Why Doesn't Kobe Ever Do Good in the Finals?

[7_cody]

Actually yes they do use stats......they look at things such as shooting percentage going to right, shooting percentage going to his left, his tendencies, when going left, his tendencies going left...how do you think they build a defensive gameplan against a player....STATS that is how.

Need more

http://www.interbasket.net/news/2009...no-weaknesses/

Sounds like stats play a vital role

You didn't get my point. I didn't mean to say that don't use stats, maybe that's why you misunderstood. I'm just saying it's not as easy as looking at the stats and then making a decision. The capabilities of statistics isn't as great as you think it is. Not everything is measurable.

[Simple Jack]

You didn't get my point. I didn't mean to say that don't use stats, maybe that's why you misunderstood. I'm just saying it's not as easy as looking at the stats and then making a decision. The capabilities of statistics isn't as great as you think it is. Not everything is measurable.

Most things are. And again, if those "unmeasurable" things impact the game, they probably are too.

[Simple Jack]

Actually, if I saw someone miss 14 shots an dmake only 6... I'm sure I would have noticed that he was missing a lot. Depending on why he was missing, I might still think he had a bad game.

Looking at someone elses shot attempts and shots made does not mean great defense. It's possible to play GREAT defense and have the other player score 35 ppg on 48% + shooting (Kobe v. Battier).

Statistics do not always verify what you see. You could argue that shot attempts is factual for how many shots a player took, but you can't use it for other things like efficiency, who the better player is. See how low the capabilities of statistics are?

Battier may have played, or rather TRIED to play great defense, but in the sense of the word; defense is stopping the other playing from scoring, or affecting their shot in order to make them shoot worse than they normally would, which he did not do in that situation.

In any event, you keep bringing up defense; how about you stick to the discussion and give examples using offense?

[Simple Jack]

You're bolded was a good point. I had to think about it for a second. If I noticed all the same things about MJ )better shot selection, easier shots, more consistency, more slashing, attacking) and he still had worse statistics than Kobe, then I might wonder why. Kobe is obviously better if he takes more difficult shots and still outperforms statistically. But I've have to watch both of them play to make my decision. Could just be that MJ had a bad season or was missing a lot of good looks.

And I disagree, KObe did not play like crap in the last Finals. But I guess you looked at his 41% FG or whatever it was and determined that he played like sh**. Nice.

Why are you switching arguments now? The % in FG was used to compare 2 players, and determine who was more efficient. Certainly if Kobe shot 41% and scored 28 ppg, while Jordan scored 30 at 53%, Jordan was the more efficient scorer, no?

For the life of me, I can't understand how someone can argue that less PPG, at a lower %, is more efficient...

[7_cody]

Why are you switching arguments now? The % in FG was used to compare 2 players, and determine who was more efficient. Certainly if Kobe shot 41% and scored 28 ppg, while Jordan scored 30 at 53%, Jordan was the more efficient scorer, no?

For the life of me, I can't understand how someone can argue that less PPG, at a lower %, is more efficient...

You still can't read. It might be, and it might not be. You have to watch the games. But that's one of those statistics that probably would verify what we see more often than not. What if I had my 10 year old brother guarding me, and I made all 10 of my layups. That's 100% shooting. Am I more efficient than Michael Jordan now? (an extreme example, but you get my point - you can't just look at the stats)

Anyway, get back to ya tonight if I can

[Simple Jack]

You still can't read. It might be, and it might not be. You have to watch the games. But that's one of those statistics that probably would verify what we see more often than not. What if I had my 10 year old brother guarding me, and I made all 10 of my layups. That's 100% shooting. Am I more efficient than Michael Jordan now? (an extreme example, but you get my point - you can't just look at the stats)

Anyway, get back to ya tonight if I can

Did you just compare you shooting 100% against your brother to Jordan playing in the NBA and scoring at a high %?

If we both played against your brother, or in the same league, and I scored 5 points at 50%, then yes, you were more efficient.

And it's sample size; we are talking about huge sample sizes. It's not a single game; it's 82 games, again and again, which help us establish who is the more efficient scorer. I understand that one game, or even a few, may not be indicative of how good a player is, but a 15 year career, vs a 14 year career is highly indicative of a players efficiency.

[whoartthou]

imo, one does not need to look at statistics or anything of that nature to determine if mj > kobe. If you have watched mj in the postseason and regular season, and have watched kobe in the post season and regular season, you would know who is the superior of the two.