Interesting: Kobe and Duncan have virtually identical career TS%
Kobe has a career TS% of 55.0, while Duncan's is 55.1.
I just think it's interesting that Kobe's supposed lack of efficiency is often brought up for having him not in the top 10, or in the lower part of it, but I have never once heard this for Duncan. Especially since Kobe attempted about 5 more FGA per game for his career, and as volume increases typically efficiency drops.
I know Duncan had a very different game, so a direct comparison like this doesn't tell the whole story, but it's just interesting how narratives often do not reflect the stats
[–]Raptors derozansmole 858 指標 3 天前
Kobe's supposed lack of efficiency is one of the most overblown, nonsense talking points based on current era standards that has no basis on the actual type of player he was. He wasn't inefficient compared to his peers or his time especially on the production he provided.
[–]NBA ivabra 8 指標 3 天前
Indeed, the fact that in his era he wasn't as inefficient as people made him to be, and that there are so many other players in the league right now that are inefficient but never get mentioned as inefficient just shows that it's most often bullshit. We know he's not as efficient as KD and LeBron who are monsters in this regard but it has created unfair criticism towards Kobe
[–]zfc9d3fr 501 指標 3 天前
a career 45% FG shooter when your go to shot was a turn around fade away long 2 with 2 hands in your face is pretty damn good tbh
[–]NBA anorexicpig 74 指標 3 天前
It just shows the age of some people here is all. Kobe was remarkably inefficient post-Achilles tear when he was just a face to sell tickets, and some young fans probably only watched him live for those games
In his prime he was never inefficient for his era
[–]chad12341296 54 指標 3 天前
Nobody used TS% at the time of his career so people would see guys putting up 50% from the field and wonder why Kobe couldn’t do that but now that TS is commonplace there’s a big sample size that proves that they weren’t actually more efficient
[–]spyirl 55 指標 3 天前
He's inefficient compared to Jordan and Lebron who he is compared to.
[–]Heat wormhole222[ ] 27 指標 3 天前
Yeah it's exactly this. Kobe isn't inefficient compared to normal players, or even a lot of great players, but if you saying he is a top 5 player he is inefficient compared to the competition.
[–][LAL] Nick Young TheChipiboy 7 指標 3 天前
Kobe was more of a perimeter player compared to those two
[–]Knicks BASEDME7O 21 指標 2 天前
So Jordan and Lebron should be penalized for being better at getting to the rim?
[–][LAL] Nick Young TheChipiboy 8 指標 2 天前
I'm giving you an explanation as to why his efficiently is lower than theirs.
[–]Wizards zrt 19 指標 3 天前
Kobe's efficiency during his prime ('98-99 through '12-13):
eFG: .488 TS: .556
MJ's efficiency during his prime ('84-85 through '97-98):
eFG: .518 TS: .580
MJ was more efficient, but Kobe was much closer than people think.
[–]Hawks KredditH 27 指標 3 天前
Kobe was efficient but I think the issue and reason people bring up his efficiency was that it was definitely lower than the guys he was compared to a lot like MJ and LeBron. Of course, those guys are better players, so it's not a perfect comparison.
Kobe's efficiency was good enough that he's a top 15 player which is where most people have him.
[–]Lakers AmnestyTHAT 21 指標 3 天前
He's a top 10 player*
[–]Sufficient Calories 9 指標 2 天前
LeBron, Jordan, Kareem, Russell, Shaq, Hakeem, Bird, Magic are i think no brainers to put ahead of him.
So at best he's 9th. But do you take him over Wilt? I definitely wouldnt. So that's tenth. I can see top 15, even though I think he's overrated, but top 10 is a huge stretch because you'd be arguing none of Curry, Durant, Duncan, Garnett, Oscar Robertson, Malone belong above him. If longetivity matters, Malone passes him. If peak matters, Curry and Durant pass him. If defense is emphasized, then Garnett and Duncan were objectively more impactful on that end. I just don't see him cracking the top ten.
[–]Warriors __BlackSheep 26 指標 3 天前
Top 5 fight me
[–][LAL] Kobe Bryant waynehead310 24 指標 3 天前
I got yo back..
[–]Lakers AmnestyTHAT 10 指標 3 天前
I mean... He's top 1 for me.
[–]gnalon 52 指標 3 天前
You're looking at it completely backwards. Duncan was one of the best defensive players of all time and in addition managed to score as efficiently as Kobe.
[–]Lakers LionZoo13 15 指標 3 天前
Or, Kobe was as efficient as one of the greatest big man of all time. And big men in general are more efficient than perimeter players.
[–]Lakers funnyhandlehere 36 指標 3 天前
I mean, Kobe was on more all-nba defensive teams than any guard in nba history. So we're talking both are all time great defensive players.
[–]gnalon 23 指標 3 天前
Even if those all-defense teams were deserved (all but maybe 2 were not), the defensive impact of a big man is in a different category than that of a guard.
[–]gnalon 9 指標 3 天前
Kobe was a better perimeter defender and better at getting steals than Duncan, but he was not all-time great at those things. Duncan was a drastically better post defender, rim protector, help defender, communicator, and gave a much more consistent effort than Kobe on defense.
[–]Spurs KawhiMVP_Bet 8 指標 3 天前
I wonder how it would look if Kobe never tore his Achilles and Duncan never had knee problems.
[–][LAL] Kobe Bryant Alonso-Kobe-Ponting 6 指標 2 天前
Duncan never had knee problems.
[–]MontenegroLogenMNE 26 指標 3 天前
And Kobe's efficiency dropped a lot after the injury, so he is actually morr efficient than Duncan. His last few years destroyed him IMO. The narrative swinged so hard... It makes me sad
[–]Lakers funnyhandlehere 19 指標 3 天前
In fairness, it was really only a little more than one season's worth of games. And at that point he was approximately an average player if you go by PER. But you are correct, he was more efficient over most of their careers than Duncan, I think primarily because he drew more fouls and shot them much better than TD.
[–]icewaternolemon 31 指標 3 天前
Duncan also played until he was 40.
[–]Joooseph2 5 指標 3 天前
And Duncan didn’t have one of the worst injuries a player can have.
[–]icewaternolemon 19 指標 3 天前
He played half his career after a knee injury that robbed him of a ton of his athleticism. That's at least comparable to Kobe playing 80-90 games post Achilles.
[–]Bulls BigPoppaPuff 221 指標 3 天前
Kobe wasn't inefficient, he just played a lot of his prime in a super "inefficient" era, granted he wasn't the best three point shooter for but for the time he played in he was perfectly fine as far as efficiency. None of the top Perimeter players were super efficient by today's standard.
[–]Magic Typical_NBA_Comment 92 指標 3 天前
Not to be one of those guys, but young LeBron was way more efficient than I thought he was, especially in his first two MVP years.
[–][LAL] Steve Nash DetectiveCactus 137 指標 3 天前
It makes sense. Bron didnt take many jump shots back then. He was a dominant slasher
[–][LAL] Caron Butler Dstorm55 74 指標 3 天前
Exactly, Brons a tank. Why settle for jumpers if you could legitimately force your way in for a layup or dunk.
[–]Celtics absynthe7 93 指標 3 天前*
Actually, if you compare the two of their careers, you get all sorts of really weird parallels, they come across as having nearly identical careers doing radically different things.
2x Finals MVP
1x NBA MVP
11x All-NBA First Team
9x All-Defense First Team
#3 All-Time in Points Scored
3x Finals MVP
2x NBA MVP
10x All-NBA First Team
8x All-Defense First Team
#7 All-Time in Rebounds, #6 All-Time in Blocks
Duncan peaked early, winning a championship past his prime with Kawhi. Kobe peaked late, winning championships before his prime with Shaq. Kobe was in a huge market and got massive media attention, Duncan was in a smaller market and virtually ignored by the national press. One was flashy and known for his highlights, the other was boring and known for his fundamentals. One was known for his offense but had decent defense (great for his position), the other known for his defense but had a decent offensive game (great for his role on the team).
They're like mirror images of each other.
[–]Spurs Nacunar 9 指標 3 天前
Kawhi was a big part in that championship, but in my opinion Duncan was the best player throughout that title run.
[–][DAL] Dennis Smith fishfishfish1345 27 指標 3 天前
Duncan not winning DPOY is crazy actually
[–]rodrigo_c91 18 指標 3 天前
I think equally crazy as Kobe only having 1 mvp
[–]peppermintpattymills 11 指標 2 天前
Kobe "only" having one MVP makes sense when you start going through it year by year. He played during a really competitive era where guys put up some fantastic regular seasons. The common one was him being robbed in '06 by Nash but honestly I think Dirk had just as good or better case than either of those guys. Conversely, he won in '08 but that CP3 had a fantastic case as well (again, remember these are voted on right at the end of the regular season, when looking back we have to train ourselves to ignore the playoffs). If you keep going down the line then Kobe is around 1 'deserved' MVP.
[–]WeaponX33 19 指標 3 天前
Crazy that Kobe only had 1 MVP.
Crazy that Duncan had zero DPOY.
While true that Duncan won a chip with Kawhi that whole squad was absolutely tits and he was still the best player on it overall.
Kawhi didn’t become the Kawhi we now have until the last 3 games of the Finals. Even then he had the best 3 games but Duncan had the better overall series.
[–]NBA bioskope 57 指標 3 天前
Duncan was at times a liability from the FT line. That's why they have almost similar TS% in spite of there being a ~6% difference in their FG%. Furthermore, If you look at the EFG%, you will see that Duncan is still ahead of Kobe .
[–]Warriors aahdin 24 指標 3 天前
Okay... can anyone give me a reason why I should care more about EFG% than TS% here?
If Kobe hits two extra free throws and misses a layup compared to Duncan... it doesn't really matter much does it?
It's like, 'Duncan is better if you ignore free throws'... yeah, but why would I want to ignore free throws? Most players get better if you just ignore the stuff they're bad at.
[–]Celtics Confirmation__Bias 135 指標 3 天前
I just think it's interesting that Kobe's supposed lack of efficiency is often brought up for having him not in the top 10, or in the lower part of it, but I have never once heard this for Duncan.
Uh... that's because Tim Duncan's ranking is mainly based on the fact that he's one of the greatest defenders of all time lmao.
[–]Trail Blazers puffpuffpastor 20 指標 3 天前
It's a travesty that Duncan didn't win a single DPOY. Even the year before he retired he was a dominant defender, and he was far from mobile by then
[–]Celtics OverallPrettyGood 12 指標 3 天前
He was competing with Ben Wallace and KG during his peak years, unfortunately
[–]Trail Blazers puffpuffpastor 7 指標 3 天前
Yeah, it's hard to argue that he was "robbed" in any one individual season (although you could definitely make a strong case for him in some). It just feels like he deserves to have at least one because his consistency and longevity exceeded both of those guys by a pretty considerable margin.