2001 Lakers vs 1971 Bucks

[Point forward]

Spun off the 1971 Bucks thread, I thought it a nice idea to pit these teams against each other. Here a head to head overview w/playoffs stats:

1971 MILWAUKEE BUCKS (66-16, 12-2 playoffs)
C - Lew Alcindor (MVP, scoring champ, All-D 2nd Team, Finals MVP): 27/17/3/.515
PF - Greg Smith: 12/9/2/.547
SF - Bob Dandridge: 19/9/3/.463
SG - Jon McGlocklin: 15/2/2/.536
PG - Oscar Robertson (NBA 2nd Team): 18/5/9/.486
Bench - C/F Bob Boozer (7/5 in 20 mpg), F Dick Cunningham (7 in 22 mpg), G Allen, F McLemore
Coach - Larry Costello

I think you all know who Lew Alcindor became after winning that ring

Additional facts: considered the best offensive and defensive team in that year (118-106 ppg average) although they were firmly rooted in D... Alcindor took Wilt 1-on-1 in the playoffs and outscored him... fundamentally sound w/o weaknesses... a super version of the TD Spurs?

2001 LOS ANGELES LAKERS (56-26, 15-1 playoffs)
C - Shaquille O'Neal (NBA 1st Team, All-D 2nd team, 3rd in MVP vote): 30/15/3/.555
PF - Horace Grant: 6/6/.385
SF - Rick Fox: 10/5/4/.450
SG - Kobe Bryant (NBA 2nd Team, All-D 2nd Team): 29/7/6/.469
PG - Derek Fisher: 13/4/3/.484
Bench - F Horry (6/5 in 25mpg), G Shaw (4 in 18mpg), G Lue, F George
Coach - Phil Jackson

Additional facts: swept the Blazers, Kings and Spurs with TD/DRob... prime Shaq broke DPOY Mutombo into two... had a GOAT playoffs run after a subpar, injury-laden regular season... full of clutch players

In the last discussions about the 2001 Lakers, it was said that prime Shaq steamrollers anybody. But this notion is not valid vs prime Alcindor, not to mention that Alcindor's legendary sky hook would take much away from Shaq's low post D. Still, Shaq is much heavier and stronger than Alcindor, so we have a true clash of the titans. Young Kobe will take a bite out of old Oscar, but Oscar was still a very good player, and the supporting casts are nearly equal. Fox and Dandridge are ideal glue guys, and Fisher and McGlocklin legit 3rd scoring options, and Horry and Boozer equally feared sixth men.

The Bucks have HCA due to their better record. Who wins?

[JordansBulls]

Kareem had trouble with Power Players for the Most Part, but Shaq had trouble with Finesse players.
I would take the Bucks in this one though, they were more consistent throughout the entire year.

[semi-sentient]

I would take the Bucks in this one though, they were more consistent throughout the entire year.

Wow, that's your reasoning?

The Bucks starters missed a total of 3 games in the regular season, whereas Lakers starters missed a combined 89. Of course they were more consistent.

It's mind-boggling how people continually underrate the 01 Lakers simply because they couldn't put it together until the last month of the season when they were finally healthy (and heck, they still won 56 games despite all the injury).

...

As for me, I would take the Lakers. Once that team got healthy they steam-rolled the entire league. I remember very clearly how dominate they were even outside of looking at the numbers, and while I was alive to see those Bucks play, I've been following the Lakers (which means I've been paying attention to the rest of the NBA) since the mid 80's and I've never seen a team dominate more than the 01' Lakers did in the post-season. In fact, no one here has. They went into the playoffs on an 8-game winning streak and absolutely demolished teams until their 1st and only loss to the 76ers in the Finals.

HCA? The Lakers were 8-0 on the road in the post-season, including 4-0 against the two best home teams in the league.

The teams they were beating up on were no slouches either, whereas the Bucks had it pretty easy from start to finish. Here are the opponent winning percentages of each team just to put things into perspective:

Lakers:
.707 (SAS)
.683 (PHI)
.671 (SAC)
.610 (POR)

Bucks:
.585 (LAL)
.512 (BAL)
.500 (SFW)

Kobe, Shaq and the rest of the Lakers were firing on all cylinders at exactly the right time so that is not a team that I would bet against. There are a couple of teams that I might place above that Lakers team, but this is not one of them.

[kooldude]

No weaknesses? How are the Bucks going to defend the 3-pointer? Sure, they'll adjust but no chance they can be adequate at it without any previous experience defending it.

I made a thread previously about how weak perimeter defense was back then (60s actually but close enough) and there were numerous videos contributed by realgmers proving that point.

It depends on which era they are playing in. In '01, no question Lakers in 4. In '71, maybe Bucks in 7. maybe

[Baller 24]

Good thread, IMO it'd go down to 6 or 7 games. Kareem was at the very top of is game, scoring, rebounding, passing, defense, footwork, athleticism, he was a beast that year. Oscar was playing great too, but I think the Lakers take this one in 7, maybe 6. Shaq just attracts so much attention, while everyone took their game to another level defensively speaking in the playoffs, as noted, the Bucks were good based on team defense, their man to man defense wasn't that good. Though I for sure don't consider the '01 Lakers the GOAT team by any means. Candidate? Yeah, GOAT? No.

[Point forward]

I think that the X factor is Kobe. The Bucks have excellent team defense but they lack a dedicated 1-on-1 stopper like Frazier, Havlicek, Sloan or Chaney. If MIL does not watch out, Kobe could have a 50 point game.

[Baller 24]

Exactly, they were a better using team defense, not man to man, and Kobe could very well lit up any one of those defenders the Bucks throw at him.

[Benjammin]

Bobby Dandridge was a very good defender and a better player than simply a "glue" guy. Even seven years later he was a key contributor to the Bullets winning a championship.

[richboy]

We should have a all-time tournament and see who wins. Take the NBA champions and take some at large teams and run a little tournament. I would go 01 Lakers because I don't see anyone that can defend Kobe. While Kobe can guard Oscar and slow him down to a degree.

[Cybulski37]

I always wonder how good Alcindor would have been if he never seemingly fell off the earth. It's so weird. You hear of him, and then all of a sudden there is no more Lew Alcindor, anywhere you look. It's a damn shame, really. There would have been some great contests between he and Kareem, I wonder who would come out on top. Would have been some epic battles though, for sure.

[Baller 24]

We should have a all-time tournament and see who wins. Take the NBA champions and take some at large teams and run a little tournament. I would go 01 Lakers because I don't see anyone that can defend Kobe. While Kobe can guard Oscar and slow him down to a degree.

That's a pretty damn good idea, have like a 16 team bracket that we consider some of the greatest teams, and then face them head 2 head until the very end, and we decide who really is the GOAT team.

[kooldude]

We should have a all-time tournament and see who wins. Take the NBA champions and take some at large teams and run a little tournament. I would go 01 Lakers because I don't see anyone that can defend Kobe. While Kobe can guard Oscar and slow him down to a degree.

That's a pretty damn good idea, have like a 16 team bracket that we consider some of the greatest teams, and then face them head 2 head until the very end, and we decide who really is the GOAT team.

I don't like that idea or at least the specific head-2-head structure. For starters, many ppl will ignore rule changes, shifts in playing style, and the progression of the game.

For example, anyone that thinks a past team say like pre-1975, can beat the '01 Lakers with today's rules, are imo, insane.

I think it's best to compare each GOAT team relative to their era, like with the top 100 list.

[Roger Murdock]

These are playoff stats you posted correct?


Its close, but probably the Lakers. I think they matchup better.

As good as Kareem is, I think Shaq is a better if they were to go heads up.