247 Responses to “2010 NBA Finals Stats”

1. huevonkiller Says:
   June 21st, 2010 at 6:18 am

   It doesn't matter how many times you post Anon, Kobe is inferior and various people will continue to prove it. You're a terribly biased Laker fan that I have dealt with on various already, none of your arguments work and they all have holes in them. Talking about "bailing" lol what a joke. Kobe is a quitter and he's quit in Detriot, Boston, Phoenix, and in Game 7 2010. What exactly is your purpose in this debate Anon, because Kobe has choked amazingly in this Finals series and you continue to forgive him.

   I'll give you a clue, Pau Gasol carries the Cavs into a Game 7 easily and LeBron doesn't choke that badly again at home. Kobe has a history of under performing in the Finals. LeBron faces the same competition and easily outperforms him on average, certainly the playoffs.

   He had as many turnovers as assists against Boston.

   "What were Kobe's efg%?

   And let's not forget he went up against 3 of the best defenses ever in 3 of his last 4 finals.

   And Kobe was not the only one affected. Pau Gasol shot around 53% for the season and 53% for the playoffs, but shot 48% for the Finals.

   In other words, Pau dropped 10% off his normal shooting % while Kobe dropped 11% off his normal shooting percentage.

   If you look at just games 1-6 for both players, Pau had the bigger drop-off.

   give credit to Boston's defense, people. Lakers offensive efficiency in that series was well below their norm and it wasn't just because Kobe shot below his average. everyone shot below their averages except maybe Fisher (haven't looked at his numbers), but his chances were few and far between."

   Let's not forget, Kobe's TS% is under 51. What is your point? He choked in Game 7 the Lakers should have lost the series without Pau Gasol.

   Kobe is a career playoff choker in various important games, but he gets saved by Shaq and his other teammates. It is amazing how much better LeBron is against the same competition.

   "^^ thank you for that."

   Before Game 7 he had a lower game score and was still an inferior defender compared to how much Pierce fell off.

2. huevonkiller Says:
   June 21st, 2010 at 6:21 am

   "I think you're really reaching with Wade/Pierce. We don't even know what Wade will be like when he's 31 and something tells me he's going to be declining quite a bit because of his style of play and his body's tendency to get hurt (but who knows). If you want to assert the replacing Kobe with Wade would probably result in back to back titles, I'm fine with that. And I don't think anyone puts rings against Wade. He's only been capable of winning a ring twice based on his team, winning once. He's done well."

   We've seen Kobe at age 27-29, and he looked off. He did not have great post-season runs even individually. Wade easily had the capability of beating the Atlanta Hawks but he's overrated as well. LeBron took a Smush Parker level squad to the Finals, Kobe and Wade are T-mac posers without another All-star big.

3. huevonkiller Says:
   June 21st, 2010 at 6:32 am

   "the monte carlo simulation might be interesting. Another wrinkle would be to look into different qualities of players and opponents. Kobe with a crappy set of teammates against a tough defense would probably produce less wins than Lebron and his high STD. On the flip side, Kobe with a good set of teammates might produce the opposite because Kobe playing below par is less significant relative to his norm so he can play below average and win while Lebron playing so far below his norm that he becomes a severe detriment."

   You really are ignorant on this matter, because Neil has shown Kobe is quite overrated in the playoffs AND has faced weaker defenses.

   http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=6142

   Suck on that. :]

4. huevonkiller Says:
   June 21st, 2010 at 6:54 am

   "Kobe's knee was not right in that series. I do kind of disagree with gasol assertion. I mean, obviously without him they don't win the 1st round, just like they don't win without Kobe too, but Ron Artest's D on Durant was the difference. Without holding Durant way below his norm, Lakers would have never moved on without Kobe's knee healing first. And Gasol had a couple bad games in that series.

   Pau was horrendous on offense in games 4 and 6. Kobe carried the offense in game 2's 4th quarter and game 6 overall. Pau's tip in was the only good offensive play he had that game. Pau was great in games 1,2,3 and both he and kobe dominated game 5.

   And let's not forget Kobe switching onto Westbrook for defense which was a big change for the final 2 games. Westbrook's TO numbers skyrocketed.

   As always, the two of them need each other. To say that in a series one carried the other or visa-versa for the entire time is really short-sighted. Sure, a game here and there, but the Lakers strength lies in Kobe-Pau-Ron-Bynum combo and whenever Lamar feels like playing too."

   Did you just skim over that guy's post? Because let's revist his assertions.

   1) Kobe played terrible against OKC. The "reason" why doesn't matter genius, the Lakers got by anyway.
   2) You "say"/"claim" Pau was off in this and this game, did he actually play worse? Kobe had ~16 PER in that series and he was terrible.
   3) No duh LeBron was injured against Boston and people still give him crap for being far superior to Kobe. Kobe bailed on the gameplan in game 7 and the boards don't save him. His game score was virtually the same per minute and he was a joke.
   4)It just validates Lebron further, It doesn't matter if LeBron had one or two off games, Kobe's worst two games were by far lower. LeBron plays in Game 7 he would own Kobe with Gasol most likely.
   5)You're using a team argument for what is clearly a individual production perspective. You're confusing and it doesn't follow his claim at all.

   "KOBE:
   G 67
   PER 25.5
   FG% 0.464
   3P% 0.344
   FT% 0.845
   TS% .569
   EFG% .503
   TRB% 8.1
   AST% 26.3
   STL 2.0%
   BLK% 1.3%
   TOV% 10.6
   USG% 33.0"

   Ok Dave B, let me understand this... You're using PER, EFG%, Ast^, Stl%, Blk%, Usg%, and you're still defending Kobe from what exactly? None of those stats in his prime go in his favor or beat the best player in the game today.

   http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/tiny.cgi?id=cHH6u

   Kobe is also off in crucial playoff games over the course of his career.

   http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=6132

5. Anon Says:
   June 21st, 2010 at 7:20 am

   "I don't see why Pierce shouldn't be able to chuck his way through the finals at a 40% clip as Kobe usually does. In fact he accomplished that feat this year when his decline really seemed to kick into high gear. But the better scenario would of course be that Pierce would chuck less than Kobe and would consequently not take as many shots away from more efficient players like Shaq or Gasol. And in contrast to Kobe he even managed to get more assists than turnovers these finals"

   Kobe's career FG% in the playoffs is 45% and 5 straight years of 46%+.

   Paul Pierce has shot over 44% only once in his career in the playoffs (back in '05) and is a career 42.5%. Pierce also has a significantly lower assist rate and high turnover rate. His playoff offensive rating has exceeded Kobe's average ONCE in his entire career and with a much lower usage rate (which means his rating is much worse at Kobe's usage rate).

   Also of note is that Pau Gasol Offensive rating is significantly higher on the Lakers than it was on Memphis, despite taking fewer shots and a bit of a lower usage rate.

   In other words, Kobe's game makes Pau Gasol more efficient.

   That's nice that Pierce would chuck less, but he would be chucking less at a more inefficient rate while also turning the ball over more and not creating as many easy baskets for teammates. Pierce on LA is not an upgrade over Kobe at any point for the Lakers except for when Kobe is injured and in a suit.

   "As for Wade, he has shown he can win with aging Shaq + nobody so with prime Shaq there is a good chance he even might have won 6 straight with the Lakers by 2006. And before excusing Kobe these finals with Bostons great defense - check out how Wade played against a fresh Boston team these playoffs while being the sole focus of their defense instead of the low efficiency chucker they actually want to take shots."

   I'd love to know how Wade would have won 6 straight, starting at like the age of 18.

   Comparing how Wade and Kobe played vs these Celtics is a mistake because even Doc Rivers admitted he approached the defense completely differently. They allowed Wade to do whatever he wanted and stayed home on all of his teammates since they knew Wade couldn't win it by themselves.

   Congrats to Wade for putting up great stats while losing easily in 5 games. I'm sure he felt great about that.

   My point is that had Wade faced a Celtic defense geared to stop him, you could be assured his numbers would suffer but his team would have a much better chance at winning.

6. Anon Says:
   June 21st, 2010 at 7:29 am

   "You really are ignorant on this matter, because Neil has shown Kobe is quite overrated in the playoffs AND has faced weaker defenses.

   http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=6142

   Suck on that. :]"

   For someone who focuses so much on playing against the same defense, how come you ignore Neil's SPM posting that demonstrates Kobe consistently posted a higher SPM against Boston on a per game basis?

   Also, 2008 Kobe had an offensive rating of 106.5 vs 2008 Boston. Lebron's was below 100, including posting 2 games below seventy. seventy!

   2/18 makes 6/24 sound like kobe couldn't miss!

7. huevonkiller Says:
   June 21st, 2010 at 7:40 am

   "For someone who focuses so much on playing against the same defense, how come you ignore Neil's SPM posting that demonstrates Kobe consistently posted a higher SPM against Boston on a per game basis?

   Also, 2008 Kobe had an offensive rating of 106.5 vs 2008 Boston. Lebron's was below 100, including posting 2 games below seventy. seventy!

   2/18 makes 6/24 sound like kobe couldn't miss!"

   I'm wondering something, do you enjoy ignoring every single post-season that Kobe was inferior in? Because he sucks a lot more on average, and on better defenses.

   I got an average of 94.833 offensive rating for Kobe in 2008 against Boston, so please shut it already.

   What did I miss, LeBron's SPM is higher than Kobe's in 2010 vs Boston, AND SPM doesn't capture Man-to-Man defense which LeBron destroyed Kobe in. Rondo broke out in a couple of games, Pierce was erased.

8. huevonkiller Says:
   June 21st, 2010 at 7:44 am

   "Comparing how Wade and Kobe played vs these Celtics is a mistake because even Doc Rivers admitted he approached the defense completely differently. They allowed Wade to do whatever he wanted and stayed home on all of his teammates since they knew Wade couldn't win it by themselves.

   Congrats to Wade for putting up great stats while losing easily in 5 games. I'm sure he felt great about that.

   My point is that had Wade faced a Celtic defense geared to stop him, you could be assured his numbers would suffer but his team would have a much better chance at winning."

   So congrats to Kobe winning as a choke artist and second banana?

9. Anon Says:
   June 21st, 2010 at 7:45 am

   Why do people try to claim Lebron took a team to the Finals with a "smush" level team. He was playing with Big Z (18.5 PER) and Larry Hughes (just off an 21.6 PER season, Gooden (16.5 PER) and varajeo (14.5) who is also a solid defender. That team was 4th in the league on defense.

   Lebron didn't have a great team or anything, but it was more than adequate. It was a defensive minded team with a some offensive weapons.

   The team was the #2 seed with 50 wins because the East was so bad. They played only 1 team above .500 in the Eastern playoffs.

   They were a mediocre team that beat two bad teams and then another mediocre team (Detroit's Pythagorean W-L was only 1 win ahead of Cleveland) and got promptly swept by the Spurs as Lebron played like crap in the Finals.

   Every single team in the East would have been defeated by the top 4 teams in the West that season. Heck, golden state probably makes it out of the East had they been situated out there. One could only feel bad for Dallas having had to face Golden State while the top teams in the east played below .500 teams.

   Anyway, Lebron has never led a "smush-like" team to the Finals. Wade's situation was much more "Smush-like" these past two seasons.

   Kobe and Wade wish they had teams as good as Lebron had (Kobe then, Wade now).

10. huevonkiller Says:
    June 21st, 2010 at 7:47 am

    *Meant to say 98 O-rating on far less usage which favors LeBron.

    Kobe had 15 PER in that series? Truly horrific actually. LeBron beats him again in Game Score as well.

11. huevonkiller Says:
    June 21st, 2010 at 7:51 am

    "Anyway, Lebron has never led a "smush-like" team to the Finals. Wade's situation was much more "Smush-like" these past two seasons.

    Kobe and Wade wish they had teams as good as Lebron had (Kobe then, Wade now)."

    Tracy McGrady was stuck on Smush level teams in his prime, what is your point?

    It still doesn't change the fact the Wade and Kobe choked as individuals, does it?

    LeBron's top 4 teamates had just over 23 win shares, just like that Smush level team in 2006. Embarrassing your position again I see, I think it is better if you let others defend your guy.

12. Anon Says:
    June 21st, 2010 at 7:56 am

    "I'm wondering something, do you enjoy ignoring every single post-season that Kobe was inferior in? Because he sucks a lot more on average, and on better defenses.

    I got an average of 94.833 offensive rating for Kobe in 2008 against Boston, so please shut it already."

    Didn't realize Neil's blog post wasn't on the whole series. Anyway, I got 98 out of it, not 94. Which is still higher than Lebron's. If we only do the first 6 games to see games 1-6, we find that Lebron's is much lower.

    And Lebron's FG% was atrocious in that series.

    Furthermore, Lebron reach a usage % of 40+ numerous times, so his offense was even worse that is understood by the Off rating.

    "What did I miss, LeBron's SPM is higher than Kobe's in 2010 vs Boston, AND SPM doesn't capture Man-to-Man defense which LeBron destroyed Kobe in. Rondo broke out in a couple of games, Pierce was erased."

    The answer lies in the Standard Deviation. As I said, Kobe consistently posted a higher SPM than Lebron.

    lebron had 2 games below Kobe's worst game. Kobe had 4 games above Lebron's 3rd best game. By any reasonable analysis, Kobe performed better.

13. huevonkiller Says:
    June 21st, 2010 at 8:02 am

    "The answer lies in the Standard Deviation. As I said, Kobe consistently posted a higher SPM than Lebron.

    lebron had 2 games below Kobe's worst game. Kobe had 4 games above Lebron's 3rd best game. By any reasonable analysis, Kobe performed better."

    Haha ok whatever:

    http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=4388

    You lose about "consistent" players anyway. That blog provides quite a bit of insight, and Kobe won at 1 SPM! NO one cares what Kobe accomplished.

    SPM is regressed off team-based APM. It doesn't matter what you say, LeBron was better in virtually every metric.

    Kobe shot 29% in the fourth quarter of the Finals, and his net Game Score is pathetic. LeBron was better in SPM, SPM doesn't capture man defense.

14. huevonkiller Says:
    June 21st, 2010 at 8:05 am

    "And Lebron's FG% was atrocious in that series.

    Furthermore, Lebron reach a usage % of 40+ numerous times, so his offense was even worse that is understood by the Off rating."

    Lol Neil proved you wrong yet again.

    "For this post, I want to create a simple lineup efficiency model that combines Dean and Eli's findings -- specifically Eli's tradeoff for average players (+/-1.25 in a 107.5 ORtg league), but Dean's distinction between high-usage, mid-usage, and low-usage effects on personal efficiency (the effect on low-usage players is twice the effect on high-usage ones). What we in essence have, then, is a simple algebra problem: let x be the tradeoff for low-usage (=23%). (x + y) / 2 = 1.25, and x = 2*y. What are x and y?

    x = 1.6667, y = 0.8333

    This means that in a 107.5-ORtg environment, the efficiency trade-off for increasing or decreasing usage by 1% is as follows:
    Player Type Tradeoff
    High Usage (>=23%) 0.833
    Mid Usage (18-23%) 1.250
    Low Usage (<=18%) 1.667"

    And LeBron's TS% was higher in 2010, and he was the better player in both series.

    Stick to Lakersground.

15. huevonkiller Says:
    June 21st, 2010 at 8:10 am

    After the usage-efficiency tradeoff against Boston I got approximately a ~103 O-rating for Bron in 08 versus Boston. Compared to Kobe's ~98 in 2008.

16. Anon Says:
    June 21st, 2010 at 8:11 am

    "It still doesn't change the fact the Wade and Kobe choked as individuals, does it?"

    How do you choke if you win a championship? Lebron has had HCA 2 years running and hasn't didn't even get to the NBA Finals with it.

    Your definition of choking is odd.

    "LeBron's top 4 teamates had just over 23 win shares, just like that Smush level team in 2006. Embarrassing your position again I see, I think it is better if you let others defend your guy."

    2007 Lakers win shares top 4 after Kobe

    4.7
    4.2
    3.8
    3.1

    total: 15.8

    That's a far cry from 23, man!

    And 2006's numbers are disingenuous. Chris Mihm didn't play in the playoffs, so how can you include him in your numbers when he wasn't available.

    Chris Mihm, Brian Cook, Devean George, Kwame Brown, and Smush Parker are all either no longer in the league or riding the pine most of the game within 2 seasons.

    hughes, Gooden, Z, and Varajeo remained productive and playing for years.

17. Anon Says:
    June 21st, 2010 at 8:13 am

    "And Lebron's FG% was atrocious in that series.

    Furthermore, Lebron reach a usage % of 40+ numerous times, so his offense was even worse that is understood by the Off rating."

    Lol Neil proved you wrong yet again.

    "For this post, I want to create a simple lineup efficiency model that combines Dean and Eli's findings -- specifically Eli's tradeoff for average players (+/-1.25 in a 107.5 ORtg league), but Dean's distinction between high-usage, mid-usage, and low-usage effects on personal efficiency (the effect on low-usage players is twice the effect on high-usage ones). What we in essence have, then, is a simple algebra problem: let x be the tradeoff for low-usage (=23%). (x + y) / 2 = 1.25, and x = 2*y. What are x and y?

    x = 1.6667, y = 0.8333

    This means that in a 107.5-ORtg environment, the efficiency trade-off for increasing or decreasing usage by 1% is as follows:
    Player Type Tradeoff
    High Usage (>=23%) 0.833
    Mid Usage (18-23%) 1.250
    Low Usage (<=18%) 1.667"

    And LeBron's TS% was higher in 2010, and he was the better player in both series.

    Stick to Lakersground."

    You misunderstand. it was worse, not because of the adjustments needed to compare players directly, it was worse because he was slaughtering his own team by not only sucking, but by not letting anyone else do anything.

18. Anon Says:
    June 21st, 2010 at 8:14 am

    "After the usage-efficiency tradeoff against Boston I got approximately a ~103 O-rating for Bron in 08 versus Boston. Compared to Kobe's ~98 in 2008."

    You can't reverse it. You can only increase Kobe's rate to make a comparison.

    The fact that he had a usage rate of 40% and such a low ORating is the issue. He went beyond the "reasonable threshold" of usage when playing poorly.

19. huevonkiller Says:
    June 21st, 2010 at 8:14 am

    "How do you choke if you win a championship? Lebron has had HCA 2 years running and hasn't didn't even get to the NBA Finals with it.

    Your definition of choking is odd."

    Kobe choked because he played terrible for Superstar standards.

    You must be dense then, because you ignore when Kobe has 19 and 24 PER against the Phoenix suns.

    "2007 Lakers win shares top 4 after Kobe

    4.7
    4.2
    3.8
    3.1

    total: 15.8

    That's a far cry from 23, man!

    And 2006's numbers are disingenuous. Chris Mihm didn't play in the playoffs, so how can you include him in your numbers when he wasn't available.

    Chris Mihm, Brian Cook, Devean George, Kwame Brown, and Smush Parker are all either no longer in the league or riding the pine most of the game within 2 seasons.

    hughes, Gooden, Z, and Varajeo remained productive and playing for years."

    Lol what a joke position, in 2006 his top 4 teammates combined for almost exactly 23.5 Win Shares.

    Kobe choked against Phoenix, LeBron got to the Finals.

20. huevonkiller Says:
    June 21st, 2010 at 8:16 am

    "You can't reverse it. You can only increase Kobe's rate to make a comparison.

    The fact that he had a usage rate of 40% and such a low ORating is the issue. He went beyond the "reasonable threshold" of usage when playing poorly."

    Read slowly.

    Um yes you can, Neil Paine does it all the damn time genius.

    http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=5500

    You're such an amateur dude, I'm embarrassed for you.

21. Anon Says:
    June 21st, 2010 at 8:28 am

    "Haha ok whatever:

    http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=4388

    You lose about "consistent" players anyway. That blog provides quite a bit of insight, and Kobe won at 1 SPM! NO one cares what Kobe accomplished"

    I don't think you understand that blog. that's a study on players who peak high and decline fast vs those with lower peaks but stay the same OVER ENTIRE SEASONS.

    It's completely different to analyzing a 7 game series.

    Woudl you rather have a guy who has 1 game of SPM of 30 and 6 games of 0 SPM or a guy with an SPM of 4 every game?

    Anyone rational takes the 4.

    "SPM is regressed off team-based APM. It doesn't matter what you say, LeBron was better in virtually every metric."

    Sure, if we ignore the metrics that disagree.

    "Kobe shot 29% in the fourth quarter of the Finals, and his net Game Score is pathetic. LeBron was better in SPM, SPM doesn't capture man defense."

    Lebron was not better in game to game SPM. his STD was nearly double that of Kobe's.

    As I said, Kobe had FOUR games above Lebron's 3rd best game. these are facts you have to deal with.

    And Kobe held rondo completely in check for most of the series...and he was like, you know...Boston's best player.

    Rondo's ORating during the season was 109. Against LA it was below 100.

    BTW, if no one cares about Kobe's accomplishments, why do you keep bringing him up?

22. Anon Says:
    June 21st, 2010 at 8:30 am

    Um yes you can, Neil Paine does it all the damn time genius.

    http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=5500

    You're such an amateur dude, I'm embarrassed for you.

    you can't reverse it. I mean, you can mathematically, but it's an "if" statement. He didn't have a usage of 30% so saying what we expect to happen tells us nothing. it's nothing more than attributing a probability.

    The fact that Lebron DIDN'T have such a low usage is all that matters. What MIGHT have happened has no relevance.

    What we did learn is that Kobe wasn't so stupid as to have a 40% usage rate against the Cs.

23. Anon Says:
    June 21st, 2010 at 8:34 am

    Furthermore, Neil point in that post is about optimal strategy...that someone with a lower usage rate but higher ORating should be seeing a higher usage until the Oratings equalize.

    You can't take Kobe Orating at 30% usage and compare it to Lebron's worse Orating with 40% usage and draw a conclusion.

    In case you're unaware, Kobe and Lebron do NOT play for the same team.

24. huevonkiller Says:
    June 21st, 2010 at 8:45 am

    "It's completely different to analyzing a 7 game series.

    Woudl you rather have a guy who has 1 game of SPM of 30 and 6 games of 0 SPM or a guy with an SPM of 4 every game?

    Anyone rational takes the 4."

    LeBron beats Kobe in PER, and net PER, which is a direct defensive matchup. Sorry you're a loser on this one.

    How do you know what the Monte Carlo simulation would be? You're a novice that fails to understand concepts Neil JUST went over in the Laker thread a little bit ago.

    Who cares, ask Neil about Kobe's SPM in his prime? What ridiculous position you have. Kobe is a loser, accept it. LeBron wins in virtually every series, hence the crucial game blog smart one.

    Anyone rational would take LeBron over Kobe at any time. You're a homer Laker fan that makes terrible arguments about intangibles Kobe doesn't have.

    You make me sick because Kobe "violated" reasonable usage threshold according to your random theories. You're a fool because LeBron has higher PER in every single post-season. from 06-now. And he's always been a better defender.

    Neil said he would do a Monte Carlo simulation, not that you're right.

    "Sure, if we ignore the metrics that disagree."

    Anyone rational would take LeBron in the playoffs. Kobe is a career choker, you started this debate by saying LeBron has equal teammates. Neil proved you wrong yet again.

    "And Kobe held rondo completely in check for most of the series...and he was like, you know...Boston's best player.

    Rondo's ORating during the season was 109. Against LA it was below 100.

    BTW, if no one cares about Kobe's accomplishments, why do you keep bringing him up?"

    Pierce was worse, so?

    Why can't you have a straight up career comparison? Ages whatever-to-whatever? You'll lose every time.

25. huevonkiller Says:
    June 21st, 2010 at 8:49 am

    "you can't reverse it. I mean, you can mathematically, but it's an "if" statement. He didn't have a usage of 30% so saying what we expect to happen tells us nothing. it's nothing more than attributing a probability.

    The fact that Lebron DIDN'T have such a low usage is all that matters. What MIGHT have happened has no relevance.

    What we did learn is that Kobe wasn't so stupid as to have a 40% usage rate against the Cs."

    Lol what are you rambling about now? That's not an if, LeBron was better in 2009 and 2010 in pure O-rating. Piece shot 30% against LeBron, once again you lose.

    You're terrible, if Neil doesn't REVERSE O-rate for Kobe LeBron wins in a landslide in 2010 and various other times.

    http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=6269

    Please shut up already this is a bad made up theory on your part.

26. huevonkiller Says:
    June 21st, 2010 at 8:50 am

    *Pierce

    "Furthermore, Neil point in that post is about optimal strategy...that someone with a lower usage rate but higher ORating should be seeing a higher usage until the Oratings equalize.

    You can't take Kobe Orating at 30% usage and compare it to Lebron's worse Orating with 40% usage and draw a conclusion.

    In case you're unaware, Kobe and Lebron do NOT play for the same team."

    No he never said such a thing.

27. Spree Says:
    June 21st, 2010 at 10:38 am

    "What were Kobe's efg%?

    And let's not forget he went up against 3 of the best defenses ever in 3 of his last 4 finals.

    And Kobe was not the only one affected. Pau Gasol shot around 53% for the season and 53% for the playoffs, but shot 48% for the Finals.

    In other words, Pau dropped 10% off his normal shooting % while Kobe dropped 11% off his normal shooting percentage.

    If you look at just games 1-6 for both players, Pau had the bigger drop-off.

    give credit to Boston's defense, people. Lakers offensive efficiency in that series was well below their norm and it wasn't just because Kobe shot below his average. everyone shot below their averages except maybe Fisher (haven't looked at his numbers), but his chances were few and far between."

    Going up against great defenses is likely to happen when you're playing in the NBA Finals! It goes with the territory and cannot be an excuse for Kobe Bryant. And in this era with the rules skewed to offensive potency, it makes Kobe's poor shooting more inexcusable.

    And while Pau's shooting percentage dropped, he only averaged about 13 shots a game. Meanwhile, Kobe was shooting about 22 shots a game. What hurts more? Obviously a team is hurt more when the person shooting the most shots also shoots one of the worst percentages. Looking at Kobe's fg% and shot attempts you would think it was Allen Iverson's box score.

    In Game 3 of the series Kobe shot 10-29 for the game and don't forget that he led the Lakers in Turnovers at 3.9 a game. So in Game 3 and Game 7 he was not only shooting a terrible percentage, but he was still turning the ball over at an alarming clip.

    And it is no coincidence that Kobe's best games in the series were in defeats. The Laker offense bogs down when he takes an inordinate amount of shots and handles the ball almost exclusively. The Lakers are more successful running the offense through Pau Gasol and the Triangle. The Laker wins were usually games where the big guys were involved and the role players played well.

28. Neil Paine Says:
    June 21st, 2010 at 10:55 am

    The Monte Carlo sim, more fuel for the fire:

    http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=6618

29. Gil Meriken Says:
    June 21st, 2010 at 12:01 pm

    @Huevonkiller "The stats speak for the themselves".

    They absolutely do not do that - in fact, you are doing all the speaking for the stats.

30. huevonkiller Says:
    June 21st, 2010 at 3:12 pm

    Oh they most certainly do speak, loudly.

    http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/tiny.cgi?id=qglbY

31. Mike Says:
    June 21st, 2010 at 6:15 pm

    I had an idea, why don't you include a "Finals" composite statistics table in individual player profiles? You could even create another leader board.

32. Gil Meriken Says:
    June 21st, 2010 at 6:15 pm

    @Huevonkiller Again, they are not speaking at all. At all. YOU are the one placing meaning on those stats.

33. Herm Says:
    June 21st, 2010 at 8:41 pm

    Kobe's numbers in the Celtics series were impressive notwithstanding the last game. He truly choked in game 7, but I would argue that no other player has ever had as much pressure on them, not even MJ. For starters, it was gm 7 of the finals, with the pressure of the rivalry, revenge and a career legacy all on the line. No one remembers Magic's dud in gm 7 1984 because the MJ standard (which, btw, has become exaggerated to mythic levels, lest we not forget the duds MJ gave us in some big games), didn't exist at the time. We didn't expect invincability from our icons like we do now.

    Kobe's numbers are more impressive when you consider that in the 3 games LA lost, he had roughly 12-15 desperation shots at the end when the games were already decided (of which he hit maybe 3) that brought his percentages down (those games ended as 10-22 twice and 13-27, but discounting those shots Kobe was shooting over 50%, including quite a few tres and was the only reason his team wasn't blown out in those games).

    Kobe was also relentless in attacking, and while I was cursing as much as anyone in game 7, the C's insistence on triple teaming him was the reason Gasol and others kept getting offensive rebounds. It's no coincidence that LA lost the only game where KB got limited minutes (game 2, where Gasol and Bynum scored plenty, and consistent with my observation, didn't get a lot of rebounds), and they won both games in which he seemingly shot them out of the game.

34. Herm Says:
    June 21st, 2010 at 8:51 pm

    people seem to talk about the kobe's shots and the team's success as though that correlation establishes why that happens. Game 7 it seemed like Kobe shot too much on his own. The other games, it seemed like Gasol couldn't get to his spots and they couldn't run it through him, and everyone else was stifled, so Kobe had to shoot more.

    Point is that we can say what we want about Gasol's efficiency vs Kobe's, but Gasol doesn't impose his will on the game the way Kobe can. Gasol's efficiency isnt' as adversely affected because he was ineffective by being less aggressive and shooting less, not just by being less efficient in the shots he did take.

    In general, I'm all for looking at stats as an objective measure of performance, but lets not pretend efficiency is a perfect proxy for quality.

35. Ryan Says:
    June 21st, 2010 at 11:32 pm

    Jordan's level of greatness isn't built on myth, it's built on standard. If Kobe not being able to match up to that standard leads you to believe it is "mythic", then the problem lay with your reasoning - not with Michael's production.

36. rooboy Says:
    June 22nd, 2010 at 12:06 am

    Kobe > Lebron

    simple fact that he makes his team mates better and he trust them to perform unlike Lebron who spends time devising ridicouls pre-game routines.....not sure how this helps your team win buddy....Kobe is always bad mouthed for being a bad team mate....not sure how 7 finals apparences and 5 titles in 13 years = bad team mate.....to me that = winner and I would rathter play for a winner than a fraud

    and i am sick of all this so called arguemnt that kobe has better team mates.....LBJ wanted a strong post player to defend Dwight so the cavs get shaq who played in the all-star game last year....LBJ wanted a PF who can shoot...they trade for AJ (another all-star) and give up a slice of bread to get him....they had mo williams (all-star) read all last year that he was the player that LBJ always needed to win the title

    even during the finals we read how Kobe did not trust his team....sure he called them out at the end game 5 that they needed to play better defense....what happend in game 6 and 7....celtics scored 67 and 79....that is the def'n of leadership right there, to demand a level of performance from your team and than go out and get the job done.... something that cannot be meausred in advanced stats, and all the other crap people want to throw out there..

    Kobe is a better team mate....a better leader and a better player...enough said

37. huevonkiller Says:
    June 22nd, 2010 at 12:31 am

    Jamison and Williams shot 40% on 11.8 and 13 points a night, getting killed on D.

    http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=6132

38. Basketballogy Says:
    June 22nd, 2010 at 1:09 am

    (1) I thought it was VERY interesting in game 7 that Kobe waited until his teammates shot 11 shots (and missed 10), before he decided his "supporting cast" wasn't going to be any help that night, and infamously tried to go it alone.

    However, that game would never go to the team with the best shooting heroics. Blue collar work, (defense, rebounds and hustle). Kobe eventually realized this, hence the 15 rebounds.

    (2) I think Doc Rivers holds much of the blame for the Celtics' loss. After preaching to his team to "trust each other" every time out all playoffs long, he wouldn't trust his bench and overplayed his aging starters.

    After adhering to strict limits on minutes all season, Ray Allen (35.2 minutes per game in the regular season), Paul Pierce (34.0 minutes per game) and Rajon Rondo (36.6 minutes per game) were suddenly played about 45 minutes each in game 7 -- playing more minutes than Kobe Bryant and Pau Gasol.

    Clearly the Celtics did not have the legs for it.

    After leading almost the entire game, the Celtics ran out of gas with 6:13 left in the game. Derek Fisher nailed a 3 pointer, tying the score at 64, and sparking a 9-0 run. In the next few minutes the Celtics missed their next 4 shots, and were out rebounded 7 to 1.

    Were it not for that lapse, the Celtics might well have prevailed.

39. Rich Says:
    June 22nd, 2010 at 10:26 am

    Man, the way Huevonkiller presents his argument, sounds like Kobe's the luckiest player of all time. I mean, to win 1,2,3,4, 5 rings and be a terrible "career choker" as he makes him sound to be, this guy's gotta be the greatest fluke/statistical anomaly of all time right?

    Sucks for Lebron because he, on the other hand, is clearly unlucky. "Best player" in the league for years now and best reg. season record for the last couple seasons and still can't win a chip.

    Curse the basketball gods!!

    This is asinine.

40. Joe Schaller Says:
    June 22nd, 2010 at 5:40 pm

    Career comparisons for Kobe should be to Dwyane Wade- currently I rank Wade superior as a closer, playoff performer and team player.... as far as character they both rate high.

41. huevonkiller Says:
    June 22nd, 2010 at 7:41 pm

    Rich, the only asinine assumption is that you could visit a website called basketball-reference.com and think your personal emo beliefs trump reality. Or that we wouldn't use facts against you. Reality is he's underperformed in the Finals and had Shaq.

    Everything makes sense if you stop ignoring Pau Gasol is better than Mo Williams and Jamison combined, in the playoffs.

    Pau Gasol: .224 WS/48
    Mo: .080 WS/48
    Jamison: .091 WS/48

42. rooboy Says:
    June 24th, 2010 at 12:16 am

    Huevonkiller,

    you always like to bring up these stats and so....as I said earlier so much of what happens on a b'ball court cannot be measured in some formula like D....you being the stats man compare rondos stats against the cavs v's lakers....i bet the house he preformed worse against the lakers....guess who played on him....thats right Kobe....

    leadership is what counts, to get your team mates to preform at a level that allows them to achieve team success....5 titles proves that and if you want first hand proof of this leadership, please watch the USA vs Spain gold medal game at the Olympics and you tell me who the best players in the world turned to in crunch time.....

43. huevonkiller Says:
    June 24th, 2010 at 4:11 pm

    Why the hell are you bringing up "crunch" time in a series where Kobe had a pathetic Game 7 and shot 29% in the fourth quarter all series? Last year Kobe was inferior in crunch time as well.

    Unfortunately for you, I can indeed measure defense.

    Paul Pierce vs Cle: 7.3 Game score per game
    Rajon Rondo vs LA: 12.05 game score per game

    You homer people are freaking amazing, Why don't you watch your own guy choking in the Finals every year, if we want to apply the same standards? Kobe's bar is much lower it seems.

44. nba is so fixed. Says:
    June 25th, 2010 at 7:30 pm

    all of you are so naive. Kobe sucks butt. He complains about every call that goes against him. And he gets far too many calls to his benefit. GAME freakin seven of the nba FINAls and he basically gets as many free throw attempts as the opposing team. 15 as to the celtic's 17. tis criminal. The NBA is terrible.

45. rooboy Says:
    July 5th, 2010 at 7:54 pm

    Huevonkiller

    I asked you to compare rondos stats against the cavs v lakers for me not PP v cavs and than Rondo v LA....i bet they decrease significantly, in large part due to Kobe

    If Rondos stats are better against LA this will show how wrong the system is as everyone knows that the best player during the Cavs v Boston sereis was Rondo 1, daylight 2nd

    NBA is so fixed

    please re-watch game 7 for me and tell me that those fouls were not there....the celtics settled for jumpers while the lakers attacked the basket....the celtics also had some stupid early fouls blocking fouls etc (often a sign of fatigue - maybe Doc should have given his starters more of a rest)..at the start of the 4th which put the lakers into the penalty early and were able to exploit

46. huevonkiller Says:
    July 7th, 2010 at 7:08 am

    Good for you, Rondo wasn't the best player on the Celtics. He's the co-MVP of Boston maybe.

    Paul Pierce and Rondo played at nearly the same level according to their .131 WS/48. The difference is LeBron shut down Pierce to a greater degree. Pierce feasted against Orlando also and faced the tougher defensive matchups in the playoffs.

    
    "(Game score per game)

    Paul Pierce:

    vs Cle- 7.33 GSPG

    vs Others: 14.822 GSPG

    Rondo (Kobe's dude)

    vs Cle- 20.366 GSPG

    vs LA- 12.057 GSPG

    Others- 13.07778 GSPG

    Kg

    vs Cle- 13.83 GSPG

    vs Otrhers- 11.24 GSPG

    Ray Allen:

    vs Cle- 10.2 GSPG

    vs Others- 10.6 GSPG"
    
    

    So LeBron took a comparable offensive player, if not superior looking at Pierce's basketball on paper stats, and shut him down better.

    No one cares about the foul calls, just Kobe's lack of consistency in the last 12 fourth quarters of the Finals. Where he's shooting 29% IIRC.

47. Jeromy Infield Says:
    November 14th, 2011 at 12:22 am

    Good insight and review, love using my Adesso tablet even tho it is at the lower end of the market.