<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Let me just say the rules have changed. The way defense and offense is played. Its hard to judge two players who basically played in two different eras except for a small overlap when Jordan was already past his prime</div> while the eras they played in were of a different time period, I don't think there's that much of a difference as far as athleticism is concerned....Kobe and MJ even matched up a few times when Kobe was younger...I think there eras kind of overlapped like u said
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 27 2008, 02:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Lavalamp @ May 26 2008, 09:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>First off, the entire league during Jordan's time wasn't as good at shooting the 3 point shot. The league was averaging around 32% up until they shortened the 3 point line. Unlike 36% which the league averages around now. During Jordan's years before they shortened the 3 point line, he shot 27.6%, 37.6%, 31%, 27%, and 35%. Those 5 years before the shortened 3 point line, put him at 32%, which puts him at league average. Kobe is in the same situation in terms of him hitting around 35%, 36%, 37%, which is around the league's average of 36%.</div> You didn't address the points you ignored. </div> lol, ok you mean I didn't address your two points? Well to shooter in the top 10-20 in 3FGA, but you are only shooter at the league's average, doesn't mean you are a very effective shooter. You are just average. If a player is shooting say 40% at the 3 point line, then he is taking better shots or is shooting better than teammates and opponents in general. Also your point on hitting 36% means 54% in FG%, but that is what the league shoots there, and I think it works out because the number of FT opportunities at the 3 point line are much much much less than during 2 point opportunities like drives, post moves, or mid range jump shots. If he shot top 10-20 in 3FGA in volume, and was 4-5% below the league average, I`d call Kobe a chucker and detrimental to the team. Since he shoots 10-20 top 10-20 in 3FGA in volume, and he is shooting at league average, he is neither a chucker, or impressive at the 3 point line. If he shot top 10-20 in 3FGA in volume, and was 4-5% above the league average, I`d say Kobe was doing impressive things at the 3 point line.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Lavalamp @ May 27 2008, 08:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 27 2008, 02:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Lavalamp @ May 26 2008, 09:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>First off, the entire league during Jordan's time wasn't as good at shooting the 3 point shot. The league was averaging around 32% up until they shortened the 3 point line. Unlike 36% which the league averages around now. During Jordan's years before they shortened the 3 point line, he shot 27.6%, 37.6%, 31%, 27%, and 35%. Those 5 years before the shortened 3 point line, put him at 32%, which puts him at league average. Kobe is in the same situation in terms of him hitting around 35%, 36%, 37%, which is around the league's average of 36%.</div> You didn't address the points you ignored. </div> lol, ok you mean I didn't address your two points? Well to shooter in the top 10-20 in 3FGA, but you are only shooter at the league's average, doesn't mean you are a very effective shooter. You are just average. If a player is shooting say 40% at the 3 point line, then he is taking better shots or is shooting better than teammates and opponents in general. Also your point on hitting 36% means 54% in FG%, but that is what the league shoots there, and I think it works out because the number of FT opportunities at the 3 point line are much much much less than during 2 point opportunities like drives, post moves, or mid range jump shots. If he shot top 10-20 in 3FGA in volume, and was 4-5% below the league average, I`d call Kobe a chucker and detrimental to the team. Since he shoots 10-20 top 10-20 in 3FGA in volume, and he is shooting at league average, he is neither a chucker, or impressive at the 3 point line. If he shot top 10-20 in 3FGA in volume, and was 4-5% above the league average, I`d say Kobe was doing impressive things at the 3 point line. </div> Lol what? All you did was paraphrase your previous post. You haven't debunked anything concerning me. The error in your thinking is that you forget, regardless of the average, that 36% is more efficient than 50% 2-point field goals; and that shooting % goes down the higher the volume increases. The average is that high because most people wait for the right kind of moment to shoot a three and the league has practiced this more over the years. Kobe however can create those shots for himself, whereas Sasha Vujacic has to wait before he can launch his shot. A three pointer adds spacing for Kobe to drive to the hoop too, expanding his efficiency. I could make 33 out of 100 shots, someone could make 49 out of 100 over the course of a year, but I would have been more efficient per possession if I had only taken three pointers and the other person had made only dunks. Yet I was "below" the league average in three pointers, and Person X was "above" the league average in FG%. Put things in context. Saying Kobe's an average three point shooter is quite misleading in this case. 36% is not "close to detrimental" or average when accouting for TS%, a superior measure of efficiency.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 27 2008, 02:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>No one here has seen Oscar play,</div> Not true at all
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ May 27 2008, 09:55 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 27 2008, 02:12 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>No one here has seen Oscar play,</div> Not true at all </div> Congrats. You know what I meant.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 27 2008, 03:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller)</div><div class='quotemain'><u>1962</u> (the year Wilt averaged 50 PPG and 26 RPG) - Teams attempted an average of 8,619 field goals in a total of 80 games. That's about 107.735 Shots per game. <u>2006</u> - Teams attempted an average of 6,477 field goals in a total of 82 games. That's about 78.987 shots per game. -- That's 2,142 more field goals attempted in two less games. Anyway, if we do some calculations.... 78.987/107.735 is 73.316%. If Wilt plays the SAME number of minutes in his career with an adjusted figure in Shots per game, his new RPG would be 16.782. So if he plays, let's say, 43 MPG, his RPG total would be, (.938 x 16.782) 15.741. This would be within my previous accepted range of 15-17 RPG. I was just too lazy to explain it before.</div> That was me back in August 2006. Everyone in that era is affected by pace. </div> Yes, Pace impacts the pretty stats, but look at Oscar's PER, TS% (without the benefit of a 3 point line) and eventually Assist %. I've never looked it up, but I wonder how many other rookies led the NBA in TS
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ May 27 2008, 10:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 27 2008, 03:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller)</div><div class='quotemain'><u>1962</u> (the year Wilt averaged 50 PPG and 26 RPG) - Teams attempted an average of 8,619 field goals in a total of 80 games. That's about 107.735 Shots per game. <u>2006</u> - Teams attempted an average of 6,477 field goals in a total of 82 games. That's about 78.987 shots per game. -- That's 2,142 more field goals attempted in two less games. Anyway, if we do some calculations.... 78.987/107.735 is 73.316%. If Wilt plays the SAME number of minutes in his career with an adjusted figure in Shots per game, his new RPG would be 16.782. So if he plays, let's say, 43 MPG, his RPG total would be, (.938 x 16.782) 15.741. This would be within my previous accepted range of 15-17 RPG. I was just too lazy to explain it before.</div> That was me back in August 2006. Everyone in that era is affected by pace. </div> Yes, Pace impacts the pretty stats, but look at Oscar's PER, TS% (without the benefit of a 3 point line) and eventually Assist %. I've never looked it up, but I wonder how many other rookies led the NBA in TS </div> Yeah I looked at his PER, he's a HOFer, I know. This was a Jordan versus O debate which is different.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 27 2008, 11:24 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cpawfan @ May 27 2008, 10:22 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 27 2008, 03:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller)</div><div class='quotemain'><u>1962</u> (the year Wilt averaged 50 PPG and 26 RPG) - Teams attempted an average of 8,619 field goals in a total of 80 games. That's about 107.735 Shots per game. <u>2006</u> - Teams attempted an average of 6,477 field goals in a total of 82 games. That's about 78.987 shots per game. -- That's 2,142 more field goals attempted in two less games. Anyway, if we do some calculations.... 78.987/107.735 is 73.316%. If Wilt plays the SAME number of minutes in his career with an adjusted figure in Shots per game, his new RPG would be 16.782. So if he plays, let's say, 43 MPG, his RPG total would be, (.938 x 16.782) 15.741. This would be within my previous accepted range of 15-17 RPG. I was just too lazy to explain it before.</div> That was me back in August 2006. Everyone in that era is affected by pace. </div> Yes, Pace impacts the pretty stats, but look at Oscar's PER, TS% (without the benefit of a 3 point line) and eventually Assist %. I've never looked it up, but I wonder how many other rookies led the NBA in TS </div> Yeah I looked at his PER, he's a HOFer, I know. This was a Jordan versus O debate which is different. </div> Well to be fair, I opined Oscar as a level in overall game between Kobe and MJ, so I did make the comparison of him to both germane.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 27 2008, 09:33 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Lavalamp @ May 27 2008, 08:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 27 2008, 02:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Lavalamp @ May 26 2008, 09:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>First off, the entire league during Jordan's time wasn't as good at shooting the 3 point shot. The league was averaging around 32% up until they shortened the 3 point line. Unlike 36% which the league averages around now. During Jordan's years before they shortened the 3 point line, he shot 27.6%, 37.6%, 31%, 27%, and 35%. Those 5 years before the shortened 3 point line, put him at 32%, which puts him at league average. Kobe is in the same situation in terms of him hitting around 35%, 36%, 37%, which is around the league's average of 36%.</div> You didn't address the points you ignored. </div> lol, ok you mean I didn't address your two points? Well to shooter in the top 10-20 in 3FGA, but you are only shooter at the league's average, doesn't mean you are a very effective shooter. You are just average. If a player is shooting say 40% at the 3 point line, then he is taking better shots or is shooting better than teammates and opponents in general. Also your point on hitting 36% means 54% in FG%, but that is what the league shoots there, and I think it works out because the number of FT opportunities at the 3 point line are much much much less than during 2 point opportunities like drives, post moves, or mid range jump shots. If he shot top 10-20 in 3FGA in volume, and was 4-5% below the league average, I`d call Kobe a chucker and detrimental to the team. Since he shoots 10-20 top 10-20 in 3FGA in volume, and he is shooting at league average, he is neither a chucker, or impressive at the 3 point line. If he shot top 10-20 in 3FGA in volume, and was 4-5% above the league average, I`d say Kobe was doing impressive things at the 3 point line. </div> Lol what? All you did was paraphrase your previous post. You haven't debunked anything concerning me. The error in your thinking is that you forget, regardless of the average, that 36% is more efficient than 50% 2-point field goals; and that shooting % goes down the higher the volume increases. The average is that high because most people wait for the right kind of moment to shoot a three and the league has practiced this more over the years. Kobe however can create those shots for himself, whereas Sasha Vujacic has to wait before he can launch his shot. A three pointer adds spacing for Kobe to drive to the hoop too, expanding his efficiency. I could make 33 out of 100 shots, someone could make 49 out of 100 over the course of a year, but I would have been more efficient per possession if I had only taken three pointers and the other person had made only dunks. Yet I was "below" the league average in three pointers, and Person X was "above" the league average in FG%. Put things in context. Saying Kobe's an average three point shooter is quite misleading in this case. 36% is not "close to detrimental" or average when accouting for TS%, a superior measure of efficiency. </div> Well to be honest you haven't really brought up any real arguement. And same thing with this post. You talked about in terms of points shooting 33% from 3 is the equivalent of 50% from 2. That has nothing to do with comparing Kobe`s 3 point shooting to the league`s 3 point shooting or Michael Jordan`s 3 point shooting in relation to his era. If you look at the league's 3 point shooting. Take the average of every 3 point Field Goal made out of every 3 point field goal attempted and you will see that the average is 36%. So every time the 3 point shot is taken the average player makes 36%. Kobe shooting 36% is just an average player`s percentage in this era. It is not phenominal.
Lava, that's not the argument. No one ever claimed that Kobe is a phenomenal three point shooter. The thread starter stated that Jordan was a phenomenal long distance shooter. Kobe is a good 3 point shooter, due to the volume of the shots (and the % of makes) and his ability to get hot from that distance. Jordan was a poor/average 3 point shooter because he barely shot threes and made a low percentage of them. His ability to get hot might improve his status to about average.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Lavalamp @ May 27 2008, 11:03 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 27 2008, 09:33 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Lavalamp @ May 27 2008, 08:27 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ May 27 2008, 02:10 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Lavalamp @ May 26 2008, 09:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>First off, the entire league during Jordan's time wasn't as good at shooting the 3 point shot. The league was averaging around 32% up until they shortened the 3 point line. Unlike 36% which the league averages around now. During Jordan's years before they shortened the 3 point line, he shot 27.6%, 37.6%, 31%, 27%, and 35%. Those 5 years before the shortened 3 point line, put him at 32%, which puts him at league average. Kobe is in the same situation in terms of him hitting around 35%, 36%, 37%, which is around the league's average of 36%.</div> You didn't address the points you ignored. </div> lol, ok you mean I didn't address your two points? Well to shooter in the top 10-20 in 3FGA, but you are only shooter at the league's average, doesn't mean you are a very effective shooter. You are just average. If a player is shooting say 40% at the 3 point line, then he is taking better shots or is shooting better than teammates and opponents in general. Also your point on hitting 36% means 54% in FG%, but that is what the league shoots there, and I think it works out because the number of FT opportunities at the 3 point line are much much much less than during 2 point opportunities like drives, post moves, or mid range jump shots. If he shot top 10-20 in 3FGA in volume, and was 4-5% below the league average, I`d call Kobe a chucker and detrimental to the team. Since he shoots 10-20 top 10-20 in 3FGA in volume, and he is shooting at league average, he is neither a chucker, or impressive at the 3 point line. If he shot top 10-20 in 3FGA in volume, and was 4-5% above the league average, I`d say Kobe was doing impressive things at the 3 point line. </div> Lol what? All you did was paraphrase your previous post. You haven't debunked anything concerning me. The error in your thinking is that you forget, regardless of the average, that 36% is more efficient than 50% 2-point field goals; and that shooting % goes down the higher the volume increases. The average is that high because most people wait for the right kind of moment to shoot a three and the league has practiced this more over the years. Kobe however can create those shots for himself, whereas Sasha Vujacic has to wait before he can launch his shot. A three pointer adds spacing for Kobe to drive to the hoop too, expanding his efficiency. I could make 33 out of 100 shots, someone could make 49 out of 100 over the course of a year, but I would have been more efficient per possession if I had only taken three pointers and the other person had made only dunks. Yet I was "below" the league average in three pointers, and Person X was "above" the league average in FG%. Put things in context. Saying Kobe's an average three point shooter is quite misleading in this case. 36% is not "close to detrimental" or average when accouting for TS%, a superior measure of efficiency. </div> Well to be honest you haven't really brought up any real arguement. And same thing with this post. You talked about in terms of points shooting 33% from 3 is the equivalent of 50% from 2. That has nothing to do with comparing Kobe`s 3 point shooting to the league`s 3 point shooting or Michael Jordan`s 3 point shooting in relation to his era. If you look at the league's 3 point shooting. Take the average of every 3 point Field Goal made out of every 3 point field goal attempted and you will see that the average is 36%. So every time the 3 point shot is taken the average player makes 36%. Kobe shooting 36% is just an average player`s percentage in this era. It is not phenominal. </div> The average person does not attempt that many threes, and is limited in the moments he can attempt them. I understand quite well that he is at the league average in some aspects, yet TS% correlates more with winning so I don't really care.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Kobe has been considered the best player in the league for years.</div> SMH Duncan has been the best player for years now probably leading up to this point, where he starting to decline do to age.
Nice job, Lava. You've bunked, debunked, and rebunked those who say you're not addressing points. Rick Barry was a terrible long range shooter, because he took like no 3 point shots. ;-)
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane @ May 28 2008, 02:57 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Nice job, Lava. You've bunked, debunked, and rebunked those who say you're not addressing points. Rick Barry was a terrible long range shooter, because he took like no 3 point shots. ;-)</div> Denny, that has to be one of the most immature things to say. I'm making a different argument, I know what the League average is.
