Better at basketball, Jokić or Kobe?

[QUOTE=SouBeachTalents;15032782]I feel like between roster construction/injury, T-Mac was arguably the unluckiest player of all time. He was trapped on legitimately the worst rosters I've ever seen in Orlando, then in Houston injuries started to affect his game while Yao constantly missed time.

[B]If Doc doesn't tell Duncan his family can't fly on the team plane, they would've been battling Shaq & Kobe in some epic Finals.[/B][/QUOTE]That's always been one of the weirdest stories for me. I get Doc was trying to assert his authority, but it's Tim Duncan who is one of the least problematic stars ever. And the Spurs, an incredibly well run organization with a coach who famously holds his own stars accountable is letting Duncan do it with no problems, why not Orlando?

[QUOTE=SouBeachTalents;15032772]I felt like it didn't make sense to lump in seasons where these guys were clearly not yet in/past their prime, I was curious what their numbers would look like if you focused solely on that

Kobe 2001-2010: 29/6/5 on 55%TS

T-Mac 2001-2007: 30/7/6 on 53%TS

Iverson 1999-2006: 31/4/6 on 49%TS

Allen 2000-2007: 25/5/5 on 60%TS

Vince 2000-2007: 26/7/5 on 52%TS

Wade 2005-2011: 27/6/6 on 58%TS

I left out Spree as he just had no business being in the discussion, Manu just didn't have the volume, and most of LeBron's took place after Kobe's prime anyway. The most notable thing is how undeserved McGrady's playoff rep is when despite never getting out of the first round, he was usually ballin.[/QUOTE]

I was intentional to use 2000-10 as a spread because it aligned with Kobe's prime and quite frankly, just about everyone else's. Secondly, I didn't use those years for every single player. For example, TMac's last postseason that was meaningful was 2008.

Manu didn't need to have the volume. The point was that his efficiency wasn't leaps and bounds above Kobe's.

You could adjust for Ray Allen's but I wouldn't stop at 2007. I think 2008-10 are still included in his prime despite production falling, but that was due to being on a superteam. Even if you use 2000-07 for his PS, then he's at 58% TS%.

And I specifically focused on the postseason because that's what ultimately matters. Kobe's efficiency was in some cases better, but mostly on par with the elite players of his time.

Either way, the efficiency numbers are blown out of proportion. How many series were lost during that decade that we can truly pin on Kobe for his overshooting and poor efficiency? Maybe 1?

Lastly, I didn't use other statistics like rebounds or assists because that wasn't the point of my comment. I started by discussing efficiency because he's consistently targeted for it and I think he has become underrated in this forum, which I think is unfair.

[QUOTE=SouBeachTalents;15032772]I felt like it didn't make sense to lump in seasons where these guys were clearly not yet in/past their prime, I was curious what their numbers would look like if you focused solely on that

Kobe 2001-2010: 29/6/5 on 55%TS

T-Mac 2001-2007: 30/7/6 on 53%TS

Iverson 1999-2006: 31/4/6 on 49%TS

Allen 2000-2007: 25/5/5 on 60%TS

Vince 2000-2007: 26/7/5 on 52%TS

Wade 2005-2011: 27/6/6 on 58%TS

I left out Spree as he just had no business being in the discussion, Manu just didn't have the volume, and most of LeBron's took place after Kobe's prime anyway. The most notable thing is how undeserved McGrady's playoff rep is when despite never getting out of the first round, he was usually ballin.[/QUOTE]

Forgot to mention, I added guards like Spree just to show a pattern. Here's some other guards/wings:

PS Melo '05-'10: 26 PPG on 53% TS%

PS Payton '00-'03: 23 PPG on 48% TS%

PS Peja '01-'07: 19 PPG on 54% TS%

PS Hamilton '03-'09: 21 PPG on 52% TS%

I avoided posting splits because they'd just show more of the same and it's actually a lot worse for these guys. Kobe's supposed shooting woes are overblown.

Here are the NBA's TS% in the playoffs between 2000-2010:

2000: 51.7%
2001: 51.1%
2002: 51.4%
2003: 52.5%
2004: 50.0%
2005: 53.4%
2006: 54.7%
2007: 53.0%
2008: 53.2%
2009: 54.4%
2010: 54.3%

It seems that the league hovered somewhere around 52-53% during this time, which is about a rTS of +3.5 or so when it comes to Kobe.

Looking at the Jokic's, his TS% 61% whereas the league hovered around 56-57% in the playoffs...his rTS would be around +4.5 let's say. It's higher than Kobe's, but I think Jokic benefits from a lot more close range shots 10 ft and under, which skews the data a little. Given all considerations, I think the gap isn't as wide as I had originally believed.

This isn't to say that Kobe is on the same level offensively as Jokic. He isn't. But I think it helps to clarify the inefficiency argument at least, which I think is overused far too often to not just criticize Kobe, but to make him appear as if he was some net negative overall.

I personally don't think this is close.

Jokic has been enjoying one of the best peaks EVER. He is at the same table as early 90s Jordan, mid 80s Bird, early 00's Shaq and a couple others.

Kobe is not at this table. His peak has never been seen through that extent - goat level.

[QUOTE=HoopsNY;15032921]Here are the NBA's TS% in the playoffs between 2000-2010:

2000: 51.7%
2001: 51.1%
2002: 51.4%
2003: 52.5%
2004: 50.0%
2005: 53.4%
2006: 54.7%
2007: 53.0%
2008: 53.2%
2009: 54.4%
2010: 54.3%

It seems that the league hovered somewhere around 52-53% during this time, which is about a rTS of +3.5 or so when it comes to Kobe.

Looking at the Jokic's, his TS% 61% whereas the league hovered around 56-57% in the playoffs...his rTS would be around +4.5 let's say. It's higher than Kobe's, but I think Jokic benefits from a lot more close range shots 10 ft and under, which skews the data a little. Given all considerations, I think the gap isn't as wide as I had originally believed.

[B]This isn't to say that Kobe is on the same level offensively as Jokic. He isn't.[/B] But I think it helps to clarify the inefficiency argument at least, which I think is overused far too often to not just criticize Kobe, but to make him appear as if he was some net negative overall.[/QUOTE]

I appreciate you putting in the time and the work and doing the research. I think it's obvious at this point that the efficiency dorks are lost in the sauce.

But in regard to the bolded and what defines the best offensive player:

The best offensive player, to me, is the one who can [B]instantly[/B] create offense. It's what gave OKC the edge over every other team. Jalen Williams is good but he's not THAT good. It's not like having him as your 2nd best player means your all but GUARANTEED to win a championship. OKC had the edge in the playoffs because at the end of the day they had a bucket getter who couldn't be stopped.

As you can see I have a lot of respect for SGA's game. I think he gets away with a lot of carries, but his finesse and his skill is undeniable. He's as talented as anyone that has ever played the position. Top 10 for sure. Maybe even Top 7-8, but definitely Top 10. There's no question he has a legitimate claim for being the best offensive player in basketball right now.

And yet having said all that, as much as I respect his game, Kobe was even better. More natural. More aggressive.

SGA is definitely not as talented as anyone to ever play his position.

He is a SKILLFUL player with very good length for his position with decent athletic ability.

Lebron.... Shaq..... Jordan....


These guys are goat talent level. SGA belongs nowhere near them.

[QUOTE=Carbine;15033072]SGA is definitely not as talented as anyone to ever play his position.

He is a SKILLFUL player with very good length for his position with decent athletic ability.

Lebron.... Shaq..... Jordan....


These guys are goat talent level. SGA belongs nowhere near them.[/QUOTE]

Lol no, I meant he is as talented as any SG ever.

[QUOTE=Carbine;15033063]I personally don't think this is close.

Jokic has been enjoying one of the best peaks EVER. He is at the same table as early 90s Jordan, mid 80s Bird, early 00's Shaq and a couple others.

Kobe is not at this table. His peak has never been seen through that extent - goat level.[/QUOTE]

Offensively? I agree. Jokic's ability to dish the roc puts him at a level above Kobe. This can't be denied. That being said, I think Kobe's defensive ability more than makes up for it. I also think Kobe's playmaking ability is severely underrated.

In the first 3 peat, Kobe was the primary playmaker, regardless of what assists say. He was also the team's closer despite playing alongside peak Shaq.

But my going through the analysis on efficiency wasn't for me to prove that Kobe > Jokic offensively. I truly don't believe that he is. What I wanted to highlight is that people on this forum have an obsession with Kobe's efficiency whereas they're not accounting for a myriad of factors.

We can't ignore the era he played in and the fact that he was either better or on the same level relative to his peers — guys who were at the same position or similar, and played in pinnacle of the best era in the 75+ years of the NBA that was also an era that saw the highest levels of defensive intensity, particularly on the perimeter. When you couple that with the fact that he did this entirely in the Western Conference, it just makes it all the more impressive.

His rTS in the playoffs during this stretch is also impressive. I showed how he managed to post such numbers even though he consistently faced elite defensive schemes. Guys who were compared to him, like T-Mac, weren't doing it against the same levels of defensive competition. When you add in the fact that he did that against teams who [I]also[/I] had great offenses, it just adds to the mix.

These points are almost [I]always[/I] left out of the conversation. And it's also impressive that he did what he did despite consistent injuries. Kobe laid it all out on the court. Whether it was the ankle, shoulder, shooting hand, hips, knees, etc, Kobe still managed to do what he did.

So who has amassed such a resume, on both ends of the court, while playing hurt half of the time — 5 championships, 7 finals appearances, and being a finals threat nearly every year? A handful of guys fit this mix, but none did it in the best era while also being in the best conference; not Bird, Magic, Kareem, Hakeem, LeBron, or even Jordan. The only one who did this is probably Duncan.

Kobe isn't above any of these guys, but he's in the conversation, and his naysayers won't admit that much...cause ya know....eFfiCiEnCy!

[QUOTE=Baller234;15033068]I appreciate you putting in the time and the work and doing the research. I think it's obvious at this point that the efficiency dorks are lost in the sauce.

But in regard to the bolded and what defines the best offensive player:

The best offensive player, to me, is the one who can [B]instantly[/B] create offense. It's what gave OKC the edge over every other team. Jalen Williams is good but he's not THAT good. It's not like having him as your 2nd best player means your all but GUARANTEED to win a championship. OKC had the edge in the playoffs because at the end of the day they had a bucket getter who couldn't be stopped.

As you can see I have a lot of respect for SGA's game. I think he gets away with a lot of carries, but his finesse and his skill is undeniable. He's as talented as anyone that has ever played the position. Top 10 for sure. Maybe even Top 7-8, but definitely Top 10. There's no question he has a legitimate claim for being the best offensive player in basketball right now.

And yet having said all that, as much as I respect his game, Kobe was even better. More natural. More aggressive.[/QUOTE]

Thank you. Just wanna be clear, I don't agree with you, lol. Not saying your analysis doesn't have merit. I do think what Jokic is doing is ridiculous. And it's simply a step above what Kobe did. I just wanted to stick it to the haters. :lol

[QUOTE=Baller234;15033073]Lol no, I meant he is as talented as any SG ever.[/QUOTE]

He absolutely 100 percent is not as talented as Jordan.

TMac, Clyde, etc are all level or levels above SGA in terms of raw physical talent. A lot of people are.

SGA is as good as he is because of his skills and IQ.

[QUOTE=Carbine;15033063]I personally don't think this is close.

Jokic has been enjoying one of the best peaks EVER. He is at the same table as early 90s Jordan, mid 80s Bird, early 00's Shaq and a couple others.

Kobe is not at this table. His peak has never been seen through that extent - goat level.[/QUOTE]

One last point....if peak Kobe is in this era...then he's dominating, probably putting up 30-35 a night on better efficiency. The spacing would give him more open looks on the perimeter and the clear path to the basket would just be NBA Live entertainment.

Give him a big who produces similar to Murray and we're likely talking about multiple championships. If Tatum is putting up numbers like 30/9/6 in some seasons, what's Kobe doing? And I think we can all agree Kobe is a better scorer, defender, and passer than Tatum is.

If Jokic is in Kobe's era, drop the spacing, drop the 3 point attempts, slow the game down....yea, he'll dominate, but we're not seeing triple double numbers at all. We're seeing Dirk like numbers with more assists. Couple him with a guard akin to Gasol production and it's also good for a chip, but can he produce 10+ years with the same level of success as Kobe? Maybe. I'm just not convinced......[I]yet.[/I]

[QUOTE=Carbine;15033084]He absolutely 100 percent is not as talented as Jordan.

TMac, Clyde, etc are all level or levels above SGA in terms of raw physical talent. A lot of people are.

SGA is as good as he is because of his skills and IQ.[/QUOTE]

Uh, my guy. I didn't say best, I said top 10. Obviously I don't think he's more talented than MJ.

You are smoking glass if you don't think he's more talented than Clyde though. Jordan was leaps more talented than Clyde and every great SG that came after him modeled their game after him. SGA is an offshoot of an offshoot of MJ. Clyde is old software.

[QUOTE=HoopsNY;15032754]Kobe is becoming underrated on this board and elsewhere. People are bringing up inefficiencies way too much and not considering the gauntlet that he typically had to run through, or the fact that he played a considerable amount of his prime in the height of the defensive era.

Furthermore, his overall offensive efficiency wasn't some anomaly given the time period.

[B]PS Kobe '00-'10: 28 PPG on 45/34/82 splits (56% TS%)[/B]

PS TMac '00-'08: 29 PPG on 43/30/77 splits (52% TS%)

PS Iverson '00-08: 30 PPG on 40/33/77 splits (52% TS%)

PS Sprewell '00-'04: 20 PPG on 42/36/78 splits (50% TS%)

PS Allen '00-'10: 19 PPG on 44/40/90 splits (58% TS%)

PS Vince '00-'10: 23 PPG on 41/31/79 splits (51% TS%)

PS LeBron '06-'10: 29 PPG on 46/32/74 splits (56% TS%)

PS Manu '03-'10: 16 PPG on 44/38/83 splits (58% TS%)

PS Wade '04-'10: 26 PPG on 48/35/79 splits (57% TS%)


What are we really arguing here? Clearly during Kobe's prime, his efficiency was relative to his peers. And I'd argue that it was usually on the tougher road, given he played the entire time in the Western Conference. T-Mac, for example, faced one top 5 defense (Detroit) in that entire spread. Kobe faced two top 5 defenses just in 2000 alone. And that doesn't even account for the mix of offense that those teams brought to the table.

I'm biased, but I believe the 2000s was the greatest era we ever saw. It brought all the elements of historical basketball all into one, with the highest level of guard play we had ever seen. Kobe likely stands on top of that hill, and that means a lot.[/QUOTE]


People are obsessed with doing these either disingenuous or ignorant box score comparisons across vastly different eras. Check league average in Kobe years, check league average efficiency. To try to write off Kobe is trying to write off an entire era of basketball. They are low key trying to give the 2000’s the 1960’s treatment. Everyone in the NBA sucked back then, that is their spin.

Sengun took a dump on Jokic just the other day:oldlol: