Team record with and without Duncan/Kobe/LeBron/Shaq/Dirk

[Anaximandro1]

- a couple of surprising results (small sample size ?)

- draw your own conclusions


Reminder:

-they barely missed any playoff games.


Duncan
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-fgGg4tcvpwE/U7VCebg4BTI/AAAAAAAADKI/Ci5Xv38afRs/s1600/4.jpg

Kobe
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-LyOfCkXezX0/U7VCebKEdKI/AAAAAAAADJg/GpL_b5EuK9I/s1600/5.jpg

Shaq
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-nYRiIj2H0-E/U7VCfdJgo0I/AAAAAAAADJo/W5n2f9L8Uj8/s1600/7.jpg

LeBron
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Es1IvpXOd1o/U7VCfPx2v-I/AAAAAAAADJ4/c0luwBgNorY/s1600/6.jpg

Dirk
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-u6KSD85S4w4/U7VCfgUJxFI/AAAAAAAADJ0/HhkEW3wyrTU/s1600/8.jpg

[ArbitraryWater]

Interesting... as usual the Lakers without Kobe don't seem to miss much.

The points are now being scored at the same rate, but by the collective of the team, multiple guys, instead of just one.. which means everyone is involved, and therefore also puts in more effort into the game, specifically defense..

[T_L_P]

Some very surprising results.

How many Playoff games has Duncan missed? All of the 2000 ones, one of the 2002 ones. Any others?

[Yao Ming's Foot]

Why is it Lebron. Dirk and Duncan's stats include the 13-14 season and not Kobe's? :roll:

[backb0ard]

Poor Dirk, having OJ Mayo lead his mavs when he got injured.

[Yao Ming's Foot]

Why is it Lebron. Dirk and Duncan's stats include the 13-14 season and not Kobe's? :roll:

Lakers from 07/08-13/14 =

Is it because

With Kobe

365-185 66.4%

Without Kobe

39-62 38.6%

27.8% change

:confusedshrug: :confusedshrug: :confusedshrug:

[tmacattack33]

Lakers from 07/08-13/14 =

Is it because

With Kobe

365-185 66.4%

Without Kobe

39-62 38.6%

27.8% change

:confusedshrug: :confusedshrug: :confusedshrug:

Child please.

[Heavincent]

Why is it Lebron. Dirk and Duncan's stats include the 13-14 season and not Kobe's? :roll:

Yeah I don't get that.

[Heavincent]

Interesting... as usual the Lakers without Kobe don't seem to miss much.

The points are now being scored at the same rate, but by the collective of the team, multiple guys, instead of just one.. which means everyone is involved, and therefore also puts in more effort into the game, specifically defense..

What happened this year?

[GimmeThat]

conclusion

Duncan 2x MVP 2002-2003 3x FMVP 99,03,05
Kobe MVP 2008 2x FMVP 09,10


then I got lazy



zzzz.........

[T_L_P]

What happened this year?

The Lakers tanked?

[gts]

Why is it Lebron. Dirk and Duncan's stats include the 13-14 season and not Kobe's? :roll:

Because that would f*ck up the agenda

[rule1223]

Why is it Lebron. Dirk and Duncan's stats include the 13-14 season and not Kobe's? :roll:
lmaooooo, "surprising" the op says...when he manipulates the data to get the results he wants

[Heavincent]

The Lakers tanked?

Uh yeah, because they couldn't be competitive without Kobe. That's the point.

Regardless, the Lakers record without Kobe between 04 and 14 is awful.

[qrich]

No surprise when it comes to Kobe or Shaq. Duncan I'm somewhat surprised on.

Didn't expect the Heat difference to be as high as it is for Bron.

Thought the difference would be much higher with the Dirk led Mavericks to boot.

[T_L_P]

Duncan I'm somewhat surprised on.


How come?

[Kblaze8855]

Little reason to include 14. They lost the best 2 and 5 in the NBA for the entire season. You cant just call that "Without Kobe" if youre being the least bit honest. None of those other players have anything like that.

It would be about like counting the 2011 Cavs in the "Without Lebron".

Only....Lebron was the only major loss.

If Harden and Dwight both miss next season I dont think it would be fair to list the results as "Without Harden" as if nothing else happened.

[qrich]

How come?

Thought the difference would be a bit higher, but at the same time, Pop is Pop.

[T_L_P]

Thought the difference would be a bit higher, but at the same time, Pop is Pop.

Do you mean the record in recent years or in the early 2000s?

[ArbitraryWater]

Why is it Lebron. Dirk and Duncan's stats include the 13-14 season and not Kobe's? :roll:

Guess why... The 2014 season totally alters the records as it was a shit team through and through, AND Kobe missed like the whole damn season...
weren't they 2/6 with him anyway?

[qrich]

Do you mean the record in recent years or in the early 2000s?

Recent

[ArbitraryWater]

It's no agenda with Kobe, it would just heavily f up the records you idiots :facepalm

[Heavincent]

Guess why... The 2014 season totally alters the records as it was a shit team through and through, AND Kobe missed like the whole damn season...


Why does it matter? I thought the Lakers "don't miss much without Kobe"?

[T_L_P]

Recent

Ah, yes. Pop is Pop.

[rule1223]

Little reason to include 14. They lost the best 2 and 5 in the NBA for the entire season. You cant just call that "Without Kobe" if youre being the least bit honest. None of those other players have anything like that.

It would be about like counting the 2011 Cavs in the "Without Lebron".

Only....Lebron was the only major loss.

If Harden and Dwight both miss next season I dont think it would be fair to list the results as "Without Harden" as if nothing else happened.
should we not include all the other years except 2013-2014 since they didnt have howard for those years as well?

[Ne 1]

Uh yeah, because they couldn't be competitive without Kobe. That's the point.

Regardless, the Lakers record without Kobe between 04 and 14 is awful.
Just look at 2013, without Kobe they got swept and blown out in each game by a team that Kobe routinely takes a dump on in the playoffs.

[qrich]

OP, anyway you could pull these stats together only for the years said players/teams made the post-season?

[Heavincent]

Just look at 2013, without Kobe they got swept and blown out in each game by a team that Kobe routinely takes a dump on in the playoffs.

And the only reason they even made the playoffs was because of Kobe playing 48 minutes a game and dropping 40 point bombs and triple doubles on teams toward the end of the regular season.

[Kblaze8855]

should we not include all the other years except 2013-2014 since they didnt have howard for those years as well?


If any team in question lost its two best players for the entire year...listing it as "Without ____" and ignoring what else was missing would just be dishonest.

Its that simple.

You lose 2 superstars...arguably the best players at their positions...

You dont then judge the resulting team as if it lost one of them.

There is no justification for it at all.

If the Bulls lose Jordan and Pippen...its not "Well....what did they do without Jordan?" to anyone being the least bit fair.

Dirk misses 3 games and comes back....it is not the same thing as Kobe and Dwight not being on a team for the entire year.

Lets just be real here and put the BS aside.

[qrich]

Guess why... The 2014 season totally alters the records as it was a shit team through and through, AND Kobe missed like the whole damn season...
weren't they 2/6 with him anyway?

Yep.

25% with him.

33.8% with him.

(8.8%)

[gts]

If any team in question lost its two best players for the entire year...listing it as "Without ____" and ignoring what else was missing would just be dishonest.

Its that simple.

Why the chart doesn't ignore other seasons where you have overlapping missed games by the key players why should it only be excluded on that one year for Kobe?

[Kblaze8855]

You really want to go into finding out if Jason Terry also missed one game in 2006 with Dirk out and if Parker was 100% in a Duncan resting game in 2012?

Dwight and Kobe were gone pretty much the whole year. It is not the least bit like any of othe other situations. If Kobe missed all but 5 games in 2005 you cant say "The Lakers without Kobe...." when they win 16 games and act like Shaq being in Miami isnt also a major reason for the decline.

It is ridiculous.

[rule1223]

If any team in question lost its two best players for the entire year...listing it as "Without ____" and ignoring what else was missing would just be dishonest.

Its that simple.

You lose 2 superstars...arguably the best players at their positions...

You dont then judge the resulting team as if it lost one of them.

There is no justification for it at all.

If the Bulls lose Jordan and Pippen...its not "Well....what did they do without Jordan?" to anyone being the least bit fair.

Dirk misses 3 games and comes back....it is not the same thing as Kobe and Dwight not being on a team for the entire year.

Lets just be real here and put the BS aside.
honestly, how much different is the 2011-12 lakers and the 2013-14 lakers besides kobe

[gts]

You really want to go into finding out if Jason Terry also missed one game in 2006 with Dirk out and if Parker was 100% in a Duncan resting game in 2012?

If these types of things are to be taken seriously then yes.. otherwise it's just another case of picking and choosing numbers without context

Dwight was in Houston last year too, don't know why you're trying to discount it on that basis


you don't want to justify/include a season where Kobe missed 76 games but you're happy to except the numbers where Shaq missed 110 games during his time in LA.. do you honestly think during those 110 games he was the only injured Laker?

[qrich]

Appearing in a mere 9.7% of games & wanting to use it in a blatant tanking season is a bit far.

If the team wasn't trying to lose every game & ended with 58 wins, would you still want it added on?

[Kblaze8855]

honestly, how much different is the 2011-12 lakers and the 2013-14 lakers besides kobe

Bynum putting up 19/12 on 56% shooting seems a rather significant difference.

[Kblaze8855]

If these types of things are to be taken seriously then yes.. otherwise it's just another case of picking and choosing numbers without context

Nobody being rational about it is gonna compare losing Dwight Howard for an entire season to lacking a 6th man for a night.

This is just one of those emotional things where some arent gonna think clearly.

Kobe is great and history isnt gonna care if the team went 8-5 or whatever in some meaningless stretch in January 2011 without him.

Its mostly just trivia. Nobody reasonable thinks Kobe has no impact on winning games. Likely just people trying to bug Laker fans.

But fact is....there is still little justification for considering 2014.


It barely makes more sense than judging Jordan by the Bulls record without him in 1999.

Other things did happen. Things anyone being fair have to consider a lot more than....if Olden Polynice missed a night the same night Mitch Richmond was hurt in the 90s.

They just arent comparable situations.

[tmacattack33]

What happened this year?

The Lakers this year were 2-4 (.333) with Kobe.

And 25-51 without (.328).

[riseagainst]

The Lakers this year were 2-4 (.333) with Kobe.

And 25-51 without (.328).

so they were better with Kobe.
:bowdown:

[gts]

"Nobody being rational about it is gonna compare losing Dwight Howard for an entire season"


Kblaze muddying the waters again with hobbledegook that nobody else is trying to address.. Howard went to Houston he wasn't injured... lol so now we're going to not count the season because he signed with another team?

Besides, who's talking about role players? and sixth men... I'm talking about the key players missing games..

funny how you're in here arguing this is a legitimate list list then when points are made it's suddenly just for trivia... :lol


If you are going to make these types of lists you cannot pick and choose which seasons are in or out based on a goofy idea that we'll omit this one off because Dwight Howard decided to go to Houston

once again if these lists are to be taken seriously and you're going to use a balnet to cover the entire career you have to use the same blanket for everyone or you have to break it down into proper context with an indepth look at each and every players situation... you can't have multiple criterias

[Kblaze8855]

Kblaze muddying the waters again with hobbledegook that nobody else is trying to address

Who's talking about role players? and sixth men... I'm talking about the key players missing games..

funny how you're in here arguing this is a legitimate list list then when points are made it's suddenly just for trivia...


If you are going to make these types of lists you cannot pick and choose which seasons are in or out based on a goofy idea that we'll leave this one off because Dwight Howard decided to go to Houston


Of course its trivia. What have I even said about the legitimacy of the list?

A question was asked. One I feel had an obvious answer.

The 2014 Lakers were not the Lakers without Kobe. Its the Lakers without Kobe and Dwight for an entire season.

You want to pretend Kobe was the sole difference feel free.

There is no good reason to do it.

All you can claim is a need to search games to see when other missing teammates coincide. To...what? Change 9 results out of 8 dozen after an hour of work?

This is not important research.

Im sure Rodman missed some games Jordan played...or Pippen was in some games Jordan missed while they played some doormat team.

I dont give a shit. Im not demanding more research be done because he might have been denied justice on one or two games out of 100 in question.

What I would come in here and argue against...would be using the 99 Bulls as evidence of what the Bulls did without Jordan even if it made him look better.

Which is pretty much what youre advocating when you want to ignore that Dwight is gone too and there are a number of other changes.

Maybe you want to factor in if Manu(the 6th man I was thinking of by the way) had a bad ankle in a night Duncan missed in 2005.

I wouldnt mind it.

Im not gonna act like it not being considered skews the findings as much as calling a season "Without ____" would when that player wasnt the only subtraction....for an entire season.

There is no reason to count 2014 except the person calling for it wanting to skew results they dont like.

I suspect the OP has his "agenda" too. I dont know. I dont know the name well enough to remember his usual opinions. But his findings are far more reasonable in their calculation than what Laker fans would suggest.

[gts]

"The 2014 Lakers were not the Lakers without Kobe. Its the Lakers without Kobe and Dwight for an entire season."

Dwight was in Houston you nimrod :lol I keep telling you that and you just keep trying to ram that down our throats

Stop trying to muddy the waters with this comment

You're seriously sitting trying to make the argument that an entire season should be excluded from the Lakers "games without Kobe" list because Dwight decided to move to Houston?

I won't address the rest of your point because it's foundation is based in your fantasy world where Dwight still played for the Lakers last season

Kblaze school of debate, when you can't make a legitimate argument with facts just ignore them and make something up then stick to your guns

[iamgine]

Here's the answer. OP shouldn't exclude Kobe's 2013-2014 :no:

With Kobe: 2-4 (.333)

Without Kobe: 25-51 (.328).

.005 Diff

[kennethgriffin]

no team self destructed worse than last years lakers without kobe

playoff team to 2nd worst record

[T_L_P]

no team self destructed worse than last years lakers without kobe

playoff team to 2nd worst record

Yes, because the Bulls didn't go from champions to a 17 win team. :rolleyes:

[Kblaze8855]

This is one of those things you cant talk to some people about. I'll leave it alone knowing few if any non Laker/Kobe fans would have trouble seeing why one wouldnt count a season like 2014 in a with/without win total.

No reason to count the 2-4 or the 25-51. Not for anyone being more rational than emotional about it.

[iamgine]

This is one of those things you cant talk to some people about. I'll leave it alone knowing few if any non Laker/Kobe fans would have trouble seeing why one wouldnt count a season like 2014 in a with/without win total.

No reason to count the 2-4 or the 25-51. Not for anyone being more rational than emotional about it.
Why not? Too little sample?

What shouldn't be done is count it along with the '08-'13. But if they're gonna count Lebron's 9-9 from '11-'14, then Kobe's '13-'14 should be counted on its own.

[ArbitraryWater]

Why does it matter? I thought the Lakers "don't miss much without Kobe"?

EXACTLY, that team was shit, with Kobe or without Kobe... alters their real level of the previous years, brother :cheers:

[tmacattack33]

:oldlol:

Kobe fans.

[Artillery]

Lebron and Duncan - most impactful players of the post-Jordan era. Results speak for themselves.

[kennethgriffin]

Yes, because the Bulls didn't go from champions to a 17 win team. :rolleyes:


they lost their coach, pippen, rodman, jordan

lakers = same coach, same gasol ( if not better ) ... and roughly the same team top to bottom ( nash missed both years ) and howard never was interested. if anything the lakers gained by his departure

bulls = 10 new guys. new offense, new coach, lost everything

not even remotely the same

[DMAVS41]

they lost their coach, pippen, rodman, jordan

lakers = same coach, same gasol ( if not better ) ... and roughly the same team top to bottom ( nash missed both years ) and howard never was interested. if anything the lakers gained by his departure

bulls = 10 new guys. new offense, new coach, lost everything

not even remotely the same

Howard had an EWA of 12 in 2013.

The Lakers did not gain by his departure.

[DatAsh]

Dwight was in Houston you nimrod :lol I keep telling you that and you just keep trying to ram that down our throats

Stop trying to muddy the waters with this comment

You're seriously sitting trying to make the argument that an entire season should be excluded from the Lakers "games without Kobe" list because Dwight decided to move to Houston?

I won't address the rest of your point because it's foundation is based in your fantasy world where Dwight still played for the Lakers last season

Kblaze school of debate, when you can't make a legitimate argument with facts just ignore them and make something up then stick to your guns


That's exactly what he's saying - unless I'm also missing something - and exactly why including 2014 is silly. Why intentionally skew the data with a huge sample like that?

Yes...you could go through the data game by game to try and figure out if other key pieces simultaneously missed. That probably would help, but it's also probably a good bit of work, and I still see no reason to intentionally skew the results by including a entire year of bad data.