Lakers Thread

Credit where its due and congrats to Kobe, he's joined some elite company there.

Good. That's awesome.

I have a question. How many made and missed baskets to acheive that? How would that rank among his peers?

As of this post, 10,465 field goals on 23,071 attempts, in 1180 games (and counting). The obvious comparison, MJ, finished his career with 32,292 points, making 12,192 of 24,537 attempts in 1072 games.

On rough estimates, Kobe has hit 35-40% of his career shots while MJ hit almost 50%.

Oh Come on. Give Kobe a break. How about try comparing turnovers and other stats to achieve that fantastic milestone, u sick haters.

Kobe is also notably the youngest to score 30,000. The fact he made his debut at 18 certainly helps though, with MJ actually reaching the 30,000 mark in 220 fewer games.

Kobe is also notably the youngest to score 30,000. The fact he made his debut at 18 certainly helps though, with MJ actually reaching the 30,000 mark in 220 fewer games.

Kobe would have reached it earlier if he was a starter for the first two years of his career. Hater.

It's an accomplishment, no doubt, but he's certainly the most inefficient scorer to reach 30,000.

It's an accomplishment, no doubt, but he's certainly the most inefficient scorer to reach 30,000.

Well they are only 5. 2 Centers, 1 Power Forward, who plays close to the basket. And a Shooting Guard that is arguably the greatest player to play the game.

It's an accomplishment, no doubt, but he's certainly the most inefficient scorer to reach 30,000.

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/871 ... obe-assist

a Shooting Guard that is arguably the greatest player to play the game.

Kobe indeed is.

Uh oh. Disco stu started sucking something other than his thumb.

a Shooting Guard that is arguably the greatest player to play the game. And Kobe.

Kobe indeed is.

Sorry about that.

It's an accomplishment, no doubt, but he's certainly the most inefficient scorer to reach 30,000.

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/871 ... obe-assist

"Everything's interconnected, so giving rebound credit solely to the rebounder is stupid! We should give it solely to the shooter instead!"

Way to miss the point.

But the same things that make basketball so captivating to watch also make it more difficult to measure and to analyze.

Basketball is very different from baseball, but in the basketball analytics world, too often we treat our sport as if it were baseball;

But, unfortunately, it's not that simple.

basketball outcomes exhibit sensitive dependence on previous environmental conditions, yet the analytical "baseball-ification" of our fluid sport too often neglects this basic tenet of basketball ecology. We disregard too much environmental context. As an illustration of how this baseball-ification of basketball ecology can hinder our understanding, consider the Kobe Assist, those missed shots that are more like accidental passes that lead to put-backs.

What happens after a missed shot is very important and directly related to the same set of environmental conditions on the floor that provided both the original context for the shot and the influential factors that determine what happens next.

But just like shot outcomes, rebounding outcomes also depend on who is shooting, where they are shooting from, the stratagems of each team, the rebounding abilities of each player, and the precise spatial configuration of the 10 players on the court; as a result, there is a less apparent tenet of basketball: All missed shots are not created equal, and their DNA is inherently dependent upon their ancestral events — some missed shots are good for the defensive team, and some benefit the offense, as many misses actually extend offensive possessions with the proverbial "fresh 24."

We fail to understand which shooting environments are most or least conducive to offensive rebounds.

Every time a shot is released, a potential change of possession gets its wings. An additional reason close-range shots are more effective than mid-range shots is that, when missed, they are rebounded by the offensive team at much higher rates; in other words, they kill possessions at lower rates than jump shots.

Although Kobe Assists are admittedly a silly reminder of the natural connectedness of basketball plays, they also provide a real diagnostic of how well offensive ecosystems cooperate.

Of course Kobe has the most "Kobe assists". He throws up a shitload of bricks and the Lakers are one of the best offensive rebounding teams.

As another example, consider the cases of Elton Brand and Derrick Rose. Conventional wisdom suggests Elton Brand is a better mid-range shooter than Derrick Rose. Over the last two seasons Elton Brand made 381 out of his 782 mid-range jumpers (49 percent). This is really impressive because as a whole the league shoots only 38 percent from mid-range. During the same window, Derrick Rose made 294 of his 724 mid-range shots (41 percent), which isn't bad, but it's much closer to average than to elite. Again, field goal percentage does not tell the whole story. The Bulls rebounded 152 of Rose's 430 misses (35 percent), while the Sixers rebounded only 63 of Brand's 401 misses (16 percent). Looking at these shots through another lens, 62 percent of Rose's mid-range shots result in points or a fresh possession for the Bulls. For Brand, 57 percent of his mid-range shots result in points or a fresh possession for the Sixers. Which is better?

The Rose-Brand comparison suggests that by appending offensive rebounding rate or put-back rate to field goal percentage we can more accurately assess a shot's true value. Every time a shot is released, a potential change of possession gets its wings. An additional reason close-range shots are more effective than mid-range shots is that, when missed, they are rebounded by the offensive team at much higher rates; in other words, they kill possessions at lower rates than jump shots.

How about looking at ORB% of the Bulls and the Sixers to help you understand why so many more of Rose's misses were rebounded by his teammates?

All in all, I'm very impressed - this is one of the stupidest things I've ever read. Either this is just a troll article or the writer needs to take his head out of his ass - it's easier to properly analyze basketball (or anything, for that matter) that way.

What a disaster. Kobe was awful despite getting his numbers. He kept losing Gordon Hayward on defense and was non-existent on board. Ball hogging as usual and that left his teammates nothing to do but shoot threes or grab boards(which Hill did good). No wonder the Lakers take enormous amount of threes. As been said before, he needs to try to faciliate a bit. We know he ain't never been one but he needs to put the big boy's pants on and adjust.

What a disaster. Kobe was awful despite getting his numbers. He kept losing Gordon Hayward on defense and was non-existent on board. Ball hogging as usual and that left his teammates nothing to do but shoot threes or grab boards(which Hill did good). No wonder the Lakers take enormous amount of threes. As been said before, he needs to try to faciliate a bit. We know he ain't never been one but he needs to put the big boy's pants on and adjust.

A new pair or the same ones the Lakers pooped?

Kobe's been playing like absolute garbage for the majority of this season despite the numbers (lucky for me, I still got a value pick at #10 in my fantasy draft). But it's not entirely his fault. The team has been hurt and there's no chemistry. Plus they are starting Chris Duhon. Chris Fucking Duhon.

Should have hired the right coach. Not the scumbag D'antoni. They resemble last year's NY Knicks. I hate it when the team loses. I really don't like the way they're playing.

Man. I'm a big Kobe fan but gotta admit he's been ball hogging all season long. Looks like he's really trying to move up on that all-time scoring list.

30,000 Points From Nowhere: Is Kobe Bryant Hurting The Lakers?

More alarming is that after the loss to the Oklahoma City Thunder, the Lakers are 1-8 when Kobe scores more than 30 points. To put that into perspective, they are 8-3 when he scores, and so shoots, less. An 8 and 3 record is a 72.7 winning percentage, .5 better than Miami’s at 13-5 and would put them at fourth in the Western Conference―a better reflection of the level of talent playing for the 16-time champions.

While not all of the team’s woes can be pinned to the Black Mamba, the numbers do indicate a trend that should be looked into. People have blamed Pau Gasol, the Princeton offense, a lack of Steve Nash, Jim Buss’ snub of supposed rival Phil Jackson, and now the offense-obsessed D’Antoni system for L.A.’s woes, but have not given any interest to the 1-8 emergency flare. Given Kobe’s recent milestone, a hyper-efficient year, MVP consideration, and the league’s 11-best +/- output at a plus-131, no one has looked at Bryant’s contribution to a disappointing season thus far.

The question, as raised earlier, is whether Bryant shoots the team out of games or simply has to take more of the offensive load when his teammates aren't playing well.

Of course Kobe has the most "Kobe assists". He throws up a shitload of bricks and the Lakers are one of the best offensive rebounding teams.

As another example, consider the cases of Elton Brand and Derrick Rose. Conventional wisdom suggests Elton Brand is a better mid-range shooter than Derrick Rose. Over the last two seasons Elton Brand made 381 out of his 782 mid-range jumpers (49 percent). This is really impressive because as a whole the league shoots only 38 percent from mid-range. During the same window, Derrick Rose made 294 of his 724 mid-range shots (41 percent), which isn't bad, but it's much closer to average than to elite. Again, field goal percentage does not tell the whole story. The Bulls rebounded 152 of Rose's 430 misses (35 percent), while the Sixers rebounded only 63 of Brand's 401 misses (16 percent). Looking at these shots through another lens, 62 percent of Rose's mid-range shots result in points or a fresh possession for the Bulls. For Brand, 57 percent of his mid-range shots result in points or a fresh possession for the Sixers. Which is better?

The Rose-Brand comparison suggests that by appending offensive rebounding rate or put-back rate to field goal percentage we can more accurately assess a shot's true value. Every time a shot is released, a potential change of possession gets its wings. An additional reason close-range shots are more effective than mid-range shots is that, when missed, they are rebounded by the offensive team at much higher rates; in other words, they kill possessions at lower rates than jump shots.

How about looking at ORB% of the Bulls and the Sixers to help you understand why so many more of Rose's misses were rebounded by his teammates?

All in all, I'm very impressed - this is one of the stupidest things I've ever read. Either this is just a troll article or the writer needs to take his head out of his ass - it's easier to properly analyze basketball (or anything, for that matter) that way.

You're way worse than koberulz in missing the point.

30,000 Points From Nowhere: Is Kobe Bryant Hurting The Lakers?

Like the article says, it is at least something to think about. Ppl been pointing fingers at every little things to princeton offence and gasol. True or not, whatz for sure is that Kobe's scoring and all that ball hogging isnt helping at all. Itz a legit question just like ppl questioning dantoni's ability to coach.