Where is the focus on team accomplishments in this post? "Clearly he didn't have better stats, or else he might have gotten passed them. He messed up in overtime and 5 out of 6 fourth quarters that round. First quality opponent he faced and he didn't meet Bryant's level. The Rockets would have done an even better job on him."
Where is the focus on team accomplishments in that post? If he as an individual would have cut down on the turnovers, been as efficient as Bryant, he might have gotten passed them. He failed on a personal level.
I dont get this thread. We read an article explaining the limitations in PER. The creator of PER states implicitly it is not the end-all, be-all measurment of an individual in basketball, and points out its specific areas of inaccuracy. And then this thread goes 3 pages arguing the accuracy of PER. Take PER for what is, a useful statistic for evaluating different players across a broad spectrum of play styles in basketball.
How do you define the elite teams? They were 3-6 against Boston, LA, and Orlando. But they were also 9-1 against Portland, Houston, San Antonio, Denver, and Utah. Against the "middle pack" (SRS team rating between -2 and 2), they were 30-7. Against the bottom feeders (SRS team rating less than -2), they were 24-2. The Lakers were 4-2 against Cleveland, Boston, and Orlando. Against the rest of the pretty good teams (Portland, Houston, etc.) they were 13-5. Against the middle, as defined above, they were 18-9. Against the bottom feeders, they were 30-1. On one hand, one could argue that LA played better against the their top 3 opponents compared to Cleveland. 4-2 versus 3-6. But another way to look at it is to throw away the record against the bottom feeders, so we're focusing mainly on playoff-caliber teams. Then, Cleveland went 42-14, while LA went 35-14. To me, it looks like Cleveland played better against the bulk of the teams in the middle, while the Lakers were dominant against teams on either end of the spectrum.
Actually, what I said was, "He messed up in overtime and 5 out of 6 fourth quarters that round. First quality opponent he faced and he didn't meet Bryant's level. The Rockets would have done an even better job on him." If he didn't have butterfingers in the Conference Finals, he would have gotten shut down in the Finals by Kobe. Instead of walking off the court against the Magic. I remember last year they sucked against the very elite teams, you still thought they would win. No wonder, it is cool though whatever.
Are we including eastern playoff teams? The bottom half tier of east playoff teams is pretty bad though.
yes, if you disregard the first part of your statement, then that is what you said. right. i thought the cavs would win. not exactly relevant any way in this discussion, but yes, i was wrong then.
And then I restated the first sentence again just for you sweetie. "If he didn't have butterfingers in the Conference Finals, he would have gotten shut down in the Finals by Kobe. Instead of walking off the court against the Magic." This entire side discussion isn't exactly relevant to the original topic. But yeah like I said, it is cool. :]
It would basically include all playoff teams, or teams that were in contention for the playoffs. "Bottom feeders", as I'm defining it, for last year would be Nets, Knicks, Raptors, Warriors, T-Wolves, Grizzlies, Thunder, Wizards, Clippers, and Kings.
Do they? Brandon Roy put up superficially nice numbers against the Rockets in the first round, and the Blazers still got their butts thrashed. I would argue that the Lakers' inside-outside *balance* on offense was what over-whelmed the Rockets. If they had relied solely on Kobe, he would have had great numbers, and his team would also have lost.
Heh, if Lebron was on the Lakers and Kobe on the Cavs, I'd guarantee that all the Laker fans would be saying that Lebron >> Kobe, because his team won the championship last year. Laker fans arguing that if Kobe was better than Lebron that his team with Wally Sz, Varajao and Big Z as starters, would win the championship, and ignore that Lebron has Odom, Gasol, and Bynum. Hell even Ariza >>> Wally Szerbiack.
Not really, I was prepared to start watching the Bulls when Kobe wanted out. It isn't just about the Lakers, though I like them as well of course. Yes in the regular season Bron was quite impressive, I however compared them individually in the post-season. It has nothing to do with teammates in the way you define it. Rocketeer just doesn't want to admit Bron didn't play anyone, or at the best level against a quality opponent.
Kobe's PER against the Rockets was superior to Brandon's though, and he doesn't control the ball as much as him either. Brandon Roy matches up better against Artest, who might be the best Bron defender in the league. Anyway they also got this guy Shane, and Chuck. ;]
Ok sir. A nice round number would be, 50 win teams? I usually start around there when I want to measure myself against serious playoff competition. Adjusting for injuries during the post-season.
