Kobe's not LeBron offensively because he loses in the usage-efficiency tradeoff, bopspm offense/defense I and II, rapm and other stuff but still Kobe is at a pretty impressive tier. Kobe's better than Magic offensively across the board with these figures not just rapm.

The +/- isn't needed for Magic because we are comparing Kobe to players that are at/above Magic level like Duncan and Dirk in the rapm. Think of it like the "Big Mac index". It is easy to see prime Kobe is in a different team situation than prime Magic. Magic's teams are deep it isn't just about the top heavy talent like Gasol either.

Remember Shaq only won 56 games in 2001 even though he played like an MVP and had an almost prime Kobe. How deep one's team is, is crucial. A good supporting cast has to play excellent defense too not just put up numbers. A good defensive team makes people underrate supporting casts, such is the case with Derrick Rose and the Chicago Bulls. The advanced numbers sort through nostalgia and represent how comparable both these Laker greats are.

Thanks, I also enjoy our discussion.

Kobe is indeed an excellent offensive player, his ten year offensive rAPM is tied for best with Lebron's, though the latter is higher thanks to defense. But I can't find rAPM numbers for Magic, I wonder if they are available at all for 80's players.

Magic's teammates were better, true, though Shaq/Gasol at their peak aren't bad, and Kobe had them for all but 3.5 seasons. But one can argue that it was also so because Magic had a larger positive impact on his team than Kobe did. On court-off court +/- would be very helpful here but they are also unavailable for 80's players. Anyway, Magic's impact was seemingly huge as the Lakers dropped from 58 wins and NBA finals to 43 wins and first round exit in 1992.

As for Magic's peak, maybe I put it in the wrong way. I wasn't arguing that Magic's peak was better than Kobe's. I mentioned that Magic's career had ended when he was still at his peak and that one should have that in mind when judging the player, because it seems fair. Who knows how many productive seasons Magic would have had, he even wasn't bad in 1996 when he briefly returned.

I concur with you on the pool of talent argument. That surely works in Kobe's favor, especially since it was Magic and Bird (and a bit later Jordan) that popularized the NBA. Basketball almost certainly had a bigger impact on late 80's and early 90's youth than it did when Magic's generation was young.

Magic was less consistent in the post-season than in the regular season in bopSPM I. He's not better in bopSPM II offensively (they're almost equal overall), Kobe's just penalized for being on a worse team defensively. Kobe didn't "choke" for Magic standards. Sometimes defensive rating does a good job of capturing defense, other times when you're freakishly good offensive player on a bad team, it does not. The metrics say Kobe is not a "worse" defender and the usage-efficiency tradeoff shows what a freakishly good offensive player Bryant is. rAPM adjusts for teammates and provides another context for Kobe and the tier he is at.

I've seen "Wins Produced" adjustments that have Jordan as number 1, that's what I meant. Yeah it is shocking how bad real WP is (it is a team stat not individual stat) but SPM/rAPM are accepted along with WS/48 in this era.

"Also... It is simply untrue that I brought up the "Magic's peak is better than Kobe's peak" argument. Show it in my posts."

Sure you did, in post #36:

~~~~~~"The second point is that Magic's career, as you perfectly know, was cut at a moment when he was still at his peak and was still an elite player. 1991 regular season - 4th in PER, WS and WS/48. 1991 playoffs - 5th in PER, 2nd in WS and 9th in WS/48. Who knows where he would rank if he ended his career due to age, but it is very much possible that he would be completely out of Kobe's range."~~~~~~

Also the depth of the league does matter not just how top heavy it is. If the worst player in the league was Andre iguodala (with the same top tier of talent), that would deflate every player's statistics. Also it is unlikely another superstar or two haven't been added to the league, if the pool of talent grows. Again you have not considered the full implications of adjusting for league average.

I see that you consider bopSPM as a superior stat to win shares. OK, I did a little reading and indeed it seems to be a very fine metric. But only the "old" version exists, since the new version does not include playoff stats. So we will have to wait.

I am still curious what are your favorite metrics. If you want to make a case that Kobe is at least as good as Magic was, then all you have to do is show that Kobe's numbers do look better. Magic has a much better ws/48, has a similar PER, and trails somewhat in the older version of bopSPM, but we will see about the new one. Where did you find the rAPM? Some other metrics you use, like Pelton's WARP?

Also... It is simply untrue that I brought up the "Magic's peak is better than Kobe's peak" argument. Show it in my posts.

As for WP, I was right that Magic is ahead of Jordan. Here is the link:

http://wagesofwins.net/2011/06/30/just-desserts-100-greatest-wins-produced-players-since-1978/

Not that it matters, I never said I like WP.

I agree with the talent pool argument. Still, just because hundreds of millions more are playing does not necessarily mean much. It is the pure elite talent that matters, and the question is how much of that talent ends up playing basketball.

The 1980s had a much higher average league offensive rating in the playoffs. Heretic this is mostly about the advanced metrics lets not distract ourselves with the other stuff. The Dean Oliver stats you cited were incorrect as well.

Kobe played in a much tougher league environment so the offensive rating stats you just mentioned are distorted. Again look at the July 11, 2011 post. It seems you have not grasped the advanced figures used in bopSPM, one of them being offensive rating above league average. Kobe is a better two-way player than Magic which is something team defensive rating will not capture, but other stats might.

Well clearly you didn't read the explanation of bopSPM and ten-year rAPM. These are indeed respected metrics and bopSPM is based on the stats Win Shares uses. You did not make a great statistical defense for your position which is all that concerns me at this moment. Magic has played sub-par in plenty of playoff games and the figures reflect that.

I've already proven Kobe is just as consistent, or more consistent. Your previous argument was that Kobe's prime does not match Magic's prime, but that's false. It is proven false by a variety of metrics that are respected around here. Wins Produced does not have that reputation.

WP is not respected by the majority of APBRmetricians. APM and SPM are, and I use a variety of metrics not just one. There is no end-all metric so your philosophy is flawed. And WP doesn't rank Magic ahead of Jordan anyway.

"You can't punish Magic for being born in a different era. This makes no sense whatsoever. One should only stick to the facts, Magic never played in Kobe's era and vice versa. "

No one is punishing anyone, if his era is inferior that is not Kobe's fault. Now you could argue his era isn't inferior, but I doubt that given the increase in population and international interest. Billions of extra people now play basketball. I'll say this again, in 2030 the league will be even more talented than this one.

You can't punish Magic for being born in a different era. This makes no sense whatsoever. One should only stick to the facts, Magic never played in Kobe's era and vice versa.

Also, I don't know why you bring the "sharing possessions with Shaq" argument, since in 2003 Kobe had his highest postseason USG of 34% and in 2001-2004 generally had a 30% USG. Except for 2001, he wasn't very efficient, with a ORtg of 106.

I brought up consistency because it is important. When a player regularly chokes - like Kobe did - he diminishes opportunities for his team to win. Had Kobe played on his regular season level, Lakers could have beaten the Spurs in 2003, the Pistons in 2004, the Suns in 2006 and even possibly the Celtics in 2008 and the Mavs in 2011. Magic was more consistent and there is little surprise that the Lakers were more successful (5 titles and 9 finals in 12 years), despite the fact that Magic at his prime never played with a player on Shaq's level or even Gasol's. Kareem was still good but not even close to superstar level from the mid 80's.

And I don't know why you keep bringing up new metrics. I could do the same and point to Berri's WP, for instance, in which Magic is better even than Jordan and crushes Kobe. But I doubt it's a good stat. I wonder what are your favorite metrics (or rather which ones you consider best). Then, we can compare Magic and Kobe by those metrics and see who shows up better.

Kobe's ten year regularized APM is 6.1, Tim Duncan is at 5.8 and Dirk is at 5.7.

Consistency is relative, just look at the metric I provided above. I measured only their primes, ages 22-31 in the above study. So Magic being cut off in his peak has nothing to do with anything, Kobe's prime matches Magic and exceeds it according to bopSPM and versions of regularizedAPM. Kobe also had to share possessions with Shaq.

Kobe is just as good as Magic or better. And this is assuming Magic played in a comparable era. Seems unlikely with the smaller pool of interest in the world.

You make fine arguments, so I'll just point to two things. The first thing is that what I like about Magic is that he performed on a consistent basis, with 1981 as the sole exception. Kobe unfortunately has not been consistent at all in the playoffs, as I pointed out earlier.

The second point is that Magic's career, as you perfectly know, was cut at a moment when he was still at his peak and was still an elite player. 1991 regular season - 4th in PER, WS and WS/48. 1991 playoffs - 5th in PER, 2nd in WS and 9th in WS/48. Who knows where he would rank if he ended his career due to age, but it is very much possible that he would be completely out of Kobe's range.

To sum things up, I think Kobe should achieve something more if he wants to be GLOAT. It will be more than fine with me if he does, since he's my favorite player.