I think that a fundamental difference between the two systems that you're not taking into account is that D'Antoni's system revolves around Nash pushing the ball at a ridiculous rate to create opportunities for everyone, whereas P-Jax's system is just him giving Kobe carte blanche to jack up 50 shots every night and giving the other Lakers self-help books to stop them from killing themselves after never getting any touches. Apples and oranges. Also, if your team was so bad that Smush Parker was your starting backcourt buddy, wouldn't you try to take over every game? Just saying.
Nah, I just get a bit irritated when people say things without knowing. Luckily I have NBA league pass, have insomnia and have watched many many lakers games among many other west coast games this year. I have seen first hand what Kobe has done this year. The Kobe of old is everything DD said, but this years Kobe is different. Also when people talk about Nash creating shots for Marion, etc etc. Why does everyone only think about offense? Marion is more valuable than most players in the league because of his defense, rebounding, and ability to get to loose balls. Who cares how many shots Nash creates for him, Nash doesn't do all those other things for him. Lamar Odom has never done crap, not with any of his teams, so it isn't as if Kobe is holding him down. If Nash is so great then why didn't the Mavericks just fall apart when he left? If he is the reason all of these people are getting shots, then why aren't Dirk's numbers down? Nash is great, but come on he has way more to work with than Kobe. Nash definitely does more for his teammates than Kobe does, but hell that isn't everything. All that matters in the end is winning. Kobe got his squad into the playoffs and now people are still talking about what he can and can't do for his teammates. Who cares? They have a winning record, whatever he is doing it is working. Nobody ever gives Kobe any credit, even those who said they Lakers had no chance to make the playoffs this year, now that they are in, they still don't want to give Kobe his fair due.
Kwame Brown is useless. Thats the main thing to come out of the Lakers / Suns game today. I really love it when people talk about how Kobe needs to trust his team mates more, get them more involved, etc. I would rather kobe take on 2 defenders everytime down the court than pass the ball to an open Kwame. There were stretches int he game today where kobe didnt touch the ball for several possesions in a row... now that is a joke. Especially the way he was shooting today. Other than Lamar Odom. NO-ONE on that lakers team other than kobe deserves to get more than 15 minutes a game. He is playing with the worst supporting cast in the league. (not including lamar)
Wait. You really don't think he plays good defense? He is voted onto the NBA defensive 1st team because of his reputation? What reputation, the reputation he has for being a tenacious defender? Why isn't Nash ever voted onto the all defensive team, doesn't have have a pretty good reputation in general?
http://www.82games.com/pelton13.htm The Value of Kobe Bryant Imagine a team that owns, at the same time, both the NBA's best defense and its worst offense. This scrappy bunch of overachievers, not blessed with a ton of offensive talent, nonetheless manages to stay in most games before falling just short. This team exists not just in your imagination but in reality - sort of. This team is the 2005-06 Los Angeles Lakers, sans Kobe Bryant. Through Friday, this Web site's database indicated that, without Bryant in the game, the Lakers were scoring at a rate of just 90.2 points per 100 possessions while surrendering just 95.7 points per 100 possessions. No full NBA team is scoring less than 100 points per 100 possessions; the only team with a Defensive Rating below 100 is San Antonio (99.6). You might think this is a common effect for a team with its superstar off the floor, but the Bryant-less Lakers take this to an extreme. Bryant's presence has been worth 22.0 points per 100 possessions to the Lakers offense this season, far and away the biggest difference made on offense by any NBA player: Players Tm Diff --------------------- Bryant LAL +22.0 Wade MIA +17.0 Szczerbiak MIN +15.0 Howard ORL +14.9 Nowitzki DAL +14.9 Last year, Steve Nash led the NBA with a 17.6 difference in Offensive Rating, so what Bryant is doing is rather remarkable. It's also probably not as dramatic as it seems, given that Bryant is usually out of the game for short stretches -- he's averaging 40.4 minutes per game -- and often with other starters also on the bench. When Bryant missed two games because he was suspended for elbowing Memphis' Mike Miller in the throat, the Lakers offense struggled, but faired better than it has overall, scoring at a rate of 103.1 points per 100 possessions -- still well below their mark of 112.2 points with Bryant. (It was the defense, which surrendered 113.8 points per 100 possesssions, that really let the Lakers down as they lost both games to the Jazz.) No matter what measure you use, Bryant's importance to the Lakers offense is evident. Yet this hasn't silenced critics that demean Bryant as a ballhog. To the extent that the term is defined as a player who shoots a lot, it is inarguable. Bryant is attempting an amazing 39.4% of the Lakers' shots while on the court this season, twice as many as an average player. Tracy McGrady (35.6%) is second in terms of percentage of his teams shots and only 15 other players are attempting even 30%. Bryant's so-so efficiency makes it tempting to label him a ballhog. After all, his True Shooting Percentage of 54.1% is lower than fellow Lakers starters Lamar Odom (54.9%), Smush Parker (55.3%) and Chris Mihm (56.4%) as well as occasional starter Brian Cook (57.6%). It's also scarcely above the league average of 53.2%. While I'm a big believer in the importance of True Shooting Percentage, it doesn't tell a complete story. For one, it ignores the role of turnovers. Bryant's turnover rate is in the NBA's top 15. If we look at points scored per possessions used (FGA + (.44*FTA) + TO), Bryant -- who averages 98.8 points per 100 possessions -- shoots past every Lakers regular save Cook (103.8) in terms of efficiency. Still, this alone is not enough to explain Bryant's dramatic impact on the Lakers offense. For that, we have to look deeper into Bryant's on-court/off-court statistics available on this site to take a look at how his presence has affected the performance of his teammates. Of the 10 other Lakers who have played at least 100 minutes this season, only two -- Mihm and reserve forward Devean George -- have shot a lower field-goal percentage with Bryant on the court. We can take this a step forward by going to the points per 100 possessions rating I referenced earlier, which takes into account the extra turnovers other players pick up with Bryant on the bench. Here is how the Lakers regulars' Offensive Ratings look with and without Bryant: Player with w/o diff ----------------------------- Brown 76.8 68.5 + 8.3 Bynum 66.9 49.5 +17.4 Cook 104.6 100.9 + 3.8 George 92.0 80.2 +11.8 Mihm 96.4 81.1 +15.3 Odom 92.9 91.9 + 1.0 Parker 100.5 73.3 +27.2 Profit 90.5 86.1 + 4.4 Vujacic 95.9 72.7 +23.2 Walton 81.2 64.2 +17.0 Remarkably, every single player has improved his Offensive Rating, if only by a little in a couple of cases. However, Parker and his backup, Sasha Vujacic, have seen their efficiency cut into by about a quarter when Bryant leaves the court. George is a particularly interesting case that illustrates why field-goal percentage is not sufficient to address this issue. While George's field-goal percentage has basically been the same with and without Bryant, his Offensive Rating drops dramatically without Bryant. George hits twice as many 3s per field goal with Bryant on the court, and turns the ball over far, far less. He has just eight turnovers in 433 minutes when teamed with Bryant, 13 in 236 by himself. Is it possible that other players make this kind of difference? Perhaps, but a glance at the statistics with and without other key offensive players, including Nash and Shaquille O'Neal from last year, reveals a less consistent pattern. Nash, for example, had a major influence of the shooting of Amaré Stoudemire -- perhaps adding context to Stoudemire's "breakout" season -- but had no effect on Shawn Marion. Without Bryant using as many possessions as he does, the Lakers become a much more balanced team on offense. Here's how their percentage of possessions used compare with and without Bryant on the court: Player with w/o diff --------------------------- Brown 12.2 21.4 + 9.2 Bynum 11.2 27.6 +16.4 Cook 17.5 17.0 - 0.5 George 12.6 20.5 + 7.9 Mihm 17.6 24.6 + 7.0 Odom 17.3 24.4 + 7.0 Parker 16.0 19.3 + 3.3 Profit 16.4 23.0 + 6.7 Vujacic 10.1 14.4 + 4.2 Walton 14.2 17.9 + 3.7 It's a bit surprising that Odom hasn't stepped forward as more of a go-to player with Bryant off the court. While he's never been an aggressive player, Odom used about as many possessions in 2003-04 in Miami despite playing with Dwyane Wade. He's probably got the capability to step up his role in the offense even more. I see the difference in his teammates' performance with and without Bryant as relating to the age-old notion that a player can "make his teammates better." To many APBRmetricians, that line of thinking is anathema, but I've always had more problem with the haphazard manner in which the claim has been used to denigrate star players blessed with untalented teammates than the concept itself. It's theoretically obvious that playing with a star player should help a player's statistics. Not only does it produce more open shots because of double-teams drawn by the star, it also forces the teammate to take fewer contested shots because of being asked to create his own shot. Kurt from the definitive Lakers blog, Forum Blue and Gold, sees the other Lakers adjusting to and playing off of Bryant much better recently. "Brian Cook has developed a very consistent outside shot since he came into the league, so you have started to see him run a pick-and-pop with Kobe that works well. Parker and Vujacic are figuring out where to be to get kickout passes. Mihm in particular but also the much-maligned Brown have started to find good spacing under the basket when Kobe penetrates, leading to them getting easy baskets off passes or putbacks on misses. "Regular Laker watchers have long thought Kobe does make his teammates better - did you see the year Chucky Atkins had in 2004-05?" Really, you can't look at statistics to determine whether a player is a ballhog. Like p*rnography as defined by Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart, I know a ballhog when I see one. Given the positive effect Bryant has had on his teammates, it seems to me that the amount Bryant is shooting is not only not hurting the Lakers, it's the reason for the team's offensive success. Considering how much Bryant has helped his teammates, they certainly can't complain.
Wow, this is so wrong, and I'm not even a Kobe fan. PP? Is Boston even is the playoffs? TM? Remember his Orlander years? LJ? only 5 games better than Lakers with big Z this year. Melo? 2 wins better than Lakers with Miler, Kmart, Camby etc. Are you serious?
i would have to say i agree with the people here saying Kobe is pretty dang good. and overall a better player then steve nash.
I said the Lakers starters would have career years and in time, IN TIME become a better team due to good team chemistry and each player knowing their role. The point I was trying to make is these players make their teams better, not just the record of the team, but the actual players on the team. Kobe doesn't do that. Tracy McGrady never got out of the first round on his own (or ever, yet), and if he keeps this up, neither will Kobe (on his own, of course, I realize he has 3 rings...). The Lakers have no chemistry and Kobe isn't helping. At least the Celtics, Nuggets, Rockets (with T-Mac and Yao), and the Cavaliers have team chemistry. With the exception of the Celtics. After the trade, they haven't been doing too hot. They're playing .500 ball right now (last 10) and are 2 games out of the playoffs.
i think the closest two players to kobe are a healthy t-mac and lebron james. as an overall talent i think kobe has the tenacious drive that puts him slightly ahead though i don't think there's one thing on the basketball court either of those guys can do that the other two can't. that said i don't think kobe is superior enough to them that i'd want him on my team before lebron or tracy. his cockiness and arrogance is hard to cheer for and it doesn't really seem like his teammates enjoy it either. i'd rather have last year's t-mac teamed up with yao then this year's kobe that's for sure.
Kobe isn't a half of defender he used to be during Lakers championship seasons. not that he isn't capable, but he doesn't put as much effort in D as he did before. and even than, he's been primarily known as a terrific team defender rather than one-on-one. take a look at NBA finals 2000, Jalen Rose absolutely abused anyone Lakers threw at him, including Kobe, and that was the season Kobe was on All-NBA first defensive team. BTW this defensive team honours are from time to time overrated. take last seasons selection of Larry Hughes for example. what does he do on D? other than gambling on passing lanes... he was voted to 1st defensive team last season only based on his steals stat, and than Wade did whatever he wanted against him in the playoffs. as for Nash, he simply isn't capable of playing D. that was completely exposed during last seasons playoffs series with Spurs when Suns had to switch Joe Johnson (!!!) on Parker.
The only person close to Kobe is Lebron. Remember, Shaq wouldn't have his rings without Kobe. Lebron will be better very, very soon though. Once he stops missing gamewinners, look out. Oh yeah, and the dude who thinks Dwade is better than Kobe is out of his gourd.
I do remember his Orlando years, you're the one who doesn't. His Orlando YEARS (note plural, which means multiple years, not the one year -- 2003-04 -- you decided to investigate prior to him being traded here) were very similar, especially 2002-03 when he had monster overall numbers. He had to do everything for his sorry cast of characters (a supporting cast that makes the current Lakers cast look like world beaters) and he carried them to the playoffs 3 out of the 4 years he was there as a low seed (7/8 -- does that look familiar). You would think Kobe carried his team to a 4/5 seed the way you all are acting. There is nothing special about his team's accomplishments this year. If you're one of the best (or the best like some homers say) your team is suppose to make the playoffs. A healthy McGrady could easily surpass that, he matched that w/out anyone the caliber of Odom on his Magic teams (again playoffs 3 out of the 4 years since you didn't know). They would have killed together in Orlando. And you all can keep denigrating Odom all you want, but the fact remains he's a very good player who thrives on unselfish play and had a very good year in Miami before being traded to play with the black hole.
Whatever you might think of Kobe's all around game, I think everyone can agree he is clutch. He is the most clutch player in the NBA by far, and is probably the same as if not better than Jordan was. I always root against the Lakers when watching games, and he always scares the **** out of me.
Kobe is great. But "light years ahead"? You would have an incredibly hard time to prove this, especially with talents such as Lebron, KG, Duncan, Wade, Pierce, Vince, AI, T-Mac, among others in the league. Your exaggeration is what I take issue with.
Kobe is very very good no debate about that, but if he were on a team that required him to share the ball more he wouldn't look nearly as all-world.
Since I don't know? Dude, We are comparing current Kobe to current Tmac and others. Let's say Kobe isn't Jordan while we are at it. Thanks for all these words for nothing.
No. You compared this season's Kobe to T-Mac's Orlando seasons... Lamar Odom is pretty damn good, and Kobe doesn't care to utilize that talent. Lamar is strong, bulky, rangy, long, he can handle the ball, drive the ball, shoot the 3, rebound, play defense. He's versatile and very talented. He should be a 20/8 guy, but he's a 14/6 guy or something like that. The reason all the Lakers miss shots when Kobe gives it up is because Kobe doesn't make plays, if you think he does, you're completely wrong. When Kobe passes, it's because he can't get a shot, not because he wants to pass it. His teamamtes haven't found their niche or their rythym because Kobe messes it up. I think if you put anyother of those superstars on the Lakers, maybe they would lose more games in the beginning, but all those players would at least let Lamar play his game, and he would be a huge asset later on in other seasons or later in the same season. Kobe has had 2 seasons to get some team chemistry going, and they're still on square 1. That's why Kobe isn't going anywhere anymore, unless he changes.
Kobe is coasting on the reputation of clutchness. You make two or three dramatic shots to win a game and people forget about the 9-10 that you missed: http://www.82games.com/random12.htm Over the past two years, Kobe Bryant is shooting 25% on game winning/tying shots in the final 24 seconds, which is actually lower than the entire league average of 29.4%
I would definitely rather have T-Mac than Kobe in the clutch. This season, Carmelo is just so good after All-Star break. He's just been the definition of clutch, 62.5% on clutch shots!? God, I wouldn't want to root against those odds. I knew Iverson was a scorer, but I didn't know he was that clutch. Also, I had no idea Francis is that clutch, either. Also, T-Mac didn't make the playoffs 03-04 and he hasn't played too much this season, and he's still among the tops.
based on what, the rockets choking a two game lead coming home last year. you guys with mcgrady in your username make some of the most ridiculous comments sometimes. you can argue a lot of things mcgrady does better, but being more clutch is definitely not one of them.
