Nathan Scandella (personal)

LeBron is Le Man

Any time someone brings up the subject of who the best basketball player on the planet is, the response is "Kobe Bryant". And not just "Kobe Bryant". But, with a confident delivery that says, "and isn't that obvious?". I'm going to have to beg to differ.

LeBron James is the best player on the planet. LeBron is the best perimeter player not named Jordan to have played in my lifetime. He's better than Kobe, and not by a small margin. LeBron can do almost everything Kobe can, and a couple things Kobe can't. LeBron is admired by his teammates. Kobe is respected by his teammates, but not well-liked. LeBron is a great rebounder. Kobe is only a good rebounder for a guard. LeBron has good shot selection. Kobe does not. LeBron punishes his opponents, literally, both on offense and on defense. Kobe hounds his opponents on defense, but on offense, he seems more interested in showing off, rather than exacting a physical toll on his defender.

Sure, Kobe has three rings, but those were all on teams with Shaquille O'neal in his prime. LeBron has Ilgauskas. Kobe had Shaq. C'mon. Shaq has won a ring without Kobe, and gone to the Finals with two Kobe-less teams. Without Shaq, Kobe has had even less success than LeBron. Both have made it to the Finals (and lost). They have the same regular season winning percentage (in the post Kobe-Shaq era). Yet, LeBron's Cavs have gone further in the playoffs than Kobe's Lakers, over that period; and LeBron started with the worst team in the league. Kobe was born into one of the NBA's royal families. There's also no doubt in my mind that the Lakers team with Shaq, Kobe, Gary Payton, and Karl Malone would've won a championship if Kobe's ego hadn't taken over in the playoffs. LeBron's ego has always been in check.

Let's look at the numbers. Career, LeBron scores more points (27.4 to 25.0), grabs more rebounds (6.9 to 5.3), and dishes out more assists (6.6 to 4.6). Those margins aren't close. Advantage LeBron. And LeBron hasn't been in his prime for as many years as Kobe. After another 5 years, I expect those margins to be greater. But, it's more than the points, boards, and assists. LeBron shoots a better percentage from the field, and has more steals and blocks. Kobe has a minuscule edge in three-point shooting, and turnovers. The only area where Kobe stands out from LeBron is free-throw shooting. I just don't see how that would translate into someone thinking Kobe is the best player in the NBA.

Some will say that Kobe outshines LeBron on the defensive end, but I don't think even that is true. Kobe could be a lock-down defender if he put his mind to it, but he doesn't. I think Shaq put the idea in Kobe's head that he only needs to do so much to get by. Kobe doesn't apply himself enough defensively, and so I don't think he's any more effective than LeBron in that area. And keep in mind that LeBron is dishing out more punishment on the offensive end of the court. That may leave his man with less energy to expend when he has the ball. Whatever the reason, the numbers show that LeBron is every bit as good defensively. As I said, he gets more blocks, steals, and defensive rebounds than Kobe. 82games publishes a player effectiveness rating (PER) for each player, and also tallies the PER of each player's opponents, while they are on the floor. Looking at the PER numbers since 82games has been publishing them:

	LeBron		Kobe
Year	PER	Opp. PER	PER	Opp. PER
2005-6	30.2	12.6	30.0	14.1
2006-7	26.6	13.0	28.0	13.7
2007-8	32.7	13.5	27.4	13.4

We see that LeBron has higher PER numbers on average, and his opponent has been held to lower PER numbers than Kobe's opponents. And PER takes into account points, rebounds, assists, steals, blocks, turnovers, everything. So, where is the evidence that Kobe is a better defender on the court? This data is also only for the last three years, so it doesn't even take into account that it took Kobe about 4 years in the league to become dominant, while only taking LeBron one.

Finally, I can't resist shamelessly promoting my own rating numbers, which you can find here. My adjusted +/- numbers, which I consider the best single stat in the game, are as follows for the last four years:

Year	LeBron	Kobe
2004-5	10.16	2.14
2005-6	20.80	12.87
2006-7	12.72	7.94
2007-8	8.43	12.00

Now, these numbers are straight from my webapp, with relative ratings data, and no other correction. However, a relative rating defines a rating of 0.0 as "average" for that team. To compare the on-court importance of players on different teams, you need to adjust these ratings based on how each time performed relative to their opponents during that year. For example, in 2004-5, the Cavs outscored their opponents by 0.8 points per game, so to correct LeBron's numbers for that year, you need to add 0.8 to his score, to yield a true rating of 10.86. That is because the ratings numbers themselves mean "how many points better per 48 minutes is the team when this player plays".

Correcting both players' ratings to account for their teams' performance doesn't change them much (since I already said the two have had almost identical success since Shaq left the Lakers).

Year	LeBron	Kobe
2004-5	10.86	-0.14
2005-6	23.0	15.37
2006-7	15.62	7.84
2007-8	8.13	19.30

LeBron has been significantly better for his team's success than Kobe in three of the last four years.

LeBron has also done all this with significantly more pressure on him that Kobe had at the start of his career. Kobe was highly touted coming out of high school, but nothing like LeBron. Kobe also didn't have to carry his team until his 9th year. LeBron had to do it from Day One in the NBA.

Oh, and Kobe's a scumbag. And also, not the best player on the planet.

Posted at 11:00PM Nov 18, 2008 by Nathan in Sports  |  Comments[1]