Tracy McGrady is an NBA star.
For his career he has averaged more than twenty points per game and earned nearly $100 million. Despite his personal success and wealth, though, his teams have never made it out of the first round of the playoffs. Certainly he and his team have come close. The last three trips into the playoffs have seen his team battle to a decisive seventh game. But each time when the deciding was over, McGrady and company took a vacation.
The inability to have any playoff success has led some to question whether T-Mac really is an NBA star. Sure he score. Sure he gets paid. But if you don’t win, how can you be considered one of the game’s best?
For example, consider Kobe Bryant. Like McGrady, Kobe scores and Kobe gets paid. But unlike McGrady, Kobe’s team wins. Kobe has played for three NBA championship teams. And as we learned this summer, Kobe will demand everyone in LA get traded – including himself – to win another title.
This “will to win” is what appears to separate Kobe and T-Mac. One player would like to win. The other player demands that he win. Or at least, that’s what we are told. But is it true that Kobe is clearly a better player than McGrady? Or is this just another Kobe myth?
Comparing T-Mac and Kobe
Let’s begin our answer to this question by comparing the career numbers – per 48 minutes – of McGrady and Kobe.
Table One: Comparing the Per-Minute Performance of McGrady and Kobe
As Table One indicates, Kobe has been a better scorer in his career. He’s both more efficient from the field and the line. And although McGrady takes more shots, Kobe gets more points.
When we look past scoring, though, we see that McGrady has the advantage. McGrady is better with respect to rebounds, turnovers, blocked shots, assists, and personal fouls. Although Kobe has a slight advantage in steals, McGrady is clearly better at every other non-scoring aspect of the game. As a result, McGrady has posted a higher Win Score per 48 minutes.
And this higher Win Score translates into more wins.
Table Two: Comparing the Careers of McGrady and Kobe
Table Two indicates that McGrady has posted a career WP48 [Wins Produced per 48 minute] of 0.247, which is well above average (average is 0.100). Kobe is also well above average, but his career WP48 of 0.202 falls short of McGrady’s mark.
Table Two doesn’t just reveal that T-Mac has been consistently the more productive player; it also reveals the productivity of each player’s teammates. On this score, Kobe clearly has the edge. Again, an average player posts a WP48 of 0.100. In seven of the eleven seasons Kobe has played his teammates surpassed this mark. In contrast, McGrady’s teammates have only been above average twice. And when McGrady was at his best – in Toronto and Orlando – his teammates were consistently below average.
Playing “What If?”
It’s this difference in the quality of teammates that I think drives the perception of the two players. To see this point, let’s play with the numbers. One of the neat things you can do with numbers is play “what if?” For example, what if Kobe and McGrady switched teammates? The answer is in Table Three
Table Three: What If McGrady and Kobe Switched Teammates?
Entering the 2007-08 campaign, Kobe’s teams have averaged 52 wins per season while McGrady’s teams had only averaged 39 victories. But if these players switched places, we would see the final results also switch. Kobe’s teams, with McGrady’s teammates, would have averaged 38 wins per season. McGrady with Kobe’s teammates – and yes, that includes Shaquille O’Neal in his prime – would have averaged 53 victories per year. In fact, the 2001-02 Lakers team – with McGrady replacing Kobe – may have been the best team ever.
Unfortunately for T-Mac, the alternative world presented in Table Three isn’t the one we live in. McGrady wasn’t drafted by the Lakers. And when he tried to join a championship caliber team in Orlando, Grant Hill – the other key piece to the puzzle – was never healthy.
If McGrady and Kobe were somehow able to switch places over the past decade, how would we perceive each player today? I think we can see the answer when we look at the coverage of Kevin Garnett, Paul Pierce, and Ray Allen today. The Big Three in Boston are now referred to in glowing terms by the sports media. If we go back just a few months, though, the coverage was quite different. When each of these stars played for losing teams, the media questioned each player’s ability to lead a team to victory. Strange how a 30-5 start causes these stories to fade away. In sum, when KG, Piece, and Allen changed teammates, the perception of each player also changed.
I think the story would be the same if Kobe and T-Mac switched places. At least, I don’t think anyone would think Kobe is the best player in the game today if his team only averaged 38 wins in his career.
T-Mac and Kobe Today
Unfortunately for T-Mac, we may never see a Garnett story for him. Looking over Table Two it’s easy to see that McGrady has not quite been the same player in Houston that we saw in Orlando and Toronto. And this change is most likely due to injuries.
In Tables One and Two the careers of T-Mac and Kobe were compared. And when we look over all the years each has played, McGrady is the more productive player. But if we focus on the past two seasons – where McGrady has missed 46 games — Kobe has offered more (both in terms of WP48 and Wins Produced).
This trend has continued this season. Heading into Sunday’s game Kobe had a WP48 of 0.240. In contrast, before McGrady finally sat down his WP48 was only 0.134. This is easily the lowest mark of McGrady’s career. When we look at the individual stats we can see that the key difference in his game is rebounding. Again, this decline on the boards is probably due to a decline in health.
Much has been made of the fact the Rockets were 13-15 when McGrady was hurt and have been 7-3 since. I would note that the Rockets schedule across the past ten games hasn’t been that difficult. Of the seven victories, four came against Memphis, New York (twice), and Minnesota. Against teams with a winning record this team is 3-3 without McGrady.
That being said, replacing a player with a 0.134 WP48 is much easier than replacing a 0.247 player. McGrady in 2007-08 has simply not been the star we have seen in the past. What we should see, though, is that despite the playoff record of McGrady’s teams (by the way, one should note that McGrady’s teams were never clear favorites to advance past the first round), T-Mac was a star before his recent health problems.
Let me close by repeating something I have said before. The purpose of tracking player statistics in sports is to separate the individual from his team. When we make an effort to separate player from teammates in the NBA, it’s clear that T-Mac has been more productive than Kobe. Unfortunately, if McGrady is unable to recover from the injuries that have plagued him, this point will only be clear in the past numbers.
– DJ
Our research on the NBA was summarized HERE.
The Technical Notes at wagesofwins.com provides substantially more information on the published research behind Wins Produced and Win Score
Wins Produced, Win Score, and PAWSmin are also discussed in the following posts:
Simple Models of Player Performance
What Wins Produced Says and What It Does Not Say
Introducing PAWSmin — and a Defense of Box Score Statistics
Finally, A Guide to Evaluating Models contains useful hints on how to interpret and evaluate statistical models.
Wages of Wins Journal 
Tomo "the Rookie"
January 14, 2008
Hi DJ,
Well i must admit that I was shock to see that nobody had already posted a comment about Kobe vs TMac article because that was great to read, and just strength my view on TMac being a better overall player that Kobe but never had the chance to be have really good teammates around him (except Yao)….
I feel sorry to heard today that some dudes in the Rockets roster talk about playing better as a team without TMac and probably wish that he would traded before the February, I mean this guy is such a great player and a great dude to be around, really loved by the fans around the world and always himself, humble…
Hope he could be traded in a team where he will be welcome and have finally a chance to go further in playoffs…
Owen
January 14, 2008
Did you use the same position adjustment for both? I always considered Kobe a true shooting guard and Mcgrady more of a small forward.
I agree with your basic analysis though, that Kobe’s reputation has been enhanced by the success of his teams. Also, I think Mcgrady took a huge blow to his stardom though last year, when he guaranteed victory in the first round, only to see his team go down.
On a nearly unrelated note, Andrew Bynum unfortunately went down with an injury last night. It’s unclear how serious it is, but it’s going to be pretty interesting to see what happens with the Lakers if he misses any serious amount of time.
Harold Almonte
January 14, 2008
All of that is fair in the numbers, but as you say, the “will to win” separates a bit the level of the two players, no matter the teammates. That”will to win” just links with another thing that depends a lot on will: defense; and it’s what produces that Kobe suddenly becomes from on year to the next, from the best scorer of NBA to the best defender of his position, and what produces the general perception that TMac, even having all the skills to be a superior defender, like Dirk, is a choker.
tony cohen
January 14, 2008
I will not insult myself with one of the asinine comments about how Kobe just ‘is’ better because I, and my unscientific eye, say so, but the previous poster’s comment about defense did make me pause. I do hope in the next book that there is some metric to show defensive presence.
Having read the book and the site, I am aware that just because you get one of the NBA awards hardly equals statistic proof of much, but wouldn’t a perennial 1st 2nd or 3rd team defensive player be worth more to a team than a few more blocks and boards?
Tomo "the Rookie"
January 14, 2008
Agreed with H.A. that the “will to win” is the big difference between both player, Kobe got that killer instinct in his game as MJ had during his time, but TMac seem lacking this type of predator attitude on the court and this make an huge difference during playoffs time.
As for Bynum I hope he’ll be back on court for the next game, I’m not a Lakers fan, but this kid deserved credit for the way he’s playing right now, after all the critics he had to take from Kobe and Jackson, you have to admire the way he responded to that…….
GV
January 14, 2008
For those who want to point to the Rocket’s current success without T-Mac, you can simply respond by pointing out the Rockets record with and without T-Mac since he joined the Rockets. Coming into this season, the Rockets had won about 60% of their games with T-Mac. They had gone something like 11-40 without him.
Mike H
January 14, 2008
I’m not sure that dberri was serious when he mention the ‘will to win’. The real reason that Kobe is better than T-Mac is that his aura has prettier colors, and of course he has better shoes too.
John G
January 14, 2008
Kobe Bryant is the best defender at his position? Seems like a big claim. Care to provide *any* support for it?
antonio
January 14, 2008
It is speculation. Kobe Bryant is just widely regarded as a very good defender, while McGrady is widely regarded as a pretty poor defender. I think that is what he is referring to. As far as I know, there are no reliable statistics that state defensive efficiency or productivity. I do agree that Kobe is a much better defender, but as far as I know that is just something you have to see with you eye and know.
antonio
January 14, 2008
And I do think it should be factored into overall productivity. I think that Bryant’s defense more than makes up for his deficiencies in other areas compared to McGrady, but this is all just opinion because I can’t prove to you for sure that Bryant is a better defender, nor by how much
TG Randini
January 14, 2008
dberri,
Example on ‘writing’ and your ‘Logic of Life’ for this T-Mac/Kobe post: This could have been your lead…
“How can anyone in the world state that Kobe Bryant is a better player than Tracy McGrady? Are we dazzled by Kobe’s aura? Does the flash from his weapons blind us – leaving us with powder residue – when Tracy’s bullets strike more true?
Let me say this right now: Tracy McGrady has produced more value than Kobe Bryant.”
I’m not suggesting you write just like this… I’m having a little fun… but the point is…
(Capitalize this)… Hit them with your lead right up front. And THEN explain it. (Just like in academic papers… but with some punch.)
brouk
January 14, 2008
Incredible BS. I can’t believe that you’re going to honestly tell me that you believe what you’re writing. How can Mcgrady be the better player when Kobe averages more PPG, shoots a better %, and is about 10 times the defensive player that McGrady is? Last 2 yrs, Houston had a MUCH better team than the Lakers, yet kobe took his team just as far as Mcgrady did. this is getting absolutly ridiculous, you’ll believe ANYTHING your crazy formula is going to spit out.
mar
January 14, 2008
BEING ON THE 1ST OR 2ND ALL NBA TEAM FOR OVERALL AND DEFENSE SHOULD BE AN INDICATION OF WHAT THE COACHES AND GM’S BELIEVE AND WHO WOULD BE MORE KNOWLEDGEABLE THAN THEM? A TALKING HEAD OR SPORTSWRITER/COMMENTATOR?
Mark
January 14, 2008
Personally, I believe the arguement that is shouted all in upper caps.
Look, David is making a pretty reasonable arguement here. He’s basically pointing out that Kobe has been a better scorer than TMac in his career, while TMac has been better in points, assists etc.
Then using his player valuation method called WinsProduced, his metric values TMac as having produced more wins for his teams than Kobe for the lakers.
It’s a reasonable arguement to make, although dberri, do you think that there’s value in putting links to the WoW primer articles on all of your tables showing wins produced?
It seems that each time you have an article like this you attract another moth who has no idea what your underlying methodology is and posts comments with a flamethrower (although you be honest, you do ‘poke the bear’ with your kobe articles a little).
mar
January 14, 2008
i would like to see what they do in their head to head matchups? kobe usually defends tmac but rarely does tmac defend kobe. in houston its been battier mostly. if you have watched those matchups when they go at each other, its been no contest. kobe by a landslide. that should show who’s the dominant player. dberri’s stats are just stats that don’t mean much in the dynamics of the game. its like assists: if you have great shooters to pass to, you are going to get assists in bunches, if you have trash to play with…………the will to win and going all out all the time at both ends of the court not just in stretches is what makes the biggest differences between the players and that makes the other players better as well
spike
January 14, 2008
Isn’t there a pretty big problem with your statistical method pretending a player is playing with another guy’s teammates? I thought you used a team adjustment to fill in some of the holes to arrive at the Wins Produced number. You’re assuming that all Rockets perform equally on defense and all Lakers perform equally on defense. It seems like this analysis particularly highlights WoW’s deficiency in arriving at a defense rating. If Kobe is the best defender on his team while TMac is the worst defender on his team, your system smooths that out and actually over-corrects for it.
Taking a player and switching his teammate’s for someone else’s seems like exactly the kind of analysis you should be doing with something like adjusted +/- rather than Wages of Wins.
Sufian
January 14, 2008
Well if you believe T-mac is a more productive player than Kobe, than you dont really understand basketball. I wont even argue this because I dont really believe in numbers, I actually watch and analyze the game.
Mike H
January 14, 2008
I hear you Sufian. I for one, don’t believe in colors and I prefer beauty contests to sports.
John
January 14, 2008
I think the problem with these articles that yes while statistical reasoning is sound, they don’t include the nuances of the NBA which make a player truly great in my opinion. How do you quantify the defensive contributions of a player like Kevin Garnett (who I just had the pleasure of seeing up close and personal 48 hours ago) to say Tim Duncan’s defensive prowess? How to you quantify their exceptional help defense or the fact that they are always talking, making sure that players don’t miss assignments, which in turn make their teams play great D?
On the offesnsive side of the ball, how do you account for coaches basically designing their defensive to constantly account for Kobe on the floor and ensuring that he always has multiple defenders thrown at him? With the exception of Lebron, I really don’t think that any other perimeter player in defended in that manner particularly now that A.I. has lost a half-step. This kind of extra attention paid to a player of Bryant’s caliber clearly opens things up for his teammates (who haven’t always be this good at hitting shots in the Post-Shaq era) and also makes things extra difficult for himself. That’s why during his 50 ppg streak, it was so mind-blowing is that Bryant was doing this despite the defensive effort and gameplanning that is done to combat him. It’s really HARD to score 50 points in an NBA game. Hell it’s really hard to score 30 points in an NBA game.
Obviously, I’m a little biased here having grown up as a Lakers fan (my family had tickets for twenty years thru the 1980s, the vaunted Sedale Threatt years and the early 2000s before we moved away), but when a guy like LeBron says that “Kobe is the best player in the NBA”, he doesn’t need a statistical measure to know that or back it up. He knows from direct personal experience and knowledge of being probably the biggest basketball talent that we know of on the planet. And despite Mr. Berri’s (or John Hollinger’s for that matter) fine analysis and statistical models there is no way you can trump that kind of pronouncement.
I do find Mr. Berri’s calculations interesting and thought provoking. Maybe because a lot of the vitriol is directed at Kobe, I often don’t agree with them, but I think this debate is consistently fascinating.
tom
January 14, 2008
kobe and T-mac, prior to injuries, were at the same skill level, but Kobe’s determination and competitiveness puts him into another category. Believe me, there’s not a bigger T-mac fan than me, but still honestly Kobe is the better player. He has that competitive edge that puts him in the categories of guys like Jordan, Bird, Magic, Olajuwon, and Isiah. He is the rare blend of talent, skill, athleticism, and competitiveness that keeps us arguing that he’s as close to Jordan as we will ever see. MJ23 and Kobe are so eerily similar, especially on the approach they have for the game, that it brings shivers when you think about it. Mcgrady on the other hand, to me, is a lot like clyde drexler, the guy that was closest to Jordan, ability wise. Both McGrady and Drexler duplicated the abilities, skills, and athleticism of Kobe and Jordan, but lacked the competitiveness and leadership. That’s why on paper and statistics, McGrady and Kobe appear the same. The reason why I liked T-mac better than Kobe is that he still has the courtesy and sense of loyalty to respect his teammates even if they are losing. You never see him yell at his teammates or flat out butcher them on tv. Kobe on the other hand, will do anything to win that he can abandon all sense of brotherhood and team play. When things aren’t going his way, he often doesn’t try to fix his teammates but just asks for a change. Jordan had a similar problem, but lucky for him Pippen was always there to help. Unlucky for Kobe, he never had any one there for him.
Tray
January 14, 2008
It’s true that T-Mac’s a better rebounder, passer, and ball-handler – but does that make him a better player? There’s a division of labor that goes on in basketball. Both of these guys are primarily paid to be #1 scorers. Kobe does that job a lot better. T-Mac has a better floor game. But if you surround Kobe with good passers, like a Luke Walton, and good rebounders, it doesn’t much matter that he personally doesn’t rebound quite as much. So I don’t know that T-Mac would’ve won more than Kobe if he had Kobe’s teammates. If he had played with Shaq instead of 4’s and 5’s like Pat Garrity, Tony Battie, Andrew DeClercq, and a decrepit Horace Grant/Shawn Kemp, he would’ve gotten fewer rebounds because fewer rebounds would be there to get. He would have scored less. With a better supporting cast, his numbers might be worse than Kobe’s. At any rate, today he’s a shell of himself and is nowhere near as good as Kobe, as you concede.
Happydaze
January 14, 2008
LOL! Sedale Threatt…boy, those were the years, eh, John? Remember Anthony Peeler
Honestly these formulas make me laugh. Seriously, it’s like John Hollinger’s PER formula…if a GM were to make a team from Hollinger’s list of top 12 players, that team would be a mix of journeymen and bench players.
This formula cracks me up for so many reasons…
“Oh, McGrady averages more assists.”
Kobe has shared the ball for years. Its not his fault he’s often had teammates that lacked the ability to hit anything other than a wide open lay-up…and sometimes they even miss those (yeah, I’m talking to you, Kwame).
“Kobe has had a better team around him.”
Oh, yeah, you’re right…it’s been so great to have people like Smush Parker, Chucky Atkins, and Brian Cook in the lineup. Too bad McGrady has never had a fellow superstar like Yao Ming on his team. Kobe won 3 titles when he had the best center in the league on his team. If only McGrady could somehow be put in a comparable situation…
Hey, does McGrady cover the other team’s best scorer when the game is on the line? No, he doesn’t. Kobe takes (and often makes) the clutch shots and guards the best scorers in crunch time, and it’s his success in those situations that makes him great.
Not to mention the durability factor. Players gotta play to have a positive effect of the games. McGrady seems to be on the IR every 2 weeks.
I will admit that maybe being a Laker fan clouds my judgement. But I would NEVER trade Kobe for McGrady. I don’t care what your formula says. I understand though. You’ve been blinded by his flash; he is after all, a tremendously entertaining player. Just like Vince Carter. Hey, VC must be better than Kobe too…
Anyways, thanks for the laughs. I had tears in my eyes XD
show time is back
January 14, 2008
if you look at this, according to your own stats, with a superstar center, kobe was alot more affective with shaq, then tmac with yao. kobe solo is doing better than tmac solo.
Kobe is the best!!
January 14, 2008
This article is so retarded its funny. How can anybody say that the injury prone, cant guard anybody McGrady is better than Kobe. He is nowhere close to be at Kobes level. U never hear anybody comparing McGrady to MJ but people are saying that Kobe may better than MJ or its a legit arguement. Kobe is the best in the league by far and is one of the best players ever to play the game. Period.
Eliot
January 14, 2008
Well compare T-Macs time in Orlando when he was a scoring champ but had no one around him at all. Kobe has never been on such bad teams, if you are going to compare Kobe’s worst teammates ever why don’t you look at how bad T-Macs teammates have been in certain years. Defense is also very subjective, even so T-Mac was a great defender before he got worn down in Orlando, while Kobe who the NBA is constantly trying to make into a MJ type player gets over-hyped on his defense. My question is if Kobe is so good and a winner why has he be unable to get out of the first round w/o Shaq?
givensna
January 14, 2008
The difference between Shaq and Yao is really ridiculously wide. Yao is an all-star center and very good NBA player (WP48 around .2+ as I recall), but Shaq is an historic, all-time great, possibly best center ever type-player. There is a HUGE difference between the two, especially in the years Kobe played with Shaq.
Dave, with Bynum missing the next 8 weeks, perhaps you’d care to post a prediction for the Lakers win total during his absence. If, as I’m sure the data suggests, Kobe is again benefitting from another great post player, maybe you can quiet some of the Kobe-proponents by correctly predicting a .500 or below .500 record in Bynum’s absense.
-Andrew
Mo
January 14, 2008
Kobe is a better defender simply because he puts the time and effort during the off season. Tmac simply cant because he’s constantly hurt. And although Kobe did have a better team the earlier part of his career, the recent teams have been a bunch of rookies and nobodys until they recently started to develop chemistry and play as a team. Furthermore, the rockets have some pretty solid individual players. They have Yao, which was regarded as one of the best and consistent centers, Battier which is known for he hard work and consistency (wasn’t he invited to try out for the USA olympic team… where was Tmac), Bonzi Wells who was a very good player before he came to the rockets. You might claim that they have a lower wp48 score than kobe’s roster… but what does that say about Tmac. Maybe the reason the rocket’s score is so low is because of Tmac. And the reason the laker’s score is higher is because of Kobe. Now I dont like to bash Tmac, beacuse I too believe he is a tremendously talented player. But a big part of being a superstar is longevity and consistency. Kobe has been putting up high yet consistent scoring numbers for the past 8 years. So you can say how if this and that were different then maybe this and that would happen, all you want. The matter of fact is Kobe has earned the respect of both players, fans, and coaches, through his hard work and achievements.. not because of anything else.
Mo
January 14, 2008
P.s the next few weeks that Bynum is out just so happens to be their hardest schedule. They play Phoenix, San Antonio, Dallas, Denver, Cleveland, Detroit and so on. And no matters what the results are, taking a key player such as Bynum would obviously hurt them. You can’t expect Kobe to fill his shoes all of a sudden for every game for eight weeks, especially the way hes been playing this year.. more passive. Tmac for a fact would not be able to do it either.
givensna
January 14, 2008
It would be tough for any team to go 8 weeks without their most efficient and best player, on a per minute basis. The Lakers are no different.
Zafir
January 14, 2008
Can we get a look the playoff number comparison between Kobe and T-Mac? Although T-Mac hasn’t won any series, I think he’s played really well and helped produce more wins than Kobe has, but I could be wrong. He had that historic series against Detroit where he went for over 40 a number of times. Last year against Utah there was a game where he scored or assisted on all but 7 Houston baskets. What’s the real story there?
Joe
January 14, 2008
I would have to agree with Mo. His de-construction of the author’s original thesis is well thought out, logical, and in good taste. I would not be surprised if he is off right now doing something great, like curing cancer with his brilliant mind. Or, maybe he is just going to Applebee’s. Who knows. God bless you, “Mo”
Mo
January 14, 2008
youre per minute scoring doesnt account for the countless other factors that aren’t recorded. the reason the other lakers have better scores is due to the double or triple team that kobe attracts. that creates openings and positioning for other players, especially Bynum. And what about he extra passes that Kobe always makes, the assist to set up the assist. And what about 4th quarter scoring, which is a huge factor.
givensna
January 14, 2008
Here’s a question for you, Mo. Would it be fair to assume that similar double and triple teams happen to Lebron James and Dwayne Wade on the perimeter? Would it also be fair to assume Tim Duncan and Kevin Garnett have gotten their fair share of double teams in the low and mid post? Now if you’re willing to allow those assumptions, can you please explain how those 4 guys have been better (in some cases much better) players than Kobe throughout their careers?
Or instead, will you blindly cite Kobe’s character and will to win as evidence of Kobe’s superiority and status as THEE Best Player in the L?
John (Vancouver)
January 14, 2008
Are your formulas adjusted for position?
Are your formulas taking into account they play in completely, radically different offenses?
Are you taking into consideration the style of play that would be asked of McGrady in the triangle offense?
Are you adjusting all of the statistics for who would be defending Kobe’s man if he wasn’t there?
I don’t think you are.
This is where your statistics fail.
Frederick Flintstone
January 14, 2008
“Andrew Bynum, a big factor in the Los Angeles Lakers’ strong start, will be out at least eight weeks because of an injured left knee. ”
I guess we’ll see how valuable Kobe is without Bynum in the lineup.
Mark
January 14, 2008
John,
Yes, No, No, No
Kobe is the best!!
January 14, 2008
Im not even going to continue to argue that McGrady is better than Kobe cuz thats just dumb. Kobe Bryant is better than Michael Jordan. Not more successful. Hasn’t had a bigger economic impact. Hasn’t won more MVPs. Hasn’t won more titles.
But he’s a better player. Kobe can do everything Michael did, and even a few things Michael couldn’t do. Kobe is just as good a defender. His killer instinct is just as pronounced. He can shoot, finish and explode. And just like Jordan, the more he’s pissed off, the more unstoppable he is. Kobe’s streak of four straight 50-points-plus games is something that MJ never did and it’s something that hasn’t been done since Wilt Chamberlain, who had seven straight 50-point games and I wont mention the 81 point game. Of course, the idea that Kobe is better than Jordan — or even the best player in this league — is as repugnant to some folks as a rectal exam. Even though Kobe has proven himself under pressure countless times, he gets the A-Rod treatment. Kobe can’t please anyone. And it doesn’t help that most people suffer from revisionist history when it comes to Jordan, forgetting that he was just as poor a teammate and a ball hog and that he ran off coach Doug Collins like Kobe ran off Phil Jackson the first time. In fact, you could argue that Jordan was even worse. Far as we know, Kobe hasn’t jacked up any of his teammates the way Jordan punched out Steve Kerr and Will Perdue at practice. Kobe will never be forgiven for Shaq’s departure, but you’re delusional if you think Jordan wouldn’t have had any ego issues playing alongside a player with Shaq’s star power. The best-player argument shouldn’t be determined by personal dislike. But if you want to take it there, fine. Jordan was hardly the ideal husband, but only the tabloids were brave enough to venture into his personal life. And what about those gambling issues? If Jordan’s life had been covered like Kobe’s, we would have an entirely different opinion of His Airness. Besides a different level of media scrutiny, there was definitely a difference in the level of competition during Jordan’s heyday compared to now. Yesterday’s NBA player certainly was more fundamentally sound, but there’s no question that today’s player is bigger, stronger and faster. When Jordan played, he was a singular force that could not be equaled. Jordan was guarded by the likes of John Starks and Joe Dumars, and Craig Ehlo who were fine players but weren’t nearly as skilled or physically imposing as LeBron, D-Wade, Tracy McGrady, Bruce Bowen or even Vince Carter. The NBA is tougher now. Kobe, like Michael, is surrounded with mediocre to below-average talent, and Phoenix, Dallas and San Antonio are all better than the Utah, Portland and the Charles Barkley-led Phoenix team that Michael met in the NBA Finals. Hakeem Olajuwon, David Robinson and Patrick Ewing will be among the best centers ever, but none of them affected the league the way Shaq and Tim Duncan have. There are two two-time MVPs in Kobe’s own conference (Duncan, Nash), which is a problem Jordan never faced during his championship runs. Seven-footers weren’t launching 3s back then. Magic Johnson and the Lakers were on a downward spiral, and the Pistons were on their last legs. It was Michael and everyone else. That’s not the case for Kobe.
The shame of it is that Kobe might finish his career without a MVP, even though his ability can be compared only to that of Jordan and Wilt Chamberlain. All this time we’ve been looking for a player who is better than Jordan, but most of us can’t get beyond whether we like or dislike Kobe as a person to recognize his contributions to the game. Dallas and Phoenix are strong enough to make the playoffs without their stars. The Lakers, however, are a lottery team without Kobe. Now that’s a valuable player.
givensna
January 14, 2008
I have to completely agree with the above poster. Kobe is way better than Jordan, except for every possible quantitative metric. And most qualitative ones as well. (Jordan was named Def POY. Kobe never was.)
spike
January 14, 2008
It’s laughable to think Kobe is better than MJ. Check out MJ’s line in 1989: 52.6% from the floor, 38% from 3, 8 rebounds a game, 8 assists a game, almost 3 steals a game, and 32.5 PPG. That is the most insane stat line a 2-guard has ever put up. Jordan shot over 50% from the floor 5 different years. And that includes the fact that Jordan had to play during the most physical era in NBA history when hand checks (and body checks) were the common defensive tactic.
I’m not a huge Jordan fan (he killed my Knicks throughout the ’90s), but come on. He’s way better than Kobe. It’s really not close. Kobe’s never shot higher than 47% for a season. And he hasn’t had any playoff success when he didn’t also have a top 5 all-time center on his team.
dberri
January 14, 2008
Not much time to comment…
but I want to note that Luc Longley was the greatest Australian center ever. And Australia is a continent.
Shaq may not have been the greatest center in the U.S., and the U.S. is just a country. When you look at it that way, we can see why Kobe had a harder time winning with Shaq. If Kobe would have Longley, then he could have also won 6 titles.
hanamichi
January 14, 2008
do these statistics factor level of competition?
for almost a decade the level of competition has been higher in the west. because western conference teams play more games against “superior” competition (more games vs. western conference teams), i would assume these statistics are somewhat biased if they don’t factor this in.
Animal
January 14, 2008
Jason, post hoc ergo propter hoc?
Owen
January 14, 2008
Interesting watching the Lakers game tonight, Kobe has 42 points, which I am sure will get oohs and ahhs, but just 18-39, 4-7 ft, I reb, 2 assist, 1 to, 1 stl. Basically a very mediocre 42 point effort. And “the mamba” got stripped at the end of regulation with a chance to win.
The lack of Bynum is glaringly evident, Nick Collison is going hog wild….
Kent
January 14, 2008
Dberri,
With Andrey Bynum hurt you have a good case study to see how valuable he is. Let’s see some predictions on how the Lakers without Bynum will do! :-)
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_ylt=ArL0kCHjnSqcFDQuRgxQgas5nYcB?slug=ap-lakers-bynumhurt&prov=ap&type=lgns
Owen
January 14, 2008
Lol, perfect reverse jinx, Kobe just canned a jumper to take the lead with 4 seconds left…. ;-)
WinScore of 3 in 44 minutes….
Kobe is the best!!
January 14, 2008
Jordan got every freakin call known to man when he played. Kobe gets no love from the refs. O yeah Kobe just hit the game winner.
Mo
January 15, 2008
I guess kobe’s game winners weren’t that rusty. And no one in the league gets defended harder than Kobe. Lebron comes close, but look how well his team is doing in the west. And don’t try to argue about Duncan or Kg, they rarely get that kind of treatment due to their surrounding players. Allen, Pierce, Ginobli, Parker, etc
JAY$$$
January 15, 2008
this fool DBerri is just a KOBE-HATER
1st team offense and 1st team defense
for like the last 3 years and kobe’s early years
so i don’t really know what Dberri is talking bout
i have not seen t-mac been in that category…i mean he’s expected to win a championship…he’s got Yao…best center in the league…and everytime t-mac fails all the time or has a bad game….you see it in the court….where….he just “suddenly gets injured” and it always the same excuse….
to where you see Kobe…he gets injured…but at the same time….the guys scores like 45 points and shuts out the other team’s best player…
when it comes down to it….you want Kobe on your team…not T-WACK….i don’t hate on McGrady’s game or anything…..he’s a good scorer….but that’s it…has he won anything????
i mean if he’s good….then his team should be good with him…
i don’t know…this is the stupidest article that never made any sense to me what so ever
John G
January 15, 2008
Too bad this threat got hijacked…
I appreciate the thoughtful response from antonio. I have no subjective opinion on Bryant’s defense, although I’m under the impression that the +/- numbers don’t speak to him being some tremendous defender.
As far as being 1st team all defensive player, I put about as much faith into those awards as I do gold gloves – none. The results are decided by popularity and league wide reputation (regardless of the reason for that reputation). I also remember that a few years ago no one spoke about Kobe the star defender. Has he gotten better/more athletic as he’s gotten older?
John G
January 15, 2008
*thread, not threat :)
Dan
January 15, 2008
McGrady isn’t even close. He’s Stephon Marbury with a better jump shot. He’s a loser in the sense that he’d be a better 2nd option than a superstar. The fact that him and Ming can’t get them out of the first round, and they hover around .500, is the true meaning… that he isn’t Kobe.
Animal
January 15, 2008
A haiku about Kobe’s game winning shot tonight:
Clutch player wins game
Impenetrable defense.
Kobe is the best
Animal
January 15, 2008
To stay on topic to this post, a haiku about win score as well:
Linear weighting
Reveals who contributed what
Distills the box score
Kent
January 15, 2008
Animal, that 2nd haiku is actually really good.
Mo
January 15, 2008
he got better at defense because he dedicated the off seasons to improving on it. and you say he got older as in hes out of his prime. He is in is prime which is why he’s better at defense.
Eliot
January 15, 2008
I think these comments show how subjective people are in their observations. T-Mac and Kobe are both clutch to some degree and both have played good defense at points in their career and they put up similar stats, but Kobe had Shaq to lean on and won championships, while T-Mac got stuck with a loser label even though he has performed in the playoffs.
hanamichi
January 15, 2008
uhmm….stats normalized against competition/defensder?
if you’re weighting 2 players who have identical stats …
points scored against a teams on the caliber of san antonio or detroit should be weighted higher than those scored against…uh..seattle.
this might not influence comparison between players in the same conference (cuz they play the same number of games against the same competition..(assuming no injuries..but you can consider that noise in the data) )…but if you’re comparing players in different conferences …then the statistics are biased.
this brings me back to my previous post..you have to normalize mcgrady’s statistics relative to the competition he’s faced ..same with kobe to do a truly objective comparison.
but then again..i’m not statistician/mathematician….but i think even hollinger’s power rankings are normalized against quality of competition…wins against better teams are weighted higher than wins against terrible teams.
Polar Bear
January 15, 2008
humaninchi writes, “i think even hollinger’s power rankings are normalized against quality of competition”
Yes, but HOllinger’s PER is NOT normalized against quality of competition.
Polar Bear
January 15, 2008
Furthermore, batting average (in baseball) is not normalized against quality of competition
Polar Bear
January 15, 2008
Animal, your haikus stink. You transgressed the allowed # of syllables in the 2nd line of the 2nd haiku.
hanamichi
January 15, 2008
ok..PER isn’t normalized against competition..i would .. so i’ll assume per is biased also..
i mean… scoring 45 points against bruce bowen 4 times a year is much more difficult that scoring 45 against jason kapono.
i don’t follow baseball..but i’d assume it’s much easier to get a higher batting average against a terrible pitcher vs. a cy young award winner.
hrm..i guess both measures are biased…
Tomo
January 15, 2008
Dudes I woke up this morning (London) and couldn’t believe some comments on this page about Kobe better than MJ (Kobe is the best & givensna) or TMac compare to Marbury….. Come on dudes this iss insane, MJ23 is the best ball player the game never seen and before you start to compare KB24 to MJ23, compare the type of ball game each player have to face during their time, MJ23 played during the most physical and mentally demanding time, yes he was hard on his teammates but I don’t thing any off them today would argue that is why they won a championship ring and can still get an high profile job today in the league (Kerr, Paxson…)
Yes today players are stronger, faster and whatever but the game is much easier physically that 20 years ago, yes Kobe is the best player in the game today and probably for the last 3 years but he’s far to be close to MJ23, as SPIKE said it’s just laughable to think Kobe is better than MJ23 and his line of stats from the 1989 season is just phenomenal : 52.6% from the floor, 38% from 3, 8 rebounds a game, 8 assists a game, almost 3 steals a game, and 32.5 PPG.
My final though on that post from DBerri : Yes Kobe is a better player than TMac because he’s got this killer instinct and a huge will to win to go with, yes he had better players around him and this is one of the reason he’s got 3 championship ring (Thanks to SHAQ) but I still believe that TMac is as good as Kobe when he’s healthy and take more responsibility on defense (what he never did after Toronto), but I would never trade Kobe for TMac (and I’m a huge TMac fan) because I think that today just one 1/2 players in the league can do what Kobe do on the court : Lebron James (one) and an healthy DWade (1/2).
Have a nice day……
Harold Almonte
January 15, 2008
One aspect of the “will” is that it allows you overdo and overperform above your average peak. To score 60, 80 points in this era is an overperform, no matter how bad is your team, your opponent, and how fast is the pace. In order to be “clutch”, you need to overperform. You can be very good, and give 100% every day, but when it’s needed that you play 200%, then you just feel it’s a level where you don’t belong, you feel is other’s selfishness to demand you something like that, that’s not your duty, you probably can, but why do you need to do that? you just don’t feel committed, because deep inside you are afraid to be so great and the responsibility that carries.
Ep
January 15, 2008
dberri said:
“Not much time to comment…
but I want to note that Luc Longley was the greatest Australian center ever. And Australia is a continent.
Shaq may not have been the greatest center in the U.S., and the U.S. is just a country. When you look at it that way, we can see why Kobe had a harder time winning with Shaq. If Kobe would have Longley, then he could have also won 6 titles.”
Wait, wait, wait. Is the dberri who wrote this comment the same one as wrote the original article? Because this comment is so boneheaded I would suspect the writer of wearing velcro shoes and a bike helmet at all times.
Let me get the reasoning straight. Is this person actually saying that because Longley was the best center ever produced by a whole continent, whereas Shaq was one of the top centers produced by a mere country (which, taken together with the unstated corollary that a continent > a country) means that Longley was better than Shaq? He must be saying this, since he says that Longley and Kobe would have won 6 titles, which is more than the 3 that Shaq and Kobe won in reality. If Kobe+Longley>Kobe+Shaq, then Longley>Shaq.
You are aware, are you not, people, that Australia has a population of about 20 million, compared to the U.S. population of 300 million? That means there are 15 times as many Americans as there are Australians. Despite the large territorial expanse of Australia, it has only 6 percent the population as the U.S. So it would be rather absurd to say that Longley>Shaq based on the idea that a continent>a country.
Longley was an average player. Just because he was the best player produced by a continent does not mean he is required to be good. Australia has the same population as Texas. Would a Texan all-star team beat an all-star team from the rest of the country combined?
I can’t believe nobody commented on what has to be the most specious reasoning I’ve come across all week.
andrew
January 15, 2008
Dear Ep,
Welcome.
Sincerely,
Huge Helping of Sarcasm
TG Randini
January 15, 2008
dberri,
“Luc Longley…” You’re a riot! Welcome to your own party! (And use that kind of stuff for your ‘leads’…)
I’m not really a troll, you know. I’m a munchkin.
TG Randini
January 15, 2008
And in your new book you should put an Animal haiku at the beginning of each chapter. (The irony of the ‘rebound’ one was National Book Award sublime… )
D-Rok
January 15, 2008
Forget all this “Wp48” stuff. Kobe Bryant is hands down the best player in the league by far, certainly the best perimeter player, and has been for years. The only player other than Kobe to make All-NBA and Defensive First Team five out of the last six years is Tim Duncan. So only Duncan can really be in that argument of best player with Kobe. Nobody gets labeled as the best player by more coaches and players than Bryant. I’ve never heard anyone saying T-Mac is the best player in the league. You tell me anyone capable of stopping somebody big as LeBron and quick as Nash on the last play of the game and can score on anybody. If you say anyone other than Kobe then you’re wrong.
NBA4Life
January 15, 2008
TMac is injury prone. Throughout his career he has found ways not to play. Kobe is an all defensive player where TMac is not. He has no kille rinstinct or drive to win. This article is a bunch of bullshit. How the hell is TMac gonna be better than kobe with his teammates? Fuckin stupid article. Be serious man, this is just an article based on bias. Kobe is a winner, this is fact. Even if he doesn’t win, kobe at least wants to win. TMac has no drive to win. This is not an opinion peoples. This is a fact.
rockwell johnson
January 15, 2008
it still amazes me how people try to “find” something, anything that goes against popular belief (especially Kobe).. all the guy wants to do is win and he gets judged wrongly for this.. if you go back to his trade demands what was it that he said that was so bad??.. anyway, there is no reason to compare T-Mac and Kobe.. obviously, T-Mac is a special player but he’s not Kobe… and it’s ridiculous to compare what if’s.. the fact of the matter is that Kobe is the best player… period.. throw everything out of the window.. but i can bet if Kobe had the team that T-Mac has now he would have gotten out of the first round..
Harold Almonte
January 15, 2008
A rating is itself Lg. adjusted because is an average for all the 82 games and generally every team play against everybody, but ratings doesn’t have adjust for circumstances, although someones attempt to adjust for quality of playtime.
T-Mac, a good scorer as he is, is one of the betters scorers in the 4th. quarter, but he’s trailed by Kobe here, and a rating can’t say that. You can say what does mean 4th quarter, crucial games, last seconds, and playoffs? for some bench players 4th quarter just means eventual garbaggetime, but for a top star it does (or should) mean time to be the Hercules.
John
January 15, 2008
Now, I’ve been physically present to watch the Lakers win 4 out of their last 5 titles (I missed the 2000 run because I was busy pounding Sangria in Spain for a summer)…pretty much as big of a Lakers fan as their is on the planet (I even wrote my personal statement to college entrance on the day Magic announced he had AIDS)…but in no way shape or form would I say that Kobe is better than MJ. That’s just crazy.
This argument is definitely ironic in the context of the game Kobe had last night….where all of those “intangible’s” that make Kobe better than T-Mac came into play. Clutch shooting, defense, will to win etc. But I’d like to assert something a little different here for a moment which I think draws the distinction between Kobe, Lebron, Wade, T-Mac, Carmelo and top-shelf players of that ilk.
I think (though I’m totally overvaluing scoring here, bear with me) that the difference between those players and Kobe is in the manner in which they can score. Lebron primarily scores in 2 ways. He’s got that step-back, fading to the left jumper, which he can hit from pretty much anywhere on the court; Or he has the bull-rush drive where his once-in-a-generation speed and athleticism allow him to get to the basket with ease. Same with D-Wade. He comes off the curl or gets the high pick and roll from the top of the key. The next three pointer I see D-Wade make will be the first.
T-Mac’s offensive repertoire comes close to matching Kobe. Except I don’t think that he can match Bryant in the post. And that’s why I think players put Kobe on such a pedestal. In terms of basketball skill…there is literally nothing Kobe isn’t good at. He can step back and hit the 3 pointer. He take you in the post. Beat you off the dribble. Work off the elbow. Run the pick and roll. I think Stephen Jackson put it best when he remarked earlier this season that what makes guarding Kobe so difficult is that he has “no tendencies.” It’s a complete package.
Plus as we saw the the FIBA Championships this summer (albeit against not the greatest comp), Kobe is able to play some of the most suffocating defense around. His offensive repertoire, defensive skill and “will to win” make Bryant the most skilled player in the game right now. I think having the most skill is maybe in some respects a little different than being the best player in the game. To be honest “the best player” just might be Lebron James or Tim Duncan or KG with the season he is having with Boston, but I would be hard pressed not to say that if one of those guys is #1 that Bryant is damn close and probably #2 or 1b.
rockwell johnson
January 15, 2008
i agree with john with the exception of having “the best skills” and being the best player.. i think being that Kobe has the best skills and goes out and proves this night in night out proves that he is actually “the best player”.. there have been many players with an enormous amount of “skill” but couldn’t translate that into dominance on the court.. and on another note, it’s hard to statistically compare many players due to their court responsibility/position.. case in point Lebron and T-Mac will probably have more assist than Kobe due to the fact that although their positions may say forward, they do most of their work being utilized as point guards.. therefore, they usually end up being distributors… that’s another story though…….
Jason
January 15, 2008
If a player can score, if defenses cannot seem to stop it, does it matter how?
the garz
January 15, 2008
THE LAKERS DID NOT DRAFT KOBE. please get your facts right. if you can’t get a detail like that right, we can’t trust any of your bunk.
T-Mizzac
January 15, 2008
I don’t understand how you can say Kobe is not a good defensive player. If Phil Jackson doesn’t let Kobe guard Mike Bibby in the conference finals when they played Sacramento they don’t go to the finals! What about the Olympics guarding the other teams best player? I am not trying to take anything away from MJ because there will never be another player like him. As good a defensive player as he was if Phil Jackson does not but Scottie Pippen on Magic the Bulls don’t win the Finals against the Lakers. I’m not saying that Kobe Bryant is MJ but if you had to look for the next best thing….. Does anyone watch Sports Center do you see the types of blocked shots Kobe is getting only one man (guard) used to come out of nowhere and do that (MJ) I will admit that Kobe seems or comesoff selfish sometimes but I think MJ was the same way but his teamates feared him because lets face it you piss MJ off and you are probably off the team. That is the major difference between Kobe and MJ. I wouldn’t say that MJ’s teamates gained his trust I think it was more of a fear thing if MJ passed you the ball and you were open you better make the shot or feel his wrath.
I will just finish by saying two more things. 1) I have never seen a player in the history of the game I’m only 35yrs old look to attack more than one person on the basketball court. If you watch Kobe play watch him closely if there are three players in front of him and the basket he won’t go at them wreklessly it’s almost as if he plans it almost like he practices going against three people at the sametime. 2) Who would you rather shoot the ball with the game on the line forget the stats! You are the coach : Paul Pierce, T-Mac, Carmelo, Dwane Wade, Lebron or Kobe Bryant?
Tomo (London)
January 15, 2008
T-Mizzac is right, Kobe defense on Bibby was a huge difference against Sacramento and obviously P. Jackson know that he can rely on him defensively but dude saying that Pippen was the man in the 93 finals by going after Magic doesn’t seem right for me, as a pure 6’8 Scottie Pippen was better suited to defend Magic where at 6’6 Jordan as to work harder to keep Magic down when the bulls needed him to score at least 30/game, Jordan was probably one of the best defender of his generation and Kobe is one of the best guard defender in the league today, then to answer your question, if I had to choose one guy to shoot the ball with the game on the line, my today choice would KB24 without any hesitation but MJ23 would be my all time choice.
K2DAX
January 15, 2008
Okay first things first Kobe plays mostly on the perimeter on defense so he does not have as many oppurtunities to get rebounds like TMAC and Lebron. Secondly Kobe’s heart seperates him from TMAC at one point in Orlando TMAC lost like 17 or 19 in a row none of Kobe’s teams would have ever lost that much. And on winning percentage TMACS teams over the last two the three years on paper have been better than Kobe;s with maybe this year being the exception because of Bynum
K2DAX
January 15, 2008
And another thing the Triangle rarely allows for there to be a a great passer on the team or a statisticaly great passer because of the ball movement and the pivot of big man constanly getting touches in the post
Logic
January 15, 2008
Dberri –
First off, congratulations on generating more hits to your website.
Next, can we get the analysis that demonstrates how the law of gravity is a creation of media hype, despite what our experience tells us?
Rob Clark
January 15, 2008
I’m fascinated by this system, but I have a few questions:
Does your analysis take into account when points are scored? That is, are there different values placed on first quarter points and fourth quarter points? How about shots taken and made with a score differential of 3 points or less?
One observation:
By adjusting numbers on a per 48-minute basis you are actually deviating from one of the clear benefits of statistics: that they measure actual occurrences. There are reasons why players play different amounts of minutes, conditioning, foul trouble, and injury are three very key components.
Conditioning and the ability to play without fouling are two key abilities very much under the players control, both of which add to a players value, and with your adjustments you toss away one players strengths and compensate for another’s weakness.
When you take into account that Kobe has had teammates with higher WIN numbers than McGrady has and use that to justify T-Mac’s efficiency, did you consider that the attention that Kobe demands makes the game easier for his teammates?
When I see these kind of “surprising” conclusions based on statistical analysis, it just reminds me how limited stats are. Great tools, but only tools and always need of subjective context to make sense.
purplemamba
January 15, 2008
ehh couple of things wrong with this article
first of all
Kobe is a SG and t mac plays most of his ball at SF, which accounts for the higher rebound number. Comparing two players at different position is not that possible because the responsibilities are different. In addition all your stats are based on PER 48 minutes, meaning the data are EXTRAPOLATED. Fact is, both of them averaged a career 4.6 APG. Even using your PER 48 data, kobe averages 0.3 less assist yet around 2 more points, can u get 2 points off 0.3 assist????? i don’t think so….overall kobe’s contribution to his team is greater in the offensive end
and i dont even need to mention ab0ut the defense.
Like other posters mentioned before, you never adjusted the stats when T mac padded his stats in the weak eastern conference in his orlando days. Back then, the bulls and the cavaliers are constant laughing stocks of the NBA, and before the bobcats were introduced, t mac get to play those team a whooping FOUR TIMES a year (2 away 2 home) and kobe only TWO (1 away 1 home). This is the structure for every team to play 82 games…..41 away and 41 home before the bobcats were formally introduced. Such inflated stats t mac had was NOT accounted.
The best way to compare t mac with kobe is during their years when they are BOTH in the western conference ALONG with the best center in the west, and the result is obvious. Kobe’s stats also put t mac to shame when he has crappy teammates (the last three years) and so his stats are inflated…
Finally, to evaluate one’s teammate, you said kobe has had more help even for the last three years because kobe had better teammate. I know this is a shocker, but has it occured to u that MAYBE KOBE MADE HIS TEAMMATE BETTER? the fact that opposing defense adjust so much to kobe has given his teammates more open shots. the fact that opposing defense has to run back to fast break defense has given kobe’s teammates more rebounds? did it occur to u that maybe KOBE himself padded the stats of his teammates? something t mac never did?
purplemamba
January 15, 2008
haha rob
as i hit enter, i see that both our observations point to the same deficiencies in his formula
Eric G
January 15, 2008
a haiku about these comments
Lots of trolling
Blind support for Kobe lacking in objectivity
Strays from stats
Anon
January 15, 2008
I’ve never really understood why Kobe is regarded as a basketball god who makes everyone better and has great intangibles, and anyone who is compared to him is automatically not as good, because they lack those “intangibles.” You’d think from reading a lot of these comments that Tmac is a selfish player who makes no one better and hates winning. Every time i see Mcgrady play, he makes an effort to get everyone involved and scores when he has to.
I think a lot of people have forgotten how amazing Mcgrady was when he was healthy in Orlando.
Mo
January 15, 2008
Mcgrady was really good in Orlando. But if he was amazing why was he traded?
antonio
January 15, 2008
Eric G, I don’t think you understand what a haiku is… it is three lines with the first and last lines having 5 syllables and the second line having 7 syllables. nice try though
TG Randini
January 15, 2008
“Lots of trolling…”
This is econ-speak … but in the long-run EVERYONE’S a troll. (Even if I’m a munchkin.)
Rob Clark
January 15, 2008
Purplemamba –
Yeah, I think the flaws in this system are pretty evident. I assume that these guys are aware of its limitations, but would rather make extraordinary claims, in order to get attention, than really provide insight into the game. The whole thing strikes me as disingenuous.
Anon –
Sometimes a player can make his teammates better just by occupying the defense’s attention. That is, you don’t always have to record an assist to create a shot for your teammate. That’s the basic flaw in statistical analysis, not every factor can be neatly quantified and measured.
Tracy McGrady is a great player, very talented offensively, very unselfish, he makes his teammates better, but nobody puts pressure on a defense like Kobe Bryant. When a defense is focused on a player like Kobe the game opens up for others, even if he’s not actually making the pass before the shot.
david
January 15, 2008
This article is one of the best arguments I’ve ever seen against using statistics exclusively to compare players.
Carlos A
January 15, 2008
I havent read all the posts, but here is how I’ve always seperated Kobe from T-Mac, and any other “the next Jordan” candidate that have come around in the past few years, to include Grant Hill when he was young and healthy and Kobe was a kid in this league.
At the end of the game (like last night against Seattle) Kobe will always, and I mean always, guard the opposing teams best perimeter player. And, 98% of the time that player, including T-Mac, will not come down on the other end and guard him.
That is the difference, Kobe is a complete player, T-Mac is not. Kobe takes it on his shoulders to win the game, with whatever is called for, and T-Mac does not.
End of discussion for me. Take your alternate universes and figure that one out.
TG Randini
January 15, 2008
By the way, dberri, let me be the first to congratulate you. This was your best post ever. Wonderful, deadpan, tongue-planted-firmly-in-your-cheek, consistent satire of both the style AND content of your own work! Sublime! (“Rajon Rondo: MVP?”)
You lit some fires and raised the temperature on a very cold day…
Jason
January 15, 2008
“When a defense is focused on a player like Kobe the game opens up for others, even if he’s not actually making the pass before the shot.”
Is there evidence that this has a positive effect? This seems like the sort of thing that should be reasonably testable. Have players who have played with and without Kobe seen a higher FG% when they’ve played with him? If he’s really commanding that much attention such that it does open things up for others, we should be able to see some real affect. Is it there? Is it more pronounced than other similar scorers?
At least this season, the Lakers have a lower effective FG% with him on the floor, FWIW
Rob Clark
January 15, 2008
Jason –
One might look for the evidence in Kobe’s greater total of wins, greater success in the playoffs.
Benjamin
January 15, 2008
Well, this sort of thing never gets old I guess.
Someone (I suspect) has some sort of personal grudge against Kobe. Maybe they saw him take too many bad shots. Maybe they are affected by the constant negative media portrayal. Maybe they respond poorly to his immaturity sometimes, usually related to a strong desire to win.
When this happens, and some cheap hack wants to get some ratings, the cheap hack writes an article about Kobe’s inferiority as a player. Never mind that he’s widely considered the best player by virtually every player in the league and those that don’t commit say he’s at least tied for the best player in the league.
It’s extremely easy to take statistics and warp them for one’s own purposes. And basically, that’s what’s occurring here. It’s mathematical alchemy.
I actually really like T-mac. And I really feel for how much it hurts him to not have had playoff success. He cares. A lot. He also may be underappreciated. He puts up good numbers and gets good passing statistics. While the Rockets may play better team basketball when T-mac’s not dominating the ball, they are clearly a better team with him on the floor. The coach needs to solve that problem, not T-mac.
However, despite T-mac’s freakish athleticism, there are some serious deficiencies in his game. He lacks defensive effort and doesn’t challenge himself defensively by guarding the other team’s best player a large portion of the time. T-mac has shown himself to not pull through in close games and especially in the playoffs. His playoff performance, to me, is unforgivable. He is constantly getting injured and doesn’t seem to train in a special way to compensate and prevent injuries like others that frequently get injured. T-mac also doesn’t seem to play injured as much as many of the other top players in the league.
Even though you can compare the stats, and you may be able to compare T-mac favorably to Kobe, those statistics don’t tell the whole story. T-mac is an amazing physical talent and a specially gifted offensive player, individually, during the regular season.
Kobe on the other hand is one of the best 2-way players in the game, the most versatile offensive talent, the best closer, playoff and finals tested, and considered by most to be the best player in the NBA today, for many, 2 years running.
There is no valid comparison.
Benjamin
January 15, 2008
BTW, Kobe is very injury prone, but he makes up for it. He plays hurt and he trains extra hard to prevent injury.
With an ankle sprain a few years ago, he stayed up 24 hours just writing out ABCs with his foot to keep his ankle loose. He returned to the next game, played at about 70%, skipped the next game, and returned to not miss a beat.
Does anyone else in the NBA do that? Maybe 3 guys. And T-mac sure as hell isn’t one of them.
purplemamba
January 15, 2008
Jason
i do agree it is very very hard to evaluate as each player played different minutes when they are WITH and without kobe
here are some stats:
Fisher averaged 47% FGpct this year, highest ever in his career, 10% higher than his years with Utah and GSW. His overall % with the lakers are higher as well.
Smush Parker (a horrible player btw) shot the best percentage in his career when he is a lakers (43%) aside from that 5 game stint with the suns a couple years back.
Lamar Odom shot the best percentage in his whole career after he came to the lakers (around 47%). Most people remember his amazing run with Dwade through the playoffs before he got traded, but that year he shot a mere 43%
Kwame Brown shot over 52% his three season with the lakers while he averaged around 45% before that.
However the must notable counterproof is caron butler, who went on to up his scoring percentage from 44 to 45 and this year’s 48 after he left the lakers.
I might sound like a homer but Caron is developing as a player and that there is no stats saying whether he would have improved while he remained with the lakers next to kobe.
I would say if u are really interested in these stats, you would want to look at fisher, a player who has been steady for the last 8 years of his career (no major improvement yet reliable) and u can see that during the champs year he shot a nice percentage, then struggled as he went to the warriors and utah, and came back and shot the lights out. Part of it is because fish is perfect for the triangle and he is so knowlegable, but also give kobe credit, stephon jackson and boozer just doesn’t merit enough double and triple team for fisher to be always open on the perimeter.
purplemamba
January 15, 2008
o and benjamin
u dont have to look at couple years back
he did the same staying up the whole night riding bicycle keeping his body lose after suffering an injury earlier this year
and the last three games? he was suffering with a virus infection and he was the only one with enough hearts to dig out a win last night
Jason
January 15, 2008
Interesting about Fisher. I don’t think he’s been ‘steady’ at all.
He’s having his best shooting year (effective FG%–accounting for the % of his shots from beyond the arc). His worst year was also with the Lakers. It wasn’t an issue of experience. His worst year was at age 29, also with the Lakers, following his 3 best prior to this year, also with the Lakers. The GSW year one sits in the middle right on his career average, improving in his second year there. Fisher didn’t start struggling when he went to the Warriors, but rather he stunk his last year in LA (with Kobe and Shaq) and then improved when he left, though not back to what he was.
I don’t see a clear “Kobe effect” with Fisher. It looks like he’s been bad and good alongside Bryant.
hanamichi
January 15, 2008
For the statisticians out there…I’m not sure if this would increase variance or bias in the statistics…but I think this might help normalize statistics against competition.
Because the a team plays another team in it’s own conference 4 times (2 home and 2 away) and only 2 games against teams in another conference (1 home 1 away)…
couldn’t we just average the 2 home games against teams in its own conference and treat it as a single game ( and the average the statistics in the 2 away games and treat it as a single game )in the accumulation of the statistics?
I’m not sure if this biases the results or increases variance (std. deviation)….but i think this is applicable to PER as well.
hanamichi
January 15, 2008
another way of looking at teh above post … treat games against teams in your own conference as half a game (half the stats also )..
Benjamin
January 15, 2008
I just looked into your site further. You’re economists. It all makes a lot of sense now.
Statistical modeling that works great in model environments and typically don’t take into account many confounding factors (that aren’t easily quantifiable even through operationalization)… Then you apply this use of mathematics to an area in which you don’t have any expertise without considering outside variables, well it’s a recipe for what you have here.
I guess you could always make a probabilistic argument and say nothing can be perfectly predicted and that T-mac has just gotten unlucky…
purplemamba
January 15, 2008
Jason,
well again it is hard to argue, but for the sake of arguement, fisher’s struggle during 03-04 year was because of him not getting used to coming off the bench and he had to play behind gary payton. The other horrible shooting years by Fisher was before 2000. This actually proved the point further, since kobe didn’t get major minutes until 1999 and when his role expanded in 2000. Thus the “kobe effect” elevated fisher’s percentage, and the same kobe effect increased fisher’s production significant even though fisher is a starter at both utah and LA and played roughly the same minutes. his productions are way up…but then again these are all stats manipulations that i dont wanna get too much into ;D
o and hanamichi
that used to be the format, but now some teams only play each other 3 times a year (1 or 2 away depends) because the bobcats expanded the league to 30 teams. I guess u can average his overall production and divide it by the games played. I think that would be a better indication. However, that would increase the variance mathematically because the sample size decreased, so mathematically it is less accurate
Notes on a Scorecard
January 15, 2008
Lets forget about statistical mumbo jumbo and vote
Kobe
amar
January 15, 2008
hahaha this twisting the stats is getting ridicolous
and by twisting i mean just being plain BIAS
hahaha
if you played 15-minute games and had 10 game seasons MAYBE tmac would have been close (no injuries) but like this..
you use stats to put kobe in the rockets, but imagine him with the inside presence like Yao, shooters like alston and head, mike james, defensive minded player like batties and a good bench.. CHAMPIONSHIP
Larry L
January 15, 2008
Hey,
Any way you cut it with your stats, all you have to do is think like the NBA GM’s. If you had a choice of one player or the other, which would you take? No question! “EVERY”, not 95%, EVERY NBA GM, would take Kobe Bryant over Tracy McGrady. So, What’s the arguement? Stats are like A-holes. Everybodys got one and if you squeeze it hard enough, you can make something come out.
Eric G
January 15, 2008
a haiku about tracy mcgrady-
Injury prone.
Never played on a championship team.
Not even close to as good as Kobe.
Mike H
January 16, 2008
Thanks to all who participated in the laugh fest. My personal fave (courtesy of NBA4Life):
“Kobe is a winner, this is fact. Even if he doesn’t win, kobe at least wants to win. TMac has no drive to win. This is not an opinion peoples. This is a fact.”
Jason
January 16, 2008
“Fact”
antonio
January 16, 2008
Eric G, yet another failed haiku. Do you know what a haiku is?
Eric G
January 16, 2008
antonio, of course I know what a haiku is. Do you?
Eric G
January 16, 2008
antonio, it is a 3-line poem where the 2nd line contains an equal amount of syllables to the first and 3rd lines combined while the number of syllables in the 3rd line exceeds the number in the first line. The 3rd line often has the conclusion as well.
Oren
January 16, 2008
Haiku are written as three lines, with a syllable count of five, seven, and five on in the first, second, and third line.
Mike H
January 16, 2008
Kobe is winner.
TMac has no drive to win.
This is fact peoples.
Forever yours, EricG4Life
Logic
January 16, 2008
Camp Chen-a-wanda
Animal
January 16, 2008
Mike H, that is a beautiful haiku!!!!!!!!!
antonio
January 16, 2008
Eric G, you clearly don’t know what a haiku is. From dictionary.com
a major form of Japanese verse, written in 17 syllables divided into 3 lines of 5, 7, and 5 syllables, and employing highly evocative allusions and comparisons, often on the subject of nature or one of the seasons.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/haiku
antonio
January 16, 2008
what amazes me is you could obviously have looked up the definition before you posted, but still posted anyways and claimed to know what a haiku is
Mark
January 16, 2008
dberri clearly gives too much weight to hakius in WinsProduced. I mean, a whole value of 1?
Just a fatally flawed model.
TG Randini
January 16, 2008
animal,
swamp fox swamp fox tail
on his hat nobody knows
where the swamp fox at
(had to include some nature in there…)
TG Randini
January 16, 2008
If ESPN can give 1.4 for assists, dberri should see them, raise them and give 2.0 for haiku.
Oren
January 17, 2008
TG,
Congratulations. You’ve actually come up with a system where Etan Thomas isn’t being overpaid!
Daniel
January 18, 2008
For all of you questioning TMac’s “will to win”, I very vividly remember him scoring 13 points in 37 seconds to beat the Spurs (not quite so bad as “0.4” for a Spurs fan, but still pretty bad). 4 3s and a free throw on one of them after being down double digits in the last minute being booed at home. TMac is absolutely killer in crunch time but his team just doesn’t seem to play quite so many close games as Kobe (thus smaller sample size). From my unscientific observation, it seems like the Rockets (especially under JVG) seem to either blow teams out or get blown out all the time.
Steve
March 13, 2008
Kobe has been better the last 2 years.
If Kobe never had Shaq he would be EXACTLY THE SAME as Tmac, (TMac is a very good defender too, was lockdown in toronto and has been a good defneder again last year and this year in Houston)…….. Kobe MIGHT HAVE got out of the ifrst round without Shaq, MAYBE. But he DEFINITELY wouldnt have won a ring.
TMac has better playoff numbers too.
Is TMac good enough, at 28 years old, to regain the form that he had form 2001-2003 in Orlando? He should be in his prime and he is healthy playing great ball………. if he could regain that form while he is smarter, a better defender, more unselfish and makes his teammates better at htis age now….. if he could regain that form he had in Orlando with the maturity and all the things I just mentioned that he has now at 28 years old in the first half of his prime while having YAO at 27 and entering his prime as his teammate and now having a great coach and a true great supporting cast around him and Yao for the first time ever……..
if all that could happen than The Rockets could easily win multiple championships in the next 5 years. DEFINITELY.