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

They'd thrive just as they did before. The Triangle would be more potent with the freedom of movement rule. Not to mention the legalized third (gather) step. They have the positional/lineup flexibility to be versatile, just as they were back then against proto-modern teams like Phoenix and Orlando. They also have the personnel to increase their 3PAr if needed. But I don't think it's as necessary as you'd think.

I'll keep my argument simple:

1) Size and offensive rebounding are still incredibly valuable.

[quote]It seemed as though there was a period of time in the 2010s where transition defense and smaller lineups were prioritized over offensive rebounding and size. But in the '20s, we've begun to see a return to traditionally valued second chance points. We've seen Taylor Jenkins' Memphis (2021-22) and Tom Thibodeau's Knicks (2022-23 and 2023-24) utilize offensive rebounding to create elite offenses despite below-average eFG%:

[quote]MEM 2021-22: 5th ORtg; +2.6 rORtg [23rd eFG%, 4th TOV%, 1st ORB%, 23rd FT/FGA]

NYK 2022-23: 3rd ORtg; +3 rORtg [20th eFG%, 5th TOV%, 2nd ORB%, 11th FT/FGA]
NYK 2023-24: 7th ORtg; +2.9 rORtg [16th eFG%, 15th TOV%, 1st ORB%, 15th FT/FGA]
NYK PLAYOFFS 2023-24: 2nd ORtg; +5.1 rORtg [10th/16 eFG%, 2nd/16 TOV%, 1st/16 ORB%, 5th/16 FT/FGA][/quote]

Both Memphis and New York utilize Aaron Fearne-style Tagging Up tactics to maximize offensive rebounding chances without sacrificing transition defense.[/quote]

2) Elite modern offenses can and have been accomplished with high-volume mid-range and post-up shot selection.

[quote]I'm surprised this wasn't about the 2018-19 Spurs. They had the third-best half-court offense despite ranking 26th in 3PM, 30th in 3PA, and 30th in 3PAr.

Its overall offense was third-best in the playoffs: +3.0 rORtg compared to the 2018-19 playoffs league-average ORtg. +4.1 opponent-adjusted rORtg if you adjust for Denver's regular season DRtg. The Nuggets had the 10th-best regular-season defense, coming in at 1.5 points better (-1.5 rDRtg) than the league average. So, it was a solid defense they were up against.

SAS was 30th in playoff 3PAr (.233); a whopping -14.6 r3PAr/-38.5%/61.5 3PAr+ compared to the playoff average 3PAr (.379).

It's only seven games but it's food for thought. I made a thread on this several months back but no one responded:

[url]https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2336902&hilit=Spurs[/url]

The KD/Kyrie Brooklyn Nets were doing similar things.[/quote]

3) High-performing offenses can look any number of ways. Some leverage shot-making (eFG%) more while others lean on differing blends of FTr, ORB%, and TOV%.

4) Dual-big PF/C tandems have resulted in elite defenses in the modern era. See San Antonio from 2014-2018. 4.9 rDRtg while featuring Splitter-Duncan, LMA-Duncan, LMA-Gasol starting lineups.

5) There is no specific requirement for the number of three-point shooters or a vaguely defined amount of spacing for a lineup to be effective.

[quote]Another poor-faith stance is boiling the validity of a lineup to the number of three-point shooters or vague/undefined spacing. There have been many high-performing lineups in recent years with multiple non-shooters. Here are some examples:

(NBA.com and Basketball Reference lineup numbers vary slightly. This is due to a different possession formula I believe)

[img]https://i.ibb.co/tw6p9bt/imagelineups.png[/img]

GSW's 2022-23 starting lineup. Featuring two non-shooters (Green, Looney), it was statistically far and away the best starting five in the NBA.

[quote]2023: S. Curry - K. Thompson - D. Green - A. Wiggins - K. Looney

- 27 games played, 331 minutes played
- 128.0 ORtg; 106.1 DRtg; +21.9 Net Rating (1st [min. 80 minutes played])[/quote]

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).

2024 Celtics are an all-time great team and them beating the Kobe-Pau Lakers (which they likely would) isn't exactly a knock on the latter. Those Lakers would still be contenders today. Fish/Kobe/Ariza is enough 3pt shooting too.

[QUOTE=dankok8;14941047]2024 Celtics are an all-time great team and them beating the Kobe-Pau Lakers (which they likely would) isn't exactly a knock on the latter. Those Lakers would still be contenders today. Fish/Kobe/Ariza is enough 3pt shooting too.[/QUOTE]

How do they compare regarding full-strength SRS and playoff SRS? The '09 Lakers were pretty damn good IIRC:

[QUOTE]This is a team that completely dominated the league and yet they're hardly talked about.

They won 65 gms with a 7.3 SRS and won a great conference by ten games. They were one of the best "healthy" teams ever:

[img]http://www.backpicks.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Screen-Shot-2016-07-31-at-2.27.57-PM.png[/img]

2008 Lakers: +9.7
[b]2009 Lakers: +9.0[/b]

[quote]2008-09 Lakers and Celtics. These teams were fantastic in an incredibly competitive league. The Celtics were +8.8 and +9.3 when healthy, and the Lakers +9.7 and +9.0 once Pau Gasol joined. Kevin Garnett’s injury robbed us of possibly the NBA’s greatest trilogy[/quote]

[quote]Amazingly, of the top 40 healthy teams of all-time, seven are Pop’s Spurs teams. Five are Jordan’s Bulls. Four are Laker teams with Kobe Bryant.[/quote]

And they were utterly dominant in the post-season:

The 09 Lakers rank sixth all-time in leverage-adjusted playoff SRS

[url]https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-year-of-the-warriors/[/url]

[url]https://fivethirtyeight.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/neil-warriors-2-0617.png?w=575[/url]

Ahead of teams like the 1992 Bulls, 87 Lakers, 08 Celtics, and 1997 Bulls.

Seventh all-time in ELO blend
[url]https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/after-all-that-the-warriors-arent-even-the-second-best-team-ever/[/url]


Ahead of teams like the 92 and 91 Bulls, 83 Sixers, 14 Spurs, and 72 and 87 Lakers.

The best NBA teams ever (according to Elo). [b]The 09 Lakers ranked eighth all-time in overall ELO.[/b]
[url]https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-warriors-are-in-the-goat-debate-but-they-blew-their-chance-to-end-it[/url]


[b]The 09 Lakers are higher than teams like the 92 Bulls, 91 Bulls, 83 Sixers,2014 Spurs, etc

The 09 Lakers had the [b]sixth greatest peak ELO Rating in NBA histroy [/b]at 1790.0:
[/b]

[url]https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/last-years-warriors-werent-the-best-ever-but-this-years-might-be/[/url]

They completely dominated in the post-season:

Their post-season adjusted SRS of 12.7[/b] was the sixth highest since 1984: [url]https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-year-of-the-warriors[/url]

Here they're ahead of teams like the 85 Lakers, 87 Lakers, 08 Celtics, and 97 Bulls.

The 09 Kobe/Pau/Odom was one of the absolute the most dominant trio we have on record. [b]The Kobe/Pau/Odom 09 trio (+17.5 in 3739 possessions) was the one of the very best we have recorded.

The 09 Lakers were also very arguably the best passing team in the league. Their team passer rating was #1 in the league and #61 all-time: [url]http://www.backpicks.com/2018/07/15/nba-passer-ratings-since-1978/[/url]

Discuss.[/QUOTE]

Kobe and Pau would be fine but I don't think that version of Derek Fisher and Trevor Ariza can hang today. Fisher would be hunted by every guard and Ariza couldn't shoot well and only got hot in the playoff. Lakers relied heavily on them since Bynum wasn't even playing 20 minutes in the playoff. If we take Ron Artest Lakers it's even worse since he's taking horrible low percentage shots like Artest loved to do and Fisher was even older. I think it's obvious the Kobe-Pau Lakers would be worse today, but not because of Kobe-Pau.

[QUOTE=dankok8;14941047]2024 Celtics are an all-time great team and them beating the Kobe-Pau Lakers (which they likely would) isn't exactly a knock on the latter. Those Lakers would still be contenders today. Fish/Kobe/Ariza is enough 3pt shooting too.[/QUOTE]

There have been over 20 teams with as many or more than the Celtics 64 wins. Although I believe Jaylen Brown should have been All-NBA the Celtics only had one AllNBA player and Tatum was 6th (I think) in mvp voting. Just the two Allstars. The Celtics probably were better than most nba champions but but judged by wins or awards there are a lot of teams that did better.

But even if you take them out of the argument the Gasol/Bryant Lakers would be overwhelmed by the threes on modern offenses. I don't see them winning the West. Bryant and Gasol are great as cornerstones but the rest of the team would have to be different. No NBA GM today is putting out a team with Fisher, Artest, Ariza and Odom spreading the floor. They probably would develop into better shooters if they came up today but if they're the exact same players that they were that team would not work.

[QUOTE]. 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.[/QUOTE]


That's really not true at all. The Lakers had one of the biggest and best tandems of low post scorers in the league with Pau / Odom / Bynum and Kobe who was an elite post player who would also easily be the best player in the series.

So if defending size in the post is a problem for Boston there isn't even a team in the league today that had what LA had back then in that regard.


[QUOTE=iamgine;14941050]Kobe and Pau would be fine but I don't think that version of Derek Fisher and Trevor Ariza can hang today. Fisher would be hunted by every guard.[/QUOTE]


Fisher was a better defensive player than guards Boston faced in the playoffs last year like Haliburton and Kyrie. Not a better player obviously but don't know where you're getting this idea he'd be "hunted". Defensive hustle was probably his strongest suit as a basketball player.

And an Artest / Kobe / Fisher perimeter defense is much better than the weak backcourt defenses Boston faced in the 2024 playoffs. Artest in particular would lock Tatum up just how he did Durant. Too skinny and weak.

[QUOTE=tpols;14941082]That's really not true at all. The Lakers had one of the biggest and best tandems of low post scorers in the league with Pau / Odom / Bynum and Kobe who was an elite post player who would also easily be the best player in the series. [/quote]Bynum averaged 15 points and Gasol was not a bruiser. Put them both out there and the advantage is solidly for the Celtics. Tatum has guarded Myles Turner and Bam Adebayo, he can defend in the paint. Gasol would be hopeless guarding Tatum on the perimeter. There's a reason two-big lineups have become less common.

[QUOTE]So if defending size in the post is a problem for Boston there isn't even a team in the league today that had what LA had back then in that regard.[/QUOTE]It is a problem when they have to deal with Jokic or Giannis. Lakers don't have a dominant gut like those two.

[QUOTE]Fisher was a better defensive player than guards Boston faced in the playoffs last year like Haliburton and Kyrie. Not a better player obviously but don't know where you're getting this idea he'd be "hunted". Defensive hustle was probably his strongest suit as a basketball player. [/quote]Fisher would be the guy getting abused in the paint by KP when the Celtics forced the switch. He was not a special defender and even if he was the Celtics offense isn't at all focused on creating isolating plays for White or Holiday vs the opposing point guard. The Celtics want to exploit mismatches but when they do go with that kind of play it's going to be Tatum or Brown.

[Quote]And an Artest / Kobe / Fisher perimeter defense is much better than the weak backcourt defenses Boston faced in the 2024 playoffs. Artest in particular would lock Tatum up just how he did Durant. Too skinny and weak.[/QUOTE]Artest was a great defender in his prime but as a lake he was past his prime. And saying Tatum is skinny and weak I'm not sure that you even watch basketball. Bryant could make it tough for JB but overall the Celtics would be burying the Lakers from the three point line.

[QUOTE=tpols;14941082]
Fisher was a better defensive player than guards Boston faced in the playoffs last year like Haliburton and Kyrie. Not a better player obviously but don't know where you're getting this idea he'd be "hunted". Defensive hustle was probably his strongest suit as a basketball player.

And an Artest / Kobe / Fisher perimeter defense is much better than the weak backcourt defenses Boston faced in the 2024 playoffs. Artest in particular would lock Tatum up just how he did Durant. Too skinny and weak.[/QUOTE]
Fisher was a decent defender but was particularly weak against quick guards. And with the guards we have today, he'd be hunted every night.

Sure the defense is nice but their offense would be a mess. Not enough quality scoring.

The Lakers averaged only 6.7 made 3s per game.

[url]https://www.teamrankings.com/nba/stat/three-pointers-made-per-game?date=2009-06-15[/url]


This past season last place Orlando made 11 per game.

[QUOTE=iamgine;14941087]Fisher was a decent defender but was particularly weak against quick guards. And with the guards we have today, he'd be hunted every night.

Sure the defense is nice but their offense would be a mess. Not enough quality scoring.[/QUOTE]


Never heard Fisher couldn't guard quick guards before. That's a new one. But even if it were true Jrue Holiday isn't a quick guard. He's more of a bully PG. So that wouldn't be a problem in the Boston matchup.

As far as quality scoring goes, OP just showed that the Lakers production was elite. They relied on offensive rebounding for it to an extent, which makes the efficiency lower but provides extra possessions and wears teams down physically.

Anybody that's played basketball against a team much bigger than them knows how tiring it can become. With the Lakers trio of 7 footers and bully Artest swinging elbows in the paint from a size perspective Boston is like a middleweight fighter and LA is like a heavyweight.

So it's a contrast of styles. LA obviously wouldn't just get into a 3pt chucking battle. They'd have to force double teams in the post which we know Boston and many other teams today would absolutely have to do, work the triangle to get the role players open 3s, and generally just dominate the paint.

TBH... the Garnett Pierce Ray Rondo Celtics were better than the 2024 iteration. They had the bullies like Perk and Tony Allen to bang with LA's size as well. This current Celtic team doesn't have that.

[QUOTE=tpols;14941090]Never heard Fisher couldn't guard quick guards before. That's a new one. But even if it were true Jrue Holiday isn't a quick guard. He's more of a bully PG. So that wouldn't be a problem in the Boston matchup.

As far as quality scoring goes, OP just showed that the Lakers production was elite. They relied on offensive rebounding for it to an extent, which makes the efficiency lower but provides extra possessions and wears teams down physically.

Anybody that's played basketball against a team much bigger than them knows how tiring it can become. With the Lakers trio of 7 footers and bully Artest swinging elbows in the paint from a size perspective Boston is like a middleweight fighter and LA is like a heavyweight.

So it's a contrast of styles. LA obviously wouldn't just get into a 3pt chucking battle. They'd have to force double teams in the post which we know Boston and many other teams today would absolutely have to do, work the triangle to get the role players open 3s, and generally just dominate the paint.

TBH... the Garnett Pierce Ray Rondo Celtics were better than the 2024 iteration. They had the bullies like Perk and Tony Allen to bang with LA's size as well. This current Celtic team doesn't have that.[/QUOTE]
Jrue isn't the only guard in the league you know.

It was elite when they played. Today, they'd be quite mediocre. I'm not sure they will even make the playoff the way they played.

[QUOTE=iamgine;14941095]Jrue isn't the only guard in the league you know.

It was elite when they played. Today, they'd be quite mediocre. I'm not sure they will even make the playoff the way they played.[/QUOTE]

You don't think the Laker team that won B2B championships would even make the playoffs today?

See you guys are totally out of wack. And I'm a 3pt guy too... but this is just getting out of hand. A lot of you fellas probably didn't play ball and don't know the effect size and strength can have on a matchup. This isn't Gobert and KAT in the paint. It's a trio of bigger much better inside players. And Kobe.

We just saw a Miami heat underdog team with Jimmy Butler and Bam as their best players make the Finals and those two guys aren't good long range shooters at all. But they won with their grit and toughness.

It's a contrast of styles. Artest and Fisher spaced the floor from deep even if they weren't always on target you had to guard them. Hell... Artest was MVP of G7 in the 2010 Finals and his Mos iconic plays were 3s.

2010 wasn't 1980 or 1990. Guys were actually being guarded @ the 3pt line.

I mean, I suppose 14 years in sports years and specifically the current NBA is a long time, especially with the proliferation of the 3pointer the last decade. But Kobe and Pau did win a title 14 years ago lol, it's not like them as individual players are outdated or as a duo. 2008-2010 Kobe is comfortably the best 2-guard today and Pau would still be a top flight big, he'd probably exclusively play the 5. Kobe would have a greater greenlight to shoot the 3 with more spaced out courts. His volume and % will likely noticeably rise.

You'd then surround then with the requisite 3 point shooting needed of more modern( say post 2014) teams. And I can imagine someone like a Jrue Holiday next to Kobe in the backcourt.

[QUOTE=tpols;14941096]You don't think the Laker team that won B2B championships would even make the playoffs today?

See you guys are totally out of wack. And I'm a 3pt guy too... but this is just getting out of hand. A lot of you fellas probably didn't play ball and don't know the effect size and strength can have on a matchup. This isn't Gobert and KAT in the paint. It's a trio of bigger much better inside players. And Kobe.

We just saw a Miami heat underdog team with Jimmy Butler and Bam as their best players make the Finals and those two guys aren't good long range shooters at all. But they won with their grit and toughness.

It's a contrast of styles. Artest and Fisher spaced the floor from deep even if they weren't always on target you had to guard them. Hell... Artest was MVP of G7 in the 2010 Finals and his Mos iconic plays were 3s.

2010 wasn't 1980 or 1990. Guys were actually being guarded @ the 3pt line.[/QUOTE]

Yes, the Lakers that won B2B, the way they were constructed, I'm not sure they make the playoff. They might tho.

Miami Heat ah yes look at how much more 3s they shot compared to the Lakers.

[QUOTE=Phoenix;14941098]I mean, I suppose 14 years in sports years and specifically the current NBA is a long time, especially with the proliferation of the 3pointer the last decade. But Kobe and Pau did win a title 14 years ago lol, it's not like them as individual players are outdated or as a duo. 2008-2010 Kobe is comfortably the best 2-guard today and Pau would still be a top flight big, he'd probably exclusively play the 5. Kobe would have a greater greenlight to shoot the 3 with more spaced out courts. His volume and % will likely noticeably rise.

You'd then surround then with the requisite 3 point shooting needed of more modern( say post 2014) teams. And I can imagine someone like a Jrue Holiday next to Kobe in the backcourt.[/QUOTE]

It's not about Kobe or Pau, they'd be fine. It's about the other Lakers.

[QUOTE=iamgine;14941101]Yes, the Lakers that won B2B, the way they were constructed, I'm not sure they make the playoff. They might tho.

Miami Heat ah yes look at how much more 3s they shot compared to the Lakers.[/QUOTE]

And yet... the 2020 and 2023 Miami Heat and 2009 Lakers had the same exact offensive efficiency over the course of the season. But the Lakers defensive and rebounding metrics were far superior. And LAs tandem of Kobe and Pau was > Butler and Bam.

So what you're saying isn't adding up. Miami made the Finals with a 25th ranked offense in 2023.

[QUOTE=tpols;14941104]And yet... the 2020 and 2023 Miami Heat and 2009 Lakers had the same exact offensive efficiency over the course of the season. But the Lakers defensive and rebounding metrics were far superior. And LAs tandem of Kobe and Pau was > Butler and Bam.

So what you're saying isn't adding up. Miami made the Finals with a 25th ranked offense in 2023.[/QUOTE]

Miami made the Finals but you seem to forget that they were a play-in team. Their style was not particularly effective, Butler just played at a great level for a few series. Once they got to the finals they got destroyed. A team from the Lakers era that had never seen the level of the point shooting we have in the NBA now isn't going to be a contender. Bryant and Gasol would still be effective but they would have to be surrounded by far better shooters.

[QUOTE=tontoz;14941088]The Lakers averaged only 6.7 made 3s per game.

[url]https://www.teamrankings.com/nba/stat/three-pointers-made-per-game?date=2009-06-15[/url]


This past season last place Orlando made 11 per game.[/QUOTE]
They’d get obliterated by the Celtics lmao.

[QUOTE=iamgine;14941103]It's not about Kobe or Pau, they'd be fine. It's about the other Lakers.[/QUOTE]

The thread topic is about Kobe and Pau, so my reply is focused on them. It being mainly about the others goes without saying, as is the case for any other elite players(s). And in saying that, 'the others' is highly variable. So what is your premise.. throw together 10 other hypothetical teammates? That's an exercise worth investing time and energy in? Kobe and Pau on their own would be a great core even in 2024, now you surround them with the right talent, coaching, system and circumstances. The formula doesn't change, you just tweak it to fit the league they're in.

[QUOTE=Phoenix;14941124]The thread topic is about Kobe and Pau, so my reply is focused on them. It being mainly about the others goes without saying, as is the case for any other elite players(s). And in saying that, 'the others' is highly variable. So what is your premise.. throw together 10 other hypothetical teammates? That's an exercise worth investing time and energy in? Kobe and Pau on their own would be a great core even in 2024?now you surround them with the right talent, coaching, system and circumstances based. The formula doesn't change, you just tweak it to fit the league they're in.[/QUOTE]
Kobe and Pau could be built around to make a good team in 2024 but those Lakers were built terribly for today. They were playing 3 bigs at times.

I just looked it up fellas because I knew what some of you cats were saying didn't add up in regards to the 3pt spacing of those Laker teams.

Look at Trevor Arizas playoff splits from 2009.

[IMG]https://i.postimg.cc/8Ck8hqmf/Screenshot-20240905-125742-Chrome.jpg[/IMG]

He shot 50+% on average from deep. Best of his career... on absolute fire. And Derek Fisher played all 82 games that year and he shot 40% from 3pt range.

This is direct proof that LAs role players could shoot 3s and space the floor. Now the question is could today's champions with their weak defensive frontcourts contain their 2pt scoring in the triangle system.

We haven't seen this point addressed yet.

[QUOTE=RRR3;14941128]Kobe and Pau could be built around to make a good team in 2024 but those Lakers were built terribly for today. They were playing 3 bigs at times.[/QUOTE]

Yes but I'm not making a case for putting the 2008-2010 Lakers in 2024. I'm making the case that Kobe and Gasol would still be a great duo today, and you surround them with the right mix of players in today's league. Like...what is the conversation in question? How good would Kobe/Gasol be in 2024, or how good are the 2009 Lakers in 2024? Because my comments address the former scenario. Like... I ain't even said anything about the 2008-2010 Lakers lol...

[QUOTE=Phoenix;14941131]Yes but I'm not making a case for putting the 2008-2010 Lakers in 2024. I'm making the case that Kobe and Gasol would still be a great duo today, and you surround them with the right mix of players in today's league. Like...what is the conversation in question? How good would Kobe/Gasol be in 2024, or how good are the 2009 Lakers in 2024? Because my comments address the former scenario. Like... I ain't even said anything about the 2008-2010 Lakers lol...[/QUOTE]
The OP's question is about the 2009 Lakers though. That team would not even be good.

[QUOTE=RRR3;14941132]The OP's question is about the 2009 Lakers though. That team would not even be good.[/QUOTE]

I skimmed through his OP and didn't see any specific arguments about the 2009 Lakers. I'll read it again....in any case I've made my comments about Kobe/Gasol on their own merits. The 2009 team isn't designed for 2024 NBA basketball, if that's the core sentiment being argued ( and again, I must have missed it in the OP).

The main reference I see to the 2009 Lakers is this:

'They also have the personnel to increase their 3PA if needed.'

Which I assume he's saying the 2009 Lakers personnel could scale their games to 2024 basketball. Otherwise I don't see where the core of the conversation( at least in the OP) is expressly centered on 'how good would the 2009 Lakers be in 2024?' I don't get the sense that was the main purpose of the thread.

If it is the intent, the title should probably better reflect that as opposed to singling out how good Kobe and Gasol would be today. ' How good would the 2009 Lakers be today' as a thread title and supporting OP speaking specifically to that question wouldn't leave wiggle room for misinterpretation.

I'm genuinely curious, which championship teams since 2010 would you guys pick the Kobe/Pau Lakers to beat?

[QUOTE=tpols;14941130]I just looked it up fellas because I knew what some of you cats were saying didn't add up in regards to the 3pt spacing of those Laker teams.

Look at Trevor Arizas playoff splits from 2009.

[IMG]https://i.postimg.cc/8Ck8hqmf/Screenshot-20240905-125742-Chrome.jpg[/IMG]

He shot 50+% on average from deep. Best of his career... on absolute fire. And Derek Fisher played all 82 games that year and he shot 40% from 3pt range.

This is direct proof that LAs role players could shoot 3s and space the floor. Now the question is could today's champions with their weak defensive frontcourts contain their 2pt scoring in the triangle system.

We haven't seen this point addressed yet.[/QUOTE]




Trevor's 3 pt shooting during the Lakers title run was a total outlier. He shot 25% in the playoffs the season before. He shot 33% during the regular season in 2008-09.

In spite of his career best 3 pt shooting he still only made 1.7 3s per game in the playoffs. He was a slow release catch and shoot player. He was not a guy who could scale up his 3s. He couldn't shoot 3s off the dribble at all.

His first season with the Wizards he shot 36.4% from 3 which was his career high by far, thanks to Wall setting him up for easy looks. He never even shot 34% prior to that.

[QUOTE=SouBeachTalents;14941138]I'm genuinely curious, which championship teams since 2010 would you guys pick the Kobe/Pau Lakers to beat?[/QUOTE]

I couldn't make strong arguments for anyone after 2011. Mayyyybe the 2012 Heat? I don't see them beating the 2014 Spurs, 2013 Heat, definitely not the Warriors. 2016 Cavs...nope but could go 7 maybe(I'm not sure why I feel that way). 2019 Raptors...nope. 2019 Kawhi vs 2010 Kobe is a push(maybe even slight edge to Kawhi) but I'm definitely taking the rest of the Raptors roster. 2021 Bucks? Alot of health related luck went into their run. The Nuggets were 26th in 3PA and still took 12 more than the Lakers. It really just comes down to the X and Os not being enough to balance out the gulf in 3s taken, and/or huge gaps in overall firepower.

[QUOTE=Phoenix;14941151]I couldn't make strong arguments for anyone after 2011. Mayyyybe the 2012 Heat? I don't see them beating the 2014 Spurs, 2013 Heat, definitely not the Warriors. 2016 Cavs...nope but could go 7 maybe(I'm not sure why I feel that way). 2019 Raptors...nope. 2019 Kawhi vs 2010 Kobe is a push(maybe even slight edge to Kawhi) but I'm definitely taking the rest of the Raptors roster. 2021 Bucks? Alot of health related luck went into their run. The Nuggets were 26th in 3PA and still took 12 more than the Lakers. It really just comes down to the X and Os not being enough to balance out the gulf in 3s taken, and/or huge gaps in overall firepower.[/QUOTE]
Despite the thrashing they gave them in 2011, I'd pick them to beat Dallas. That Lakers team was running on fumes, and Kobe/Pau played like shells of themselves.

I actually feel the opposite about Miami, I think they'd have a better shot at the 2013 Heat than they would 2012. Hibbert absolutely destroyed them in 2013, I shudder to think what the Lakers frontline would do to them, plus that version of Wade was far worse.

I also think they'd give the Cavs a run for their money. Similarly to Miami, I think their frontcourt poses a potential matchup problem for Cleveland.

I think they'd have a solid shot against the Bucks as well. I think their frontcourt personnel would potentially cause problems for Giannis, as he would not be able to run downhill towards the basket with ease like he does against current teams.

Gun to my head, I'd probably still pick the latter 3 teams to beat them, but I think those are the matchups they'd be the most competitive in. The rest of the teams I'd pick to beat the Lakers.

[QUOTE=SouBeachTalents;14941172]Despite the thrashing they gave them in 2011, I'd pick them to beat Dallas. That Lakers team was running on fumes, and Kobe/Pau played like shells of themselves.

[B]I actually feel the opposite about Miami, I think they'd have a better shot at the 2013 Heat than they would 2012. Hibbert absolutely destroyed them in 2013, I shudder to think what the Lakers frontline would do to them, plus that version of Wade was far worse.[/B]

I also think they'd give the Cavs a run for their money. Similarly to Miami, I think their frontcourt poses a potential matchup problem for Cleveland.

I think they'd have a solid shot against the Bucks as well. I think their frontcourt personnel would potentially cause problems for Giannis, as he would not be able to run downhill towards the basket with ease like he does against current teams.

Gun to my head, I'd probably still pick the latter 3 teams to beat them, but I think those are the matchups they'd be the most competitive in. The rest of the teams I'd pick to beat the Lakers.[/QUOTE]

Yeah this is a good point. Wade wasn't peak but still all-nba level in 2012. I was thinking moreso the roster around them was better but yeah, that may not be enough to make up for Wade's dropoff in 2013.

Wade was pretty badly hurt the entire 2013 playoffs, while he had declined he was still way better (when healthy) than he played in those playoffs.

Lamar Odom was a matchup nightmare 15 years ago. He could rebound and defend the rim better than guards and shoot the 3 better than traditional bigs, Players with the combination of his size and skillset are not nearly as rare in the modern game and they have improved.

The 2013 Heat team gets a lot of shine and rightfully so, as Wade was still very good and Bron was arguably at his peak but that was definitely a flawed team. They were literally dead last in rebounding and bottom 5 in all of the rebounding percentages. They could be very susceptible to a team with a really good frontcourt like the Lakers had. The 09 team in particular would have a good shot.

[QUOTE=tontoz;14941142]Trevor's 3 pt shooting during the Lakers title run was a total outlier. He shot 25% in the playoffs the season before. He shot 33% during the regular season in 2008-09.

In spite of his career best 3 pt shooting he still only made 1.7 3s per game in the playoffs. He was a slow release catch and shoot player. He was not a guy who could scale up his 3s. He couldn't shoot 3s off the dribble at all.

His first season with the Wizards he shot 36.4% from 3 which was his career high by far, thanks to Wall setting him up for easy looks. He never even shot 34% prior to that.[/QUOTE]


You can't just discount the fact that Ariza shot 50+% from 3 in the 2009 playoffs or Derek Fisher shot 40% from 3 over the 82 game regular season and 44% from deep in the 2009 NBA Finals. Sorry bud. Fluke or not it happened.

You can't say the Kobe Pau Odom Laker champions role players couldn't shoot from 3 when they factually lit it up from 3 in their run. We've got the receipts.

And part of it was probably due to the Lakers elite triangle system which had expert ball movement, chemistry and top assist ranks. Ariza actually shot way better with Kobe and Pau in the triangle than he ever did even with Harden in 2018's small ball era where he bricked vs the warriors in the WCFs shooting only 20% from 3. And that was on a modern 3pt spam squad.

[QUOTE=tpols;14941229]You can't just discount the fact that Ariza shot 50+% from 3 in the 2009 playoffs or Derek Fisher shot 40% from 3 over the 82 game regular season and 44% from deep in the 2009 NBA Finals. Sorry bud. Fluke or not it happened.

You can't say the Kobe Pau Odom Laker champions role players couldn't shoot from 3 when they factually lit it up from 3 in their run. We've got the receipts.

And part of it was probably due to the Lakers elite triangle system which had expert ball movement, chemistry and top assist ranks. Ariza actually shot way better with Kobe and Pau in the triangle than he ever did even with Harden in 2018's small ball era where he bricked vs the warriors in the WCFs shooting only 20% from 3. And that was on a modern 3pt spam squad.[/QUOTE]



I didn't even mention Fisher who was the only good 3 pt shooter in their starting lineup. Funny how you ignore that Ariza shot 25% in the playoffs the season before. Whenever you are looking at small sample sizes the results aren't that reliable. For his career Ariza shot 36.5% from 3 in the playoffs on 4 attempts per game. *yawn*

And even with his outlier shooting during their title run Ariza averaged 1.7 made 3s per game. That isn't moving the needle.

The Lakers made only 7 threes per game during their title run. I wouldn't call that "lighting it up".:lol

What does "just as good" even mean? We all know they were incredibly stacked relative to their competition, but in today's NBA they'd be just another tier 2 competitive team.

They're not beating the Celtics or Nuggets, and probably not OKC, Dallas, Minny, or Milwaukee.


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?

Okay.

I remember ariza as an athletic 3 and D guy. Surprised to see he shot as few. Looking at his basketball reference he did end up as a 35% shooter. His percentage increased with increased volume it looks like. @3ball :lol

I love a thread like this because it exposes bad-faith arguments about the modern game. You have a poor understanding of basketball if your argument boils down to shooting and spacing. Of course, these individuals are going to completely ignore the evidence provided in the OP.

Not enough shooting? 2018-19 SAS had a far inferior version of Kobe and Pau and had a top-three half-court offense and third-best playoff offense. They shot a minuscule 6.9% more threes in the regular season. 21.7% 3PAr vs. 28.6% 3PAr. There was only a 0.4% difference in the playoffs. 22.9% 3PAr vs. 23.3% 3PAr.

Are we really going to boil it all down to [i]that[/i]? That differential would be covered by a couple of role players stepping to the side instead of forward on closeouts. Not that it'd even be a make-or-break thing. Because LA was a way, way better offensive rebounding team. And ORB% is another point in the OP many have just outright ignored...

And that's not even talking about 2018-19 SAS' weak defense and how it limited transition/early offense and its overall ORtg. The Kobe-Pau LA were elite on defense.

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. And claiming they were the third best playoff offense when they played 7 games seems rather disingenuous :lol