Talk:Kobe Bryant

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] (If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
	This article is supported by the Sports and games work group.

This article is part of WikiProject National Basketball Association, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide of the NBA on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page, or visit the WikiProject National Basketball Association, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.

Archives 1. 2004 - 2006

Contents 1 2007 All-Star Game 2 nba milestones 3 Section names 4 remove franchise record 5 Edit warring 6 first started playing basketball? 7 Changes to lead 8 Jersey change/sales & edit summaries 9 Proposal to archive talk page

[edit] 2007 All-Star Game

Kobe Bryant was recently made the MVP of the 2007 NBA All-Star Game after notching 31 points, 6 assists, and six steals. Someone please make those changes. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.156.21.56 (talk) 04:40, 19 February 2007 (UTC).

I agree totally. But since Wikipedia's such a shitty source of information, it still hasn't been highlighted in the article. Also the 'rape' case and the 'shaq-thing' are place ahead of all other NBA milestones that Mr. Bryant has set. It seems that there is an attempt by Wikipedia to magnify this man's personal issues. Panda

[edit] nba milestones

I think it's really unncessary to include the "youngest player to acheive X points" with X being incremented every 1000 points. Considering he will get 1000 points every 30 to 35 games.

also, i've removed 18,000 points (28 years, 156 days), set January 27, 2007 vs. the Charlotte Bobcats. I believe wilt Chamberlain holds that record. I couldn't find the exact date but by Jan 15, 1965 (the date he was traded) he has already reached 18000 points. Since their birthdays are only a 2 days apart it was pretty easy to figure out Wilt was younger on Jan 15 in 1965 than Kobe was on Jan 27 in 2007. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Z3u2 (talk • contribs) 09:00, 22 February 2007 (UTC). Z3u2 09:00, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

in fact, now thinking about it, why should all the "youngest player to be..." be listed under milestones?? Youngest to win nba dunk contest, start an nba game, etc, are more like records than milestones. They should be moved to another section(or removed).

and, many of the lakers franchise records. Can we have a better source for all those? Many of the sources currently listed are just boxscores or recaps for the specefic game. Individual game stats doesn't really justify that it is THE MOST of laker's 60 year history. Ex: Points-Overtime, playoffs: 12 (May 4, 2006 vs. Phoenix Suns)

Z3u2 20:44, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

ummm, also removed Most points scored by a player against a team in consecutive games: 112 (81 on January 22, 2006 and 31 on November 17, 2006 against the Toronto Raptors) under NBA Records.

1. it's really not a record and 2. It's really simple math that Wilt Chamberlain would have scored more than 121 in two games against the same team. When he scored 100 points against NY, he probably would have scored more than 12 points against NY in a previous/later game when he avgs over 50 points a game

a lot of these records...really are just filling up the spaces with no encyclopedic values

Z3u2 20:58, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree that I'm not a fan of the whole list of "youngest to score X thousand poitns", but as long as they are there, then for the record, I don't believe Wilt Chamberlain had 18,000 points when he was traded. He scored 2707 in '59-'60, 3033 in '60-'61, 4029 in '61-'62, 3586 in '62-'63, 2948 in '63-'64, and had scored 1558 in '64-'65 at the time he was traded. All that added up is 17861. His scoring average that year after the trade was 30 points per game. So at that pace, figure it took him perhaps four or five more games after the trade to reach 18,000. If he happened to get off to a slow start in those first few games after the trade, it might even have been six or seven. That extra two weeks or so tacked on to Chamberlain's age at the time he really reached 18,000 would be enough time for Bryant to in fact be the youngest.

There are a gazillion newspaper article references to Bryant becoming the youngest to 18,000. It's a little tough to believe they've all miscalculated. Mwelch 08:33, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

On second thought, maybe they all did. Looking up his stats at one site had him 1558 in '64-'65 before the trade and 1743 after. But at another site, those numbers are reversed. And if the latter is true, he'd indeed be over 18,000 at the trade. And it's late enough now that I don't feel like putting any more time into figuring out which is right, so I'll back down now and just go to bed. lol 8-) Mwelch 08:38, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

nickname: his most used nickname is KB24. can someone please change that?

After going back to check the states, perhaps you were right on the first post. I guess we were both too tired staring at all the numbers. 1743 was the minutes he played (as seem on http://www.databasebasketball.com/players/playerpage.htm?ilkid=CHAMBWI01), and i believe i had used that number earlier as well.

PS: After Jan 15 there's quite a few games scheduled for Wilt's new team: http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/PHI/1965_games.html Although it still seems, by using wilt's avg ppg, he may not have reached 18000 by jan 25 (same age as kobe reached 18000)

what i meant by "youngest to reach... should not belong here" was, i think it should go under the "nba record" category instead of "nba milestones". Every player have their own milestones, they don't have to be the youngest to say they've reached a milestone of X points on Date Y.

Z3u2 09:57, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, when I get a chance, I'll double-check it all and also give some thought to what's really the best way to format such info in the article. Just a little too busy with other stuff to put a *whole* lot of time into the issue just this moment.

Thanks! Mwelch 03:54, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Section names

Some of these section names are whack. "Unquestioned leader" doesn't sound very professional. Tayquan 05:25, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

couldn't agree more Z3u2 18:55, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

That needs to go then. How about "Post-O'Neal era"? Or something like dat? Tayquan 05:37, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] remove franchise record

i've removed Free throws attempted Quarter: 16 (3rd quarter, December 20, 2005 vs. Dallas Mavericks). because shaq had way more in a quarter (25) during a 2000 playoff game against the blazers. http://www.cbc.ca/sports/story/2000/05/20/lakers-blaze000520.html

Most of the references shown next to each so-called "records" are just a game recap/scorebox, which doesn't say it is "indeed" a record.

How i figure it is that some fans, see Kobe's stat in a game with high numbers in a certain category, they think it "must" be a record, so they just put it up on wikipedia and ref it to the boxscore.

I'm trying to find better references to some of the so called records, but if i cannot find any, i will proceed to remove them since it's not verifiable. Z3u2 05:00, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm not a big fan of the long list of records, but it should be noted here that as far as NBA record keeping goes, playoff records and regular season records are kept differently. If a record isn't explicitly stated as a playoff record, then it's referring to regular season games only. I don't know whether Bryant's 16 is the franchise record or not, but if the only basis for nixing it is that O'Neal had more in a playoff game, then that's not valid. Mwelch 05:38, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Edit warring

I think it would be a good idea if everybody just backed off and took a breather. I know there are heated points on both sides, but an edit war will only draw one of us back, and eventually get the topic locked. Nobody wants that. So let's just slow down a bit and not make any edits without discussing them first. Thanks Sue Rangell^{[citation needed]} 23:24, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Err . . . to what edit warring are you referring? Other than reverting the constant vandalism (and one other edit that was quite reasonably reverted because the user added an item to the trivia section that was already discussed in detail within the article body), there hasn't been any edit warring on this page lately (looking for some wood upon which to knock as I type that, cuz goodness knows it's indeed been a problem in the past). There are points on "both sides" of what? About what is it that you're talking? Mwelch 03:22, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] first started playing basketball?

When did he first start playing basketball? The earliest mention of him playing basketball is at the high school level. Did he ever play basketball in Italy as a kid or just soccer? Mahanga^{Talk to me} 01:58, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Changes to lead

To User:Duece22: Please stop adding your content to the lead. It is excessively long and poorly written, and a number of editors have reverted it already. Your actions are bordering on vandalism. Simishag 18:52, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jersey change/sales & edit summaries

I don't really care where this jersey info goes, but I don't think it's appropriate for the lead graph in a section about the 2006-07 season. It's a pretty minor fact in the context of the season, and if Kobe had been injured or played poorly, we wouldn't be talking about jersey sales. My comment about WP:DICK was addressed to User:Tayquan, whose edit summary was rather patronizing and unnecessary. "Common knowledge" is not so common. When you add specific claims, add a source. If you don't, expect your content to be reverted. Simishag 18:50, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it's necessary for you to utilize "WP:DICK" comments or continually trump one's contributions. I agree, that the article is constantly subject to much WP:FC and unsourced material (I myself have reverted and removed a ton of POV in this article, and have become actively involved in maintaining it). The jersey issue is a minor fact and for that reason I believe it is better served as a lead for the season and gradually grow into the more pertinent information. Ex: You wouldn't start a paragraph with Bryant led the league in scoring during X year and was All-NBA X for X time. He was born in the year blah blah. Instead, you would start with the latter. Zodiiak 20:05, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

It's simple common knowledge to anyone who has ever been in any economics classes, marketers and companies are always looking for ways to create new demand, whether it be through new styles or models etc. All the people who had #8 will now have to buy #24 jerseys to remain up to date. Also look at my brief edit history-I add no "cruft" to articles. His jersey sales are important to the average reader because it gives an estimate as to his popularity. Tayquan ^holla_{My work} 06:43, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

But the thing is it's also common knowledge that someone who is playing the way Kobe is playing is going to see a rise in the demand for their jersey, no matter whether they have a new number or not. Especially when he's bouncing back from the especially low jersey sales of three years ago. So which factor is the primary reason? No matter which way you answer, it's you interpreting the situation to come to that conclusion. And it's not Wikipedia's place to do that sort of interpretation. That is a textbook case of original research. If someone's actually done some market research that says "It's the number change; just his play alone is not a significant factor", then by all means that can be cited. But in the absence of such a study to cite, it is simply not appropriate for the article to make that determination, no matter how intuitive it may seem to you (or to me). Mwelch 09:25, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Sources were added, the current wording is fine unless you want to remove any mention of what the cause of his rise in jersey sales is. Because it's also OR to consider that he's number one solely, or even mostly, because of his improved image. Tayquan ^holla_{My work} 08:35, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

With sources, it is fine. Sorry for being unclear. I was not suggesting it be changed to simply say it's the image thing. I was just providing an example to address why the "it's common knowledge; it's Economics 101" argument was not sufficent without citing sources.

Cheers! Mwelch 09:01, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Proposal to archive talk page

This talk page is getting really big. I propose archiving the older portions of it. I think we can archive anything before the "2007 All-Star Game" section. Simishag 18:54, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Agreed Zodiiak 20:06, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Archived. Zodiiak 23:02, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Simishag, feel free to just archive talk pages on your own in the future. It doesn't need to be discussed ahead of time. :-) --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 08:40, 3 April 2007 (UTC)