Zach Lavine is putting up prime/peak Kobe numbers on even greater efficiency

[hiphopanonymous]

Averaging 29, 5 and 5 with 59 percent accuracy from 2's, 44 percent from 3's, and 86 percent from the line.

How do you older fans figure you'll explain to someone who was born in the 21st century how good a player like Kobe was if his best numbers add up to what fringe top 15 guys are doing today but on even lower efficiency?

[Proctor]

Is this really an argument a Wilt stan wants to make?

[RRR3]

Is this really an argument a Wilt stan wants to make?
:lol

[hiphopanonymous]

Is this really an argument a Wilt stan wants to make?
I love dissecting the game and talking hoops - any era - got any thoughts about the topic?

[Gudo]

A lot of players are shooting their career percentages this season. Would take the stats comparison with context.

[Dbrog]

Averaging 29, 5 and 5 with 59 percent accuracy from 2's, 44 percent from 3's, and 86 percent from the line.

How do you older fans figure you'll explain to someone who was born in the 21st century how good a player like Kobe was if his best numbers add up to what fringe top 15 guys are doing today but on even lower efficiency?

Cause pace and defense was a thing and now even d-league people can go off for 30+
Put Lavine in the early 2000s I guarantee he would struggle to score 18ppg

[warriorfan]

Averaging 29, 5 and 5 with 59 percent accuracy from 2's, 44 percent from 3's, and 86 percent from the line.

How do you older fans figure you'll explain to someone who was born in the 21st century how good a player like Kobe was if his best numbers add up to what fringe top 15 guys are doing today but on even lower efficiency?

Tell them it’s a different game now with differences in pace and physicality, it used to be more difficult to put up big numbers.

[hiphopanonymous]

I think I've learned there's a camp that gets dug into "the rules changed - it opened up the game" (things like on or off-ball hand checking, moving screens, etc). Then there's the camp of "shooters today are just so much better - nobody utilized the 3 properly until now".

Is the truth a little bit of both? Or is it really more strongly one or the other?

[fsvr54]

Deep down inside you know why.

Kobe murks this chump any day of the week and twice on Sundays.

[HBK_Kliq_2]

He's the modern day Vince Carter. I don't see how that makes this era so bad.

[Real Men Wear Green]

Averaging 29, 5 and 5 with 59 percent accuracy from 2's, 44 percent from 3's, and 86 percent from the line.

How do you older fans figure you'll explain to someone who was born in the 21st century how good a player like Kobe was if his best numbers add up to what fringe top 15 guys are doing today but on even lower efficiency?
My son doesn't have any mental handicaps so I'm sure he can understand that the rules have changed to make defense more difficult. You can't handcheck, you can't crowd jumpshooters, physicality has been banned and as a result the offensive player has a strong advantage.

Now the game has evolved and generally speaking players of the present era will always be collectively better than the guys they grew up watching, emulating and ultimately improving upon. But if we went with the logic that the improved offensive numbers proves that offensive players are the best ever then why don't we say that the inferior defensive statistics prove that defenders have gotten worse?

Because we know that the rules have changed to benefit perimeter scoring and that the strategy of the game has changed with it to emphasize the three. If you go back far enough? Jerry West didn't even play with the three.

[warriorfan]

I think I've learned there's a camp that gets dug into "the rules changed - it opened up the game" (things like on or off-ball hand checking, moving screens, etc). Then there's the camp of "shooters today are just so much better - nobody utilized the 3 properly until now".

Is the truth a little bit of both? Or is it really more strongly one or the other?

The common sense is a little bit of both. However rule changes have given shooters more and better opportunities so you will see more and better shooting naturally. If you look year by year at league FT% averages, you do see an increase, especially in the last few years with a starting take off after the 2014-2015 season. This coincides with the Warriors success and the rest of the league recognizing the importance of shooting in the modern league.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_stats_per_game.html

[dankok8]

There is nothing to explain. Compared to 2006 which was back then funny enough called "an offensive explosion" the NBA had an average TS of 53.6% and an average pace of 90.5. The 2021 NBA has an average TS of 57.2% and an average pace of 99.4. Give 2006 Kobe a 3.6% boost in efficiency and two more shots every game because of higher pace and he's at ~39.2 ppg on 59.5 %TS.

[RRR3]

There is nothing to explain. Compared to 2006 which was back then funny enough called "an offensive explosion" the NBA had an average TS of 53.6% and an average pace of 90.5. The 2021 NBA has an average TS of 57.2% and an average pace of 99.4. Give 2006 Kobe a 3.6% boost in efficiency and two more shots every game because of higher pace and he's at ~39.2 ppg on 59.5 %TS.
Kobe wouldn’t play enough minutes to average 39.2 if he played today. He obviously could have on a weak team if he played enough minutes but stars play at most 37 MPG these days, so he’d probably still top at around 35 PPG. His efficiency would absolutely be better though.

[Charlie Sheen]

Averaging 29, 5 and 5 with 59 percent accuracy from 2's, 44 percent from 3's, and 86 percent from the line.

How do you older fans figure you'll explain to someone who was born in the 21st century how good a player like Kobe was if his best numbers add up to what fringe top 15 guys are doing today but on even lower efficiency?

I wouldn't explain efficiency because I don't care too much about that stuff. Basketball isn't an academic exercise for me. I'd color in the context that is lost for someone never saw Kobe play while he was playing.

[HBK_Kliq_2]

Kobe wouldn’t play enough minutes to average 39.2 if he played today. He obviously could have on a weak team if he played enough minutes but stars play at most 37 MPG these days, so he’d probably still top at around 35 PPG. His efficiency would absolutely be better though.

The defense today is still very good. The efficiency is just better because the talent across the league is so elite. It's not like the 1960's era every wing player was Ron Artest? because efficiency sucked back then.

[HBK_Kliq_2]

A guy like Kevin Garnett was the leading scorer back in the early 2000's. With his lack of offensive moves and scoring game, he wouldn't even be a top 15 scorer today. That's the difference between this era and the early 2000s.

[RRR3]

The defense today is still very good. The efficiency is just better because the talent across the league is so elite. It's not like the 1960's era every wing player was Ron Artest? because efficiency sucked back then.
How good the defense is is irrelevant when the rules neuter defenders so much. Additionally players are used optimally now which helps efficiency. People take smarter shots due to analytics.

[dankok8]

Kobe wouldn’t play enough minutes to average 39.2 if he played today. He obviously could have on a weak team if he played enough minutes but stars play at most 37 MPG these days, so he’d probably still top at around 35 PPG. His efficiency would absolutely be better though.

I took into account the slightly reduced minutes. Otherwise he'd take 3 more shots each game instead of 2 shots. The Lakers were a very weak team that year so they would rely on Kobe to carry them in any era.

[Dbrog]

A guy like Kevin Garnett was the leading scorer back in the early 2000's. With his lack of offensive moves and scoring game, he wouldn't even be a top 15 scorer today. That's the difference between this era and the early 2000s.

He basically played PG for a whole season and playoffs in the early 2000s. At worst he's AD with better handles and defense....but he wouldn't be a top 15 scorer :facepalm

[HBK_Kliq_2]

How good the defense is is irrelevant when the rules neuter defenders so much. Additionally players are used optimally now which helps efficiency. People take smarter shots due to analytics.

What about the 1980s? Were the rules not in place yet? because defense sucked ass in the 1980s.

1990s defense got better but was nothing special

2000-2005 is pretty much the only "defensive" era but i think it was just because the lack of offensive talent across the league. This was when Shaq\Duncan made the finals every year, they would be more likely to get played off the court today.

At the end of the day, there's just more offensive guard\wing talent today then ever. So yeah a guard\wing would probably thrive in this era but a big man would get played off the court, it works both ways.

[HBK_Kliq_2]

He basically played PG for a whole season and playoffs in the early 2000s. At worst he's AD with better handles and defense....but he wouldn't be a top 15 scorer :facepalm

He doesn't have anywhere close to the playoff efficiency and shooting ability of Anthony Davis.

Garnett would take fadeaway long two point jumpshots, he was physically weak and didn't have much of a low post game. He was basically a Draymond\Pippen hybrid.

[HBK_Kliq_2]

https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/2006-nba-western-conference-semifinals-mavericks-vs-spurs.html

This is what would happen if prime Tim Duncan defended a modern day offensive team.

Mavs offensive rating for series: 114.7

[Dbrog]

He doesn't have anywhere close to the playoff efficiency and shooting ability of Anthony Davis.

Garnett would take fadeaway long two point jumpshots, he was physically weak and didn't have much of a low post game. He was basically a Draymond\Pippen hybrid.

This guy right? :lol

You do realize in 03....defensive 03, he scored 27ppg in the playoffs shooting 52% along with other monster stats? That's why I said AD at worst. Prime Draymond/Pippen hybrid is definitely way better. Maybe go watch some Thinking Basketball videos since you obviously didn't see KG play

[tpols]

If he does that in the playoffs then we will have something to talk about.

[tpols]

He doesn't have anywhere close to the playoff efficiency and shooting ability of Anthony Davis.

Garnett would take fadeaway long two point jumpshots, he was physically weak and didn't have much of a low post game. He was basically a Draymond\Pippen hybrid.

Garnett was much more violent and intense than AD... AD has GOAT skill and quickness for his height but if there's any knock on him it's that he's a little soft. KG was kind of an asshole lol... And he definitely wasn't weak by comparison to AD. Shaq and big guys like that sure but he held his own against most big men. Draymond and Pippen were nowhere near as tall as him either. He is legit 7 foot, Dray is like 6'6.

Him and Duncan grade out as two of the best defenders of all time in every metric. And KG's brand of defense would be particularly devastating today because he could cover the perimeter like a demon.

[ralph_i_el]

KG is the goat perimeter defending big man. He would be DPoY in this league right now. They used to run a soft zone and let KG defend like, everything above the free throw line. Idk what his scoring would look like because they wouldn't let him shoot a bunch of fadeaway 2's, but he would probably shoot spot up 3's and play the 5. I have to think he would be scoring 25ppg just based on being a length or quickness mismatch with basically every 5.

[Smoke117]

Everyone knows Zach Lavine is far superior to kobrick.

[HBK_Kliq_2]

Garnett was much more violent and intense than AD... AD has GOAT skill and quickness for his height but if there's any knock on him it's that he's a little soft. KG was kind of an asshole lol... And he definitely wasn't weak by comparison to AD. Shaq and big guys like that sure but he held his own against most big men. Draymond and Pippen were nowhere near as tall as him either. He is legit 7 foot, Dray is like 6'6.

Him and Duncan grade out as two of the best defenders of all time in every metric. And KG's brand of defense would be particularly devastating today because he could cover the perimeter like a demon.

Yeah, he's a Pippen. Kevin Garnett wouldn't be able to be the #1 scorer on a championship team in any era. He lacked a low post game, he's actually kind of soft for his height and shoots fadeaways, long 2 pointers, can't shoot the 3, he was also the worst superstar at drawing fouls.

All traits of a beta for KG. That's probably why he tries to act like he's so damn tough, he knows deep down he's just a beta player.

Back to OP, there's no dominant player today that wouldn't dominate in the early 2000s. Zack Lavine would be Vince Carter.

[Smoke117]

Yeah, he's a Pippen. Kevin Garnett wouldn't be able to be the #1 scorer on a championship team in any era. He lacked a low post game, he's actually kind of soft for his height and shoots fadeaways, long 2 pointers, can't shoot the 3, he was also the worst superstar at drawing fouls.

All traits of a beta for KG. That's probably why he tries to act like he's so damn tough, he knows deep down he's just a beta player.

Back to OP, there's no dominant player today that wouldn't dominate in the early 2000s. Zack Lavine would be Vince Carter.

Kevin Garnett led the championship Celtics in scoring in the 2008 playoffs, chief. Kawhit Leotard will also never surpass him on the goat players list.

[tpols]

Yeah, he's a Pippen. Kevin Garnett wouldn't be able to be the #1 scorer on a championship team in any era. He lacked a low post game, he's actually kind of soft for his height and shoots fadeaways, long 2 pointers, can't shoot the 3, he was also the worst superstar at drawing fouls.

All traits of a beta for KG. That's probably why he tries to act like he's so damn tough, he knows deep down he's just a beta player.

Back to OP, there's no dominant player today that wouldn't dominate in the early 2000s. Zack Lavine would be Vince Carter.

Pippen was nowhere near as good as peak 2004 KG... ever in his career.

[ShawkFactory]

He doesn't have anywhere close to the playoff efficiency and shooting ability of Anthony Davis.

Garnett would take fadeaway long two point jumpshots, he was physically weak and didn't have much of a low post game. He was basically a Draymond\Pippen hybrid.
This is literally one of the worst takes I've ever seen.

[Axe]

Pippen was nowhere near as good as peak 2004 KG... ever in his career.
At least both kg and pip have better efficiencies than black mamba

[Smoke117]

This is literally one of the worst takes I've ever seen.

So basically an ordinary take from him...considering he's an imbecile.

[Axe]

This is literally one of the worst takes I've ever seen.
That's why he's the biggest dimwit in this board.

[mehyaM24]

Yeah, he's a Pippen. Kevin Garnett wouldn't be able to be the #1 scorer on a championship team in any era. He lacked a low post game, he's actually kind of soft for his height and shoots fadeaways, long 2 pointers, can't shoot the 3, he was also the worst superstar at drawing fouls.

All traits of a beta for KG. That's probably why he tries to act like he's so damn tough, he knows deep down he's just a beta player.

Back to OP, there's no dominant player today that wouldn't dominate in the early 2000s. Zack Lavine would be Vince Carter.

zack lavine is great. but he would struggle to score on good efficiency. like every perimeter player then.

unless you're saying he is better than prime tmac & kobe

[SATAN]

Averaging 29, 5 and 5 with 59 percent accuracy from 2's, 44 percent from 3's, and 86 percent from the line.

How do you older fans figure you'll explain to someone who was born in the 21st century how good a player like Kobe was if his best numbers add up to what fringe top 15 guys are doing today but on even lower efficiency?


Terrible thread, man.

[Bronbron23]

Averaging 29, 5 and 5 with 59 percent accuracy from 2's, 44 percent from 3's, and 86 percent from the line.

How do you older fans figure you'll explain to someone who was born in the 21st century how good a player like Kobe was if his best numbers add up to what fringe top 15 guys are doing today but on even lower efficiency?

Comparing stats from this generation to kobe's is dumb. The rules and play style make it hella easy for good players to put up crazy numbers.