Kobe Bryant's skill level was simply INSANE

[Swagnificent]

Triple-doubles are an official stat in all those places too. Are you going to claim that being on the internet makes "triple-doubles" analytics as well?


Please stop digging this hole for yourself. Being on an internet box score does NOT make something analytics.

You clearly don't have a clue what analytics means.

I guess I must have hit a nerve since you are ignoring a direct question.

I'll repeat it once again:

Please cite a STAT (not media declaration or team success like a ring) that proves LeBron was the best player in the NBA from 2014-2017?

Since you're all about stats when we talk about Kobe, I'm sure this shouldn't be too hard.

 

[Swagnificent]

I'll help you start out.

In 2016-17, LeBron was 6th in PER, 6th in win shares, 4th in box score plus/minus, and his best metric was 3rd in Wins Above Replacement. These are the analytics cited by Basketball Reference (you know the website that tracks all NBA stats).

So according purely to analytics, last season LeBron was AT BEST the 3rd best player in the NBA. And more than likely he was around the 6th best player in the NBA.

So @The Dankster why were you NOT arguing LeBron was the 3rd-6th best player in the NBA last year?

 

[Swagnificent]

This is the thing about Bron stans. They wanna have their cake and eat it too. When the stats favor LeBron they're all about the numbers and nothing else. But when the numbers don't favor LeBron, it's now about what the media says, the eye test, playoff success, LeBron not having enough help, etc.



I would actually respect fools like @The Dankster if he was always consistent. If he was Mr. Numbers all day everyday I wouldn't care. I would still disagree with him all the time, but I would at least respect the fact he's consistent. But it's this sneaky bytch like form of arguments where he now pretends that PER (arguably the stat that started the whole analytics movement) is not analytics anymore that makes him look foolish.

@The Dankster just say LeBron hasn't been the best player in the NBA since 2013 and you can continue with your stupid stat based arguments.

But trying to sneak your way outta this to say LeBron was the best player in 2016-17 when there isn't a single statistic that supports that argument simply makes you look like a joke. That you really have no guiding principle. You simply like LeBron and will craft your arguments around that position.

 

[Swagnificent]

FTR, you guys may not like me but at least I'm consistent. I've always been Mr. Eye Test. And regardless of what the media or stat nerds say I stick to my positions. For example, I was the loudest Anti-Kevin Love voice on here. When everyone who just pays attention to stats was on his dikk cause he was averaging 26ppg and 13 rpg, I called him a SCRUB. I said he was just another Ryan Anderson. I caught flack for it cause most people are deluded by stats. They'll believe that over their eyes.

I stuck to my eye test and have ultimately been proven right about how much of a SCRUB Kevin Love is.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

I guess I must have hit a nerve since you are ignoring a direct question.

I've asked you numerous direct questions that you've ignored. Does that mean I've hit a lot of nerves.

I'll repeat it once again:

Please cite a STAT (not media declaration or team success like a ring) that proves LeBron was the best player in the NBA from 2014-2017?

Since you're all about stats when we talk about Kobe, I'm sure this shouldn't be too hard.

When has anyone ever claimed that some single stat should capture something as complex as "who was the most important player in the NBA over the last five years"?

That's an idiot strawman that no one has ever run with. No single thing can capture that.

But I'll do it anyway, just for you:

Lebron has led all players in playoff plus/minus (+543) from 2014-2017.

Lebron's presence makes a bigger difference in whether his team will outscore the other team than anyone else in the NBA.

There are ways in which on/off can be skewed (such as if you only play for the 1st unit, or if you are always on the court with another particularly effective player, or if you backup is particularly bad). But since Lebron plays more 2nd-unit minutes than any other starter, those don't apply. So the benefit is legit.

Or here is a really simple one for the rock-brains:

Lebron has led all players in playoff scoring from 2014-2017 (2,292 points) while shooting above his team average (60% eFG).

That's a fairly simple statistic, but you probably can't find any four-year period in the last forty years where a player has led the NBA in playoff points with an above-average FG% and not had an argument for the best player in the NBA over that time.

Lebron has led the NBA in playoff assists over that time (565) while maintaining an above average assist-to-turnover ratio (2-to-1).

Then you could get into analytics, like showing how much better his teammates shoot off of passes from him, how much more poorly opposing players scored in various situations against him, etc.

But that would first require you to know what analytics even is.

I'll help you start out.

In 2016-17, LeBron was 6th in PER, 6th in win shares, 4th in box score plus/minus, and his best metric was 3rd in Wins Above Replacement. These are the analytics cited by Basketball Reference (you know the website that tracks all NBA stats).

So according purely to analytics, last season LeBron was AT BEST the 3rd best player in the NBA. And more than likely he was around the 6th best player in the NBA.

So @The Dankster why were you NOT arguing LeBron was the 3rd-6th best player in the NBA last year?

First off, by the end of the regular season Lebron WAS the 3rd-6th best player in the NBA last year. The actual players who were playing the best in the regular season last year were Durant, Kawhi, Harden, Lebron, Curry, and Westbrook, and Lebron was somewhere around 3rd-4th in that group.

Second of all, PER AND WIN SHARES AND BOX SCORE PLUS/MINUS AND WINS ABOVE REPLACEMENT ARE NOT ANALYTICS.

Stop being such a rock brain and using words that you don't know what they mean.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

I would actually respect fools like @The Dankster if he was always consistent. If he was Mr. Numbers all day everyday I wouldn't care. I would still disagree with him all the time, but I would at least respect the fact he's consistent. But it's this sneaky bytch like form of arguments where he now pretends that PER (arguably the stat that started the whole analytics movement) is not analytics anymore that makes him look foolish.

Stop. Embarrassing. Yourself.

PER is not analytics. PER is just a formula that takes the REGULAR BOX SCORE NUMBERS and puts them together to make one number. It has NOTHING to do with analytics, and you keep embarrassing yourself by claiming it does.


Basketball Analytics is the process of actually ANALYZING what is happening on a play-to-play basis. Analytics is about looking at player tracking, shot selection, ball movement, etc. to show who and what is most effective in any particular situation. It gives you shooting charts, points per post up possession, distance traveled per player, tells you who is most effective on spot-up shots versus off-the-dribble, etc.

Here is an article on analytics so you can try to understand it. You'll notice that PER is never mentioned because analytics has NOTHING to do with PER:

This Isn't Your Dad's NBA: Thank Big Data

FTR, you guys may not like me but at least I'm consistent.

Except I've already pointed out three times in this argument when you've jumped to "But RINGZ!"...but only when it fits your narrative.

Your eye test has failed. Eye test told you that Kobe took all the clutch shots for the Lakers in 2009-2010. Actual stats showed you that his teammates made 70% of the biggest clutch shots and shot twice as good as Kobe when they did it.

Your eye test will simply tell you what you want to believe.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

FTR, you guys may not like me but at least I'm consistent. I've always been Mr. Eye Test. And regardless of what the media or stat nerds say I stick to my positions.

And the results on the court say your way has failed. Every successful team in the NBA is prominently using analytics. EVERY one. You're left in the meaningless basket of losing trolls like Barkley, who no one on Earth would let run their team even if he offered to do it for free.

Once, the dominant way of judging how well a player or team would perform was the “eye-test”—the organic, gut-instinct impression that came simply from watching a game unfold. But that time has been replaced by an era in which coaches and their backroom staff pore over formulas and figures—how many mid-range jump shots a team uses versus attempts near the hoop, or how many three-point shots versus two-pointers—to predict the most effective methods for winning. While some doubt the importance of the shift, there are still coaches and legends of the sport who reject the practice of analytics and are leery of how number-crunching will fundamentally change the sport.

Last week’s NBA Finals may have offered the naysayers the strongest evidence yet that analytics does, in fact work, that it’s become an entrenched part of basketball today, and that it will remain so for some time. The most-watched Finals since the age of Michael Jordan ended with victory for the Golden State Warriors over the Cleveland Cavaliers—both of which are teams that have heavily incorporated data analysis into how they play the game. The playoffs were yet another clear indicator that if teams want to win, they’d do best to ignore the likes of detractors such as Charles Barkley, who infamously went on a rant against the approach in January on Inside The NBA. (“Smart guys wanted to fit in so they made up a term called ‘analytics.’”)

This Isn't Your Dad's NBA: Thank Big Data

 

[Swagnificent]

When has anyone ever claimed that some single stat should capture something as complex as "who was the most important player in the NBA over the last five years"?

That's an idiot strawman that no one has ever run with. No single thing can capture that.

But I'll do it anyway, just for you:

Lebron has led all players in playoff plus/minus (+543) from 2014-2017.

Lebron's presence makes a bigger difference in whether his team will outscore the other team than anyone else in the NBA.

There are ways in which on/off can be skewed (such as if you only play for the 1st unit, or if you are always on the court with another particularly effective player, or if you backup is particularly bad). But since Lebron plays more 2nd-unit minutes than any other starter, those don't apply. So the benefit is legit.

Or here is a really simple one for the rock-brains:

Lebron has led all players in playoff scoring from 2014-2017 (2,292 points) while shooting above his team average (60% eFG).

That's a fairly simple statistic, but you probably can't find any four-year period in the last forty years where a player has led the NBA in playoff points with an above-average FG% and not had an argument for the best player in the NBA over that time.

Lebron has led the NBA in playoff assists over that time (565) while maintaining an above average assist-to-turnover ratio (2-to-1).

Then you could get into analytics, like showing how much better his teammates shoot off of passes from him, how much more poorly opposing players scored in various situations against him, etc.

But that would first require you to know what analytics even is.






First off, by the end of the regular season Lebron WAS the 3rd-6th best player in the NBA last year. The actual players who were playing the best in the regular season last year were Durant, Kawhi, Harden, Lebron, Curry, and Westbrook, and Lebron was somewhere around 3rd-4th in that group.

Second of all, PER AND WIN SHARES AND BOX SCORE PLUS/MINUS AND WINS ABOVE REPLACEMENT ARE NOT ANALYTICS.

Stop being such a rock brain and using words that you don't know what they mean.

Playoffs? We talking about Playoffs?

Give the regular season stats. We all know LeBron plays on stacked teams in a weak conference and skates to the finals with ease. Obviously that will allow him to crank out better plus/minus than the guys out West that are engaging in actual wars. Show me some stats over the 82 game season that show LeBron was the best? Better yet CLEARLY the best? Since that is typically the Bron stan argument. That LeBron was CLEARLY the best. If he was clearly the best from 2014-17, there should be stats to support this.

If you are gonna agree that LeBron hasn't been the best player ALL season since 2013 then say it.

Stop with the double speak.

 

[Swagnificent]

Stop. Embarrassing. Yourself.

PER is not analytics. PER is just a formula that takes the REGULAR BOX SCORE NUMBERS and puts them together to make one number. It has NOTHING to do with analytics, and you keep embarrassing yourself by claiming it does.


Basketball Analytics is the process of actually ANALYZING what is happening on a play-to-play basis. Analytics is about looking at player tracking, shot selection, ball movement, etc. to show who and what is most effective in any particular situation. It gives you shooting charts, points per post up possession, distance traveled per player, tells you who is most effective on spot-up shots versus off-the-dribble, etc.

Here is an article on analytics so you can try to understand it. You'll notice that PER is never mentioned because analytics has NOTHING to do with PER:

This Isn't Your Dad's NBA: Thank Big Data






Except I've already pointed out three times in this argument when you've jumped to "But RINGZ!"...but only when it fits your narrative.

Your eye test has failed. Eye test told you that Kobe took all the clutch shots for the Lakers in 2009-2010. Actual stats showed you that his teammates made 70% of the biggest clutch shots and shot twice as good as Kobe when they did it.

Your eye test will simply tell you what you want to believe.

All right forget I ever said analytics. Find me any the advanced stat on a credible site like basketball reference that shows LeBron was the best player in the NBA from 2014-17?

And not just playoff stats or some other cherry picked number. Give me the regular season stats from basketball reference that support the argument Bron stans argue that he's been the best player for the last 4 years.

Cause I look at those "advanced stats" that are featured on Basketball Reference and I don't see any that support the argument LeBron was the best at anything the last 4 years. And definitely no where close to CLEARLY the best.

 

[Supreme365]

And this is why Kobe's peers and anyone who has ever played basketball marvels at him.

UNPARALLELED MASTERY of the game.

You'll keep saying unparalleled like Jordan ain't the best to do it when it comes to footwork anyway here's my masters of footwork in no particular order

Mj
Dream
Kobe
Mchale
Duncan
Melo
Tmac
Worthy
Bernard king
D.Wade
Kyrie
And Cap he didn't have a million moves but his ability to always setup good post position and get the hook off with either hand anywhere is next level and he could shoot the hook shot damn near 12-15 ft out

 

[JYoung24]

There's no decision where putting a guy who isnt the best at scoring, and is potentially not top 3 in that facet, who isnt close to the best in passing, rebounding, or defense, shoots like ass and isnt very athletic can be supported. He's good as a fringe top 10 player. His story checks out to being a fringe top 10 player

hes top three scorer and hes one of the best peremiter defenders in the nba and he was very athletic anda great passer wtf are u talking about. ur literally wrong about everything u said. he was one of the best rebounder guards. oh and he has five rings hes not no damn fringe top 10 player. hes automatic top 10 if u said frige top 5 tht would been better

 

[JYoung24]

I post ether facts showing that it was Kobe's teammates, not Kobe, that showed out game after game in the clutch in the playoffs, and this is what my alerts look like:








Not ONE response actually addressing why Kobe's shot disappeared in so many clutch games, or why they don't give Pau/MWP/Fisher/etc credit for winning so many games for the Lakers in the clutch while Kobe did little.


You dumbasses, it's Swag, not me, who just posted the long-ass four paragraph post all about Lebron. I barely have mentioned Lebron in this thread except when replying to something one of YOU TWO said about him.

Hell, the first person to bring up Lebron in this thread was a Kobestan. The first person to bring up Lebron's FG% in this thread was a Kobestan. The first two replies the Kobestan Lebron comment got were....both Kobestans. Once Big L came on the thread, within three minutes he was...posting giant graphics about Lebron.


Ya'all are the ones obsessed. Ya'all are the ones who repeatedly make threads about Lebron even though you don't even like him. How many Kobe threads have you seen Lebron fans start? How often do you see Lebron fans just randomly bring up Kobe on their own in a thread about Lebron? Ya'all were the ones who brought him up here, the ones who keep obsessing about him.

Makes sense though. Fans of a #10-11 guy are going to be obsessed about the #2-3 guy who surpassed him during his own era. Fans of the #2-3 guy have bigger fish to fry.





I agree - #11 is about right. MJ, Lebron, Kareem, Magic, Hakeem, Duncan, Wilt, Shaq, Russell, Bird....then Kobe.

If you're putting Kobe #12-15, then you have to put someone like Jerry West or Malone ahead of him, and that's unjustified.

nah bruh hes better then everybody u named other then jordan and kareem does have more accolades

 

[Ben.]

Kobetard casuals getting son'd, nothing new

 

[Professor Emeritus]

All right forget I ever said analytics.

Thank god you finally realized that you didn't know what analytics means.

To think that you've been complaining about it for ten years and didn't even understand what you were talking about. Goes to show EXACTLY how little you understand about the game. A guy like you in anyone's front office would have the rest of the league running a train on your team.

But I gotta give you props for finally backing down and admitting it. Lots of guys here wouldn't have done that. I might even rep you for it.

Find me any the advanced stat on a credible site like basketball reference that shows LeBron was the best player in the NBA from 2014-17?

And not just playoff stats or some other cherry picked number. Give me the regular season stats from basketball reference that support the argument Bron stans argue that he's been the best player for the last 4 years.

Cause I look at those "advanced stats" that are featured on Basketball Reference and I don't see any that support the argument LeBron was the best at anything the last 4 years. And definitely no where close to CLEARLY the best.

Why do you think that that these advanced stats will automatically show you who the best player is? Some of them are pretty good with offense to a degree, but they can hardly take into account defense at all, which is a huge part of the game.

Playoffs? We talking about Playoffs?

Give the regular season stats.

But I don't think that Lebron has been the best regular season offensive player in 2014-2017. Kevin Durant and Stephen Curry have been. Lebron was the best regular season player over somewhere around the 2006-2013 stretch, if not the whole thing.

Regular season doesn't show who the best player in the NBA is though. It doesn't matter how you perform against 30-52 teams or how well you do when everyone is playing at 80%. If it did, then James Harden and Russell Westbrook would be incredible players, and the 2010 Cavs and 2007 Mavs would have been amazing teams. What matters is how you perform when you're facing the best and everyone is playing at 100%. That's a far better determinate of ability than relatively meaningless regular season games.

We all know LeBron plays on stacked teams in a weak conference and skates to the finals with ease.

That's a joke, first of all because his Finals stats from 2014-2017 are as good or better than the rest of his playoff stats, and second because the rest of his lineup has struggled without him even against that "weak conference". If it really were as easy as you are saying, then Lebron would have been playing 30 minutes a night staying rested for the Finals (like all the Warriors did) rather than being forced to be out there 40 minutes/night over and over.

If you are gonna agree that LeBron hasn't been the best player ALL season since 2013 then say it.

Stop with the double speak.

What "double speak"? I have NEVER said that Lebron has been the "best player ALL season since 2013".

He's the best player in the NBA. He's the most valuable player in the NBA. He can take over on both sides of the court better when it matters than any other player in the game. (I should have posted his elimination game numbers as yet another proof that he's been the best.) He would be an idiot if he played with 100% effort for 40 minutes/night all season when he's in his 30s and knows that he'll be playing a 100+ game season for the seventh year in a row.

 

[Supreme365]

Playoffs? We talking about Playoffs?

Give the regular season stats. We all know LeBron plays on stacked teams in a weak conference and skates to the finals with ease. Obviously that will allow him to crank out better plus/minus than the guys out West that are engaging in actual wars. Show me some stats over the 82 game season that show LeBron was the best? Better yet CLEARLY the best? Since that is typically the Bron stan argument. That LeBron was CLEARLY the best. If he was clearly the best from 2014-17, there should be stats to support this.

If you are gonna agree that LeBron hasn't been the best player ALL season since 2013 then say it.

Stop with the double speak.

Lebron ranks second all time in per