2001 Lakers in the 2023/2024 NBA

[rand]

Let's say the 2001 Lakers were transported to this season and added to the league. They're transported at the start of training camp so they'll get a full training camp and preseason to begin adjusting to the modern game before starting the regular season. They get the same level of health they had in 2001. Would they win the title?

[RCM88x]

Probably not, but only because any team is very unlikely to win the title in any season unless they are just so significantly more talented than any other team, regardless of era translation.

That being said, any team who has possibly two, at worst, top 10 players in the league is gonna be a contender as long as the rest of the team isn't just some anemic group of pieces.

[MyUniBroDavis]

Whose the coach

If they run a 2000s triangle they do nothing lol

[rand]

Whose the coach

If they run a 2000s triangle they do nothing lol

Good question. Assume a quality modern HC, or high quality modern assistant coaches with Phil as manager/figurehead HC, whichever you rate to be better.

[SportsGuru08]

Whose the coach

If they run a 2000s triangle they do nothing lol

The triangle works as long as there's a generational talent at the guard position.

The reason Jim Cleamons and Kurt Rambis flopped as head coaches running the same system is because they didn't have top-of-the-line talent at guard. Meanwhile, Phil Jackson had the two greatest guards in NBA history

[SportsGuru08]

I don't see why not. The best defensive center in today's game is Gobert and Shaq used to eat up defenders much better than him. With today's spacing, Kobe has a lot of room to operate and Fisher, Shaw, Fox, Horry & Lue can just rain threes off those double and triple teams on Shaq

[MyUniBroDavis]

Whose the coach

If they run a 2000s triangle they do nothing lol

The triangle works as long as there's a generational talent at the guard position.

The reason Jim Cleamons and Kurt Rambis flopped as head coaches running the same system is because they didn't have top-of-the-line talent at guard. Meanwhile, Phil Jackson had the two greatest guards in NBA history

The triangle does not work now

(But split cuts :0)

[tsherkin]

I think Shaq would lose some value in today's league. His profoundly incompetent FT shooting would remain a major impediment to his scoring efficiency, and that means a lot more in an environment where league average might roughly match his career average.

A good coach probably wouldn't try to ram the ball into him for 19-21 FGA/g in this game, but then, Shaq had other strengths. He was a good offensive rebounder, moved well in transition, cut well around the key and around dribble penetration. He wasn't especially good with PnR, which isn't ideal in today's game, but he'd find ways to still be good. He would certainly exert a ton of foul pressure on the opposition and while the other 4 guys on the roster would be opening up the interior, he'd likely have a fair amount of room to play... plus, he faced illegal doubles and triples all the time in his own career, so that likely wouldn't be super new to him. He passed well enough when the team had an environment suited to it and a coach driving it, so there's also that. He was no Jokic, of course, but he was good enough.

Kobe could be anywhere from like 5th to 8th in the league, I'd guess. Some people value him more or less, but that's about where I put him. Excellent player. Bit daft in his shot selection, touch overrated on D in his own era, but still ultimately an all-time great player.

The team at the time had Horry, Fox and Ron Harper, as well as Derek Fisher (who took over when Harper's health eventually flamed out). Ho Grant. Brian Shaw. Fisher and Fox were actually good 3pt shooters (if on low volume) and then a bunch of other garbage. Not a staggeringly deep team, per se, but they went about 8 strong in the playoffs. Ho Grant was a reasonable spacer in his D and obviously a skilled player at either end. He'd be a limitation with Shaq on the floor today, though, because Shaq would need all the perimeter gravity the team could provide, as does any post scorer, and it even helped a ton in his own career, and in Olajuwon's.

Their bench would be unimpressive, their spacing non-ideal. I think they'd be very good just by virtue of top-end star talent, though. The earlier they went to Fisher at the point, the better; the earlier they started to use Horry more, the better. I don't see them winning the title without changes, but they'd still be good.

[SportsGuru08]

I think Shaq would lose some value in today's league. His profoundly incompetent FT shooting would remain a major impediment to his scoring efficiency, and that means a lot more in an environment where league average might roughly match his career average.

A good coach probably wouldn't try to ram the ball into him for 19-21 FGA/g in this game, but then, Shaq had other strengths. He was a good offensive rebounder, moved well in transition, cut well around the key and around dribble penetration. He wasn't especially good with PnR, which isn't ideal in today's game, but he'd find ways to still be good. He would certainly exert a ton of foul pressure on the opposition and while the other 4 guys on the roster would be opening up the interior, he'd likely have a fair amount of room to play... plus, he faced illegal doubles and triples all the time in his own career, so that likely wouldn't be super new to him. He passed well enough when the team had an environment suited to it and a coach driving it, so there's also that. He was no Jokic, of course, but he was good enough.

Kobe could be anywhere from like 5th to 8th in the league, I'd guess. Some people value him more or less, but that's about where I put him. Excellent player. Bit daft in his shot selection, touch overrated on D in his own era, but still ultimately an all-time great player.

The team at the time had Horry, Fox and Ron Harper, as well as Derek Fisher (who took over when Harper's health eventually flamed out). Ho Grant. Brian Shaw. Fisher and Fox were actually good 3pt shooters (if on low volume) and then a bunch of other garbage. Not a staggeringly deep team, per se, but they went about 8 strong in the playoffs. Ho Grant was a reasonable spacer in his D and obviously a skilled player at either end. He'd be a limitation with Shaq on the floor today, though, because Shaq would need all the perimeter gravity the team could provide, as does any post scorer, and it even helped a ton in his own career, and in Olajuwon's.

Their bench would be unimpressive, their spacing non-ideal. I think they'd be very good just by virtue of top-end star talent, though. The earlier they went to Fisher at the point, the better; the earlier they started to use Horry more, the better. I don't see them winning the title without changes, but they'd still be good.

Given the current small ball era, Grant would probably be Shaq's back-up these days and come off the bench instead; start Horry at the PF. Devean George might have also gotten more minutes earlier since he's another three-point threat

[tsherkin]

Given the current small ball era, Grant would probably be Shaq's back-up these days and come off the bench instead; start Horry at the PF. Devean George might have also gotten more minutes earlier since he's another three-point threat

Devean George sucked, and even as a 3pt threat, he was a mediocre shooter. He posted 34% on his career getting spoon-fed kickout 3s the entire time. He was garbage. He had some athleticism and wasn't a bad man defender and that's about it.

But yeah, starting Horry would have been a little wiser, even if Grant was the considerably better player overall.

[SportsGuru08]

Given the current small ball era, Grant would probably be Shaq's back-up these days and come off the bench instead; start Horry at the PF. Devean George might have also gotten more minutes earlier since he's another three-point threat

Devean George sucked, and even as a 3pt threat, he was a mediocre shooter. He posted 34% on his career getting spoon-fed kickout 3s the entire time. He was garbage. He had some athleticism and wasn't a bad man defender and that's about it.

But yeah, starting Horry would have been a little wiser, even if Grant was the considerably better player overall.

Now that I think about it, even on the early 90s Bulls, Grant is probably starting at center in the modern era since he'd be a better option than an aging Cartwright or any of their back up bigs.

[tsherkin]

Now that I think about it, even on the early 90s Bulls, Grant is probably starting at center in the modern era since he'd be a better option than an aging Cartwright or any of their back up bigs.

Sure, Grant even did play some C for the Lakers. Of course, like Kurt Thomas, he also had a 15-foot baseline J and a foul line J, so he was something of a spacer in his own time. Not now, of course, but still. And if he'd been on a team like Utah, he'd have been a nasty PnR guy. He miiiiight have been a 32-34% guy from 3 in today's era, but he didn't have amazing touch outside of the key and wasn't hot at the foul line, either.

[SportsGuru08]

Now that I think about it, even on the early 90s Bulls, Grant is probably starting at center in the modern era since he'd be a better option than an aging Cartwright or any of their back up bigs.

Sure, Grant even did play some C for the Lakers. Of course, like Kurt Thomas, he also had a 15-foot baseline J and a foul line J, so he was something of a spacer in his own time. Not now, of course, but still. And if he'd been on a team like Utah, he'd have been a nasty PnR guy. He miiiiight have been a 32-34% guy from 3 in today's era, but he didn't have amazing touch outside of the key and wasn't hot at the foul line, either.

I think Grant could get it up to 36% with enough practice. We've seen guys like Lopez, Millsap, Ibaka and Marc Gasol go from shooting barely any threes to shooting them at a respectable percentage.

[tsherkin]

I think Grant could get it up to 36% with enough practice. We've seen guys like Lopez, Millsap, Ibaka and Marc Gasol go from shooting barely any threes to shooting them at a respectable percentage.

Possible. Not a guarantee. Ibaka was a nearly 76% FT shooter on his career; Marc Gasol, almost 78%. Millsap, around 74% and 75% after his first 4 seasons. Brook was just shy of 80% on his career. All of them substantially better than Grant in that respect, which is what makes me more leery of his capacity to develop a 3. Again, not impossible, just... harder to get into the idea.

[MyUniBroDavis]

Offensively I quite like shaq today

[One_and_Done]

Shaq would be incredible still today, but certainly less effective, especially on D. Hs lazy D would be a big problem. Kobe would be worse on O and D. His bad habits on offense, and loafing on D, would be unviable today. We saw a glimpse of how it'd look in a changed league in Kobe's last 2 seasons. Obviously he was past his prime, but the core issues would still be there albeit in a lesser way.

They'd have a chance, especially last year, just because of how stacked the top end talent is. Shaq might still be the best player in the league or close to it, and Kobe would likely be in the top 10. I doubt that's enough to overcome their structural problems though, or the better quality of contender in 2024. Lakers go down before the finals to a bad match up probably.

[MyUniBroDavis]

Shaq would be incredible still today, but certainly less effective, especially on D. Hs lazy D would be a big problem. Kobe would be worse on O and D. His bad habits on offense, and loafing on D, would be unviable today. We saw a glimpse of how it'd look in a changed league in Kobe's last 2 seasons. Obviously he was past his prime, but the core issues would still be there albeit in a lesser way.

They'd have a chance, especially last year, just because of how stacked the top end talent is. Shaq might still be the best player in the league or close to it, and Kobe would likely be in the top 10. I doubt that's enough to overcome their structural problems though, or the better quality of contender in 2024. Lakers go down before the finals to a bad match up probably.

There isn’t a more devoted hater on this board I swear lmao

[MyUniBroDavis]

I assumed this question was 2001 Lakers get a training camp to prepare EVERYTHING and I was gonna say hell no, if you assume they have a modern scheme and everything it’s more interesting, I’d have them as having the best duo by a lot but the spacing is tough lol

[One_and_Done]

Shaq would be incredible still today, but certainly less effective, especially on D. Hs lazy D would be a big problem. Kobe would be worse on O and D. His bad habits on offense, and loafing on D, would be unviable today. We saw a glimpse of how it'd look in a changed league in Kobe's last 2 seasons. Obviously he was past his prime, but the core issues would still be there albeit in a lesser way.

They'd have a chance, especially last year, just because of how stacked the top end talent is. Shaq might still be the best player in the league or close to it, and Kobe would likely be in the top 10. I doubt that's enough to overcome their structural problems though, or the better quality of contender in 2024. Lakers go down before the finals to a bad match up probably.

There isn’t a more devoted hater on this board I swear lmao

I don't see anything controversial in that post.

[MyUniBroDavis]

Shaq would be incredible still today, but certainly less effective, especially on D. Hs lazy D would be a big problem. Kobe would be worse on O and D. His bad habits on offense, and loafing on D, would be unviable today. We saw a glimpse of how it'd look in a changed league in Kobe's last 2 seasons. Obviously he was past his prime, but the core issues would still be there albeit in a lesser way.

They'd have a chance, especially last year, just because of how stacked the top end talent is. Shaq might still be the best player in the league or close to it, and Kobe would likely be in the top 10. I doubt that's enough to overcome their structural problems though, or the better quality of contender in 2024. Lakers go down before the finals to a bad match up probably.

There isn’t a more devoted hater on this board I swear lmao

I don't see anything controversial in that post.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bat-Signal