Lowest reasonable ranking for Kobe Bryant?

Moderators: trex_8063, penbeast0, PaulieWal, Clyde Frazier, Doctor MJ

70sFan
RealGM
Posts: 30,185
And1: 25,458
Joined: Aug 11, 2015
 

Re: Lowest reasonable ranking for Kobe Bryant? 

Post#121 » by 70sFan » Sat Sep 11, 2021 9:37 am

Strepbacter wrote:You don't have a point. You're talking about offensive talent, but The 09 and especially the 2010 Lakers were quite defensively oriented/slanted and clearly not as talented on O.

Why not? What makes these late 1980s Lakers teams more talented? Magic had Worthy (solid scorer, great in transition not a good creator and didn't bring much spacing), Scott (great shooter, couldn't create his own shot) and bunch of defensive oriented roleplayers in Thompson, Green, old Cooper). They also had old Kareem for two years (I hope you don't see him as a difference maker) and Orlando Woolridge (known for having very little impact).

Kobe played next to Gasol (solid scorer, excellent passer, good shooter for a bigman), Odom (great passer, low volume scorer, couldn't create his own shot, questionable spacing), Bynum (great finisher and offensive rebounder, strong post player, bad passer). They also had good shooters around them.

They look comparable to me, maybe I miss something though. Both teams have quite strong supporting casts on offense, but nothing exceptional in all-time sense.

The 08 Lakers were actually offensively oriented/slanted (but without blatantly sacrificing their defense/rebounding) and had excellent offensive talent/shooting, but were riddled with injuries/roster turnover. They finished with a +5.5 ORTG. The 88 Lakers were at +5.0. The 89 team was at +6.0. The 90 was at 5.9 and the 91 was at +4.2. All those LA teams had better health/roster continuity

Yeah, so Magic anchored to better offenses during that period than 2008 Lakers - that's my point. Of course, we can now start to contextualize this fact, but I wasn't wrong.

:lol:

This is completely false. That's exactly what he did in 2008...with a roster that had all sorts of turnover. Get your facts straight.

In fact, the "healthy" 08 Lakers posted a team offense that was among the highest in history and that matched any Magic led team.

The Best “Healthy” Offenses of All-Time

https://backpicks.com/2016/08/01/the-best-healthy-offenses-of-all-time/

90 LA: +8.7
08 LA: +8.7
87 LA: +8.4

Not that this is gospel, but you haven't "proven" anything.

That's a good point, although we should be careful with comparing 48 games sample to 92 or 72. Although it's fair to point out injuries in 2008, I wonder why they never came close to this level again after. There are some shifts in rosters, but not important enough to make it such a gap.

By the way, if we include postseason offenses then the gap becomes bigger:

2008 LAL: +7.2
2009 LAL: +7.0
2010 LAL: +5.5

1988 LAL: +8.3
1989 LAL: +9.3
1990 LAL: +8.4
1991 LAL: +5.9

Why the gap is so big on Magic-led teams favor? Again, I'm open to discussion but I don't see any reason for now to call Kobe better offensive anchor. Nor do I see any reason to call 2008-10 Lakers on Magic-led teams level offensively, though you've made a solid case for 2008.
70sFan
RealGM
Posts: 30,185
And1: 25,458
Joined: Aug 11, 2015
 

Re: Lowest reasonable ranking for Kobe Bryant? 

Post#122 » by 70sFan » Sat Sep 11, 2021 9:44 am

It's probably the first time someone has problems with understanding my posts due to me not being a native speaker. My English is pretty simple, I don't hide it that I'm not 100% fluent with the language. I read my post again and I don't see how and where I made mistake.

Let's take a look at Stepbacter - he clearly disagrees with me but he doesn't have any problem with understanding my posts. His criticism is strictly related to what I wrote and wanted to point out. Instead of looking for some hidden agenda, he simply called me out for things he believes that are wrong. Stepbacter is also a passionate Kobe fan, but he doesn't have any problems with understanding my words.

I'm glad that he made a constructive criticism of my thoughts and I have no problem with his post.
LAL1947
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,383
And1: 2,621
Joined: Dec 28, 2018

Re: Lowest reasonable ranking for Kobe Bryant? 

Post#123 » by LAL1947 » Sat Sep 11, 2021 10:06 am

70sFan wrote:It's probably the first time someone has problems with understanding my posts due to me not being a native speaker. My English is pretty simple, I don't hide it that I'm not 100% fluent with the language. I read my post again and I don't see how and where I made mistake.

Let's take a look at Stepbacter - he clearly disagrees with me but he doesn't have any problem with understanding my posts. His criticism is strictly related to what I wrote and wanted to point out. Instead of looking for some hidden agenda, he simply called me out for things he believes that are wrong. Stepbacter is also a passionate Kobe fan, but he doesn't have any problems with understanding my words.

I'm glad that he made a constructive criticism of my thoughts and I have no problem with his post.

Well, I've done exactly the same as Stepbacter... except when you told me I "had trouble comprehending" and was "reading your posts in bad faith", after you had written something that actually meant something else. So I pointed out that it is not good to question people's comprehension or motives (both of which can be insulting things), when not being 100% fluent. There's better and friendlier ways to go about conversing.

If you took it as a constructive criticism, then I'm glad because it wasn't meant to be rude. It appears you and I have no problem with each other there... but this DutchBall97 guy is trying to twist my words and intentions.
70sFan
RealGM
Posts: 30,185
And1: 25,458
Joined: Aug 11, 2015
 

Re: Lowest reasonable ranking for Kobe Bryant? 

Post#124 » by 70sFan » Sat Sep 11, 2021 10:14 am

LAL1947 wrote:
70sFan wrote:It's probably the first time someone has problems with understanding my posts due to me not being a native speaker. My English is pretty simple, I don't hide it that I'm not 100% fluent with the language. I read my post again and I don't see how and where I made mistake.

Let's take a look at Stepbacter - he clearly disagrees with me but he doesn't have any problem with understanding my posts. His criticism is strictly related to what I wrote and wanted to point out. Instead of looking for some hidden agenda, he simply called me out for things he believes that are wrong. Stepbacter is also a passionate Kobe fan, but he doesn't have any problems with understanding my words.

I'm glad that he made a constructive criticism of my thoughts and I have no problem with his post.

Well, I have done exactly the same as Stepbacter... except when you told me I "had trouble comprehending" and was "reading your posts in bad faith", after you had written something that actually meant something else. So I pointed out it is not good to question people's comprehension or motives, both of which can be insulting things... when not being 100% fluent. There's better ways to go about conversing. That's it.

If you took it as a constructive criticism, then I'm glad because it wasn't meant to be rude. It appears you and I have no problem with each other there... but this DutchBall97 guy is trying to twist my words and intentions.

No, don't compare your reply to Stepbacter. He actually referred to my points, you created a strawman argument.

I also don't want to be rude, but I don't agree with you about Dutchball97 either.
User avatar
Point-Forward
Sophomore
Posts: 237
And1: 452
Joined: Jul 22, 2015
Location: Spain
     

Re: Lowest reasonable ranking for Kobe Bryant? 

Post#125 » by Point-Forward » Sat Sep 11, 2021 10:52 am

Regarding the debate of 2008-2010 Lakers vs 1988-1990 Lakers (I much prefer these type of comparisons than the individual vs individual comparisons, btw, they seem more fair and fun), I think' it's close but I'd probably give the slight nod to the '88-90 version.

They seemed to have a bigger depth of talented athletes that could put the ball into the hoop and actually finish plays. I know basketball is not only about scoring, but unless your role-players bring so much value on other aspects, ideally you want a good chunk of your players to be able to score and not stagnate the offense when your top-stars are resting. We have to remember that until '89, those Lakers had 4 top draft picks at the same time (Kareem, Magic, Worthy and Thompson), which is insane. Even if Kareem was very old, he still put up solid numbers for his age, and when very very very desperate for a basket in a key situation, the team still tended to throw him the ball to the post (case in point that controversial posession against Detroit in the 1988 Finals). It's true that with Magic upgrading his low-post scoring skills by '87 that started to change, but still, Kareem remained important. Then they brought another athlete and scorer in Woolridge (unidimensional and too exposed if you ask him to be a second option, yes, but valuable as a scoring role player), and when Kareem retired in '89, they filled the blank with Divac. Again, another talented athlete that could run the floor, post up a bit, pass and play perfectly with Magic. Not a bad gain considering he was a rookie and making the transition from Europe (much tougher in those days).

A squad with Worthy, Scott (he was a little bit inconsistent at times but pretty deadly when he got hot), Thompson, Green, Orlando, Cooper (wonderful player that could literally do a little bit of everything, played some PG when Magic rested, could jump, could shoot, plus added top level perimeter defense) and Kareem/Divac. That looks like a whole lot of talent to me. There's a lot of guys that can run and finish. Now, one can say, and that's a perfectly reasonable and true take, that Magic's GOAT level offensive distribution maximized those players and made them better. Yes, you can say that. But still, when taking everything into account, I think he was working with slightly more talent than Kobe throughout 2008-2010.

Also, I'm convinced to this day that the '89 Lakers would have won the title if not for injuries. What happened in 1990 was strange. They should have won everything also, but the Suns had a bit of a fluky series (they forced Magic into being a 24/7 scorer, which was a brilliant strategy), and the inner turmoil with the players getting tired of Riley's methods and such...probably played a factor. But still, it's strange. The Lakers should have reached the Finals again in 1990.

Return to Player Comparisons