Hacker News Reader

Comment by phamilton | Hacker News Reader

Apples to apples shot percentage is a great stat.

My biggest complaint with Kobe is that he scored a lot of points because he took a lot of shots. Last night for example, he took ~60% of shots from the field for his team which accounted for ~55% (ignoring FTs). In other words, the expected return on his shot was lower than the rest of his team. Now, FTs change that story a bit, but even in the best case scenario he breaks even with his team.

Kobe was a great leader on the court, which is what allowed him to get away with shooting more shots than the rest of his team combined on a regular basis. He also had this "The Lakers are built around Kobe" team structure that made that the expectation.

View on HN

I mean, I would argue that last night is an outlier. The game plan was to give the ball to Kobe, they wanted him to shoot.

Look at his career and I think it's a different story.

> My biggest complaint with Kobe is that he scored a lot of points because he took a lot of shots.

Isn't that the point of basketball?

not all shots are created equal - the "long 2" has a lower expected value than taking a few steps back for a 3-pointer, or finishing at the rim for an easier 2

we can't really hold kobe's last game against him imo - he's definitely been a ballhog but if it's his last game he should have the opportunity to shoot until his arms fall off

I thought it was a wonderful and fitting final game. Kobe playing like he has his whole career. It was great.

The point is to make shots, not just take them.

EDIT: There's roughly a finite number of shots a team can take in a game. If one player takes most of the shots, then sure they will score a lot of points. But are they maximizing team points? If other members of the team have a higher shooting percentage then taking less shots and passing the ball around will be advantageous.

The point is to out score your opponent.

As a team. Not as an individual. Kobe taking 50 shots and going for 40+ is orthogonal to the team winning.

Lakers win-loss record w/ Kobe Bryant (up to 2013):

Regular Season: 878-468 (.652) Post Season: 137-89 (.606)

There is a strong correlation between Kobe Bryant's scoring, and winning Laker's seasons.

Kobe Bryant being integral to the Laker's success is absolutely correct. The Laker's made the strategic decision to structure everything around him and it worked well. No doubt that would have failed with a less talented individual.

However, it is important to view his accomplishments in that light. He scored 40+ points in games because the team basically said "Let's have Kobe score 40+ points today". Because of that, his absolute point totals aren't great markers for individual talent.

I wonder if on some forum for Basketball fans somewhere, some folks are sitting around discussing PG's impact on technology and startups.

I've quoted pg on a basketball forum before.

This doesn't account for the possibility that his teammates have a higher percentage because Kobe is the biggest threat to take a shot and the opposing team sets up to defend accordingly.

The point of basketball is to sell tickets and paraphernalia, and he's got that part covered. I'm sure the owners are perfectly happy.

</cynic>

http://imgur.com/gallery/L73De4L

The two are not mutually exclusive!

It's a team sport, though. There's more players than Kobe out there.

How many of those players are as skilled as Kobe?

The biggest knock people seem to have against Kobe is that unlike Jordan, he didn't elevate the game of his teammates.

Which I find to be a pretty weird idea. The list of players that played their best while playing with Kobe is long and varied.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com