Myths perpetrated by low IQ Kobe haters

[Deuce Bigalow]

Myth: Kobe is not efficient

Kobe: 55.5 TS%; peak of 58.0; 9 seasons of 55+
Bird: 56.4 TS%; peak of 61.2; 7 seasons of 55+
Hakeem: 55.3 TS%; peak of 57.7; 12 seasons of 55+
Duncan: 55.1 TS%; peak of 57.9; 7 seasons of 55+
West: 55.0 TS%; peak of 59.0; 8 seasons of 55+
Wilt: 54.7 TS%; peak of 68.9; 8 seasons of 55+
MJ: 56.9 TS%; peak of 61.4; 10 seasons of 55+
Shaq: 58.6 TS%; peak of 65.9; 19 seasons of 55+
Lebron: 57.9 TS%; peak of 64.0; 9 seasons of 55+
Russell: 47.1 TS%; peak of 50.0
Baylor: 49.4 TS%; peak of 53.7
Oscar: 56.4 TS%; peak of 58.8; 11 seasons of 55+
Moses: 56.9 TS%; peak of 60.4; 16 seasons of 55+
Magic: 61.0 TS%; peak of 63.7; 13 seasons of 55+
Kareem: 59.2 TS%; peak of 63.9; 19 seasons of 55+

The low IQ point to only FG% when determining efficiency but we higher IQ fans know that free throws and 3-pointers are also needed to be taken into account. TS% is the best stat we have which factors in 3-pointers and freethrows.

Myth: Kobe is the only alltime great that missed the playoffs in his prime

Kobe missed the playoffs once in 04-05.
Wilt missed the playoffs once in 62-63 and in 64-65 he was on a 10-28 team before being traded away.
Kareem missed the playoffs back to back times in 74-75 and 75-76.
Oscar missed the playoffs four times in his prime from 67-68 to 69-70 and 60-61.
Hakeem missed the playoffs once in 91-92 (team went 2-10 without him)
Lebron missed the playoffs in 04-05 after having a 27/7/7 55TS% season.

The highest PER season of all-time was Wilt's 62-63 season. What was his team's record? 31-49 and his Warriors missed the playoffs. Oscar missed the playoffs in a season where he led the league in ppg, apg, and freethrow percentage.

Myth: Kobe is not an alltime great according to advanced stats like PER

Kobe: 23.4 PER; peak of 28.0; 3 seasons of 25+
Bird: 23.5 PER; peak of 27.8; 4 seasons of 25+
Baylor: 22.7 PER; peak of 28.2; 4 seasons of 25+
Russell: 18.9 PER; peak of 22.8
Magic: 24.1 PER; peak of 27.0; 5 seasons of 25+
Wilt: 26.1 PER; peak of 31.8; 8 seasons of 25+
Oscar: 23.2 PER; peak of 27.6; 6 seasons of 25+
MJ: 27.9 PER; peak of 31.7; 12 seasons of 25+
Hakeem: 23.6 PER; peak of 27.3; 5 seasons of 25+
Kareem: 24.6 PER; peak of 29.9; 10 seasons of 25+
Lebron: 27.7 PER; peak of 31.7; 8 seasons of 25+
Duncan: 24.6 PER; peak of 27.1; 5 seasons of 25+
West: 22.9 PER; peak of 25.0; 1 season of 25+
Moses: 22.0 PER, peak of 26.8; 3 seasons of 25+

Kobe is right in Magic and Bird's ballpark when it comes to Hollinger's player efficiency rating.

Myth: Kobe was carried to his first 3 rings

pts-reb-ast-stl-blk fgm/fga
bold indicates leader on the team

2000 WCQF vs Sacramento Kings
1: 23-7-5-0-0 11/22
2: 32-4-1-2-0 12/20
3: 35-3-2-2-0 13/25
4: 34-6-4-2-0 13/30
5: 17-2-6-0-3 7/16
Series: 27.8 PPG, 4.4 RPG, 3.6 APG, 1.2 SPG, 0.6 BPG, 49.6 FG%, 55.7 TS%
2000 WCSF vs Phoenix Suns
1: 25-6-1-3-3 8/17
2: 15-4-6-2-2 6/11
3: 25-5-2-2-2 8/20
4: 23-3-5-2-0 10/20
5: 17-1-3-1-0 6/16
Series: 21 PPG, 3.8 RPG, 3.4 APG, 2 SPG, 1.4 BPG, 45.2 FG%, 52.4 TS%
2000 WCF vs Portland Trailblazers
Series: 20.4 PPG, 4.9 RPG, 5.9 APG, 1.6 SPG, 2.1 BPG, 43.9 FG%, 55.2 TS%
1: 13-3-6-1-1 4/9
2: 12-2-4-1-2 2/9
3: 25-7-7-2-1 11/18
4: 18-4-7-2-3 5/15
5: 17-5-4-0-2 4/13
6: 33-2-6-4-3 12/24
7: 25-11-7-0-4 9/19
2000 Finals Indiana Pacers
1: 14-3-5-1-2 6/13
2: 2-1-4-0-1 1/3
3: DNP
4: 28-4-5-1-2 14/27
5: 8-5-3-2-0 4/20
6: 26-10-4-1-2 8/27
Series: 15.6 PPG, 4.6 RPG, 4.2 APG, 1 SPG, 1.4 BPG, 36.7 FG%, 41.1 TS%

2000 Playoffs: 21.1 PPG, 4.5 RPG, 4.4 APG, 1.5 SPG, 1.5 BPG, 44.2 FG%, 51.7 TS%

2001 WCQF vs Portland Trailblazers
1: 28-6-7-0-0 9/20
2: 25-3-7-3-0 8/11
3: 22-4-9-2-0 9/23
Series: 25 PPG, 4.3 RPG, 7.7 APG, 2.3 SPG, 0 BPG, 48.1%FG, 56.5%TS
2001 WCSF vs Sacramento Kings
1: 29-4-5-0-0 10/23
2: 27-9-5-1-1 9/19
3: 36-7-4-2-0 10/22
4: 48-16-3-2-1 15/29
Series: 35 PPG, 9 RPG, 4.3 APG, 1.3 SPG, 0.5 BPG, 47.3 FG%, 58.8 TS%
2001 WCF vs San Antonio Spurs
1: 45-10-3-1-1 19/35
2: 28-7-6-2-1 11/24
3: 36-9-8-1-0 14/27
4: 24-2-11-2-1 10/19
Series: 33.3 PPG, 7 RPG, 7 APG, 1.5 SPG, 0.8 BPG, 51.4%FG, 57.1%TS
2001 Finals vs Philadelphia 76ers
1: 15-3-5-1-3 7/22
2: 31-8-6-2-2 11/23
3: 32-6-3-2-0 13/30
4: 19-10-9-1-1 6/13
5: 26-12-6-1-1 7/18
Series: 24.6 PPG, 7.8 RPG, 5.8 APG, 1.4 SPG, 1.4 BPG, 41.5 FG%, 50.1 TS%

2001 Playoffs: 29.4 PPG, 7.3 RPG, 6.1 APG, 1.6 SPG, 0.8 BPG, 46.9 FG%, 55.5 TS%

2002 WCQF vs
1: 34-7-3-2-3 10/28
2: 19-6-5-2-0 5/21
3: 25-4-7-2-2 9/19
Series: 26.0 PPG, 5.7 RPG, 5 APG, 2 SPG, 1.7 BPG, 35.3 FG%, 48.3 TS%
2002 WCSF vs San Antonio
1: 20-2-4-0-0 8/18
2: 26-4-6-3-0 12/25
3: 31-6-6-0-1 15/31
4: 28-7-3-1-0 10/27
5: 26-8-5-1-0 10/20
Series: 26.2 PPG, 5.4 RPG, 4.8 APG, 1 SPG, 0.2 BPG, 45.5 FG%, 48.6 TS%
2002 WCF vs Sacramento Kings
1: 30-6-5-2-2 12/26
2: 22-6-2-1-1 9/21
3: 22-2-3-2-2 8/24
4: 25-4-2-2-3 12/26
5: 30-5-3-1-0 11/29
6: 31-11-5-0-0 10/20
7: 30-10-7-2-0 10/26
Series: 27.1 PPG, 6.3 RPG, 3.9 APG, 1.4 SPG, 1.1 BPG, 41.9 FG%, 49.1 TS%
2002 Finals vs New Jersey Nets
1: 22-3-6-1-0 6/16
2: 24-8-3-2-1 9/15
3: 36-6-4-1-2 14/23
4: 25-6-8-2-0 7/16
Series: 26.8 PPG, 5.8 RPG, 5.2 APG, 1.5 SPG, 0.8 BPG, 51.4 FG%, 62.3 TS%

2002 Playoffs: 26.6 PPG, 5.8 RPG, 4.6 APG, 1.4 SPG, 0.9 BPG, 43.4 FG%, 51.1 TS%

2000-2002 Playoffs: 25.3 PPG, 5.7 RPG, 4.9 APG, 1.5 SPG, 1.1 BPG, 44.7 FG%, 52.7 TS%

Low IQ fans like to use this argument a lot. What they might not fully comprehend is that you need to win 3 playoff series before you make the NBA Finals.

[Cold soul]

Myth: Kobe is not efficient

Kobe: 55.5 TS%; peak of 58.0; 9 seasons of 55+
Bird: 56.4 TS%; peak of 61.2; 7 seasons of 55+
Hakeem: 55.3 TS%; peak of 57.7; 12 seasons of 55+
Duncan: 55.1 TS%; peak of 57.9; 7 seasons of 55+
West: 55.0 TS%; peak of 59.0; 8 seasons of 55+
Wilt: 54.7 TS%; peak of 68.9; 8 seasons of 55+
MJ: 56.9 TS%; peak of 61.4; 10 seasons of 55+
Shaq: 58.6 TS%; peak of 65.9; 19 seasons of 55+
Lebron: 57.9 TS%; peak of 64.0; 9 seasons of 55+
Russell: 47.1 TS%; peak of 50.0
Baylor: 49.4 TS%; peak of 53.7
Oscar: 56.4 TS%; peak of 58.8; 11 seasons of 55+
Moses: 56.9 TS%; peak of 60.4; 16 seasons of 55+
Magic: 61.0 TS%; peak of 63.7; 13 seasons of 55+
Kareem: 59.2 TS%; peak of 63.9; 19 seasons of 55+

The low IQ point to only FG% when determining efficiency but we higher IQ fans know that free throws and 3-pointers are also needed to be taken into account. TS% is the best stat we have which factors in 3-pointers and freethrows.

Myth: Kobe is the only alltime great that missed the playoffs in his prime

Kobe missed the playoffs once in 04-05.
Wilt missed the playoffs once in 62-63 and in 64-65 he was on a 10-28 team before being traded away.
Kareem missed the playoffs back to back times in 74-75 and 75-76.
Oscar missed the playoffs four times in his prime from 67-68 to 69-70 and 60-61.
Hakeem missed the playoffs once in 91-92 (team went 2-10 without him)
Lebron missed the playoffs in 04-05 after having a 27/7/7 55TS% season.

The highest PER season of all-time was Wilt's 62-63 season. What was his team's record? 31-49 and his Warriors missed the playoffs. Oscar missed the playoffs in a season where he led the league in ppg, apg, and freethrow percentage.

Myth: Kobe is not an alltime great according to advanced stats like PER

Kobe: 23.4 PER; peak of 28.0; 3 seasons of 25+
Bird: 23.5 PER; peak of 27.8; 4 seasons of 25+
Baylor: 22.7 PER; peak of 28.2; 4 seasons of 25+
Russell: 18.9 PER; peak of 22.8
Magic: 24.1 PER; peak of 27.0; 5 seasons of 25+
Wilt: 26.1 PER; peak of 31.8; 8 seasons of 25+
Oscar: 23.2 PER; peak of 27.6; 6 seasons of 25+
MJ: 27.9 PER; peak of 31.7; 12 seasons of 25+
Hakeem: 23.6 PER; peak of 27.3; 5 seasons of 25+
Kareem: 24.6 PER; peak of 29.9; 10 seasons of 25+
Lebron: 27.7 PER; peak of 31.7; 8 seasons of 25+
Duncan: 24.6 PER; peak of 27.1; 5 seasons of 25+
West: 22.9 PER; peak of 25.0; 1 season of 25+
Moses: 22.0 PER, peak of 26.8; 3 seasons of 25+

Kobe is right in Magic and Bird's ballpark when it comes to Hollinger's player efficiency rating.

Myth: Kobe was carried to his first 3 rings

pts-reb-ast-stl-blk fgm/fga
bold indicates leader on the team

2000 WCQF vs Sacramento Kings
1: 23-7-5-0-0 11/22
2: 32-4-1-2-0 12/20
3: 35-3-2-2-0 13/25
4: 34-6-4-2-0 13/30
5: 17-2-6-0-3 7/16
Series: 27.8 PPG, 4.4 RPG, 3.6 APG, 1.2 SPG, 0.6 BPG, 49.6 FG%, 55.7 TS%
2000 WCSF vs Phoenix Suns
1: 25-6-1-3-3 8/17
2: 15-4-6-2-2 6/11
3: 25-5-2-2-2 8/20
4: 23-3-5-2-0 10/20
5: 17-1-3-1-0 6/16
Series: 21 PPG, 3.8 RPG, 3.4 APG, 2 SPG, 1.4 BPG, 45.2 FG%, 52.4 TS%
2000 WCF vs Portland Trailblazers
Series: 20.4 PPG, 4.9 RPG, 5.9 APG, 1.6 SPG, 2.1 BPG, 43.9 FG%, 55.2 TS%
1: 13-3-6-1-1 4/9
2: 12-2-4-1-2 2/9
3: 25-7-7-2-1 11/18
4: 18-4-7-2-3 5/15
5: 17-5-4-0-2 4/13
6: 33-2-6-4-3 12/24
7: 25-11-7-0-4 9/19
2000 Finals Indiana Pacers
1: 14-3-5-1-2 6/13
2: 2-1-4-0-1 1/3
3: DNP
4: 28-4-5-1-2 14/27
5: 8-5-3-2-0 4/20
6: 26-10-4-1-2 8/27
Series: 15.6 PPG, 4.6 RPG, 4.2 APG, 1 SPG, 1.4 BPG, 36.7 FG%, 41.1 TS%

2000 Playoffs: 21.1 PPG, 4.5 RPG, 4.4 APG, 1.5 SPG, 1.5 BPG, 44.2 FG%, 51.7 TS%

2001 WCQF vs Portland Trailblazers
1: 28-6-7-0-0 9/20
2: 25-3-7-3-0 8/11
3: 22-4-9-2-0 9/23
Series: 25 PPG, 4.3 RPG, 7.7 APG, 2.3 SPG, 0 BPG, 48.1%FG, 56.5%TS
2001 WCSF vs Sacramento Kings
1: 29-4-5-0-0 10/23
2: 27-9-5-1-1 9/19
3: 36-7-4-2-0 10/22
4: 48-16-3-2-1 15/29
Series: 35 PPG, 9 RPG, 4.3 APG, 1.3 SPG, 0.5 BPG, 47.3 FG%, 58.8 TS%
2001 WCF vs San Antonio Spurs
1: 45-10-3-1-1 19/35
2: 28-7-6-2-1 11/24
3: 36-9-8-1-0 14/27
4: 24-2-11-2-1 10/19
Series: 33.3 PPG, 7 RPG, 7 APG, 1.5 SPG, 0.8 BPG, 51.4%FG, 57.1%TS
2001 Finals vs Philadelphia 76ers
1: 15-3-5-1-3 7/22
2: 31-8-6-2-2 11/23
3: 32-6-3-2-0 13/30
4: 19-10-9-1-1 6/13
5: 26-12-6-1-1 7/18
Series: 24.6 PPG, 7.8 RPG, 5.8 APG, 1.4 SPG, 1.4 BPG, 41.5 FG%, 50.1 TS%

2001 Playoffs: 29.4 PPG, 7.3 RPG, 6.1 APG, 1.6 SPG, 0.8 BPG, 46.9 FG%, 55.5 TS%

2002 WCQF vs
1: 34-7-3-2-3 10/28
2: 19-6-5-2-0 5/21
3: 25-4-7-2-2 9/19
Series: 26.0 PPG, 5.7 RPG, 5 APG, 2 SPG, 1.7 BPG, 35.3 FG%, 48.3 TS%
2002 WCSF vs San Antonio
1: 20-2-4-0-0 8/18
2: 26-4-6-3-0 12/25
3: 31-6-6-0-1 15/31
4: 28-7-3-1-0 10/27
5: 26-8-5-1-0 10/20
Series: 26.2 PPG, 5.4 RPG, 4.8 APG, 1 SPG, 0.2 BPG, 45.5 FG%, 48.6 TS%
2002 WCF vs Sacramento Kings
1: 30-6-5-2-2 12/26
2: 22-6-2-1-1 9/21
3: 22-2-3-2-2 8/24
4: 25-4-2-2-3 12/26
5: 30-5-3-1-0 11/29
6: 31-11-5-0-0 10/20
7: 30-10-7-2-0 10/26
Series: 27.1 PPG, 6.3 RPG, 3.9 APG, 1.4 SPG, 1.1 BPG, 41.9 FG%, 49.1 TS%
2002 Finals vs New Jersey Nets
1: 22-3-6-1-0 6/16
2: 24-8-3-2-1 9/15
3: 36-6-4-1-2 14/23
4: 25-6-8-2-0 7/16
Series: 26.8 PPG, 5.8 RPG, 5.2 APG, 1.5 SPG, 0.8 BPG, 51.4 FG%, 62.3 TS%

2002 Playoffs: 26.6 PPG, 5.8 RPG, 4.6 APG, 1.4 SPG, 0.9 BPG, 43.4 FG%, 51.1 TS%

2000-2002 Playoffs: 25.3 PPG, 5.7 RPG, 4.9 APG, 1.5 SPG, 1.1 BPG, 44.7 FG%, 52.7 TS%

Low IQ fans like to use this argument a lot. What they might not fully comprehend is that you need to win 3 playoff series before you make the NBA Finals.

Damn you destroyed all the haters in one post. Future bookmarked thread.


http://mrwgifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Dramatic-Slow-Motion-Clap.gif

[JebronLames]

Lebron was no where near his prime in 04-05.

[Prometheus]

Lebron was no where near his prime in 04-05.

this as well. and then he includes the numbers LeBron put up that year as if that's supposed to make missing the playoffs unimpressive rather than making the numbers impressive for a f-king 19 year old. :coleman:

[MMM]

I think i qualify as a Kobe hater just not an extreme one. Never really believed many of these myths though.

On the real who uses advance stats in compare cross generational stars??? I don't think i've seen too much of that or anyone really care about it.

I don't think anyone really believes he was carired for his last 3 rings.

He was a 2nd option for his 1st ring and a 1B arguable 1A for his last two of the 3 peat. However, he was the clear first option/mvp level talent for his last 2 rings. He might of been saved by his role players in game 7 though. Not sure why Allen gets so much mention for saving LeBron but there is no mention of Horry, Fisher, and Artest making gave saving plays in the same context.

As for missing the playoffs in his prime I got to actually praise him. If you want to compete for the playoffs year in and out than Kobe is on a short list of players you want to take. In the context of Shaq just getting traded and Rudy stepping down mid season it is understandable why he didn't make the playoffs that season.

[HoopsFanNumero1]

And OP is supposed to be one of the more rational Kobe stans.

[Deuce Bigalow]

right? I got a bunch of backlash earlier today because of an essay about Jordan/LeBron and this guy digs up half of b-ball reference just to slurp kobe's knob
Most of this is an old copy pasta of mine

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=8094254&postcount=27

At least I didn't write a 1,701 word essay :oldlol:

[TylerOO]

and people call pauk weird because of 1500 word essays. what you just typed requires more time.

seriously. this dude just looked up game by game stats and double checked to see if Kobe led the team in that stat in that specific game. holy shit

[Milbuck]

The post isn't that bad to read. 2/3 of it is game logs. It's really not that hard to follow, or appreciate for that matter.

[Illuminati]

LOL @ LeBron's second year in the NBA being in his prime. Only part I read, so most likely, the rest of the shit you posted is BS too.

[SavageMode]

So, OP destroys every myth dumbass haters bring up with proof and well written evidence, and no poster responds with any facts trying to debunk him, no, instead, just reply in saltiness like "well, Kobe stans are dumb stupid heads!"....ISH ladies and gentlemen.:oldlol:

Thread bookmarked.:applause:
Lebron prime in 04-05?

Right. Another Kobe Stan exposed with inaccurate agenda.

Next.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Lebron prime in 04-05?

Right. Another Kobe Stan exposed with inaccurate agenda.

Next.
27-7-7 55TS% season in 04-05. Beginning of his prime tbh.

[knicksman]

that lebron is a tier above kobe when it comes to impact yet +/- says otherwise esp when theyre paired with stars

[Rose'sACL]

:roll: damn dis fakkit straight caught feelings less than a month on this new alt. meltdown by memorial day for sho
not thread related but why do people on this forum use the word nikka or fakkit? is this the new black hipster kid thing because i am not in touch.
do you get a free AK47 and a couple of kilos of cocaine if you use those words in a sentence a thousand times or some shit like that?
a lot of heat fans use it too so i am not writing this because you're are a fan of any-team-that-is-playing-heat.

[chazzy]

huge mental problems
Projecting, I see

[Prometheus]

a bunch of my replies got deleted from this thread. did OP tell on me?

[SavageMode]

a bunch of my replies got deleted from this thread. did OP tell on me?
Most likely. Jeff gotta protect the Kobe Stans as they are the main traffic on this website, sitting on their computers all day doe.

[Prometheus]

Most likely. Jeff gotta protect the Kobe Stans as they are the main traffic on this website, sitting on their computers all day doe.

beta mentality.

[Audio One]

not thread related but why do people on this forum use the word nikka or fakkit? is this the new black hipster kid thing because i am not in touch.
do you get a free AK47 and a couple of kilos of cocaine if you use those words in a sentence a thousand times or some shit like that?
a lot of heat fans use it too so i am not writing this because you're are a fan of any-team-that-is-playing-heat.

:biggums:



































:roll:

[215Philly]

beta mentality.
Still got ethered :roll:

[STATUTORY]

not thread related but why do people on this forum use the word nikka or fakkit? is this the new black hipster kid thing because i am not in touch.
do you get a free AK47 and a couple of kilos of cocaine if you use those words in a sentence a thousand times or some shit like that?
a lot of heat fans use it too so i am not writing this because you're are a fan of any-team-that-is-playing-heat.
:biggums:

this escalated from some good nature usage of internet slang to not so subtle racism and profiling real fast

[iamgine]

Kobe: 55.5 TS%; peak of 58.0; 9 seasons of 55+
Lebron: 57.9 TS%; peak of 64.0; 9 seasons of 55+

Kobe missed the playoffs once in 04-05.
Lebron missed the playoffs in 04-05 after having a 27/7/7 55TS% season.

Kobe: 23.4 PER; peak of 28.0; 3 seasons of 25+
Lebron: 27.7 PER; peak of 31.7; 8 seasons of 25+


How it looks like when compared to another wing player from the same era.

[Deuce Bigalow]

a bunch of my replies got deleted from this thread. did OP tell on me?
I got a connection with Jeff. My grandson is one of his best friends.

[215Philly]

How it looks like when compared to another wing player from the same era.
:lebronamazed:

[moe94]

:biggums:

this escalated from some good nature usage of internet slang to not so subtle racism and profiling real fast

Why is he so damn angry?

[chazzy]

Why is he so damn angry?
:oldlol:

[branslowski]

Why they delete MY post though?:biggums:

[Deuce Bigalow]

How it looks like when compared to another wing player from the same era.
PER accounts for pace so it can be used across eras. TS% is most useful when comparing players from the 80s to present as that is around the time league efficiency has been about the same.

[iamgine]

PER accounts for pace so it can be used across eras. TS% is most useful when comparing players from the 80s to present as that is around the time league efficiency has been about the same.
Not really since the competition are different.

[Mr. Jabbar]

that girl didnt agree to have sax

[Prometheus]

that girl didnt agree to have sax

:oldlol: :cheers: :oldlol:

f'real though, everyone knows she was just a gold diggin hoe. just wanted to take advantage of the opportunity

[moe94]

:oldlol: :cheers: :oldlol:

f'real though, everyone knows she was just a gold diggin hoe. just wanted to take advantage of the opportunity

He still wrecked her ass without permission then snitched on Shaq. You can't spin that in his favor.

[Prometheus]

He still wrecked her ass without permission then snitched on Shaq. You can't spin that in his favor.

well he's still a scumbag for cheating on his wife, and definitely a deuche for snitching on shaq. but rapist is a whole different ball park

[STATUTORY]

He still wrecked her ass without permission then snitched on Shaq. You can't spin that in his favor.
white girl doe, not even mad after seeing 12 years a slave


white guilt

[Prometheus]

white girl doe, not even mad after seeing 12 years a slave


white guilt

wtf?

[moe94]

white girl doe, not even mad after seeing 12 years a slave


white guilt

I'd joke around but you know we'll both get banned. :confusedshrug:

[Breezy]

This thread is one giant strawman argument. No one with a brain seriously argues that Kobe isn't an all time great. He's just not AS GREAT as several other all timers. The prevailing wisdom amongst his fans is that if you rank him anything less that #1 all time and possibly the son of god then your a "Hater"

[ssginc]

Kobe isn't as bad as the haters make him out to be, and he's not as good as his fans want him to be. On any given night he can play like the GOAT or a second rate scrub. He's like a box of chocolates: You never know what you're gonna get from game to game, consistently inconsistent his entire career.

[moe94]

Kobe isn't as bad as the haters make him out to be, and he's not as good as his fans want him to be. On any given night he can play like the GOAT or a second rate scrub. He's like a box of chocolates: You never know what you're gonna get from game to game, consistently inconsistent his entire career.

Nah, I'd say Kobe's been pretty damn consistent for the majority of his career. Terrible analysis, no offense. What you're saying might apply to Nate Robinson, if anything.

[Mr Feeny]

LOL @ LeBron's second year in the NBA being in his prime. Only part I read, so most likely, the rest of the shit you posted is BS too.

Same here:oldlol: I guess 1999 Kobe was in his prime too. Damn akobe really strugggled against Utah in his prime:)

[Prometheus]

Nah, I'd say Kobe's been pretty damn consistent for the majority of his career. Terrible analysis, no offense. What you're saying might apply to Nate Robinson, if anything.

well put moseph

[Mr Feeny]

This thread is one giant strawman argument. No one with a brain seriously argues that Kobe isn't an all time great. He's just not AS GREAT as several other all timers. The prevailing wisdom amongst his fans is that if you rank him anything less that #1 all time and possibly the son of god then your a "Hater"

Exactly right. And the OP is transparent is hell:lol You're boy just isnt on Durant, Lebron, or Wade's levels. U mad?

[Combat Wombat]

Why is he so damn angry?

That deep cut between his legs just ain't closing.

[Lebron23]

LMAO at TS%

[riseagainst]

god dam... OP destroyed those myths.

:applause: :applause:

[Mr Feeny]

LMAO at TS%

Haha I know:cheers: Im glad OP has been exposed:applause:

[riseagainst]

love how all the lebron stans are now trying to discredit TS but they continue to use PER and WS48 as arguments.

:lol

[Mr Feeny]

love how all the lebron stans are now trying to discredit TS but they continue to use PER and WS48 as arguments.

:lol

http://thesportsflush.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/lebron-mvp-finals-16x9.jpg

[T_L_P]

white girl doe, not even mad after seeing 12 years a slave


white guilt

Are you saying you didn't know about slavery until you watched a movie on the subject? :roll:

[G-Funk]

Kobe is a monster among monsters

[ImKobe]

Damn you destroyed all the haters in one post. Future bookmarked thread.


http://mrwgifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Dramatic-Slow-Motion-Clap.gif

..

[T_L_P]

Do you take mythbuster requests, OP?

[Big#50]

OP still has nothing to do but talk about KOBE.

[Deuce Bigalow]

love how all the lebron stans are now trying to discredit TS but they continue to use PER and WS48 as arguments.

:lol
:applause:

[TheMarkMadsen]

OP posted a bunch of stats of mostly Kobe but other legends too..

and the first 4 pages are people all rustled that he listed Lebron missing the playoffs in 05..

:biggums:

dat insecurity. Expected tho, since the facts are right in their face they really have no ammunition but to look for the smallest "mistake" and then run with it hoping others will do the same

[Crafty]

And yet ... people make fun of Pauk for his meltdowns.

[secund2nun]

Kobe fans are low IQ fans.

The bottomline is that Kobe had 3 seasons with a non loaded team and he could not even win a playoff series once and the best he got was an 7th seed...and he was in his prime all of those seasons...plus Kobe's level of play in the playoffs is nowhere near real all time greats especially in the finals where Gasol was the real finals mvp....6/24 finals mvp. In 7 NBA finals Kobe has not had even one single great finals performance. :roll:

[sportjames23]

Myth: Kobe is not efficient

Kobe: 55.5 TS%; peak of 58.0; 9 seasons of 55+
Bird: 56.4 TS%; peak of 61.2; 7 seasons of 55+
Hakeem: 55.3 TS%; peak of 57.7; 12 seasons of 55+
Duncan: 55.1 TS%; peak of 57.9; 7 seasons of 55+
West: 55.0 TS%; peak of 59.0; 8 seasons of 55+
Wilt: 54.7 TS%; peak of 68.9; 8 seasons of 55+
MJ: 56.9 TS%; peak of 61.4; 10 seasons of 55+
Shaq: 58.6 TS%; peak of 65.9; 19 seasons of 55+
Lebron: 57.9 TS%; peak of 64.0; 9 seasons of 55+
Russell: 47.1 TS%; peak of 50.0
Baylor: 49.4 TS%; peak of 53.7
Oscar: 56.4 TS%; peak of 58.8; 11 seasons of 55+
Moses: 56.9 TS%; peak of 60.4; 16 seasons of 55+
Magic: 61.0 TS%; peak of 63.7; 13 seasons of 55+
Kareem: 59.2 TS%; peak of 63.9; 19 seasons of 55+

The low IQ point to only FG% when determining efficiency but we higher IQ fans know that free throws and 3-pointers are also needed to be taken into account. TS% is the best stat we have which factors in 3-pointers and freethrows.

Myth: Kobe is the only alltime great that missed the playoffs in his prime

Kobe missed the playoffs once in 04-05.
Wilt missed the playoffs once in 62-63 and in 64-65 he was on a 10-28 team before being traded away.
Kareem missed the playoffs back to back times in 74-75 and 75-76.
Oscar missed the playoffs four times in his prime from 67-68 to 69-70 and 60-61.
Hakeem missed the playoffs once in 91-92 (team went 2-10 without him)
Lebron missed the playoffs in 04-05 after having a 27/7/7 55TS% season.

The highest PER season of all-time was Wilt's 62-63 season. What was his team's record? 31-49 and his Warriors missed the playoffs. Oscar missed the playoffs in a season where he led the league in ppg, apg, and freethrow percentage.

Myth: Kobe is not an alltime great according to advanced stats like PER

Kobe: 23.4 PER; peak of 28.0; 3 seasons of 25+
Bird: 23.5 PER; peak of 27.8; 4 seasons of 25+
Baylor: 22.7 PER; peak of 28.2; 4 seasons of 25+
Russell: 18.9 PER; peak of 22.8
Magic: 24.1 PER; peak of 27.0; 5 seasons of 25+
Wilt: 26.1 PER; peak of 31.8; 8 seasons of 25+
Oscar: 23.2 PER; peak of 27.6; 6 seasons of 25+
MJ: 27.9 PER; peak of 31.7; 12 seasons of 25+
Hakeem: 23.6 PER; peak of 27.3; 5 seasons of 25+
Kareem: 24.6 PER; peak of 29.9; 10 seasons of 25+
Lebron: 27.7 PER; peak of 31.7; 8 seasons of 25+
Duncan: 24.6 PER; peak of 27.1; 5 seasons of 25+
West: 22.9 PER; peak of 25.0; 1 season of 25+
Moses: 22.0 PER, peak of 26.8; 3 seasons of 25+

Kobe is right in Magic and Bird's ballpark when it comes to Hollinger's player efficiency rating.

Myth: Kobe was carried to his first 3 rings

pts-reb-ast-stl-blk fgm/fga
bold indicates leader on the team

2000 WCQF vs Sacramento Kings
1: 23-7-5-0-0 11/22
2: 32-4-1-2-0 12/20
3: 35-3-2-2-0 13/25
4: 34-6-4-2-0 13/30
5: 17-2-6-0-3 7/16
Series: 27.8 PPG, 4.4 RPG, 3.6 APG, 1.2 SPG, 0.6 BPG, 49.6 FG%, 55.7 TS%
2000 WCSF vs Phoenix Suns
1: 25-6-1-3-3 8/17
2: 15-4-6-2-2 6/11
3: 25-5-2-2-2 8/20
4: 23-3-5-2-0 10/20
5: 17-1-3-1-0 6/16
Series: 21 PPG, 3.8 RPG, 3.4 APG, 2 SPG, 1.4 BPG, 45.2 FG%, 52.4 TS%
2000 WCF vs Portland Trailblazers
Series: 20.4 PPG, 4.9 RPG, 5.9 APG, 1.6 SPG, 2.1 BPG, 43.9 FG%, 55.2 TS%
1: 13-3-6-1-1 4/9
2: 12-2-4-1-2 2/9
3: 25-7-7-2-1 11/18
4: 18-4-7-2-3 5/15
5: 17-5-4-0-2 4/13
6: 33-2-6-4-3 12/24
7: 25-11-7-0-4 9/19
2000 Finals Indiana Pacers
1: 14-3-5-1-2 6/13
2: 2-1-4-0-1 1/3
3: DNP
4: 28-4-5-1-2 14/27
5: 8-5-3-2-0 4/20
6: 26-10-4-1-2 8/27
Series: 15.6 PPG, 4.6 RPG, 4.2 APG, 1 SPG, 1.4 BPG, 36.7 FG%, 41.1 TS%

2000 Playoffs: 21.1 PPG, 4.5 RPG, 4.4 APG, 1.5 SPG, 1.5 BPG, 44.2 FG%, 51.7 TS%

2001 WCQF vs Portland Trailblazers
1: 28-6-7-0-0 9/20
2: 25-3-7-3-0 8/11
3: 22-4-9-2-0 9/23
Series: 25 PPG, 4.3 RPG, 7.7 APG, 2.3 SPG, 0 BPG, 48.1%FG, 56.5%TS
2001 WCSF vs Sacramento Kings
1: 29-4-5-0-0 10/23
2: 27-9-5-1-1 9/19
3: 36-7-4-2-0 10/22
4: 48-16-3-2-1 15/29
Series: 35 PPG, 9 RPG, 4.3 APG, 1.3 SPG, 0.5 BPG, 47.3 FG%, 58.8 TS%
2001 WCF vs San Antonio Spurs
1: 45-10-3-1-1 19/35
2: 28-7-6-2-1 11/24
3: 36-9-8-1-0 14/27
4: 24-2-11-2-1 10/19
Series: 33.3 PPG, 7 RPG, 7 APG, 1.5 SPG, 0.8 BPG, 51.4%FG, 57.1%TS
2001 Finals vs Philadelphia 76ers
1: 15-3-5-1-3 7/22
2: 31-8-6-2-2 11/23
3: 32-6-3-2-0 13/30
4: 19-10-9-1-1 6/13
5: 26-12-6-1-1 7/18
Series: 24.6 PPG, 7.8 RPG, 5.8 APG, 1.4 SPG, 1.4 BPG, 41.5 FG%, 50.1 TS%

2001 Playoffs: 29.4 PPG, 7.3 RPG, 6.1 APG, 1.6 SPG, 0.8 BPG, 46.9 FG%, 55.5 TS%

2002 WCQF vs
1: 34-7-3-2-3 10/28
2: 19-6-5-2-0 5/21
3: 25-4-7-2-2 9/19
Series: 26.0 PPG, 5.7 RPG, 5 APG, 2 SPG, 1.7 BPG, 35.3 FG%, 48.3 TS%
2002 WCSF vs San Antonio
1: 20-2-4-0-0 8/18
2: 26-4-6-3-0 12/25
3: 31-6-6-0-1 15/31
4: 28-7-3-1-0 10/27
5: 26-8-5-1-0 10/20
Series: 26.2 PPG, 5.4 RPG, 4.8 APG, 1 SPG, 0.2 BPG, 45.5 FG%, 48.6 TS%
2002 WCF vs Sacramento Kings
1: 30-6-5-2-2 12/26
2: 22-6-2-1-1 9/21
3: 22-2-3-2-2 8/24
4: 25-4-2-2-3 12/26
5: 30-5-3-1-0 11/29
6: 31-11-5-0-0 10/20
7: 30-10-7-2-0 10/26
Series: 27.1 PPG, 6.3 RPG, 3.9 APG, 1.4 SPG, 1.1 BPG, 41.9 FG%, 49.1 TS%
2002 Finals vs New Jersey Nets
1: 22-3-6-1-0 6/16
2: 24-8-3-2-1 9/15
3: 36-6-4-1-2 14/23
4: 25-6-8-2-0 7/16
Series: 26.8 PPG, 5.8 RPG, 5.2 APG, 1.5 SPG, 0.8 BPG, 51.4 FG%, 62.3 TS%

2002 Playoffs: 26.6 PPG, 5.8 RPG, 4.6 APG, 1.4 SPG, 0.9 BPG, 43.4 FG%, 51.1 TS%

2000-2002 Playoffs: 25.3 PPG, 5.7 RPG, 4.9 APG, 1.5 SPG, 1.1 BPG, 44.7 FG%, 52.7 TS%

Low IQ fans like to use this argument a lot. What they might not fully comprehend is that you need to win 3 playoff series before you make the NBA Finals.


http://www.quickmeme.com/img/a0/a07cc3d666c9e75a579e5c6f9db10e1476a517a80fa2e2b7c7 31a359cd1045d9.jpg

[chazzy]

The bottomline is that Kobe had 3 seasons with a non loaded team and he could not even win a playoff series once and the best he got was an 7th seed...and he was in his prime all of those seasons...
Sounds like KG and Wade too

[secund2nun]

Sounds like KG and Wade too

KG has lead crap past the first round most notably to the WCF. As for Wade, Wade is overrated just like Kobe. Wade could not even win a single playoff series after Shaq left (before Lebron) and he was in his prime during those years. Same thing with Tmac he never won a playoff series either and he was in his prime. As a whole, perimeter players are extremely overrated only Lebron, Magic, MJ, Bird and Durant were/are true superstar perimeter players in modern history. Kobe is very overrated along with Iverson, Wade, Rose, Melo, Tmac etc.

[ArbitraryWater]

Myth: Kobe is not efficient

Kobe: 55.5 TS%; peak of 58.0; 9 seasons of 55+
Bird: 56.4 TS%; peak of 61.2; 7 seasons of 55+
Hakeem: 55.3 TS%; peak of 57.7; 12 seasons of 55+
Duncan: 55.1 TS%; peak of 57.9; 7 seasons of 55+
West: 55.0 TS%; peak of 59.0; 8 seasons of 55+
Wilt: 54.7 TS%; peak of 68.9; 8 seasons of 55+
MJ: 56.9 TS%; peak of 61.4; 10 seasons of 55+
Shaq: 58.6 TS%; peak of 65.9; 19 seasons of 55+
Lebron: 57.9 TS%; peak of 64.0; 9 seasons of 55+
Russell: 47.1 TS%; peak of 50.0
Baylor: 49.4 TS%; peak of 53.7
Oscar: 56.4 TS%; peak of 58.8; 11 seasons of 55+
Moses: 56.9 TS%; peak of 60.4; 16 seasons of 55+
Magic: 61.0 TS%; peak of 63.7; 13 seasons of 55+
Kareem: 59.2 TS%; peak of 63.9; 19 seasons of 55+

The low IQ point to only FG% when determining efficiency but we higher IQ fans know that free throws and 3-pointers are also needed to be taken into account. TS% is the best stat we have which factors in 3-pointers and freethrows.

Myth: Kobe is the only alltime great that missed the playoffs in his prime

Kobe missed the playoffs once in 04-05.
Wilt missed the playoffs once in 62-63 and in 64-65 he was on a 10-28 team before being traded away.
Kareem missed the playoffs back to back times in 74-75 and 75-76.
Oscar missed the playoffs four times in his prime from 67-68 to 69-70 and 60-61.
Hakeem missed the playoffs once in 91-92 (team went 2-10 without him)
Lebron missed the playoffs in 04-05 after having a 27/7/7 55TS% season.

The highest PER season of all-time was Wilt's 62-63 season. What was his team's record? 31-49 and his Warriors missed the playoffs. Oscar missed the playoffs in a season where he led the league in ppg, apg, and freethrow percentage.

Myth: Kobe is not an alltime great according to advanced stats like PER

Kobe: 23.4 PER; peak of 28.0; 3 seasons of 25+
Bird: 23.5 PER; peak of 27.8; 4 seasons of 25+
Baylor: 22.7 PER; peak of 28.2; 4 seasons of 25+
Russell: 18.9 PER; peak of 22.8
Magic: 24.1 PER; peak of 27.0; 5 seasons of 25+
Wilt: 26.1 PER; peak of 31.8; 8 seasons of 25+
Oscar: 23.2 PER; peak of 27.6; 6 seasons of 25+
MJ: 27.9 PER; peak of 31.7; 12 seasons of 25+
Hakeem: 23.6 PER; peak of 27.3; 5 seasons of 25+
Kareem: 24.6 PER; peak of 29.9; 10 seasons of 25+
Lebron: 27.7 PER; peak of 31.7; 8 seasons of 25+
Duncan: 24.6 PER; peak of 27.1; 5 seasons of 25+
West: 22.9 PER; peak of 25.0; 1 season of 25+
Moses: 22.0 PER, peak of 26.8; 3 seasons of 25+

Kobe is right in Magic and Bird's ballpark when it comes to Hollinger's player efficiency rating.

Myth: Kobe was carried to his first 3 rings

pts-reb-ast-stl-blk fgm/fga
bold indicates leader on the team

2000 WCQF vs Sacramento Kings
1: 23-7-5-0-0 11/22
2: 32-4-1-2-0 12/20
3: 35-3-2-2-0 13/25
4: 34-6-4-2-0 13/30
5: 17-2-6-0-3 7/16
Series: 27.8 PPG, 4.4 RPG, 3.6 APG, 1.2 SPG, 0.6 BPG, 49.6 FG%, 55.7 TS%
2000 WCSF vs Phoenix Suns
1: 25-6-1-3-3 8/17
2: 15-4-6-2-2 6/11
3: 25-5-2-2-2 8/20
4: 23-3-5-2-0 10/20
5: 17-1-3-1-0 6/16
Series: 21 PPG, 3.8 RPG, 3.4 APG, 2 SPG, 1.4 BPG, 45.2 FG%, 52.4 TS%
2000 WCF vs Portland Trailblazers
Series: 20.4 PPG, 4.9 RPG, 5.9 APG, 1.6 SPG, 2.1 BPG, 43.9 FG%, 55.2 TS%
1: 13-3-6-1-1 4/9
2: 12-2-4-1-2 2/9
3: 25-7-7-2-1 11/18
4: 18-4-7-2-3 5/15
5: 17-5-4-0-2 4/13
6: 33-2-6-4-3 12/24
7: 25-11-7-0-4 9/19
2000 Finals Indiana Pacers
1: 14-3-5-1-2 6/13
2: 2-1-4-0-1 1/3
3: DNP
4: 28-4-5-1-2 14/27
5: 8-5-3-2-0 4/20
6: 26-10-4-1-2 8/27
Series: 15.6 PPG, 4.6 RPG, 4.2 APG, 1 SPG, 1.4 BPG, 36.7 FG%, 41.1 TS%

2000 Playoffs: 21.1 PPG, 4.5 RPG, 4.4 APG, 1.5 SPG, 1.5 BPG, 44.2 FG%, 51.7 TS%

2001 WCQF vs Portland Trailblazers
1: 28-6-7-0-0 9/20
2: 25-3-7-3-0 8/11
3: 22-4-9-2-0 9/23
Series: 25 PPG, 4.3 RPG, 7.7 APG, 2.3 SPG, 0 BPG, 48.1%FG, 56.5%TS
2001 WCSF vs Sacramento Kings
1: 29-4-5-0-0 10/23
2: 27-9-5-1-1 9/19
3: 36-7-4-2-0 10/22
4: 48-16-3-2-1 15/29
Series: 35 PPG, 9 RPG, 4.3 APG, 1.3 SPG, 0.5 BPG, 47.3 FG%, 58.8 TS%
2001 WCF vs San Antonio Spurs
1: 45-10-3-1-1 19/35
2: 28-7-6-2-1 11/24
3: 36-9-8-1-0 14/27
4: 24-2-11-2-1 10/19
Series: 33.3 PPG, 7 RPG, 7 APG, 1.5 SPG, 0.8 BPG, 51.4%FG, 57.1%TS
2001 Finals vs Philadelphia 76ers
1: 15-3-5-1-3 7/22
2: 31-8-6-2-2 11/23
3: 32-6-3-2-0 13/30
4: 19-10-9-1-1 6/13
5: 26-12-6-1-1 7/18
Series: 24.6 PPG, 7.8 RPG, 5.8 APG, 1.4 SPG, 1.4 BPG, 41.5 FG%, 50.1 TS%

2001 Playoffs: 29.4 PPG, 7.3 RPG, 6.1 APG, 1.6 SPG, 0.8 BPG, 46.9 FG%, 55.5 TS%

2002 WCQF vs
1: 34-7-3-2-3 10/28
2: 19-6-5-2-0 5/21
3: 25-4-7-2-2 9/19
Series: 26.0 PPG, 5.7 RPG, 5 APG, 2 SPG, 1.7 BPG, 35.3 FG%, 48.3 TS%
2002 WCSF vs San Antonio
1: 20-2-4-0-0 8/18
2: 26-4-6-3-0 12/25
3: 31-6-6-0-1 15/31
4: 28-7-3-1-0 10/27
5: 26-8-5-1-0 10/20
Series: 26.2 PPG, 5.4 RPG, 4.8 APG, 1 SPG, 0.2 BPG, 45.5 FG%, 48.6 TS%
2002 WCF vs Sacramento Kings
1: 30-6-5-2-2 12/26
2: 22-6-2-1-1 9/21
3: 22-2-3-2-2 8/24
4: 25-4-2-2-3 12/26
5: 30-5-3-1-0 11/29
6: 31-11-5-0-0 10/20
7: 30-10-7-2-0 10/26
Series: 27.1 PPG, 6.3 RPG, 3.9 APG, 1.4 SPG, 1.1 BPG, 41.9 FG%, 49.1 TS%
2002 Finals vs New Jersey Nets
1: 22-3-6-1-0 6/16
2: 24-8-3-2-1 9/15
3: 36-6-4-1-2 14/23
4: 25-6-8-2-0 7/16
Series: 26.8 PPG, 5.8 RPG, 5.2 APG, 1.5 SPG, 0.8 BPG, 51.4 FG%, 62.3 TS%

2002 Playoffs: 26.6 PPG, 5.8 RPG, 4.6 APG, 1.4 SPG, 0.9 BPG, 43.4 FG%, 51.1 TS%

2000-2002 Playoffs: 25.3 PPG, 5.7 RPG, 4.9 APG, 1.5 SPG, 1.1 BPG, 44.7 FG%, 52.7 TS%

Low IQ fans like to use this argument a lot. What they might not fully comprehend is that you need to win 3 playoff series before you make the NBA Finals.

Sorry man but this has fail written all over it.

-Measuring Efficiency with TS%?
-Trying to prove he wasn't carried, yet not showing SHAQ'S STATS?
-Nobody talks about the missing playoffs thing
-According to PER Kobe is the 20th best all time, below Dirk.
You fine with that?

/thread

Stop the BS.

[chazzy]

-Measuring Efficiency with TS%?

:facepalm

[ArbitraryWater]

seriously. this dude just looked up game by game stats and double checked to see if Kobe led the team in that stat in that specific game. holy shit

lol for real

Guess retirement brings a lot of free time.


04-05 as LeBron prime :roll: best chance they got huh

[ArbitraryWater]

:facepalm

Just what I thought

[SavageMode]

lol for real

Guess retirement brings a lot of free time.


04-05 as LeBron prime :roll: best chance they got huh
:roll: :applause:

[Deuce Bigalow]

Kobe fans are low IQ fans.

The bottomline is that Kobe had 3 seasons with a non loaded team and he could not even win a playoff series once and the best he got was an 7th seed...and he was in his prime all of those seasons...plus Kobe's level of play in the playoffs is nowhere near real all time greats especially in the finals where Gasol was the real finals mvp....6/24 finals mvp. In 7 NBA finals Kobe has not had even one single great finals performance. :roll:
Kareem lost in the first round 3 times including one of them with a 60 win team to a 47 win team. Wilt was swept in the first round with HCA to team with a losing record. Jordan lost in the first round 3 years in a row. They can't be top 10 either according to you, they "lost in the first round by themselves". It's funny how you use team accomplishments to argue against Kobe but ignore the fact that he is a 5 time champion. Don't know how your low IQ brain interprets that one.

Kobe from 2001-2010 averaged 29/6/5/2/1 55TS% in the playoffs. Yeah that's nowhere near the greats...

27/6/5 62TS% and 32/6/7 53TS% are his numbers in the 02 and 09 finals, not great huh?

[Mr Feeny]

Kareem lost in the first round 3 times including one of them with a 60 win team to a 47 win team. Wilt was swept in the first round with HCA to team with a losing record. Jordan lost in the first round 3 years in a row. They can't be top 10 either according to you, they "lost in the first round by themselves". It's funny how you use team accomplishments to argue against Kobe but ignore the fact that he is a 5 time champion. Don't know how your low IQ brain interprets that one.

Kobe from 2001-2010 averaged 29/6/5/2/1 55TS% in the playoffs. Yeah that's nowhere near the greats...

27/6/5 62TS% and 32/6/7 53TS% are his numbers in the 02 and 09 finals, not great huh?

Greats dont single handidly blow 3-1 series leads and capitulate in game 7's:applause:

[Mr Feeny]

Sorry man but this has fail written all over it.

-Measuring Efficiency with TS%?
-Trying to prove he wasn't carried, yet not showing SHAQ'S STATS?
-Nobody talks about the missing playoffs thing
-According to PER Kobe is the 20th best all time, below Dirk.
You fine with that?

/thread

Stop the BS.

He wont respond to any of your points cuz we are talkinf about a littlw biach. He'll continue spouting drivel though and derailig his own thread with pointless info.

[jzek]

I have only one question - how come Kobe has 5 rings but only have 2 FMVPs?

I don't get it because Jordan has 6 rings and also the same number of FMVPs? How come Kobe has so few? Did he get CARRIED?

[Mr Feeny]

I have only one question - how come Kobe has 5 rings but only have 2 FMVPs?

I don't get it because Jordan has 6 rings and also the same number of FMVPs? How come Kobe has so few? Did he get CARRIED?

This man knows his basketball:applause:

[Deuce Bigalow]

Greats dont single handidly blow 3-1 series leads and capitulate in game 7's:applause:
Ever heard of Wilt Chamberlain kid? Exposing yourself as only knowing about the "Lebron era". And I don't know how you blow a series lead by yourself when you scored 50.

[chazzy]

KG has lead crap past the first round most notably to the WCF
KG MISSED the playoffs 3 years in a row

[Mr Feeny]

Ever heard of Wilt Chamberlain kid? Exposing yourself as only knowing about the "Lebron era". And I don't know how you blow a series lead by yourself when you scored 50.

Wilt? The 18 ppg finals scorer? Yeah he isnt on MJ Magic Bird Lebron Shaq Duncan territory. He belongs with the Kobe's of tgis world. Just a tier lower.

Scored fifty in one game? How about game 7? Ah thats right. In the biggest game of the season he was schooled by a bench player (Barbosa).:oldlol:

You have been educated my friend:applause:

[NumberSix]

Myth: Kobe is not efficient

Kobe: 55.5 TS%; peak of 58.0; 9 seasons of 55+
Bird: 56.4 TS%; peak of 61.2; 7 seasons of 55+
Hakeem: 55.3 TS%; peak of 57.7; 12 seasons of 55+
Duncan: 55.1 TS%; peak of 57.9; 7 seasons of 55+
West: 55.0 TS%; peak of 59.0; 8 seasons of 55+
Wilt: 54.7 TS%; peak of 68.9; 8 seasons of 55+
MJ: 56.9 TS%; peak of 61.4; 10 seasons of 55+
Shaq: 58.6 TS%; peak of 65.9; 19 seasons of 55+
Lebron: 57.9 TS%; peak of 64.0; 9 seasons of 55+
Russell: 47.1 TS%; peak of 50.0
Baylor: 49.4 TS%; peak of 53.7
Oscar: 56.4 TS%; peak of 58.8; 11 seasons of 55+
Moses: 56.9 TS%; peak of 60.4; 16 seasons of 55+
Magic: 61.0 TS%; peak of 63.7; 13 seasons of 55+
Kareem: 59.2 TS%; peak of 63.9; 19 seasons of 55+

The low IQ point to only FG% when determining efficiency but we higher IQ fans know that free throws and 3-pointers are also needed to be taken into account. TS% is the best stat we have which factors in 3-pointers and freethrows.

Myth: Kobe is the only alltime great that missed the playoffs in his prime

Kobe missed the playoffs once in 04-05.
Wilt missed the playoffs once in 62-63 and in 64-65 he was on a 10-28 team before being traded away.
Kareem missed the playoffs back to back times in 74-75 and 75-76.
Oscar missed the playoffs four times in his prime from 67-68 to 69-70 and 60-61.
Hakeem missed the playoffs once in 91-92 (team went 2-10 without him)
Lebron missed the playoffs in 04-05 after having a 27/7/7 55TS% season.

The highest PER season of all-time was Wilt's 62-63 season. What was his team's record? 31-49 and his Warriors missed the playoffs. Oscar missed the playoffs in a season where he led the league in ppg, apg, and freethrow percentage.

Myth: Kobe is not an alltime great according to advanced stats like PER

Kobe: 23.4 PER; peak of 28.0; 3 seasons of 25+
Bird: 23.5 PER; peak of 27.8; 4 seasons of 25+
Baylor: 22.7 PER; peak of 28.2; 4 seasons of 25+
Russell: 18.9 PER; peak of 22.8
Magic: 24.1 PER; peak of 27.0; 5 seasons of 25+
Wilt: 26.1 PER; peak of 31.8; 8 seasons of 25+
Oscar: 23.2 PER; peak of 27.6; 6 seasons of 25+
MJ: 27.9 PER; peak of 31.7; 12 seasons of 25+
Hakeem: 23.6 PER; peak of 27.3; 5 seasons of 25+
Kareem: 24.6 PER; peak of 29.9; 10 seasons of 25+
Lebron: 27.7 PER; peak of 31.7; 8 seasons of 25+
Duncan: 24.6 PER; peak of 27.1; 5 seasons of 25+
West: 22.9 PER; peak of 25.0; 1 season of 25+
Moses: 22.0 PER, peak of 26.8; 3 seasons of 25+

Kobe is right in Magic and Bird's ballpark when it comes to Hollinger's player efficiency rating.

Myth: Kobe was carried to his first 3 rings

pts-reb-ast-stl-blk fgm/fga
bold indicates leader on the team

2000 WCQF vs Sacramento Kings
1: 23-7-5-0-0 11/22
2: 32-4-1-2-0 12/20
3: 35-3-2-2-0 13/25
4: 34-6-4-2-0 13/30
5: 17-2-6-0-3 7/16
Series: 27.8 PPG, 4.4 RPG, 3.6 APG, 1.2 SPG, 0.6 BPG, 49.6 FG%, 55.7 TS%
2000 WCSF vs Phoenix Suns
1: 25-6-1-3-3 8/17
2: 15-4-6-2-2 6/11
3: 25-5-2-2-2 8/20
4: 23-3-5-2-0 10/20
5: 17-1-3-1-0 6/16
Series: 21 PPG, 3.8 RPG, 3.4 APG, 2 SPG, 1.4 BPG, 45.2 FG%, 52.4 TS%
2000 WCF vs Portland Trailblazers
Series: 20.4 PPG, 4.9 RPG, 5.9 APG, 1.6 SPG, 2.1 BPG, 43.9 FG%, 55.2 TS%
1: 13-3-6-1-1 4/9
2: 12-2-4-1-2 2/9
3: 25-7-7-2-1 11/18
4: 18-4-7-2-3 5/15
5: 17-5-4-0-2 4/13
6: 33-2-6-4-3 12/24
7: 25-11-7-0-4 9/19
2000 Finals Indiana Pacers
1: 14-3-5-1-2 6/13
2: 2-1-4-0-1 1/3
3: DNP
4: 28-4-5-1-2 14/27
5: 8-5-3-2-0 4/20
6: 26-10-4-1-2 8/27
Series: 15.6 PPG, 4.6 RPG, 4.2 APG, 1 SPG, 1.4 BPG, 36.7 FG%, 41.1 TS%

2000 Playoffs: 21.1 PPG, 4.5 RPG, 4.4 APG, 1.5 SPG, 1.5 BPG, 44.2 FG%, 51.7 TS%

2001 WCQF vs Portland Trailblazers
1: 28-6-7-0-0 9/20
2: 25-3-7-3-0 8/11
3: 22-4-9-2-0 9/23
Series: 25 PPG, 4.3 RPG, 7.7 APG, 2.3 SPG, 0 BPG, 48.1%FG, 56.5%TS
2001 WCSF vs Sacramento Kings
1: 29-4-5-0-0 10/23
2: 27-9-5-1-1 9/19
3: 36-7-4-2-0 10/22
4: 48-16-3-2-1 15/29
Series: 35 PPG, 9 RPG, 4.3 APG, 1.3 SPG, 0.5 BPG, 47.3 FG%, 58.8 TS%
2001 WCF vs San Antonio Spurs
1: 45-10-3-1-1 19/35
2: 28-7-6-2-1 11/24
3: 36-9-8-1-0 14/27
4: 24-2-11-2-1 10/19
Series: 33.3 PPG, 7 RPG, 7 APG, 1.5 SPG, 0.8 BPG, 51.4%FG, 57.1%TS
2001 Finals vs Philadelphia 76ers
1: 15-3-5-1-3 7/22
2: 31-8-6-2-2 11/23
3: 32-6-3-2-0 13/30
4: 19-10-9-1-1 6/13
5: 26-12-6-1-1 7/18
Series: 24.6 PPG, 7.8 RPG, 5.8 APG, 1.4 SPG, 1.4 BPG, 41.5 FG%, 50.1 TS%

2001 Playoffs: 29.4 PPG, 7.3 RPG, 6.1 APG, 1.6 SPG, 0.8 BPG, 46.9 FG%, 55.5 TS%

2002 WCQF vs
1: 34-7-3-2-3 10/28
2: 19-6-5-2-0 5/21
3: 25-4-7-2-2 9/19
Series: 26.0 PPG, 5.7 RPG, 5 APG, 2 SPG, 1.7 BPG, 35.3 FG%, 48.3 TS%
2002 WCSF vs San Antonio
1: 20-2-4-0-0 8/18
2: 26-4-6-3-0 12/25
3: 31-6-6-0-1 15/31
4: 28-7-3-1-0 10/27
5: 26-8-5-1-0 10/20
Series: 26.2 PPG, 5.4 RPG, 4.8 APG, 1 SPG, 0.2 BPG, 45.5 FG%, 48.6 TS%
2002 WCF vs Sacramento Kings
1: 30-6-5-2-2 12/26
2: 22-6-2-1-1 9/21
3: 22-2-3-2-2 8/24
4: 25-4-2-2-3 12/26
5: 30-5-3-1-0 11/29
6: 31-11-5-0-0 10/20
7: 30-10-7-2-0 10/26
Series: 27.1 PPG, 6.3 RPG, 3.9 APG, 1.4 SPG, 1.1 BPG, 41.9 FG%, 49.1 TS%
2002 Finals vs New Jersey Nets
1: 22-3-6-1-0 6/16
2: 24-8-3-2-1 9/15
3: 36-6-4-1-2 14/23
4: 25-6-8-2-0 7/16
Series: 26.8 PPG, 5.8 RPG, 5.2 APG, 1.5 SPG, 0.8 BPG, 51.4 FG%, 62.3 TS%

2002 Playoffs: 26.6 PPG, 5.8 RPG, 4.6 APG, 1.4 SPG, 0.9 BPG, 43.4 FG%, 51.1 TS%

2000-2002 Playoffs: 25.3 PPG, 5.7 RPG, 4.9 APG, 1.5 SPG, 1.1 BPG, 44.7 FG%, 52.7 TS%

Low IQ fans like to use this argument a lot. What they might not fully comprehend is that you need to win 3 playoff series before you make the NBA Finals.
Didn't read

[Deuce Bigalow]

Wilt? The 18 ppg finals scorer? Yeah he isnt on MJ Magic Bird Lebron Shaq Duncan territory. He belongs with the Kobe's of tgis world. Just a tier lower.

Scored fifty in one game? How about game 7? Ah thats right. In the biggest game of the season he was schooled by a bench player (Barbosa).:oldlol:

You have been educated my friend:applause:
Kobe had 21 in the first half, rest of team 24, Lakers down 15.

You have now been educated child.

[Mr Feeny]

Kobe had 21 in the first half, rest of team 24, Lakers down 15.

You have now been educated child.

So he...err quit trying in the second half? Thats why he had one point and was massacared by a bench player? In a game 7? Nice educating you chump:applause:

[NumberSix]

So he...err quit trying in the second half? Thats why he had one point and was massacared by a bench player? In a game 7? Nice educating you chump:applause:
Murder

[Mr Feeny]

Murder

The kid makes it too damn easy:cheers:

[3LiftHeatCurse]

Again with the true shooting % shit.

I just laugh at kobe stans.

[Deuce Bigalow]

So he...err quit trying in the second half? Thats why he had one point and was massacared by a bench player? In a game 7? Nice educating you chump:applause:
Massacared by a bench player? Were not talking about Lebron in the 2011 finals here. This is 2006 first round vs Phoenix.

[Mr Feeny]

Massacared by a bench player? Were not talking about Lebron in the 2011 finals. This is 2006 first round vs Phoenix.

Ezactly right. We are talking about a win or go home game 7 and somebody wet the bed scoring just one second half point while being demolished by Barbosa:cheers:

[Deuce Bigalow]

Ezactly right. We are talking about a win or go home game 7 and somebody wet the bed scoring just one second half point while being demolished by Barbosa:cheers:
Game was over early in the second half. Don't know why this is relevant?

[Mr Feeny]

Game was over early in the second half. Don't know why this is relevant?

Greats go down fighting. Others capitulate when the going gets tough:cheers:

[moe94]

Why do people try to pretend Barbosa wasn't a beast at one point? Like it's a disgrace to get beat by him...

[Deuce Bigalow]

Greats go down fighting. Others capitulate when the going gets tough:cheers:
Others join 2 allstars during their prime

:roll: :roll: :roll:

[Mr Feeny]

Others join 2 allstars during their prime

:roll: :roll: :roll:

Some people sweep MVP awards and dominate their sport (Lebron), others watch him at home:roll:

[Deuce Bigalow]

Some people sweep MVP awards and dominate their sport (Lebron), others watch him at home:roll:
Just remember that he had to join 2 allstars in his prime to do it. He had 0 rings before doing that. And you have now been educated, class dismissed.

[Black and White]

Why do people try to pretend Barbosa wasn't a beast at one point? Like it's a disgrace to get beat by him...

He was a quality player, him and Raja Bell back in the suns days.

[Mr Feeny]

Just remember that he had to join 2 allstars in his prime to do it. He had 0 rings before doing that. And you have now been educated, class dismissed.

Had more MVPs before that though than Kobe has managed in 17 years:applause:
Aww poor tot don't be mad now tho.

[Owl]

Myth: Kobe is not efficient

Kobe: 55.5 TS%; peak of 58.0; 9 seasons of 55+
Bird: 56.4 TS%; peak of 61.2; 7 seasons of 55+
Hakeem: 55.3 TS%; peak of 57.7; 12 seasons of 55+
Duncan: 55.1 TS%; peak of 57.9; 7 seasons of 55+
West: 55.0 TS%; peak of 59.0; 8 seasons of 55+
Wilt: 54.7 TS%; peak of 68.9; 8 seasons of 55+
MJ: 56.9 TS%; peak of 61.4; 10 seasons of 55+
Shaq: 58.6 TS%; peak of 65.9; 19 seasons of 55+
Lebron: 57.9 TS%; peak of 64.0; 9 seasons of 55+
Russell: 47.1 TS%; peak of 50.0
Baylor: 49.4 TS%; peak of 53.7
Oscar: 56.4 TS%; peak of 58.8; 11 seasons of 55+
Moses: 56.9 TS%; peak of 60.4; 16 seasons of 55+
Magic: 61.0 TS%; peak of 63.7; 13 seasons of 55+
Kareem: 59.2 TS%; peak of 63.9; 19 seasons of 55+

The low IQ point to only FG% when determining efficiency but we higher IQ fans know that free throws and 3-pointers are also needed to be taken into account. TS% is the best stat we have which factors in 3-pointers and freethrows.

Myth: Kobe is the only alltime great that missed the playoffs in his prime

Kobe missed the playoffs once in 04-05.
Wilt missed the playoffs once in 62-63 and in 64-65 he was on a 10-28 team before being traded away.
Kareem missed the playoffs back to back times in 74-75 and 75-76.
Oscar missed the playoffs four times in his prime from 67-68 to 69-70 and 60-61.
Hakeem missed the playoffs once in 91-92 (team went 2-10 without him)
Lebron missed the playoffs in 04-05 after having a 27/7/7 55TS% season.

The highest PER season of all-time was Wilt's 62-63 season. What was his team's record? 31-49 and his Warriors missed the playoffs. Oscar missed the playoffs in a season where he led the league in ppg, apg, and freethrow percentage.

Myth: Kobe is not an alltime great according to advanced stats like PER

Kobe: 23.4 PER; peak of 28.0; 3 seasons of 25+
Bird: 23.5 PER; peak of 27.8; 4 seasons of 25+
Baylor: 22.7 PER; peak of 28.2; 4 seasons of 25+
Russell: 18.9 PER; peak of 22.8
Magic: 24.1 PER; peak of 27.0; 5 seasons of 25+
Wilt: 26.1 PER; peak of 31.8; 8 seasons of 25+
Oscar: 23.2 PER; peak of 27.6; 6 seasons of 25+
MJ: 27.9 PER; peak of 31.7; 12 seasons of 25+
Hakeem: 23.6 PER; peak of 27.3; 5 seasons of 25+
Kareem: 24.6 PER; peak of 29.9; 10 seasons of 25+
Lebron: 27.7 PER; peak of 31.7; 8 seasons of 25+
Duncan: 24.6 PER; peak of 27.1; 5 seasons of 25+
West: 22.9 PER; peak of 25.0; 1 season of 25+
Moses: 22.0 PER, peak of 26.8; 3 seasons of 25+

Kobe is right in Magic and Bird's ballpark when it comes to Hollinger's player efficiency rating.

Myth: Kobe was carried to his first 3 rings

pts-reb-ast-stl-blk fgm/fga
bold indicates leader on the team

2000 WCQF vs Sacramento Kings
1: 23-7-5-0-0 11/22
2: 32-4-1-2-0 12/20
3: 35-3-2-2-0 13/25
4: 34-6-4-2-0 13/30
5: 17-2-6-0-3 7/16
Series: 27.8 PPG, 4.4 RPG, 3.6 APG, 1.2 SPG, 0.6 BPG, 49.6 FG%, 55.7 TS%
2000 WCSF vs Phoenix Suns
1: 25-6-1-3-3 8/17
2: 15-4-6-2-2 6/11
3: 25-5-2-2-2 8/20
4: 23-3-5-2-0 10/20
5: 17-1-3-1-0 6/16
Series: 21 PPG, 3.8 RPG, 3.4 APG, 2 SPG, 1.4 BPG, 45.2 FG%, 52.4 TS%
2000 WCF vs Portland Trailblazers
Series: 20.4 PPG, 4.9 RPG, 5.9 APG, 1.6 SPG, 2.1 BPG, 43.9 FG%, 55.2 TS%
1: 13-3-6-1-1 4/9
2: 12-2-4-1-2 2/9
3: 25-7-7-2-1 11/18
4: 18-4-7-2-3 5/15
5: 17-5-4-0-2 4/13
6: 33-2-6-4-3 12/24
7: 25-11-7-0-4 9/19
2000 Finals Indiana Pacers
1: 14-3-5-1-2 6/13
2: 2-1-4-0-1 1/3
3: DNP
4: 28-4-5-1-2 14/27
5: 8-5-3-2-0 4/20
6: 26-10-4-1-2 8/27
Series: 15.6 PPG, 4.6 RPG, 4.2 APG, 1 SPG, 1.4 BPG, 36.7 FG%, 41.1 TS%

2000 Playoffs: 21.1 PPG, 4.5 RPG, 4.4 APG, 1.5 SPG, 1.5 BPG, 44.2 FG%, 51.7 TS%

2001 WCQF vs Portland Trailblazers
1: 28-6-7-0-0 9/20
2: 25-3-7-3-0 8/11
3: 22-4-9-2-0 9/23
Series: 25 PPG, 4.3 RPG, 7.7 APG, 2.3 SPG, 0 BPG, 48.1%FG, 56.5%TS
2001 WCSF vs Sacramento Kings
1: 29-4-5-0-0 10/23
2: 27-9-5-1-1 9/19
3: 36-7-4-2-0 10/22
4: 48-16-3-2-1 15/29
Series: 35 PPG, 9 RPG, 4.3 APG, 1.3 SPG, 0.5 BPG, 47.3 FG%, 58.8 TS%
2001 WCF vs San Antonio Spurs
1: 45-10-3-1-1 19/35
2: 28-7-6-2-1 11/24
3: 36-9-8-1-0 14/27
4: 24-2-11-2-1 10/19
Series: 33.3 PPG, 7 RPG, 7 APG, 1.5 SPG, 0.8 BPG, 51.4%FG, 57.1%TS
2001 Finals vs Philadelphia 76ers
1: 15-3-5-1-3 7/22
2: 31-8-6-2-2 11/23
3: 32-6-3-2-0 13/30
4: 19-10-9-1-1 6/13
5: 26-12-6-1-1 7/18
Series: 24.6 PPG, 7.8 RPG, 5.8 APG, 1.4 SPG, 1.4 BPG, 41.5 FG%, 50.1 TS%

2001 Playoffs: 29.4 PPG, 7.3 RPG, 6.1 APG, 1.6 SPG, 0.8 BPG, 46.9 FG%, 55.5 TS%

2002 WCQF vs
1: 34-7-3-2-3 10/28
2: 19-6-5-2-0 5/21
3: 25-4-7-2-2 9/19
Series: 26.0 PPG, 5.7 RPG, 5 APG, 2 SPG, 1.7 BPG, 35.3 FG%, 48.3 TS%
2002 WCSF vs San Antonio
1: 20-2-4-0-0 8/18
2: 26-4-6-3-0 12/25
3: 31-6-6-0-1 15/31
4: 28-7-3-1-0 10/27
5: 26-8-5-1-0 10/20
Series: 26.2 PPG, 5.4 RPG, 4.8 APG, 1 SPG, 0.2 BPG, 45.5 FG%, 48.6 TS%
2002 WCF vs Sacramento Kings
1: 30-6-5-2-2 12/26
2: 22-6-2-1-1 9/21
3: 22-2-3-2-2 8/24
4: 25-4-2-2-3 12/26
5: 30-5-3-1-0 11/29
6: 31-11-5-0-0 10/20
7: 30-10-7-2-0 10/26
Series: 27.1 PPG, 6.3 RPG, 3.9 APG, 1.4 SPG, 1.1 BPG, 41.9 FG%, 49.1 TS%
2002 Finals vs New Jersey Nets
1: 22-3-6-1-0 6/16
2: 24-8-3-2-1 9/15
3: 36-6-4-1-2 14/23
4: 25-6-8-2-0 7/16
Series: 26.8 PPG, 5.8 RPG, 5.2 APG, 1.5 SPG, 0.8 BPG, 51.4 FG%, 62.3 TS%

2002 Playoffs: 26.6 PPG, 5.8 RPG, 4.6 APG, 1.4 SPG, 0.9 BPG, 43.4 FG%, 51.1 TS%

2000-2002 Playoffs: 25.3 PPG, 5.7 RPG, 4.9 APG, 1.5 SPG, 1.1 BPG, 44.7 FG%, 52.7 TS%

Low IQ fans like to use this argument a lot. What they might not fully comprehend is that you need to win 3 playoff series before you make the NBA Finals.
1) This post is loaded with ad hominiem attacks. It's unclear whether "low IQ Kobe haters" refers to a specific group within those OP deems "Kobe haters" or whether all people who like Kobe less than him are necessarily of a low IQ. Either way its a poor argument.

2) TS% Should be relative to era. Superficially one might think Robertson was only slightly more efficient than Bryant. Yet Robertson was consistently top 2 in shooting percentage for a decade and has the best ts% over the decade of the 60s http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=1&p1=roberos01&y1=1970&p2=howelba01&y2=1970&p3=lucasje01&y3=1970&p4=chambwi01&y4=1970&p5=westje01&y5=1970&p6=bellawa01&y6=1970#advanced::7 . The primarily 80s players get a substantial artificial boost in this area, and this is a largely apples - oranges comparison. FWIW Bryant was never top 10, Jordan finished top 10 once.

3) Regarding advanced metrics
(a) PER is only one such metric (and places him 20th all-time including ABA). PER is likely the most favourable per minute metric because it more favourable than all others towards scorers. This doesn't however factor in minutes.
(b) Win Shares has him at 34th on a per minute basis, 17th in net production (both figures including ABA, the only way not to chop a substantial chunk off the career of Dr J, Gilmore et al).
(c) Full WARP numbers aren't available but they have his apex 20.5 Wins Above Replacement Player, a lower peak than a number of modern players. He was 3rd in WARP over the decade of the 2000s behind Duncan and Garnett.
(d) Plus/minus based metrics (as far as I've seen) tend to conclude that Bryant was never a top 5 player.
(e) No metric that I'm aware of has ever valued Kobe as the leagues best player. The closest would be EWA in 2006 (PER but as a valued added metric, i.e. you benefit for playing more minutes) where he came second to LeBron.
(f) All metrics agree Bryants apex is not particularly close to that of Chamberlain, Jabbar, Jordan and yes, LeBron James.
(g) It's unfair to compare Russell to other greats on these metrics alone. I have Russell lower than most, but especially given blocks weren't officially recorded then boxscore based metrics can't hope to capture Russell's value.

As such whilst it is perfectly accurate to say PER and advanced metrics do not call Bryant "not a an all time great", they certainly don't put him top 10 all time.

4) Regarding "being carried". That really depends on what that means. To me it means nothing. But then I don't register titles as an individual accomplishment (it's great having them, but context matters a great deal, and there are many easier, more accurate ways of telling if an individual player is good other than his team's performance). If those people are asserting Bryant was entirely unimportant they are incorrect. If they are saying he was significantly worse than O'Neal, who was the best player on those teams and the best player by vast distances in the '00 and '02 playoffs the metrics bear this out.

[Deuce Bigalow]

Had more MVPs before that though than Kobe has managed in 17 years:applause:
Aww poor tot don't be mad now tho.
Kobe will always have more rings than Lebron. Poor 1 time MVPs Shaq and Hakeem. I'm sure Shaq would trade in his rings for MVP awards :yaohappy:

[Mr Feeny]

1) This post is loaded with ad hominiem attacks. It's unclear whether "low IQ Kobe haters" refers to a specific group within those OP deems "Kobe haters" or whether all people who like Kobe less than him are necessarily of a low IQ. Either way its a poor argument.

2) TS% Should be relative to era. Superficially one might think Robertson was only slightly more efficient than Bryant. Yet Robertson was consistently top 2 in shooting percentage for a decade and has the best ts% over the decade of the 60s http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=1&p1=roberos01&y1=1970&p2=howelba01&y2=1970&p3=lucasje01&y3=1970&p4=chambwi01&y4=1970&p5=westje01&y5=1970&p6=bellawa01&y6=1970#advanced::7 . The primarily 80s players get a substantial artificial boost in this area, and this is a largely apples - oranges comparison. FWIW Bryant was never top 10, Jordan finished top 10 once.

3) Regarding advanced metrics
(a) PER is only one such metric (and places him 20th all-time including ABA). PER is likely the most favourable per minute metric because it more favourable than all others towards scorers. This doesn't however factor in minutes.
(b) Win Shares has him at 34th on a per minute basis, 17th in net production (both figures including ABA, the only way not to chop a substantial chunk off the career of Dr J, Gilmore et al).
(c) Full WARP numbers aren't available but they have his apex 20.5 Wins Above Replacement Player, a lower peak than a number of modern players. He was 3rd in WARP over the decade of the 2000s behind Duncan and Garnett.
(d) Plus/minus based metrics (as far as I've seen) tend to conclude that Bryant was never a top 5 player.
(e) No metric that I'm aware of has ever valued Kobe as the leagues best player. The closest would be EWA in 2006 (PER but as a valued added metric, i.e. you benefit for playing more minutes) where he came second to LeBron.
(f) All metrics agree Bryants apex is not particularly close to that of Chamberlain, Jabbar, Jordan and yes, LeBron James.
(g) It's unfair to compare Russell to other greats on these metrics alone. I have Russell lower than most, but especially given blocks weren't officially recorded then boxscore based metrics can't hope to capture Russell's value.

As such whilst it is perfectly accurate to say PER and advanced metrics do not call Bryant "not a an all time great", they certainly don't put him top 10 all time.

4) Regarding "being carried". That really depends on what that means. To me it means nothing. But then I don't register titles as an individual accomplishment (it's great having them, but context matters a great deal, and there are many easier, more accurate ways of telling if an individual player is good other than his team's performance). If those people are asserting Bryant was entirely unimportant they are incorrect. If they are saying he was significantly worse than O'Neal, who was the best player on those teams and the best player by vast distances in the '00 and '02 playoffs the metrics bear this out.
End thread/
:applause:

[Mr Feeny]

Kobe will always have more rings than Lebron. Poor 1 time MVPs Shaq and Hakeem. I'm sure Shaq would trade in his rings for MVP awards :yaohappy:

Shaq has 3 finals MVPs and third hughest PER in NBa history onky behind MJ and Lebrob.
Kobe? 20th:oldlol:

U mad?

[Deuce Bigalow]

Shaq has 3 finals MVPs and third hughest PER in NBa history onky behind MJ and Lebrob.
Kobe? 20th:oldlol:

U mad?
Shaq called Kobe the greatest Laker ever :applause:

[Mr Feeny]

Shaq called Kobe the greatest Laker ever :applause:

He's trying to pump up his old sidekick:applause:

[Deuce Bigalow]

He's trying to pump up his old sidekick:applause:
But who was Shaq's career without Kobe?

[ssginc]

Nah, I'd say Kobe's been pretty damn consistent for the majority of his career. Terrible analysis, no offense. What you're saying might apply to Nate Robinson, if anything.


I guess it depends on your definition of consistency.

Kobe has shot 40% or less in 35% of his games, 50% or better 37% of the time. He's scored 20 or fewer Points in 32% of his games, 30 or more Points 33% of the time. 20% of the time he's scored 20 or fewer Points on 40% or less shooting. 30% of the time he's scored 30 or more Points on 50% or greater shooting.

Considering Kobe is a "volume" shooter/scorer I would say he's been consistently inconsistent over his entire career.

[Mr Feeny]

But who was Shaq's career without Kobe?

I though you were comparing the two? One has rhe third highest PER all time while the other is 20th:applause:

Hey yo bro. Lebron aint even got no worries. Just completed back to back MVP sweeps and now has 6 total MVPS to tie Magic for third all time behind Kareem and MJ.

U mad bro? Dont be mad yo

[Owl]

1) This post is loaded with ad hominiem attacks. It's unclear whether "low IQ Kobe haters" refers to a specific group within those OP deems "Kobe haters" or whether all people who like Kobe less than him are necessarily of a low IQ. Either way its a poor argument.

2) TS% Should be relative to era. Superficially one might think Robertson was only slightly more efficient than Bryant. Yet Robertson was consistently top 2 in shooting percentage for a decade and has the best ts% over the decade of the 60s http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=1&p1=roberos01&y1=1970&p2=howelba01&y2=1970&p3=lucasje01&y3=1970&p4=chambwi01&y4=1970&p5=westje01&y5=1970&p6=bellawa01&y6=1970#advanced::7 . The primarily 80s players get a substantial artificial boost in this area, and this is a largely apples - oranges comparison. FWIW Bryant was never top 10, Jordan finished top 10 once.

3) Regarding advanced metrics
(a) PER is only one such metric (and places him 20th all-time including ABA). PER is likely the most favourable per minute metric because it more favourable than all others towards scorers. This doesn't however factor in minutes.
(b) Win Shares has him at 34th on a per minute basis, 17th in net production (both figures including ABA, the only way not to chop a substantial chunk off the career of Dr J, Gilmore et al).
(c) Full WARP numbers aren't available but they have his apex 20.5 Wins Above Replacement Player, a lower peak than a number of modern players. He was 3rd in WARP over the decade of the 2000s behind Duncan and Garnett.
(d) Plus/minus based metrics (as far as I've seen) tend to conclude that Bryant was never a top 5 player.
(e) No metric that I'm aware of has ever valued Kobe as the leagues best player. The closest would be EWA in 2006 (PER but as a valued added metric, i.e. you benefit for playing more minutes) where he came second to LeBron.
(f) All metrics agree Bryants apex is not particularly close to that of Chamberlain, Jabbar, Jordan and yes, LeBron James.
(g) It's unfair to compare Russell to other greats on these metrics alone. I have Russell lower than most, but especially given blocks weren't officially recorded then boxscore based metrics can't hope to capture Russell's value.

As such whilst it is perfectly accurate to say PER and advanced metrics do not call Bryant "not a an all time great", they certainly don't put him top 10 all time.

4) Regarding "being carried". That really depends on what that means. To me it means nothing. But then I don't register titles as an individual accomplishment (it's great having them, but context matters a great deal, and there are many easier, more accurate ways of telling if an individual player is good other than his team's performance). If those people are asserting Bryant was entirely unimportant they are incorrect. If they are saying he was significantly worse than O'Neal, who was the best player on those teams and the best player by vast distances in the '00 and '02 playoffs the metrics bear this out.
Addendum: Many people don't believe advanced stats can be compared across different eras (talking about cumulative ones, like PER, WARP, WS; not TS% which obviously can't). Using Z-Scores which show how many standard deviations above (or below) average a player is would perhaps be considered preferable.

[Prometheus]

1) This post is loaded with ad hominiem attacks. It's unclear whether "low IQ Kobe haters" refers to a specific group within those OP deems "Kobe haters" or whether all people who like Kobe less than him are necessarily of a low IQ. Either way its a poor argument.

2) TS% Should be relative to era. Superficially one might think Robertson was only slightly more efficient than Bryant. Yet Robertson was consistently top 2 in shooting percentage for a decade and has the best ts% over the decade of the 60s http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=1&p1=roberos01&y1=1970&p2=howelba01&y2=1970&p3=lucasje01&y3=1970&p4=chambwi01&y4=1970&p5=westje01&y5=1970&p6=bellawa01&y6=1970#advanced::7 . The primarily 80s players get a substantial artificial boost in this area, and this is a largely apples - oranges comparison. FWIW Bryant was never top 10, Jordan finished top 10 once.

3) Regarding advanced metrics
(a) PER is only one such metric (and places him 20th all-time including ABA). PER is likely the most favourable per minute metric because it more favourable than all others towards scorers. This doesn't however factor in minutes.
(b) Win Shares has him at 34th on a per minute basis, 17th in net production (both figures including ABA, the only way not to chop a substantial chunk off the career of Dr J, Gilmore et al).
(c) Full WARP numbers aren't available but they have his apex 20.5 Wins Above Replacement Player, a lower peak than a number of modern players. He was 3rd in WARP over the decade of the 2000s behind Duncan and Garnett.
(d) Plus/minus based metrics (as far as I've seen) tend to conclude that Bryant was never a top 5 player.
(e) No metric that I'm aware of has ever valued Kobe as the leagues best player. The closest would be EWA in 2006 (PER but as a valued added metric, i.e. you benefit for playing more minutes) where he came second to LeBron.
(f) All metrics agree Bryants apex is not particularly close to that of Chamberlain, Jabbar, Jordan and yes, LeBron James.
(g) It's unfair to compare Russell to other greats on these metrics alone. I have Russell lower than most, but especially given blocks weren't officially recorded then boxscore based metrics can't hope to capture Russell's value.

As such whilst it is perfectly accurate to say PER and advanced metrics do not call Bryant "not a an all time great", they certainly don't put him top 10 all time.

4) Regarding "being carried". That really depends on what that means. To me it means nothing. But then I don't register titles as an individual accomplishment (it's great having them, but context matters a great deal, and there are many easier, more accurate ways of telling if an individual player is good other than his team's performance). If those people are asserting Bryant was entirely unimportant they are incorrect. If they are saying he was significantly worse than O'Neal, who was the best player on those teams and the best player by vast distances in the '00 and '02 playoffs the metrics bear this out.

:applause: genuinely impressed by this post :applause:

[pauk]

TS% again....

I dont care about Kobe here in any way, just aiming this completely towards TS%... FT% and actual shot making (actual field goals) are two completely different things and should be sepparated, like it always was....

In my basketball "career" i have shot at best up to 90%, even to this day i am a 80-90% FT shooter, if you put me in the NBA i would struggle like hell to shoot 40% FG (taking 1 to 2 FGA, layups preferably, WIDEopen ones)..... but it still gives me a great TS%......... does that make me efficient?

You could put this guy in the NBA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtvRN5S7m_U and he would manage to have a great TS% hence "be efficient".

At least use "eFG%" or something....

TS% is just a way to:
*bail out an actual bad shot maker due to his great FT%
*diminish a great actual shot maker due to his bad FT%

FTs impact the game aswell, obviously...... but shooting FTs and MAKING/TAKING SHOTS WHILE DRIBBLING BEING DEFENDED
..... are two completely different things....

[chazzy]

TS% again....

I dont care about Kobe here in any way, just aiming this completely towards TS%... FT% and actual shot making (actual field goals) are two completely different things and should be sepparated, like it always was....

In my basketball "career" i have shot at best up to 90%, even to this day i am a 80-90% FT shooter, if you put me in the NBA i would struggle like hell to shoot 40% FG (taking 1 to 2 FGA, layups preferably, WIDEopen ones)..... but it still gives me a great TS%......... does that make me efficient?

You could put this guy in the NBA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtvRN5S7m_U and he would manage to have a great TS% hence "be efficient".

At least use "eFG%" or something....

TS% is just a way to:
*bail out an actual bad shot maker due to his great FT%
*diminish a great actual shot maker due to his bad FT%

FTs impact the game aswell, obviously...... but shooting FTs and MAKING/TAKING SHOTS WHILE DRIBBLING BEING DEFENDED
..... are two completely different things....
Ugh. What about drawing fouls while being defended? Making 3s?

[NumberSix]

Ugh. What about drawing fouls while being defended? Making 3s?
Like he said... eFG%

[pauk]

Ugh. What about drawing fouls while being defended? Making 3s?

I didnt say FTs are bad / dont impact the game..... i said that FTs and making/taking actual shots are two completely different things, two different systems of judging efficiency.... and FTs sure cant compare to actual shot making anyways.... its not like you can win a game by doing nothing but trying to draw fouls the entire game without a single actual FG (that would be one hellava interesting game to see lol).... but you can win one without any FTs at all....

..and what do you mean Making 3's? Those ARE fieldgoals.... FG% accounts for all actual fieldgoals (2PT/3PT).... last time i checked... you maybe mean AND1 or something? :)

[ArbitraryWater]

pauk gets shit for his essay, yet he probably wrote that stuff out of his head in like 10 mins, this, wow, musta taken hours

[mehyaM24]

kobe = on pace to break the record for most bricks in bball history. his efficiency, or lack there of, is definitely not a myth. sorry.

[mehyaM24]

Kobe will always have more rings than Lebron. Poor 1 time MVPs Shaq and Hakeem. I'm sure Shaq would trade in his rings for MVP awards :yaohappy:

lechamp= leading the nba in true shooting %. an incredible .669%. damn....sidekick boy topped out at .580%. :oldlol: .what about .517% and .511%. those are sidekick boys playoff true shooting % in the 00 and 02 playoffs....title yrs....kobe couldn't crack 52% in title yrs....LeBron cracking 66% in true shooting. :roll: a true marksman

[Deuce Bigalow]

lechamp= leading the nba in true shooting %. an incredible .669%. damn....sidekick boy topped out at .580%. :oldlol: .what about .517% and .511%. those are sidekick boys playoff true shooting % in the 00 and 02 playoffs....title yrs....kobe couldn't crack 52% in title yrs....LeBron cracking 66% in true shooting. :roll: a true marksman
Kobe's TS% in titles years vs Lebron

.567
.564
.555
.517
.511

.585
.576

1-2% difference is all the efficient Lebron could muster up compared to 3 of Kobe's titles?

BTW league effiency was lower in late 90s to 2005.

[pauk]

Like he said... eFG%

eFG% is like FG% but gives you a bigger bonus for hitting 3's, it is the most impactful FG in basketball afterall.... this is a way to try show the perimeter player some love...

That actually evaluates a players shot composing realibility at least, better than TS%...

TS% does something differently simply due to the addition of FT%.... it is trying to evaluate a players overall scoring % in its entirety using any type of points the player brings to the game....

Its a wonderful idea, but it doesnt really work simply due to FTs it makes it flawed... why? Because FTs are by majority accidental fouls or deliberate contacts WHILE you were most likely about to make an easy FG.... it therefore cant be used as a reliable/controllable attempt to try and score points as actual FIELDGOALS are....... you can sometimes draw the shooting foul, but you cant do that any time you wish at a high magnitude enough to compare with FGs, not even close..... you can take a FG any time you like and the FG% shows exactly how reliable that shot will be....

There is 10 seconds left... and you need 1-2 points to win the game.... do you take the FG or try draw a shooting foul...... what is more reliable there? Your shot making ability (FG%) or TS%?

[215Philly]

eFG% is like FG% but gives you a bigger bonus for hitting 3's, it is the most impactful FG in basketball afterall.... this is a way to try show the perimeter player some love...

That actually evaluates a players shot composing realibility at least, better than TS%...

TS% does something differently simply due to the addition of FT%.... it is trying to evaluate a players overall scoring % in its entirety using any type of points the player brings to the game....

Its a wonderful idea, but it doesnt really work simply due to FTs it makes it flawed... why? Because FTs are by majority accidental fouls or deliberate contacts WHILE you were most likely about to make an easy FG.... it therefore cant be used as a reliable/controllable attempt to try and score points as actual FIELDGOALS are....... you can sometimes draw the shooting foul, but you cant do that any time you wish at a high magnitude enough to compare with FGs, not even close..... you can take a FG any time you like and the FG% shows exactly how reliable that shot will be....

There is 10 seconds left... and you need 1-2 points to win the game.... do you take the FG or try draw a shooting foul...... what is more reliable there? Your shot making ability (FG%) or TS%?
Quality poster :applause:

[Deuce Bigalow]

1) This post is loaded with ad hominiem attacks. It's unclear whether "low IQ Kobe haters" refers to a specific group within those OP deems "Kobe haters" or whether all people who like Kobe less than him are necessarily of a low IQ. Either way its a poor argument.

2) TS% Should be relative to era. Superficially one might think Robertson was only slightly more efficient than Bryant. Yet Robertson was consistently top 2 in shooting percentage for a decade and has the best ts% over the decade of the 60s http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=1&p1=roberos01&y1=1970&p2=howelba01&y2=1970&p3=lucasje01&y3=1970&p4=chambwi01&y4=1970&p5=westje01&y5=1970&p6=bellawa01&y6=1970#advanced::7 . The primarily 80s players get a substantial artificial boost in this area, and this is a largely apples - oranges comparison. FWIW Bryant was never top 10, Jordan finished top 10 once.

3) Regarding advanced metrics
(a) PER is only one such metric (and places him 20th all-time including ABA). PER is likely the most favourable per minute metric because it more favourable than all others towards scorers. This doesn't however factor in minutes.
(b) Win Shares has him at 34th on a per minute basis, 17th in net production (both figures including ABA, the only way not to chop a substantial chunk off the career of Dr J, Gilmore et al).
(c) Full WARP numbers aren't available but they have his apex 20.5 Wins Above Replacement Player, a lower peak than a number of modern players. He was 3rd in WARP over the decade of the 2000s behind Duncan and Garnett.
(d) Plus/minus based metrics (as far as I've seen) tend to conclude that Bryant was never a top 5 player.
(e) No metric that I'm aware of has ever valued Kobe as the leagues best player. The closest would be EWA in 2006 (PER but as a valued added metric, i.e. you benefit for playing more minutes) where he came second to LeBron.
(f) All metrics agree Bryants apex is not particularly close to that of Chamberlain, Jabbar, Jordan and yes, LeBron James.
(g) It's unfair to compare Russell to other greats on these metrics alone. I have Russell lower than most, but especially given blocks weren't officially recorded then boxscore based metrics can't hope to capture Russell's value.

As such whilst it is perfectly accurate to say PER and advanced metrics do not call Bryant "not a an all time great", they certainly don't put him top 10 all time.

4) Regarding "being carried". That really depends on what that means. To me it means nothing. But then I don't register titles as an individual accomplishment (it's great having them, but context matters a great deal, and there are many easier, more accurate ways of telling if an individual player is good other than his team's performance). If those people are asserting Bryant was entirely unimportant they are incorrect. If they are saying he was significantly worse than O'Neal, who was the best player on those teams and the best player by vast distances in the '00 and '02 playoffs the metrics bear this out.
I have heard these arguments before many times so I wouldn't say they are ad hominiem. I agree about the TS% because league efficiency was lower from the 40s to 60s then began to rise to about what it is today in the 80s. So I think that comparisions to Bird, MJ, Moses, Hakeem, Duncan are valid. PER is tricky but fact remains that he is up there with top 5 player alltime Larry Bird in terms of PER. Winshares are truly awful as I can find many examples proving that they are not accurate in determing who is better. Plus minus has a lot to do with team winning doesn't it? If advanced metrics don't put Kobe alltime, then how do they put Bird top 5/10? This doesn't just go against Kobe and stop at Kobe. Has Magic ever led the league in PER? Duncan? Hakeem? The comparison was to show how close he is to Bird and Magic if anything.

[Deuce Bigalow]

eFG% is like FG% but gives you a bigger bonus for hitting 3's, it is the most impactful FG in basketball afterall.... this is a way to try show the perimeter player some love...

That actually evaluates a players shot composing realibility at least, better than TS%...

TS% does something differently simply due to the addition of FT%.... it is trying to evaluate a players overall scoring % in its entirety using any type of points the player brings to the game....

Its a wonderful idea, but it doesnt really work simply due to FTs it makes it flawed... why? Because FTs are by majority accidental fouls or deliberate contacts WHILE you were most likely about to make an easy FG.... it therefore cant be used as a reliable/controllable attempt to try and score points as actual FIELDGOALS are....... you can sometimes draw the shooting foul, but you cant do that any time you wish at a high magnitude enough to compare with FGs, not even close..... you can take a FG any time you like and the FG% shows exactly how reliable that shot will be....

There is 10 seconds left... and you need 1-2 points to win the game.... do you take the FG or try draw a shooting foul...... what is more reliable there? Your shot making ability (FG%) or TS%?
I agree with eFG% being the best efficiency from the field stat. Then you need to mention FT%. eFG% and FT% mentioned together Kobe is not inefficient player. He would stack up well with other greats.

[pauk]

I agree with eFG% being the best efficiency from the field stat. Then you need to mention FT%. eFG% and FT% mentioned together Kobe is not inefficient player. He would stack up well with other greats.

Yep! But man.... lets just watch the games shall we... Kobe was as impactful of a perimeter scorer as anybody... ever... his shot creation sure was reliable, as well as anybody in NBA history....

He may not had better FG% / eFG% than a couple of guys who took the same volume of shots overall, but you have to look into the framework of what type of shots he used to take!

[iamgine]

eFG% is like FG% but gives you a bigger bonus for hitting 3's, it is the most impactful FG in basketball afterall.... this is a way to try show the perimeter player some love...

That actually evaluates a players shot composing realibility at least, better than TS%...

TS% does something differently simply due to the addition of FT%.... it is trying to evaluate a players overall scoring % in its entirety using any type of points the player brings to the game....

Its a wonderful idea, but it doesnt really work simply due to FTs it makes it flawed... why? Because FTs are by majority accidental fouls or deliberate contacts WHILE you were most likely about to make an easy FG.... it therefore cant be used as a reliable/controllable attempt to try and score points as actual FIELDGOALS are....... you can sometimes draw the shooting foul, but you cant do that any time you wish at a high magnitude enough to compare with FGs, not even close..... you can take a FG any time you like and the FG% shows exactly how reliable that shot will be....

There is 10 seconds left... and you need 1-2 points to win the game.... do you take the FG or try draw a shooting foul...... what is more reliable there? Your shot making ability (FG%) or TS%?
Your situation (end of game 10 sec left) is a special case because the ref usually swallow their whistle. In any other case though, FT% is always useful.

Also FG% doesn't even remotely show how reliable your shot is in different types of situation. End of game, you wouldn't want to give it to Blake Griffin with the paint packed. His FG% might be high but if his only option is a mid-range shot then his FG% is not a reliable indicator of anything.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Good post, Pauk. Would rep if I could. :cheers:

[I<3NBA]

rape is not a myth

[andgar923]

rape is not a myth
:roll: :roll: :roll: