70sFan wrote:OhayoKD wrote:70sFan wrote:Basketball doesn't work that way in such small samples.
It works that way more often than it doesn't. What exactly is giving you insight that the Lakers are losing in this hypothetical?
Well, the Lakers would not have had any perimeter creators and their second scoring option would be... Fox? Fisher? These players can't create their own shots. I guess their defense would be still quite good without Kobe (assuming the same level of focus from others), but they'd lose a lot on offensive end and once you start taking tough shots and making more turnovers, your defense also starts to look significantly worse.
I don't understand how it is even a question. Basketball isn't a game of the sum of parts. Kobe's value is not +20 in absolute sense, but the Lakers were very reliant on his playmaking and shot creation. I doubt they'd clear the West, let alone win 4 series in a row.
Kobe was not worth 20 points even situationally. Yes they would be worse. Yes their offense and potentially defense would slide. But that they slide by so much a historically big blowout becomes a loss is not something that follows from any of these points. Small samples increase uncertainity and to an extent better players become more valuable vs tougher opponents. If kobe is out they slant more defensively. Flawed rosters can still win titles. Just ask the 2021 Bucks.
And anyway, the claim here was not "clearing the west', it was beating a similarly flawed team they obliterated.