Kobe Bryant Is An All Time Great, Unless You Do The Math: VICE

[O.T.I.S.]

I'm going through that site now and it gets worse, it really does get worse:

Rodman's career WP/48 is .344, higher than LeBron's (.261), Jordan (.244), and Shaq (.224), among others.

Jason Kidd is at .248, Ben Wallace at .299


This is the worst fukking stat I've encountered, and the guy that made is an economics professor.

Mods need to send this thread to the bushes asap

 

[Houston911]

I GET WHAT THEYRE SAYING...
KOBE IS AN ALL TIME GREAT
BUT IS HE AS GREAT AS THE RINGS SAY HE IS?

YALL THINK REGGIE
AND CLYDE COULDNT HAVE WON RINGS WITH SHAQ AND GASOL?

REGGIE WOULD HAVE PROBABLY SHOT 55 PERCENT FROM THE 3
WITH THE LOOKS SHAQ WOULD HAVE GOTTEN HIM.

CLYDE GOT TO 2 FINALS AS THE MAN...
REGGIE GOT TO A FINALS AS THE MAN...

NIETHER ONE HAD TEAMMATES ANY WHERE CLOSE TO SHAQ AND GASOL.

KOBE COULDNT GET OUT THE 1ST ROUND...
CLYDE WAS PUTTING UP 27, 8 & 6 IN 50% IN HIS PRIME....

LIKE @Gravity SAID
KOBE ALSO HAS THE PERCEPTION OF BEING ONE OF THE MOST CLUTCH
PLAYERS,
WHEN THE NUMBERS SHOWS HES ACTUALLY ONE OF THE WORST
HES JUST HAD MORE CHANCES.

HES A GREAT BUT HES NOT HEAD AND SHOULDERS ABOVE SOME OF THE OTHER GREATS
HE JUST HAD BETTER TEAMMATES.



​

"Imagine the open looks pau gasol wpuld have got them"



Is this a serious post

Not shaq
Not hakeem
Not duncan

Pau gasol?

 

[mbewane]

If you check the website for wins produced it goes as far back as the 77-78 season. Check where Jordan's 37ppg ranks, you have to scroll down to find it

According to either WP or WP/48 Jordan was only the best player once and was rarely ever top 5. Rodman was the MVP of the 96-98 Bulls, why would anyone take this metric seriously?

Dikembe Mutombo was Shaq's equal in 2000, wtf

You're biased breh

If the stats say that Rodman was the MVP of the Bulls over the GOAT well you need to believe the stats

 

[Lakerman0834]

Cacs and dweebs being exposed in this thread

 

[Trip]

@Trip you wanna provide a response for this breh?

Dennis Rodman has a career WS/48 of .150 and Jordan is at .250...they're not even close. Where are you getting this from? The geek stats have Jordan as easily the best guard of all time.

 

[Maximus]

Statnerds and Kobe haters are getting their asses kicked all over this thread.

Kobe will go down in history as an elite all-time great, and there is nothing you morons can do about it.

Who ever the hell wrote this article, along with the John Hollingers and Henry Abbots of the world will just have to make up another stat that makes Kobe look bad.

Hopefully, for their sake, they won't make themselves look like damn fools in the process like they're doing now.

 

[Trip]

If you check the website for wins produced it goes as far back as the 77-78 season. Check where Jordan's 37ppg ranks, you have to scroll down to find it

According to either WP or WP/48 Jordan was only the best player once and was rarely ever top 5. Rodman was the MVP of the 96-98 Bulls, why would anyone take this metric seriously?

Dikembe Mutombo was Shaq's equal in 2000, wtf

Mutomobo graded out really high that year because he was unbelievably good on the offensive glass. They get weighted highly because they generate an extra possession for the offense they otherwise wouldnt have had.

 

[Sccit]

You never look at the score during games right? Because if you're watching, you should already know who's winning....right?

Its crazy to dismiss math when the outcome of the game is decided by adding up the number of baskets each team makes, using a multiplier based on where the shots are made from and determining which number is greater. Who needs math though?

YOUR LOGIC IS ILLOGICAL

 

[Trip]

You're talking in circles. Lol
How many times have I stated that no one stat is indicative of a player's entire value?

Quote where I have argued otherwise. Please.
It's one stat with a limited scope that shows that a certain beloved player isn't as efficient as you all though he was.

But this being the coli....red pill/blue pill.

We've been so conditioned to simply look at PPG as an end all be all measure of success. The league has too...it's the easiest way to get a big contract and celebrity. High PPG dont always = wins though.

 

[Bilz]

YOUR LOGIC IS ILLOGICAL

It's logical, it's just above some people.

 

[Trip]

It's logical, it's just above some people.

High usage + high efficiency are the Jordans, Duncans, Kareems of the world. Extremely rare players. Kobe took a lot of shots but didnt make them as much as those guys. I dont get why people hate this fact.

 

[Illuminatos]

Stop it dawg, you just sound mad.

How many of those guys have scored as much, and won as much as Kobe?

Lebron bout to loose his 5th NBA finals, he a fraud. Love Kareem but Kobe accomplished more than him.

Kobe is 4-2 against Duncan in the playoffs 3 wins in the wcf.

Stop the hate c00n.

Again with the scoring shyt. Is that all Kobe stans know?
nikka Kareem is the NBAs all-time leading scorer.

More Championships, more MVPs, more Finals MVPs, more All-Star appearances. In what world has Kobe accomplished more than him?

LeBron surpassed Kobe years ago. nikka is about to head to his 6th straight Finals.

Again, Tim Duncan has more Championships, more MVPs and more Finals MVPs. Let's not even get into longevity. Duncan is still putting in work on a contender at 39 years old while Kobe is already washed up and gunning at on a lottery team.

I'm not even gonna respond to that c00n comment.

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

Mutomobo graded out really high that year because he was unbelievably good on the offensive glass. They get weighted highly because they generate an extra possession for the offense they otherwise wouldnt have had.

Offensive and defensive rebounds have the exact same value in the formula, making your point null and void.

 

[Houston911]

THE POST CLEARLY SAYS SHAQ.
SOMEBODY HACK YOUR ACCOUNT?



​

My beard not connecting how i wanted and i cant think straight

My bad bro

 

[Cyber]

Mutomobo graded out really high that year because he was unbelievably good on the offensive glass. They get weighted highly because they generate an extra possession for the offense they otherwise wouldnt have had.

You must mean 2001 because he wasn't even top 10 in ORB% in 2000. That doesn't change the fact he's nowhere near peak Shaq's level or frankly any all-timer's level. The metric completely ignores several things, diminishing returns on increased usage being a big one.

I can't stress enough how important context is and this and several catch all metrics ignore context. In a ecosystem like a basketball game there's more to individual value than box score data and what a custom metric tells you. What people should care more about when evaluating players (and when evaluating life in general) is why it happens, not what happens.