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

[ShawkFactory]

Who did Tatum and Brown shoot 26% and 23% from 3pt range against then?

Spell it out.

It's a 5 game sample and sometimes the shots just don't go down? And neither of them are particularly great 3pt shooters anyway?

Wow that easy.

[tpols]

It's a 5 game sample and sometimes the shots just don't go down? And neither of them are particularly great 3pt shooters anyway?

Wow that easy.

That's the point OP has been trying to make. 3pt variance. It's extremely boom or bust.

In the 2024 NBA Finals Tatum, Brown, and Porzingis shot 26%, 23%, and 22%(!) from 3pt range.



It's just funny because a lot of the arguments we hear in this thread are "woah man... they'd just bang mad 3s and 3>2 amirite?"

Turns out they weren't even good at that. Their best scorers and shooters shot terribly from 3.

[AlternativeAcc.]

That's the point OP has been trying to make. 3pt variance. It's extremely boom or bust.

In the 2024 NBA Finals Tatum, Brown, and Porzingis shot 26%, 23%, and 22%(!) from 3pt range.



It's just funny because a lot of the arguments we hear in this thread are "woah man... they'd just bang mad 3s and 3>2 amirite?"

Turns out they weren't even good at that. Their best scorers and shooters shot like terribly from 3.

And yet they still shot better from 3 than the Mavs on higher volume.

[Axe]

If pau can shoot threes really well upon transitioning, then that would be so good for his team.

[ShawkFactory]

That's the point OP has been trying to make. 3pt variance. It's extremely boom or bust.

In the 2024 NBA Finals Tatum, Brown, and Porzingis shot 26%, 23%, and 22%(!) from 3pt range.



It's just funny because a lot of the arguments we hear in this thread are "woah man... they'd just bang mad 3s and 3>2 amirite?"

Turns out they weren't even good at that. Their best scorers and shooters shot terribly from 3.

And they still won easily because they do so many other things well.

Imagine what would happen if they were actually hot from 3, as they are obviously capable of doing? Like Kristaps missed most of the series and went 2-9 from 3.

They move the ball ridiculously. Constantly cutting, poking and prodding at a defense and wearing them down. Then they're so good on the other end, particularly on the perimeter. Kobe would NOT have an easy time dealing with Brown and Jrue with an intelligent team concept defensively behind them.

Their best shooters are Jrue, White, Horford, Pritchard, and Hauser btw. That's why they're so dangerous because literally everyone outside of their top dawgs are great shooters.

[Axe]

That's the point OP has been trying to make. 3pt variance. It's extremely boom or bust.

In the 2024 NBA Finals Tatum, Brown, and Porzingis shot 26%, 23%, and 22%(!) from 3pt range.



It's just funny because a lot of the arguments we hear in this thread are "woah man... they'd just bang mad 3s and 3>2 amirite?"

Turns out they weren't even good at that. Their best scorers and shooters shot terribly from 3.

Ever heard of defense? Lmao.

[Real Men Wear Green]

Who did Tatum and Brown shoot 26% and 23% from 3pt range against then?

Spell it out.

The team three point shooting is more than three players. As a team they only had one game shooting under 33%. And that's with their two big guns missing from three.

But you keep acting like Kyrie Irving's defense had anything to do with Tatum's shooting.

[tpols]

And yet they still shot better from 3 than the Mavs on higher volume.

Yup. And Boston also shot worse from 3 than the 2009 Lakers in the Finals.

LA shot 37% from deep. The Celtics shot 33%.

The more we delve into this the funnier it gets.

[AlternativeAcc.]

Bynum would absolutely be played off the court vs. the Celtics.

Pau could definitely get the better of Tatum in some 1v1 situations, but Pau isn't even a high volume scorer and the Celtics have the best help defense in the league. The mismatch on the other end is far greater in the Celtics favor.

All in all the current Celtics would wipe the floor with the 09 Lakers. Some of you guys seriously don't know ball.

[AlternativeAcc.]

Yup. And Boston also shot worse from 3 than the 2009 Lakers in the Finals.

LA shot 37% from deep. The Celtics shot 33%.

The more we delve into this the funnier it gets.

Its almost like the Celtics and Magic have different defenses and the volume difference is massive.

Whats funny is you've brought up 2 examples of a team shooting better from 3 than their competition while trying to make the argument that 3pt shooting doesn't matter.

You're a national treasure.

[ShawkFactory]

Its almost like the Celtics and Magic have different defenses and the volume difference is massive.

Whats funny is you've brought up 2 examples of a team shooting better from 3 than their competition while trying to make the argument that 3pt shooting doesn't matter.

You're a national treasure.

It'd be interesting to see if the eFG% and TS% reflects the difference in 3pt volume.

Spoiler alert...it does.

[tpols]

You're a national treasure.

Oh stop... im bashful.



Don't try to turn this around though. Yall are the ones saying 3pt shooting is all that matters but when I point out the 2009 Lakers shot better from 3 than today's champion in the NBA Finals, which is the only real series Boston played, you want to tuck tail.

Once again no pun intended.

[AlternativeAcc.]

Oh stop... im bashful.



Don't try to turn this around though. Yall are the ones saying 3pt shooting is all that matters but when I point out the 2009 Lakers shot better from 3 than today's champion in the NBA Finals, which is the only real series Boston played, you want to tuck tail.

Once again no pun intended.

No, I think you're the one trying to pretend the Celtics are only a 3pt shooting team when in reality they can beat you with passing, defense, and chemistry in a more dominant fashion than the 09 Lakers could.

When you add the massive difference in 3pt capabilities, it's easy to see why the Celtics would be a massive favorite in a hypothetical series.

You brought up 2 examples of a team out-shooting their competition in the finals while making the argument that 3pt shooting doesn't matter. So your weird strawmans and 5 game samples don't even hold up...it's just desperation and half-baked arguments per usual.

[tontoz]

Yup. And Boston also shot worse from 3 than the 2009 Lakers in the Finals.

LA shot 37% from deep. The Celtics shot 33%.

The more we delve into this the funnier it gets.

Actually the Celtics shot 34% from 3 if you round it correctly, and they made 14 3s per game, double what the "lights out" Lakers made

[HoopsNY]

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.

Not sure this is the flex that you might think it is? Bam led the Heat in scoring with 23 PPG on near 50% shooting in the series against Boston. So what's Tatum doing against Pau, really?

In addition, Bam this season shot 52% on 2P attempts whereas the league shot 55%.

2009 Pau shot almost 57% with the league shooting something like 48.5% in 2P attempts. In the playoffs, Pau put up 58% while the league shot 48%.

I have to agree with tpols on this one. The two, at least in terms of offensive skillsets, are completely different. Sure, the Lakers are at a disadvantage with Gasol guarding Tatum on the perimeter, but I think the C's would actually try to go with a bigger lineup which would probably result in him not even having to guard Tatum at that point.