Why I think the Kobe-Pau Lakers would be just as good today

[QUOTE=SouBeachTalents;14941322]Your points are taken regarding the statistics you provided, but the Spurs were the 7 seed in 2019, finished 18th in ppg and lost in the first round, so I'm not so sure that's the best example you could use to try to back your argument.[/quote]

Because of its defense. Obviously...

19th in DRtg (+0.8 rDRtg). They were 29th in opponent turnover percentage—11.0% D-TOV (-1.4 rD-TOV). San Antonio's defense did its offense absolutely zero favors.

[QUOTE=SouBeachTalents;14941322]And claiming they were the third best playoff offense when they played 7 games seems rather disingenuous :lol[/QUOTE]

I understand the sentiment. The playoffs are always going to be limited when it comes to sample size. Even for the teams that go all the way. And yet we extrapolate on a limited amount of postseason games all the time. But if the data generally aligns with the 82 games of the regular season? There's probably something there.

If you want, you can add the 2016-17 Spurs (16 games played; 4th-ranked playoff ORtg (+2.1 playoff-adjusted rORtg); 15th/16 in 3PAr (.282) [-6.6 playoff-adjusted r3PAr]).

Or the 2015-16 Spurs (10 games played; 3rd-ranked playoff ORtg (+4.3 playoff-adjusted rORtg); 13th/16 in 3PAr (.232) [-7.8 playoff-adjusted r3PAr]).

And I'm sure at this point you'll say something akin to "the modern game started in 2020!" or another. Some arbitrary point where the NBA stepped out of the stone age.

[QUOTE=Real Men Wear Green;14941003]Even a team from 2009 would be utterly shell-shocked by modern three point shooting. Assuming Tatum isn't hampered by hero-worship the Celtics would beat them 4-1, the one loses being the game where the team as a hole shots terribly and maybe Kobe blows up. But the Celtics would have done of the best personnel to guard him anyone ever has. You beat the Celtics either with great scoring bruising big or an elite night of three point shooting. Kobe-Pau Lakers couldn't come with either. Bryant might be able to hero ball them to one win but Brown Holiday and Tatum are a rough trio to go through for any wing and then they have KP behind them (most nights).[/QUOTE]

Only because they might not be able to shoot right themselves. Pau and Bynum is a ridiculous line up vs anyone. It was ridiculous back then. Just like TD and Robinson would also be very hard to deal with. Twolves are running KAT and Gobert. Tatum would be BBQ'd off the floor. The whole Cs team would be unable to compete with that squad. Why? Because nobody could stop Kobe from getting inside and shooting, and when he missed, they would reb.

Porzingis is a crazy player, but he can't guard Pau or Bynum and keep them off the glass, imo, especially not if he has to move to contest Kobe. However, there is a lack of shooting in the LAL lineup, for sure.

I think the Cs were a one time thing. They are gonna be able to compete with anyone due to their line up, but historically, I don't think they beat a lot of championship teams. Their team is deeply flawed considering its talent level. You'd just hope you could leave LAL open and they'd miss. They can't deal with Odom and Kobe.

Cs lost a game to the Mavs. It's possible they could win a series with exceptional play/shooting, but I'd be shocked if they won it easily. More likely, they would get ground out. The ups and downs of modern shooting teams would cause them to lose. Remember, the Cs did a lot of games of bricking in the Finals. I think they gotta shoot close to 40% cuz they aren't gonna get offensive rebs, either.

If you wanna switch up the lineup and try rotating people out, put Porzingis at PF and Brown/Tatum at the wings, that would be nice. They could play small for spot moments, but I don't think they could run the whole game with Tatum at PF.

It'd be fun to see, though, obviously we dunno. I just have a hunch. But yea the Cs aren't the team I am using to prove that 09 Lakers wouldn't be as good as today, plus they were a better team compared to their peers than LAL was then, especially considering Porzingis missed a decent chunk of time. So, in theory, they SHOULD be winning, but I don't think they would.

-Smak

[QUOTE=AlternativeAcc.;14941244]


You think they'd be just as good relative to the competition of today when this is a Kobe/Pau equivalent duo or better on every team, with better role players to boot?

[/QUOTE]


Wat, who is as good as Kobe? Pau is good enough that he makes the duo better. It's not like you can take one guy who is kinda better than Pau and another guy who is kinda worse than Kobe and it's equal.

I'm thinking... ANT / KAT? Maxey Embiid? I'm thinking fuccouttahere, brother.

You need to start with an atg SG and then add a big who complements him. There are people you could argue as ATG bigs, but it's not the same. You put the ball in Kobe's hands in this nba, and it would be crazy. Like half of the high impact players who have enough experience to win rings are over the hill atm.

-Smak

[QUOTE=ILLsmak;14941385]Only because they might not be able to shoot right themselves. Pau and Bynum is a ridiculous line up vs anyone. It was ridiculous back then. Just like TD and Robinson would also be very hard to deal with. Twolves are running KAT and Gobert. Tatum would be BBQ'd off the floor. The whole Cs team would be unable to compete with that squad. Why? Because nobody could stop Kobe from getting inside and shooting, and when he missed, they would reb. [/quote]Tatum had been starting power forward for two years now. If being matched up with a big was a problem someone would have exploited it and he wouldn't have averaged 9.7 rebounds in the playoffs. One of the keys to the Celtics that you may not be aware of is that Tatum has legit pf size. The NBA doesn't bother updating player measurements after the rookie year but Tatum is 6'9 or 6'10 and 240. There's really only 4 guys you would be worried about putting him on (Embiid, Jokic, Giannis,Williamson...Edey is likely to be a fifth). He wouldn't be good on Bynum but you could put him in Gasol. And he will be much better at guarding Bynum or Gasol than they will be at guarding him. Kobe Bryant was a great player but Holiday Brown and Tatum are all great defending wings. Meanwhile the Celtics are shooting 30 threes and blowing the Lakers off the floor. The Warriors and other teams forced the evolution of basketball. You are acting like the game didn't evolve for a reason.

[QUOTE]Porzingis is a crazy player, but he can't guard Pau or Bynum and keep them off the glass, imo, especially not if he has to move to contest Kobe. However, there is a lack of shooting in the LAL lineup, for sure.[/QUOTE]We saw Paul Pierce Ray and Tony Allen defend Bryant solidly. Brown Tatum and Holliday are no worse.

[QUOTE]I think the Cs were a one time thing. They are gonna be able to compete with anyone due to their line up, but historically, I don't think they beat a lot of championship teams. Their team is deeply flawed considering its talent level. You'd just hope you could leave LAL open and they'd miss. They can't deal with Odom and Kobe. [/QUOTE]"Deeply flawed?" Please explain that because they're is no justification for that statement at all.

[QUOTE]Cs lost a game to the Mavs. It's possible they could win a series with exceptional play/shooting, but I'd be shocked if they won it easily. More likely, they would get ground out. The ups and downs of modern shooting teams would cause them to lose. Remember, the Cs did a lot of games of bricking in the Finals. I think they gotta shoot close to 40% cuz they aren't gonna get offensive rebs, either. [/QUOTE]16-3 is one of the greatest postseason records of all time. A 4-1 finals win is dominant. That's an 80% win rate against the best team in the opposing conference. 80% win rate in the regular season is...64 wins. And actually closer to 65.

[QUOTE]If you wanna switch up the lineup and try rotating people out, put Porzingis at PF and Brown/Tatum at the wings, that would be nice. They could play small for spot moments, but I don't think they could run the whole game withdrew Tatumat PF. [/QUOTE]Again they've been doing it for two years. You don't seem to know how big Tatum actually is.

Saying Tatum could guard Pau or Bynum in the low post is one of the most delusional things I've ever seen posted on this forum.

[QUOTE=ILLsmak;14941385]Only because they might not be able to shoot right themselves. Pau and Bynum is a ridiculous line up vs anyone. It was ridiculous back then. Just like TD and Robinson would also be very hard to deal with. Twolves are running KAT and Gobert. Tatum would be BBQ'd off the floor. The whole Cs team would be unable to compete with that squad. Why? Because nobody could stop Kobe from getting inside and shooting, and when he missed, they would reb.

Porzingis is a crazy player, but he can't guard Pau or Bynum and keep them off the glass, imo, especially not if he has to move to contest Kobe. However, there is a lack of shooting in the LAL lineup, for sure.

I think the Cs were a one time thing. They are gonna be able to compete with anyone due to their line up, but historically, I don't think they beat a lot of championship teams. Their team is deeply flawed considering its talent level. You'd just hope you could leave LAL open and they'd miss. They can't deal with Odom and Kobe.

Cs lost a game to the Mavs. It's possible they could win a series with exceptional play/shooting, but I'd be shocked if they won it easily. More likely, they would get ground out. The ups and downs of modern shooting teams would cause them to lose. Remember, the Cs did a lot of games of bricking in the Finals. I think they gotta shoot close to 40% cuz they aren't gonna get offensive rebs, either.

If you wanna switch up the lineup and try rotating people out, put Porzingis at PF and Brown/Tatum at the wings, that would be nice. They could play small for spot moments, but I don't think they could run the whole game with Tatum at PF.

It'd be fun to see, though, obviously we dunno. I just have a hunch. But yea the Cs aren't the team I am using to prove that 09 Lakers wouldn't be as good as today, plus they were a better team compared to their peers than LAL was then, especially considering Porzingis missed a decent chunk of time. So, in theory, they SHOULD be winning, but I don't think they would.

-Smak[/QUOTE]

Yup. The Celtics simply don't have the defensive personel at all to guard the Lakers frontcourt with a gimpy injured Zingis and old undersized Horford. They basically have no sturdy big men. And with how we seen Tatum bricking a lot of his shots, you know Kobe would outproduce him by a lot.

What it comes down to is the Lakers 2pt and paint dominance would be a certainty. If their role players get hot from 3 like in the 2009 run that would just be a cherry on top. Where as Boston is completely at the mercy and variance of their 3pt spam because their midrange game is mediocre and they wouldn't be doing squat at the rim.

[QUOTE=tpols;14941397]Saying Tatum could guard Pau or Bynum in the low post is one of the most delusional things I've ever seen posted on this forum.[/QUOTE]

He guarded Myles Turner and Bam Adebayo just this postseason. He had been the starting power forward for the last two years. Are you paying any attention at all?

[QUOTE=Real Men Wear Green;14941400]He guarded Myles Turner and Bam Adebayo just this postseason. He had been the starting power forward for the last two years. Are you paying any attention at all?[/QUOTE]

Neither of those guys are even remotely as skilled offensively in the low post as Pau and Bam in particular is nowhere near as long and tall as Pau. Turner isn't even a gifted offensive player either... he's known for his defense mostly. Gasol would be getting automatic buckets on Tatum all game long. That's an absurd mismatch.

[QUOTE=tpols;14941402]Neither of those guys are even remotely as skilled offensively in the low post as Pau and Bam in particular is nowhere near as long and tall as Pau. Turner isn't even a gifted offensive player either... he's known for his defense mostly. Gasol would be getting automatic buckets on Tatum all game long. That's an absurd mismatch.[/QUOTE]

Adebayo averaged 19 points, same as Gasol. And it wasn't just jumpers, he pays. Tatum isn't going to shut him down but he would defend Gasol as competently as most power forward. But on the other end how is Gasol going to cover a perimeter player that has averaged 30? That year out is one of the reasons why the Celtics are a great team, because they're are a lot more guys that Tatum can guard than they're are guys that can guard Tatum.

:oldlol: @ the C's being "deeply flawed". They had the best record in the league by far in spite of chillin at times. They have strong 2 way players throughout their lineup.

How many ECF's have they played in the last few years? I lost count.

Bam was measured @ 6'8 barefoot at the combine. Pau Gasol was a true 7 footer. And not only that, Bam is not a low post guy. Miami runs him in the pick and pop and roll all day. While the strongest part of Paus game was his low post footwork, hook shots, craftiness and passing. He was like a diet Kevin McHale in that regard. Bam and Paus styles and size are so far apart it makes 0 sense to equivocate their games.

[QUOTE=tpols;14941408]Bam was measured @ 6'8 barefoot at the combine. Pau Gasol was a true 7 footer. And not only that, Bam is not a low post guy. Miami runs him in the pick and pop and roll all day. While the strongest part of Paus game was his low post footwork, hook shots, craftiness and passing. He was like a diet Kevin McHale in that regard. Bam and Paus styles and size are so far apart it makes 0 sense to equivocate their games.[/QUOTE]

And yet Gasol averaged 19 points. Tatum is not smaller than the average pf Gasol faced. But on the other end Gasol never had to guard elite scoring wings. He's literally never done it his entire career. Tatum meanwhile has been defending 4s for the last two years. The mismatch is definitely in the Celtics favor, even more so considering that the Laker offense is going to run through Kobe not Gasol.

Pau Gasol led the league in post-up efficiency in 2008-09 with 1.034 points per play. I'm not sure what the league average was but it was considerably less than today. I imagine, relatively speaking, that's like 1.10-1.15+ ppp in today's league.

Factoring in post-up scoring efficiency, diversity, range, and passing, Jokic is the best modern comparison. Even if he's not as good he was still a handful.

He's nowhere near Jokic's level offensively. Not close in scoring average or assists per game. Also doesn't have Jokic's bill to take it to the Celtics as a physical presence.

Did you think they are? Because I never said that.

[QUOTE=Im Still Ballin;14941415]Did you think they are? Because I never said that.[/QUOTE]
You said Jokic was the best modern comparison. I pointed out why that isn't that relevant.

[B]2008-09 Pau Gasol Regular season: (81 games)[/B]

3-10 feet: 52.3% FG (29.5% of FGAs); [LEAGUE AVERAGES: 41.2% FG and 12.4% of FGAs]; Pau shot 26.9% above league average efficiency
10-16 feet: 49.2% FG (17.5% of FGAs); [LEAGUE AVERAGES: 39.5% FG and 11.1% of FGAs]; Pau shot 24.6% above league average efficiency

[B]2022-23 Nikola Jokic Regular season: (69 games)[/B]

3-10 feet: 64.3% FG (41.4% of FGAs); [LEAGUE AVERAGES: 45.4% FG and 20.6% of FGAs]; Nikola shot 41.6% above league average efficiency
10-16 feet: 50.0% FG (9.2% of FGAs); [LEAGUE AVERAGES: 44.7% FG and 9.6% of FGAs]; Nikola shot 11.9% above league average efficiency

[QUOTE=Real Men Wear Green;14941416]You said Jokic was the best modern comparison. I pointed out why that isn't that relevant.[/QUOTE]

Can you read? ... [I]In the post[/I]. There's no one who's a better comparison in the game today when you break down all the elements of post-up play. Doesn't mean he's as good. Just that he's stylistically most comparable.

[QUOTE=Im Still Ballin;14941419]Can you read? ... [I]In the post[/I]. There's no one who's a better comparison in the game today when you break down all the elements of post-up play. Doesn't mean he's as good. Just that he's stylistically most comparable.[/QUOTE]

And I pointed out why that isn't relevant. "Can you read?"

[b]2008-09 Pau Gasol PLAYOFFS: (23 games)[/b]

3-10 feet: 56.5% FG (30.8% of FGAs); [LEAGUE AVERAGES: 41.2% FG and 12.4% of FGAs]; Pau shot 37.1% above league average efficiency
10-16 feet: 46.3% FG (14.9% of FGAs); [LEAGUE AVERAGES: 39.5% FG and 11.1% of FGAs]; Pau shot 17.2% above league average efficiency

[b]2022-23 Nikola Jokic PLAYOFFS: (20 games)[/b]

3-10 feet: 56.0% FG (52.2% of FGAs); [LEAGUE AVERAGES: 45.4% FG and 20.6% of FGAs]; Nikola shot 23.3% above league average efficiency
10-16 feet: 47.5% FG (9.7% of FGAs); [LEAGUE AVERAGES: 44.7% FG and 9.6% of FGAs]; Nikola shot 6.3% above league average efficiency

[QUOTE=Real Men Wear Green;14941422]And I pointed out why that isn't relevant. "Can you read?"[/QUOTE]

You said offensively. I said exclusively post-up play. Those are not the same things.

[QUOTE=Im Still Ballin;14941425]You said offensively. I said exclusively post-up play. Those are not the same things.[/QUOTE]

And still not relevant. Feel free to have the last word.

[QUOTE=Im Still Ballin;14941418][B]2008-09 Pau Gasol Regular season: (81 games)[/B]

3-10 feet: 52.3% FG (29.5% of FGAs); [LEAGUE AVERAGES: 41.2% FG and 12.4% of FGAs]; Pau shot 26.9% above league average efficiency
10-16 feet: 49.2% FG (17.5% of FGAs); [LEAGUE AVERAGES: 39.5% FG and 11.1% of FGAs]; Pau shot 24.6% above league average efficiency

[B]2022-23 Nikola Jokic Regular season: (69 games)[/B]

3-10 feet: 64.3% FG (41.4% of FGAs); [LEAGUE AVERAGES: 45.4% FG and 20.6% of FGAs]; Nikola shot 41.6% above league average efficiency
10-16 feet: 50.0% FG (9.2% of FGAs); [LEAGUE AVERAGES: 44.7% FG and 9.6% of FGAs]; Nikola shot 11.9% above league average efficiency[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Im Still Ballin;14941424][b]2008-09 Pau Gasol PLAYOFFS: (23 games)[/b]

3-10 feet: 56.5% FG (30.8% of FGAs); [LEAGUE AVERAGES: 41.2% FG and 12.4% of FGAs]; Pau shot 37.1% above league average efficiency
10-16 feet: 46.3% FG (14.9% of FGAs); [LEAGUE AVERAGES: 39.5% FG and 11.1% of FGAs]; Pau shot 17.2% above league average efficiency

[b]2022-23 Nikola Jokic PLAYOFFS: (20 games)[/b]

3-10 feet: 56.0% FG (52.2% of FGAs); [LEAGUE AVERAGES: 45.4% FG and 20.6% of FGAs]; Nikola shot 23.3% above league average efficiency
10-16 feet: 47.5% FG (9.7% of FGAs); [LEAGUE AVERAGES: 44.7% FG and 9.6% of FGAs]; Nikola shot 6.3% above league average efficiency[/QUOTE]

Jason Tatum is a good defender and Pau was known to be soft at times. But I think Gasol from 2008 to 2010 or 2011 is just too much size and skill for him. LA's frontcourt was a league-best powerhouse for a reason.

[QUOTE=Real Men Wear Green;14941429]And still not relevant. Feel free to have the last word.[/QUOTE]

You are really childish for a moderator. Christ.

Here's a great 2008-09 season highlight video. He's being guarded by guys like Kenyon Martin, Chris Andersen, Marcus Camby, Chris Kaman, Luis Scola, Erick Dampier, Dirk Nowitzki, etc. I'm only a few minutes in but.. yeah, just way too big and skilled for Jason.

Tatum is only 6'8" barefoot with a 6'11" wingspan and an 8'10.5" standing reach. If I'm not mistaken, Gasol was a legit 7' barefoot with a 7'6" to 7'7" wingspan. And his standing reach looks really good per the game footage; easily more than Jokic's 9'3". Probably 9'5" to 9'7". Hell, look at this dunk from Gasol. Barely had to jump:

[img]https://i.ibb.co/pbCQvXW/92mor0.gif[/img]

FYI: Bam is 6'8.75" barefoot with a 7'2.75" wingspan and a 9'0" standing reach. It makes sense that Tatum can guard him given that they're not that far off in functional size.

[video=youtube;dXd24ggzeKA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXd24ggzeKA&ab_channel=Pick%26Roll[/video]

[QUOTE=Im Still Ballin;14941424][b]2008-09 Pau Gasol PLAYOFFS: (23 games)[/b]

3-10 feet: 56.5% FG (30.8% of FGAs); [LEAGUE AVERAGES: 41.2% FG and 12.4% of FGAs]; Pau shot 37.1% above league average efficiency
10-16 feet: 46.3% FG (14.9% of FGAs); [LEAGUE AVERAGES: 39.5% FG and 11.1% of FGAs]; Pau shot 17.2% above league average efficiency

[b]2022-23 Nikola Jokic PLAYOFFS: (20 games)[/b]

3-10 feet: 56.0% FG (52.2% of FGAs); [LEAGUE AVERAGES: 45.4% FG and 20.6% of FGAs]; Nikola shot 23.3% above league average efficiency
10-16 feet: 47.5% FG (9.7% of FGAs); [LEAGUE AVERAGES: 44.7% FG and 9.6% of FGAs]; Nikola shot 6.3% above league average efficiency[/QUOTE]
Why are you just pretending volume and the way they’re guarded don’t matter? Gasol was playing with prime Kobe Bryant. I like Gasol but pump the brakes.

[QUOTE=Im Still Ballin;14941462]Here's a great 2008-09 season highlight video. He's being guarded by guys like Kenyon Martin, Chris Andersen, Marcus Camby, Chris Kaman, Luis Scola, Erick Dampier, Dirk Nowitzki, etc. I'm only a few minutes in but.. yeah, just way too big and skilled for Jason.

Tatum is only 6'8" barefoot with a 6'11" wingspan and an 8'10.5" standing reach. If I'm not mistaken, Gasol was a legit 7' barefoot with a 7'6" to 7'7" wingspan. And his standing reach looks really good per the game footage; easily more than Jokic's 9'3". Probably 9'5" to 9'7". Hell, look at this dunk from Gasol. Barely had to jump:

[img]https://i.ibb.co/pbCQvXW/92mor0.gif[/img]

FYI: Bam is 6'8.75" barefoot with a 7'2.75" wingspan and a 9'0" standing reach. It makes sense that Tatum can guard him given that they're not that far off in functional size.

[video=youtube;dXd24ggzeKA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dXd24ggzeKA&ab_channel=Pick%26Roll[/video][/QUOTE]


Yea... that kind of solidified things for me. Tatum being able to guard Pau Gasol full time as a starter. Absolute insanity.

People think because he can play the 4 in today's small ball era means he could guard long 7 footers with tremendous post skill in the past. Goes to show some people have no idea what they're talking about. And then there's Bynum and Odom as well. It's crazy.

[QUOTE=tpols;14941488]Yea... that kind of solidified things for me. Tatum being able to guard Pau Gasol full time as a starter. Absolute insanity.

People think because he can play the 4 in today's small ball era means he could guard long 7 footers with tremendous post skill in the past. Goes to show some people have no idea what they're talking about. And then there's Bynum and Odom as well. It's crazy.[/QUOTE]
Playing Bynum Odom and Gasol at the same time is suicide in 2024, they'd get obliterated :oldlol:

[QUOTE=tontoz;14941405]:oldlol: @ the C's being "deeply flawed". They had the best record in the league by far in spite of chillin at times. They have strong 2 way players throughout their lineup.

How many ECF's have they played in the last few years? I lost count.[/QUOTE]

Weak era lool. Who is the last ec team that won. Even the west is weak now. They got bodied in 21. They are playing flawed teams as well. Mil is the only possible good team but they have had issues.

I mean flawed on a championship level. Dudes think they are a dynasty. Was a good win tho. It was a perfect storm. They are a reg season team. Def not a benchmark of greatness, or maybe they will continue to win. The nba isn’t gonna be much better next year and i bet they dont win again. And nah i want them to win, but they were flawed with a big line up and its even crazier to have tatum at pf.

-Smak

[QUOTE=ILLsmak;14941498]Weak era lool. Who is the last ec team that won. Even the west is weak now. They got bodied in 21. They are playing flawed teams as well. Mil is the only possible good team but they have had issues.

I mean flawed on a championship level. Dudes think they are a dynasty. Was a good win tho. It was a perfect storm. They are a reg season team. Def not a benchmark of greatness, or maybe they will continue to win. The nba isn’t gonna be much better next year and i bet they dont win again. And nah i want them to win, but they were flawed with a big line up and its even crazier to have tatum at pf.

-Smak[/QUOTE]


Your "analysis" is the only thing deeply flawed. Embarrassing.

Boston's top 2 are surely weaker than a lot of championship teams but 3-8 they are stronger than most of them in the last 30 years.

[QUOTE=ILLsmak;14941387]Wat, who is as good as Kobe? Pau is good enough that he makes the duo better. It's not like you can take one guy who is kinda better than Pau and another guy who is kinda worse than Kobe and it's equal.

I'm thinking... ANT / KAT? Maxey Embiid? I'm thinking fuccouttahere, brother.

You need to start with an atg SG and then add a big who complements him. There are people you could argue as ATG bigs, but it's not the same. You put the ball in Kobe's hands in this nba, and it would be crazy. Like half of the high impact players who have enough experience to win rings are over the hill atm.

-Smak[/QUOTE]

Luka, SGA, Jokic, Giannis...

Every contending team has a dominant duo in today's league.

Kobe/Pau stuck out in late 00s, but wouldn't in 2024.

[QUOTE=RRR3;14941492]Playing Bynum Odom and Gasol at the same time is suicide in 2024, they'd get obliterated :oldlol:[/QUOTE]

LA almost never played that lineup back then. What are you talking about? Odom came off the bench. He often started alongside Gasol because Bynum was oft-injured. I don't think that's what Tpols was suggesting.

Looking at the Basketball Reference lineup data, they only played a Bynum-Odom-Gasol lineup in the 2009-10 regular season for 77 minutes and 13 seconds out of 3,966 total minutes (1.95% of the time in 2009-10; 0.65% of the time from 2008-09 to 2010-11) It was +8.2 points per 100 for what it's worth:

[img]https://i.ibb.co/F3B3SQp/KEm-Mu-F6-d.webp[/img]

Gasol + Odom and Gasol + Bynum would be the staples as they were back then. With some Ariza and MWP at PF thrown in there depending on the year.

[QUOTE=Im Still Ballin;14941578]LA almost never played that lineup back then. What are you talking about? Odom came off the bench. He often started alongside Gasol because Bynum was oft-injured.[/QUOTE]

This. We were at our best with Gasol & Odom in the lineup & Ariza playing the 3. Artest actually made our team a bit worse, bad fit on offense, Ariza was better.

[QUOTE=Im Still Ballin;14941578]LA almost never played that lineup back then. What are you talking about? Odom came off the bench. He often started alongside Gasol because Bynum was oft-injured. I don't think that's what Tpols was suggesting.

Looking at the Basketball Reference lineup data, they only played a Bynum-Odom-Gasol lineup in the 2009-10 regular season for 77 minutes and 13 seconds out of 3,966 total minutes (1.95% of the time in 2009-10; 0.65% of the time from 2008-09 to 2010-11) It was +8.2 points per 100 for what it's worth:

[img]https://i.ibb.co/F3B3SQp/KEm-Mu-F6-d.webp[/img]

Gasol + Odom and Gasol + Bynum would be the staples as they were back then. With some Ariza and MWP at PF thrown in there depending on the year.[/QUOTE]
Fair enough, I didn’t start seriously watching NBA until 2011 playoffs.

Still don’t like two big lineups in todays NBA if neither are a real threat from 3.

[QUOTE=RRR3;14941588]Fair enough, I didn’t start seriously watching NBA until 2011 playoffs.

Still don’t like two big lineups in todays NBA if neither are a real threat from 3.[/QUOTE]

then maybe refrain from speaking on shit you don’t know about????


Tbh I was always huge on Odom and Pau but Bynum never did it for me. To me he seemed like the guy who people thought he could tap into this potential but he never did. He had spurts of it but was never consistent, he wasn’t a big player in playoffs or finals. He literally was out of the league very prematurely it seemed after his Lakers stint. I always found the hype of Bynum puzzling. A combo of Laker homers being very optimistic and Kobe haters trying to prop up his cast to tear him down. I never saw Bynum as being anything from my point of view. It is what it is.

[QUOTE=tontoz;14941507]Your "analysis" is the only thing deeply flawed. Embarrassing.

Boston's top 2 are surely weaker than a lot of championship teams but 3-8 they are stronger than most of them in the last 30 years.[/QUOTE]

yea read all my bad takes lol. It's a constant problem. Having a weak 1-2 and strong 3-8 is not the recipe for a dynasty. What teams are coming to mind? The b2b pistons, maybe?

Edit: thought experiment, Bos is locked into a tight game coming down the stretch vs an all time great team, what do they run to get scores? Try to get Porzingis to post vs a 6'6 guy on the pick and roll?

[QUOTE=AlternativeAcc.;14941526]Luka, SGA, Jokic, Giannis...

Every contending team has a dominant duo in today's league.

Kobe/Pau stuck out in late 00s, but wouldn't in 2024.[/QUOTE]

Those guys are not duos? And only two of them are guards like Kobe. Like I said it has to be guard w/ complementary big, and if you take a 'better big' and a 'worse guard,' it doesn't work because the game is much different. So Jokic and Giannis are really good, but they are not on the wing. Kobe is universally regarded as the best 1 on 1 player in history, and that's even to people who hate him (I don't hate him, but I dislike his play style,) he would shit on everyone. The only way they could do anything is to hope that LAL just kept bricking. Which, as i said, could be an issue, but I think in a series, it would be fine.

-Smak

There aren't many teams that qualify as a dynasty. Other than the warriors there are the Lakers and the Spurs since the bulls broke up.

Boston was first in offensive efficiency and 3rd in defense. They have 2 way players throughout their rotation. The strength of their roster is the reason they were able to win without a MVP caliber player.

Dallas rolled minny and looked like a real threat to win the Finals. Boston just punked them.

Since 2020 Tatum has the most playoff points and is second in assists and rebounds. Jaylen Brown followed the biggest defensive play of the postseason with the biggest shot of the postseason in Game 1 vs Indiana to save the Celtics. There is basically nothing the Celtics could have done to change minds if they win 64 games in the regular season, go 16-3 in the postseason, and we still have people talking about "thought experiment." The rest of the NBA fails to test them and you act like that means they failed the test when in reality they were just a level above everyone else. Being the best team is not a fatal flaw.

Before the finals we had a thread on here talking about how Doncic could be the greatest clutch playoff performer ever or some such dumb shit...I didn't agree but he was definitely playing some great basketball. Had Dallas won people would be talking about what a great do Irving and Doncic were. But when the Celtics shut them down with JB routinely wearing Doncic out in the fourth you just talk about what a weak do Tatum and Brown are. Whatever. The lesson is about to be repeated.

[QUOTE=warriorfan;14941617]then maybe refrain from speaking on shit you don’t know about????


Tbh I was always huge on Odom and Pau but Bynum never did it for me. To me he seemed like the guy who people thought he could tap into this potential but he never did. He had spurts of it but was never consistent, he wasn’t a big player in playoffs or finals. He literally was out of the league very prematurely it seemed after his Lakers stint. I always found the hype of Bynum puzzling. A combo of Laker homers being very optimistic and Kobe haters trying to prop up his cast to tear him down. I never saw Bynum as being anything from my point of view. It is what it is.[/QUOTE]

He did have one season where he legit looked like the best offensive center in the league in 2012. He had a very nice touch around the rim, although I could tell the fit between Bynum & Gasol was kinda weird that year. Gasol/Odom pair was better. Bynum was a super talented dude, but just didn't care too much about basketball and was often injured.

[video=youtube;uzmjolNHE28]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzmjolNHE28[/video]

[QUOTE=warriorfan;14941617]then maybe refrain from speaking on shit you don’t know about????


Tbh I was always huge on Odom and Pau but Bynum never did it for me. To me he seemed like the guy who people thought he could tap into this potential but he never did. He had spurts of it but was never consistent, he wasn’t a big player in playoffs or finals. He literally was out of the league very prematurely it seemed after his Lakers stint. I always found the hype of Bynum puzzling. A combo of Laker homers being very optimistic and Kobe haters trying to prop up his cast to tear him down. I never saw Bynum as being anything from my point of view. It is what it is.[/QUOTE]


Bynum had crazy soft touch for how huge he was. He was a true giant with finesse on the low block.

I still remember I joined ISH during the 2010 NBA Finals and everybody was saying Boston would lose Game 7 because Perkins had been declared out, which meant LA could bully the paint. Kobe and Pau shot a combined 12/42, and they still won because they dominated the boards. Kobe had 15 rebounds and Pau had 18. That's nuts.

The funniest thing to me though is people thinking Jayson ****ing Tatum would solve that paint domination. :oldlol: It wasn't even just Pau, Bynum, and Odom. Kobe was pulling boards down at a crazy level and Artest was beating the shit out of guys while boxing out since he kind of moves naturally like a bull in a China shop.

In games where they weren't on fire from 3, Boston would be getting their cheeks clapped. And we've seen Tatum brick a million 3s in the Finals so that's going to be tough to cover.