True. But I think Haberstroh twisted his interpretation of 'in the clutch' to make a more interesting argument . His preamble was And then he concludes with: Yet half his piece is about Lebron's better team success (really? in fantasy ball, maybe) and dismissing Kobe's Highlight Reel dramatics as either the fallacy of preconceived notions or so rare that they're statistically irrelevant. And he defines clutch as last 5 mins with teams within 5 points. Doesn't really say much about who the opponents are. Or the importance of the game. The Cav's -- in the weaker East -- pulling ahead against weak opponents late in the game? Just too many variables. I'm not hating on Lebron. I think he will continue to improve and will soon b the best in the league. But I also think if the SI poll had asked -- who do you want leading your team, in an important game with 5 minutes to go, and with the score within 5 -- most GM's would still pick Kobe -- and it wouldn't just be inherent bias. 80% (down from 90%) on the final shot question is just so overwhelming. (and re: aelliots post-- I don't think too many would rate Landry as a top guy they'd want on the floor). The stats are interesting -- but, I think, academic without much much more context.
It wasn't his interpretation he was using the 82games.com definition as he stated: But if we stick to the generally accepted criteria of clutch -- thanks to the go-to crunch-time source 82games.com Do you have a better measurable definition? Why in the world wouldn't you want Landry on the floor in clutch time. He's been phenominal in those situations.
Fair enough. Missed that it was 82games.com's definition -- though I think it's overstating things to say it's the "generally accepted criteria of clutch." (and there's a difference between 'who is better' and 'who has better stats') And I'd love Landry on the floor in clutch time. (especially if it's Game 7 NBA Finals!). It means the Rocket's are contending! But I'm not convinced he'd be a consensus top three selection if you had the choice of all NBA players to create a dream team clutch five. Fun with stats! Game analyses from the box score.
82games's definition of clutch time, to me, is more useful than simply looking at last possessions. If you limit yourself to final possessions, the results are going to be much more random.
Bill Simmons on Kobe: August 2008 - ...8:13 left (of the gold medal game): Rudy Fernandez's three cutst the lead to two; the crowd goes bonkers; Spain's bench reacts like a euphoric fifteenth seed during a March Madness upset; and the United States calls timeout. All along my biggest fear had been a tight game and multiple U.S. guys saying, "I got it!" Instead, everyone deferred to Kobe and he made some monster plays to clinch it. Know that in the history of the NBA we have never had the best-player-alive argument resolved so organically. February 2009 - He has more to gain historically than anyone over these next four months: if the Lakers win the title, he becomes one of the top eight players ever and that's that. (which the Lakers did) June 2009 - He (Kobe) submitted an unforgettable display of human will from Halloween 2007 through June 2009, leading his team to consecutive Finals, winning an NBA title, and playing in the maximum of 164 regular-season games and 44 playoff games without a summer break, thanks to the Olympics. He was the Terminator. He was Schwarzenegger with bullets bouncing off him. For such a polarizing player, I found it fascinating that so many living basketball legends (Walton, Russell, West, Bird and Magic, to name five) professed such profound appreciation of Kobe's talents. And really, the best basketball players are like elite chefs, writers or singers - they know instinctively when someone else has reached their level. When Bird or Walton explains that, yes, Kobe Bryant is truly magnificent, you cannot disagree. What Simmons makes clear in his book is that in basketball, you HAVE to win to be truly great. I think we all accept and understand that. Look at all of the best players of all time; they were winners. Look at one of the best statistical players (and physically dominant) of all-time in Wilt Chamberlain, and people see a large blemish on his record being that he did not win enough. Lebron has the luxury of still being young and has plenty of time to change his legacy/record. However, at this point he simply has not proved that he belongs in the conversation with Kobe. Kobe for his career has now been the best player on 2 title teams, and 2nd best/equal on three other title teams with Shaq. He was also the best player on a title runner up team (loss in 6 to the 2008 Celtics). Lebron has not won anything. Kobe had 3 rings by the time he had played 6 seasons and was 23 (Kobe was also averaging 25ppg, 6rpg, and 5apg over that span). Sure, Lebron has had worse coaches, and in most instances, worse teammates, but you can't fault Kobe for that. Unfortunately for Lebron, those are still chalked up as "what ifs". Now, if Lebron has stayed with Cleveland, he probably would not have needed 5 or 6 rings to be included in one of the GOAT conversation, but now that he is with Miami, we may never get to have that conversation. Now, he is only arguably the best player on his own team, the Heat. And especially if Lebron is not able to win multiple titles with the Heat, there is no way he can be considered on the same level as Kobe (or any of the other GOAT players for that matter). Now, this is another "what if" in Lebron's favor, he's only 26, but as each year goes by and Lebron does not win, it works against him.
2010/2011 NBA GM survey results http://www.nba.com/2010/news/features/10/02/misc-predictions/index.html Case closed
Is it Lebron ball, or is it Mike Brown ball? And is it Lebron's fault that playing that style has given his team the best chance to win throughout his career? And as for Kobe being better because he plays within the team: if that was so true in the early 2000s, why did it cease to be true when Phil Jackson and all Kobe's talented teammates left? Why did it only become true again once Kobe had Phil and very talented teammates? The obvious answer is that Kobe needs the coach and system and great teammates that he's had success with because his instinct is to play a different, and less successful, style.
NBA GMs are not free from the plague of confirmation bias. And the hardware is irrelevant, because as we saw in the Finals last year, Kobe's team isn't winning championships because of his ability to step up in the clutch. He was terrible in Game 7, ineffective even in the late stages of that close game, and his team still won.
Applying 3rd grade logic to scratch and claw your way in to the argument? That's pure speculation, and has no merit. The truth of the matter is, Kobe has won 5 titles any way you slice it.
As has been mentioned numerous times alread, game winning shots and clutch time are different things. The article was referencing clutch time NOT game winners.
you don't think going for game winning shots is not clutch? Going for the game winner is the ultimate type of "clutch shot" there is and GMs picked him
Just a couple of minor points on what you posted. First, despite this supposed "large blemish" that people seem to see now in Wilt's career, he was universally regarded as the greatest basketball player of all-time into the 1980s. Not Bill Russell, the great winner. Wilt, the dominant force with inferior teammates and fewer rings. Second, you're incorrect on your last point. You state that Kobe won 3 rings in his first 6 seasons and averaged 25,6,5 "over that span." He absolutely did not average those numbers over that span. He was averaging less than 20ppg at the end of his 6th season. The 25,6,5 were his averages for the final three of those six seasons.
And yet Lebron is criticized for his performance in an elimination game against those same Celtics despite the fact that he pulled down 19 boards, dished 10 assists, and shut down Paul Pierce. Thanks for the great point by point rebuttal to my post.
And history shows that if Kobe does fire that game winning shot attempt, the Heat have roughly a 75% chance of walking out of Staples Center with a victory.
history also shows that Christmas day games don't count towards championships i wouldn't be surprised if the Lakers take a day off tomorrow and get blown out as usual, its a holiday theyr'e humans they want to chill. They'll come to play when its time to play which is late in the season and the playoffs...they're the 2 time defending champs and they've played more games than any other team the past 3 years...3 straight NBA finals runs takes a toll
This must be ESPN's way of saying - who do we love more the HEAT or LAKERS? F@#$ ESPN! Lets go Rockets!
