This has been an interesting side-discussion (re: Kobe vs Pau), and one that I have entertained in the past before. It is actually a microcosm of, and an application of the argument that Bryant fans and stat heads have been having for years. You see, it has been stated that "Kobe Bryant is the best player in the world" so often that it is often taken as a given. But if you test it...none of the so-called advanced stats can find it. Kobe's never led the league in PER, in adjusted +/-, in win shares, in on-court/off-court +/-, in WARP, in wins produced, etc. etc. etc. Literally every other player that I can think of in the last 30 years that could even argue for being the best has measured out at the top of at least one for either the regular or postseason, but not Kobe.
Because we "know" that Kobe is the best and "advanced stats" are just math tricks and can't replace "the eye test", the default is generally that the stats are wrong and Kobe is the best. But it makes me question, and remember.
When we played the Lakers in 2008, the Lakers were vast favorites with the thought that the team talent levels were similar but Kobe was obviously the best player, so the Lakers would clearly win. But the Cs won convincingly, which didn't fit the given...instead of questioning whether the given were true, instead it was decided that it must be someone else's falut...The Lakers must have lost because Gasol and Odom let them down, not because Kobe wasn't the best. The only problem is, I remember Gasol and Odom playing pretty well and just not getting many touches. So this is another instance I'm being told to ignore my view of the evidence, and simply accept that Kobe is the best as a given without proof.
Same situation in 2006, Kobe's monster season, when they played the Suns in the playoffs. The Lakers lost, which only makes sense if the Suns were just the more talented team. So therefore Kobe must have had no help. The only problem is that I remember watching Odom, the Lakers' 2nd best player, absolutely destroy Shawn Marion (the 2nd best player on the Suns) for that whole series. And outside of Nash (who Kobe should outshine, of course) and Marion, the other starters on the Suns were nothing to write home about (Diaw, Tim Thomas, Barbosa, Raja Bell). So if Kobe is clearly the best, why did his team lose to a team with similar talent? It must be because Odom let him down...only Odom was great in my memory, so I don't understand?
And (bringing it back on-topic after a long build-up), we're told to do the same thing now with Gasol. Gasol is even or ahead of Bryant in most "advanced stats" since joining the Lakers. The Lakers' record with Gasol in the fold is absurd. But, it is a GIVEN that Kobe is the best, so therefore Gasol can be no better than 2nd best. If the Lakers struggle a bit without Gasol, it MUST be that they would struggle more without Kobe. But, as history indicates to me, those givens about Kobe being the best just don't often stand up unless we ignore or change some of the other evidence. If I tried to run my own research like that I'd be fired and told to find another line of work.
As such...for the sake of maintaining civil dialogue I am often willing to concede the point that Kobe must be the best Laker because there isn't enough independent evidence to prove otherwise...but I am definitely willing to accept and recognize when someone puts a lot of thought and reasonable analysis (that isn't advanced-stat based) into pointing out why even that given may not really be true.
Topic: KG is to us what Gasol is to the Lakers.. (Read 10104 times)