美球迷用數據為科比正名！其實科比跟喬丹詹皇一樣得分高效？

美國JRS之聲

美球迷用數據為科比正名！其實科比跟喬丹詹皇一樣得分高效？

Up until 2015, Kobe Bryant had a higher Slightly TS% than Tim Duncan. Kobe also had a slightly lower TS% than LeBron in the 2008-2010 playoffs than LeBron had 2011-2013. Why is Kobe called inefficient? (self.nba)

直到2015年，科比的真實命中率都要高於鄧肯。並且科比在08-10季後賽中的真實命中率只略低於詹姆斯11-13年季後賽的真實命中率。為什麼大家都說科比是個低效的得分手呢？

Kobe"s career TS up until 2015 was .555 while Tim Duncan"s was .551 Kobe"s playoff TS when he was contending was .570 while LeBron"s was .575

I know it"s a very slight difference, but my annoyance is more about Kobe being an inefficient chucker while LeBron and TD are considered pinnacles in efficiency and patience. Prime Kobe from 2006-2010 had some of the best TS% of anyone doing jumpshots as their main weapon and eclipsed MJ"s best at some points(81 point game, 61 at MSG, his stretch in 2007 of 50 point games). Yes Kobe during his last years was pretty inefficient, and I"m not saying he"s better than MJ, LeBron or Duncan, but he has certaintly as efficient as LeBron and Duncan and at his very best could equal Michael.

直到2015年科比的TS是55.5%，而鄧肯是55.2%。 科比的季後賽TS是57.0%，而詹姆斯是57.5%。

我知道儘管很小，這也是有區別的。但我比較氣的是為什麼科比就是個低效的球場黑洞而詹姆斯鄧肯就被看做是高效且穩定的得分手呢？06-10的巔峰科比是以跳投為主的球員的命中率巔峰，，在某些得分記錄上甚至超過了喬丹（單場81分，麥迪遜狂砍61分，07年連砍50+）。沒錯科比最後一年是很掙扎，我也並沒有說他比喬丹詹姆斯鄧肯更棒，但他的確和詹姆斯鄧肯一樣高效，並且巔峰時不虛喬丹。

[–]Pelicanscastleinskyyy 163 指標 4 天前

Part of it is because he had a lot those games where he went 6-20 and haters just look at that. And his FG% has never been that good as LeBron and MJ.

一個原因是他經常投出6-20這種命中率。。而黑子們抓住不放。並且他的投籃命中率也不像詹姆斯喬丹這麼高。

[–]Raptorstsn101 34 指標 3 天前

Yeah, people kept bringing up getting 20 something points on 20 something shots and kind of brushed it off as whatever.

沒錯人們經常提起他用20投拿20多分的比賽，隨便幹什麼都會把這個拿出來說。

[–]TimberwolvesSwishBender 120 指標 4 天前

Compared to players like KD, Steph, or Harden who completely prioritize every shot but the midrange he was inefficient. But it was also a different era. Russ is dealing with this now, his TS is fine it just isn"t gaudy like a few guys have shown they are capable of. It isn"t really at all inefficient it just is what we have come to expect from a great scorer.

With no analytics and MJ as a role model it isn"t surprising why guys of that era grade out worse. One of the main reasons that MJ is so head and shoulders the GOAT is that he put up modern era TS% while basically not taking 3"s, which is pretty much unthinkable for a guard if it hadn"t been done.

和杜蘭特，庫里，哈登這種幾乎不投中距離的球員比起來科比是很低效。但現在已經是另一個時代。威斯布魯克現在也投很多中距離，他的TS還不錯，只是沒有中距離大師們這麼花哨。這根本就不是效率的問題，是你怎麼看待得分方式的問題。

毫無疑問，以喬丹作為模板來看，同時期其他的人都會顯得很爛。誰讓他是籃球之神，並且不投三分的情況下他的TS也不虛現代這些的分手，這真是不可思議，其他後衛根本沒做到過。

[–][GSW] Stephen CurryIronhide94 46 指標 3 天前

This is so true on MJ

這話放在喬丹身上非常到位

[–][HOU] Tracy McGradyvy2005 44 指標 3 天前

Yeah MJ"s seasons were generally around 56-58% which is insane given how much of his game was mid range based

沒錯喬丹在很多賽季保持著56% - 58% 的TS， 考慮到他大量的中距離出手，太瘋狂了

[–]CelticsLemkelaya 17 指標 3 天前

He had multiple 60% or close to it, just boggles my mind

他甚至有很多賽季達到了60%或者接近60%，我還能說什麼呢。。

[–]NBAsohcea 3 指標 3 天前

When I was kid as a Sixers and Magic fan, my nightmares were made of Jordan fadeaways

我小時候是76人和魔術隊的球迷，噩夢裡出現的都喬丹的後仰跳投。。

[–]Lakerssheeeeeez 26 指標 3 天前*

This is the key, it was a different era.

Find me a single article back then that mentioned advanced analytics and you"re bound to come up sparse. It just wasn"t a thing then. But now we"re applying advanced metrics retroactively while ignoring that advanced stats are also a reason players model certain aspects of their game the way that they do.

Eg. LeBron and KD telling the stat keeper when it was a pass instead of a shot

If you went back in time and told Kobe his entire legacy will be determined by how efficient he was. He wouldn"t have shot as many threes as he did or as many long twos as he did.

時代已經變了，這很關鍵。

我之前看過一片文章，裡面提到了一些高級分析說中距離勢必要拉開空間。所以不能把中距離和其他手段混為一談。現在我們正在使用高級指標回顧過去，而忽視了很多其他數據也體現了球員們場上的的作用。

比如詹姆斯和杜蘭特很多時候會選擇傳球而不是強投，他們的數據就會很好看。

如果你回到過去告訴科比人們會用他的效率判斷他是否偉大。他將不會投這麼多三分或者長兩分。

[–]Magicwhat_what_7 127 指標 4 天前

Preconception, experience, and comparison.

We"re told he"s inefficient, our only memories - for most of us, including myself - are of him being inefficient, and we constantly compare him to guys who are incredibly efficient - i.e. Lebron - so we come to the conclusion he is.

The latter is the one I think is most apparent, because he and Lebron - and Jordan, too - are so often compared to one another. It"s unfair, because someone being more efficient than you doesn"t make you less efficient, but that"s ultimately how it ends up being perceived.

成見，經驗，和互相比較。

我們先入為主認為科比很低效，我在內的大部分人都認為他很低效。然後我們去把科比和那些效率無限高的人比較，比如說詹姆斯，所以我們又繞回了他很低效的結論。

接下來的理由是很明顯的，因為我們把科比，詹姆斯，喬丹放在一起比較。這很不公平，因為有人比你高效不意味著你很低效，但很不幸最後人們都陷入了這個誤區。

[–]goobrooo 28 指標 3 天前*

Prime Kobe from 2006-2010 had some of the best TS% of anyone doing jumpshots as their main weapon

This is basically the meat of why the perceptions skewer Kobe a bit. 2-point jump shooting off the dribble is a fundamentally inefficient way to play basketball(caveat: this does shift era-to-era a bit, but the pure math of it is what it is). It just is. You basically have to be Kobe-tier good at it for it to not be and even then it will still look inefficient next to being a spot-up three point marksman, dominant center or runaway freight train take it to the cup swingman.

One summation of Kobe"s play style that is part-shade and part-commendation is "He could take a shot in any situation and have it go in 45% of the time", sounds a bit like shade on the surface but when you consider how Kobe played and the shots he could get off, under just about any context from any position on the floor and the ridiculous degree-of-difficulty in his shot creation and it"s hard to think of many other guys who get it done that way. Paul Pierce said of Kobe once that people don"t respect just how difficult it is to even get as many shots of as he even does and the fact that he puts so much pressure on a defender every single time he has the ball has a cumulative effect across the course of a game. At times, it almost would seem like Kobe preferred to make a shot more difficult than it needed to be.

Ultimately, the body of work speaks for itself though and really you get to a certain level of the sport and it basically becomes pointless to talk about best/better when it"s more often just different paths to the same/similar ends.

06-10的巔峰科以跳投為主，並且擁有著頂尖的TS.

這就是印象中科比低效的原因。運球後兩分跳投本身就是籃球里的低效手段（註：根據時代不同可能略有變化，但從數學的角度看就是這麼回事）。即使一個像科比這麼精通中距離的人看上去也比空位三分投手，扣籃為主的中鋒，或者以快攻得分為主的搖擺人們更加低效。

我們對科比毀譽參半的比賽風格總結就是：他可以在任何情況強投，並最後強行拉到45%命中率。聽上去像在貶損科比，但假如你想想科比不去投那些高難度投籃-那些出現在球場任何位置，各種奇怪的角度，別人根本完成不了的投籃。皮爾斯有一次談起科比，說人們沒意識到像科比這樣出手這麼多是多麼艱難，也沒有意識到比賽過程中科比每次持球時給防守人施加多麼大的壓力。長久下來，就好像科比刻意給自己製造困難的投籃環境。

科比最終的成就可以解釋一切。當你到達了一定的層次，真的沒必要把給運動員的風格分個三六九等，因為他們都可以獲得一樣/相似的成就。

[–][LAL] Brandon IngramPairedFoot08 19 指標 4 天前

It comes from people who compare the standards of today"s league to that of past years. Kobe"s efficiency numbers taken out of context don"t look so flashy compared to the ridiculous age of efficiency we are in currently, but in his time? he looks much more favourable.

人們把現在的聯盟和過去比較才會有這種結論。科比的效率值不考慮當時背景的話沒有現在球員們這麼高效好看。但在他的時代呢？他是如此出眾。

[–]CavaliersCavs4life2016 24 指標 3 天前

Duncan wasn"t a great offensive player comparative to his top 10 peers.

That"s just the best way to view it.

比起歷史前十里的其他人，鄧肯的進攻並不能算是偉大

這樣看你是不是能理解問題了？

[–][LAL] Brandon IngramPairedFoot08 28 指標 4 天前

the thing is though, he kinda was a very efficient scorer for his time. Consistently comfortably above league average for TS% (like Kobe)

儘管如此，在那個時代他依然是頂尖得分手。長期在聯盟平均TS之上（科比也是）

[–][SAS] LaMarcus AldridgeCheesyMightyMo 9 指標 3 天前

David Robinson"s career average TS% is better than Tim Duncan"s Career high

大衛羅賓遜的生涯平均TS比鄧肯的巔峰賽季都高。

[–][LAL] Brandon IngramPairedFoot08 23 指標 3 天前

even he is from a different era, what is more impressive? Duncan having a 57.6 TS% in a time when the league average was 52% or Robinson"s 60.2 TS% in a time when the league average was 54.3%? they are pretty comparable when you put a little bit of context in there

Robinson I would still say is more efficient over his career, but that doesn"t mean Duncan wasn"t

放在不同的時代，我們來看看哪個更出眾。鄧肯在聯盟平均52%的情況下達到57.6%，羅賓遜在平均54.3%的聯盟達到了60.2%。多考慮一下當時情況的話，這樣看來他們倆幾乎是一樣的。

當然我認為羅賓遜整個生涯更加高效，這不意味著鄧肯打得不高效。

[–][SAS] Bruce BowenAnachronym 25 指標 4 天前

TS% takes into account free throw shooting, which TD was mediocre at for the early part of his career but got better at as he went along.

When people talk about "efficiency" they"re typically referring to hitting shots other than free throws

TS里包括著罰球，鄧肯早期罰球很爛，但後期進步很大。

當人們說起效率，更多指的是命中跳投，而不是罰球。

[–]NetsChitalian8 33 指標 4 天前

I wouldn"t say TD got significantly better at FT shooting as he went on. He had his one outlier season in 2013, but he was always pretty inconsistent at it.

我不認為鄧肯的罰球顯著提高了。13年他的罰球高的離譜，但其他年份他罰球命中率都不怎麼穩定。

[–]LakersDr_FuzzyBallz 58 指標 4 天前

Lol that might be the most retarded logic I have ever heard.

Then curry is only efficient Becuase be shoots 3s. Harden isn"t more efficient then Duncan or Kobe because he shoots free throws?

Being able to shoot free throws is part of offense and scoring. It"s not an excuse lol.

笑死我了，你是個傻子吧。

這麼說庫里的高效只是因為他的三分命中率高？哈登因為罰了太多球所以比不上科比或者鄧肯？

能罰進球也是比賽的一部分，而不是借口。

[–][HOU] Tracy McGradyvy2005 15 指標 3 天前

Yeah lol making 2 free throws gives the same number of points as a layup lol

你要知道命中兩記罰球和一個上籃得分是一樣的，lol

[–][SAS] Malik RoseGolai77 9 指標 3 天前

I don"t think he was making an excuse, he was simply saying that Kobe"s TS% is comparable to Tim"s because of their difference in FT%, which I think is pretty apparent.

Kobe was great at drawing fouls and sinking FTs, those are points and Kobe was one of the best scorers of all time... Duncan was good at drawing fouls, but didn"t hit FTs that well, but he did have efficient FG% from everywhere on the court except from 3.

他不是在為鄧肯找借口啊，他只是說科比的TS和鄧肯接近是因為他的罰球比鄧肯強很多。我認為這是很顯然的。

科比很擅長造犯規並且命中罰籃。這是科比能成為歷史頂級得分手的原因。鄧肯也很擅長造犯規，但他不能很好的命中投籃。但他在三分線內的投籃命中率超高啊！

我們的公眾號：ChinaReddit，還處於成長之中~，微博：虎撲JRS字幕組~

希望得到您更多的改善建議和支持！

喜歡這篇文章嗎？立刻分享出去讓更多人知道吧！