurs, Sixers, Lakers, etc where spacing isn’t exactly their calling card. I agree his efficiency should improve as a whole in the modern era. What I’m not convinced of is that his impact on winning would improve.

Cool. He doesn't improve and he's still a better playoff performer than Curry prime vs prime. He's still a better defender who is much less exploitable in the post-season. He's still more durable. He still takes better care of the ball and is the better rebounder. He's still a much better ISO scorer (critical in the post-season) etc etc. He has plenty of advantages over Curry...particularly in the post-season.

As for impact, we're talking about a guy who had the BEST ORAPM mark (+6.6) in the 02-11 study RAPM study. Who had the THIRD best minute-adjusted RAPM marks in that same study behind behind only LBJ and KG and ahead of guys like Dirk, Nash, Duncan, etc. His impact is unquestionable.

Worse winning% in the playoffs, less points on worse efficiency (weighted for league average), worse RAPM averages including slightly worse DRPM... Per usual people overrate on ball perimeter defense (like when people thought Avery Bradley was some elite defender) and underrate playing the passing lanes. Curry is always among the league leader in steals.

What exactly is the argument for Kobe creating separation from Curry in the playoffs? He’s a top ~15 player of all time so let’s not pretend I’m insulting the guy. Just his inflated reputation.

Winning percentage? Seriously? Yeah, that's going to happen when you're playing on a team that's so stacked they can go 9-3 in the post-season without Steph Curry since 2015. When Curry plays less then 20 minutes (or doesn't play at all) they are still 11-3 in the post-season. Taking into account opponent faced and to put it into perspective, in the 14 games in the post-season where Curry doesn't play (or plays less than 20 minutes), the average SRS faced was 1.58 (account for games played against each foe) and the average MOV for all games was 13.2 points. This puts their SRS roughly at 14.78 through the 13 games without Curry. 10-3 with a +9.8 MOV (as of 5-5-2019).

Less points? Did you miss the part where I said was talking about prime?

01-10 Kobe: 28.5 PPG and 36.0 Points 100 possessions
14-19 Curry: 26.9 PPG and 35.6 Points Per 100 possessions

Curry has better SCORING efficiency. But you people don't understand is that scoring efficiency isn't overall efficiency. Turnovers matter. And Prime Kobe (10.8%) had a significantly lower turnover rate than Prime Curry (13.8%) in the post-season.

From 14-19 Curry has a 116 individual offensive rating against teams with a average DRTG of 107 (+9)
From 01-10 Kobe had a 110 individual offensive rating against teams with a average DRTG of 102 (+9)

All this nonsense about Curry's "far" better efficiency is a MYTH when it comes to the post-season. Their overall efficiency is essentially EVEN after you adjust for comp/environment.

Maybe someday you people will realize that scoring efficiency isn't overall efficiency

As for the rest of your post...

1) We don't have DRPM for Bryant

2) We don't have post-season RAPM for prime Bryant. We DO know that's Curry's post-season RAPM's marks are noticeably worse than they are in the regular season. For example, in the 14-19 post-season RAPM, Curry is all the way down at #8:https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vQdG8Zv84zqKEzETDjd8KPsClcw9bPETX9v_x_KEAxjv9NrFaWikOoiSaciy1jbMiygg2D-V8DUQn0O/pubhtml?gid=721454147&single=true

Two of his teammates are ahead of him.

3) Steals are worthless as a measure of defense.

Seriously, name me one Curry series that's even close to the best defensive series of Bryant's prime (09 Finals, 08 Finals, 01 Finals, 09 WCSF, etc) Oh, wait. You can't.

All your nonsense about Bryant's "inflated" rep but you can't even get your numbers straight.

Kobe is top ten all-time. Deal with it.

[LKN]

Cool. He doesn't improve and he's still a better playoff performer than Curry prime vs prime. He's still a better defender who is much less exploitable in the post-season. He's still more durable. He still takes better care of the ball and is the better rebounder. He's still a much better ISO scorer (critical in the post-season) etc etc. He has plenty of advantages over Curry...particularly in the post-season.

As for impact, we're talking about a guy who had the BEST ORAPM mark (+6.6) in the 02-11 study RAPM study. Who had the THIRD best minute-adjusted RAPM marks in that same study behind behind only LBJ and KG and ahead of guys like Dirk, Nash, Duncan, etc. His impact is unquestionable.

Worse winning% in the playoffs, less points on worse efficiency (weighted for league average), worse RAPM averages including slightly worse DRPM... Per usual people overrate on ball perimeter defense (like when people thought Avery Bradley was some elite defender) and underrate playing the passing lanes. Curry is always among the league leader in steals.

What exactly is the argument for Kobe creating separation from Curry in the playoffs? He’s a top ~15 player of all time so let’s not pretend I’m insulting the guy. Just his inflated reputation.

Winning percentage? Seriously? Yeah, that's going to happen when you're playing on a team that's so stacked they can go 9-3 in the post-season without Steph Curry since 2015. When Curry plays less then 20 minutes (or doesn't play at all) they are still 11-3 in the post-season. Taking into account opponent faced and to put it into perspective, in the 14 games in the post-season where Curry doesn't play (or plays less than 20 minutes), the average SRS faced was 1.58 (account for games played against each foe) and the average MOV for all games was 13.2 points. This puts their SRS roughly at 14.78 through the 13 games without Curry. 10-3 with a +9.8 MOV (as of 5-5-2019).

Less points? Did you miss the part where I said was talking about prime?

01-10 Kobe: 28.5 PPG and 36.0 Points 100 possessions
14-19 Curry: 26.9 PPG and 35.6 Points Per 100 possessions

Curry has better SCORING efficiency. But you people don't understand is that scoring efficiency isn't overall efficiency. Turnovers matter. And Prime Kobe (10.8%) had a significantly lower turnover rate than Prime Curry (13.8%) in the post-season.

From 14-19 Curry has a 116 individual offensive rating against teams with a average DRTG of 107 (+9)
From 01-10 Kobe had a 110 individual offensive rating against teams with a average DRTG of 102 (+9)

All this nonsense about Curry's "far" better efficiency is a MYTH when it comes to the post-season. Their overall efficiency is essentially EVEN after you adjust for comp/environment.

Maybe someday you people will realize that scoring efficiency isn't overall efficiency

As for the rest of your post...

1) We don't have DRPM for Bryant

2) We don't have post-season RAPM for prime Bryant. We DO know that's Curry's post-season RAPM's marks are noticeably worse than they are in the regular season. For example, in the 14-19 post-season RAPM, Curry is all the way down at #8:https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vQdG8Zv84zqKEzETDjd8KPsClcw9bPETX9v_x_KEAxjv9NrFaWikOoiSaciy1jbMiygg2D-V8DUQn0O/pubhtml?gid=721454147&single=true

Two of his teammates are ahead of him.

3) Steals are worthless as a measure of defense.

Seriously, name me one Curry series that's even close to the best defensive series of Bryant's prime (09 Finals, 08 Finals, 01 Finals, 09 WCSF, etc) Oh, wait. You can't.

All your nonsense about Bryant's "inflated" rep but you can't even get your numbers straight.

Kobe is top ten all-time. Deal with it.

I don't always agree with every point you make - but you are the best pro Kobe poster here.

Seriously

[ccameron]

as for the shot charts...don't really understand the point here either...doesn't really prove anything other than Kobe took a lot of low-percentage shots...look at DeRozan's short chart...looks like Kobe's pretty much and that's in this era:

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/d/derozde01/shooting/2017

so if your opinion is that Kobe's short chart would change had he played in this era instead, not really buying it.

and I already conceded that Kobe has an advantage on defense and longevity, but as I stated, on-ball defense is overrated for guards and I think the longevity gap is only going to get smaller considering Steph is still 31 and in his prime.

I'm not saying Kobe's shot chart would change in this era. I mean it probably would a little, and that's something else to consider, but that's not my point. My point is actually the opposite. I'm saying there is an advantage (and disadvantage) to Kobe's shot chart -- the disadvantage is maybe a lower offensive ceiling over time, the advantage is greater offensive resiliency. Also, the shot chart kind of undersells the point because it's not just about where he is shooting from, but the kinds of shots he is shooting (the location of the shot doesn't tell you if it was a post-up or a drive, both of which Kobe could do). My point is his ability to get shots from everywhere and in multiple ways makes his offense more resilient. It's hard to take Kobe out of his game when he has so many tools.

Just because Derozen has a similar shot chart doesn't mean he was as good as Kobe. The shot chart doesn't tell the whole story. Lots of players have a similar shot chart to Curry now a days but that doesn't make them as good as Curry. The point is just to illustrate there was a larger variety of ways Kobe could get you, and as I mentioned, the shot chart undersells this because he could get shots off in each location in many different ways.

[Strepbacter]

But if I'm building a team I'm picking Steph. Kobe could never be the focal point of such a historically dominant team as the Warriors.

This is utter nonsense. The 09 Lakers were insanely dominant. In fact, they grade out as one of the most dominant teams in history, and their level of talent doesn't even compare to the Warriors.

The 09 Lakers were one of the best teams ever, and I'd describe Kobe's support as very good but hardly special in all-time sense

--They won 65 gms with a 7.3 SRS and won a great conference by ten games. They were one of the best "healthy" teams ever:



2008 Lakers: +9.7
2009 Lakers: +9.0

2008-09 Lakers and Celtics. These teams were fantastic in an incredibly competitive league. The Celtics were +8.8 and +9.3 when healthy, and the Lakers +9.7 and +9.0 once Pau Gasol joined. Kevin Garnett’s injury robbed us of possibly the NBA’s greatest trilogy

Amazingly, of the top 40 healthy teams of all-time, seven are Pop’s Spurs teams. Five are Jordan’s Bulls. Four are Laker teams with Kobe Bryant.

The 09 Lakers rank sixth all-time in leverage-adjusted playoff SRS

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-year-of-the-warriors/

https://fivethirtyeight.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/neil-warriors-2-0617.png?w=575

Ahead of teams like the 1992 Bulls, 87 Lakers, 08 Celtics, and 1997 Bulls.

Seventh all-time in ELO blend
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/after-all-that-the-warriors-arent-even-the-second-best-team-ever/


Ahead of teams like the 92 and 91 Bulls, 83 Sixers, 14 Spurs, and 72 and 87 Lakers.

The best NBA teams ever (according to Elo). The 09 Lakers ranked eighth all-time in overall ELO.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-warriors-are-in-the-goat-debate-but-they-blew-their-chance-to-end-it


The 09 Lakers are higher than teams like the 92 Bulls, 91 Bulls, 83 Sixers,2014 Spurs, etc

The 09 Lakers had the [b]sixth greatest peak ELO Rating in NBA histroy at 1790.0:
[/b]

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/last-years-warriors-werent-the-best-ever-but-this-years-might-be/

They completely dominated in the post-season:

Their post-season adjusted SRS of 12.7[/b] was the sixth highest since 1984: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-year-of-the-warriors

Here they're ahead of teams like the 85 Lakers, 87 Lakers, 08 Celtics, and 97 Bulls.



2008 Lakers: +9.7
2009 Lakers: +9.0

2008-09 Lakers and Celtics. These teams were fantastic in an incredibly competitive league. The Celtics were +8.8 and +9.3 when healthy, and the Lakers +9.7 and +9.0 once Pau Gasol joined. Kevin Garnett’s injury robbed us of possibly the NBA’s greatest trilogy

Amazingly, of the top 40 healthy teams of all-time, seven are Pop’s Spurs teams. Five are Jordan’s Bulls. Four are Laker teams with Kobe Bryant.

The 09 Lakers rank sixth all-time in leverage-adjusted playoff SRS

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-year-of-the-warriors/

https://fivethirtyeight.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/neil-warriors-2-0617.png?w=575

Ahead of teams like the 1992 Bulls, 87 Lakers, 08 Celtics, and 1997 Bulls.

Seventh all-time in ELO blend
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/after-all-that-the-warriors-arent-even-the-second-best-team-ever/


Ahead of teams like the 92 and 91 Bulls, 83 Sixers, 14 Spurs, and 72 and 87 Lakers.

The best NBA teams ever (according to Elo). The 09 Lakers ranked eighth all-time in overall ELO.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-warriors-are-in-the-goat-debate-but-they-blew-their-chance-to-end-it

*The 2011 Mavs rank #50

The 09 Lakers are higher than teams like the 92 Bulls, 91 Bulls, 83 Sixers,2014 Spurs, etc

The 09 Lakers had the [b]sixth greatest peak ELO Rating in NBA histroy at 1790.0:
[/b]

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/last-years-warriors-werent-the-best-ever-but-this-years-might-be/

They completely dominated in the post-season:

Their post-season adjusted SRS of 12.7[/b] was the sixth highest since 1984: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-year-of-the-warriors

Here they're ahead of teams like the 85 Lakers, 87 Lakers, 08 Celtics, and 97 Bulls.

Man the sheer amount of ignorance around Bryant's career here is astounding.

[GeorgeMarcus]

Cool. He doesn't improve and he's still a better playoff performer than Curry prime vs prime. He's still a better defender who is much less exploitable in the post-season. He's still more durable. He still takes better care of the ball and is the better rebounder. He's still a much better ISO scorer (critical in the post-season) etc etc. He has plenty of advantages over Curry...particularly in the post-season.

As for impact, we're talking about a guy who had the BEST ORAPM mark (+6.6) in the 02-11 study RAPM study. Who had the THIRD best minute-adjusted RAPM marks in that same study behind behind only LBJ and KG and ahead of guys like Dirk, Nash, Duncan, etc. His impact is unquestionable.

Worse winning% in the playoffs, less points on worse efficiency (weighted for league average), worse RAPM averages including slightly worse DRPM... Per usual people overrate on ball perimeter defense (like when people thought Avery Bradley was some elite defender) and underrate playing the passing lanes. Curry is always among the league leader in steals.

What exactly is the argument for Kobe creating separation from Curry in the playoffs? He’s a top ~15 player of all time so let’s not pretend I’m insulting the guy. Just his inflated reputation.

Winning percentage? Seriously? Yeah, that's going to happen when you're playing on a team that's so stacked they can go 9-3 in the post-season without Steph Curry since 2015. When Curry plays less then 20 minutes (or doesn't play at all) they are still 11-3 in the post-season. Taking into account opponent faced and to put it into perspective, in the 14 games in the post-season where Curry doesn't play (or plays less than 20 minutes), the average SRS faced was 1.58 (account for games played against each foe) and the average MOV for all games was 13.2 points. This puts their SRS roughly at 14.78 through the 13 games without Curry. 10-3 with a +9.8 MOV (as of 5-5-2019).

Less points? Did you miss the part where I said was talking about prime?

01-10 Kobe: 28.5 PPG and 36.0 Points 100 possessions
14-19 Curry: 26.9 PPG and 35.6 Points Per 100 possessions

Curry has better SCORING efficiency. But you people don't understand is that scoring efficiency isn't overall efficiency. Turnovers matter. And Prime Kobe (10.8%) had a significantly lower turnover rate than Prime Curry (13.8%) in the post-season.

From 14-19 Curry has a 116 individual offensive rating against teams with a average DRTG of 107 (+9)
From 01-10 Kobe had a 110 individual offensive rating against teams with a average DRTG of 102 (+9)

All this nonsense about Curry's "far" better efficiency is a MYTH when it comes to the post-season. Their overall efficiency is essentially EVEN after you adjust for comp/environment.

Maybe someday you people will realize that scoring efficiency isn't overall efficiency

As for the rest of your post...

1) We don't have DRPM for Bryant

2) We don't have post-season RAPM for prime Bryant. We DO know that's Curry's post-season RAPM's marks are noticeably worse than they are in the regular season. For example, in the 14-19 post-season RAPM, Curry is all the way down at #8:https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vQdG8Zv84zqKEzETDjd8KPsClcw9bPETX9v_x_KEAxjv9NrFaWikOoiSaciy1jbMiygg2D-V8DUQn0O/pubhtml?gid=721454147&single=true

Two of his teammates are ahead of him.

3) Steals are worthless as a measure of defense.

Seriously, name me one Curry series that's even close to the best defensive series of Bryant's prime (09 Finals, 08 Finals, 01 Finals, 09 WCSF, etc) Oh, wait. You can't.

All your nonsense about Bryant's "inflated" rep but you can't even get your numbers straight.

Kobe is top ten all-time. Deal with it.

A lot wrong with this post.
- Curry has the highest average playoff RAPM of any player in the span you referenced.
- Playoff RAPM IS available for Kobe- not sure why you believe it's not.
- Efficiency is a term generally used to describe scoring efficiency. If you want to expand beyond that, you might as well expand to offensive impact as a whole.
- You talk about comparing across eras, and yet you compare their DRtg? Can't tell if you don't understand or are being purposely disingenuous. Kobe's average DRAPM is worse than Curry's. "Steals are overrated" is what's overrated. It doesn't always indicate defensive ability, but rotational awareness and playing the passing lanes are much more conducive to defensive impact than on-ball perimeter defense. I'd love to see you argue that point with data of your choosing.

I'm sorry I seemed to have touched on a soft spot for you but I don't have any emotional attachment to my opinion.

[ccameron]

Maybe not as high a ceiling for the offense, but a more resilient offense. And that's exactly what I want in those games where you just don't have a plan left, a resilient offense. And I don't care how good you are, how efficient an offense you run, those games are going to come deep in the playoffs. That is what Kerr is talking about, and this is one of Kobe's greatest strengths. I don't see it as Curry's strength at all..

This is exactly it. I'm extremely skeptical that the Warriors win a title post-2015 without Durant. Especially with how erratic Klay performs in the Finals. Durant's addition put them way over the top, but that doesn't mean they were over the top without him. When the going got tough and defenses were allowed to bully Steph coming off of screens, he wasn't able to deliver at the level we're used to or at the level Durant is capable of.

Without Durant, the counter-strategy should have been having Curry play initiator and setting very high screens. At that point you've turned Steph into a less strong James Harden, who's also garnered his fair share of criticism about not being able to get it done at the highest levels.

The problem is this argument is really anecdotal and prone to bias, while averages fail. Breaking down generally by clutch stats doesn't work nearly as well as it should either in capturing this phenomenon.

Agreed and it's easy to come off while trying to articulate this as "mAmBa mEnTaLiTy" but I'm just not sure how this can show up in the stats.

[Strepbacter]

Kobe's longevity will be far too difficult to overcome, though i think Steph is the better player. TBH, i dont think their best 5 years (Steph 2015-2019 vs Kobe whatever) is all that close. Steph crushes him, even with some of his playoff falls (which Kobe has some of as well).

Im gonna enjoy cheering for Steph and W's again. It sucked hating on them cause of KD (and to a lesser extent Green) but i love watching Steph play

This is some ignorant ****. Not even close? Where do you people come up with this nonsense?

Kobe's 05-10 run is more than comparable to 15-19 Curry. Seriously, Curry has 16 where he's GOAT level in the RS but was massively disappointing in the post-season (+ misses 5 games ), 17 which was amazing, 18 which isn't even close to a being better than a typical prime Kobe season (missed 30 games in RS and frankly wasn't all that great in the PS), and 19 where frankly he wasn't better than prime Kobe in the RS or especially in the PS. Stop it.

[GeorgeMarcus]

I don't always agree with every point you make - but you are the best pro Kobe poster here.

Seriously

No offense LKN, but much of that post was factually incorrect. I question your opinion on this one.

Sure the Warriors went 9-3 without Curry against teams like the LeMarcus Aldridge-led Spurs of last year. That's a pretty small blip in the ocean of data we have.

[Strepbacter]

Worse winning% in the playoffs, less points on worse efficiency (weighted for league average), worse RAPM averages including slightly worse DRPM... Per usual people overrate on ball perimeter defense (like when people thought Avery Bradley was some elite defender) and underrate playing the passing lanes. Curry is always among the league leader in steals.

What exactly is the argument for Kobe creating separation from Curry in the playoffs? He’s a top ~15 player of all time so let’s not pretend I’m insulting the guy. Just his inflated reputation.

Winning percentage? Seriously? Yeah, that's going to happen when you're playing on a team that's so stacked they can go 9-3 in the post-season without Steph Curry since 2015. When Curry plays less then 20 minutes (or doesn't play at all) they are still 11-3 in the post-season. Taking into account opponent faced and to put it into perspective, in the 14 games in the post-season where Curry doesn't play (or plays less than 20 minutes), the average SRS faced was 1.58 (account for games played against each foe) and the average MOV for all games was 13.2 points. This puts their SRS roughly at 14.78 through the 13 games without Curry. 10-3 with a +9.8 MOV (as of 5-5-2019).

Less points? Did you miss the part where I said was talking about prime?

01-10 Kobe: 28.5 PPG and 36.0 Points 100 possessions
14-19 Curry: 26.9 PPG and 35.6 Points Per 100 possessions

Curry has better SCORING efficiency. But you people don't understand is that scoring efficiency isn't overall efficiency. Turnovers matter. And Prime Kobe (10.8%) had a significantly lower turnover rate than Prime Curry (13.8%) in the post-season.

From 14-19 Curry has a 116 individual offensive rating against teams with a average DRTG of 107 (+9)
From 01-10 Kobe had a 110 individual offensive rating against teams with a average DRTG of 102 (+9)

All this nonsense about Curry's "far" better efficiency is a MYTH when it comes to the post-season. Their overall efficiency is essentially EVEN after you adjust for comp/environment.

Maybe someday you people will realize that scoring efficiency isn't overall efficiency

As for the rest of your post...

1) We don't have DRPM for Bryant

2) We don't have post-season RAPM for prime Bryant. We DO know that's Curry's post-season RAPM's marks are noticeably worse than they are in the regular season. For example, in the 14-19 post-season RAPM, Curry is all the way down at #8:https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vQdG8Zv84zqKEzETDjd8KPsClcw9bPETX9v_x_KEAxjv9NrFaWikOoiSaciy1jbMiygg2D-V8DUQn0O/pubhtml?gid=721454147&single=true

Two of his teammates are ahead of him.

3) Steals are worthless as a measure of defense.

Seriously, name me one Curry series that's even close to the best defensive series of Bryant's prime (09 Finals, 08 Finals, 01 Finals, 09 WCSF, etc) Oh, wait. You can't.

All your nonsense about Bryant's "inflated" rep but you can't even get your numbers straight.

Kobe is top ten all-time. Deal with it.

A lot wrong with this post.
- Curry has the highest average playoff RAPM of any player in the span you referenced.
- Playoff RAPM IS available for Kobe- not sure why you believe it's not.
- Efficiency is a term generally used to describe scoring efficiency. If you want to expand beyond that, you might as well expand to offensive impact as a whole.
- You talk about comparing across eras, and yet you compare their DRtg? Can't tell if you don't understand or are being purposely disingenuous. Kobe's average DRAPM is worse than Curry's. "Steals are overrated" is what's overrated. It doesn't always indicate defensive ability, but playing the passing lanes is much more conducive to defensive impact than on-ball perimeter defense. I'd love to see you argue that point with data of your choosing.

I'm sorry I seemed to have touched on a soft spot for you but I don't have any emotional attachment to my opinion.

-Yeah, no. He's #8 in playoff RAPM from 15-19
-Please link me to playoff RAPM for prime Kobe
-Because most don't understand that scoring efficiency isn't efficiency. I've already explained this. Prime Kobe and Prime Curry have extremely comparable overall efficiency. That's a fact.
-I'm comparing the DRTG's of the teams they played. Use relative DRTG if you want. The fact remains that Bryant played far better defensive comp. From 01-10 the average team he played ranked #5 in DRTG.
-Again, try getting your facts straight.

[Strepbacter]

I don't always agree with every point you make - but you are the best pro Kobe poster here.

Seriously

No offense LKN, but much of that post was factually incorrect. I question your opinion on this one.

Sure the Warriors went 9-3 without Curry against teams like the LeMarcus Aldridge-led Spurs of last year. That's a pretty small blip in the ocean of data we have.

Literally everything I said in that post is a fact. Nice try.

Keep acting like the Warriors going 10-3 with a massive point differential in the post-season without Curry isn't a big deal tho. You think the 08-10 Lakers are pulling off anything like that without Bryant? Heh.

[LKN]

I don't always agree with every point you make - but you are the best pro Kobe poster here.

Seriously

No offense LKN, but much of that post was factually incorrect. I question your opinion on this one.

Sure the Warriors went 9-3 without Curry against teams like the LeMarcus Aldridge-led Spurs of last year. That's a pretty small blip in the ocean of data we have.

Well as I said - I don't agree with all of it.

I was more complimenting him for actually putting forth some metrics based arguments.