Winning can do wonders for an individual’s reputation in a team sport. I have long contested, with great resistance, that the conflation between individual results and team results plays tricks on even the most objective minds. Kobe Bryant has a history of falling short the bigger the situation (playoffs, Finals, game 7′s, GW shot attempts), yet has garnered a reputation as one of the best clutch players ever. Conversely, Karl Malone is seen by many as not just a failure, but a true choker. People often describe their perceptions of facial expressions in these situations:
Kobe looks like he wants it. Look at his face!
Malone looks scared. Look at his face!
It’s not exactly a scientific approach. And it’s one that preys on our cognitive biases. Bryant won early in his career with a great overtime performance, in a game everyone was watching (game 4 of the 2000 Finals). Malone was labeled as a failure early on. We then sought out to affirm those opinions, and selectively remembered what supported them and ignored what didn’t. Winning creates the perception of “clutchness” and alleviates the appearance of choking, regardless of how the individual plays. Peyton Manning was labeled a choker, but then lost that moniker after winning a Super Bowl…in arguably his worst postseason performance.
But back to Malone. One thing that stood out to me when combing back through his career was just how many big games he had in the playoffs and just how little help he had. Indeed, he even tormented some teams in the West. Our lasting memory of him is disappearing in the final minutes of Game 6 in 1998 and MJ stripping him on the penultimate play. But no one remembers the absolute gem he had to force that game in the first place…
Curious, I thought it would be interesting to compare Malone’s performances in elimination games from his highest profile period to Bryant’s elimination game performances. After all, what game is bigger than the one you can’t lose?
Before I present all the data, let’s just look at the true shooting percentage numbers:
| Reg Season TS% | Elimination Game TS% | |
|---|---|---|
| Player A | 55.6% | 50.5% |
| Player B | 58.7% | 55.3% |
Stop and think about those numbers telescopically. Player A drops over 5% in TS% – a catastrophic dip – from above average to well below average. Player B drops 3.4%, but still maintains a figure comparable to Player A’s regular seasons figure, and is still well above average. Which of those players would you say is a choker? Which of those players would you say shoots poorly when his team is facing elimination?
Player A, of course, is Kobe Bryant. Player B, Malone. Below are their full statistics in elimination games, for Malone 91-98 (Basketball-Reference doesn’t have playoff logs before 91) and for Bryant 00-10 (essentially Bryant’s prime). Statistics are normalized per 75 possessions played. Regular season averages are weighted based on the percentage of elimination games from that season. (eg 4 of Malone’s 16 elimination games are from 1998, so 25% of his regular season averages come from 1998.)
Wow. Kobe’s scoring, shooting and assists drop heavily. He has a slight increase in rebounding. If that’s not surprising enough, Malone actually increases his scoring in elimination games while significantly reducing his turnovers. His rebounding goes up as well.
Bryant certainly faced tougher defenses, but the Jazz also met plenty of stingy defenses. For an idea of the difference between a 101.6 DRtg and a 103.6 DRtg, that’s about the disparity between this year’s 6th-ranked Bulls defense (101.8 DRtg) and this year’s 10th-ranked 76ers defense (104.0 DRtg). Those Bulls teams allow an opponent’s TS% of 52.0% while the Sixers is 52.4%. So the difference in defensive quality explains little of the difference in performance.
Of course, there’s also the fact that Malone was the primary focus of every defense he faced throughout those years while Bryant had Shaq by his side for six of 13 games and Pau Gasol in another five. Malone’s secondary option was feeble by comparison: John Stockton’s high-scoring playoff game from 1991-1998 was 28 points! (An interesting follow up might be Stockton’s performances in these 16 games.) Indeed only three times did a Jazz player other than the Mailman go over 30 in that 8-year playoff period: Hornacek twice in 1996 (30 each time) and Jeff Malone in 1992 (33).
Yet Malone is heavily docked in all-time comparisons because of some perceived inability to play well at big times. And Bryant seems to get a boost because of it. While statistics certainly do not tell the entire story – ironically, I’d say Malone’s defense was better than Bryant’s as well, but that’s not a statistical debate – they certainly do fly in the face of conventional wisdom in this case.
*I’m impressed, I must say. Really rarely do I encounter a blog that’s both educative and entertaining, and let me tell you, you have hit the nail on the head. Your idea is outstanding; the issue is something that not enough people are speaking intelligently about. I am very happy that I stumbled across this in my search for something relating to this.
WordPress tagged this as spam — is it?
Interesting article
Great article…I have two playoff memories of Malone: 1) Him killing the Bulls on the games he played good and 2) Bulls’ fans signs that said ‘The Mailman doesn’t deliver on Sunday!’ (Game 6 was on a Sunday for Jordan’s 5th ring). Oh yeah, I remember MJ stealing the ball from him lol
I think what people need to realize when they think about how their brain frames the story of a player is that factors outside his control matter *a lot.* (eg teammate quality)
For those who don’t know, Jordan has committed late turnovers, Bird missed key shots, Magic made bad passes, Duncan had bad games. But these guys played so many years with great teammates that they were never the story because writers were busy focusing on the good they did in wins. Remove 30 ppg from their roster and they’d be writing about all the flaws in their game from the loss.
Hey, another stat guy telling us that Kobe Bryant is not really a clutch player. Quite surprising.
You have a point, of course. I also notice that in sticking up for Malone, you neglect to mention the two missed FTs in the 97 Finals, in a game which Jordan won a few minutes later by sticking a J. That plus the steal in 98 sealed Malone’s image. Malone came up short at key moments in two key Finals games. Bryant, on the other hand, has been on five title teams, and came up pretty big in the 4th qtr in the biggest Finals game of his career, (after shooting very badly most of the game) Game 7 in 2010, which you also neglect to mention, focusing instead on Game 4 in 2000, a game no one except Laker and Pacer fans really remembers, to fit your “early on” thesis. The problem with that is that Malone actually got tagged for good late in his career, as did Bryant, based on the six game-winners in 2010, plus the title win over the hated Celtics. On such moments are images made.
As to Bryant, one other thing you leave out (bias by omission is a big thing in the anti-Kobe stuff; Simmons and Abbott do it all the time as well) is that a lot of Bryant’s elimination games were blowout losses or fairly easy wins, for either side, which probably skews his stats. That doesn’t mean he didn’t play less well than he might have, but I notice you don’t account for it.
In addition, while Malone was the “primary focus” of the defense, Bryant is too, of course, on the Gasol teams and being the #2 option may have affected Bryant’s numbers in some ways as well. And of course Malone was also the “primary focus” of the offense.
The most egregious example of your bias issue is your dismissal of John Stockton as “feeble.” It seems likely that playing with the NBA’s All-Time assist leader might have helped the Mailman’s numbers in elimination games.
Also, in 2004, Larry Brown put a huge amount of emphasis on dealing with Kobe who had to carry a heavy load with Gary Payton getting crushed by Billups and Karl Malone out. I could go on.
So, this is a pretty good article, but like a lot of the anti-Kobe blogger/stat guys, you get dragged down by your agenda and bias and miss some things.
I am a Laker fan, as my handle indicates, and I admire Kobe Bryant as a player. I am aware, however, that he is not as good as Jordan, James, Magic, Bird and about 25 other guys. But I get the impression that the “brain frame” of the stats guys is that the world needs to be infromed, repeatedly, that Kobe Bryant is really not as good as the MSM thinks he is. We get it; you can stop now. And, while you are busting myths, there used to be one out there that Kobe Bryant was too selfish to be the centerpiece of a championship team. I am sure that if I search this blog, I will see that you wrote about that with equal fervor, since, like the idea that LeBron James lacks killer instinct or that Karl Malone is a choker, that turned out to be false as well.
This is a good blog, I have linked it in other discussions. The EV methodology is fascinating. But the blogosphere needs another stat guy with a thing about Kobe Bryant like it needs more guys on the ESPN message boards saying that Bryant is better than LeBron James.
Appreciate the really well thought out comment here. Keep in mind that this is as much, or more, about Malone and false perceptions as it is a Kobe Bryant clutch analysis. (My take on that was here, and it had to with his decision-making bringing down his stats: http://www.backpicks.com/2011/02/01/more-cognitive-bias-the-kobe-bryant-clutch-debate/) I used Bryant here precisely because of his reputation. A few specifics:
-The “moments” of failure/success *are* where images are branded, rightly or wrongly (that was somewhat outside the scope of this examination, which was elimination games). In this case, Kobe was 1-4 in the 4th and missed a bad shot at the end of the game…only his *teammates* grabbed a rebound. Malone’s couldn’t do that for him. Kobe’s 4th Q play was bad in general in these recent Finals, his team was just better. Nonetheless, digging up a few specific moments of close, Finals games you allude to might well look better for Bryant, but that wasn’t the point here.
-John Stockton is quite overrated IMO, and if you read the link to him above, you’ll see his performances in such elimination games for Utah: 13/9 52% TS. Dude never carried a scoring burden, and Utah never had good 2nd/3rd scoring options. Games are available on youtube and I suggest re-watching and examining Stock’s play.
-re: specific elimination games. We can nitpick both ways, but that was never the point. The stats — which don’t tell the whole story — are different than people would expect. They are a measurement of overall play, and Malone looks OK and Kobe really bad, but the reputations are a polarized opposite.
I hear your frustration about the repetition of clutch-Kobe discussions, especially with someone like Abbot. Whether it’s overkill or not, I’m not sure. Maybe it’s necessary from them. Maybe they think it sells well. But whether they have agendas about Bryant, I have a very different agenda (basketball analysis). Sometimes Bryant looks good in the studies I run, sometimes he looks bad. Most of the time, they really have little to do with Kobe Bryant, even if may be involved because of his high-profile status.
(You might be interested in noting the difference between Bryant’s clutch decisions in the final minute or so versus his excellent late-game performances, in which I ranked him a top-5 offensive player over the course of 82games available data: http://www.backpicks.com/2011/02/24/the-power-of-memes-and-the-nbas-best-closer/)
You do realize that Kobe has the record for most consecutive 30+ point road games in elimination games at 8, with his team going 7-1 in such games. That streak was broken last year at NO, when it was a beatdown and Kobe wasn’t needed to play heavy minutes.
You can nitpick whatever you want, but if you’re not clutch going to 7 finals and winning 5 while being a major player for each, then I don’t want to be clutch. It’s easy and sloppy to just look at the stat line, and so then conclude that some player was terrible or unclutch without noticing what was actually going on during the game.
Take the lakers/celtics game 7 for one example. Kobe did shoot terribly, fact. Was it one of the worst offensive games in finals appearance? Probably. But, the defensive was amazing in the game. Kobe outrebounded KG/sheed combined. He played awesome defense. And he got to the line 15x, consistently putting the pressure on the defense, and was active, drawing the defense’s attention even when he’s struggling, something that lebron should pay attention to, that even when you’re struggling, moping around on the court is useless, and you can still help your team a lot by being aggressive, allowing for good scoring opportunities for your teammates. He went for 10 and 4 in the 4th, and had the key assist to Artest for a 3 with 1:01 left, which most people seem to forget, those same people who quickly and repeatedly denigrate Kobe for not passing to much inferior teammates. If that’s not clutch, then I don’t know what is.
I don’t think he’s really knocking Bryant here. I think he’s actually closer to complimenting him.
He’s saying look Malone has a reputation as being a choker in big games, but look, he’s on the same level as Kobe and we all know Kobe is great. Therefore we should acknowledge Malone is great too.
“I don’t think he’s really knocking Bryant here.”
Of course he wasn’t. But some Kobe Bryant fans are notoriously sensitive to articles that tell the truth about Bryant.
The issue with Boyer’s post (along with the irrelevant and unnecessary LeBron James comparison) is that people don’t usually talk about defense when referring to “clutch” performances; you are more likely to recall great shooting performances and see offensive highlights on SportsCenter. Bryant might have rebounded in that game 7 and gotten to the line, but those things aren’t *as* essential to winning bassketball games as putting the ball into the basket – and Bryant shot the ball at a .376 TS% clip. That’s simply poor shooting, even against a good Celtics defense. His assist rate was also pedestrian.
While he certainly contributed to the team in other areas, Bryant’s was dragging down the Lakers with his “hero ball” offense. He was just fortunate that the Boston Celtics’ offense was even more anemic (and also that the “much inferior teammate” Pau Gasol turned in a good performance), or the Lakers would not have won that championship.
Wow, that Pau Gasol that went 6-16 with a .437 TS%, wow, he was so much better, come on, bob, get real. That game was just a brutal dogfight game. Yes, the offense was poor, but the defense was great at the same time. Pau came up big, sure, but so did Kobe and Artest. This is the problem with fans like you, Bob. You blame Kobe for his poor shooting, but then applaud Pau for his poor shooting, and Pau is getting much better looks than Kobe since Kobe is the one drawing the defensive attention and double teams.
I brought lebron because there’s a key difference between Kobe and him. When Kobe is struggling, he continues to play hard, and the defense still has to pay attention to him along with the fact that he has no skill weaknesses. If we look at lebron, who has some skill weaknesses, which allows defenses to sag off him when he’s on the perimeter, and then lebron has had multiple no-shows in the 10 and 11 playoffs, just moping around in the corner for large portions of the game. You can complain about the shooting pct. all you want, there’s a lot more ways to contribute to the game, which Kobe does consistently.
Are you kidding me? What does everyone seem to preach as to how to win championships? Defense and rebounding. Rebounding is extremely important, and when your SG gets more rebounds than the opposing teams’ starting bigs, that’s simply amazing. And then he plays amazing defense in the game. And FTs are putting the ball in the hoop, to cite your words. Kobe may have only had 1 FG in the 4th, but if he decided to mope around like lebron often does in big games and stop being aggressive, then he couldn’t have gotten to the line multiple times to finish with 10 pts. and 4 reb. in the 4th. That’s absolutely huge. If you can’t see that as being clutch, then you’re hopeless. Just extremely weird overall how Kobe is always given the double standard, damned if he does, damned if he doesn’t, it’s always a no-win situation for him. I’d like to read some articles about how the heat should run their offense through Bosh, much like idiots everywhere claim that the lakers should run their offense through bynum and pau.
Again, what does LeBron James have to do with an article between Kobe Bryant ane Karl Malone? Can you stay on topic?
As to your other points:
-Gasol didn’t shoot lights out in that game, but he was better than Bryant in the offensive glass and moved the ball better on offense. Those things, in addition to his shooting from the field, made him a better performer on the offensive end than Bryant. Kobe does “create” more offense than Gasol, but you sill need to put the ball in the basket.
-I acknowledged that Bryant helped his team in the other areas of the game that you mentioned, but those other things aren’t as valuable as shooting. You need to consider to consider the good with the bad, and in this case the good was outweighed by the bad – namely, Kobe’s inefficient volume shooting.
I don’t know why everything has to be so personal with Kobe Bryant fans. He’s a truly great player. He’s also far from perfect. Why should the team result change the fact that he didn’t play well in that game 7?
I already explained that to you. Citing how silly it is to simply look a piece of paper solely in order to base one’s assertions whether a certain player is clutch or not. Kobe shot awful in that game 7, but was super clutch and still contributed in many ways to help his team win. Lebron is the prime example of someone doing the opposite, but his stats are usually great, which unfortunately his sycophants and fans can’t look past.
You praised Pau for shooting well, but his pct. was atrocious like Kobe’s, don’t try to sugarcoat it now. Pau didn’t get the defensive attention like Kobe did, nowhere close. Pau routinely gets much better offensive opportunities than Kobe does because of the defensive attention that Kobe gets, which is lost with most people. Most of Kobe’s looks were good shots, he just wasn’t making many, similar to Pau.
When did I ever say Kobe’s shooting was good? I think you’re reading into things a little much. I was mainly just citing examples of how Kobe was very clutch, though the stats wouldn’t say that.
Nothing personal bobby. I’m just pointing the discrepancies of most of elgee’s flawed articles. He does come up with some interesting stats and topics, but it’s very hard to make any good conclusions out of them, and that’s what I have a problem with him and others like you. I mean he was trying to tell us Wilt’s offense had very little impact on his team when entered the nba. That’s so absurd, I don’t know why I even commented on it. And Malone was still a decent playoff performer, but he certainly choked many times. To put him and Kobe on the same level playing field is also absurd, whether you like Kobe or not. At some pt., we can have to get real.
“Citing how silly it is to simply look a piece of paper solely in order to base one’s assertions whether a certain player is clutch or not.”
Let me make this clear for you Boyer: many people who use statistics in their articles (such as El Gee) also watch the games. In many cases, they watch more games than you even have ACCESS to watching, especially if it’s part of their daily job.
“Lebron is the prime example of someone doing the opposite, but his stats are usually great, which unfortunately his sycophants and fans can’t look past.”
I see. Do you have proof for this? I would think that someone who is routinely among the league’s most productive players in crunchtime is doing plenty to “help his team win”. Or do you make a conclusion about a player’s “clutchness” based on his team winning/losing a game? Because if you are, it is a fallacious argument. Especially in a team sport such as basketball.
“Pau routinely gets much better offensive opportunities than Kobe does because of the defensive attention that Kobe gets, which is lost with most people.”
Not at all. People who do this for a living are aware about the importance of shot-creation. However, it’s still a results-based sport; you don’t get points on the scoreboard simply by shooting and missing, and it’s especially crippling to a team when you don’t move the ball and use your teammates on offense when the shots aren’t falling (which has been a flaw in Bryant’s many times thought his career). When you consider the fact that shooting is the most important part of the game, a bad performance from that end of the floor cam hurt your team more than something like rebounding.
Boyer – is there more to offense than just points? What do you think makes someone a good offensive player?
Hey, by the way this article is how I found the site. Great stuff!
I’ll be referencing this in an article I’m writing. I’ll credit you and put a link. Can’t promise how much traffic it will send you but hopefully some.
Cool – thanks Kelly. Enjoying the feedback.