What a ballhog.

Posted on by

On an actual basketball note: why didn’t that post player double him to make him pass? The defender in the white jersey (not James Harden) lets his man cut to the other side of the basket, so he’s already leaving someone on the offense wide open. He’s bouncing on his toes in the worst possible spot, he wouldn’t be able to cover his man’s jumper and he’s not hedging to close the lane for Kobe.

And why didn’t the man that cut through realize his man was away, and immediately cut to the basket?

And is this the first time I’ve seen someone shoot a video on an iPad? And doesn’t that look strange and awkward?

And why am I analyzing this awesome video so much?

17 thoughts on “What a ballhog.”

  1. Abbott posted a two-minute version of the video today, with this comment:

    •Great highlight reel of Kobe Bryant’s triumphant Drew League performance. If you ever wondered what Bryant’s offense would look like without the structure of the NBA game, the answer appears to be, at this point, a lot of posting up.

    Reply ↓

  2. In the same post, Abbott did say this:

    •Classy. The Lakers cut a bunch of staffers, and Lakers including Kobe Bryant and Luke Walton have pitched in to alleviate some of their financial pain.

    Of course, he LEAD with the post-up thing.

    Reply ↓

  4. A guy named Zach Blott rudely linked to his own blog at PBT:

    http://www.behindthebasket.com/btb/2011/9/1/its-all-about-the-ws-kobe-bryant.html

    Here is my takedown of one piece of it:

    Nah. Go back and read your last comment with a critical eye; it is clearly slanted, as is the piece itself. Your biggest problems are:
    slanting the facts to fit the narrative based on your emotional needs
    bias by omission
    lack of in-depth research
    misunderstanding of sample size
    an inability to deal with the usage/efficiency conundrum
    I could pick about 20 examples, but one of the funniest is your amusing description of the 2007 team:
    ________
    Lamar Odom remained great in all facets of the game, Luke Walton’s cerebral play did enough to earn him a huge contract, Smush Parker was about the same as the year before (plus he now averaged more steals than Bryant even though he played 10 less minutes per), Kwame Brown was now shooting a phenomenal 59% from the field, and youngster Andrew Bynum played in every game and recorded 10 double-doubles. Again, not the best supporting cast, but we see plenty of teams with much much worse every year. The Lakers went 39-38 (.506) with Kobe in the lineup and 3-2 (.600) without. Again taking a look at Odom’s numbers, the team was 30-26 (.536) with him and 12-14 (.462) without, including losing 5 straight in March during the only 5 games he missed after January.
    __________
    Odom is a very good player, among the best 30-40 in the game, but he is not a franchise anchor–never has been. He lacks a central skill but is pretty good at everything–hence his success as a third option. Given who was backing him up on that team, it is not surprising that the team suffered without him. Actual Laker fans saw Walton’s contract as a mistake at the time, and now, of course, it is the biggest joke in the NBA.
    Kwame Brown did indeed have his best year that year, posting a TS% of .573. Here are his TS numbers before and after the time he played with Bryant:
    .450
    .496
    .547
    .497
    .503 with LA in 2008
    .482 with MEM in 2008
    .546
    .470
    .550
    Seems clear Bryant’s selfishness was holding him back. Brown also had his two highest USGs playing with Bryant.
    WRT Parker, you cherry-pick a stat you like, steals, and ignore this:
    PER/GAMES PLAYED, SMUSH PARKER
    06 13.4/82
    07 11.6/82
    08 7.0/28
    09 OUT OF NBA
    Clearly, a superstar waiting to happen, undermined by Kobe Bryant.
    You left out Brian Cook:
    PER, BRIAN COOK:
    06 15.6
    07 14.1
    08 (WITH ORL) 9.5
    09 7.6
    10 2.4
    11 11.6
    Like I said, I could go on, easily. It would take too long, though. Bryant’s value to a team is the diversity of his offense.
    I am a Laker fan, and I know that Kobe is not as good as James, and not as good as Jordan. Shaq was clearly the best player on the 2000-2002 3peat teams. But you, like Henry Abbott, are clearly a HaterBoy with an agenda.
    As to the NBC thing, it is frowned upon to self-link–you should know that if you don’t. Your post doing so got 29 dislikes and 5 likes, so you may be getting hits out of it (this will be the last one you get from me) but it is bad form.

    Reply ↓

    • Wow, thanks for the link, that Zach Blott piece is almost an Onion parody of advanced stat posts. I can’t believe he is using raw W-L to write about it.

      One of the main tenets of the advanced stat case against Kobe is that you can’t just count rings. But that’s exactly what counting W-L is (and even worse, primarily counting W-L in the regular season).

      That post is ridiculous.

      Reply ↓

  5. @rreducla1
    I’ll cut/paste my response to you over at Behind the Basket:
    Glad you cleared all that up, but that still leaves the really obvious question of why Kobe’s teams never got worse without him when that was the case with all the other stars, as any logical person would expect. Looking at wins and losses is kinda what this whole column was about until Kobe fans went off about all of his great attributes that supposedly help teams win, even though the actual wins and losses don’t reflect that. I’m wondering if you have an explanation for that. Without one, your numbers and your explanation of them all look bogus.

    Reply ↓

    • Your post is the definition of “begging the question” in the original sense. Using W-L as your basis is the kind of choice most advanced statisticians would back away from while shaking their head. There are tons of other team-based performance metrics you could be looking at. If you’re going to count wins and losses, then you might as well count rings.

      Asserting that Gasol was FAR more valuable than Kobe in the postseason shows you are not using any advanced statistics to support your claims. I’d also like to see what stats you are using for “passing and ballhandling” efficiency, whatever that means. Assists per dribble?

      Reply ↓

      • Crabby,
        You’re the guy who couldn’t figure out that Turnover Rates are a bogus way to look at guards considering they turn out best for players who shoot a lot and don’t pass, namely big men. It’s laughable you pretend to add anything of value to conversations that involve numbers. Go retake Math 020 at your local CC.

        Reply ↓

  6. WHY DIDN’T HE TAKE THE BALL TO THE HOLE??? DOESN’T HE KNOW THAT THE FADEAWAY JUMPSHOT IS THE MOST INEFFICIENT SHOT IN BASKETBALL??? WHAT A SHOWBOATING POSER!!!! TRYING TO LOOK MORE HEROIC BY TAKING A TOUGH SHOT IN THAT SITUATION GIVES FANS A DISTORTED SENSE OF HIS TRUE CLUTCHNESS..!!! DAMN!!! NOW I MUST WRITE ANOTHER ARTICLE TO SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT!!! YOU MAY SEE THIS AS DRAGGING HIS NAME THRU THE MUD BUT I SEE IT AS LETTING JUST A SMALL MEASURED AMOUNT OF AIR OUT OF THE BALLOON IN THE NAME OF OBJECTIVE ANALYSIS!!!

    Reply ↓

  7. On a more serious note, it looks like the Black Mamba has learned a new trick from the White Mamba. That little stepback one legged fadeaway off the left foot and bent right knee? That has Dirk written all over it. Just when I thought I’d seen it all from Kobe.

    Reply ↓


  8. Starting from the 1:00 mark, he hits two of those Deutsch fadeaways over Harden. Man, poor Big Mane James aka Kimbo Slice got roasted in this game

    Reply ↓

  10. Blott’s case is based, as he has said several times, largely on Dean Oliver’s Four Factors. As per BaskRef:

    Four Factors
    1. Shooting (40%) EFG%
    2. Turnovers (25%) TOV %
    3. Rebounding (20%) ORB AND DRB%
    4. Free Throws (15%) FT/FGA AND FT%
    KOBE BRYANT, CAREER
    EFG: .481
    TOV: 11.2
    ORB: 3.1 DRB 12.0
    FTA/G 7.6 FT% .837

    JASON KIDD, CAREER
    EFG: .462
    TOV 18.8
    ORB: 4.1 DEB 16.1
    FTA/G 3.1 FT% .784

    Reply ↓

Leave a comment