Definite Proof Duncan better statistically than Kobe for career

[HarlemHeat37]

PER is a decent stat from an overall standpoint, but it shouldn't be used as a career number..it's useful when you're comparing yearly rankings/yearly finishes for the player's career, but it's very flawed when it is used as a career stat..

PER changes to adapt to the average standard of every individual season, so using it as a whole doesn't make any sense..

A certain player might have a higher PER number if you're comparing numbers from different seasons, but the higher number might come during a season that was weaker overall..

[kobe4life]

PER is a decent stat from an overall standpoint, but it shouldn't be used as a career number..it's useful when you're comparing yearly rankings/yearly finishes for the player's career, but it's very flawed when it is used as a career stat..

I definitely agree with that its a stat that is only used by geeks like Dr Gump to justify an overrated legend being better then the greatest player of all time Kobe Bryant.

[Killakobe81]

LOL PER ...the end all be all ...

5 rings buddy ...

[Killakobe81]

PER is a decent stat from an overall standpoint, but it shouldn't be used as a career number..it's useful when you're comparing yearly rankings/yearly finishes for the player's career, but it's very flawed when it is used as a career stat..

PER changes to adapt to the average standard of every individual season, so using it as a whole doesn't make any sense..

A certain player might have a higher PER number if you're comparing numbers from different seasons, but the higher number might come during a season that was weaker overall..

Yep, what he said ....

[badfish22]

spurfans are really bad at this. Lakaluva usually has 6 pages of furious gnsf by now.

[Koolaid_Man]

http://www.basketball-reference.com/...er_career.html

PER is a more robust measure of a players value than points or other single measures as it weighs many factors.


Rank Player PER
1. Michael Jordan* 27.91
2. LeBron James 26.86
3. Shaquille O'Neal 26.43
4. David Robinson* 26.18
5. Wilt Chamberlain* 26.13
6. Dwyane Wade 25.63
7. Bob Pet * 25.37
8. Tim Duncan 24.88
9. Neil Johnston* 24.73
10. Charles Barkley* 24.63
11. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar* 24.58
12. Magic Johnson* 24.11
13. Karl Malone* 23.90
14. Dirk Nowitzki 23.74
15. Hakeem Olajuwon* 23.59
16. Kobe Bryant 23.57



Duncan 8th all time and Mr. Bryant lagging considerably at 16th and Bryant is also behind Wade at his position (to be fair Duncan is trailing LeBron but time will tell whether LBJ or Wade can sustain their PER over longer careers). He also trails the immortal Neil Johnston and the under-ranked Bob Pe in PER!

By the way, - alll you David Robinson haters - look who is number 4 all time (just behind his rival Shaq but Shaq will probably drop as he extends his career a year or two more behind Robinson - but Shaq was DEFINETELY the Man on the Lakers Tri-peat!

humor me and tickle my balls will ya....

[Killakobe81]

LOL at any stat that has David over Duncan, Kobe, Wilt Kareem and Magic ...

Posting this kind of stuff on an all-time list just makes it even less valid ...nice job OP.

I am even more convinced that PER is flawed and Kobe is better ... nice job, champ!

[Greg Oden]

You can only play with and against your era but ask Kevin Love about putting up those kind of numbers at a similar size so it is possible?

Just admit your thread failed with your cool "definite proof".

[Rummpd]

Just reiterates the fact Duncan in his career has been a far better and more valuable player than Bryant (there is no doubt about that and besides PER Duncan's >> season and NBA finals MVPs and higher career winning % than Bryant)

(Bryant, who is very much over-ranked by his fans or some of the fawning media who do not delve into advanced stats - of course not only fails the test of PER but also has only been the main man on two les for the Lakers and for even that he needed Gasol to join him to even get that accomplishment.)

[Killakobe81]

Just reiterates the fact Duncan in his career has been a far better and more valuable player than Bryant (there is no doubt about that and besides PER Duncan's >> season and NBA finals MVPs and higher career winning % than Bryant)

(Bryant, who is very much over-ranked by his fans or some of the fawning media who do not delve into advanced stats - of course not only fails the test of PER but also has only been the main man on two les for the Lakers and for even that he needed Gasol to join him to even get that accomplishment.)

OK so Shaq and David are also better than Duncan, and Kareem and Wilt ... LOL
Yes, you failed here miserably ... if you said based on hollinger's love child that duncan IS MORE EFFICIENT you might have an argument. As good as David was the fact that he is way above Hakeem on this list just shows you that stats in a va are worthless ...

[TD 21]

If you watched them throughout their careers, knew the game, weren't overly biased and didn't get brainwashed from media propaganda and revisionist history, then you'd know Duncan's better.

Great as Bryant is, even at his peak, he was never as good as Duncan, O'Neal or James. In their primes, you could put damn near anyone around them and you'd win 50+ games and at least one round. The same couldn't be said for him.

Consider this with regards to PER: it doesn't factor in defense. Just imagine if it did, the gap would be even wider.

[TheMACHINE]

Finally! Proof that Shaq is greater then Duncan.

[lefty]

Who the is Neil Johnston ?????

Johnston > Kobe

[HarlemHeat37]

PER actually is a decent stat, when you actually judge it by it's proper usage..it helps when you want to look at a player's longevity in the NBA..it helps by evaluating a player's peak years..you have to consider the fact that it doesn't appropriately evaluate defender, slightly overvalues rebounding, undervalues passing, undervalues PGs in general..it's a flawed stat, but it's a decent gauge, in most cases..

Jordan finished at #1 in virtually every season of his prime years..he continued to finish near the top, even at the end of his career with the Bulls..

Shaq has 5 #1 PER finishes in his career, all in his prime..would anybody really disagree that prime Shaq was the best player in the NBA?(if not the best, at least he was always in the conversation)..

Lebron has had the #1 spot for a few years now, which coincides with his time as the best player in the NBA..

Duncan finished in the top 3 every year during his peak years, finished in the top 5 multiple other times, and continued to finish high, even late in his career(even last year)..Olajuwon is the same thing..they finished very high, despite their value being more defensive than offensive(IMO)..

Players like Kareem and Wilt always finished at the top, for obvious reasons..Larry Bird finished at the top in virtually all of his peak years, coinciding with his MVP awards..

David Robinson and Dirk Nowitzki are examples of players that were arguably the best player in the NBA during the regular season of their MVP years, but their play suffered during the playoffs, and their playoffs PER shows that..

The legends that are undervalued by the stat are Magic Johnson and Bill Russell, for obvious reasons..

It's a decent stat, it's pretty accurate, but it's over-used by people that are new to advanced stats in basketball..it has serious limits and flaws..it's good as a box score stat, but it still leaves a lot to be desired..

[LkrFan]

You are using PER as evidence?

[mathbzh]

PER is a not a bad indicator (not quite a definite proof of anything though) but looking at career average is not a good idea.

It highly depends on when you started your career (Unlike Kobe, Duncan was never an 18 yo rookie) and when you retired.

Just looking at David vs. Kareem... you can't just forgot that David was a 24 yo rookie and that Kareem played until he was 41.

If you compare both player in their prime, there number are very similar.

[Rummpd]

You are using PER as evidence?

Better than Kobe lover hanging on every point scored when talking about his supposed historical top five greatness never recognize:

1) he did not play in college so got a 4 year head start on Jordan or Duncan
2) shoots < 5% less than either Jordan or Duncan
3) only has 1 MVP and 2 finals MVPs with the last one being very laughable when he went a historic 6 for 24 in the deciding game throwing up brick after brick after brick.
4) was the legit man on only 2 championship teams
5) missed the playoffs during his primary leadership without a great big next to him - even Scotty Pippen never did that for one.
6) add to that his PER which puts him about where he belongs in the greatest lists 10-20 but not in the top 10 like Duncan or Shaq.

PER is a far better measure of great seasons then points scored and wake me when and if Kobe ever seriously threatens a quadruple double in a finals deciding game as Duncan did vs. the Nets.

[Cry Havoc]

lol underwater city

Rrraaaaaaaaaaapture!