In the same mins, Jordan has more PTs/RBs/ASTs/BLKs/STLs but less TOs then Kobe

[guy]

Jordan played 41,010 mins and Kobe has played 41,102 mins, roughly same amount. Despite the fact that they've played about the same amount, Jordan has nearly 4,000 more points, 700 more rebounds, 400 more assists, 800 more steals, and 300 more blocks. Alot of people say that the main reason Kobe doesn't come anywhere near Jordan's stats despite playing just as much is cause of his reduced role coming out of HS and having to defer to Shaq. If thats the case, can someone explain why Kobe has 400 more turnovers then Jordan?

[LA_Showtime]

Like you said, a lot of those numbers are lower because Kobe came out of high school, and because of Shaq. They're also lower because Jordan was the better player, although I'm going to assume you knew that. :oldlol:

Kobe has and never will be a natural play maker, and that's what, IMO, has caused him to never reach his full potential. He's had moments or stretches of games where he's found a happy medium, but more often than not he's either shot too much, passed too much, or got his feelings hurt and just played passively. Kobe's turnover's are a result of making a surprisingly high number of bad decisions for a player of his caliber, and obviously aren't helped by his finger injuries. Kobe also has never had a Scottie Pippen type of player to run the offense and get other guys involved.

[rodman91]

This Jordan dude must be good.

[pauk]

Ofcourse? Jordan was a much better talent...

[TheFrozenOne]

different era's...and pace.

Look at Oscar's Stats and minutes compared to Jordan....or Wilt's

Jordan in the modern era would be a 42%fg putting up 25 - 30PPG in his prime/modern era.

just think that in the 80's there were over 30 players who scored over 24PPG on 50%FG......

it has only been done 5times in the past 12 years.

[guy]

Kobe also has never had a Scottie Pippen type of player to run the offense and get other guys involved.

Irrelevant in this case cause he would have more assists to go along with more turnovers.

[Glide2keva]

This Jordan dude must be good.
A little bit.

He did suffer from Chronic "Good at basketball" Disease.

[StacksOnDeck]

You feel insecure or something lol?

[32Dayz]

Currently :
Jordan > JWest > Kobe

In the future :
Jordan > JWest > Wade > Kobe

:applause:

[guy]

You feel insecure or something lol?

Nope. Someone just brought it up the other day and I thought it was an interesting observation due to many people's reasoning behind the huge difference in their stats so I thought I'd make a thread about it.

[Scholar]

Currently :
Jordan > JWest > Kobe

In the future :
Jordan > JWest > Wade > Kobe

:applause:

I think Kobe cheated on Vanessa with your mom. That would make sense for why you're always trying to bag on the guy. :facepalm

Anyway, this isn't a surprise. Jordan was clearly the better player, as well as the guy who was given a starting spot immediately after being drafted. Kobe coming off the bench for the first couple seasons of his career didn't help him much.

[Heavincent]

Currently :
Jordan > JWest > Kobe

In the future :
Jordan > JWest > Wade > Kobe

:applause:

You probably think Jacque Vaughn is better than Kobe too.

Your opinion is irrelevant.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

You're welcome Guy :D

[swi7ch]

Also, Jordan has never quit on his team in the playoffs and finals unlike Kobe.

[TheFrozenOne]

Also, Jordan has never quit on his team in the playoffs and finals unlike Kobe.


Yes he did....in 87' 89' and 90'

[Glide2keva]

different era's...and pace.

Look at Oscar's Stats and minutes compared to Jordan....or Wilt's

Jordan in the modern era would be a 42%fg putting up 25 - 30PPG in his prime/modern era.

just think that in the 80's there were over 30 players who scored over 24PPG on 50%FG......

it has only been done 5times in the past 12 years.

Wow. :facepalm

[KOBEtherealKing]

Also, Jordan has never quit on his team in the playoffs and finals unlike Kobe.

Please explain your statement? When, what, where, why....how?

[swi7ch]

different era's...and pace.

Look at Oscar's Stats and minutes compared to Jordan....or Wilt's

Jordan in the modern era would be a 42%fg putting up 25 - 30PPG in his prime/modern era.

just think that in the 80's there were over 30 players who scored over 24PPG on 50%FG......

it has only been done 5times in the past 12 years.

It is actually a much easier/softer era today. Just look at all the rule changes that pu$$ifies the league. Did you see how the late 80s/early 90s Pistons play? Or how about the mid-90s Knicks? Tackling a player mid-air is considered a foul or a warning. Today, it equals suspension.

Jordan would do more damage to today's kids not just because of his basketball skills but his athleticism and physical prowess.

[ThatsGame]

http://thehoopdoctors.com/online2/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/goat2.jpg

[swi7ch]

Please explain your statement? When, what, where, why....how?
Off the top of my head, Kobe quit against the PHO series. I believe this is the one where LAL had like a 3-1 lead and then PHO came back to win the series. He quit on them and refused to take any shot in I believe one half of the game.

He also quit during the last game of the series when BOS won the championship. Jordan never quits on his team even when his team is down... especially in the Finals!

There are more but it's hard to type on my phone.

[32Dayz]

http://thehoopdoctors.com/online2/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/goat2.jpg

Owned. :applause:

[talkingconch]

Owned. :applause:
No not really. 90's Doesn't equal the 2000's.

You still spew nonsense. :roll:

[TheFrozenOne]

Owned. :applause:

http://images4.fanpop.com/image/user_images/2173000/AlphaWolf-2173969_446_591.jpg

[32Dayz]

No not really. 90's Doesn't equal the 2000's.

You still spew nonsense. :roll:

Yea... in the 90's you could actually touch guards and play real defense.

Kobe's TS% in the playoffs before hand checking was .515% :roll:

[SuperPippen]

http://images4.fanpop.com/image/user_images/2173000/AlphaWolf-2173969_446_591.jpg

:lol

I can't tell who's worse, you, or 32dayz.

[LA_Showtime]

Irrelevant in this case cause he would have more assists to go along with more turnovers.

No, it's not. Like I said, Kobe's not a natural play maker and he never will be. He would, however, have less turnovers if he wasn't handling the ball as much as he does, and I'd argue he'd be slightly more efficient too.

[guy]

No, it's not. Like I said, Kobe's not a natural play maker and he never will be. He would, however, have less turnovers if he wasn't handling the ball as much as he does, and I'd argue he'd be slightly more efficient too.

Right. But when it comes to his stats in comparison to Jordan, with a greater playmaker role not only would he have more turnovers, but he also should have more assists. Thats not the case though. Thats why it really doesn't have much to do with Scottie Pippen, and more to do with the fact that he's just not as great of a passer/playmaker as Jordan.

[andgar923]

different era's...and pace.

Look at Oscar's Stats and minutes compared to Jordan....or Wilt's

Jordan in the modern era would be a 42%fg putting up 25 - 30PPG in his prime/modern era.

just think that in the 80's there were over 30 players who scored over 24PPG on 50%FG......

it has only been done 5times in the past 12 years.

But at 40 years old way past his prime, he averaged 20pts on .445 fg% and only 4.0 ft attempts.

His TO wasn't the high TO avg that some (Kobe fans) fantasize about either.

A prime MJ would obliterate today's era.

[Yao Ming's Foot]

Off the top of my head, Kobe quit against the PHO series. I believe this is the one where LAL had like a 3-1 lead and then PHO came back to win the series. He quit on them and refused to take any shot in I believe one half of the game.

He also quit during the last game of the series when BOS won the championship. Jordan never quits on his team even when his team is down... especially in the Finals!

There are more but it's hard to type on my phone.

unless the Birmingham Barons need a first string benchwarmer :oldlol:


Jordan mythologists are the most delusion fan base around. No player has quit like Jordan has.

[guy]

unless the Birmingham Barons need a first string benchwarmer :oldlol:


Jordan mythologists are the most delusion fan base around. No player has quit like Jordan has.

What? There's a difference between quiting in the offseason and quitting in a game.

[Yao Ming's Foot]

04 Spurs 94.1
99 Spurs 95.0
04 Pistons 95.4
01 Spurs 98.0
01 76ers 98.9
08 Celtics 98.9
00 Suns 99.0
04 Rockets 99.0
02 Nets 99.5
01 Kings 99.6
04 Twolves 99.7
02 Spurs 99.7
03 Spurs 99.7
93 Knicks 99.7
97 Heat 100.6
00 Blazers 100.8
02 Kings 101.1
98 Pacers 101.6
08 Spurs 101.8
01 Blazers 101.8
09 Magic 101.9
00 Kings 102.1

MJ vs 97 Heat

Game 1 15 for 31
Game 2 4 for 15
Game 3 14 for 25
Game 4 9 for 35
Game 5 11 for 31

MJ vs 93 Knicks

Game 1 10 for 27
Game 2 12 for 32
Game 3 3 for 18
Game 4 18 for 30
Game 5 11 for 24
Game 6 8 for 24

Amazing how inefficient Jordan was the couple of times he faced defensive teams on the same level that Kobe faced regularly

:confusedshrug:

The Jordan era is the juiced era of basketball. His numbers are inflated subpar defense being played.

[Yao Ming's Foot]

What? There's a difference between quiting in the offseason and quitting in a game.

Yeah one is human nature and has happened to every single player in the NBA with a brain and an ability to look at the time remaining in the game and determine if they have any chance of winning the game.

The other is leaving your teammates and fans high and dry so you can play with the ants in the outfield.

The Bulls made the ECF without Jordan. He cost his teammates a title for that nonsense.

[guy]

Yeah one is human nature and has happened to every single player in the NBA with a brain and an ability to look at the time remaining in the game and determine if they have any chance of winning the game.

The other is leaving your teammates and fans high and dry so you can play with the ants in the outfield.

The Bulls made the ECF without Jordan. He cost his teammates a title for that nonsense.

Wow this is the dumbest sh*t I've ever heard. The Lakers were down 15 at the end of the first half. They weren't done at that point. Kobe gave up and quit in the middle of a game. Thats completely disrespectful.

On the other hand, every player has a perfectly acceptable right to retire in the offseason if they don't feel like they can play anymore. What do you expect him to do? Play even if he doesn't feel like it anymore just for his teammates and a check?

[andgar923]

04 Spurs 94.1
99 Spurs 95.0
04 Pistons 95.4
01 Spurs 98.0
01 76ers 98.9
08 Celtics 98.9
00 Suns 99.0
04 Rockets 99.0
02 Nets 99.5
01 Kings 99.6
04 Twolves 99.7
02 Spurs 99.7
03 Spurs 99.7
93 Knicks 99.7
97 Heat 100.6
00 Blazers 100.8
02 Kings 101.1
98 Pacers 101.6
08 Spurs 101.8
01 Blazers 101.8
09 Magic 101.9
00 Kings 102.1

MJ vs 97 Heat

Game 1 15 for 31
Game 2 4 for 15
Game 3 14 for 25
Game 4 9 for 35
Game 5 11 for 31

MJ vs 93 Knicks

Game 1 10 for 27
Game 2 12 for 32
Game 3 3 for 18
Game 4 18 for 30
Game 5 11 for 24
Game 6 8 for 24

Amazing how inefficient Jordan was the couple of times he faced defensive teams on the same level that Kobe faced regularly

:confusedshrug:

The Jordan era is the juiced era of basketball. His numbers are inflated subpar defense being played.

YOu're forgetting one thing.....

The rules were different.

Prime MJ vs the Pistons and Celtics Kobe faced, would've been a better result than Kobe's performances under today's rules.

[Asukal]

Ahahaha here comes that defensive rating idiot! :roll: :roll: :roll:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

I love how that moron posts his defensive ratings after being thoroughly exposed about them in another thread (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=250685&page=6).

Most of the teams today that you see with a "GREAT" DRtg are so inept offensively it takes them 90% of the shot clock to run their plays (most if it is isolation garbage anyway). Of course you see less possessions.

[Yao Ming's Foot]

Ahahaha here comes that defensive rating idiot! :roll: :roll: :roll:

Jordan mythologists love stats until you point how bad statistically the defenses Jordan faced were

:confusedshrug:

[Yao Ming's Foot]

I love how that moron continues to post defensive ratings after being completely exposed about them in another thread (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=250685&page=6).

Most of the teams today that you see with a "GREAT" DRtg are so inept offensively it takes them 90% of the shot clock to run their plays (most if it is isolation garbage anyway). Of course you see less possessions.

I'm exposed by people who don't even know what it means?

Its not a points per game measure, its points per possession.

[bwink23]

04 Spurs 94.1
99 Spurs 95.0
04 Pistons 95.4
01 Spurs 98.0
01 76ers 98.9
08 Celtics 98.9
00 Suns 99.0
04 Rockets 99.0
02 Nets 99.5
01 Kings 99.6
04 Twolves 99.7
02 Spurs 99.7
03 Spurs 99.7
93 Knicks 99.7
97 Heat 100.6
00 Blazers 100.8
02 Kings 101.1
98 Pacers 101.6
08 Spurs 101.8
01 Blazers 101.8
09 Magic 101.9
00 Kings 102.1

MJ vs 97 Heat

Game 1 15 for 31
Game 2 4 for 15
Game 3 14 for 25
Game 4 9 for 35
Game 5 11 for 31

MJ vs 93 Knicks

Game 1 10 for 27
Game 2 12 for 32
Game 3 3 for 18
Game 4 18 for 30
Game 5 11 for 24
Game 6 8 for 24

Amazing how inefficient Jordan was the couple of times he faced defensive teams on the same level that Kobe faced regularly

:confusedshrug:

The Jordan era is the juiced era of basketball. His numbers are inflated subpar defense being played.




And yet, using those SAME DEFENSIVE RATING metrics....the 2003 Wizards would be considered a better defensive team than the 1991 Chicago Bulls, who had 2 of the best defenders of all-time, and a great defensive player in Horace Grant.

The only thing different about the defense of the 2000's and the late 80's, early 90's are the rules(WEAKER in 2000's), 3-point shooting, and GAME PACE....the eFG% of the eras is nearly IDENTICAL, with the 2000's having 2 seasons over 50%eFG.



NOW SIT DOWN SON....:pimp:

[Yao Ming's Foot]

Wow this is the dumbest sh*t I've ever heard. The Lakers were down 15 at the end of the first half. They weren't done at that point. Kobe gave up and quit in the middle of a game. Thats completely disrespectful.

On the other hand, every player has a perfectly acceptable right to retire in the offseason if they don't feel like they can play anymore. What do you expect him to do? Play even if he doesn't feel like it anymore just for his teammates and a check?

I don't know I seem to think quitting a season and a half worth of games and costing your teammates a good chance of two titles is greater than quitting 15 mins of a game when a team is going nowhere.

I imagine if Pippen instead of Jordan was the player fooling around with the Barons the mythologists would have a different spin on it.

[Asukal]

Jordan mythologists love stats until you point how bad statistically the defenses Jordan faced were

:confusedshrug:

Using a stat in the wrong context shows just how little you understand. Your argument has been crushed awhile back I don't know why you insist on using it. :lol

[Yao Ming's Foot]

And yet, using those SAME DEFENSIVE RATING metrics....the 2003 Wizards would be considered a better defensive team than the 1991 Chicago Bulls, who had 2 of the best defenders of all-time, and a great defensive player in Horace Grant.

The only thing different about the defense of the 2000's and the late 80's, early 90's are the rules(WEAKER in 2000's), 3-point shooting, and GAME PACE....the eFG% of the eras is nearly IDENTICAL, with the 2000's having 2 seasons over 50%eFG.



NOW SIT DOWN SON....:pimp:

Why did the 2003 Wizards give up less points per possession than the 1991 Bulls?

[Yao Ming's Foot]

Using a stat in the wrong context shows just how little you understand. Your argument has been crushed awhile back I don't know why you insist on using it. :lol

Amazing how the context and era suddenly become important around here for this stat but not for any offensive stats coming from the same era. Keep the inflated offensive stats ignored the inflated defensive stats. :oldlol:

You guys are like a broken record of excuses. I wish you would have a meeting so you could come up with a consistent logical viewpoint.

[Nevaeh]

I'm exposed by people who don't even know what it means?

Its not a points per game measure, its points per possession.

You were exposed on how possessions work in that other thread as well, genius. You started your flawed premise here about a year ago, and yet continue to make fool out of yourself based on a premise that's easily exposed by people who watch, play and understand the game.
:rolleyes:

[bwink23]

Why did the 2003 Wizards give up less points per possession than the 1991 Bulls?



The 1995-1996 Chicago Bulls, considered one of the GREATEST DEFENSIVE TEAMS of ALL-TIME with MJ, Pippen, Rodman, and Harper.....had a D-Rating of 101.8.....Just in the year 2000 alone, there were 9 TEAMS with a D-Rating better than that, LOL!!!! DEEERRRRRR!!!! :hammerhead:


PUT THE CRACK PIPE DOWN SON, you can't win over common sense.

[Yao Ming's Foot]

You were exposed on how possessions work in that other thread as well, genius. You started your flawed premise here about a year ago, and yet continue to make fool out of yourself based on a premise that's easily exposed by people who watch, play and understand the game.
:rolleyes:

Same nameless guy in some nameless thread exposed me but none of you actually remember how he did it? Why can't you guys just write the argument that supposedly "destroyed" me again. Its not like you have anything better to talk about. You are still fawning over Jordan for the millionth time.

[Yao Ming's Foot]

The 1995-1996 Chicago Bulls, considered one of the GREATEST DEFENSIVE TEAMS of ALL-TIME with MJ, Pippen, Rodman, and Harper.....had a D-Rating of 101.8.....Just in the year 2000 alone, there were 9 TEAMS with a D-Rating better than that, LOL!!!! DEEERRRRRR!!!! :hammerhead:


PUT THE CRACK PIPE DOWN SON, you can't win over common sense.


I didnt see an answer to my question. If they are one of the greatest defenses of all time whyy did they give up more points per possession than 9 teams in 2000?

[Nevaeh]

Why did the 2003 Wizards give up less points per possession than the 1991 Bulls?

Oh gee, I don't know. Maybe they um.......let me think ......... perhaps held on to the ball a bit longer during the 24 second clock each possession maybe?

[Asukal]

Amazing how the context and era suddenly become important around here for this stat but not for any offensive stats coming from the same era. Keep the inflated offensive stats ignored the inflated defensive stats. :oldlol:

You guys are like a broken record of excuses. I wish you would have a meeting so you could come up with a consistent logical viewpoint.

Logical? That coming from you? :roll: :roll: :roll:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

I'm exposed by people who don't even know what it means?

Its not a points per game measure, its points per possession.

Who said it was a PPG measure? I brought up possessions for a reason, twit.

[Yao Ming's Foot]

Oh gee, I don't know. Maybe they um.......let me think ......... perhaps held on to the ball a bit longer during the 24 second clock each possession maybe?

Do you know what per possession means? It makes no difference if its a fast or slow paced offense. Its points divided by the number of possessions

:facepalm .

[necya]

oh no, he came back with this shit again...:banghead:

[guy]

I don't know I seem to think quitting a season and a half worth of games and costing your teammates a good chance of two titles is greater than quitting 15 mins of a game when a team is going nowhere.

I imagine if Pippen instead of Jordan was the player fooling around with the Barons the mythologists would have a different spin on it.

He clearly left for personal reasons. If Pippen's dad died and then he retired, no one would give him the sh*t that you're giving Jordan. Quitting in a game is completely different because his teammates/fans have a different expectation of him. If you're going to play the game, play with 100% effort. The offseason is not an inappropriate time to quit, as opposed to the middle of a season, playoff run, or game. Its not like a player can't only retire because of old age or injury. What the hell should it matter to him if it means the likes of BJ Armstrong doesn't get an extra title? He was the biggest reason for their success anyway.

If you don't understand the huge difference you clearly have an agenda or just dumb as shit.

[Nevaeh]

Same nameless guy in some nameless thread exposed me but none of you actually remember how he did it? Why can't you guys just write the argument that supposedly "destroyed" me again. Its not like you have anything better to talk about. You are still fawning over Jordan for the millionth time.

Dude, don't play dumb. You know damn well you read every post in that thread, and got boxed in, based on how "defense rating" actually works, in relation to how late or early teams shoot, based on the shot clock. quit playin' :oldlol:

[bwink23]

I didnt see an answer to my question. If they are one of the greatest defenses of all time whyy did they give up more points per possession than 9 teams in 2000?


There have been 3 other posters here who already answered your question.

LONGER possessions of the ball in the 24 seconds they have to take a shot, less running game....slower pace.

DERRRR!!!! :hammerhead:

[Nevaeh]

Do you know what per possession means? It makes no difference if its a fast or slow paced offense. Its points divided by the number of possessions

:facepalm .

And what determines number of possessions? Oh yeah, that's right, TIME does. (You know, that big ole clock on top of the hoop that's counting down the number of minutes left in the game?

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Do you know what per possession means? It makes no difference if its a fast or slow paced offense. Its points divided by the number of possessions

:facepalm .

You do know that the league in 2003 shot (600+) more 3PA than in 1991, right?

[Yao Ming's Foot]

There have been 3 other posters here who already answered your question.

LONGER possessions of the ball in the 24 seconds they have to take a shot, less running game....slower pace.

DERRRR!!!! :hammerhead:

Team 1 takes has a slow place and scores 50 points in 50 possessions

Team 2 has a fast pace and scores 100 points in 100 possessions

The opposing team defensive rating for the game 100.0 for both games

:facepalm

[bwink23]

Do you know what per possession means? It makes no difference if its a fast or slow paced offense. Its points divided by the number of possessions

:facepalm .



If the defense was actually better, then it would show up in the FG%'s....but the eFG% of both the 2000's and the late 80's and early 90's is damn near identical....now why is that??? :rolleyes:

[Yao Ming's Foot]

You do know that the league in 2003 shot about 600+ more 3PA, right?

yeah and? what percentage did they make?

[bwink23]

Team 1 takes has a slow place and scores 50 points in 50 possessions

Team 2 has a fast pace and scores 100 points in 100 possessions

The opposing team defensive rating for the game 100.0 for both games

:facepalm


There are thousands of different scenarios you can make up :facepalm

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

yeah and? what percentage did they make?

Yeah and? What do you mean yeah and? :oldlol: 3PT are worth an extra point.

[Miserio]

If MJ was on the league today, they would have to put the handcheck back because he would score so much it would be boring.

[bwink23]

Yeah and? What do you mean yeah and? :oldlol: 3PT are worth an extra point.


Did you know the 2000 Hornets were a better defensive team than the 1996 Chicago Bulls??? :rolleyes:

[Yao Ming's Foot]

Yeah and? What do you mean yeah and? :oldlol: 3PT are worth an extra point.

so if anything they would increase a teams defensive rating since there are more of them

3 times .349 = 1.05 points per possession the avg def rating was 103.6

More 3 pters increased their defensive rating it did not decrease it

Come up with a new theory please..

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

so if anything they would increase a teams defensive rating since there are more of them

3 times .349 = 1.05 points per possession the avg def rating was 103.6

More 3 pters increased their defensive rating it did not decrease it

Come up with a new theory please..

:roll:

I don't think even you know what you're talking about now.

Pace in 2003: 91.0; Pace in 1991: 107.9 -- any questions?

[Yao Ming's Foot]

I like how you guys who dislike defensive ratings are completely ignorant of that fact that it is composed completely of offensive statistics.

If its "wrong" for being too high.... the offensive numbers from that era are "wrong". Don't you get that you dopes?

:lol

[Yao Ming's Foot]

:roll:

I don't think even you know what you're talking about now.

Pace in 2003: 91.0; Pace in 1991: 107.9 -- any questions?

Yeah my question is what does that have to do with anything?

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Yeah my question is what does that have to do with anything?

600 more 3PA = more PPP = more reliant on your half court offense = less pace (points/offense in transition) = better defensive rating

Maybe if you used your brain we wouldn't have to spoon feed you?

[Nevaeh]

600 more 3PA = more PPP = more reliant on your half court offense = less pace (points/offense in transition) = better defensive rating

Maybe if you used your brain we wouldn't have to spoon feed you?

YMF was soooooo sure he had found the Magic Bullet to take down MJ, and basically ran into another brick wall, because he wanted "Defense Rating" to be the "Be All, End All", and it's not. Poor kid.........

Give him props though, he's dedicated :oldlol:

[Yao Ming's Foot]

600 more 3PA = more PPP = more reliant on your half court offense = less pace (points/offense in transition) = better defensive rating

Maybe if you used your brain we wouldn't have to spoon feed you?


breaks down where the bolded ends

Its a really simple formula

Points scored divided by # of possessions defended times 100.

The Suns didnt just slow down there offense because they shoot more 3s than they did in the 90s. You are just making a blindless leap grasping at straws trying to make sense of it all.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

YMF was soooooo sure he had found the Magic Bullet to take down MJ, and basically ran into another brick wall, because he wanted "Defense Rating" to be the "Be All, End All", and it's not. Poor kid.........

Give him props though, he's dedicated :oldlol:

The Kobe cult will do just about anything to defend their man. I call it hero worship. :lol

[Mr. I'm So Rad]

Do the mods have the day off?

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

breaks down where the bolded ends

Its a really simple formula

Points scored divided by # of possessions defended times 100.

The Suns didnt just slow down there offense because they shoot more 3s than they did in the 90s. You are just making a blindless leap grasping at straws trying to make sense of it all.

No, the Suns just decided to never play defense. Look where that got them. What's D'Antoni doing these days? :oldlol:

Who's next?

[Nevaeh]

The Kobe cult will do just about anything to defend their man. I call it hero worship. :lol

Yeah, stay tuned for Yao Ming's Foot to blame teams holding the ball longer during the shot clock as the reason Kobe couldn't catch up to MJ in points sooner. Or rebounds. or assists. Or blocks and steals. Or MVPs. Or Finals MVPs. Or................

[BlueandGold]

You know call me crazy but some people actually think Jordan was better than Kobe.

[RRR3]

You like Defensive Rating, eh Yao?

Well, guess what?

Tracy McGrady has a lower career Defensive rating than your beloved Kobe. Clearly, by your logic, T-Mac>Kobe on defense.

Oh, Dwyane Wade has a lower DRTG too! Amazing :eek: And here you were arguing Kobe>Wade on defense in that other thread. :no:

Let's look at guards who had lower DRTG's than Kobe in the years he made all-defensive teams (I bolded the hilarious ones)

1999-00: Ron Harper, Jason Kidd

2000-01: Jason Kidd, Eddie Jones, Charlie Ward, Dan Majerle, Latrell Sprewell, Allen Iverson, Doug Christie, Anthony Carter, Derek Anderson, Erick Strickland, Terry Porter, Aaron McKie, Bobby Jackson, Hershey Hawkins, Baron Davis, Bonzi Wells, Eric Snow, Elliot Perry, Tracy McGrady, Tim Hardaway, Mario Elie, Tony Delk, Chris Childs, Rodney Buford, Brevin Knight, Allan Houston, Eddie House, Adrian Griffin, Antonio Daniels, Jason Williams, David Wesley, John Stockton....the list goes on, too! :lol

2001-02: Jason Kidd, Stephen Jackson, Eddie Jones, Allen Iverson, Tracy McGrady, Kerry Kittles, amongst others

2002-03: Jason Kidd, Kerry Kittles, Manu Ginobili, Stephen Jackson, Doug Christie, Michael Jordan, Chauncey Billups, amongst others

2003-04: Manu Ginobili, Jamaal Tinsley, Vince Carter, Baron Davis, Dwyane Wade, amongst others

2005-06: Manu Ginobili, Jason Kidd, Tracy McGrady, Mike Miller, Vince Carter, Tony Parker, Dwyane Wade, amongst others

2006-07: Tracy McGrady, Monta Ellis, Dwyane Wade, Jacque Vaughn, Luther Head, Brent Barry, Kirk Hinrich, Beno Udrih, Larry Hughes, Vassilis Spanoulis :roll:, amongst others

2007-08: Tracy McGrady, Chris Paul, Ray Allen, Bonzi Wells, amongst others

2008-09: Dwyane Wade, Brevin Knight, George Hill, Mickael Pietrus, Tony Allen, Delonte West

2009-10: Brandon Jennings, Manu Ginobili, James Harden, Raymond Felton, Carlos Delfino, Dwyane Wade, amongst others

2010-11: Mario Chalmers, Dwyane Wade, Tony Allen, Nate Robinson, Von Wafer, Derrick Rose, Kyle Korver :roll: , amongst others



Damn, Yao, according to your logic, Kobe has NEVER deserved all-defense :lol

[bwink23]

YAO MING'S DONG


Let me a REAL SIMPLE correlation for you....

PPG = points per game.
Pace = avg. number of possessions per 48 minutes.

PPG/pace = Points scored per possession, regardless of offense or defense.

Average in the NBA from 1987-1993 = 1.088 points per possession.
average in the NBA from 2005-2011 = 1.079 points per possession..

Big difference, NOT A CHANCE.....The last 4 years have been over 1.081 ppp, very similar to the late 80's, early 90's.

Peak PPP year in the 2000's = 1.091
Peak PPP year in the 1980's = 1.090.......NOW WHAT??? :hammerhead:



A little common sense goes a long way too son....

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Let me me a REAL SIMPLE correlation for you....

PPG = points per game.
Pace = avg. number of possessions per 48 minutes.

PPG/pace = Points scored per possession, regardless of offense or defense.

Average in the NBA from 1987-1993 = 1.088 points per possession.
average in the NBA from 2005-2011 = 1.079 points per possession..

Big difference, NOT A CHANCE.....The last 4 years have been over 1.081 ppp, very similar to the late 80's, early 90's.

Peak PPP year in the 2000's = 1.091
Peak PPP year in the 1980's = 1.090.......NOW WHAT??? :hammerhead:

:applause:

[RRR3]

Plus, Kobe played in the "weak 90's remember"? Well, you might not remember, he was keeping the bench warm while he backed up Eddie Jones and Nick Van Exel, occasionally popping up in the playoffs to shoot 4 consecutive airballs in a tight game! :roll:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Plus, Kobe played in the "weak 90's remember"? Well, you might not remember, he was keeping the bench warm while he backed up Eddie Jones and Nick Van Exel, occasionally popping up in the playoffs to shoot 4 consecutive airballs in a tight game! :roll:

Damn Kobe, why is this bench so warm?!? :oldlol:

[bwink23]

Plus, Kobe played in the "weak 90's remember"? Well, you might not remember, he was keeping the bench warm while he backed up Eddie Jones and Nick Van Exel, occasionally popping up in the playoffs to shoot 4 consecutive airballs in a tight game! :roll:


Yeah, "WEAK" 90's with a 43%FG while basically scrimmaging against the other team's bench players in garbage time.....:roll:

[RRR3]

Yeah, "WEAK" 90's with a 43%FG while basically scrimmaging against the other team's bench players in garbage time.....:roll:
Godbe :bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:
Check out this clip of Godbe doin' work on the might Utah Jazz!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ws2yhBzJjis

[bwink23]

Godbe :bowdown: :bowdown: :bowdown:
Check out this clip of Godbe doin' work on the might Utah Jazz!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ws2yhBzJjis


Isn't that the same Bryon Russell Jordan busted for 2 game winners in the Finals ???.......OH SNAP :wtf:

[Kblaze8855]

At least 3 of the worst posts ive ever seen are in here.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Jordan jockers just cant get enough of kobe can they
Almost as obsessive as 32dayz

[LakersReign]

Nothing new here. Just pretty much proves what most of us on here already know. They're clueless when it comes to basketball. The "weak" 90's(where Jordan dominated)....huh?!:hammerhead:





I REST MY CASE!!!!:applause:

[Nevaeh]

Jordan jockers just cant get enough of kobe can they
Almost as obsessive as Yao Ming's Foot is with his flawed Defense Rating theories

Come on now Deuce, you know he had it coming :oldlol:

[Yao Ming's Foot]

YAO MING'S DONG


Let me a REAL SIMPLE correlation for you....

PPG = points per game.
Pace = avg. number of possessions per 48 minutes.

PPG/pace = Points scored per possession, regardless of offense or defense.

Average in the NBA from 1987-1993 = 1.088 points per possession.
average in the NBA from 2005-2011 = 1.079 points per possession..

Big difference, NOT A CHANCE.....The last 4 years have been over 1.081 ppp, very similar to the late 80's, early 90's.

Peak PPP year in the 2000's = 1.091
Peak PPP year in the 1980's = 1.090.......NOW WHAT??? :hammerhead:



A little common sense goes a long way too son....

I wonder why you left out the late 90s and early 00s

:oldlol:

Kobe's had 4 finals trips and 3 rings before 05. You remember that right?

[Nevaeh]

I wonder why you left out the late 90s and early 00s

:oldlol:

Maybe he was showing some mercy on your hero Kobe :confusedshrug:

[Yao Ming's Foot]

You like Defensive Rating, eh Yao?

Well, guess what?

Tracy McGrady has a lower career Defensive rating than your beloved Kobe. Clearly, by your logic, T-Mac>Kobe on defense.

Oh, Dwyane Wade has a lower DRTG too! Amazing :eek: And here you were arguing Kobe>Wade on defense in that other thread. :no:

Let's look at guards who had lower DRTG's than Kobe in the years he made all-defensive teams (I bolded the hilarious ones)

1999-00: Ron Harper, Jason Kidd

2000-01: Jason Kidd, Eddie Jones, Charlie Ward, Dan Majerle, Latrell Sprewell, Allen Iverson, Doug Christie, Anthony Carter, Derek Anderson, Erick Strickland, Terry Porter, Aaron McKie, Bobby Jackson, Hershey Hawkins, Baron Davis, Bonzi Wells, Eric Snow, Elliot Perry, Tracy McGrady, Tim Hardaway, Mario Elie, Tony Delk, Chris Childs, Rodney Buford, Brevin Knight, Allan Houston, Eddie House, Adrian Griffin, Antonio Daniels, Jason Williams, David Wesley, John Stockton....the list goes on, too! :lol

2001-02: Jason Kidd, Stephen Jackson, Eddie Jones, Allen Iverson, Tracy McGrady, Kerry Kittles, amongst others

2002-03: Jason Kidd, Kerry Kittles, Manu Ginobili, Stephen Jackson, Doug Christie, Michael Jordan, Chauncey Billups, amongst others

2003-04: Manu Ginobili, Jamaal Tinsley, Vince Carter, Baron Davis, Dwyane Wade, amongst others

2005-06: Manu Ginobili, Jason Kidd, Tracy McGrady, Mike Miller, Vince Carter, Tony Parker, Dwyane Wade, amongst others

2006-07: Tracy McGrady, Monta Ellis, Dwyane Wade, Jacque Vaughn, Luther Head, Brent Barry, Kirk Hinrich, Beno Udrih, Larry Hughes, Vassilis Spanoulis :roll:, amongst others

2007-08: Tracy McGrady, Chris Paul, Ray Allen, Bonzi Wells, amongst others

2008-09: Dwyane Wade, Brevin Knight, George Hill, Mickael Pietrus, Tony Allen, Delonte West

2009-10: Brandon Jennings, Manu Ginobili, James Harden, Raymond Felton, Carlos Delfino, Dwyane Wade, amongst others

2010-11: Mario Chalmers, Dwyane Wade, Tony Allen, Nate Robinson, Von Wafer, Derrick Rose, Kyle Korver :roll: , amongst others



Damn, Yao, according to your logic, Kobe has NEVER deserved all-defense :lol

Individual defensive rating and team defensive rating are different animals. You can be a bad defensive player and have a good defensive rating. You cant be a bad defensive team and have a good defensive rating.

[bwink23]

I wonder why you left out the late 90s and early 00s

:oldlol:

Kobe's had 4 finals trips and 3 rings before 05. You remember that right?


Cuz that's not the time frame Kobe had his most dominant offensive years now is it?? Same reason i left out Jordan's late years....

DA DEERRR DEEERR DA DE DA DEEERR!!!! :hammerhead:

[Yao Ming's Foot]

Maybe he was showing some mercy on your hero Kobe :confusedshrug:

Right

:oldlol:

[Yao Ming's Foot]

Cuz that's not the time frame Kobe had his most dominant offensive years now is it?? Same reason i left out Jordan's late years....

DA DEERRR DEEERR DA DE DA DEEERR!!!! :hammerhead:

Ah the fact that it was also the era where he faced about 20 playoff teams with a lower def rating than Jordan had nothing to do with it?

[Nevaeh]

Individual defensive rating and team defensive rating are different animals. You can be a bad defensive player and have a good defensive rating. You cant be a bad defensive team and have a good defensive rating.

What's that? You mean there are variables in the game of basketball that can make things like this possible? Nah nah, f@ck that!! I WON'T accept that. Defense Rating formula is FULL PROOF, with no flaws at all!!

You trippin' YMF, you TRIPPIN'!!!

[bwink23]

Ah the fact that it was also the era where he faced about 20 playoff teams with a lower def rating than Jordan had nothing to do with it?


NOPE....the fact he was playing in an era that was in transition, with an influx of inexperienced talent, weaker shooters, slow paced ball and more 3-point shooting had something to do with it :oldlol: Oh, and the handcheck rule that needed to be implemented. ,which resulted in more FT's, higher eFG%....the era Kobe did his most damage, LOL....:lol


Notice how Kobe's FG% never budges year to year, only his FTA's.

[Yao Ming's Foot]

What's that? You mean there are variables in the game of basketball that can make things like this possible? Nah nah, f@ck that!! I WON'T accept that. Defense Rating formula is FULL PROOF, with no flaws at all!!

You trippin' YMF, you TRIPPIN'!!!

What are the flaws with team defensive rating? Is it possible for a bad defensive team to have a good defensive rating? Is it possible for a good defensive team to have a bad defensive rating? How would that happen?

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

What's that? You mean there are variables in the game of basketball that can make things like this possible? Nah nah, f@ck that!! I WON'T accept that. Defense Rating formula is FULL PROOF, with no flaws at all!!

You trippin' YMF, you TRIPPIN'!!!

Yao wants to have his foot and and eat it too. :oldlol:

[guy]

Individual defensive rating and team defensive rating are different animals. You can be a bad defensive player and have a good defensive rating. You cant be a bad defensive team and have a good defensive rating.

Right now the Heat are #9 in DRT and the Knicks are #10. How are those two teams that close defensively to each other? How are the Heat that high and the Knicks that low in the first place? In 2010, the Bobcats and Bucks had lower DRT then the Celtics, Lakers, Magic, and Cavs. In 2008, the AI/Melo Nuggets were in the top 10 in DRT despite the fact that EVERYONE was criticizing how horrible defensively they were the whole year. There's way too many inconsistencies to really depend on DRT meaning much.

[bwink23]

What are the flaws with team defensive rating? Is it possible for a bad defensive team to have a good defensive rating? Is it possible for a good defensive team to have a bad defensive rating? How would that happen?

Look no further than the 1999-2004 era for that....:lol

See 2003 Wizards vs. 1991 Chicago Bulls.....DEERRRR!!! :hammerhead:

[bwink23]

There are OBVIOUS discrepancies in defensive ratings based on ERA's....

A child can figure out that the defensive ratings aren't for CROSS-ERA examination....

1980's-early 90's.....running game, high FT's but lower 3-point shots, 48-50%eFG%.

99-2004....lower eFG%, inexperienced draft picks, high amount of 3's, slow game pace, low FT attempts. 47-48%eFG%.

2005-present....still slow game pace, rule changes to benefit the perimeter players, many more FT's taken compared to early 2000's. 48-50%eFG%

Points per possession is near identical between 2000's and early 1990's.....

[Yao Ming's Foot]

Right now the Heat are #9 in DRT and the Knicks are #10. How are those two teams that close defensively to each other? How are the Heat that high and the Knicks that low in the first place? In 2010, the Bobcats and Bucks had lower DRT then the Celtics, Lakers, Magic, and Cavs. In 2008, the AI/Melo Nuggets were in the top 10 in DRT despite the fact that EVERYONE was criticizing how horrible defensively they were the whole year. There's way too many inconsistencies to really depend on DRT meaning much.

Nuggets were criticized because they were a high pace team and people only look at PPG numbers. The fact that there per possession numbers were pretty good just further validates that defensive rating doesn't punish high paced teams.

[guy]

Nuggets were criticized because they were a high pace team and people only look at PPG numbers. The fact that there per possession numbers were pretty good just further validates that defensive rating doesn't punish high paced teams.

The fact that there DRT is pretty good further validates that DRT is flawed because they were absolutely horrible defensively. They repeatedly made horrible mistakes on defense. Commentators would repeatedly talk about how bad their defense was and even George Karl acknowledged and joked about how bad they were.

[bwink23]

Nuggets were criticized because they were a high pace team and people only look at PPG numbers. The fact that there per possession numbers were pretty good just further validates that defensive rating doesn't punish high paced teams.


In that case, in Offensive Rating we can assume that the late 80's, early 90's had BETTER OFFENSIVE teams, with ratings in 107-108 range...compared to the early 2000's with ratings of 103-104, YES???

[LA_Showtime]

I still don't understand what the point of this thread was. I gave you an objective response, you responded accordingly and repeated what I said, and now you're just arguing with a bunch of people for no reason whatsoever. What are you trying to prove? Jordan > Kobe? Sorry, that's been proved countless times and doesn't even have to be proved because the margin is so wide. Are you trying to prove basketball sucks nowadays? Then don't watch it.

[RRR3]

Defensive rating is only right when it fits my agenda!
I see.

[Yao Ming's Foot]

The fact that there DRT is pretty good further validates that DRT is flawed because they were absolutely horrible defensively. They repeatedly made horrible mistakes on defense. Commentators would repeatedly talk about how bad their defense was and even George Karl acknowledged and joked about how bad they were.


They were not horribly defensively. They just had the fastest offense in the league which make their defense look worse and their offense look better to the common person. When you adjust for pace they were a top ten squad in both categories. How do you think they won 50 games?

[guy]

I still don't understand what the point of this thread was. I gave you an objective response, you responded accordingly and repeated what I said, and now you're just arguing with a bunch of people for no reason whatsoever. What are you trying to prove? Jordan > Kobe? Sorry, that's been proved countless times and doesn't even have to be proved because the margin is so wide. Are you trying to prove basketball sucks nowadays? Then don't watch it.

What are you talking about? I said like two things to someone about DRT.

[guy]

They were not horribly defensively. They just had the fastest offense in the league which make their defense look worse and their offense look better to the common person. When you adjust for pace they were a top ten squad in both categories. How do you think they won 50 games?

Cause they were great offensively and led by two of the best offensive players in the league. Even THERE coach acknowledged how bad they were. Its not like they were the first bad defensive team to win 50 games, nor were they the last.

[bwink23]

Nuggets were criticized because they were a high pace team and people only look at PPG numbers. The fact that there per possession numbers were pretty good just further validates that defensive rating doesn't punish high paced teams.


According to Offensive Rating, the 2003 San Antonio Spurs offense IS EQUAL to that of the 1987 New Jersey Nets..(record of 24-58)

Spurs 2003 champions...


Do you agree with that assessment??

[LA_Showtime]

What are you talking about? I said like two things to someone about DRT.

I'm just curious to know your motive behind starting this thread.

[bwink23]

I'm just curious to know your motive behind starting this thread.


Probably the same motive Kobe fans will have when this board lights up with "Kobe passes MJ in points" threads.

[Yao Ming's Foot]

According to Offensive Rating, the 2003 San Antonio Spurs offense IS EQUAL to that of the 1987 New Jersey Nets..(record of 24-58)

Spurs 2003 champions...


Do you agree with that assessment??

Its not an opinion. Thats like saying according to FG percentage Kwame Brown is greater than Kobe. Do you agree with that?

Its either true or not. The Spurs scored as efficiently on points per possession basis as the Nets. How can you disagree or agree with something that is simply true?

[chazzy]

Team DRTG is an accurate way to measure the best defensive teams in a given season, but I think it's better to adjust the numbers relative to league average when comparing across eras.. similar to what's done at times with scoring efficiency. Rule changes and style of play affect the way offenses are run so it's not a constant offensive variable that defenses are being measured against.

RRR3, there's a big difference between team defensive rating and individual defensive rating. Individual is simply the points given up (per possession) while the player is on the court..that leaves out way too many factors regarding individual D.

[DMAVS41]

Team DRTG is an accurate way to measure the best defensive teams in a given season, but I think it's better to adjust the numbers relative to league average when comparing across eras.. similar to what's done with scoring efficiency. Rule changes and style of play affect the way offenses are run so it's not a constant offensive variable that defenses are being measured against.

RRR3, there's a big difference between team defensive rating and individual defensive rating. Individual is simply the points given up (per possession) while the player is on the court..that leaves out way too many factors regarding individual D.

This...:applause: :applause: :applause: :applause:

[RRR3]

Its not an opinion. Thats like saying according to FG percentage Kwame Brown is greater than Kobe. Do you agree with that?

Its either true or not. The Spurs scored as efficiently on points per possession basis as the Nets. How can you disagree or agree with something that is simply true?
Its not an opinion. Thats like saying according to PPG Vince Carter is greater than Magic Johnson. Do you agree with that?

Its either true or not. Dwyane Wade held his man to less points per possession than Kobe did. How can you disagree or agree with something that is simply true?


I can do it too. Have a taste your own medicine.


@ Chazzy, I don't use DRTG for individuals or teams FYI, I'm just attempting to show Yao how stupid he sounds with his Kobe>MJ agenda.

[Yao Ming's Foot]

Its not an opinion. Thats like saying according to PPG Vince Carter is greater than Magic Johnson. Do you agree with that?

Its either true or not. Dwyane Wade held his man to less points per possession than Kobe did. How can you disagree or agree with something that is simply true?


I can do it too. Have a taste your own medicine.

:confusedshrug:

[DonDadda59]

2012 and people are still doing the MJ vs Kobe thing? Shit is played out. Let's work on Kobe being the best player right now and then we'll worry about the GOAT :oldlol:

[chazzy]

@ Chazzy, I don't use DRTG for individuals or teams FYI, I'm just attempting to show Yao how stupid he sounds with his Kobe>MJ agenda.
Your example is an apples an oranges comparison though - two completely different things. It is a fact that those teams game up fewer points on a possession basis, it's just a matter of how one wants to interpret that. 98-04 is considered one of the best defensive eras for a reason.

[bwink23]

Your example is an apples an oranges comparison though - two completely different things. It is a fact that those teams game up fewer points on a possession basis, it's just a matter of how one wants to interpret that. 98-04 is considered one of the best defensive eras for a reason.


Comparing defensive ratings across eras is also an apples - oranges comparison


Are the 2003 Washington Wizards a better defensive team than the 1991 Chicago Bulls ?? This is NOT a trick question.

[Yao Ming's Foot]

Comparing defensive ratings across eras is also an apples - oranges comparison


Are the 2003 Washington Wizards a better defensive team than the 1991 Chicago Bulls ?? This is NOT a trick question.

No they just have a better defensive rating because offensive statistics in the 90s were inflated.

[bwink23]

No they just have a better defensive rating because offensive statistics in the 90s were inflated.

Offensive rating is "points scored per 100 possessions"....it means the 1987 New Jersey Nets scored more points per possession than the 2003 San Antonio Spurs, which make them the superior offensive team....


Offensive rating is not an inflated stat. It's simple math son, Right??

[DMAVS41]

Comparing defensive ratings across eras is also an apples - oranges comparison


Are the 2003 Washington Wizards a better defensive team than the 1991 Chicago Bulls ?? This is NOT a trick question.

Chazzy already said this though. Its not a good metric to compare across eras. We've literally had 50 page threads proving this before.

However, defensive rating (for a team) is fine for an individual year. Its actually quite good in my opinion.

[bwink23]

No they just have a better defensive rating because offensive statistics in the 90s were inflated.


Based on offensive and defensive ratings, the 1980's had worse defensive ratings simple because they were playing much better offensive teams.....see this isn't so hard.....:hammerhead:

[bwink23]

Chazzy already said this though. Its not a good metric to compare across eras. We've literally had 50 page threads proving this before.

However, defensive rating (for a team) is fine for an individual year. Its actually quite good in my opinion.


I can roll with that....it's easy to see throughout history the shifts in playing styles, rule changes that affect the game. defensive ratings are only worth noting in their respective years or even eras....In the respective year is a much better depiction than even their own eras...

1986-1993.....one era
1994-1998....another era
1999-2004....another era
2005-present....another era

[BEAST Griffin]

different era's...and pace.

Look at Oscar's Stats and minutes compared to Jordan....or Wilt's

Jordan in the modern era would be a 42%fg putting up 25 - 30PPG in his prime/modern era.

just think that in the 80's there were over 30 players who scored over 24PPG on 50%FG......

it has only been done 5times in the past 12 years.

:laugh:

Look up the pace of the Jordan Bulls.

And Michael Jordan would probably score 35+ pgg at 50%+ shooting in this era because of rule changes.

[Yao Ming's Foot]

Offensive rating is "points scored per 100 possessions"....it means the 1987 New Jersey Nets scored more points per possession than the 2003 San Antonio Spurs, which make them the superior offensive team....


Offensive rating is not an inflated stat. It's simple math son, Right??

You guys are worried about ranking teams.

Im talking about ranking the offensive performances against teams in that same year the defensive rating is derived.


Hitting 3 HRS against league average pitching in the deadball era isnt the same as hitting 3 HRS against league average pitching in the steroid era.

[bwink23]

You guys are worried about ranking teams.

Im talking about ranking the offensive performances against teams in that same year the defensive rating is derived.


Hitting 3 HRS against league average pitching in the deadball era isnt the same as hitting 3 HRS against league average pitching in the steroid era.


You dont even know where your going anymore...you were comparing different defensive ratings ACROSS ERAS dumb ass.....big NO NO :no:

[I.R.Beast]

different era's...and pace.

Look at Oscar's Stats and minutes compared to Jordan....or Wilt's

Jordan in the modern era would be a 42%fg putting up 25 - 30PPG in his prime/modern era.

just think that in the 80's there were over 30 players who scored over 24PPG on 50%FG......

it has only been done 5times in the past 12 years.
inb4 defense in the 80s was great players were just better at eberything bck then which is why they scored so much points and at such high percentages.

[I.R.Beast]

:laugh:

Look up the pace of the Jordan Bulls.

And Michael Jordan would probably score 35+ pgg at 50%+ shooting in this era because of rule changes.
no he wouldn't..... What indicates that?..... Jordan play about 8 years of his career that as mostly offense with league averages of 110 points etc.

His percentages and numbers would be down in this era.

[bwink23]

inb4 defense in the 80s was great players were just better at eberything bck then which is why they scored so much points and at such high percentages.



The eFG% from the 80's is IDENTICAL with that of the 2000's, TRY AGAIN.

[guy]

I'm just curious to know your motive behind starting this thread.

I already mentioned why I created this thread. Someone mentioned the other day how Kobe and Jordan have now played about the same career minutes and noted how Kobe has more TOs. I brought this up again because there's an overwhelming amount of people that think the main reason Jordan has such a large career statistical edge over Kobe is because Kobe played many years of his career in a reduced role, his first few years as not much more then a role player and then his next 5-6 years as second fiddle to Shaq. But the greater amount of turnovers help point to that being greatly overblown because if it was just cause Jordan had a significantly greater role on his teams, then there's no reason he should have less turnovers, especially going along with more assists. It was just an interesting observation that I've never heard anyone here point out so I thought I'd make a thread about it.

[I.R.Beast]

It is actually a much easier/softer era today. Just look at all the rule changes that pu$$ifies the league. Did you see how the late 80s/early 90s Pistons play? Or how about the mid-90s Knicks? Tackling a player mid-air is considered a foul or a warning. Today, it equals suspension.

Jordan would do more damage to today's kids not just because of his basketball skills but his athleticism and physical prowess.

but yet teams still scored 108+ ppg a game.... Hard fouls and butchery doesn't constitute "good defense" while it's more physical , Bad defense s bad defense(not saying the defense was bad then).

The fact that you're clobbering a guy that already made it to the rim doesn't make defense better. The phyisclity of the defense back then is very overrated when you compare it to what team were able to do offensively in the 90s up to almost the mid 90s. Obviously playing jailhous ball wasn;t good enought to stop points from being put on the board at a high clip.

[BEAST Griffin]

no he wouldn't..... What indicates that?..... Jordan play about 8 years of his career that as mostly offense with league averages of 110 points etc.

His percentages and numbers would be down in this era.

Look up the pace of the Bulls during the Jordan era.

Then tell me how his stats are inflated because of high pace.

[Yao Ming's Foot]

You dont even know where your going anymore...you were comparing different defensive ratings ACROSS ERAS dumb ass.....big NO NO :no:

Its no different than comparing offensive stats across eras. You cant do one without the other.

It like somebody comparing the HR total of Babe Ruth to Mark Mcgwire.

Somebody pointing out that everybody hit HRs of the pitching that Mcgwire faced and then somebody else claiming that I cant point that out because its across eras.

It so silly.

[bwink23]

Its no different than comparing offensive stats across eras. You cant do one without the other.

It like somebody comparing the HR total of Babe Ruth to Mark Mcgwire.

Somebody pointing out that everybody hit HRs of the pitching that Mcgwire faced and then somebody else claiming that I cant point that out because its across eras.

It so silly.


Hardly silly at all....your logic says the 91 Bulls were a worse defensive team than the 2003 Wizards....your logic says that the 2003 Spurs were a worse offensive team than the 1987 New Jersey Nets....PLEASE KID, don't talk to me about what's SILLY FOOL.

Your problem is your being a math nerd who thinks numbers > context....you can't have one without the other if your gonna make a cross-era examination.


With NO CONTEXT AT ALL....i can easily say that the 1987 Nets, who were in the bottom 5 offensive teams that year, would be a top 10 offensive team in 2001, right there with the Sacramento Kings.....TRUE or FALSE??


The 24-58 Nets....can they go from being a bottom feeder offensive team in 1987 to top-10 offensive team in 2001??? USE YOUR HEAD....do you know basketball or do you just know numbers???

[Yao Ming's Foot]

Hardly silly at all....your logic says the 91 Bulls were a worse defensive team than the 2003 Wizards....your logic says that the 2003 Spurs were a worse offensive team than the 1987 New Jersey Nets....PLEASE KID, don't talk to me about what's SILLY FOOL.

Your problem is your being a math nerd who thinks numbers > context....you can't have one without the other if your gonna make a cross-era examination.


With NO CONTEXT AT ALL....i can easily say that the 1987 Nets, who were in the bottom 5 offensive teams that year, would be a top 10 offensive team in 2001, right there with the Sacramento Kings.....TRUE or FALSE??


The 24-58 Nets....can they go from being a bottom feeder offensive team in 1987 to top-10 offensive team in 2001??? USE YOUR HEAD....do you know basketball or do you just know numbers???

Im not saying every pitcher in the dead ball era was better than every pitcher in the modern era. But hitting a HR in that era sure meant a hell of a lot more than hitting a HR against a modern era player. Do you understand the difference?

[bwink23]

Im not saying every pitcher in the dead ball era was better than every pitcher in the modern era. But hitting a HR in that era sure meant a hell of a lot more than hitting a HR against a modern era player. Do you understand the difference?


This isn't baseball kid, this is BASKETBALL.....do you know what basketball is?? Do you understand how playing styles and rule changes and officiating can greatly affect the play?? Do you understand how the 3-point line has completely changed the game ?? Do you understand that basketball philosophies also changed with the rules and the 3-point line??


Do you understand how ERA-based offensive and defensive ratings are?? It is not an accurate comparison, and never will be.

1991 Bulls < 2003 Wizards defensively.....DERRRR!!!! :hammerhead:

[bwink23]

Im not saying every pitcher in the dead ball era was better than every pitcher in the modern era. But hitting a HR in that era sure meant a hell of a lot more than hitting a HR against a modern era player. Do you understand the difference?


Why all the talk about defense??? Doesn't a team's offensive ability play a part as well?? The 1980's had a higher offensive rating than the early 2000's....

So which is it?? the better offense of the 80's, or the better defense of the early 2000's??

Is it FACT that based on offensive ratings......the defensive would look BETTER in the early 2000's due to the lack of quality offense??

[TheFrozenOne]

:lol at the Jordan stans getting merked...

Kobe in the 80's = 38PPG on 50%FG...Mj couldn't even shoot past 15' in the 80's

[Nevaeh]

:lol at the Jordan stans getting merked...

Kobe in the 80's = 38PPG on 50%FG...Mj couldn't even shoot past 15' in the 80's

No Alpha, I believe it was the "Calculator-Loving Numbers Cruncher" who received the "merking" this time around son.

:cheers:

[with malice]

Complete troll thread.