Is Kobe's game really efficient in winning games as the focal point on a team?

Question

Penny Hardaway & Kobe have collectively played 13 NBA seasons w/o Shaq..13 seasons b/t the 2 and zero (0) playoff series wins. I'm not talking about championships. I'm talking about a simple playoff series.

The Orlando team wasn't dismantled when Shaq left. They still had a 31 yr old Horace Grant, Penny 25, Nick Anderson 28, Dennis Scott 28 (3 point threat), Ronnie Seikaly 31, Brian Shaw 30, Darrell Armstrong 28, and Gerald Wilkins 33.

Penny's #'s dropped off a bit w/o Shaq, especially in FG% and in Asts, and a bit in steals. However his numbers were still very solid. That team was still a talented and deep team.

So we know that Penny and Kobe haven't played for "bad teams" for 13 seasons. For the rest of the remaining 12 seasons the odds are very slim that in 12 yrs they had "bad teams" every yr. For one Kobe has the greatest coach of all time in Phil Jackson.

Are we sure that Kobe's game is efficient in regards to winning games as the focal point on a team?

C-man that was a great observation. You're right, when Kobe's shot isn't falling his game is gone. He's a fairly good distributor but by no means is he a great distributor. And in the NBA fairly good won't get it done.

I will agree that the Lakers are not a great team, but they're not nearly as bad as ppl think. Why were ppl not saying this at the beginning of the yr when they were doing well???? Ppl say that they got out of rhythm, but with Kobe everything has been "heresay" arguments since Shaq left. For example, his teammates shots "aren't falling," his supporting cast is weak, they have no depth, and so on and so on. There's no factual or statistical information. It's funny that no matter who Steve Nash plays with or who Magic played with, their shots fell. LeBron will be the same way. You will see. It's all about distributing the ball in a shooting rhythm. That's an art in and of itself. Again, Kobe is not even a solid passer as far as efficiency is concerned.

2 cents - the best off've player to come around in a long time? I think you mean that he's the best jump shooter who creates his own shot in a long time. That I won't disagree with.

LeBron not only averages more Asts, but also has less TO's, and shoots for a higher FG%. Plus LeBron attacks the basket. Kobe rarely drives the middle of the lane to attack the basket. He did in his days w/ Shaq, but that part of him is all but gone. And when he does go to the middle he stops & drops back (pulls up), throws floaters (tear drops), or turns his body when going into a player trying to draw contact, and throws the ball up from that point.

Those are all effective techniques but in regards to efficiency & winning games, NBA history has always been kind to scorers that attack the basket like Jordan, and now LeBron. And also for guys like Magic and Nash who attack with dribble penetration then dish out effectivectively. Kobe doesn't attack, and isn't an efficient passer.

Richard, I disagree with that. If you put kobe on one of those teams as the focal point, I don't think they'd make it to the finals.

In NBA history what 2 guard was the focal point of a team who didn't attack the basket offensively (jump shooter), never recorded a 2 to 1 Ast to TO Ratio, and led a team to an NBA title? Even more importantly. What 2 guard with those factors of his game has ever come close to the finals?

The most memorable performance of Kobe attempting to be the focal point w/ Shaq was in the '04 finals. He attempted 22.6 shots per game in the series, had a FG% of .381, only averaged 2.8 Rebs, and only had a 1.2 to 1 Ast to Turnover ratio, and what do ya know??? They lost in 5 games.

Again, Kobe has had tremendous success, but in my opinion his game isn't efficient as the focal point of a team.

***** Last thing about this question. You always hear about Kobe being clutch, and what he does when it counts. That's thrown around in the media a great deal. The stats tell other wise though.

Here are his comparisons to LeBron against the top 5 teams in points allowed. Cleveland was ranked 4th in the league so we'll compare the top 6 teams, excluding the Cavs with the comparisons of the two. The teams were San Antonio, Detroit, Houston, Dallas, and Chicago.

FG%
Kobe - .431 LeBron - .483

Rebs
Kobe - 5.87 LeBron - 6.64

Asts
Kobe - 4.47 LeBron - 5.79

TO's
Kobe - 4.34 LeBron - 3.57

Extended Stats against those 5 teams...

Steals
Kobe - 1.34 LeBron - 1.64

Blks
Kobe - .25 LeBron - .50

Answer 1

**Update 2**

The more I think about it, you have a point. Kobe as the focal point is great at times, and just o.k. at others. Obviously Kobe as the focal point is less efficient than having a supremely talented big man like Shaq or Duncan- but comparing apples to apples... With Kobe you'll have heroic highs (81 pts, strings of 40-pt games) and lows (going 7-22 from the field) For a single game he's the ultimate weapon, but over a season you'll win more consistently with players who contribute more in other areas.

**Update**
I think with Lamar Odom healthy to pair with Kobe, they are ok. With Luke Walton and Kwame Brown healthy as well, they CAN compete... But they afford to have ANY of those guys get injured, let alone all. Even with Luke & kwame, other teams have a talent advantage with players like Leandro Barbosa, Bruce Bowen, Devin Harris, Michael Finley, Jerry Stackhouse. And the Lakers still need a PG.
---

The post-Shaq Orlando team was better than the post-Shaq Lakers. I'd argue that Kobe has been playing on... ok, not bad but VERY mediocre- team. Plus the Lakers are in the West with the Spurs, Mavs, Phoenix, young Denver team, 2005 Clippers etc.

The problem is this: the Lakers simply don't have the right players to run Phil Jackson's triangle, and they have no depth. With Chris Mihm out and Lamar Odom hurt most of the year, they are sub-par.

In the Shaq era they had solid players like Rick Fox, Derek Fisher and Robert Horry.

Now.... Acquiring Brian Grant, and trading Caron Butler?!?

Smush Parker?!? Kwame Brown?!? Sasha???

I don't think it's Kobe's style of play that's at fault- he simply needs help. Players that can't throw it in the ocean when the pressure's on in the 4th quarter don't help. The problem with Kobe's game is that when his shot isn't falling, he's not great at doing other things that help you win. But when hes on, there's no one better at carrying a team single-handedly.

Players like Nash, Duncan, LeBron etc make bigger contributions when they're having an off night offensively.

Answer 2

Wait, lets not take it that far. That Magic team without Shaq sucks. Those shooters were effective because of Shaq. W/o him, they wouldnt be able to create their own shot.

Kobes teams have sucked since Shaq left. Caron Butler for Kwame Brown?? And injuries have played a role too.

The thing is, having only one or two stars on your team is not enough, you need five good players to win.

Kobe more or less carried his team for years. He made the playoffs. He broke scoring records. Without him, the Lakers would have won 25 games this year.

Is he a brat and a self absorbed, twisted individual? Is he a ballhog and doesnt trust his teammates? Yes, no doubt. But hes also the best offensive player to come around in a long time.

Answer 3

All great players have others around him - or her - to bring the best out of the skills. Kobe is on a dreadful team that you could halve the wins without him on the team - no trade, simply he isn't there.....the dame goes for LeBron with the Cavs, maybe as the best example of the current bunch of title contenders.

In the debate of Russell-Wilt, it was always pointed out how Russell played on some of the best teams ever, while Wilt mostly had to carry a supporting cast.....so Russell got the rings and Wilt got the stats.

No player can lift a team up on just one pair of shoulders, but put Kobe on any number of teams - Phoenix, Dallas, Houston - and they are arguably punching a ticket to the finals. Kobe with the Knicks, Celtics, Memphis and he is scoring a bunch to keep them in games, with the hope a stealing a handful late in the game.

Answer 4

I don't think it is. When he's the focal point, he tends to force shots that he shouldn't be taking.

When Shaq was there, the offense ran through him, and Kobe would get a lot more open looks when they doubled Shaq. When Kobe gets doubled, he forces the issue instead of passing, like Shaq did.