Rise of the Spaniard

Nickel – Fantastic read as always. Your breadth is stunning!

Did you watch The Portugese break Hans Brix Balls today?

Your disdain of the Mumbai Classic Cricket Tourney is perplexing.

Keep an eye on Spain. They have the best 1-2 punch up front with Torres and David Villa and perfect set up guys in Xavi and Xabi Alonso. Sergio Ramos and Pique are also hell to defend on set pieces. Villa’s first goal against Honduras today is right up there with Maicon’s rip from the touchline as the goal of the tourney so far.

Rebounding matters – but not nearly as much as Dave Berri’s model would have you believe.

Vash: yeah I agree but Torres hasn’t quite put it together yet and I think that’s holding them back from quite matching the quality of Brazil or Argentina. I haven’t actually seen Argentina yet (watching them against Greece today) but their scoring has been impressive.

Sailor: just the highlights. As Burntorangewookie said, “looks like the shark tank for team North Korea.”

Fray: what reason do you have for believing that?

Vasherized, how do you leave Iniesta out? Is he hurt or something? He didn’t play last game but I figured that was a card issue. Agreed Re. Torres, he has been off his game so far. Villa and co. have been amazing though, but I was uninspired by how many goals they left on the field against Honduras. That game should have been no less than 5-0, and could have easily been 8-0. They better beat Chile or that game will haunt them forever.

BTW, why does nobody give Robinho any credit. I don’t care what he does for his club teams, he has been the absolute catalyst for Brazil this cup. Nobody can guard that guy (and, to a lesser extent, Bastos since he is a Forward). Kaka gets all the credit, though I don’t know why because he doesn’t do anything.

The pansy French may give S. Africa the goals needed to win a tie breaker in point differential. When France fails someone else always loses. Even in loss France is screwing someone.

Blake,

Robinho is fantastic, but go watch 2 of Brazil’s goals. They were expertly assisted by Kaka. He’s world class at what he does.

Torres is in awful form, and 4-4-2 doesn’t suit Xavi as well as other formations. Iniesta should push Torres back to the bench (he was only being rested).

Awful? That’s a little harsh. Dude is coming off an injury and Spain has played all of two games in the World Cup.

Let’s revisit in the knockout rounds once defenders start keying on David Villa and Torres’ fitness improves.

A better descriptor for awful play up front would be Iaquinta and Gilardino in Italy and pretty much anybody for England and France.

Most Brazil fans think Robinho is too selfish but they don’t complain when he scores goals. He’s also a bit of a hothead and didn’t fit in well at Man City.

nickel,

Iniesta injured his thigh in the last game. He’ll be back for Chile and it should be a hell of a game. Chile is one of my sleeper teams.

But you’re shortselling Kaka immensely. He’s the heart of the team, sets up his forwards in his sleep, can score from anywhere, and has perfectly white teeth. What’s not to love?

Vash, I don’t see the point of comparing Torres to Iaquinta or Gilardino or anyone else who doesn’t play for the Spanish National Team. Torres isn’t competing with those guys for a spot in the lineup. He’s competing with Silva and Iniesta, and he simply doesn’t bring as much to the table as they do at this point. I would be remiss if I didn’t point out that while he has the injury excuse right now, Torres has never come close to replicating his club form with Spain. But ultimately it’s not so much a knock on Torres as it is a testament to the crazy depth that Spain has up front. If Iniesta returns to health Spain’s best option is the 4-5-1 with Silva, Xavi, Alonso, Busquets, and Iniesta supporting Villa up front.

I’m guessing you’re a Liverpool fan?

Does the wins produced breakdown measure what percentage of the game win was produced by the referees? My unscientific estimate for game 7 would be that the refs get 75% of the win share for the Lakers.

He’s also a bit of a hothead and didn’t fit in well at Man City.

Brazilians never seem to do well in England. He would do well to secure a transfer to Spain or Italy.

But you’re shortselling Kaka immensely. He’s the heart of the team, sets up his forwards in his sleep, can score from anywhere, and has perfectly white teeth.

Plus he belongs to Jesus.

bigduke,

I am a Liverpool fan and a bigger Torres fan but I think you’re still discounting his impact on the national team. He scored the gamewinning goal in the 1-0 win over Germany in the Euro 2008 final. He’s had two hat tricks with the national team and scored 3 goals in the 2006 World Cup. With a team that loaded he’s not ever going to be the primary scoring option that he is in club play.

There just aren’t many players where their performance with the national teams exceeds that in club play. Klose is the biggest outlier. He spent most of the year on the bench for Bayern yet always dominates for Germany. Dude has scored 7 goals in the World Cup just with his head.

We’ll see if Torres gets it going. He has looked out of synch so far but like I said we’re only two games in.

I worry that ou will push us around up the middle. alleviate my concerns

Push us around up the middle with what? Their best power-running line the last few years was the one we stuffed in 2009. No one is pushing Kheeston Randall+guest around in any meaningful way this year.

Last year OSU tried to target Randall in their running game and got nowhere, this year he will be significantly improved.

They’re line will be much improved, randall doesnt handle power running teams well see alabama. Plus will we be able to get to l.jones off the edge without kindle?

Regarding Berri’s model, a lot of discussion of it here:

http://sonicscentral.com/apbrmetrics/viewtopic.php?t=877

And a shorter criticism by Hollinger here:

http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/2643/john-hollinger-responds-to-david-berri-and-malcolm-gladwell

“Kobe has always required a dominant big man (like most any non-PF/C championship start not named Magic or Jordan) to win rings.”

Somewhere in Bel Air, Kareem Abdul Jabbar is wondering why you don’t consider him a dominant big man.

Jordan’s sidekick is obviously too short to count, but here’s a soundbite of Pippen’s resume: “Three-time All-NBA First Team (1994-96); All-NBA Second Team (1992, 1997); Eight-time All-Defensive First Team (1992-99); 1994 NBA All-Star MVP; Seven-time All-Star (1990, ’92-97); One of 50 Greatest Players in NBA History (1996); Two-time Olympic gold medalist (1992, ’96).”

“But you’re shortselling Kaka immensely. He’s the heart of the team, sets up his forwards in his sleep, can score from anywhere, and has perfectly white teeth. What’s not to love?”

That was actually me shortselling him. And while he does have spectacular teeth, he doesn’t seem to ever touch the ball and doesn’t play much defense (for a midfielder). And his dribbling is pedestrian at best.

Kaka can’t dribble. Ha. We watch the game differently I guess.

Garnett’s career ranked above Duncan’s?

Sugarpants: yeah, it just barely did. But Garnett’s best seasons were noticeably better than Duncan’s best seasons. In terms of consistent high-level production Duncan seems likely to pass him.

Closetokilling: Randall wasn’t the problem I remember against alabama, it was bad angles and tackling by the linebacker and defensive backs. Additionally, another year of coaching and S&C for him will make a big difference. He came here as totally raw talent and a 3-tech prospect and has ended up as a quick nose-tackle.

BEhorn: oh crap, of course. But Magic won in 88 without Kareem and in 87 when Kareem was somewhere near 40 years old. The only season Kareem was in his dominant form was for the 80 title, after that he was still very good but in his mid to late 30s.
Pippen is a strong support for the idea that you need 2 HOF players as he was phenomenal. Jordan didn’t have a dominant PF/C though unless you count Rodman in the latter years.

Fray Marcos: there is another Dberri response to Hollinger’s rebuttal that pretty well ends it. Hollinger’s numbers aren’t accountable to anything. He can say, “rebounds shouldn’t be valued so high” but he doesn’t have statistical reasoning for that claim, just what his eyes or conventional wisdom tells him. Additionally, he has no response for Dberri’s point that PER rewards inefficient shooting.

I’ve consistently thought you’ve beaten the Gasol over Bryant drum with no general basis in reality. Kobe is the Alpha dog on that team and Gasol is along for the ride (not saying he isn’t a great player just he isn’t their focal point). Why is it that you give Gasol a pass by not mentioning his stinkbomb games 4 and 5. Why is it that what his work in the wins seems to be the only thing that matters.

If you want to say Gasol is the X-factor (or Odom for that matter) in the sense that if they play well then the Lake show wins that’s fine and good. But Kobe was consistently excellent throughout the playoffs, was the only Laker to show up in game 4 and would have willed them to win if he’d have gotten anything from his teammates. Additionally, his shot percentage is by design less then Gasol’s- something that is unfairly accounted for when talking about shooting percentage. By design- Gasol takes his shots at the beginning of the clock when he has a perceived advantage (I.E. work the ball down low first- inside then out).

Kobe takes many of his shots deep in the clock when other, better options have vanished. Also- a look at game 4 can be instructive- he had 3 missed shots in the last 20 seconds of the game that were no to little chance desparation heaves. Take those out, the end of the shotclock stuff and the end of the quarter stuff and for a couple of those games he’s shooting over 50 percent.

I don’t even like Kobe, but your discounting of him throughout the playoffs is perplexing. Hollinger did answer the field goal precentage claim- saying that it would take 48.5 percent from 2 point range to be league average. That seems like it makes sense. And to equate an end of the shot clock chuck with 2 guys hanging on him to a turnover in the team sense might be accurate, but to hold it against the guy doing the shooting seems fundamentally unfair.

Finally, Gasol relies on Kobe’s creativity for many of his touches/shots, and his game is helped by defenses constantly keying on Kobe. He recieves, because of Bryant (and to a lesser extent Bynum and Odom) less double teams then most big men of his stature. We saw what he was with average talent around him in Memphis- the #1 guy on an eight seed three years in a row that got swept out of the playoffs.

Before you get back to me with some stat geek critique realize that there is apparently a war brewing in the stat geek community over this with no real consensus. Also- I don’t know how instructive we will ever find win shares to be in basektball when so much depends on team work, chemistry and stuff that doesn’t show up in the box score. Do you think Shane Battier is the worst player in the league as some stats based approaches show? I don’t and neither does Van Gundy, or DM or most fans of the Rockets. Nor does Battiers record of never having a losing record. This isn’t baseball- a fundamentally individualistic game with a slight team component.

I will now go take a shower for defending Kobe Bryant at length.

PS- I really like your stuff and appreciate what you do on this blog. You are one of my favorite authors. I just think you are out to lunch on this one. I could well be wrong- but those win shares you are relying on seem distorted to me and the infancy of statistical analysis in a much more complex then baseball game makes me wonder if it will ever be much better than GIGO.

Good thoughts wulaw but I disagree.

For one, I don’t really respect a lot of the stat geeks so to say that there is a lack of consensus on an issue doesn’t matter to me. I like DBerri’s wins produced and don’t care for +/- or Hollinger. Their stats aren’t by nature predictive, and thus not accountable to anything but popular opinion. They measure what a player does by how important that stat is in achieving wins. Battier scores fairly well with Wins Produced. Better than many other role players. I suggest you read more about Dberri’s wins produced stuff, his approach can take all the box score stats (rebounds, points, attempts, etc) in a season and tell you within an average of 1.7 games how many victories that team achieved.
Similarly they can calculate how many wins each player is responsible for based on his accumulation of the relevant statistics. Gasol scores higher than Kobe. He did this season, in the playoffs and in the Finals.

In these finals Gasol’s “stinkbombs” were a 12-12 and a 21-6. Nothing horrendous, especially for a guy that doesn’t waste possessions taking 20+ shots per game.

I would sum up you defense of Kobe as saying that his shooting percentages are only bad because he takes bad shots. Yes I agree. He would shoot higher if he didn’t take late heaves and contested shots. That doesn’t mean he has to.
Exercising poor ball movement and watching Kobe settle for contested mid-range shots is both bad team offense and bad Kobe offense. You can’t pretend this is something that’s necessary for the Lakers, merely something Kobe has always been intensely interested in.

Similarly, the fact that Gasol can get quality shots that are “easier” (with easier being true when you are 7 feet tall) shouldn’t be weighed against him when evaluating which player is more valuable.

To say, “it’s not fair to say Gasol is better, his height makes shots easier” to me is a useless argument. Why Gasol can shoot at a higher percentage is irrelevant, possessions in which Gasol shoots are more likely to have a result that will encourage a Laker victory than possessions in which Kobe shoots. Tall people find basketball an easier game, for being 6’6" Kobe is a fantastic player.

This is indeed why Pau is better, not because Kobe gets better shots for him. It’s easy to assume A. that kobe is good b. that his presence must mean less attention is devoted to stopping Gasol.
I don’t see it and numbers don’t support it. Why wouldn’t teams let Kobe shoot 44% against one defender and stay home on Gasol?
It’s hard to go against the thick grain that says Kobe is one of the finest in the game today and of all time but the reasoning behind that belief is all based in scoring totals and championship bias.
In reality, Gasol is the more valuable Laker.
2).

Kobe has to shoot at the end of a possession because Gasol, by nature of his skill set and position, cannot.

What I’m trying to say- I guess- is that when a shot is taken with less than 3 seconds on the shot clock the offense- as a team- has basically already failed, and Kobe bears the brunt of that failure.

Teams won’t/can’t leave him one on one to shoot 44% because he woudn’t shoot 44% if guarded honestly. Factoring in 3’s and FT’s and his offensive efficiency really isn’t bad generally- though sometimes he does get around the 1 pont per shot that’s not a winner- in his MVP campaign’s and better years he’s around 1.5 and some series around 2- which is phenominal efficiency and winning basketball.

I don’t post on this blog very often (even though I read it all the time) because quite frankly I’m neither smart enough nor funny enough. This had just been bugging me for a while.

My argument is not fairness vis a vis height (of course it’s easy for big guys vs little guys to play basketball) rather more of the kind that Gasol has every advantage in his favor from a statistical analysis (high quality shots- early in the clock- only when he’s comfortable- lack of a double team because of Kobe and Odom/Bynum) while Kobe has some disadvantages- always has to take the late in shot clock shot that are not necessarily his fault.

I also think chemistry, will, being a good teammate (something Kobe fails at often imo), leadership etc are way more important in basketball then a sport like baseball because of the integrated portion of the game.

I will do some reading on these win share stats- I’m perfectly willing to be convinced- I just don’t see it right now.

I think, actually, that the stat known as winshares is calculated differently than DBerri’s Wins produced. I recommend Berri, don’t know much about win shares.

I don’t think that Kobe, by virtue of anything other than his temperament and style, is any more likely to take a late shot than Gasol or anyone else. He takes the late shots more because he holds onto the ball so often, not because Gasol couldn’t also take late shots.

This same characteristic draws Kobe incredible praise as a 4rth quarter closer so in the public eye he comes out ahead. Even if his shooting percentage is damaged (and his team for that matter) Kobe gets a pass like the one you just handed out from most everyone.

You should feel confident posting here though as you’ve articulated some pro-Kobe arguments better than many talking heads I’ve heard on the radio and television set. Of course in this matter I think you are all wrong…

On a final note, I would like to point out that in addition to shooting more efficiently than Kobe, Gasol grabs far more rebounds and blocks far more shots. All in all, Gasol does the things that win basketball games better than Kobe:
Gain possession of the basketball and score at an efficient rate.