Spoiler:
Overall SRS: My combo-SRS from the regular season and playoffs as discussed in the master thread
Standard Deviations: Standard Deviations of Overall SRS from the league mean.
When I post the roster makeup of the team, I try and do it by playoff minutes. The numbers are age, regular season BPM and Playoff BPM (basketball-reference's BPM is being used here).
So if I say: "C: Vlade Divac (22), +2.3 / +4.3" I mean that Vlade Divac was their center, he was 22, he had a BPM of +2.3 in the regular season and a +4.3 in the playoffs. Yes, BPM misses out on a lot of subtle stuff but I thought it a good quick-hits indicator of the skills of the players.
I also list the playoff players (20+ MPG) in order of OLoad (which is usage that integrates assists) and it has everyone's per game average for minutes, points, rebounds, assists and stocks (steals plus blocks), but all of those (including minutes) are adjusted for pace.
I then cover the three highest players in scoring per 100 (with their true shooting relative to league average) and the three highest players in Assists per 100. I realize that these are arbitrary, but I wanted a quick-hits reference for how these teams' offenses ran.
I then talk about Heliocentrism, Wingmen and Depth. Basically I add up all of the team's VORP (again, basketball-reference) and then figure out what percentage of that VORP comes from the #1 player (Heliocentrism), from the #2 and 3 players combined (Wingmen) and Depth (everyone else). I include the ranking among the top 100 for reference. There are only 82 of these rankings, because 18 teams pre-date BPM/VORP, so I only have 82 to work with. I'm not saying that these are particularly meaningful, I just thought they were cool.
Playoff Offensive Rating: Amount by which your playoff offensive rating exceeds the offensive rating you'd expect given the regular season defensive rating of your playoff opponents. If you would be expected to post a 99 given your opponents but you post a 104, that's graded as +5. This way we can compare across eras.
Playoff Defensive Rating is the same as Offensive Rating, just the opposite.
Playoff SRS: Is SRS measured *only* in the playoffs. Overall SRS is a mix of both playoffs and regular season.
Total SRS Increase Through Playoffs: Basically their Overall SRS minus their Regular Season SRS. This is basically how much better a team did in the playoffs than you'd guess, relative to their regular season performance.
Average Playoff Opponent Offense: The average regular season offensive rating of your playoff opponents.
Average Playoff Opponent Defense: The average regular season defensive rating of your playoff opponents.
Rankings of any kind are out of my list. So if I say that the '91 Lakers had the 42nd best regular season offense, I don't mean "42nd best of All-Time", I mean "42nd best of my Top 100 Teams of All_Time". Which will be pretty comparable, but I want to be clear about this.
I also walk through the playoffs at each round, covering their opponent their SRS (at that time), how many games the series was, the margin of victory (and a "+" is always in the favor of the discussed team; losing a series by +2.0 means that you outscored the other team by two points a game on average despite losing) and for reference I put in an SRS equivalency (beat a +5 SRS team by 5 points a game, that's an equivalent +10 SRS series).
In later entries I also add the Offensive and Defensive Ratings for each playoff series. This is just how well the team did, adjusted by the opponent's regular season average (if you play a team with an average Defensive Rating of 102, and you play them with an offensive rating of 106, you get credited with a +4). Pace for teams below 1973 or so is estimated based on regular season numbers, so it could easily be wrong by some.
In writeups, if I ever say a player shot at "-8%" or something, that means "his true shooting was 8% lower than the league average that year". Any time I say "a player shot" and follow it by a percent, I am *always* using true shooting percentage unless otherwise indicated.
I also have a modern comps section for any teams pre-2011. It's basically me weighting each statistical characteristic and feeding each player's stats into the BackPicks database and choosing the best-rated comp from the list. I might list something like this:
PG: 2017 LeBron James (worse rebounding, better passing, way fewer shots)
What I mean is, "This team's point guard was basically 2017 LeBron James, but make his passing better, make his rebounding worse and make him take way fewer shots).
Anyhow. I don't know how clear any of this will be, so please let me know what does and doesn't work from these writeups. And thanks for reading!
Standard Deviations: Standard Deviations of Overall SRS from the league mean.
When I post the roster makeup of the team, I try and do it by playoff minutes. The numbers are age, regular season BPM and Playoff BPM (basketball-reference's BPM is being used here).
So if I say: "C: Vlade Divac (22), +2.3 / +4.3" I mean that Vlade Divac was their center, he was 22, he had a BPM of +2.3 in the regular season and a +4.3 in the playoffs. Yes, BPM misses out on a lot of subtle stuff but I thought it a good quick-hits indicator of the skills of the players.
I also list the playoff players (20+ MPG) in order of OLoad (which is usage that integrates assists) and it has everyone's per game average for minutes, points, rebounds, assists and stocks (steals plus blocks), but all of those (including minutes) are adjusted for pace.
I then cover the three highest players in scoring per 100 (with their true shooting relative to league average) and the three highest players in Assists per 100. I realize that these are arbitrary, but I wanted a quick-hits reference for how these teams' offenses ran.
I then talk about Heliocentrism, Wingmen and Depth. Basically I add up all of the team's VORP (again, basketball-reference) and then figure out what percentage of that VORP comes from the #1 player (Heliocentrism), from the #2 and 3 players combined (Wingmen) and Depth (everyone else). I include the ranking among the top 100 for reference. There are only 82 of these rankings, because 18 teams pre-date BPM/VORP, so I only have 82 to work with. I'm not saying that these are particularly meaningful, I just thought they were cool.
Playoff Offensive Rating: Amount by which your playoff offensive rating exceeds the offensive rating you'd expect given the regular season defensive rating of your playoff opponents. If you would be expected to post a 99 given your opponents but you post a 104, that's graded as +5. This way we can compare across eras.
Playoff Defensive Rating is the same as Offensive Rating, just the opposite.
Playoff SRS: Is SRS measured *only* in the playoffs. Overall SRS is a mix of both playoffs and regular season.
Total SRS Increase Through Playoffs: Basically their Overall SRS minus their Regular Season SRS. This is basically how much better a team did in the playoffs than you'd guess, relative to their regular season performance.
Average Playoff Opponent Offense: The average regular season offensive rating of your playoff opponents.
Average Playoff Opponent Defense: The average regular season defensive rating of your playoff opponents.
Rankings of any kind are out of my list. So if I say that the '91 Lakers had the 42nd best regular season offense, I don't mean "42nd best of All-Time", I mean "42nd best of my Top 100 Teams of All_Time". Which will be pretty comparable, but I want to be clear about this.
I also walk through the playoffs at each round, covering their opponent their SRS (at that time), how many games the series was, the margin of victory (and a "+" is always in the favor of the discussed team; losing a series by +2.0 means that you outscored the other team by two points a game on average despite losing) and for reference I put in an SRS equivalency (beat a +5 SRS team by 5 points a game, that's an equivalent +10 SRS series).
In later entries I also add the Offensive and Defensive Ratings for each playoff series. This is just how well the team did, adjusted by the opponent's regular season average (if you play a team with an average Defensive Rating of 102, and you play them with an offensive rating of 106, you get credited with a +4). Pace for teams below 1973 or so is estimated based on regular season numbers, so it could easily be wrong by some.
In writeups, if I ever say a player shot at "-8%" or something, that means "his true shooting was 8% lower than the league average that year". Any time I say "a player shot" and follow it by a percent, I am *always* using true shooting percentage unless otherwise indicated.
I also have a modern comps section for any teams pre-2011. It's basically me weighting each statistical characteristic and feeding each player's stats into the BackPicks database and choosing the best-rated comp from the list. I might list something like this:
PG: 2017 LeBron James (worse rebounding, better passing, way fewer shots)
What I mean is, "This team's point guard was basically 2017 LeBron James, but make his passing better, make his rebounding worse and make him take way fewer shots).
Anyhow. I don't know how clear any of this will be, so please let me know what does and doesn't work from these writeups. And thanks for reading!
#11. The 2009 Los Angeles Lakers
Spoiler:
Overall SRS: +11.84, Standard Deviations: +2.21, Won NBA Finals (Preseason tied-1st)
PG: Derek Fisher, +0.2 / -1.9
SG: Kobe Bryant, +5.9 / +9.1
SF: Trevor Ariza, +2.4 / +3.8
PF: Lamar Odom, +2.0 / +3.2
C: Pau Gasol, +4.5 / +5.3
Regular Season Metrics:
Regular Season Record: 65-17, Regular Season SRS: +7.11 (42nd), Earned the 1 Seed
Regular Season Offensive Rating: +4.5 (39th), Regular Season Defensive Rating: -3.6 (51st)
Shooting Advantage: +2.5%, Possession Advantage: +2.7 shooting possessions per game
Kobe Bryant (SG, 30): 38 MPPG, 32% OLoad, 29 / 6 / 5 / 2 on +1.7%
Pau Gasol (C, 28): 39 MPPG, 20% OLoad, 20 / 10 / 4 / 2 on +7.3%
Lamar Odom (PF, 29): 32 MPPG, 18% OLoad, 12 / 9 / 3 / 2 on -0.2%
Trevor Ariza (SF, 23): 26 MPPG, 17% OLoad, 9 / 5 / 2 / 2 on +0.0%
Derek Fisher (PG, 34): 32 MPPG, 16% OLoad, 11 / 2 / 3 / 1 on +0.2%
Scoring/100: Kobe Bryant (37.8 / +1.7%), Pau Gasol (25.9 / +7.3%), Lamar Odom (19.5 / -0.2%)
Assists/100: Kobe Bryant (6.9), Derek Fisher (5.4), Pau Gasol (4.8)
Heliocentrism: 31.7% (47th of 84 teams) - Kobe
Wingmen: 39.8% (32nd) - Gasol & Odom
Depth: 28.5% (36th)
Playoff Metrics:
Playoff Offensive Rating: +6.41 (39th), Playoff Defensive Rating: -5.97 (37th)
Playoff SRS: +14.24 (12th), Total SRS Increase through Playoffs: +4.73 (10th)
Shooting Advantage: +3.0%, Possession Advantage: +1.6 shooting possessions per game
Average Playoff Opponent Offense: +1.17 (75th), Average Playoff Opponent Defense: -3.31 (24th)
Kobe Bryant (SG, 30): 43 MPPG, 33% OLoad, 32 / 6 / 6 / 3 on +2.0%
Pau Gasol (C, 28): 43 MPPG, 18% OLoad, 19 / 12 / 3 / 3 on +7.8%
Lamar Odom (PF, 29): 34 MPPG, 17% OLoad, 13 / 10 / 2 / 2 on +4.3%
Trevor Ariza (SF, 23): 33 MPPG, 16% OLoad, 12 / 5 / 3 / 2 on +6.6%
Derek Fisher (PG, 34): 31 MPPG, 15% OLoad, 9 / 2 / 2 / 1 on -4.4%
Scoring/100: Kobe Bryant (39.0 / +2.0%), Pau Gasol (23.8 / +7.8%), Lamar Odom (20.3 / +4.3%)
Assists/100: Kobe Bryant (7.1), Derek Fisher (4.1), Trevor Ariza (3.9)
Playoff Heliocentrism: 41.3% (25th of 84 teams) - Kobe
Playoff Wingmen: 42.9% (30th) - Gasol & Odom
Playoff Depth: 15.8% (68th)
Round 1: Utah Jazz (+2.3), won 4-1, by +9.2 points per game (+11.5 SRS eq)
Round 2: Houston Rockets (+6.0), won 4-3, by +7.3 points per game (+13.3 SRS eq)
Round 3: Denver Nuggets (+10.3), won 4-2, by +3.7 points per game (+14.0 SRS eq)
Round 4: Orlando Magic (+9.3), won 4-1, by +9.4 points per game (+18.7 SRS eq)
Offensive / Defensive Ratings from Opposition Regular Season Average:
Utah Jazz: +7.3 / -5.4
Houston Rockets: +5.2 / -7.4
Denver Nuggets: +7.6 / +0.0
Orlando Magic: +8.9 / -8.7
Shooting Advantage / Possession Advantage per game (unadjusted):
Utah Jazz: +6.9% / -3.3
Houston Rockets: +1.4% / +4.7
Denver Nuggets: +3.0% / -1.8
Orlando Magic: +1.4% / +6.3
Postseason Usage/Efficiency Change adjusted for Opposition:
Derek Fisher: -0.3% / -3.0%
Kobe Bryant: +0.7% / +1.9%
Trevor Ariza: -0.7% / +8.3%
Lamar Odom: -0.6% / +6.1%
Pau Gasol: -1.6% / +2.1%
Humans process and recognize patterns. It’s a major part of who we are. Once upon a time it was cold for several months, then nice for several months, then hot for several months, then nice for several months, then cold for several months, and so on. And eventually the pattern was recognized, and we figured out that there were seasons. And we can detect metaphor, things that are *like* things but aren’t actually them. A nurturing mentor can be a “father/mother figure”, triggering similar parts of our brains as an actual parent, even though they obviously aren’t. An event that is *like* something traumatic that happened to us before can have us experiencing that unpleasant memory again.
This pattern manifests notably in stories. Joseph Campbell, in his book ‘The Hero With a Thousand Faces’, suggests that almost every hero story has a bunch of elements in common. And he argues that, within reason, almost every single hero story has most of these characteristics, and if it doesn’t, it likely won’t be experienced as the story of a hero.
I bring this up because much of basketball ‘analysis’ is actually about storytelling. And the search for greatness in players actually has a lot in common with the search for players whose stories match up the most with stories of heroes. Bear with me. But we’re going to take a tour through a variety of different hero stories and look for common themes and then we’ll be back.
Consider the film High Noon (a western, if you didn’t know/guess). In it, the Marshal of a small town discovers that a criminal he put away a while back is out, and is coming to the town with his gang for revenge on the Marshal. The Marshal goes to the different people in the town for assistance handling the outlaw, but they all (for different reasons) want nothing to do with it. The Marshal’s wife suggests leaving town together, to avoid the unwinnable fight. But the Marshal refuses, because he’s a lawman, and he doesn’t run from criminals. In the famous climactic shot setting up the final shootout, the crane slowly rises above the town, showing completely deserted streets where the Marshal, completely alone, walks slowly to the showdown that he refuses to avoid.
He wins of course.
There are several notable threads here: 1) The Marshal tries to get help repeatedly and ultimately fails, 2) the Marshal has a high ideal/goal, 3) the Marshal is ultimately alone in pursuing that ideal, 4) because of the above the Marshal pursues an obviously risky course of action and 5) ultimately prevails.
Consider Batman. He has the following characteristics: 1) Is born special (billionaire), 2) has dedicated his life to a high ideal/goal (making the world better by fighting crime), 3) is generally alone and isolated in the pursuit of his goal, 4) disregards the socially accepted rules for handling things (he’s a vigilante), 5) his path is ultimately high-risk compared to the lifestyle he could have led, and 6) he generally wins.
Consider Harry Potter. He has the following characteristics: 1) is born special (the boy who lived), 2) is driven to protect people and fight evil (a high ideal), 3) while he has friends, when push comes to shove he’s generally alone (facing the basilisk in CoS, walking into the woods to face Voldemort in tDH), 4) he breaks rules like it’s going out of style, 5) he takes crazy amounts of risks (facing a two-ton snake with his bare hands and he and his teenage friends breaking into the ministry of magic to stop Voldemort leap to mind), and 6) he ultimately prevails.
Consider the Buddha. His story has the following characteristics: 1) is born special (or at least, a prince), 2) is driven to a high ideal, 3) generally pursues that ideal alone, 4) while Buddha was objectively gentle, his basic MO was shattering the rigid imperfections of Hinduism at his time and trying to create something better, 5) given that he chose to wander the world in search of enlightenment instead of staying a prince, I’d say that he pursued a comparably high risk lifestyle and 6) he was ultimately triumphant.
Consider Luke Skywalker. His story has the following characteristics: 1) is born special (the son of an incredibly powerful Jedi), 2) leaves his home to make the galaxy better and fight the Empire, 3) most of his major journeys/arcs are alone (facing Vader, first in Cloud City and then on the Death Star), 4) Luke often pursues courses that are objectively risky/stupid that he believes are right, 5) he fails at times and is even humiliated in his journey but 6) ultimately wins and ascends to greatness.
Consider Robin Hood. His story has the following characteristics: 1) is born special (a noble), 2) has a high ideal (that the Normans/nobles shouldn’t be oppressing the Saxons/peasants), 3) while he had followers he is clearly their leader and is above all of them and his major arcs are alone, 4) Robin chooses the life of an outlaw (basically becoming a vigilante) to fight the things he opposes instead of avoiding that conflict, 5) Robin is consistently a risk-taker and 6) ultimately wins and ascends.
I could go on forever. These threads are *crazy* common. Not every ‘hero’ has all of them, but every hero has most of them.
Not every hero is born special, but it’s really, really common. They’re the main character of the story after all.
Every hero has a goal/motivation that pushes them toward greatness.
While heroes may have friends/helpers/support, they are always ultimately alone, or at least, above the rest. Even Buddha and Christ, both of whose major platforms are built on egalitarianism, but both at different times assert that *they* are the way and neither ever equated themselves with their followers.
Most heroes are willing to break rules in their name of their higher motivation.
Heroes universally take risky as opposed to safe paths to their goals.
Heroes often fail en route to success.
Heroes almost all ultimately prevail. Take Batman’s entire story except have him shot by the third mugger he tries to stop and he’s not a hero anymore. He’s just that idealistic crazy billionaire who got hisself killed.
Every single one of these translates to basketball:
A hero in basketball carries themselves differently, as though they believe themselves to be the main character / center of their team (or even the league).
A hero in basketball is motivated obsessively toward winning championships.
A hero in basketball ‘carries’ his team, is the *visible* ‘leader’ of his team and almost never subordinates himself to his followers/teammates.
A hero in basketball leans toward doing things their own way, not the way others say.
A hero in basketball doesn’t play the percentages or play safe, he sets his lance and charges the dragon head on.
A hero in basketball fails at first but;
Ultimately triumphs and ascends as the result of his hero journey.
Tell me that those seven things don’t fit Kobe Bryant better than any player in NBA history, except perhaps for Michael Jordan.
The Hero is Special: Kobe came into the league with a chip on his shoulder. Even as a teenager on a successful team, he refused to be hazed as a rookie. He refused to bow to Shaq’s centrality to the team, and refused to bow to the veterans. He was the son of a successful NBA player (a little like being NBA royalty). When Phil Jackson brought Michael Jordan in to talk to Kobe about deferring to his teammates more, Kobe’s first reaction on encountering Jordan was to challenge him “I could whip you on the court right now.” From the beginning Kobe *needed* to be the best and acted as if he already was. Totally consistent with being a ‘hero’.
The Hero Pursues a High Ideal: Kobe was motivated to win and to be great like few players ever. Nobody who discusses him can fail to mention his work-ethic. From his incredible efforts with Nike to build a better shoe, his late-night shooting sessions and his reverse-prep for matchups with Shane Battier, Kobe pursued his higher goal obsessively. Completely on script.
A Hero is the Visible Leader of His Team: Kobe fits this perfectly too. First, Kobe had an incredibly flashy skillset. Everything about his play was attention-getting. He scored in buckets. Tons and tons of points. But not all points were created equal. Shaq could score more and better, but he did so by creating *easy* shots. Nobody could resist him, so good looks under the basket came naturally. Kobe scored his buckets by making *hard* shots. And Kobe *looked* like a great player. He had the swagger, he had the intensity. Shaq on the court was a competitor, but off the court he had other goals. Shaq was more of a Porthos/Falstaff type, formidable, but a man of large appetites who lived to live, not just win. In contrast Kobe’s conduct on and off the court was more like a samurai’s katana, folded in on itself over and over again and again until it was a tool built perfectly for cutting through anything in the way. Shaq was the better player in the threepeat, but Kobe *acted* more like the hero of the team, in a way that Shaq did not. And when it came time for a clutch shot, Kobe would take those no matter what.
A Hero Does Things Their Own Way: Phil Jackson often despaired of Kobe. Whatever he said, Kobe seemed to take shots that should have been passes. As much as he had been drilled on the triangle, Kobe would often break it to pursue his own looks. And Jackson often mourned that Kobe’s dramatic steals, so perfect for highlight reels, often came at the expense of the team’s defensive integrity. But Kobe always did things his own way.
A Hero Doesn’t Play the Percentages; a Hero Takes Risks: this is completely on point. Kobe’s dominant skill was taking contested midrange jumpers, the least efficient shots in basketball. He wasn’t athletic enough to live at the rim, nor did he have the touch or inclination to take lots of threes and make them at a high rate. And unlike Jordan, Kobe existed in a league with a fair amount of statistical understanding. That Jordan didn’t take threes (much) wasn’t really a weakness; nobody took threes back then. But a similar shot selection 15 years later flew more in the face of where the league was going. It had its upsides; the ability to make these kinds of tough shots is unusually valuable in the playoffs. And that he took these objectively terrible shots over and over again is completely consistent with a Hero. He didn’t play it safe, he went all-in every time.
A Hero Wins: Kobe won. Five times, even if three of those times were more Shaq than him. Allen Iverson has a lot of similarities to Kobe. But he never won. Carmelo had similarities. But he never won. I’m not trying to say that those three are equivalent; Kobe was clearly better. But Kobe winning was a critical part of his Hero story. But until 2009, he’d never managed to win as the undisputed Alpha of his team.
But the hard part is that many of those ‘basketball hero’ characteristics are actually *bad* for winning. The ability to take tough shots is valuable, but an obsession with taking them is usually bad. Thinking that you’re the be-all and end-all can easily alienate teammates. Calling your own number over and over again can also alienate teammates. So, counter-intuitively, following a ‘Hero’ archetype and providing maximum career value are, at times contradictory.
It is amazing how perfectly Kobe embodies the basketball Hero archetype. And it’s why he is/was beloved by so many and why, I’d imagine, that some consider him to be the greatest player ever. But the more statistically inclined often struggled with Kobe, particularly because they’re looking for something different from compliance to an unconscious archetype. I myself spent a long time hating on Kobe, before ElGee won me over to appreciating what made him great. But I will say, 2009 may be the year that encapsulates the best of Kobe on both sides.
The threepeat Lakers fell apart. It was unthinkable on paper. Shaq was at his peak, putting up arguably the best scoring years from a center ever. Kobe was young, but playing at a high level even so. It was easy to imagine them simply running it back over and over again. I mean, who was going stop them? But nobody did; they stopped themselves. Shaq struggled with staying in shape in the offseason and there was rampant tension between the two. They fell to the Spurs in ‘03. They made the Finals and fell to the Pistons (who completely shut Kobe down). And then Shaq skipped town to join Wade in Miami. Kobe was left holding the keys. Karl Malone left, Gary Payton left, and the roster devolved to Kobe and the newly acquired Lamar Odom. In 2005 the team went from 56 wins to 34 wins, and according to BPM not a single player besides those two was above average.
A skeptic would look here and say that Kobe not being able to lead a team to more than 34 wins, even as a relatively solo act, is a pretty disappointing result. And it made clear just how dependent the team had been on Shaq.
But from a Hero journey point of view, it totally worked. After all, heroes face adversity as a natural part of their story. They can go through some pretty deep lows (heck, Luke got his freaking hand chopped off). But another part of it is that in most hero stories, the Hero loses his home/comfort. Frodo leaves the Shire, Luke’s aunt/uncle are killed, Buddha leaves the wealth of his birth and Bruce Wayne leaves home to study martial arts. So Kobe losing Shaq and having his team implode is actually a totally natural part of a traditional Hero journey.
And to Kobe’s credit, he handled it like a champ. Despite his team being awful, he went hard every night, in ‘06 posting one of the greatest scoring seasons ever (35.4 ppg, 45.6 ppx on a not-bad +2.3%). On the back of his scoring the Lakers won 45 games in ‘06 and 42 games in ‘07, both times getting knocked out in the first round of the playoffs. There were reasons to be a little optimistic about the future. Prospect Trevor Ariza was developing nicely, and several of the Lakers’ draft picks were growing into serviceable supporting roles. The Lakers started off the season on pace for 53 wins, the best start they’d had in years.
But then, the most unusual thing happened.
The Lakers bundled a ton of roster filler and first rounders to Memphis, and added big-man Pau Gasol. Gasol had been toiling on the Grizzlies for years. He was a strong rebounder, strong presence in the paint, a good passer and was a good scorer, skilled under the hoop, from the post and from midrange. But he was not equipped for massive defensive pressure. Consider his regular season -> postseason numbers in ‘05 and ‘06:
2005: 26.2% Usage, 58.2% TS -> 31.4% Usage, 49.8% TS
2006: 26.4% Usage, 55.5% TS -> 29.9% Usage, 50.5% TS
Those playoff numbers are each from only one series. But the trend seems pretty clear. In the playoffs, Memphis’ lack of other scoring options led Gasol to carry a much larger scoring load in the playoffs, and it absolutely imploded his shooting efficiency. And here’s the thing: Gasol had a lot of strong skills, skills that weren’t effectively used because he was spending such a disproportionate amount of time in the playoffs trying to score. When he joined the Lakers his game transformed. Here’s the transition from his ‘08 regular season in Memphis to LA, and his ‘06 playoffs to his ‘09:
2008 regular season (MEM): 22.1% Usage, 56.6% TS, 14.0 AST%, 2.8 BLK%, +2.1 BPM
2008 regular season (LAL): 21.2% Usage, 63.9% TS, 17.0 AST%, 3.3 BLK%, +5.5 BPM
2006 Playoffs (MEM): 29.9% Usage, 50.5% TS, 10.9% Reb, 17.8% Ast, 2.5 BLK%, +2.4 BPM
2009 Playoffs (LAL): 18.8% Usage, 62.2% TS, 15.6% Reb, 10.4% Ast, 4.1 BLK%, +5.3 BPM
So, jumping to the Lakers in the regular season, his scoring efficiency exploded (with the extra space he got to operate playing with Kobe), his passing improves and he plays better defense. In the playoffs his role went from Alpha carrying the team to a supporting player, and his efficiency went way up. Likewise his rebounding went way up, his passing drops a lot (but he had the ball way less, so per touch they’re not as far off as they look) and his defense improved. Like so many skilled bigs (Garnett, Robinson, etc), Gasol had a) such diverse skills that the team gained from him focusing on them at the expense of his scoring and b) a scoring game that wasn’t robust enough to carry an increased load in the playoffs. Moving to a team that had somebody who *could* carry an increased load in the playoffs freed up Gasol to be a better, more valuable player.
Before adding Gasol the Lakers were on pace for 53 wins. But after adding him they went 23-5 to close out the season. The Lakers went from consistent first-round exits to smashing through the Western Conference before falling in the Finals to the Boston Celtics. And in 2009 the Lakers were the favorite to win the West again. A skeptic would say the following: “Wait, we’re supposed to think that Kobe was the be-all and end-all because of his 2008-10 playoff runs? But without Pau he couldn’t even sniff the Semifinals? And adding Pau suddenly transforms them into a championship 2 out of 3 years? Who, seriously, was the driving force on these championship teams?”
Heroic Narrator: There are many stories of heroes. They inspire us with their courage, lift our hearts with their greatness. But few heroes actually save the day alone. Harry Potter, for all his heroism, needed His Mother’s Love / the Sword of Griffindor / Fawke’s Tears / his pals / the Resurrection Stone etc to actually get it done. Luke needed Obi-Wan and Han to blow up the Death Star. Batman needed Alfred / Fox. So I will not tell you that a Hero is victorious alone. Every knight needs a squire, a horse, and a fair maiden to bestow her favor. So when we see Kobe going from the first round to the Finals, we oughtn’t get confused. Kobe was the Hero on those teams. Rebounds? Defense? Passing? Those are like armor and a good horse, a sharp lance and keen sword. But scoring? Those valiant sallies where the Hero throws himself into the fierce teeth fo the defense, scoring wounds in the scaly flesh of that great beast? *That* is where Heroes are made. And before Pau the Lakers were sending Kobe, our Hero, to battle practically riding a goat, with old newspaper around him for armor. Can he be faulted, I ask you, if his efforts, pure of heart though they were, left him unhorsed and tumbling in the dust before the might of better equipped knaves? None can doubt the might of his sword, or his courage in the attack, even when his support was unworthy of him!
The coming of Pau Gasol to the Lakers was merely Sir Kobe being given the tools that every true Hero deserves, a supporting cast that can actually have his back. And it was better for Pau as well! Gasol was miscast on the Grizzlies, like Spock trying to captain the Enterprise, or Little John trying to lead the Merry Men. It isn’t an outright disaster, but without the Hero to lead them, such efforts inevitably fail. Spock is a tolerable captain, but an exceptional first officer. Hermione Granger was a skilled witch, but she lacked the pedigree and the penchant for risk-taking that makes a true Hero. Han Solo is a smooth criminal who can back up the Hero, but when he tries to be the lead he ends up frozen in carbonite. Some are Heroes, others are Squires. There’s no shame in that. But speak not of Pau Gasol lifting the Lakers to the Finals. There was only one Hero on that team. That Gasol made such an impact is only proof of how unfit for Sir Kobe the team around him had been!
*Ahem*, anyways . . .
The 2009 Lakers ripped through the regular season, posting by far the best record and SRS in the West (the East, on the other hand, was super top-heavy with the Cavs, Celtics and Magic all serious contenders). The Lakers weren’t particularly great on either side of the ball but they held their own just fine. Their offense was built on two-pointers. They took and made threes an average amount, but they took a ton of twos and made them well (which shouldn’t be a surprise between Kobe and Pau). They crashed the boards very well (Gasol and Bynum were both strong in that area with Odom helping) and as with most Phil Jackson teams they took very good care of the ball. Let’s look at their roster:
Modern Comps:
PG: 2014 George Hill
SG: 2018 Kevin Durant (but better on offense)
SF: 2013 Matt Barnes
PF: 2019 Willie Cauley-Stein (more spacing and better on defense)
C: 2009 Pau Gasol
Fisher wasn’t anything terribly remarkable at the 1; he spaced the floor and didn’t turn the ball over. Young Trevor Ariza was basically a sufficient player on offense who played strong defense from the wing. Lamar Odom wasn’t a particularly good scorer, but he was a solid passer and rebounder, who played excellent defense. ‘09 Gasol was really hard to find comps for. That level of shooting efficiency is really hard to find in guys with a big’s skillset. And Kobe . . . he barely shot above league average. But he passed well, was able to take shots in buckets, didn’t turn the ball over and rebounded well for a 2. That the rest of the Lakers (besides Gasol) struggled to shoot above league average as well should be an indication of how limited they were offensively.
Heroic Narrator: Smarting from a setback against the churlish hordes in Boston, Kobe inspired his team, leading them to the best record in the Conference and making the most out of his limited teammates. Pau Gasol, too soft to be successful in Memphis, had the best season of his career (to that point) thanks to the valiance of Kobe drawing the attention of the defense, sacrificing his own comfort so that his weaker teammates could succeed! With the smoldering fire within him, kindled from birth and inflamed by the need for vengeance, Kobe’s heroic journey to the championship began!
In the first round! The vile and perfidious Utah Jazz, verily an outstanding first round opponent at +2.3 RSRS! Led by Deron Williams, Carlos Boozer, Paul Millsap and Andrei Kirilenko, they struck fear into the hearts of the weak! But the eyes of fair maidens shed no tears, and only lit in joy at seeing Kobe and his Lakers dispatch the Jazz in a mere five games. Kobe averaged a bold 27 points a game, putting the league on notice that his claim to the throne would not be denied this year!
And jumping in here, Kobe did have a great series (27/5/6 on +3.6% with 2.4 steals a game) while Gasol averaged an 18/9/2 on +7.5%. And the Lakers played excellent defense, holding the Jazz to -2.7% as a team. They won by 9.2 points a game, a strong (though not overwhelming) margin for a decent first round matchup. I’ll turn it over to the other guy.
Heroic Narrator: In the second round! A foe perhaps worthy of the Finals, the +6.0 Houston Rockets! A FEROCIOUS second round matchup for any team! Led by a veritable GIANT, Yao Ming, who stared down on the bigs of the league from his lofty heights! Even the strongest QUAILED before him! But did our hero fear? Never! Even defended by Shane Battier, as cunning a knave as existed in the league, Kobe did score 27 points a game, leading the Lakers to a triumph by an astounding 7.3 points per game! This, against as great a five-seed as the league had ever seen! Bright was the sword of Sir Kobe as he rode onward to the Conference Finals!
It wasn’t quite that clean. Battier definitely slowed Kobe, holding him to 27/5/4 on -0.9% efficiency. And Yao Ming only got to play three games before he went out with injury. And even still the series went to seven games. 7.3 points a game against a strong team (which the Rockets definitely were) is impressive, but the injury to Yao Ming definitely takes something away from it.
VILE KNAVE! You speak ill of the victory of Sir Kobe! The noble Lakers’ Margin of Victory in those first three games, with your precious Yao Ming playing!? +6.3 points per game! The Lakers’ Margin of Victory in the remaining four games? +8.0 points per game! The superiority of Kobe and his Lakers CANNOT be doubted! What say you to that!?
Small sample size?
IGNORANT PEASANT! Let us continue! Guarding the doors to the castle where the throne lay were the FIENDISH Denver Nuggets. They were led by their own great knight, Sir Carmelo of the house of Anthony! With the thunderous hooves of his warhorse echoing in their ears, the foes of Carmelo Anthony FLED IN PANIC! Dispatching the PUNY Chris Paul and the Hornets by an astounding 24.2 points a game, their mark on the tourney was made! In the semi-finals they struck down Dirk Nowitzki and SMOTE his ruin upon the mountainside, by 7.8 points a game! Even if OSRS doth exaggerate their victories, can any DOUBT the might of Sir Carmelo and his Nuggets!
But wait! Do you hear the trumpets? Here comes a knight, noble and true, to challenge Sir Carmelo for the Dominion of the Western Conference! And even brave Sir Carmelo cannot help but to turn his face away from the fearsome aspect of Sir Kobe, he who had won not ONE, not TWO, but THREE championships when Sir Carmelo was not even a babe in the league. As the crowds circled about them, each champion drew their swords, knowing that no quarter would be asked or given.
In GAME ONE, Sir Carmelo did wreck havoc upon the Lakers’ defense, scoring 39 points! Yet even so did Sir Kobe have the last word, scoring an unthinkable FORTY POINTS! And even has he did dispatch Sir Carmelo in Game One did the Lakers edge out the Nuggets by a mere TWO POINTS, clearly earning the favor of the Clutch Fairy with their victory! In the SECOND GAME Sir Kobe faltered (was his sword arm worn from swinging into his FOES!? Were his mailed legs fatigued from KICKING the buttocks of his opponents!?) as he scored a mere 32 points while Sir Carmelo did gain the upper hand with THIRTY-FOUR points, and even so did the vile Nuggets prevail by three points! THE BATTLE WAS JOINED!
In Game Three Sir Kobe ROSE to the challenge, inflicting FORTY-ONE points of VIRTUE upon the gutless Nuggets, while Carmelo SHUDDERED to meet the challenge, scoring a paltry 21 points and the Lakers did triumph by 6 points. JUSTICE WAS DONE! But in Game 4 THE UNTHINKABLE HAPPENED! Even as Sir Kobe did verily drop buckets upon his enemies, THIRTY FOUR points MOST NOBLE, the Nuggets prevailed by 19 even while Sir Carmelo scored a mere fifteen. WAS IT TREACHERY my readers!? Do not wonder! For the RIGHTEOUS shall prevail!
For in Game Five, the Upper Hand was on the OTHER FOOT! Even as Sir Carmelo did score 31 points, Sir Kobe did nobly sacrifice of his own glory so that others may live, scoring only 22 points but dishing EIGHT ASSISTS and INSPIRING his team to a noble NINE POINT VICTORY! And in Game Six, can you doubt the result, the churlish Nuggets, their BACKS TO THE WALL, did BOW before the power of MOMENTUM, as Sir Kobe scored thirty five points with ten assists, leading his Lakers to a RESOUNDING 27 point victory! VICTORY WAS HIS! He had won the West, and now advanced to the NBA Finals, to win the crown that he TRULY DESERVED!
Just jumping in, I don’t have much to add. Yeah, a lot of that was nonsense. But it was fun nonsense. And doesn’t that count for something? And Kobe’s stat line in Game 4 was a 34/10/4 on -12.1%, so perhaps awful shooting was the reason for the loss, and not FOUL TREACHERY but who am I to say? Anyhow. I’ll let him do the Finals.
Heroic Narrator: Sir Kobe and his Lakers did enter the castle, searching for the throne room where the Crown might be. And so they came upon the room only to find FIERCE DRAGON guarding the treasure. Coiled about the throne, its rough hide grating upon the worked stone of the floor, it opened its mouth and ROARED. This was no ORDINARY DRAGON! This dragon was armored in scales like SHIELDS. So HARD were those scales that NONE could dent them! Many would-be heroes had tried and paid with their lives. One such knight, Sir LeBron the Young, was UNMATCHED in matters of the sword and yet HE TOO PERISHED TO THE BEAST!! Indeed, after seeing Sir LeBron fall to the MAGIC of the BEAST many wondered if there were any that could stand against this FOUL CREATURE! But Sir Kobe was not dismayed. For years he had kept his sword keen, his lance sharp and his armor oiled. He knew that one day the fate of the kingdom would rest on his shoulders. AND TODAY WAS THAT DAY! Sir Kobe RODE directly at the beast! The onlookers gave a gasp of fear, for HOW was Sir Kobe to survive such a reckless onslaught!? And yet, in GAME ONE, he plunged his lance DEEP within the HEART of the BEAST! Scoring FORTY POINTS, his Lakers won by twenty-five. The ground SHOOK as the dragon fell to the stone floor, hot ichor pumping from his wound. There were more games to play, but they were needed not. Sir Kobe and the Lakers vanquished the dragon in BUT FIVE GAMES, by a FEARSOME 9.4 POINTS PER GAME!! Thirty two points a game did he average, but also 7 assists, showing that his hand was giving to his teammates even as it gave DEATH TO HIS ENEMIES!
And so Sir Kobe ascended the steps of the dais. Years had he trained for this day, sacrificing the peaceful lives that others live, enduring endless trials and torments, all for this moment. He reached out gently to the crown, the cold metal warming to his touch. With deliberate grace he lifted the circlet, turning to the crowd. A hush fell over them, and with a deliberate pause, he placed the crown upon his head. And the crowd erupted in adulation! No Pontiff or man of the cloth did Sir Kobe need to put that crown on his own head! The hand that slew the dragon CROWNS the KING! And so shall it EVER BE!
He had journeyed long and hard, through thankless seasons mired in meaninglessness. But there could be no doubt. The Hero had won the Crown. LONG MAY HE REIGN!
Not to steal the thunder here. Kobe had a strong series against the Magic, averaging a 32/6/7 on -1.9% for the series. The efficiency may seem low, but against the Magic’s defense (which was by far the best in the league) and posting a 38% usage rate, it was pretty impressive. But the other bigs clearly did their part, with Gasol averaging a 19/9/2 on +10.3%. And perhaps more impressively Gasol and Odom combined to shut Howard down, holding him to less than 4 offensive boards a game. Orlando had beaten the Cavs, in part, on the back of them having no answer for Howard’s incredible athleticism. But between Odom and Gasol, Howard was stifled, and without Howard’s dominance the Magic folded like a house of cards. Matchup-wise you have to give Gasol, Odom and Bynum credit for that. But Kobe put them in a position to succeed by drawing the attention of the defenses. For better or for worse, this really was a great run from the Lakers. And 9.4 point per game win over the ‘09 Magic is one of the most dominant Finals wins *ever*. And it wasn’t like the ‘09 Magic were chumps; they beat one of the best regular season teams ever in the ‘09 Cavs, and they ran the table hard through the West. They were really, really good unless they ran into 1) an onslaught of bigs that could blunt Howard’s dominance and 2) an opposing offense so resilient that their outstanding defense lost its effectiveness. In both regards the ‘09 Lakers were a horrible matchup for them. But it still counts.
11 | Lakers
10 | Cavs
9 | Nuggets
8 | Magic
7 |
6 |
5 | Celtics
4 | Rockets
3 | Mavericks
2 | Blazers
1 | Bulls, Heat, Spurs, Suns
0 | Jazz
-0 | 76ers, Hawks, Pacers, Bucks
-1 | Bobcats
-2 | Pistons, Nets, Raptors, Knicks
-3 | Warriors
-4 | TWolves
-5 | Hornets, Grizzlies
-6 | Wizards, Thunder
-7 |
-8 | Clippers, Kings
-9 |
-10|
2009 is very reminiscent of 2016. The heights of the best teams weren’t the same, but still. The hilarious thing is, the league absolutely had a bell-curve. Look at those bottom 26 teams. That’s a pretty smooth distribution. But those four teams on top. The Nuggets went nuts in the playoffs, and while OSRS overrates them for that reason, they’re still impressive. The Cavs absolutely blew apart the season until they fell to the Magic. And the Magic were dominant . . . until they fell to the Lakers. It was not a competitive year. So the Lakers are dinged for that somewhat.
What are we to make of this season? Their regular season was honestly not that impressive. The 42nd best RSRS on this list is good . . . but not great. But their playoffs. Seriously. That was a really, really, really good playoffs. Their first round matchup, the Jazz, was a pretty tough opponent for the first round and the Lakers handled it easily. The Rockets were a stupidly tough Semifinal opponent and the Lakers blew them out (even if it took 7 games and Yao Ming’s injury probably helped). The Nuggets had just vaporized a solid Hornets team and decisively beaten Dirk and the Mavs, but the Lakers took them out by a solid margin. And the Magic were really good, but the Lakers crushed them.
Seriously, where was the series where the Lakers were challenged? The Rockets series went to 7, but the MoV there is pretty notable. The Nuggets kept it close (only 3.7 points) but the Lakers still took them in six. And this was no chump set of opponents. Compare this to the 80s Lakers and the contrast in strength of schedule is intense. They played really good teams, and beat them very soundly. I’ll be honest, I think this is one of the more impressive playoff runs ever. Quite possible Top 10.
Do I think they’re a little high here? . . . maybe. Probably. The Nuggets weren’t as good as OSRS says, and the ‘09 Lakers’ RSRS wasn’t that great. Still. I think that the Top 25 is very comfortable. I don’t think people give this team the props it deserves, historically. You know how the ‘08 Celtics dominated the regular season, but weirdly kind of underwhelmed in the playoffs? The ‘09 Lakers were the opposite. They were very good (but not great) in the regular season, but they played extremely well in the playoffs. Worth remembering.
PG: Derek Fisher, +0.2 / -1.9
SG: Kobe Bryant, +5.9 / +9.1
SF: Trevor Ariza, +2.4 / +3.8
PF: Lamar Odom, +2.0 / +3.2
C: Pau Gasol, +4.5 / +5.3
Regular Season Metrics:
Regular Season Record: 65-17, Regular Season SRS: +7.11 (42nd), Earned the 1 Seed
Regular Season Offensive Rating: +4.5 (39th), Regular Season Defensive Rating: -3.6 (51st)
Shooting Advantage: +2.5%, Possession Advantage: +2.7 shooting possessions per game
Kobe Bryant (SG, 30): 38 MPPG, 32% OLoad, 29 / 6 / 5 / 2 on +1.7%
Pau Gasol (C, 28): 39 MPPG, 20% OLoad, 20 / 10 / 4 / 2 on +7.3%
Lamar Odom (PF, 29): 32 MPPG, 18% OLoad, 12 / 9 / 3 / 2 on -0.2%
Trevor Ariza (SF, 23): 26 MPPG, 17% OLoad, 9 / 5 / 2 / 2 on +0.0%
Derek Fisher (PG, 34): 32 MPPG, 16% OLoad, 11 / 2 / 3 / 1 on +0.2%
Scoring/100: Kobe Bryant (37.8 / +1.7%), Pau Gasol (25.9 / +7.3%), Lamar Odom (19.5 / -0.2%)
Assists/100: Kobe Bryant (6.9), Derek Fisher (5.4), Pau Gasol (4.8)
Heliocentrism: 31.7% (47th of 84 teams) - Kobe
Wingmen: 39.8% (32nd) - Gasol & Odom
Depth: 28.5% (36th)
Playoff Metrics:
Playoff Offensive Rating: +6.41 (39th), Playoff Defensive Rating: -5.97 (37th)
Playoff SRS: +14.24 (12th), Total SRS Increase through Playoffs: +4.73 (10th)
Shooting Advantage: +3.0%, Possession Advantage: +1.6 shooting possessions per game
Average Playoff Opponent Offense: +1.17 (75th), Average Playoff Opponent Defense: -3.31 (24th)
Kobe Bryant (SG, 30): 43 MPPG, 33% OLoad, 32 / 6 / 6 / 3 on +2.0%
Pau Gasol (C, 28): 43 MPPG, 18% OLoad, 19 / 12 / 3 / 3 on +7.8%
Lamar Odom (PF, 29): 34 MPPG, 17% OLoad, 13 / 10 / 2 / 2 on +4.3%
Trevor Ariza (SF, 23): 33 MPPG, 16% OLoad, 12 / 5 / 3 / 2 on +6.6%
Derek Fisher (PG, 34): 31 MPPG, 15% OLoad, 9 / 2 / 2 / 1 on -4.4%
Scoring/100: Kobe Bryant (39.0 / +2.0%), Pau Gasol (23.8 / +7.8%), Lamar Odom (20.3 / +4.3%)
Assists/100: Kobe Bryant (7.1), Derek Fisher (4.1), Trevor Ariza (3.9)
Playoff Heliocentrism: 41.3% (25th of 84 teams) - Kobe
Playoff Wingmen: 42.9% (30th) - Gasol & Odom
Playoff Depth: 15.8% (68th)
Round 1: Utah Jazz (+2.3), won 4-1, by +9.2 points per game (+11.5 SRS eq)
Round 2: Houston Rockets (+6.0), won 4-3, by +7.3 points per game (+13.3 SRS eq)
Round 3: Denver Nuggets (+10.3), won 4-2, by +3.7 points per game (+14.0 SRS eq)
Round 4: Orlando Magic (+9.3), won 4-1, by +9.4 points per game (+18.7 SRS eq)
Offensive / Defensive Ratings from Opposition Regular Season Average:
Utah Jazz: +7.3 / -5.4
Houston Rockets: +5.2 / -7.4
Denver Nuggets: +7.6 / +0.0
Orlando Magic: +8.9 / -8.7
Shooting Advantage / Possession Advantage per game (unadjusted):
Utah Jazz: +6.9% / -3.3
Houston Rockets: +1.4% / +4.7
Denver Nuggets: +3.0% / -1.8
Orlando Magic: +1.4% / +6.3
Postseason Usage/Efficiency Change adjusted for Opposition:
Derek Fisher: -0.3% / -3.0%
Kobe Bryant: +0.7% / +1.9%
Trevor Ariza: -0.7% / +8.3%
Lamar Odom: -0.6% / +6.1%
Pau Gasol: -1.6% / +2.1%
Humans process and recognize patterns. It’s a major part of who we are. Once upon a time it was cold for several months, then nice for several months, then hot for several months, then nice for several months, then cold for several months, and so on. And eventually the pattern was recognized, and we figured out that there were seasons. And we can detect metaphor, things that are *like* things but aren’t actually them. A nurturing mentor can be a “father/mother figure”, triggering similar parts of our brains as an actual parent, even though they obviously aren’t. An event that is *like* something traumatic that happened to us before can have us experiencing that unpleasant memory again.
This pattern manifests notably in stories. Joseph Campbell, in his book ‘The Hero With a Thousand Faces’, suggests that almost every hero story has a bunch of elements in common. And he argues that, within reason, almost every single hero story has most of these characteristics, and if it doesn’t, it likely won’t be experienced as the story of a hero.
I bring this up because much of basketball ‘analysis’ is actually about storytelling. And the search for greatness in players actually has a lot in common with the search for players whose stories match up the most with stories of heroes. Bear with me. But we’re going to take a tour through a variety of different hero stories and look for common themes and then we’ll be back.
Consider the film High Noon (a western, if you didn’t know/guess). In it, the Marshal of a small town discovers that a criminal he put away a while back is out, and is coming to the town with his gang for revenge on the Marshal. The Marshal goes to the different people in the town for assistance handling the outlaw, but they all (for different reasons) want nothing to do with it. The Marshal’s wife suggests leaving town together, to avoid the unwinnable fight. But the Marshal refuses, because he’s a lawman, and he doesn’t run from criminals. In the famous climactic shot setting up the final shootout, the crane slowly rises above the town, showing completely deserted streets where the Marshal, completely alone, walks slowly to the showdown that he refuses to avoid.
He wins of course.
There are several notable threads here: 1) The Marshal tries to get help repeatedly and ultimately fails, 2) the Marshal has a high ideal/goal, 3) the Marshal is ultimately alone in pursuing that ideal, 4) because of the above the Marshal pursues an obviously risky course of action and 5) ultimately prevails.
Consider Batman. He has the following characteristics: 1) Is born special (billionaire), 2) has dedicated his life to a high ideal/goal (making the world better by fighting crime), 3) is generally alone and isolated in the pursuit of his goal, 4) disregards the socially accepted rules for handling things (he’s a vigilante), 5) his path is ultimately high-risk compared to the lifestyle he could have led, and 6) he generally wins.
Consider Harry Potter. He has the following characteristics: 1) is born special (the boy who lived), 2) is driven to protect people and fight evil (a high ideal), 3) while he has friends, when push comes to shove he’s generally alone (facing the basilisk in CoS, walking into the woods to face Voldemort in tDH), 4) he breaks rules like it’s going out of style, 5) he takes crazy amounts of risks (facing a two-ton snake with his bare hands and he and his teenage friends breaking into the ministry of magic to stop Voldemort leap to mind), and 6) he ultimately prevails.
Consider the Buddha. His story has the following characteristics: 1) is born special (or at least, a prince), 2) is driven to a high ideal, 3) generally pursues that ideal alone, 4) while Buddha was objectively gentle, his basic MO was shattering the rigid imperfections of Hinduism at his time and trying to create something better, 5) given that he chose to wander the world in search of enlightenment instead of staying a prince, I’d say that he pursued a comparably high risk lifestyle and 6) he was ultimately triumphant.
Consider Luke Skywalker. His story has the following characteristics: 1) is born special (the son of an incredibly powerful Jedi), 2) leaves his home to make the galaxy better and fight the Empire, 3) most of his major journeys/arcs are alone (facing Vader, first in Cloud City and then on the Death Star), 4) Luke often pursues courses that are objectively risky/stupid that he believes are right, 5) he fails at times and is even humiliated in his journey but 6) ultimately wins and ascends to greatness.
Consider Robin Hood. His story has the following characteristics: 1) is born special (a noble), 2) has a high ideal (that the Normans/nobles shouldn’t be oppressing the Saxons/peasants), 3) while he had followers he is clearly their leader and is above all of them and his major arcs are alone, 4) Robin chooses the life of an outlaw (basically becoming a vigilante) to fight the things he opposes instead of avoiding that conflict, 5) Robin is consistently a risk-taker and 6) ultimately wins and ascends.
I could go on forever. These threads are *crazy* common. Not every ‘hero’ has all of them, but every hero has most of them.
Not every hero is born special, but it’s really, really common. They’re the main character of the story after all.
Every hero has a goal/motivation that pushes them toward greatness.
While heroes may have friends/helpers/support, they are always ultimately alone, or at least, above the rest. Even Buddha and Christ, both of whose major platforms are built on egalitarianism, but both at different times assert that *they* are the way and neither ever equated themselves with their followers.
Most heroes are willing to break rules in their name of their higher motivation.
Heroes universally take risky as opposed to safe paths to their goals.
Heroes often fail en route to success.
Heroes almost all ultimately prevail. Take Batman’s entire story except have him shot by the third mugger he tries to stop and he’s not a hero anymore. He’s just that idealistic crazy billionaire who got hisself killed.
Every single one of these translates to basketball:
A hero in basketball carries themselves differently, as though they believe themselves to be the main character / center of their team (or even the league).
A hero in basketball is motivated obsessively toward winning championships.
A hero in basketball ‘carries’ his team, is the *visible* ‘leader’ of his team and almost never subordinates himself to his followers/teammates.
A hero in basketball leans toward doing things their own way, not the way others say.
A hero in basketball doesn’t play the percentages or play safe, he sets his lance and charges the dragon head on.
A hero in basketball fails at first but;
Ultimately triumphs and ascends as the result of his hero journey.
Tell me that those seven things don’t fit Kobe Bryant better than any player in NBA history, except perhaps for Michael Jordan.
The Hero is Special: Kobe came into the league with a chip on his shoulder. Even as a teenager on a successful team, he refused to be hazed as a rookie. He refused to bow to Shaq’s centrality to the team, and refused to bow to the veterans. He was the son of a successful NBA player (a little like being NBA royalty). When Phil Jackson brought Michael Jordan in to talk to Kobe about deferring to his teammates more, Kobe’s first reaction on encountering Jordan was to challenge him “I could whip you on the court right now.” From the beginning Kobe *needed* to be the best and acted as if he already was. Totally consistent with being a ‘hero’.
The Hero Pursues a High Ideal: Kobe was motivated to win and to be great like few players ever. Nobody who discusses him can fail to mention his work-ethic. From his incredible efforts with Nike to build a better shoe, his late-night shooting sessions and his reverse-prep for matchups with Shane Battier, Kobe pursued his higher goal obsessively. Completely on script.
A Hero is the Visible Leader of His Team: Kobe fits this perfectly too. First, Kobe had an incredibly flashy skillset. Everything about his play was attention-getting. He scored in buckets. Tons and tons of points. But not all points were created equal. Shaq could score more and better, but he did so by creating *easy* shots. Nobody could resist him, so good looks under the basket came naturally. Kobe scored his buckets by making *hard* shots. And Kobe *looked* like a great player. He had the swagger, he had the intensity. Shaq on the court was a competitor, but off the court he had other goals. Shaq was more of a Porthos/Falstaff type, formidable, but a man of large appetites who lived to live, not just win. In contrast Kobe’s conduct on and off the court was more like a samurai’s katana, folded in on itself over and over again and again until it was a tool built perfectly for cutting through anything in the way. Shaq was the better player in the threepeat, but Kobe *acted* more like the hero of the team, in a way that Shaq did not. And when it came time for a clutch shot, Kobe would take those no matter what.
A Hero Does Things Their Own Way: Phil Jackson often despaired of Kobe. Whatever he said, Kobe seemed to take shots that should have been passes. As much as he had been drilled on the triangle, Kobe would often break it to pursue his own looks. And Jackson often mourned that Kobe’s dramatic steals, so perfect for highlight reels, often came at the expense of the team’s defensive integrity. But Kobe always did things his own way.
A Hero Doesn’t Play the Percentages; a Hero Takes Risks: this is completely on point. Kobe’s dominant skill was taking contested midrange jumpers, the least efficient shots in basketball. He wasn’t athletic enough to live at the rim, nor did he have the touch or inclination to take lots of threes and make them at a high rate. And unlike Jordan, Kobe existed in a league with a fair amount of statistical understanding. That Jordan didn’t take threes (much) wasn’t really a weakness; nobody took threes back then. But a similar shot selection 15 years later flew more in the face of where the league was going. It had its upsides; the ability to make these kinds of tough shots is unusually valuable in the playoffs. And that he took these objectively terrible shots over and over again is completely consistent with a Hero. He didn’t play it safe, he went all-in every time.
A Hero Wins: Kobe won. Five times, even if three of those times were more Shaq than him. Allen Iverson has a lot of similarities to Kobe. But he never won. Carmelo had similarities. But he never won. I’m not trying to say that those three are equivalent; Kobe was clearly better. But Kobe winning was a critical part of his Hero story. But until 2009, he’d never managed to win as the undisputed Alpha of his team.
But the hard part is that many of those ‘basketball hero’ characteristics are actually *bad* for winning. The ability to take tough shots is valuable, but an obsession with taking them is usually bad. Thinking that you’re the be-all and end-all can easily alienate teammates. Calling your own number over and over again can also alienate teammates. So, counter-intuitively, following a ‘Hero’ archetype and providing maximum career value are, at times contradictory.
It is amazing how perfectly Kobe embodies the basketball Hero archetype. And it’s why he is/was beloved by so many and why, I’d imagine, that some consider him to be the greatest player ever. But the more statistically inclined often struggled with Kobe, particularly because they’re looking for something different from compliance to an unconscious archetype. I myself spent a long time hating on Kobe, before ElGee won me over to appreciating what made him great. But I will say, 2009 may be the year that encapsulates the best of Kobe on both sides.
The threepeat Lakers fell apart. It was unthinkable on paper. Shaq was at his peak, putting up arguably the best scoring years from a center ever. Kobe was young, but playing at a high level even so. It was easy to imagine them simply running it back over and over again. I mean, who was going stop them? But nobody did; they stopped themselves. Shaq struggled with staying in shape in the offseason and there was rampant tension between the two. They fell to the Spurs in ‘03. They made the Finals and fell to the Pistons (who completely shut Kobe down). And then Shaq skipped town to join Wade in Miami. Kobe was left holding the keys. Karl Malone left, Gary Payton left, and the roster devolved to Kobe and the newly acquired Lamar Odom. In 2005 the team went from 56 wins to 34 wins, and according to BPM not a single player besides those two was above average.
A skeptic would look here and say that Kobe not being able to lead a team to more than 34 wins, even as a relatively solo act, is a pretty disappointing result. And it made clear just how dependent the team had been on Shaq.
But from a Hero journey point of view, it totally worked. After all, heroes face adversity as a natural part of their story. They can go through some pretty deep lows (heck, Luke got his freaking hand chopped off). But another part of it is that in most hero stories, the Hero loses his home/comfort. Frodo leaves the Shire, Luke’s aunt/uncle are killed, Buddha leaves the wealth of his birth and Bruce Wayne leaves home to study martial arts. So Kobe losing Shaq and having his team implode is actually a totally natural part of a traditional Hero journey.
And to Kobe’s credit, he handled it like a champ. Despite his team being awful, he went hard every night, in ‘06 posting one of the greatest scoring seasons ever (35.4 ppg, 45.6 ppx on a not-bad +2.3%). On the back of his scoring the Lakers won 45 games in ‘06 and 42 games in ‘07, both times getting knocked out in the first round of the playoffs. There were reasons to be a little optimistic about the future. Prospect Trevor Ariza was developing nicely, and several of the Lakers’ draft picks were growing into serviceable supporting roles. The Lakers started off the season on pace for 53 wins, the best start they’d had in years.
But then, the most unusual thing happened.
The Lakers bundled a ton of roster filler and first rounders to Memphis, and added big-man Pau Gasol. Gasol had been toiling on the Grizzlies for years. He was a strong rebounder, strong presence in the paint, a good passer and was a good scorer, skilled under the hoop, from the post and from midrange. But he was not equipped for massive defensive pressure. Consider his regular season -> postseason numbers in ‘05 and ‘06:
2005: 26.2% Usage, 58.2% TS -> 31.4% Usage, 49.8% TS
2006: 26.4% Usage, 55.5% TS -> 29.9% Usage, 50.5% TS
Those playoff numbers are each from only one series. But the trend seems pretty clear. In the playoffs, Memphis’ lack of other scoring options led Gasol to carry a much larger scoring load in the playoffs, and it absolutely imploded his shooting efficiency. And here’s the thing: Gasol had a lot of strong skills, skills that weren’t effectively used because he was spending such a disproportionate amount of time in the playoffs trying to score. When he joined the Lakers his game transformed. Here’s the transition from his ‘08 regular season in Memphis to LA, and his ‘06 playoffs to his ‘09:
2008 regular season (MEM): 22.1% Usage, 56.6% TS, 14.0 AST%, 2.8 BLK%, +2.1 BPM
2008 regular season (LAL): 21.2% Usage, 63.9% TS, 17.0 AST%, 3.3 BLK%, +5.5 BPM
2006 Playoffs (MEM): 29.9% Usage, 50.5% TS, 10.9% Reb, 17.8% Ast, 2.5 BLK%, +2.4 BPM
2009 Playoffs (LAL): 18.8% Usage, 62.2% TS, 15.6% Reb, 10.4% Ast, 4.1 BLK%, +5.3 BPM
So, jumping to the Lakers in the regular season, his scoring efficiency exploded (with the extra space he got to operate playing with Kobe), his passing improves and he plays better defense. In the playoffs his role went from Alpha carrying the team to a supporting player, and his efficiency went way up. Likewise his rebounding went way up, his passing drops a lot (but he had the ball way less, so per touch they’re not as far off as they look) and his defense improved. Like so many skilled bigs (Garnett, Robinson, etc), Gasol had a) such diverse skills that the team gained from him focusing on them at the expense of his scoring and b) a scoring game that wasn’t robust enough to carry an increased load in the playoffs. Moving to a team that had somebody who *could* carry an increased load in the playoffs freed up Gasol to be a better, more valuable player.
Before adding Gasol the Lakers were on pace for 53 wins. But after adding him they went 23-5 to close out the season. The Lakers went from consistent first-round exits to smashing through the Western Conference before falling in the Finals to the Boston Celtics. And in 2009 the Lakers were the favorite to win the West again. A skeptic would say the following: “Wait, we’re supposed to think that Kobe was the be-all and end-all because of his 2008-10 playoff runs? But without Pau he couldn’t even sniff the Semifinals? And adding Pau suddenly transforms them into a championship 2 out of 3 years? Who, seriously, was the driving force on these championship teams?”
Heroic Narrator: There are many stories of heroes. They inspire us with their courage, lift our hearts with their greatness. But few heroes actually save the day alone. Harry Potter, for all his heroism, needed His Mother’s Love / the Sword of Griffindor / Fawke’s Tears / his pals / the Resurrection Stone etc to actually get it done. Luke needed Obi-Wan and Han to blow up the Death Star. Batman needed Alfred / Fox. So I will not tell you that a Hero is victorious alone. Every knight needs a squire, a horse, and a fair maiden to bestow her favor. So when we see Kobe going from the first round to the Finals, we oughtn’t get confused. Kobe was the Hero on those teams. Rebounds? Defense? Passing? Those are like armor and a good horse, a sharp lance and keen sword. But scoring? Those valiant sallies where the Hero throws himself into the fierce teeth fo the defense, scoring wounds in the scaly flesh of that great beast? *That* is where Heroes are made. And before Pau the Lakers were sending Kobe, our Hero, to battle practically riding a goat, with old newspaper around him for armor. Can he be faulted, I ask you, if his efforts, pure of heart though they were, left him unhorsed and tumbling in the dust before the might of better equipped knaves? None can doubt the might of his sword, or his courage in the attack, even when his support was unworthy of him!
The coming of Pau Gasol to the Lakers was merely Sir Kobe being given the tools that every true Hero deserves, a supporting cast that can actually have his back. And it was better for Pau as well! Gasol was miscast on the Grizzlies, like Spock trying to captain the Enterprise, or Little John trying to lead the Merry Men. It isn’t an outright disaster, but without the Hero to lead them, such efforts inevitably fail. Spock is a tolerable captain, but an exceptional first officer. Hermione Granger was a skilled witch, but she lacked the pedigree and the penchant for risk-taking that makes a true Hero. Han Solo is a smooth criminal who can back up the Hero, but when he tries to be the lead he ends up frozen in carbonite. Some are Heroes, others are Squires. There’s no shame in that. But speak not of Pau Gasol lifting the Lakers to the Finals. There was only one Hero on that team. That Gasol made such an impact is only proof of how unfit for Sir Kobe the team around him had been!
*Ahem*, anyways . . .
The 2009 Lakers ripped through the regular season, posting by far the best record and SRS in the West (the East, on the other hand, was super top-heavy with the Cavs, Celtics and Magic all serious contenders). The Lakers weren’t particularly great on either side of the ball but they held their own just fine. Their offense was built on two-pointers. They took and made threes an average amount, but they took a ton of twos and made them well (which shouldn’t be a surprise between Kobe and Pau). They crashed the boards very well (Gasol and Bynum were both strong in that area with Odom helping) and as with most Phil Jackson teams they took very good care of the ball. Let’s look at their roster:
Modern Comps:
PG: 2014 George Hill
SG: 2018 Kevin Durant (but better on offense)
SF: 2013 Matt Barnes
PF: 2019 Willie Cauley-Stein (more spacing and better on defense)
C: 2009 Pau Gasol
Fisher wasn’t anything terribly remarkable at the 1; he spaced the floor and didn’t turn the ball over. Young Trevor Ariza was basically a sufficient player on offense who played strong defense from the wing. Lamar Odom wasn’t a particularly good scorer, but he was a solid passer and rebounder, who played excellent defense. ‘09 Gasol was really hard to find comps for. That level of shooting efficiency is really hard to find in guys with a big’s skillset. And Kobe . . . he barely shot above league average. But he passed well, was able to take shots in buckets, didn’t turn the ball over and rebounded well for a 2. That the rest of the Lakers (besides Gasol) struggled to shoot above league average as well should be an indication of how limited they were offensively.
Heroic Narrator: Smarting from a setback against the churlish hordes in Boston, Kobe inspired his team, leading them to the best record in the Conference and making the most out of his limited teammates. Pau Gasol, too soft to be successful in Memphis, had the best season of his career (to that point) thanks to the valiance of Kobe drawing the attention of the defense, sacrificing his own comfort so that his weaker teammates could succeed! With the smoldering fire within him, kindled from birth and inflamed by the need for vengeance, Kobe’s heroic journey to the championship began!
In the first round! The vile and perfidious Utah Jazz, verily an outstanding first round opponent at +2.3 RSRS! Led by Deron Williams, Carlos Boozer, Paul Millsap and Andrei Kirilenko, they struck fear into the hearts of the weak! But the eyes of fair maidens shed no tears, and only lit in joy at seeing Kobe and his Lakers dispatch the Jazz in a mere five games. Kobe averaged a bold 27 points a game, putting the league on notice that his claim to the throne would not be denied this year!
And jumping in here, Kobe did have a great series (27/5/6 on +3.6% with 2.4 steals a game) while Gasol averaged an 18/9/2 on +7.5%. And the Lakers played excellent defense, holding the Jazz to -2.7% as a team. They won by 9.2 points a game, a strong (though not overwhelming) margin for a decent first round matchup. I’ll turn it over to the other guy.
Heroic Narrator: In the second round! A foe perhaps worthy of the Finals, the +6.0 Houston Rockets! A FEROCIOUS second round matchup for any team! Led by a veritable GIANT, Yao Ming, who stared down on the bigs of the league from his lofty heights! Even the strongest QUAILED before him! But did our hero fear? Never! Even defended by Shane Battier, as cunning a knave as existed in the league, Kobe did score 27 points a game, leading the Lakers to a triumph by an astounding 7.3 points per game! This, against as great a five-seed as the league had ever seen! Bright was the sword of Sir Kobe as he rode onward to the Conference Finals!
It wasn’t quite that clean. Battier definitely slowed Kobe, holding him to 27/5/4 on -0.9% efficiency. And Yao Ming only got to play three games before he went out with injury. And even still the series went to seven games. 7.3 points a game against a strong team (which the Rockets definitely were) is impressive, but the injury to Yao Ming definitely takes something away from it.
VILE KNAVE! You speak ill of the victory of Sir Kobe! The noble Lakers’ Margin of Victory in those first three games, with your precious Yao Ming playing!? +6.3 points per game! The Lakers’ Margin of Victory in the remaining four games? +8.0 points per game! The superiority of Kobe and his Lakers CANNOT be doubted! What say you to that!?
Small sample size?
IGNORANT PEASANT! Let us continue! Guarding the doors to the castle where the throne lay were the FIENDISH Denver Nuggets. They were led by their own great knight, Sir Carmelo of the house of Anthony! With the thunderous hooves of his warhorse echoing in their ears, the foes of Carmelo Anthony FLED IN PANIC! Dispatching the PUNY Chris Paul and the Hornets by an astounding 24.2 points a game, their mark on the tourney was made! In the semi-finals they struck down Dirk Nowitzki and SMOTE his ruin upon the mountainside, by 7.8 points a game! Even if OSRS doth exaggerate their victories, can any DOUBT the might of Sir Carmelo and his Nuggets!
But wait! Do you hear the trumpets? Here comes a knight, noble and true, to challenge Sir Carmelo for the Dominion of the Western Conference! And even brave Sir Carmelo cannot help but to turn his face away from the fearsome aspect of Sir Kobe, he who had won not ONE, not TWO, but THREE championships when Sir Carmelo was not even a babe in the league. As the crowds circled about them, each champion drew their swords, knowing that no quarter would be asked or given.
In GAME ONE, Sir Carmelo did wreck havoc upon the Lakers’ defense, scoring 39 points! Yet even so did Sir Kobe have the last word, scoring an unthinkable FORTY POINTS! And even has he did dispatch Sir Carmelo in Game One did the Lakers edge out the Nuggets by a mere TWO POINTS, clearly earning the favor of the Clutch Fairy with their victory! In the SECOND GAME Sir Kobe faltered (was his sword arm worn from swinging into his FOES!? Were his mailed legs fatigued from KICKING the buttocks of his opponents!?) as he scored a mere 32 points while Sir Carmelo did gain the upper hand with THIRTY-FOUR points, and even so did the vile Nuggets prevail by three points! THE BATTLE WAS JOINED!
In Game Three Sir Kobe ROSE to the challenge, inflicting FORTY-ONE points of VIRTUE upon the gutless Nuggets, while Carmelo SHUDDERED to meet the challenge, scoring a paltry 21 points and the Lakers did triumph by 6 points. JUSTICE WAS DONE! But in Game 4 THE UNTHINKABLE HAPPENED! Even as Sir Kobe did verily drop buckets upon his enemies, THIRTY FOUR points MOST NOBLE, the Nuggets prevailed by 19 even while Sir Carmelo scored a mere fifteen. WAS IT TREACHERY my readers!? Do not wonder! For the RIGHTEOUS shall prevail!
For in Game Five, the Upper Hand was on the OTHER FOOT! Even as Sir Carmelo did score 31 points, Sir Kobe did nobly sacrifice of his own glory so that others may live, scoring only 22 points but dishing EIGHT ASSISTS and INSPIRING his team to a noble NINE POINT VICTORY! And in Game Six, can you doubt the result, the churlish Nuggets, their BACKS TO THE WALL, did BOW before the power of MOMENTUM, as Sir Kobe scored thirty five points with ten assists, leading his Lakers to a RESOUNDING 27 point victory! VICTORY WAS HIS! He had won the West, and now advanced to the NBA Finals, to win the crown that he TRULY DESERVED!
Just jumping in, I don’t have much to add. Yeah, a lot of that was nonsense. But it was fun nonsense. And doesn’t that count for something? And Kobe’s stat line in Game 4 was a 34/10/4 on -12.1%, so perhaps awful shooting was the reason for the loss, and not FOUL TREACHERY but who am I to say? Anyhow. I’ll let him do the Finals.
Heroic Narrator: Sir Kobe and his Lakers did enter the castle, searching for the throne room where the Crown might be. And so they came upon the room only to find FIERCE DRAGON guarding the treasure. Coiled about the throne, its rough hide grating upon the worked stone of the floor, it opened its mouth and ROARED. This was no ORDINARY DRAGON! This dragon was armored in scales like SHIELDS. So HARD were those scales that NONE could dent them! Many would-be heroes had tried and paid with their lives. One such knight, Sir LeBron the Young, was UNMATCHED in matters of the sword and yet HE TOO PERISHED TO THE BEAST!! Indeed, after seeing Sir LeBron fall to the MAGIC of the BEAST many wondered if there were any that could stand against this FOUL CREATURE! But Sir Kobe was not dismayed. For years he had kept his sword keen, his lance sharp and his armor oiled. He knew that one day the fate of the kingdom would rest on his shoulders. AND TODAY WAS THAT DAY! Sir Kobe RODE directly at the beast! The onlookers gave a gasp of fear, for HOW was Sir Kobe to survive such a reckless onslaught!? And yet, in GAME ONE, he plunged his lance DEEP within the HEART of the BEAST! Scoring FORTY POINTS, his Lakers won by twenty-five. The ground SHOOK as the dragon fell to the stone floor, hot ichor pumping from his wound. There were more games to play, but they were needed not. Sir Kobe and the Lakers vanquished the dragon in BUT FIVE GAMES, by a FEARSOME 9.4 POINTS PER GAME!! Thirty two points a game did he average, but also 7 assists, showing that his hand was giving to his teammates even as it gave DEATH TO HIS ENEMIES!
And so Sir Kobe ascended the steps of the dais. Years had he trained for this day, sacrificing the peaceful lives that others live, enduring endless trials and torments, all for this moment. He reached out gently to the crown, the cold metal warming to his touch. With deliberate grace he lifted the circlet, turning to the crowd. A hush fell over them, and with a deliberate pause, he placed the crown upon his head. And the crowd erupted in adulation! No Pontiff or man of the cloth did Sir Kobe need to put that crown on his own head! The hand that slew the dragon CROWNS the KING! And so shall it EVER BE!
He had journeyed long and hard, through thankless seasons mired in meaninglessness. But there could be no doubt. The Hero had won the Crown. LONG MAY HE REIGN!
Not to steal the thunder here. Kobe had a strong series against the Magic, averaging a 32/6/7 on -1.9% for the series. The efficiency may seem low, but against the Magic’s defense (which was by far the best in the league) and posting a 38% usage rate, it was pretty impressive. But the other bigs clearly did their part, with Gasol averaging a 19/9/2 on +10.3%. And perhaps more impressively Gasol and Odom combined to shut Howard down, holding him to less than 4 offensive boards a game. Orlando had beaten the Cavs, in part, on the back of them having no answer for Howard’s incredible athleticism. But between Odom and Gasol, Howard was stifled, and without Howard’s dominance the Magic folded like a house of cards. Matchup-wise you have to give Gasol, Odom and Bynum credit for that. But Kobe put them in a position to succeed by drawing the attention of the defenses. For better or for worse, this really was a great run from the Lakers. And 9.4 point per game win over the ‘09 Magic is one of the most dominant Finals wins *ever*. And it wasn’t like the ‘09 Magic were chumps; they beat one of the best regular season teams ever in the ‘09 Cavs, and they ran the table hard through the West. They were really, really good unless they ran into 1) an onslaught of bigs that could blunt Howard’s dominance and 2) an opposing offense so resilient that their outstanding defense lost its effectiveness. In both regards the ‘09 Lakers were a horrible matchup for them. But it still counts.
11 | Lakers
10 | Cavs
9 | Nuggets
8 | Magic
7 |
6 |
5 | Celtics
4 | Rockets
3 | Mavericks
2 | Blazers
1 | Bulls, Heat, Spurs, Suns
0 | Jazz
-0 | 76ers, Hawks, Pacers, Bucks
-1 | Bobcats
-2 | Pistons, Nets, Raptors, Knicks
-3 | Warriors
-4 | TWolves
-5 | Hornets, Grizzlies
-6 | Wizards, Thunder
-7 |
-8 | Clippers, Kings
-9 |
-10|
2009 is very reminiscent of 2016. The heights of the best teams weren’t the same, but still. The hilarious thing is, the league absolutely had a bell-curve. Look at those bottom 26 teams. That’s a pretty smooth distribution. But those four teams on top. The Nuggets went nuts in the playoffs, and while OSRS overrates them for that reason, they’re still impressive. The Cavs absolutely blew apart the season until they fell to the Magic. And the Magic were dominant . . . until they fell to the Lakers. It was not a competitive year. So the Lakers are dinged for that somewhat.
What are we to make of this season? Their regular season was honestly not that impressive. The 42nd best RSRS on this list is good . . . but not great. But their playoffs. Seriously. That was a really, really, really good playoffs. Their first round matchup, the Jazz, was a pretty tough opponent for the first round and the Lakers handled it easily. The Rockets were a stupidly tough Semifinal opponent and the Lakers blew them out (even if it took 7 games and Yao Ming’s injury probably helped). The Nuggets had just vaporized a solid Hornets team and decisively beaten Dirk and the Mavs, but the Lakers took them out by a solid margin. And the Magic were really good, but the Lakers crushed them.
Seriously, where was the series where the Lakers were challenged? The Rockets series went to 7, but the MoV there is pretty notable. The Nuggets kept it close (only 3.7 points) but the Lakers still took them in six. And this was no chump set of opponents. Compare this to the 80s Lakers and the contrast in strength of schedule is intense. They played really good teams, and beat them very soundly. I’ll be honest, I think this is one of the more impressive playoff runs ever. Quite possible Top 10.
Do I think they’re a little high here? . . . maybe. Probably. The Nuggets weren’t as good as OSRS says, and the ‘09 Lakers’ RSRS wasn’t that great. Still. I think that the Top 25 is very comfortable. I don’t think people give this team the props it deserves, historically. You know how the ‘08 Celtics dominated the regular season, but weirdly kind of underwhelmed in the playoffs? The ‘09 Lakers were the opposite. They were very good (but not great) in the regular season, but they played extremely well in the playoffs. Worth remembering.
Back to the Main Thread
I always read all your contributions with avid interest and admiration 
), AND literary characters (referencing and/or quoting Tolkein, among others).......you're in so many of my wheelhouses right now, I have to tell you that a [probably one-sided] "bro-mance" has just begun. 
