|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
george w kush
Star Player
Joined: 05 Jun 2009
Posts: 1171
|
 Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 10:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bfc1125roy wrote: | | socalsp3 wrote: | | Here’s an orange to orange comparison. Kobe with Shaq, Malone, GP lost to the Pistons in 5. Lebron beat the pistons almost by himself in 5 games. |
Besides the fact those two Pistons teams were much different (no Ben Wallace is the most obvious), this statement clearly shows you didn't watch either of those series at all, let alone understand what was going on.
In the 2004 finals, the Pistons were trying to stop the Kobe-Shaq connection, which was the heart of the Triangle. What they did was pressure the main option, Kobe, and sniff out the passing lanes he wanted to O'Neal, cutting those off. Normally, a second facilitator in the offense could get the ball where it needed to go. But the Lakers primary scoring option and main facilitator (Kobe) were both the same person.
Compound that with Malone being reduced to a spot up shooter, and Payton being a shell of his former self, nobody on the team could do anything. Without the offense getting started, role players like Devean George and Samaki Walker were pretty much useless. It's why Luke Walton helped us win Game 2. Because he was a good passer who got the ball where it needed to be and was able to start up the offense.
Furthermore, Ben Wallace was in his athletic prime during that series, while Shaq was out of shape. He could easily take O'Neal 1 on 1 in the post, without help. Something no center up until that point could claim (not even Mutombo or Olajuwon). This meant the Pistons were free to pressure Kobe on the perimeter. And if he couldn't get the ball to Shaq, and the role players were depending on him to create, his only choice was to try to go against the Detroit defense himself, hence the inefficient scoring.
In the Cavs-Pistons series, it was completely different. Their offense was designed to have LeBron penetrate and kick to shooters. Not the triangle. Without Wallace, there was no rim protection, and they spread the floor with lots of guys that could shoot the ball, and allowed LeBron to penetrate. Different system, different outcome. If you put 2006 Kobe in his place, you'll probably get a similar outcome.
In fact, the only time Kobe was ever in an offense where he was a guard who's job was to penetrate and kick, he put up career numbers (2013 under D'Antoni) - 27/6/6, which was a career high in assists in his 17th season. |
The reason they lost the series was simple: Instead of letting Shaq dominate Ben in the low post(which had been what the Lakers had done during the 3 titles run in the finals, which would also free up other shooters), Kobe decided he wanted to get finals MVP so he kept chucking up contested jumper over and over again against one of the best wing defenders at the time in Tayshaun Prince. Prince locked him down the entire series. They also applied full court pressure when he had the ball. The idea was to frustrate him, and as a result he would end up taking poor shot attempts. Chauncy Billups confirmed it:
| Quote: | | Chauncey Billups: Our game plan was very calculated. We knew we were going to play Shaq straight-up. We knew there was no way we could stop Shaq straight-up. And there was also no way we could stop Kobe straight-up. But, if we’re going to play Shaq straight-up, [the Lakers'] eyes are going to get big, which means they’re going to keep throwing it down there. We’re telling Ben the whole time, "Take fouls when you need to, but don’t get yourself into foul trouble. You need to give up a layup, cool, we’re going to get what we want on the other side." But what’s going to happen is Mr. Bryant is going to get a little discouraged with getting no touches and now the second half comes around…now he’s pressing. He’s going to start coming down and just breaking the offense. When you do that, you’re done—you’re playing right into our hands. Even if you start making those shots, you’re finished. |
Kobe even apologized to Shaq about the series, and Shaq said he should have passed the ball to him more.
But this is a prime example of the difference between Kobe's career and Lebron's:
Early in their careers Kobe has the benefit of playing with one of the greatest players of all time in Shaq, and one of the greatest coaches of all time in Phil and rode Shaq's back to 3 rings(Shaq was finals MVP all 3 years)
Lebron on the other hand gets Larry Hughes and Potato head as coach.
If you were to compare Lebron's career to Kobe's post-Shaq career, then Lebron clearly has had the better run. Lebron dominated during all 3 of his finals MVPs while Kobe clearly struggled against the Celtics.
AND BTW going back to the thread topic, it doesn't surprise me at all the ex-players preferred Kobe because well they played against him. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
governator
Retired Number
Joined: 28 Jan 2006
Posts: 25092
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 10:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| george w kush wrote: | Lebron dominated during all 3 of his finals MVPs while Kobe clearly struggled against the Celtics.
|
You need to watch those finals games again, the only domination was Lakers-Magic series, all the other series were tough fought
LeBron with Wade/Bosh... that was a superteam by the way |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 11:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bfc1125roy wrote: | | Basketball still comes down to scoring and 1 vs 1 defending, more so than rebounds, assists, and help defense. |
You will need to sell that premise. It sounds like you are dismissing all the areas in which Lebron has an apparent advantage. I’d be interested in hearing your thesis, but it is not obviously true.
Kobe and Lebron were different types of players. If you think Kobe was greater, I have no problem with it. Kobe was a force of nature in his prime. Lebron was something different, though also very impressive. I don’t think you accomplish much by diminishing all of one player’s advantages and focusing on the other player’s advantages. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bfc1125roy
Starting Rotation
Joined: 10 Dec 2011
Posts: 682
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 2:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | bfc1125roy wrote: | | Basketball still comes down to scoring and 1 vs 1 defending, more so than rebounds, assists, and help defense. |
You will need to sell that premise. It sounds like you are dismissing all the areas in which Lebron has an apparent advantage. I’d be interested in hearing your thesis, but it is not obviously true.
Kobe and Lebron were different types of players. If you think Kobe was greater, I have no problem with it. Kobe was a force of nature in his prime. Lebron was something different, though also very impressive. I don’t think you accomplish much by diminishing all of one player’s advantages and focusing on the other player’s advantages. |
Well, at the end of the day, a basketball game is more directly impacted by scoring and individual defense, than assists and rebounds. In certain cases that's not true, but I'd argue that an all time great scorer (Wilt Chamberlain), will have a bigger impact than an all time great rebounder and help defender (Bill Russell), teams being equal.
If you break down offense and defense into basic categories:
Scoring: Kobe
Passing/Facilitating: LeBron
Rebounding: LeBron
Individual Defense: Kobe
Help Defense: LeBron
This is purely skill based. Doesn't say as much about their impacts on their teams, winning, awards, etc. That's an entirely separate discussion
If you weight the criteria differently, that is understandable. I can make arguments as to why they should be preferred one way or another, but they are subjective, as is this debate in general. But I feel most would agree that scoring and individual defense are very important, while some other aspects of the game are slightly more ancillary.
_________________
(bleep) David Stern. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bfc1125roy
Starting Rotation
Joined: 10 Dec 2011
Posts: 682
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 2:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| george w kush wrote: | | bfc1125roy wrote: | | socalsp3 wrote: | | Here’s an orange to orange comparison. Kobe with Shaq, Malone, GP lost to the Pistons in 5. Lebron beat the pistons almost by himself in 5 games. |
Besides the fact those two Pistons teams were much different (no Ben Wallace is the most obvious), this statement clearly shows you didn't watch either of those series at all, let alone understand what was going on.
In the 2004 finals, the Pistons were trying to stop the Kobe-Shaq connection, which was the heart of the Triangle. What they did was pressure the main option, Kobe, and sniff out the passing lanes he wanted to O'Neal, cutting those off. Normally, a second facilitator in the offense could get the ball where it needed to go. But the Lakers primary scoring option and main facilitator (Kobe) were both the same person.
Compound that with Malone being reduced to a spot up shooter, and Payton being a shell of his former self, nobody on the team could do anything. Without the offense getting started, role players like Devean George and Samaki Walker were pretty much useless. It's why Luke Walton helped us win Game 2. Because he was a good passer who got the ball where it needed to be and was able to start up the offense.
Furthermore, Ben Wallace was in his athletic prime during that series, while Shaq was out of shape. He could easily take O'Neal 1 on 1 in the post, without help. Something no center up until that point could claim (not even Mutombo or Olajuwon). This meant the Pistons were free to pressure Kobe on the perimeter. And if he couldn't get the ball to Shaq, and the role players were depending on him to create, his only choice was to try to go against the Detroit defense himself, hence the inefficient scoring.
In the Cavs-Pistons series, it was completely different. Their offense was designed to have LeBron penetrate and kick to shooters. Not the triangle. Without Wallace, there was no rim protection, and they spread the floor with lots of guys that could shoot the ball, and allowed LeBron to penetrate. Different system, different outcome. If you put 2006 Kobe in his place, you'll probably get a similar outcome.
In fact, the only time Kobe was ever in an offense where he was a guard who's job was to penetrate and kick, he put up career numbers (2013 under D'Antoni) - 27/6/6, which was a career high in assists in his 17th season. |
The reason they lost the series was simple: Instead of letting Shaq dominate Ben in the low post(which had been what the Lakers had done during the 3 titles run in the finals, which would also free up other shooters), Kobe decided he wanted to get finals MVP so he kept chucking up contested jumper over and over again against one of the best wing defenders at the time in Tayshaun Prince. Prince locked him down the entire series. They also applied full court pressure when he had the ball. The idea was to frustrate him, and as a result he would end up taking poor shot attempts. Chauncy Billups confirmed it:
| Quote: | | Chauncey Billups: Our game plan was very calculated. We knew we were going to play Shaq straight-up. We knew there was no way we could stop Shaq straight-up. And there was also no way we could stop Kobe straight-up. But, if we’re going to play Shaq straight-up, [the Lakers'] eyes are going to get big, which means they’re going to keep throwing it down there. We’re telling Ben the whole time, "Take fouls when you need to, but don’t get yourself into foul trouble. You need to give up a layup, cool, we’re going to get what we want on the other side." But what’s going to happen is Mr. Bryant is going to get a little discouraged with getting no touches and now the second half comes around…now he’s pressing. He’s going to start coming down and just breaking the offense. When you do that, you’re done—you’re playing right into our hands. Even if you start making those shots, you’re finished. |
Kobe even apologized to Shaq about the series, and Shaq said he should have passed the ball to him more.
But this is a prime example of the difference between Kobe's career and Lebron's:
Early in their careers Kobe has the benefit of playing with one of the greatest players of all time in Shaq, and one of the greatest coaches of all time in Phil and rode Shaq's back to 3 rings(Shaq was finals MVP all 3 years)
Lebron on the other hand gets Larry Hughes and Potato head as coach.
If you were to compare Lebron's career to Kobe's post-Shaq career, then Lebron clearly has had the better run. Lebron dominated during all 3 of his finals MVPs while Kobe clearly struggled against the Celtics.
AND BTW going back to the thread topic, it doesn't surprise me at all the ex-players preferred Kobe because well they played against him. |
Respectfully, I question if you really read my breakdown. Chauncey Billups in a short interview is not going to explain the intricacies of Larry Brown's defensive scheme. This kind of goes back to the "soundbite" stuff I was talking about earlier. People rarely like to have in depth discussions on this.
If people want to believe that Kobe was a selfish player with a big ego, and thus tried to freeze Shaq out of the game and win the series himself, you are free to do so. But a high IQ player like Kobe so obsessed with winning a championship is a little smarter than you give him credit for.
The Triangle that year was entirely based around the two man game between Kobe and Shaq. If you cut off the Shaq-Kobe connection, you're essentially cutting off the head of the snake. Our role players (other than Walton for game 2), were unable to create anything out of the offense, and relied on the two man game to get them open shots. Malone was injured and relegated to a spot up shooter (you can actually hear the announcers talk about how he can't even move), Payton was just old, and the other role players were not skilled enough to do much else.
With the Kobe-Shaq connection gone, it took way too long to start the Triangle offense, and with nobody able to do anything, the clock started to work against the Lakers. Shaq was unable to take Wallace 1 vs 1 consistently for the reasons I outlined earlier. Kobe's only hope was to try to attack the Piston's defense himself, and it played right into their hands.
If you don't believe me, you can actually hear Kobe and Shaq talking about this indirectly in their interview. When you hear them talk about "moving the pressure up" and being unable to "get into automatics" - they're referencing precisely what I'm outlining in this post.
Link to interview here
You also have to remember in 2004, zone defense was allowed, and handchecking was also legal, leading to some really ugly games, and allowing the Pistons to take full advantage of all their defensive tools.
The Miami Heat actually employed a version of this exact scheme against James Harden in the 2012 finals, leading to their win, and Harden's horrible finals statline. It was a little different, but in the 4th quarter, with Harden unable to facilitate to Durant, it caused problems for the Thunder that they could not overcome.
_________________
(bleep) David Stern. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ReaListik
Star Player
Joined: 08 Jun 2008
Posts: 6568
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 2:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It doesn’t help the Lakers now to know that ex-players take Kobe over LeBron. Solutions to issues need to be figured out in the present and unless we’ve developed a time machine to bring 27 year old Kobe to the present to help LeBron, its meaningless to know that ex-players prefer Kobe. Try to find ways to win now.
_________________
"We are the goodest." - Shaq ESPN interview |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
trablos
Star Player
Joined: 10 May 2017
Posts: 3020
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 3:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I was surprised it took Mr. Kush this long to rise from the ashes, on 4/20 no less  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 5:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bfc1125roy wrote: | Well, at the end of the day, a basketball game is more directly impacted by scoring and individual defense, than assists and rebounds. In certain cases that's not true, but I'd argue that an all time great scorer (Wilt Chamberlain), will have a bigger impact than an all time great rebounder and help defender (Bill Russell), teams being equal.
If you break down offense and defense into basic categories:
Scoring: Kobe
Passing/Facilitating: LeBron
Rebounding: LeBron
Individual Defense: Kobe
Help Defense: LeBron
This is purely skill based. Doesn't say as much about their impacts on their teams, winning, awards, etc. That's an entirely separate discussion
If you weight the criteria differently, that is understandable. I can make arguments as to why they should be preferred one way or another, but they are subjective, as is this debate in general. But I feel most would agree that scoring and individual defense are very important, while some other aspects of the game are slightly more ancillary. |
Well, you can argue whatever you want. I responded because you seem to be trying to construct a logical thesis, rather than just stating an opinion. What I'm telling you is it is not persuasive when you just toss out a breezy statement like "at the end of the day, a basketball game is more directly impacted by scoring and individual defense, than assists and rebounds." Why? It is not self-evident. If you are building a case for Kobe over Lebron, then announcing that scoring and one-on-one defense are the most important categories is tantamount to assuming your conclusion.
If you want to see an analysis similar to what you are proposing, go look at the Top 40 essays by the Thinking Basketball guy. I think his website is called Backpicks. You can disagree with his conclusions, of course, but he provides a framework for breaking all of this stuff down. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bfc1125roy
Starting Rotation
Joined: 10 Dec 2011
Posts: 682
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 5:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | bfc1125roy wrote: | Well, at the end of the day, a basketball game is more directly impacted by scoring and individual defense, than assists and rebounds. In certain cases that's not true, but I'd argue that an all time great scorer (Wilt Chamberlain), will have a bigger impact than an all time great rebounder and help defender (Bill Russell), teams being equal.
If you break down offense and defense into basic categories:
Scoring: Kobe
Passing/Facilitating: LeBron
Rebounding: LeBron
Individual Defense: Kobe
Help Defense: LeBron
This is purely skill based. Doesn't say as much about their impacts on their teams, winning, awards, etc. That's an entirely separate discussion
If you weight the criteria differently, that is understandable. I can make arguments as to why they should be preferred one way or another, but they are subjective, as is this debate in general. But I feel most would agree that scoring and individual defense are very important, while some other aspects of the game are slightly more ancillary. |
Well, you can argue whatever you want. I responded because you seem to be trying to construct a logical thesis, rather than just stating an opinion. What I'm telling you is it is not persuasive when you just toss out a breezy statement like "at the end of the day, a basketball game is more directly impacted by scoring and individual defense, than assists and rebounds." Why? It is not self-evident. If you are building a case for Kobe over Lebron, then announcing that scoring and one-on-one defense are the most important categories is tantamount to assuming your conclusion.
If you want to see an analysis similar to what you are proposing, go look at the Top 40 essays by the Thinking Basketball guy. I think his website is called Backpicks. You can disagree with his conclusions, of course, but he provides a framework for breaking all of this stuff down. |
I think you misunderstood what I said. I'll restate the conclusion
| bfc1125roy wrote: |
If you weight the criteria differently, that is understandable. I can make arguments as to why they should be preferred one way or another, but they are subjective, as is this debate in general.
|
I can make the argument that those two are more tantamount. It's too long to post here. But again, these arguments are far from definitive. And they just cover 1 aspect of who's the better player debate: overall skillset. There's many other factors to consider, and that is opening up a whole different can of worms.
If you would like to argue why passing, rebounding, and help defense should be weighted more than scoring and individual defense, I would welcome to hear what you have to say.
_________________
(bleep) David Stern. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ContagiousInspiration
Franchise Player
Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 13823
Location: Boulder ;)
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 7:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I have never seen a quote from Kobe saying he should've passed the ball to Shaq more
This wasn't big toe year was it? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bfc1125roy
Starting Rotation
Joined: 10 Dec 2011
Posts: 682
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 7:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ContagiousInspiration wrote: | I have never seen a quote from Kobe saying he should've passed the ball to Shaq more
This wasn't big toe year was it? |
Shaq having the ball wasn't the issue. The Pistons were scared of the two man game between Kobe and Shaq. Ben Wallace was able to take Shaq 1 vs. 1 in the post strength wise due to O'Neal's reduced mobility. The problem was the two man game would open up opportunities for role players. Watch what happens when Kobe and Shaq are both on the strong side. The Pistons usually sent Rasheed Wallace out to shade the post entry. Or they up the perimeter pressure on Kobe.
You have to give a lot of credit to the Pistons. To say Kobe was the reason we lost the series is disrespecting the amount of gameplanning that went into their innovative defense.
On the surface, it appears as though Kobe was bricking many contested jumpers and shot us out of the series. The reality is much more complicated, however.
_________________
(bleep) David Stern. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bum2
Starting Rotation
Joined: 31 Aug 2005
Posts: 809
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 7:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
There was an Athletic poll that had the players voting Kobe way ahead of Kareem.
Players play...their opinions arent always good |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ContagiousInspiration
Franchise Player
Joined: 07 May 2014
Posts: 13823
Location: Boulder ;)
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 8:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bfc1125roy wrote: | | ContagiousInspiration wrote: | I have never seen a quote from Kobe saying he should've passed the ball to Shaq more
This wasn't big toe year was it? |
Shaq having the ball wasn't the issue. The Pistons were scared of the two man game between Kobe and Shaq. Ben Wallace was able to take Shaq 1 vs. 1 in the post strength wise due to O'Neal's reduced mobility. The problem was the two man game would open up opportunities for role players. Watch what happens when Kobe and Shaq are both on the strong side. The Pistons usually sent Rasheed Wallace out to shade the post entry. Or they up the perimeter pressure on Kobe.
You have to give a lot of credit to the Pistons. To say Kobe was the reason we lost the series is disrespecting the amount of gameplanning that went into their innovative defense.
On the surface, it appears as though Kobe was bricking many contested jumpers and shot us out of the series. The reality is much more complicated, however. |
That was a heartbreaker for so many of us
The Hate Kobe got because Tayshaun Prince was a lot better defender than people realized along with our lack of shooters and much more
Great memories though |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 20, 2019 9:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bfc1125roy wrote: | I can make the argument that those two are more tantamount. It's too long to post here. But again, these arguments are far from definitive. And they just cover 1 aspect of who's the better player debate: overall skillset. There's many other factors to consider, and that is opening up a whole different can of worms.
If you would like to argue why passing, rebounding, and help defense should be weighted more than scoring and individual defense, I would welcome to hear what you have to say. |
Basketball is holistic. It's not a question of whether passing should be weighted more than scoring. It's a question of whether you can identify particular components that have more inherent value than other components. The only stat that truly matters is the game score. There are many ways that a player can impact the game score. Scoring by one individual player does not necessarily correlate to the game score. Otherwise, Allen Iverson's teams would have won a lot more games and Magic Johnson and Steve Nash's teams would have won a lot less.
Anyway, if you are trying to judge "overall skillset," you run into the immediate problem that Kobe and Lebron played different positions and had different styles. If you give extra weight to shooting guard skills, you skew the result. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bfc1125roy
Starting Rotation
Joined: 10 Dec 2011
Posts: 682
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 21, 2019 2:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | bfc1125roy wrote: | I can make the argument that those two are more tantamount. It's too long to post here. But again, these arguments are far from definitive. And they just cover 1 aspect of who's the better player debate: overall skillset. There's many other factors to consider, and that is opening up a whole different can of worms.
If you would like to argue why passing, rebounding, and help defense should be weighted more than scoring and individual defense, I would welcome to hear what you have to say. |
Basketball is holistic. It's not a question of whether passing should be weighted more than scoring. It's a question of whether you can identify particular components that have more inherent value than other components. The only stat that truly matters is the game score. There are many ways that a player can impact the game score. Scoring by one individual player does not necessarily correlate to the game score. Otherwise, Allen Iverson's teams would have won a lot more games and Magic Johnson and Steve Nash's teams would have won a lot less.
Anyway, if you are trying to judge "overall skillset," you run into the immediate problem that Kobe and Lebron played different positions and had different styles. If you give extra weight to shooting guard skills, you skew the result. |
I was talking purely about individual skill. When it comes to contributions to winning games, that is a different topic and will need a different breakdown. And although unrelated, I would argue Iverson is a better all time player than Nash 
I don't think there is a difference between shooting guard skills and other skills based on how I outlined them. All of the greatest players scored well and played good defense. You have big men that did it (e.g. Hakeem) and guards that did it (e.g. Jordan). Also, Kobe and LeBron were both the primary scoring options and primary facilitators for the majority of their careers (LeBron for his entire career up until now, and Kobe was the primary facilitator when Phil gave him the reigns in '99, co-shared primary scoring option duties with Shaq in 2001, and was our primary scoring option by 2002-2003).
They did, however, demonstrate those abilities differently in their respective offenses. That is very nuanced, and requires an in-depth understanding of the Triangle, 4 out 1 in (Lakers 2011-2012 offense), the Cavs two-three different offenses, and the Miami Heat offense too. That is probably out of the scope for what can be reasonably discussed on a forum, and definitely out of the scope for what ESPN wants to talk about.
_________________
(bleep) David Stern. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
activeverb
Retired Number
Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 37470
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 21, 2019 3:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bfc1125roy wrote: | | I was talking purely about individual skill. When it comes to contributions to winning games, that is a different topic and will need a different breakdown. |
I am confused here.
First, you said you believe that scoring and one-on-one defense are more important skills than rebounding and passing because they impacted the game more.
Now, you're say that scoring and one-on-one defense don't necessarily contribute more to winning than rebounding and passing.
Which raises the question: If scoring and one-on-one defense don't contribute more to winning, what exactly is the important "impact" you think they have on the game?
Last edited by activeverb on Sun Apr 21, 2019 4:17 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fracture
Star Player
Joined: 01 Feb 2005
Posts: 9318
Location: Planet Terror
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 21, 2019 4:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
He belongs ahead of LeBron  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 21, 2019 4:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bfc1125roy wrote: | | I was talking purely about individual skill. When it comes to contributions to winning games, that is a different topic and will need a different breakdown. |
Then who cares? This gets into the realm of that oddball who graded Ben Simmons an F for his offensive skills. But regardless, any skill that does not contribute to winning games has questionable relevance outside of And-1 and the Globetrotters.
| bfc1125roy wrote: | | They did, however, demonstrate those abilities differently in their respective offenses. That is very nuanced, and requires an in-depth understanding of the Triangle, 4 out 1 in (Lakers 2011-2012 offense), the Cavs two-three different offenses, and the Miami Heat offense too. That is probably out of the scope for what can be reasonably discussed on a forum, and definitely out of the scope for what ESPN wants to talk about. |
You keep saying that the basis for your opinions is too nuanced or too long for a message board. Then you toss in a gratuitous swipe at ESPN. Okay. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Batguano
Star Player
Joined: 19 Mar 2015
Posts: 2260
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 21, 2019 7:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Just like clockwork the usual suspects show up when triggered by the opinion (one that seems to be widely held by ex and current players) that Kobe is on the same level or even better than LeBron.
If Kobe was replaced by Kareem or Magic I guarantee you those posters wouldn't care as much as they do. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
george w kush
Star Player
Joined: 05 Jun 2009
Posts: 1171
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 21, 2019 8:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| wolfpaclaker wrote: | I’ve actually been really impressed with Lebron at this stage in his career how great he is. Dudes been in the league since 2003 and is still when healthy a MVP.
However vs Kobe it’s always been the same for me
Lebron is the better more efficient offense player no arguing there. Only a biased homer would argue against Lebrons superiority in stats efficiency etc he’s just a better player than Kobe on a game to game basis when it comes down to offense
Here is why Kobe is the better player though imo
- Defense. Kobe in the Shaq era was one of the best defenders in the league. He was shutting down Iverson and TMac in their primes. When it comes to a single possession or down to the wire in a long series and rough physical game Kobe plays elite D. He coasted a lot late in his career but overall man defense I take Kobe.
- leadership. Kobe wills his team to win. No way Kobe allows the team to miss the playoffs or lose focus like this team did this season
- 5 rings vs 3
To me it’s still
Jordan
Kobe
Magic
Lebron
In that order
And if not for HIV it would have been Magic a top that list. |
Kobe's defense during the Shaq era? He(unlike Carter/T-Mac) had the luxury of being able to expend more energy on defense due to him having a better player than him(Shaq) to dump the ball to for easy buckets. Shaq was also a tremendous shot blocker during that time. It's easy to look good on easy when your job is to funnel players into your shot blocker.
And leadership? Publicly advocating to trade your teammates is leadership? Or how about snitching on your teammates? Crying to the media about management needing better players? Telling free agents they should come play with you so they can be his 'Tyson Chandler'?
He was very lucky to have been drafted by the Lakers, played with a prime Shaq early in his career and played for PJ. They also lucked out by getting Gasol for peanuts. Wonder if he would have those 3 rings if he had been drafted by the Cavs and played with Boozer and Mo Williams? Exactly. You could inserted Wade, Carter or T-Mac to play with a prime Shaq during those years and they would have won a ring. In fact we saw that scenario play out when Shaq won a ring with Wade.
3 finals MVP>2 finals MVP. And BTW he was dominant in all 3 of those rings. He didn't shoot 41% for a finals series and go 6/22 in a game 7 @ home like Kobe did. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 21, 2019 8:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Batguano wrote: | Just like clockwork the usual suspects show up when triggered by the opinion (one that seems to be widely held by ex and current players) that Kobe is on the same level or even better than LeBron.
If Kobe was replaced by Kareem or Magic I guarantee you those posters wouldn't care as much as they do. |
Do you realize that you’re describing yourself? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Darth Los Angeles
Star Player
Joined: 06 Dec 2011
Posts: 2181
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 21, 2019 9:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| george w kush wrote: | | wolfpaclaker wrote: | I’ve actually been really impressed with Lebron at this stage in his career how great he is. Dudes been in the league since 2003 and is still when healthy a MVP.
However vs Kobe it’s always been the same for me
Lebron is the better more efficient offense player no arguing there. Only a biased homer would argue against Lebrons superiority in stats efficiency etc he’s just a better player than Kobe on a game to game basis when it comes down to offense
Here is why Kobe is the better player though imo
- Defense. Kobe in the Shaq era was one of the best defenders in the league. He was shutting down Iverson and TMac in their primes. When it comes to a single possession or down to the wire in a long series and rough physical game Kobe plays elite D. He coasted a lot late in his career but overall man defense I take Kobe.
- leadership. Kobe wills his team to win. No way Kobe allows the team to miss the playoffs or lose focus like this team did this season
- 5 rings vs 3
To me it’s still
Jordan
Kobe
Magic
Lebron
In that order
And if not for HIV it would have been Magic a top that list. |
Kobe's defense during the Shaq era? He(unlike Carter/T-Mac) had the luxury of being able to expend more energy on defense due to him having a better player than him(Shaq) to dump the ball to for easy buckets. [b]Shaq was also a tremendous shot blocker during that time. It's easy to look good on easy when your job is to funnel players into your shot blocker.[/b]
And leadership? Publicly advocating to trade your teammates is leadership? Or how about snitching on your teammates? Crying to the media about management needing better players? Telling free agents they should come play with you so they can be his 'Tyson Chandler'?
He was very lucky to have been drafted by the Lakers, played with a prime Shaq early in his career and played for PJ. They also lucked out by getting Gasol for peanuts. Wonder if he would have those 3 rings if he had been drafted by the Cavs and played with Boozer and Mo Williams? Exactly. You could inserted Wade, Carter or T-Mac to play with a prime Shaq during those years and they would have won a ring. In fact we saw that scenario play out when Shaq won a ring with Wade.
3 finals MVP>2 finals MVP. And BTW he was dominant in all 3 of those rings. He didn't shoot 41% for a finals series and go 6/22 in a game 7 @ home like Kobe did. |
I've been waiting for you to show yourself. Now you do it... You are just making stuff up and have no idea what you are talking about.
_________________
“There are no limits. There are plateaus, but you must not stay there, you must go beyond them. If it kills you, it kills you. A man must constantly exceed his level.” ―Bruce Lee |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bfc1125roy
Starting Rotation
Joined: 10 Dec 2011
Posts: 682
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 21, 2019 10:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| activeverb wrote: | | bfc1125roy wrote: | | I was talking purely about individual skill. When it comes to contributions to winning games, that is a different topic and will need a different breakdown. |
I am confused here.
First, you said you believe that scoring and one-on-one defense are more important skills than rebounding and passing because they impacted the game more.
Now, you're say that scoring and one-on-one defense don't necessarily contribute more to winning than rebounding and passing.
Which raises the question: If scoring and one-on-one defense don't contribute more to winning, what exactly is the important "impact" you think they have on the game? |
My bad, I did not phrase my post clearly.
I believe scoring and one vs. one defense are the most important skills because they have a more direct impact on the game. The goal of a basketball game is to score more points than your opponent. The two most obvious ways to do that are to score the ball and prevent your opponent (person you are guarding) from scoring the ball. With passing and rebounding, while they can impact the score significantly, there is usually a level or two of indirection there (e.g. if you make a good pass, someone else can make a pass, which then gives someone an open layup).
| activeverb wrote: |
Now, you're say that scoring and one-on-one defense don't necessarily contribute more to winning than rebounding and passing.
|
I am referring not to which of a player's individual skills contribute to winning games, but rather I was referring to Kobe and LeBron's overall contributions to winning games, That topic is more nuanced. For example, Magic Johnson, though he was neither an elite scorer nor an elite defender, was just such a good passer (and pretty good rebounder) that he made a huge contribution to his team winning games. So in order to asses each player's *absolute* contribution to their teams winning, you need more context than just Player A is a better scorer therefore he helps his team win more than Player B. That requires you to understand the offensive and defensive schemes each player was running, and how each player functioned within that specific context.
Hopefully I was more clear there.
_________________
(bleep) David Stern. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
george w kush
Star Player
Joined: 05 Jun 2009
Posts: 1171
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 21, 2019 10:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Darth Los Angeles wrote: | | george w kush wrote: | | wolfpaclaker wrote: | I’ve actually been really impressed with Lebron at this stage in his career how great he is. Dudes been in the league since 2003 and is still when healthy a MVP.
However vs Kobe it’s always been the same for me
Lebron is the better more efficient offense player no arguing there. Only a biased homer would argue against Lebrons superiority in stats efficiency etc he’s just a better player than Kobe on a game to game basis when it comes down to offense
Here is why Kobe is the better player though imo
- Defense. Kobe in the Shaq era was one of the best defenders in the league. He was shutting down Iverson and TMac in their primes. When it comes to a single possession or down to the wire in a long series and rough physical game Kobe plays elite D. He coasted a lot late in his career but overall man defense I take Kobe.
- leadership. Kobe wills his team to win. No way Kobe allows the team to miss the playoffs or lose focus like this team did this season
- 5 rings vs 3
To me it’s still
Jordan
Kobe
Magic
Lebron
In that order
And if not for HIV it would have been Magic a top that list. |
Kobe's defense during the Shaq era? He(unlike Carter/T-Mac) had the luxury of being able to expend more energy on defense due to him having a better player than him(Shaq) to dump the ball to for easy buckets. [b]Shaq was also a tremendous shot blocker during that time. It's easy to look good on easy when your job is to funnel players into your shot blocker.[/b]
And leadership? Publicly advocating to trade your teammates is leadership? Or how about snitching on your teammates? Crying to the media about management needing better players? Telling free agents they should come play with you so they can be his 'Tyson Chandler'?
He was very lucky to have been drafted by the Lakers, played with a prime Shaq early in his career and played for PJ. They also lucked out by getting Gasol for peanuts. Wonder if he would have those 3 rings if he had been drafted by the Cavs and played with Boozer and Mo Williams? Exactly. You could inserted Wade, Carter or T-Mac to play with a prime Shaq during those years and they would have won a ring. In fact we saw that scenario play out when Shaq won a ring with Wade.
3 finals MVP>2 finals MVP. And BTW he was dominant in all 3 of those rings. He didn't shoot 41% for a finals series and go 6/22 in a game 7 @ home like Kobe did. |
I've been waiting for you to show yourself. Now you do it... You are just making stuff up and have no idea what you are talking about. |
Shaq = 3 time All defense player during the Lakers title run, but yeah let's pretend like his elite rim protecting ability didn't matter.
Whoever Kobe was guarding, they run into Shaq.
Whoever T-Mac was guarding, they run into Steven Hunter.
It's alot easier to put more effort into defense when you have another guy carrying your team into the playoffs and finals year after year as opposed to carrying the offense by yourself.
Kobe's record during the 3-peat ERA when Shaq was out = 12-11
Shaq's record during the 3-peat ERA when Kobe was out = 25-7
If people want to debate Kobe vs Lebron, people need to acknowledge Kobe early in his career played with an elite HOF center and elite coach, while Lebron played with Carlos Boozer and Larry Hughes and even carried those bums to the finals, where as Kobe without Shaq wouldn't even make the playoffs.
Last edited by george w kush on Sun Apr 21, 2019 10:46 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bfc1125roy
Starting Rotation
Joined: 10 Dec 2011
Posts: 682
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 21, 2019 10:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | bfc1125roy wrote: | | I was talking purely about individual skill. When it comes to contributions to winning games, that is a different topic and will need a different breakdown. |
Then who cares? This gets into the realm of that oddball who graded Ben Simmons an F for his offensive skills. But regardless, any skill that does not contribute to winning games has questionable relevance outside of And-1 and the Globetrotters.
|
Well it matters, but you just need more context. For example Magic Johnson was neither an elite scorer nor an elite defender, but he was such a good passer (and pretty good rebounder) that he contributed significantly to his team winning games. So while the individual skills matter, when it comes to how that plays into each player contributing to team wins, it is more nuanced. Also, I still do think individual skills do a play a factor in the "who is the better player" debate. It is not the end all be all, though.
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: |
You keep saying that the basis for your opinions is too nuanced or too long for a message board. Then you toss in a gratuitous swipe at ESPN. Okay. |
Well, if you want to understand how each player contributed to their teams winning, you need to understand how they played in their respective offensive and defensive schemes. Which would require you to understand what each of those schemes are, what each player's role was, then understand which role Kobe/LeBron played, and so on.
So just for offense, I would have to in detail, break down the Triangle offense, the 4 out 1 in offense, and so on. That can get very complex very quickly, as there have been entire books written about just the options in the Triangle offense. Basically, I would have to break down about 5 different NBA offenses. Then I would have to do the same for defense. Then I could finally explain how each player's stats are represented in terms of their function in these different schemes. I could probably write 10-20+ pages just on this alone.
I think that is too long for a forum post. I also think that if I did post that, most people would probably not read it. If I am wrong, and people are interested in reading such long and detailed breakdowns comparing Kobe and LeBron, then I am happy to write these posts up and share them. I hope though, that folks who disagree with the conclusions of these posts spend some time reading the rationale behind them before criticizing my work. Just let me know. I am already doing a lot of work for the Tyronn Lue - Monty Williams series, though, so if there is interest I might have to pause that, or start this one later.
The ESPN "swipe" was in reference to my point about the modern media preferring soundbites to actual meaningful analysis. Obviously ESPN, unless it's Kobe's Detail (which btw is very good at breaking down this nuance) does not really care much for that, as they are more of a headline driven media organization with little depth, as that, in their opinion, is the most optimal for maximizing their revenues.
_________________
(bleep) David Stern. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
