2001 Lakers V 1996 Bulls but with Peak Kobe

[JellosJigglin]

The problem here isn't prime Kobe, I'm sure the barrage of Pippen and Jordan guarding him would slow him down significantly. And no one on that LAL team could effect MJs production. But Shaq then was having the most dominant peak of any player ever. Would be a very interesting 7 game series to watch.Problem is they both had the same HC

Kobe, even during his baby afro days, had shown he could light up both MJ and Scottie. I just smh at how people forget how good Kobe was.

[Handlez]

The problem here isn't prime Kobe, I'm sure the barrage of Pippen and Jordan guarding him would slow him down significantly. And no one on that LAL team could effect MJs production. But Shaq then was having the most dominant peak of any player ever. Would be a very interesting 7 game series to watch.Problem is they both had the same HC

No one in the history of the NBA is slowing peak Kobe "significantly."

You can make it harder for him, but he's going to explode on any defense guaranteed 2-3 games in a 7 game series.

[Handlez]

Bulls and not close.

That isn't a defensible position at all, particularly given that they never faced anyone as good as Shaq in the playoffs, and never faced a perimeter star as good as Kobe in the playoffs either, let alone together.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/1996-nba-eastern-conference-finals-magic-vs-bulls.html

Spoiler:

I know Shaq was on a different level under Jackson but those Magic teams were similarly built to Jackson's Lakers and Magic Shaq was just nasty. Hell, they even had Horace Grant.

No one counts that series as legit.

Come on.

Jordan played 17 regular season games.

[JM00n69]

The problem here isn't prime Kobe, I'm sure the barrage of Pippen and Jordan guarding him would slow him down significantly. And no one on that LAL team could effect MJs production. But Shaq then was having the most dominant peak of any player ever. Would be a very interesting 7 game series to watch.Problem is they both had the same HC

Kobe, even during his baby afro days, had shown he could light up both MJ and Scottie. I just smh at how people forget how good Kobe was.

So I forget when Kobe played against the '96 Bulls version of MJ/Pippen. Probably because Kobe wasn't drafted yet that's probably why. Kobe was insanely good I agree but Pip and MJ were the two best perimiter defenders then.

[MrBigShot]

The sonics took that bulls team to 6, and they aren't in the same stratosphere as the 2001 Lakers.

Lakers in 7. Shaq is the bulls worst nightmare and they'd have no answer to him.

[Bloodbather]

'01 Lakers win because the Bulls wouldn't be able to guard Shaq. Handling scoring bigs were their biggest weakness and you're giving them the worst case scenario.

They’d probably have a different roster construction if peak Shaq was a thing then, though. Everyone had to adjust.

[Showtime 80]

'01 Lakers win because the Bulls wouldn't be able to guard Shaq. Handling scoring bigs were their biggest weakness and you're giving them the worst case scenario.

They’d probably have a different roster construction if peak Shaq was a thing then, though. Everyone had to adjust.

The Bulls had no problem with any scoring bigs in the 90’s aside from 95’ and the Magic still needed 6 tough games including a Jordan blunder in game 1 to get them out.

Shaq was taken to the woodshed on back to back years in 97 and 98 by a geriatric Utah Jazz including the 3 headed monster in the middle of Ostertag, Foster and Carr Also the Pacers played them to a close 6 game series in 2000.

It’s amazing the Shaq apologists only claim he had two prime years in 00 and 01’ while all the other years he was getting swept out of the playoffs are just brushed away. No other true all time great had just a “2 year prime”! His physical prime came and went in the 90’s he was just facing a tougher league with great competition at his position oh and MJ and the Bulls.

The fact of the matter is the league was a lot weaker in 2001 than it has been in the previous 10 years with the Eaat becoming a joke and the only two real contenders were the Lakers and Spurs. That Lakers team won a disappointing 56 games in the regular season and just caught fire at the right time. No Shaq/Kobe team dominated from tape to tape like the 91, 97 or 98 Bulls.

96 Bulls in 5 or 6 tops against any Shaq/Kobe team, the 91 Bulls sweep them!

[Bloodbather]

'01 Lakers win because the Bulls wouldn't be able to guard Shaq. Handling scoring bigs were their biggest weakness and you're giving them the worst case scenario.

They’d probably have a different roster construction if peak Shaq was a thing then, though. Everyone had to adjust.

The Bulls had no problem with any scoring bigs in the 90’s aside from 95’ and the Magic still needed 6 tough games including a Jordan blunder in game 1 to get them out.

Shaq was taken to the woodshed on back to back years in 97 and 98 by a geriatric Utah Jazz including the 3 headed monster in the middle of Ostertag, Foster and Carr Also the Pacers played them to a close 6 game series in 2000.

The fact of the matter is the league was a lot weaker in 2001 than it has been in the previous 10 years with the Eaat becoming a joke and the only two real contenders were the Lakers and Spurs.

That Lakers team won a disappointing 56 games in the regular season and just caught fire at the right time. No Shaq/Kobe team dominated from tape to tape like the 91, 97 or 98 Bulls.

96 Bulls in 5 or 6 tops against any Shaq/Kobe team, the 91 Bulls sweep them!

Hakeem always gave the Bulls a lot of trouble. Even some of the Bulls themselves recognized that. They never faced each other in the PS.

Early 2000s Shaq was a different animal to 90s Shaq and his supporting cast sucked in the initial years after his move to LA. He also put up 32 PPG on 56% FG against the Jazz in that series, seems unfair to blame him for the loss.

And Kobe wasn't a superstar yet in 2000. He came into his own in 2001 and it made a big difference.

[Showtime 80]

'01 Lakers win because the Bulls wouldn't be able to guard Shaq. Handling scoring bigs were their biggest weakness and you're giving them the worst case scenario.

They’d probably have a different roster construction if peak Shaq was a thing then, though. Everyone had to adjust.

The Bulls had no problem with any scoring bigs in the 90’s aside from 95’ and the Magic still needed 6 tough games including a Jordan blunder in game 1 to get them out.

Shaq was taken to the woodshed on back to back years in 97 and 98 by a geriatric Utah Jazz including the 3 headed monster in the middle of Ostertag, Foster and Carr Also the Pacers played them to a close 6 game series in 2000.

The fact of the matter is the league was a lot weaker in 2001 than it has been in the previous 10 years with the Eaat becoming a joke and the only two real contenders were the Lakers and Spurs.

That Lakers team won a disappointing 56 games in the regular season and just caught fire at the right time. No Shaq/Kobe team dominated from tape to tape like the 91, 97 or 98 Bulls.

96 Bulls in 5 or 6 tops against any Shaq/Kobe team, the 91 Bulls sweep them!

Hakeem always gave the Bulls a lot of trouble. Even some of the Bulls themselves recognized that. They never faced each other in the PS.

Early 2000s Shaq was a different animal to 90s Shaq and his supporting cast sucked in the initial years after his move to LA. He also put up 32 PPG on 56% FG against the Jazz in that series, seems unfair to blame him for the loss.

And Kobe wasn't a superstar yet in 2000. He came into his own in 2001 and it made a big difference.

Trouble in the regular season and trying to beat MJ and the Bulls in a 7 game playoff series is a whole different animal. The Jazz were 3-1 against the Bulls in the 97/98 regular seasons so there’s that.

The Lakers supporting cast did not suck in 97 or 98, far from it For 1998 specially they won 61 games and sent four players to the all-star game backed by guys like Fox, Horry and Fisher who would be integral parts of the 3-peat teams and also Elden Campbell backing up Shaq. Heck that team went 9/10 deep and was overall more talented than the 00’s versions.

The 98 Lakers destroyed the Sonics in the semis and a lot of people were picking them against the Jazz so don’t try to rewrite history. Stockton/Malone were Shaq and Kobe’s kryptonite and if they would’ve been in their primes simultaneously the West would’ve looked a lot different for the next decade. Remember it took Jordan and the Bulls to stop the Jazz from going back to back!

Kobe was beginning to show the off/on the court strains with Shaq in 2001 and it showed in a lackluster 56 win regular season with Kobe wanting to take on more of the scoring burden and Shaq making claims about “the dog not guarding the house if he didn’t get fed”. Those squads were also not very deep with a very thin 7 man rotation plus Shaq never had a legit backup after Elden Campbell. Those are just two of the reasons why they never had a truly legendary overall dominant season.

The 2001 Lakers were not a great team, they had a great post season big difference. The 83 Sixers, 86 Celtics, 87 Lakers, 89 Pistons and 1996 Bulls are examples of truly great teams dominating both regular season and playoffs.

[Yank3525]

The problem here isn't prime Kobe, I'm sure the barrage of Pippen and Jordan guarding him would slow him down significantly. And no one on that LAL team could effect MJs production. But Shaq then was having the most dominant peak of any player ever. Would be a very interesting 7 game series to watch.Problem is they both had the same HC

No one in the history of the NBA is slowing peak Kobe "significantly."

You can make it harder for him, but he's going to explode on any defense guaranteed 2-3 games in a 7 game series.

Yeah. People are weirdly insecure about Kobe on this forum. Any other great player, they aren't saying this. They would say yeah, Mike/Scottie would make it harder, but so and so would still get his. With Kobe, it is no they would slow him down signficantly! It is just weird.

[HMFFL]

I think 2001 team were a little overrated, but nobody from 96 Bulls could guard Shaq, even though no one from 2001 Lakers could guard MJ. Kobe would have a tough go with Pippen guarding him.

Lakers never faced an offensive threat as incredible as MJ, not a perimeter defensive player as good as Pippen.

Kobe would probably be focused on Jordan on both ends of the court. Not Scottie.

Hypothetically, if Scottie did guard Kobe, I doubt Scottie makes a positive impact. Scottie defense can be overhyped at times and in this case, he would be facing Kobe.

[Rust_Cohle]

I think 2001 team were a little overrated, but nobody from 96 Bulls could guard Shaq, even though no one from 2001 Lakers could guard MJ. Kobe would have a tough go with Pippen guarding him.

Lakers never faced an offensive threat as incredible as MJ, not a perimeter defensive player as good as Pippen.

Kobe would probably be focused on Jordan on both ends of the court. Not Scottie.

Hypothetically, if Scottie did guard Kobe, I doubt Scottie makes a positive impact. Scottie defense can be overhyped at times and in this case, he would be facing Kobe.

We’ve seen a better version of Kobe shoot his team out of a series like the 2004 finals. Shaq is the far bigger concern for the Bulls than Kobe. With Pippen, Jordan, and Harper the Bulls would be able to keep Kobe in check. And Kobe would have a hard time guarding MJ while trying to carry some of the scoring load. And Pippen would most likely be guarding Kobe, so Kobe being focused on Jordan wouldn’t matter if Pippen was to guard him on the other end.

Kobe was a much more overrated defender than Pippen ever was.

[HMFFL]

I think 2001 team were a little overrated, but nobody from 96 Bulls could guard Shaq, even though no one from 2001 Lakers could guard MJ. Kobe would have a tough go with Pippen guarding him.

Lakers never faced an offensive threat as incredible as MJ, not a perimeter defensive player as good as Pippen.

Kobe would probably be focused on Jordan on both ends of the court. Not Scottie.

Hypothetically, if Scottie did guard Kobe, I doubt Scottie makes a positive impact. Scottie defense can be overhyped at times and in this case, he would be facing Kobe.

We’ve seen a better version of Kobe shoot his team out of a series like the 2004 finals. Shaq is the far bigger concern for the Bulls than Kobe. With Pippen, Jordan, and Harper the Bulls would be able to keep Kobe in check. And Kobe would have a hard time guarding MJ while trying to carry some of the scoring load. And Pippen would most likely be guarding Kobe, so Kobe being focused on Jordan wouldn’t matter if Pippen was to guard him on the other end.

Kobe was a much more overrated defender than Pippen ever was.

I have a difficult time believing Kobe gives up the opportunity to guard Jordan.

Scottie was weak mentally at times and checked out. Even in the playoffs. That's not going to be the case with Kobe.

We will just view this differently.

[Yank3525]

I think 2001 team were a little overrated, but nobody from 96 Bulls could guard Shaq, even though no one from 2001 Lakers could guard MJ. Kobe would have a tough go with Pippen guarding him.

Lakers never faced an offensive threat as incredible as MJ, not a perimeter defensive player as good as Pippen.

Kobe would probably be focused on Jordan on both ends of the court. Not Scottie.

Hypothetically, if Scottie did guard Kobe, I doubt Scottie makes a positive impact. Scottie defense can be overhyped at times and in this case, he would be facing Kobe.

We’ve seen a better version of Kobe shoot his team out of a series like the 2004 finals. Shaq is the far bigger concern for the Bulls than Kobe. With Pippen, Jordan, and Harper the Bulls would be able to keep Kobe in check. And Kobe would have a hard time guarding MJ while trying to carry some of the scoring load. And Pippen would most likely be guarding Kobe, so Kobe being focused on Jordan wouldn’t matter if Pippen was to guard him on the other end.

Kobe was a much more overrated defender than Pippen ever was.

Kobe had problems with bigger guards when he was younger. But peak Kobe (2003-2008) got stronger and was able to handle the bigger guards who could post up. He wouldn't have problems guarding Mike, espeically 96 Mike who was step slower then early 90s Mike. MJ would still get his since he is MJ. But it isn't one of those situations where Kobe would be helpless.

As for Scottie, Kobe is going to win that matchup more often then not.

[tsherkin]

Bulls and not close.

That isn't a defensible position at all, particularly given that they never faced anyone as good as Shaq in the playoffs, and never faced a perimeter star as good as Kobe in the playoffs either, let alone together.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/1996-nba-eastern-conference-finals-magic-vs-bulls.html

Spoiler:

I know Shaq was on a different level under Jackson but those Magic teams were similarly built to Jackson's Lakers and Magic Shaq was just nasty. Hell, they even had Horace Grant.

I suppose it depends on how you categorize 91 Magic. I consider him more of a post player, and that's how he largely orchestrated himself that series, transition notwithstanding. He was posting up constantly in that series, particularly without Worthy, and in general in the post-Kareem phase of the Lakers.

[Iwasawitness]

The problem here isn't prime Kobe, I'm sure the barrage of Pippen and Jordan guarding him would slow him down significantly. And no one on that LAL team could effect MJs production. But Shaq then was having the most dominant peak of any player ever. Would be a very interesting 7 game series to watch.Problem is they both had the same HC

No one in the history of the NBA is slowing peak Kobe "significantly."

You can make it harder for him, but he's going to explode on any defense guaranteed 2-3 games in a 7 game series.

A second year Tayshaun Prince did.

[Capn'O]

That isn't a defensible position at all, particularly given that they never faced anyone as good as Shaq in the playoffs, and never faced a perimeter star as good as Kobe in the playoffs either, let alone together.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/1996-nba-eastern-conference-finals-magic-vs-bulls.html

Spoiler:

I know Shaq was on a different level under Jackson but those Magic teams were similarly built to Jackson's Lakers and Magic Shaq was just nasty. Hell, they even had Horace Grant.

I suppose it depends on how you categorize 91 Magic. I consider him more of a post player, and that's how he largely orchestrated himself that series, transition notwithstanding. He was posting up constantly in that series, particularly without Worthy, and in general in the post-Kareem phase of the Lakers.

No - I'm saying the '96 Orlando Magic/Bulls series gives us some idea of how that would have gone since it featured Shaq and he was paired with prime Penny and the Bulls smoked them. Lakers Shaq was better than that version of Shaq and prime Kobe was better than Penny but the fact that the Bulls smoked the Magic in that series should be an indication that despite Shaq doing Shaq things these differences wouldn't overwhelm the Bulls. The '96 Bulls dealt with Shaq.

The Bulls always had this rolodex of big stiffs to deal with the big men of the league. Wennington, Purdue, Cartwright (a stiff at that point), Longley, Edwards, and so on. And also Rodman. They always had enough guys to make Ewing a bit uncomfortable and not worry about foul trouble. They could play you tough the whole game.

No one counts that series as legit.

Come on.

Jordan played 17 regular season games.

Watch on YouTube

[tsherkin]

No - I'm saying the '96 Orlando Magic/Bulls series gives us some idea of how that would have gone since it featured Shaq and he was paired with prime Penny and the Bulls smoked them. Lakers Shaq was better than that version of Shaq and prime Kobe was better than Penny but the fact that the Bulls overwhelmed the Magic in that series should be an indication that despite Shaq doing Shaq things these differences wouldn't overwhelm the Bulls. The '96 Bulls dealt with Shaq.

The Bulls always had this rolodex of big stiffs to deal with the big men of the league. Wennington, Purdue, Cartwright (a stiff at that point), Longley, Edwards, and so on. And also Rodman. They always had enough guys to make Ewing a bit uncomfortable.

Oh. No, I don't agree with that at all. Kobe was better than Penny, the 01 Lakers' roleplayers didn't crap themselves under pressure and having Horry spacing things out for peak Shaq was very different than having a Shaq who was smaller and still on his rookie contract.

The Bulls "dealt with Shaq" to the tune of 27/11 on 64% from the field, he obliterated them inside. Their problems were more related to the rest of the team utterly failing to come through, other than Penny, and that's a difference in the main which the Lakers were. Orlando was less competitive precisely because of its supporting cast.

You know I love Ewing, but he was well-overtaxed as a volume scorer by New York's roster and had a relatively simplistic game, so it's not surprising that the Bulls could frustrate him, as did Olajuwon (though in different ways, obviously). But this wasn't that. Chicago SURVIVED Shaq, and that was younger Shaq who had less experience. 01 Shaq would be an even larger nightmare for them, and very much wouldn't be the issue.

Shaq was going to do Shaq things to them. Worse, in this particular matchup. But the Lakers were a much better team than the 96 Magic.

[Capn'O]

No - I'm saying the '96 Orlando Magic/Bulls series gives us some idea of how that would have gone since it featured Shaq and he was paired with prime Penny and the Bulls smoked them. Lakers Shaq was better than that version of Shaq and prime Kobe was better than Penny but the fact that the Bulls overwhelmed the Magic in that series should be an indication that despite Shaq doing Shaq things these differences wouldn't overwhelm the Bulls. The '96 Bulls dealt with Shaq.

The Bulls always had this rolodex of big stiffs to deal with the big men of the league. Wennington, Purdue, Cartwright (a stiff at that point), Longley, Edwards, and so on. And also Rodman. They always had enough guys to make Ewing a bit uncomfortable.

Oh. No, I don't agree with that at all. Kobe was better than Penny, the 01 Lakers' roleplayers didn't crap themselves under pressure and having Horry spacing things out for peak Shaq was very different than having a Shaq who was smaller and still on his rookie contract.

The Bulls "dealt with Shaq" to the tune of 27/11 on 64% from the field, he obliterated them inside. Their problems were more related to the rest of the team utterly failing to come through, other than Penny, and that's a difference in the main which the Lakers were. Orlando was less competitive precisely because of its supporting cast.

You know I love Ewing, but he was well-overtaxed as a volume scorer by New York's roster and had a relatively simplistic game, so it's not surprising that the Bulls could frustrate him, as did Olajuwon (though in different ways, obviously). But this wasn't that. Chicago SURVIVED Shaq, and that was younger Shaq who had less experience. 01 Shaq would be an even larger nightmare for them, and very much wouldn't be the issue.

Shaq was going to do Shaq things to them. Worse, in this particular matchup. But the Lakers were a much better team than the 96 Magic.

By "dealt with Shaq" I mean they played against him and won. Shaq killed them.

I certainly agree with the better supporting cast and had forgotten that Horace Grant got injured in that series but I think the idea is similar and the Bulls prevail. The Bulls throw their three headed monster and sometimes Rodman at Shaq and don't worry about fouls for the stiffs. He smokes them even harder than he did in '96. Likewise, you commit Pippen to Kobe and deal with the results while MJ, Harper, and Rodman shut down the perimeter. Pippen should have some success against Kobe. He's a rare guy who will be bigger and just as strong.

Magic role players shat the bed but Scott and Anderson were two of the best spacers in the game. I don't see spacing as a huge difference even though Fisher, Fox, and Horry are better high pressure performers. You had to commit to the Magic's threats.

There's no way the Bulls waltz through the Lakers like they did the Magic series but I do think the Magic series provides a blueprint for how they ultimately prevail. They did see something similar.

[Capn'O]

I just looked up the Magic stats in the '95 vs '96 series... it's crazy how much the Bulls shut down the same role players in '96 who killed them in '95. Grant was injured after the first game but did nothing in 28 minutes vs 18 ppg in '95. Nick Anderson and Dennis Scott didn't even score half of what they did in '95 and both played well in the earlier series. Rodman freed up so much on defense.