|
@no_comprender
On May 31 2009 12:41 rei wrote:
Cavs scores 97pts per game in the playoffs, and they played good defense (giving up only 86pts a game) till they meet the magics (scoring over 100 in 4 of the 6 games). This could be because the opponents cavs faced were scrubs till they meet the Magics.
Lakers on the other hand scores over 102pts per game in the playoffs, (Rocket's defense is no push over) they held Denver to less than 100 in 3 of the 4 wins. Denver has the highest scoring average in the playoffs averaging close to 108 points a game.
On May 31 2009 14:24 rei wrote:
Prior to the magic series, they held their opponent to 87points a game, as they themselves score close to 100pts per game in which they did maintain during the Magic series. Magics averaged only 96 points a game in the playoffs, yet they score more than that vs the Cavs, all the statistics pointing toward the failure at defense instead of Cav's offense. Labron made up for all the epic fails in the offensive end for his team, but not on the defensive end, it is simply physically not possible as it takes all 5 to play good defense, and the defense is only as strong as the weakest link.
how is actual raw data not objective. i assume your angle is that the choosing of which data to use is not objective. but how and why would data somehow favor kobe over lebron? i claimed that the vast majority of statistical analysis say Kobe's defense is the better, it's not as if the Kobe is better statistical argument is based on a specific method that accentuates Kobe specific strengths. either that or you're just saying that because the numbers don't support the kobe<lebron hypothesis they must be wrong
|
what you just did was exactly the kind of random picking of stats and claiming they make an irrefutable argument which is retarded, doesn't mean data is worthless, i've quoted results and stats too but mostly to prove non statistical points. the guy in the espn article is talking about methods used to analyze the efficiency of individual players, not looking at some isolated results and making a judgment based on them. i mean lebron>kobe this year in every traditional stat except free throws and 3s, we could just end the argument there too but we know those stats (and certainly not team stats from a few playoff series) don't tell a complete story. the measures designed specifically to analyze the effectiveness of players as individuals are the best thing we have in terms of truly objective data, because, i assume (since there are capable people who work on this stuff), they draw from as much data as is available and analyze it responsibly. statistical analysis has really come a long way and is now a vital part of sports, anyone who's read moneyball, freakonomics, super crunchers and other books/articles/whatever knows the extent of its use and how effective it is
if the best data analysis we have available to us suggest that lebron is the best individual player then its a compelling argument. and it'd be just as compelling if those stats supported kobe, but they don't (assuming the guy from the espn article isn't full of shit)
|
On May 31 2009 21:05 no_comprender wrote:
i think there's an argument for lebron straight up being a better scorer regardless of his other talents anyway. lebron's team-carrying ability shouldn't really be questioned right after he averages 39pts while shooting just under 50% from the field, while getting minimal help from inconsistent teammates and going right at the best defensive player in basketball and getting him in foul trouble. that is so ridiculously impressive. it's hard to appreciate since they lost the series but that performance was amazing, and he certainly didn't do it through a random streak of hot jumpshooting. lebron's 25/7/7 in gm7 will hardly go down as an epic chokejob, it just didn't live up to the ridiculous 5 games preceding it. so far lebrons record is pretty good as far as clutch play goes. oh and the fact that he's been carrying an nba team since he was 19
what you just did was exactly the kind of random picking of stats and claiming they make an irrefutable argument which is retarded, doesn't mean data is worthless, i've quoted results and stats too but mostly to prove non statistical points.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
objective is obviously the wrong word to use, but the point is legitimate and salvageable. a statistical look has several advantages like consistency and completeness that are "objective" features when compared to piecemeal "eyeball" measurements based on a handful of games or even a handful of 30 seconds stretches. still, the standards by which we choose our numbers is not given self evidently, and it is still very difficult to measure player value by a single number or a collection of collected individual categories of data. what we do gather is just a consensus that lebron has been more valuable to the team in terms of his performance. this may just be that lebron is a physical freak and does so many things on the court due to greater speed and strength, but that still does not discount the performance.
anyway, two big and difficult to quantify advantages for lebron are his efficiency and multitasking/holistic effects on the game. on a consistent basis, lebron scores easier, more points per possession, and does more on the court in terms of sheer activity and involvement in the offense. both values also happen to be difficult to measure by the eyeball test, and people tend to dismiss them when they do not like the idea of lebron being better than kobe. however ill constructed statistical aggregations of value currently are, they do try to account for every game, and tend to take into account a wider range of factors, the little things that lebron does show up as results.
|
On June 02 2009 02:57 oneofthem wrote:
objective is obviously the wrong word to use, but the point is legitimate and salvageable. a statistical look has several advantages like consistency and completeness that are "objective" features when compared to piecemeal "eyeball" measurements based on a handful of games or even a handful of 30 seconds stretches. still, the standards by which we choose our numbers is not given self evidently, and it is still very difficult to measure player value by a single number or a collection of collected individual categories of data. what we do gather is just a consensus that lebron has been more valuable to the team in terms of his performance. this may just be that lebron is a physical freak and does so many things on the court due to greater speed and strength, but that still does not discount the performance.
anyway, two big and difficult to quantify advantages for lebron are his efficiency and multitasking/holistic effects on the game. on a consistent basis, lebron scores easier, more points per possession, and does more on the court in terms of sheer activity and involvement in the offense. both values also happen to be difficult to measure by the eyeball test, and people tend to dismiss them when they do not like the idea of lebron being better than kobe. however ill constructed statistical aggregations of value currently are, they do try to account for every game, and tend to take into account a wider range of factors, the little things that lebron does show up as results.
jigga what?
|
On June 02 2009 02:57 oneofthem wrote:
objective is obviously the wrong word to use, but the point is legitimate and salvageable. a statistical look has several advantages like consistency and completeness that are "objective" features when compared to piecemeal "eyeball" measurements based on a handful of games or even a handful of 30 seconds stretches. still, the standards by which we choose our numbers is not given self evidently, and it is still very difficult to measure player value by a single number or a collection of collected individual categories of data. what we do gather is just a consensus that lebron has been more valuable to the team in terms of his performance. this may just be that lebron is a physical freak and does so many things on the court due to greater speed and strength, but that still does not discount the performance.
anyway, two big and difficult to quantify advantages for lebron are his efficiency and multitasking/holistic effects on the game. on a consistent basis, lebron scores easier, more points per possession, and does more on the court in terms of sheer activity and involvement in the offense. both values also happen to be difficult to measure by the eyeball test, and people tend to dismiss them when they do not like the idea of lebron being better than kobe. however ill constructed statistical aggregations of value currently are, they do try to account for every game, and tend to take into account a wider range of factors, the little things that lebron does show up as results.
how do you figure that LeBron scores easier? I think it takes a lot less effort to shoot jump shots than to barrel into the lane, running over two people on your way to getting hacked at the basket but being so strong the shot goes in anyways. those 3 points are MUCH harder than Kobe shooting a 3.
I agree with you that LeBron most likely scores more points per possession, but I would disagree in that I think scoring for Kobe is a lot easier than it is for LeBron. If LeBron could score that easily he'd have more huge games.
Example: LeBron can always get you 35-40... but he most likely won't be a danger to score in the 50's and 60's, while Kobe won't get 35-40 as often, but he's always more of a threat to suddenly score 60 in a game.
Aside from that... I think Kevin Durant scores more easily than anybody in the NBA and he's going to keep getting better at it. I look for him to shatter almost every scoring record known to man in the next few years (note: Wilt's scoring records are super-human so they don't fall into the realm of "known to man"... that is restricted to Jordan and Kobe in terms of insane amount of points scored).
|
Lebron's physical attributes make him a difficult player to guard, if you don't man up on him on the perimeter, he's going to pick the defense apart, as the Orlando series have shown us.
Kobe's a little different, even if he gets picked up by a solid defender (like Battier), you still expect him to create offense on every possession. That's not to say Lebron can't, but I don't expect him to create offense on every possession, you just don't have that same killer pressure that Kobe seems to exert on defenses, its like the Lakers feel that much more menacing when Kobe is running the offense.
I guess the point I am trying to make since this is only based on my opinion of all of the playoff games is that Lebron creates more offense for himself and Kobe creates more offense for his team on any given possession. Part of that goes back to their supporting cast whom Kobe has the better of, but Lebron hasn't really created that helpless feeling when he's going all out, but everyone (opponents, coaches, media) talks about Kobe's finishing ability. You saw some of that way back in the first round Phoenix series a few years ago, where Kobe can really just will his team to be in a position to win (with Smush Parker and Kwame Brown), Lebron hasn't developed that as shown by his series with the Spurs.
|
I just love that Mo Williams couldn't make good on his promise
|
Defending Kobe means contested jumpshots. Defending lebron means guarding at the perimeter (and he'll simply blow by 95% of the players in the league), contesting him at the rim (which he'll run around, create contact, and finish anyway).
Did you see him against the hawks? One possession, he's isolating and dribbling for 15 seconds, then he blows by everyone and dunks it. It takes a great defense to even challenge him in the paint.
It's like comparing vintage Duncan's offense to vintage Shaq's. Duncan has a great set of post moves so he'll always get off that turnaround bank shot or jump hook that he wants. The defense rarely is able to contest it aside from keeping him away from the basket. Shaq: bump, bump, bump, alright I'm under the basket, he's grabbing my arm, dunk.
|
United States4471 Posts
On June 02 2009 06:26 igotmyown wrote:
Defending Kobe means contested jumpshots. Defending lebron means guarding at the perimeter (and he'll simply blow by 95% of the players in the league), contesting him at the rim (which he'll run around, create contact, and finish anyway).
Did you see him against the hawks? One possession, he's isolating and dribbling for 15 seconds, then he blows by everyone and dunks it. It takes a great defense to even challenge him in the paint.
It's like comparing vintage Duncan's offense to vintage Shaq's. Duncan has a great set of post moves so he'll always get off that turnaround bank shot or jump hook that he wants. The defense rarely is able to contest it aside from keeping him away from the basket. Shaq: bump, bump, bump, alright I'm under the basket, he's grabbing my arm, dunk.
I actually like the Shaq-Duncan comparison to Lebron-Kobe. Once again, I think the only point that can really be made is that both are great and that it's just a matter of taste to decide which is better.
|
Tim Duncan - such a beast. Shame his "hype" isn't even near Kobe or Lebron's when he has had an arguably better career than both.
|
On June 01 2009 21:48 Jibba wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2009 21:36 no_comprender wrote:particularly relevant i thought is when they mention stats which, though not everything, are the best thing we have when it comes to a truly objective viewpoint. here's a quote which i assume is true cos it's on espn's website:
If you're going to try and compare these guys with any sort of advanced statistical analysis, LeBron's just going to blow Kobe away ... Kobe's PER this year, when he finished second in the MVP race and was probably two wins away from making a real run at the award, was slightly lower than LeBron's in 2006-07, his worst regular season other than his rookie year. It's not just PER either, win shares, +/- rating, you name it. For years, pretty much any way people have come up with to use numbers to distill a basketball player's value, LeBron James has been at or right at the top.
I'd hardly say those are objective. All it shows is how poor a job numbers do at "distilling" a player's value.
John Hollinger and his PER numbers are just ridiculous these days :/
|
United States4471 Posts
On June 02 2009 08:33 Ace wrote:
Tim Duncan - such a beast. Shame his "hype" isn't even near Kobe or Lebron's when he has had an arguably better career than both.
It is a shame, but I think that he actually prefers to have less hype around him. Everything I've read about him suggests that he would prefer not to be in the limelight and have a puppet of him put in a huge commercial campaign. However, if someone were to offer to put him in a D&D commercial or something...
|
lol I know a girl who went to Wake Forest with him(and CP3) and she said Tim Duncan was kinda nerdy lol.
|
On June 02 2009 09:35 Ace wrote:
lol I know a girl who went to Wake Forest with him(and CP3) and she said Tim Duncan was kinda nerdy lol.
LOL, I can see that in Duncan though. I'm guessing the girl stayed at WF for grad?
And Lebron is being very arrogant right now; he says he's a competitor and so he shouldn't shake someone else's hand after a devastating game. I wish I could find the video when after the horrible Spurs Cavs final was over, Lebron went up to Duncan and shook hands and gave a hug. Where did that sportsmanship go?
|
United States10774 Posts
On June 02 2009 11:28 il0seonpurpose wrote:Show nested quote +On June 02 2009 09:35 Ace wrote:
lol I know a girl who went to Wake Forest with him(and CP3) and she said Tim Duncan was kinda nerdy lol. LOL, I can see that in Duncan though. I'm guessing the girl stayed at WF for grad? And Lebron is being very arrogant right now; he says he's a competitor and so he shouldn't shake someone else's hand after a devastating game. I wish I could find the video when after the horrible Spurs Cavs final was over, Lebron went up to Duncan and shook hands and gave a hug. Where did that sportsmanship go?
yeah, i was really surprised by lebron. that's not how he rolls? does he think think people congratulate their opponents after getting beat down because they feel good about it? everybody is a competitor, but sportsmanship is sportsmanship. one reason why i respect athletes like nadal (one of the most fierce competitors in my opinion) is that he shows class, win or lose.
|
i think this is getting blown out of proportion. everybody will forget this once the finals starts.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
it is really a media created issue. he's just a 24 year old from a distinct culture, and it is not the ideal sportsman thing that seems to be the standard of respectability. the corporate imagemaking wont change what he is. he just decided that following the script and putting up a show is a waste of time and just did what he felt like for once. his whole public life is a staged play, it is burdensome to follow that. i'm glad he cracked here, because in all probability it is the first genuine moment he has had since he's 14.
|
United States10774 Posts
On June 02 2009 11:58 oneofthem wrote:
it is really a media created issue. he's just a 24 year old from a distinct culture, and it is not the ideal sportsman thing that seems to be the standard of respectability. the corporate imagemaking wont change what he is. he just decided that following the script and putting up a show is a waste of time and just did what he felt like for once. his whole public life is a staged play, it is burdensome to follow that. i'm glad he cracked here, because in all probability it is the first genuine moment he has had since he's 14.
umm, you actually view it like this? nobody's happy after losing, just man up and show some class. i could care less about his imagemaking, his feelings, or what type of show he has to put on. he shouldn't do it because of what the media and the public would think, but because that's the right and respectable thing to do. showing respect to your opponent should not be a media/image deal. every athlete in every sport feels the same way after losing and that's what this comes down to. it's really not a big deal and will be forgotten soon, but come on, that was low of him.
i forgot about it myself until i saw that interview. i couldn't believe what he was saying. "that's just not who i am, shaking hands after getting beat badly. i am a competitor," followed by a bunch of arrogant bullshit. really, lebron?
|
On June 02 2009 11:28 il0seonpurpose wrote:
And Lebron is being very arrogant right now; he says he's a competitor and so he shouldn't shake someone else's hand after a devastating game. I wish I could find the video when after the horrible Spurs Cavs final was over, Lebron went up to Duncan and shook hands and gave a hug. Where did that sportsmanship go?
i read that in an article and i was pretty shocked myself. where's the class? we all know his team just got outplayed, but that's not an excuse to be an immature dick.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
