Assists are considered under "making teammates better" category. Steals are considered under the primary and secondary defender categories. I can see why Thorpe would put rebounding into its category. It doesn't neatly fall into any of the others. He notes in his analysis that Kobe has displayed more restrained shot selection. But also that Kobe is shooting a worse percentage both on long 2s and on 3s compared to LeBron. If (1) he's not taking as many, and (2) he's not shooting as efficiently on them ... why should Thorpe give him an edge? Just on reputation alone? Making teammates better is passing and willingness to move the ball. Intangibles is work ethic, being well-liked and respected by teammates, leadership.
So you ignore Thorpe's wealth of data and logical arguments backed by statistical evidence and stick to something based on rep and hype. Awesome, you remind me of the Roman Catholics during Galileo's time. If you watch Laker games Bryant does his share of defending the opposing team's primary threat, but the Lakers have a host of capable defenders (Artest, Odom, Vujacic is a scrub but he's really tenacious on D) and they all take turns ganging on the enemy. On the Cavs the only one I consider a great defensive threat is LBJ.
Yea but these are guys that don't NEED to bang and grab rebounds under the basket. Maybe in LeBron's case, yes, since he's listed as a forward but both players have one main goal and that is to score. Throwing in a rebounding category does nothing to help separate the two, especially if he's going to give them the same eyebrow-raising score. Not on reputation alone but I'd be interested to see what both players' career % are between 18-22 ft. Of course it's easy to look up their career 3pt% and see that Kobe's % is slightly better. Maybe it's because, in my mind, the idea of comparing both players as a whole (and not just who's the best player this year) has been entrenched into my mind. I will cede to the making teammates better category but intangibles? How can Thorpe actually form an objective rating for this? Of course people will say LeBron's more well-liked and most will probably agree that Kobe works the hardest on his game but the respect and leadership thing.....I don't see how that can be measured without bias. That's why I have an issue on how it's a 10-8 advantage for LeBron when, in the rebounding category, they finished tied when statistics show that LeBron averages more rebounds per game. Because if Thorpe doesn't use rebounds per game as a way to get his conclusion on the rebounding category, then why would he use assists under "making teammates better"?
There is the concept of long rebounds, which is when the rebound bounces to the mid-court. Usually on guards and SFs can get those since the PFs and C are clustered in the paint. Even if rebounding isn't a job requirement for swingmen, a rebound is still a rebound no matter who gets it if you can get a lot of rebs you'll help your team a lot. LBJ is an SF anyway, part of an SF's responsibility is to help rebound the ball. Since swingmen are interchangeable in this league I would argue its part of the SG's responsibility as well. The analysis was done this year's data. You're basing your decision on rep and career stats. That's out of scope of the article already, and besides doing it career wise is unfair to LBJ since he hasn't reached his peak yet while Kobe is already on the last legs of his peak. By its very nature intangibles and making teammates better will never have a purely objective rating. Assists are one way of putting some objective stats into the overall equation, but even then the most important assists (the assist that leads to the assist) aren't tracked by normal stats so this part will always have subjective aspect to it. I don't think Thorpe claims to have a 100% objective analysis though, his report seems to be a mixture of the two. I don't get the bolded part, you're complaining that LBJ got a 10-8 advantage over Kobe, but the evidence you bring up (rebounds per game) states that LBJ gets more rebs than Kobe. What's the problem here? Make it 11-8 in favor of LBJ then, it doesn't matter since LBJ wins anyway.
So you're telling me that the long rebounds and a guard's ability to get them is a big part of how a player is judged? Sorry to say, but those long rebounds in the NBA are not much different from long rebounds in a pick up game in the sense that it's more luck than positioning (i.e. total opposite of "interior rebounding"). If that was the premise that Thorpe was using to judge/gauge Kobe's and Lebron's rebounding skills, then it's kinda iffy isn't it? I mean, I DO see what you and Durvasa (and to an extent, Thorpe) is trying to prove with the Rebounding category but I just think it's one of the lesser important aspects of their games, especially since they aren't power forwards or centers. I guess maybe that's why it was a wash at 10 apiece. So would it be fair to compare LBJ's rising game (and it IS rising fast) to Kobe's declining game? It might sound useless now because we all know how the stats will tell it but I would rather compare LBJ's five best seasons against Kobe's five best seasons. Heck, you can just compare each of their best 3 seasons and LBJ would still come out on top statistically. Unfortunately, stats can only tell so much. I think me and you are coming to some kind of agreement upon the "intangibles" category and I hope you see the point I'm making because if Thorpe don't have, say, at least a 67% chance to formulate and calculate intangibles, he shouldn't bring it up at all IMO. After all, his judgement is based mostly on stats. What I was saying is how can one come up with a 10-8 score on a category that doesn't have a high chance to be proven statistically? Why couldn't it be 10-9, or 10-7? What did Kobe lack that got him 2 points less than Lebron? That's what I was after when I brought in the rebounding comparison. I mean, Thorpe can look at stats like rebounds per game, rebounds per 36 mins, etc and come to a finite conclusion that LeBron is a better rebounder statistically but, instead, he gave both players the same score. So if he's willing to say Kobe is just as good of a rebounder as LeBron despite the fact that, over his career, Lebron averages 2-3 rebounds more per game, then how can he make a final assessment that Kobe scores an 8 in intangibles while Lebron scores a perfect 10? I like both players and don't favor either one over the other. In fact, just like most intelligent NBA fans, I am pretty sure LeBron will go down as one of the, if not, greatest player in the game. It's just I guess without reading the whole article (not an insider member) I find Thorpe's scoring kinda weird.
What an utter failure... LeBron should be at least 2 below Kobe in perimeter shooting... that's not even close. LeBron can't hit a jumpshot to save his life....
I disagree about kobe making teammates better even close to james. If james gets a 10, kobe is no higher than a 6 maybe 7. The team lebron took to the finals were about as equal to the one kobe kept losing with in the 1st rd. Give lebron gasol and odom and its a wrap in terms of winning titles.
Holding the ball for every possession is called ballhog. When all the offense is Lebron 1v1 and Lebron P&R, LeBron will get many assists but force every other player to be a spot up role player, and whoever isn't will suck, like Shaq. It's ironically it only took one year for Shaq going from deserving west allstar to an old stiff. And everybody is still saying LeBron making players around him better. OK, Shaq's old, but isn't he supposed to help LeBron more than Z regardless? The 5 man unit stats say otherwise.
Making teammates better is about allowing teammates to contribute in the biggest stage of the game. We all remember how Kobe commanded double team and Fisher shot those clutch 3s in finals. While all LBJ's teammates falter in ECF when LBJ was getting 38/8/8. Coincidence? I think not. Unless LBJ proves he can win a championship by his own and making that category meaningless, he's never in Kobe's league in terms of making teammates better. LeBron benefited from a super weak east, Pistons won 53 games and was the top seed. That's as good as Rockets record wise. Cavs upset Pistons were like Jazz upset Rockets, not bad but nothing to write home about. Hell, LeBron only beat one 50+ win team in his career.
How would you allow Chuck Hayes to contribute in the biggest stage of the game? By giving him the ball when he runs down the court? No. By going into the paint, drawing the defense, and zipping a pass to him waiting unguarded under the basket. That's what McGrady had been doing, and that's what LeBron would be doing if he had a Hayes on his team. If you are the best shooter on the team, you shoot. If you are the best creator of the team, you get the ball 95% of the times. That's how you make the team better. That's how you allow your teammates to contribute in the biggest stage of the game.
How exactly is Kobe a superior "pure scorer"? Because he scores just as much as LeBron, but with a lower shooting percentage?
He doesn't consider APG explicitly. Just like with rebounding, its not considered explicitly. [rquoter] This might be the easiest category in which to see a clear separation between the two. LeBron is, simply put, the best passing guard/wing since Magic Johnson. He's terrific with the active dribble in isolation or off ball screens, and he's even better before he uses his dribble, reading and reacting to shifts by the defense in preparation for his drives. This creates easy buckets for guys who normally would have a tough time scoring. Most importantly, he'll make the key pass at any part of the game, including end-of-game scenarios. Kobe is an amazing passer, too. He has great anticipation in the halfcourt. My favorite play of his is when he dribble-drives or posts up to draw the opponent's center or power forward to take just a step or two toward him. When that happens, the Lakers big who becomes open, typically Andrew Bynum or Pau Gasol, runs straight to the rim to catch the perfect lob pass from Kobe. It's a devastating play, one that keeps the defending bigs in constant purgatory. The one fair knock on Kobe is his desire to keep the ball instead of moving it. That he has such great talent around him only exacerbates the problem. He's still a great passer, but he's not on LeBron's level.[/rquoter]
I like reading Thorpe's stuff sometimes. I know some people will dislike it because it isn't rigidly bound by statistics or public perception but it is the perspective of a good basketball mind...which I consider much more entertaining and useful.
LeBron right now is better than Kobe was in his prime. A better comparison is Kobe vs Carmelo or Wade.
i really wonder if nike has espn on payroll, and yes both kobe and lebron are nike players, but they have more money invested in lebron... but yea, perimeter shooting..lebron? really, he'll show flashes and improvement, but hes still shaky
