Bill Simmons – the latest issue of ESPN the Magazine – examines the evidence that he is a Kobe-hater. Simmons provides various definitions of a “Kobe-hater” and explains why none apply to him personally. Although his list of definitions is quite good, I think he missed the one definition that summarizes the term. To the legions who are unabashed Kobe-lovers, a “Kobe-hater” is anyone who does not acknowledge that Kobe is the greatest player in the game today, the greatest to have ever played the game, and the greatest who will ever play the game on this planet, in this universe, and in any undiscovered dimensions where basketball can be played.
Anyone who has ever violated this view of Kobe – as I have done in the past – quickly feels the wrath of the Kobe-lovers. In fact, despite the protests of Simmons, I am sure the argument he makes in his column denying his status as a “Kobe-hater” has elicited such a response.
Simmons on Kobe, LeBron, and the Knicks
In the column Simmons examines the games played recently by Kobe and LeBron James against the Knicks.
Here are some numbers from the two games:
Kobe Bryant: 61 points, 0 rebounds, 3 assists
LeBron James: 52 points, 9 rebounds, 11 assists,
Simmons looked at these numbers and had the following reaction:
Kobe’s 61-point game represented the best and worst of basketball to me. His shotmaking was transcendent: a steady onslaught of jumpers, spin moves and fallaways made in his typically icy style, as efficient an outburst as you’ll ever see. On the other hand, his teammates stood around and watched him like movie extras. In 37 minutes, Kobe took 31 shots and another 20 free throws. He finished with three assists and no boards. He may as well have been playing by himself on one of those Pop-A-Shot machines.
….Really, it was the defining Kobe game. He elicited every reaction possible from lovers, haters and everyone in between. When LeBron arrived in New York two days later and notched his amazing 52/9/11, he didn’t break Kobe’s new record but definitely cheapened it. LeBron’s 52 came in the flow of the offense. When the Knicks doubled him, he found the open man. When they singled him, he scored. He dominated every facet of the game. It was a complete performance, basketball at its finest, everything we ever wanted from King James. And it happened 48 hours after Kobe’s big game … in the same building. Crazy.
I’ve been comparing those two games ever since. Never has basketball seemed more simple to me: I would rather watch a 52/9/11 than a 61/0/3. I would. It’s really that simple. It’s a matter of preference. So don’t call me a Kobe hater, call me a basketball lover.
And if Kobe ever put up a 52/9/11, yes, I would love him, too.
Here is my first reaction when I read this column: “Here is a column I agree with by Bill Simmons” (see Speeding Up Time for Bill Simmons and I Like Bill Simmons, Really I Do for two examples of disagreements).
The basic message of The Wages of Wins – at least with respect to the evaluation of NBA players – is that there is more to player performance than scoring. Following this lesson, one would expect that a well-rounded game that results in 52 points is worth more than 61 points without much else.
Comparing Kobe and LeBron
Of course, another lesson from The Wages of Wins is that expectations don’t always match the numbers. To see this point, consider the simple Win Score model:
Win Score = PTS + REB + STL + ½*BLK + ½*AST – FGA – ½*FTA – TO – ½*PF
With this model in hand, let’s look at what Kobe and LeBron did against the Knicks.
Kobe’s Win Score = 61 + 0 + 0 + 0.5 + 1.5 – 31 – 10 – 2 – 0.5 = 19.5
LeBron’s Win Score = 52 + 9 + 0 + 1 + 5.5 – 33 – 9.5 – 3 – 0.5 = 21.5
Okay, it looks like Simmons was right. LeBron did a bit more than Kobe. But Kobe-lovers would note (at least they should note), that Kobe only played 37 minutes. LeBron was on the court for 44 minutes. When we consider Win Score per 48 minutes, Kobe appears to be the more effective player ( and that’s true before we consider position played).
Kobe’s Win Score per 48 minutes = [19.5 / 37] * 48 = 25.3
LeBron’s Win Score per 48 minutes = [21.5 / 44] * 48 = 23.5
So on a per-minute basis, Kobe’s less diverse game trumps the all-around effort of LeBron. How is this possible?
It’s thought that the Wages of Wins basketball measures are all about rebounds. This comparison between Kobe and LeBron, though, suggests otherwise. The one factor that has the largest impact on Win Produced per 48 minutes [WP48] – the more complex Wages of Wins measure – is shooting efficiency. And when we look at shooting efficiency, Kobe was amazing against the Knicks. His adjusted field goal percentage was 66.1%. So although Kobe was below average with respect to rebounds, steals, and assists, Kobe’s amazing shooting efficiency resulted in an overall game that defied the expectations of Bill Simmons (and myself).
Now before the Kobe-lovers get too excited, I thought I would extend the comparison between Kobe and LeBron beyond one game. And as Table One indicates, when we look past what these players recently did against the Knicks it becomes fairly clear that LeBron is the more productive player (sorry Kobe-lovers).
Table One: Comparing LeBron and Kobe
Both players are above average with respect to almost every statistic. King James, though, does more. In fact, LeBron has done more across the past four seasons than Kobe has done in his four best seasons. And the difference is even bigger if we look at what each player has done in 2008-09.
Turning to Wins Produced we see the same story. Across the past four seasons, LeBron has produced 79.8 wins and posted a 0.295 WP48. As noted, LeBron is even better this season. At the All-Star break his WP48 stands at 0.406.
Again, Kobe is quite good. But even his best seasons don’t come close to LeBron. In Kobe’s four best seasons he produced 63.7 wins with a 0.250 WP48. Again, these are excellent marks. But Kobe has never surpassed the 0.300 mark and he certainly has never been close to what LeBron is doing this year. And what Kobe did against the Knicks, or the 2009 All-Star game, doesn’t change this story.
Comments on Comments
As noted, when you suggest Kobe is not the greatest player in the game you tend to get a fairly negative reaction (see Kobe Myths for an example). Such reactions caused me to think about the comments blogs such as these generate.
There are essentially four policies one can adopt with respect to comments.
1. Read and react to the comments.
2. Read the comments but don’t react.
3. Don’t read the comments.
4. Don’t allow comments.
In general, I don’t know of many economists who have adopted the first approach. There is only so much time in the day (we do have jobs where we teach classes, conduct research, etc…) and responding to each and every comment is not possible.
The second reaction — or third (we don’t know if people who don’t react bother to read) — does seem like the more popular approach. At least, I don’t see Paul Krugman or the folks at Freakonomics responding to many comments. Of course, these blogs are hosted by the NY Times and apparently someone – other the authors – is in charge of managing comments.
For less supported blogs, managing comments falls on the author. And consequently, we now have a couple of examples where the fourth option has been taken. In October of 2007, Gregory Mankiw eliminated the comments feature on his blog. And now JC Bradbury – at Sabernomics – has followed Mankiw’s example.
One problem with eliminating comments is we can’t see how the readers of these blogs feel about having their right to comment removed. Still, Bradbury is well-known enough that I was able to find some reaction on other sites. And the conclusion reached by some is that Bradbury turning off the comments suggests that he is afraid of criticism. Such an argument, though, has problems.
Bradbury and Mankiw are both academics. Consequently the argument that these two are afraid of criticism is difficult to believe. Professors spend a fair amount of time critiquing the work of students. This habit of critiquing students often carries over in our interactions with our colleagues. In other words, criticism is a big part of academia. So it’s unlikely someone who has found success in this environment (like Mankiw and Bradbury) would have trouble with criticism.
For a more plausible explanation, let’s turn to basic economics. As I noted in discussing Mankiw’s policy in 2007, simple cost-benefit analysis explains this behavior. Reading comments imposes a cost. For this cost to be justified, the comments have to provide some benefit. And apparently, both Mankiw and Bradbury have concluded the benefits fall short of the costs. In sum, the removal of the comments feature on these two blogs says less about Mankiw and Bradbury and more about the perceived quality of the comments.
All that being said, let me close by commenting on the comments at The Wages of Wins Journal. I have basically adopted policy #2. The comment section is for the readers to offer thoughts on what I have said. It generally doesn’t help much for me to add to this discussion.
Although I don’t often venture into the comment section, I do read the comments (at least all the comments that don’t just go on and on and on). And I think the quality of these comments have generally been quite high (with a few exceptions).
Of course I just wrote a column that Kobe-lovers might not like. So for this post we might anticipate a small decline in quality. Even if this does happen, though, the benefits-cost ratio at this site should still be such that comments will continue to be encouraged.
– DJ
The WoW Journal Comments Policy
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 
TK
February 15, 2009
Kobe hater.
(Just kidding.)
mr. parker
February 15, 2009
I DIDNT COME HERE TO READ ANYTHING POSITIVE ABOUT KOBE!
I kid.
I argued this point at work(bartender) the other night and was killed for saying it was the better game. Talking Kobe is a lose, lose.
I follow college bball devoutly. It seems that in every big time upset, there is some guy who has 18 points on 7 shot attempts. Thats what got me thinking about Kobe’s game against the Knicks and cuased me to examine those two games. It was Ryan Ayers of Notre Dame vs. Louisville to be exact.
Blake Griffin in 09′
TRad
February 16, 2009
YOU JUST CAN’T STAND THE TRUTH!
Gutta cavat lapidem – non vi, sed saepe cadendo. It might seems you’re on mission impossible, but it’s good to say obvious things again, and again, and again. How long it took sabermetricians to change the way we look on baseball? So repeat, please, your opinion about Kobe, about Iverson, about Camby. Even if you feel a little like a Sisyphus.
gherbeen
February 16, 2009
i love lebron. but i love kobe more.
kobe is the best! yeaaah!! :P
Anon
February 16, 2009
I’ve always wondered whether anyone would mention Kobe as one of the best ever if he hadn’t played for the lakers. As far as I know no statistical model in the world thinks he’s anywhere close to the best ever. Most of them conclude that he’s a very good player, but a step below someone like Jordan. And when I watch Kobe I don’t generally think i’m watching someone who is transcending the game. Actually my most common thought is something along the lines of “why does he take so many difficult jump shots??”
The problem of course is that once he has the reputation as the best ever there’s not many arguments against it that people will accept. You can’t really say he’s bad or point out a glaring weakness in his game because he doesn’t have any. He’s a great all-around player. He also has a more well-rounded game than other greats in the game today (lebron, paul, howard), and is extremely skilled at making bad shots, making him look amazing at times. Of course that doesn’t mean he wouldn’t be more effective if he charged the basket and dunked every time, but when he has a good game it looks even more amazing because he scores most of his points on fadeaway 20 footers.
I used to be a huge Kobe fan, but nowadays I have trouble supporting him mostly because of his legion of supporters. It seems that >50% of basketball fans won’t accept any argument against him being the greatest player ever, and I find that extremely aggravating.
mr. parker
February 16, 2009
anon,
Before the finals last year I would say that number was >80%. I’m starting to think that his legacy will be more along the lines of a dr. J. 20 years from now noone will be proclaiming him the best ever, but younger player will emulate him. There will be some signature plays that we will never forget. He will have the rings that give him a certain pedigree. He will be a legend.
Arturo
February 16, 2009
I have to agree with anon. Kobe is a very good player however he is not a great one. My biggest caveat with him is that he has a tendency to give up (as noted by simmons) in big spots (against the celtics,against phoenix). To compare him to Jordan or Lebron is preposterous. Jordan and Lebron are the only two non-big men to carry their teams to the finals without the presence of an above average big in the last 30 years (although an argument could be made that Lebron is becoming a big now he wasn’t one in 2007) .
In statistical terms Kobe is 2 std. deviations above the mean, Jordan and Lebron are three
Peter
February 16, 2009
As an aside, both LeBron’s and Kobe’s Garden performances far outdistanced Michael Jordan’s 55-point effort (18.5 WS/48), the other consensus top-3 effort by a Garden opponent against the Knicks.
Evan
February 16, 2009
Remember that time Kobe was criticized for shooting too much so he refused to take any shots in the game?
Evan
February 16, 2009
FYI, Dave, you know we’re all waiting for you to comment on the Lewis article. :)
Robert
February 16, 2009
Good blog entry.
Peter, that’s not really true. Out of context, “yes”, they produced a higher win score. That said, Jordan put up his 55 points against the league’s best defense (103.8 DRtg, league average was 108.3) whereas this year the Knicks are among the worst defenses. (110.4 DRtg, league average is 107.7)
If you think about it this way (facing a defense 4.5 pp/100 better than average vs. a defense 2.7 pp/100 worse than average) I think it makes Jordan’s game as good.
Brizzle
February 16, 2009
there’s a difference between criticism against Kobe’s game, and backhanded compliments combined with straight out attacks.
Bill Simmons is a hater who takes takes the most excessive fan reaction and groups all Kobe/Laker fans together.
He never does that for Boston
Peter
February 16, 2009
Robert, I was looking at it from the viewpoint of “all else being equal”
There are a lot of variables going into play, i.e. LeBron’s and Kobe’s body types, Jordan coming back from retirement, as you mentioned, the Knicks’ defense being different then than now, etc. etc. etc.
But, if we look only at the individual stat lines, and make a calculation based solely on Win Scores, then Jordan only had the third best performance.
Unfortunately, it’s not idealized. Then again, as we know in economics, nothing is ever a “perfect fit”
anon
February 16, 2009
mr. parker,
it seems our debate over the battier article has been taken up by matt yglesias (who takes your position): http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2009/02/quantifying_shane_battier.php
be forewarned, some of the commenters are quite hostile to the berri gospel.
Italian Stallion
February 16, 2009
I find comparisons between players that play different positions difficult to accept at face value unless the difference between them is extreme. The roles of players that play different positions is different. So their abaility to accumulate some stats is different.
Some stats are more valuable than others. For example, a rebound is said to be more valuable than an assist. So I suspect there is some general tendency to value some Cs, PFs, and some SFs more than SGs and PGs in a head to head comparison even though IMHO most teams swould have a tough time winning without good passing (a difficult skill to find) but could easily replace their rebounds (an easier skill to find).
I agree with the consensus here that Lebron is better than Koby, but I think a big part of it is that Lebron plays smarter, not that he’s more talented or skilled etc.. He takes smarter shots and passes when he supposed to.
Brett Gunter
February 16, 2009
I’m in a weird spot here. I like Kobe, I want him to do well–because I’m a Lakers fan, and I want THEM to do well. That said, I can’t imagine anyone looking at those two players and not seeing that Kobe is looking up at LeBron. Any Lakers fan would swap them in a heartbeat, or he isn’t paying attention. Quick question: Who is the SECOND-best SF in the NBA? No, really, whoever it is, he’s a very distant second. Who’s the second-best SG? KOBE. Maybe. He might be third, or fourth; Wade, Manu, Roy? He’s special, he’s a gamer–but he’s not the One. That’s Chris Paul. (I know somebody had to see that coming.)
mr. parker
February 17, 2009
anon,
That comments thread was brutal. It you look at the comments of the article that was written about BAttier here Berri destroys the APBR guys. They are under a misguided notion that Berri is so accurate because he uses a residual(accusing him of knowing what the outcome should be and then adding an arbitray number to get close to that number). In fact Berri is just using team defense. These guys went into that thread and got obliterated by the man himself. It was pretty funny because they all assume that Berri is a fraud, when the reality is just that his “stat” is better than theirs and he doesn’t have to parse play-by-play to do it. Its all sour grapes really. I wanted to write a few comments but those guys wouldn’t entertain the notion that Berri is correct even if if he swore up and down that 1+1=2.
Some of those guys over there are pretty smart. I don’t want to take anything away from them. One guy invented a system for evaluating nfl talent that may have actually had an effect on how qb’s are drafted and was plagerized by Gil Brandt to the point that an article Brandt wrote included the same mistakes.
The only way to actually settle this argument is for each side to buy a team. I don’t see that happening.
kevin
February 17, 2009
“Who’s the second-best SG? KOBE. Maybe. He might be third, or fourth; Wade, Manu, Roy? He’s special, he’s a gamer–but he’s not the One. That’s Chris Paul. (I know somebody had to see that coming.)”
Ummm. Paul is a point guard, not a shooting guard.
mr. parker
February 17, 2009
kevin,
I think he’s saying chris paul is the greatest player in the game regardless of position.
Gque24
February 17, 2009
Lebron is not close to Kobe as a complete Basketball Player. Thats a fact. Thats why Lebron is a power fowrard with no post moves who can only operate at the top of the key dominating the ball with his over dribbling. Kobe cand kill an opponnet in any way possible. Thats the difference between the 2. Now 1 can argue that Lebron doesnt need to have a complete game to be dominant in the NBA. Thats evident by watching people get out of his way once he goes to the whole strong. That still does not mean he is a better pure basketball player than Kobe. Kobe has no weakness and has a counter for every thing a defense or offensive player throws at him. Lebron has 1 thing ony = Power & Size with the ability to handle like a guard. Make Lebron shoot all jumpers and foul him hard everytime he even thinks about coming to the lane, then you have what occured the only time Lebron went to the Finals = Grab the Brooms Please cause its a Sweep. Just enjoy both of there gms and hope Lebron reaches his full potential. Kobe is 7 years older than Lebron so just give Lebron time to earn the best player in the world title. He can only achieve this by becoming a complete player. Until then Kobe is bar far the best scorer the NBA has seen since MJ. Stop the Hate and just enjoy the Greatness of Kobe. Lebron has plenty of time to be King in the NBA once KObe decides to gracefully bow out.
marques
February 17, 2009
so If you pound the ball for 20 seconds, then pass to a man who is forced to shoot 20 times a game to get your assists, and shoot the rest of the times, the stats say your doing more? lol
If I am 6’8 and just stand on the freethrow box when the opponet takes a foul shot I am certain to get at least 5 rebounds by default…anyway this reminds me of the Jordan days when the people are trying to be persuaded to love someone, so the media creates reviosionist immediate history.
punching a teammate instantly becomes leadership and motivation.
cursing out the refs becomes “love for the game”
Nike and David stern sold us one bill of goods, do we have to do this again with Lebron?
mr. parker
February 17, 2009
Marques,
A guess 6 straight championships count for a bill of goods. Meanwhile Kobe fans are left to make excuses for his failures.
I love all the talk of what Kobe is capable of doing when it comes to the positive. He is also capable of throwing up a stink bomb in the nba finals and also capable of deciding not to play hard in playoff games to prove a point. His skills aren’t flawed, his mind set is. This shows up in the numbers.
Westy
February 17, 2009
They are under a misguided notion …
mr. parker, why do you think the APBR community is incorrect in their evaluation of Berri’s work?
The argument that low usage rebounders are overrated in Berri’s system is to me still very valid. I think it’s easy to see in the case of Battier that while Berri’s system calls him a good player, it’s not for all the real reasons he’s a good player. A good part of his game is in creating rebounding opportunities for his teammates, and he does not get credit for that, among other things.
While I truly appreciate the basketball statistical analysis that has been brought to the table by the WoW forum, I tend to agree with some of these disputes against the WoW rating system. I also think that many in that APBRmetrics community would be much more receptive if Mr. Berri were willing to suggest that he does not necessarily think his system is already perfect as is.
stephanie
February 17, 2009
So under WP who’s the most productive player ever (well, since ’72)? I’d love to see an article about this. Career, single season, per game/minute, whatever. Let’s see the top ten candidates or something.
Owen
February 17, 2009
Westy – Just curious, how did Chris Paul go from being one of the worst defensive point guards in the league last year to one of the best this year?
I browse at APBR and my comment would be that a lot of the current members there could retire the cup for ignoring problems with their model.
Amar
February 17, 2009
the formulas you have used and any other stat guru has used (hollinger) are not truths. there is absolutely no way to say that the formula you are using proves anything. I am not saying this becasue sports have intangible attributes that cannot be put in a formula. Rather i am wondering why in your formula you divide Assists by half. that is just one thing to think about. You see unless a formula can be proven in physical life or even under theoretical parameters it is useless. there is no way to prove or disprove your formula, hence it is inconsequentional to deciding anything. Which brings us to the fact the Statistics as useful as they are can be easily manipulated to prove a point. So since you base so much of your opinion on formulas, then please confirm this that Wilt Chamberlain was the best player to have ever played the game for any position :) On second thought if i were to come up with a formula that proves the opposite of what you believe then would you believe me because i used a formula??
Westy
February 17, 2009
Owen,
In regard to your first question, it’s very hard to say, and I’m certainly no expert. There’s a whole thread devoted to basically this question over there, and there are some good suggestions thrown out. But most have to do with who Paul’s matched against, rather than his own ability. I think it points back to that we still have a harder time effectively evaluating defense because it’s much more abstract than offense. Certainly there must be some explanation as to why NO is better on D this year with Paul in the game than last.
As to your 2nd point, sure some are of that ilk. But I think others accept problem correction well. And regardless, what others do does not need to influence us to act the same.
JoeM
February 17, 2009
Westy,
Your criticism is of the box score, not Berri. You think that a box score doesn’t correctly explain a missed shot by Kobe Bryant with a rebound given to Carl Landry. You want more information about that play stored and available for analysis. The box score just records it as a missed shot and a rebounds. Sorry.
Berri doesn’t think his model is perfect. He just wanted to make a nice, simplistic model based on only the box score. The point was just to show that stats aren’t “useless.” The box score isn’t “useless.”
Maybe Dave will get his hands on data that more accuarately summarizes the games than a box score one day and run some more regressions and report his findings. Maybe he won’t.
Everyone’s criticisms of WP48 are criticisms of the box score pretty much.
Peter
February 17, 2009
Owen, mine is a casual guess, but I would say that the publicity related to Paul’s NBA record steals streak had a big hand in that issue.
He had swiped at least one ball in every game he played last season, but because his streak was still a ways away from Alvin Robertson’s 103 straight, it flew under the radar compared to number of other NBA storylines.
Also, Paul is currently averaging a career high mark in rebounds per game, and is the first time he’s gotten 5 per since his rookie season. In particular, his defensive rebounding accounts for a big part of this increase.
Last, but not least, it helps to play with James Posey, who is no stranger to the winning-without-individual-numbers way of basketball.
If I had to pin it down, and responders beware, this is only my educated guess, I would say that those three things have helped Paul’s reputation on the other end of the floor.
Michael
February 17, 2009
“Stop the Hate and just enjoy the Greatness of Kobe”
Seconded.
Kobe may not be Michael Jordan or Lebron James or Chris Paul or whoever, but he is a great player who in my opinion is one of the best to watch in the league.
I think anyone who tries to argue that Kobe isn’t one of the best players in the league is nitpicking or worse being disingenuous. We are not talking about Allen Iverson here. Who cares if Lebron is statistically ‘better’, Kobe is still an amazing player.
Owen
February 17, 2009
Peter – I wasn’t talking about his reputation. I was talking about his Adjusted +/- defensive rating, which ostensibly filters out the impact of teammates and the other player on the court. By that measure, he went from being one of the worst defensive pg last year, when he led the league in steals, to one of the best this year.
Westy – The APM model has a huge “noise” issue and when I read APBR I can’t help but get the feeling that the majority of the people at APBR are busy trying to sweep that “problem” under the rug.
Westy
February 17, 2009
Your criticism is of the box score, not Berri.
Not necessarily. If WoW was presented as a great way to predict a team result from box scores, I think what you’re saying is accurate. But I get the strong sense that it is being presented as a means of valuing how good a player actually is. See the many posts comparing the ‘worth’ of a player based on their WP to their salary.
Since it is making that claim, and since, as you note, box scores don’t perfectly explain what goes on in a basketball game (especially defense), people receive it with trepidation. Furthermore, many people claim there are more accurate (in terms of player ability valuation rankings) ways to evaluate players based only on these box score measures using different weightings for particular stats.
Owen,
I agree the ‘noise’ is an issue. I like Ilardi’s suggestion to look at performance over time via a best fit curve, and use that as the past season’s weight component. But regardless, there does seem to be noise. Largely, this occurs on the defensive end. Offense is much more stable.
The frustrating thing is that I don’t even feel comfortable agreeing right now that it is just ‘noise’. Maybe defense is so effort based that it does vary this much from year to year. Maybe the other components of a player’s game don’t change as much since they’re ability based, but these effort based components do. Do you think the shifts in Paul’s defensive rating are indicative of an ability/talent change or a problem with the system?
I look forward to continued research.
Al
February 17, 2009
recently a GM, a good majority of them would prefer to have kobe than lebron for intangibles and certain skills, stats aren’t a proper measurement for a variety of reasons. Stat’s are produced directly from the system a player run’s which determines what the player needs depending on the talent of the team. See steve nash under Dantoni and nash now. Kobe is running a triangle offense, no player has ever averaged over 7 assists ever in phil’s triangle. Does that mean he is a worse passer, you say he has more assists so lebron is better passer, but kobe is on an equal opportunity offense which requires a different way to play. Lebron’s offense is literally run through him, which is why he has the most possesions by quite amount than the rest of the nba, think about it, more possesions more stats…..but if you just break down the simple skills, lebron is more athletic and has some better natural abilities, kobe’s iq and skill set and lebron still has holes to fill which is why gms want kobe, and players poll the guys who goto battle with both of them have chosen kobe as well…you guys can give lebron all the hype he wants, no doubt hes a top player, but dude hasn’t won championship in his own league, yet he has nba tv showing 24 hours of lebron for his birthday to recognize him and then on MJ’s birthday, the greatest of all time, he gets nothing…its sad how can a player with no championships in ihs own sport be called king and compared to tiger woods, roger ferdere, mj, and the like? He has potential sure, but since when do we reward based on potential?
Al
February 17, 2009
and one more, you usually see writers as the ones saying lebron is the best, players coaches gms, the guys in the action, and ofcourse teh greatest of all time say kobe is the best, one guy hollinger who is a big kobe doesn’t have a shot at lebron also makes the same case that he feels manu is as good or better than kobe….same guy who bc of scheduling issues kobe stood up for an interview and seems bitter ever since
Rob
February 17, 2009
Interesting argument you’ve got there. It made me curious how these players play when it matters the most – the playoffs. I tried out the win score equation of both of those guys for last years playoffs and came up with the following numbers:
Kobe(win score/48min) = 11.195
Lebron(win score/48min)=10.51
Pretty sure I did all the math right. I picked last year because i figured those numbers would most accurately describe what either of those players would do in the playoffs if they started today. As far as I can tell the players are pretty close.
Quite frankly I’m not a fan of comparing players by looking at their numbers, it loses a lot. For instance, Paul Pierce played fantastic basketball in the playoffs last year and without him the Celtics don’t (maybe) don’t make it out of the first or second rounds let alone win the finals, but his win score p48min was only 7.17. Numbers are nice but a lot of times they don’t tell the whole story.
When it comes down to it Lebron and Kobe are going to be judged by one thing, can those guys get their teams to win championships. When all is said and done with their respective careers the number of titles is most likely what they are going to be judged by, so I say don’t get caught up in the numbers business because Kobe and Lebron are two completely different players with two completely different games, enjoy what they do on a nightly basis because it’s amazing how those guys bring it every night.
As far as whose better right now – it’s tough to say because it is very even. Kobe’s easily the most skilled player in the game today and has a ridiculous bag of tricks at his disposal where as Lebron is just a physical beast that can just demolish a team with his power and athleticism. Both of them prove every night that there is more than one way to play and be successful in the game of basketball.
Westy
February 17, 2009
players coaches gms, the guys in the action… say kobe is the best
Source?
Owen
February 17, 2009
Westy – It’s interesting. There is a lot of action on that thread right now as we speak.
Clearly, I think that data on Paul shows a very serious flaw in the APM approach. Either that , or rebounding from the point guard position is incredibly valuable (which I don’t doubt, but I don’t think it accounts for the massive discrepancy in this case.)
NickP
February 17, 2009
Kobe has no weakness and has a counter for every thing a defense or offensive player throws at him.
@Gque24: Why didn’t he counter what the Pistons and Celtics did to him in his last two Finals appearances?
Did he not feel like it, or was your comment 100% hyperbole?
Owen
February 17, 2009
NickP – I am going to go with my gut here and predict the answer:
Kobe was hobbled by an injury in 2004.
His teammates were so inept last year that the Celtics could focus only on Kobe.
Peter
February 17, 2009
Owen, in any case, the rebounds would be a major factor in increasing the Adjusted +/-. It’s on me for misinterpreting the question.
As an interested aside, here are the percentage points of the five “common stats” that Paul accumulated last season and this season at time of writing, seeing as how the idea is to try and measure the player:
07-08: 20.4% of team points, 9.4% of rebounds, 34.1% of steals, 1.2% of blocks, 51.8% of assists
First 50 games of 08-09: 20.6% of points, 12.7% of rebounds, 33.4% of steals, 3.7% of blocks, 50.7% of assists
In points, steals, and assists, Paul’s relative contribution to the team remains relatively static compared to the year before. If anything, the steals and assists go down. Thus, the steals, the one defensive statistic that remains static, wouldn’t be the first place to look for clues.
However, the rebounds and blocks have gone drastically up, and Paul’s chunk of the blocks more than tripled when compared to last year. Last year, he had 4 of 321; this year, 8 of 215.
Also, Hornets opponents averaged about 92.2 defensive possessions per game. This year, that number has dropped all the way down to 89.0.
With fewer defensive possessions, each defensive statistic that Paul tallies up takes on greater value.
Those would be good places to begin searching for answers.
Jim
February 17, 2009
Kobe is the second best SG ever to play the game. As to Lebron, we’ll know what he is in a few years — right now he’s a guy who made it to the Finals once, and got swept.
Also I’d like to see James get at least one all-NBA defense award before we start talking all time greatest — it’s a two-way game, and this year is the first year James has taken the other half of the game seriously.
J.W.
February 18, 2009
This debate is fine and everything, but understand that both these players play different positions. Lebron is a forward. He stays underneath the basket more often. He doesn’t defend perimeter players all game long. Which gives him ample opportunity to rebound at a high efficiency.
Second point, the cavaliers don’t necessarily have a post up player other than himself. He sits down by the post and sets other players up with his great decision making. He creates out on the top of the key also. Point being, he drives and kicks, he posts up and kicks, and therefore the huge assist totals.
His passing ability is on par with the some of the best in league history. That’s the one thing that sets him apart from Kobe; his vision.
Kobe is great all-around, but i wouldn’t say his passing ability is better than Lebron. Forget the points he puts up or how many rebound he gets. His passing ability is the best part of his game.
Kobe doesn’t have Lebron’s rebound or assist numbers because he has 3 seven footers that eat up all the boards. Lamar Odom’s rebounding of late is that of a 7 footer. Kobe doesn’t need to drive towards the basket. He can pass into the post and waits to make a play if the ball returns. He defends little guards, 2 guards, and small forwards. Doing that keeps him away from the basket therefore lesser rebounds.
The only way to distinguish these 2 completely skilled, but different types of players is to ask who demands the ball at the end and makes the shot.
Throw the numbers out for one moment. Ask yourself that question.
JD
February 18, 2009
Jordan had much better teammates, they only lost two more game then they did the previous year when he retired! Oh wait, that’s a point I was going to make on a different Kobe hating thread. There are so many it’s hard to keep track. j/k
mr. parker
February 18, 2009
westy,
Mr Berri’s metric explains 94% of wins. To call that fraudulent is a joke. I was commenting on some guys in another thread calling Berri a “fraud”. We all know where they get that notion and it is ill-conceived.
The rebounding issue is another one. With Rodman on the bulls as an extreme example of where Winscore and other metrics defer. Knowing how defensive rating is calculated its my personal hypothesis that great defenders are drastically underrated. While I don’t think that just being a great rebounder is enough to define someone as a great defender, those that rebound at a great rate usually do alot of the immeasurable stuff(changing shots etc). In this regard I think that quantifying rebounds the way that Berri doe is as useful as weighting rebounds less and trying to quantify the other little things because you would probably(IMO) end up right back where you started.
Thats the flaw I find in the winshares method(tangenting away from apbr argument stuff). The leader in defensive win shares is usually around 1/2 the total of the leading offensive win shares guy. This is a crude calculation, but thats is like saying 75% of wins can be explained by offensive play. Berri is basically using the same inputs but comes to what in my opinion is a more realistic conclusion that offense and defense are roughly equal.
Zachary Kolodin
February 18, 2009
Dave,
Can you please comment on the NYT mag story on Shane Battier? Specifically, the article contends that Battier makes those around him better, and makes top scorers worse? Can win score account for these outcomes in some way?
Thanks,
Zach
drza44
February 18, 2009
Rob said: “Quite frankly I’m not a fan of comparing players by looking at their numbers, it loses a lot. For instance, Paul Pierce played fantastic basketball in the playoffs last year and without him the Celtics don’t (maybe) don’t make it out of the first or second rounds let alone win the finals, but his win score p48min was only 7.17. Numbers are nice but a lot of times they don’t tell the whole story.”
I’m actually of the opinion that here, the numbers DO tell a more accurate story than the commonly held theme. Pierce played two truly outstanding games over the 26-game playoffs (Cleveland 7 and Lakers 5). He played another handful of good games, several average ones, and several below average ones. Over the last 3 rounds, Pierce had a whopping SIX games with more turnovers than field goals made. Pierce’s really good games got more press than his bad ones, which makes people project that over his whole playoffs. When in reality, he was very up and down and that showed in his average numbers.
Italian Stallion
February 18, 2009
I think adjusted +/- is probably the best possible approach for evaluating players available for public consumption. The general public does not have access to stats for a lot of important things that go on in games. I thought the best part of the NYT article about Battier illustrated just how detailed some teams get in evaluating their own players and the competition.
Adjusted +/- should tend to capture all those less obvious things (especially defense because the mainstream stats are so weak in that area) and also weight them properly.
The major problem is sample size.
By the time you have a large enough sample size, some of the data used may be out of date because young players tend to improve, older players tend to deteriorate, injuries occur, form is not static etc….
I think a good way of coping with that might be to use adjusted +/- covering 2 years or so as a starting point for evaluating a player, but then supplement the analysis with some kind of trend analysis using a less volatile measurement.
As a neutral person in all these statistical debates I think it’s a shame so much time is spent by opposing camps pointing out the weaknesses and flaws in the other camp’s data and formulas. More should be spent focusing on the strengths and somehow combining them in ways that yield better results.
That’s what is done in horse racing.
There are speed handicappers, class handicappers, trip handicappers, pace handicappers etc…. Some guys are numbers oriented and some primarily use excellent visual skills. In the end there are strengths and weaknesses to all these approaches. But by recognizing the strengths and weaknesses, a more comprehensive and better approach is possible.
As a guy that likes to point out some of the weaknesses with stats because of my devil’s advocate personality, LOL, I find it interesting that not even the stats guys can agree on much or get along.
phia. :)
February 19, 2009
I personally think that KOBE BRYANT is the best player to ever played the game! :) I really love the way he plays. Others may not think as I am but I really can assure you that if he isn’t the BEST he is ONE (of the GREAT players to ever played the game) though. :D
Westy
February 19, 2009
mr. parker,
You note, “While I don’t think that just being a great rebounder is enough to define someone as a great defender, those that rebound at a great rate usually do alot of the immeasurable stuff…”
The problem is, we don’t track those “immeasureable” things, so we have no way of knowing if that is accurate.
While it’s quite possible this is true, and so overvaluing rebounds makes up for it, the point is that rebounds in and of themselves are being overvalued. And most importantly, we do not know this is true.
Also, I would note that I did not call Berri’s work “fraudulent” and I agree that is too strong if you’re implying the folks at APBR do so.
Simon
February 19, 2009
Ahh, I forgot how entertaining comments can get with Kobe postings. Good times, good times.
Hutchdaman
February 20, 2009
1st let me say that i’m a Wizard fan(sadly) and a Kobe fan but also a fan of the NBA. Let me say to all the Kobe fans out there that no one is above criticism! However i would like the criticism to be universal. When someone has a good game that’s it! No body breaks it down to every detail. Only when Kobe has a good-great game, then all the details of the game come into question. Why is it that way with Kobe. If you point out Kobe’s short comings, then point out Lebrons. When you say LBJ took his team to the finals that one year, then also mention how he was shut down in the finals that year too! Scoring is still the most important stat! that is what decides the game. Now lets give credit where credit is due. LBJ had a great game at madison square. But would we be talking about the game in the same manor if Kobe didn’t hit 61 prior? So Kobe set the stage for LBJ’s performance! If Joe Johnson went off for 61 we wouldn’t even break his game down the way we do with Kobe. And the hype for LBJ to follow wouldn’t have been as high. When they mention MJ’s 55 they don’t talk about his assist or his rebounds. But they’ll say his game was better! Because someone has better stats for a game doesn’t mean that that player had a better game. What if LBJ or Kobe put up the same numbers and both teams lost! Would there still be this comparison? LBJ has games when he has low assist, but we still no he can pass. Kobe had o rebounds but we all know he is a very good rebounding 2 guard. You also have to keep in mind when comparing statistics that players play in different systems, have different coaches, different skill sets, and play different positions, with different roles. If they ever put a true point guard next to LBJ his assist would probably go down because he would not handle the ball as much. Kobe plays on a team with 3 guys who are good rebounders, and he still averages a good number of rebounds for a 2 guard. He also plays with guys who are good passers, so that effects his assists. Example Chris Paul is a very good passer, but he is the only ball-handler on his team! So his stats are going to be great because he handles the ball the majority of the time. But they will not be a championship team until they get another playmaker. When they get another playmaker CP3 stats might go down but he would still be the same caliber player, but his role would have changed! Also take into account the age difference and physical presence. LBJ is 6’8 260, Kobe is 6’6 200, so there going to have different styles based on that alone. Not to mention age and wear and tear. LBJ is in his atheletic prime, Kobe has to be more paced he is 30. But his skill level is so high,that he can cruise and still produce at a high level. All atheletes have to make adjustments to there game as they get older. So Kobe is not going to go to the hole as much as LBJ or even D-wade. You evolve the rest of your game so you can play longer in the league. That’s why MJ added a fadeway! If Boston shut down Kobe then they shut down LBJ too! and Kobe getting shutdown still averaging 25 points(leading scorer inthe finals). If you look at Paul pierce’s numbers vs. Kobe’s in the finals they are virtually identical, but people have this perception that Kobe was shut down, when he wasn’t! Add on top of that the defensive attention that Kobe gets vs. Paul Pierce. Kobe was the Celtics entire focus, while PP was played by Radmonavic, Walton, and Sasha, not hardly defensive specialist.
Dr. Hoopz
February 20, 2009
In response to this and other journalist, check out The Truth: Love Kobe and the Game on LA Hoopz, ‘Give credit where credit is due.’
t4inc
March 16, 2009
Wade’s game against the Bulls on March 9th was superior to either of the two games Lebron and Kobe played against the Knicks.
Wade’s Win Score that game was 30.5 while his WS48 was 29.3!!