Why I think the Kobe-Pau Lakers would be just as good today

[tsherkin]

The point is Dwight carried a crap ton of mediocre guys that year to the finals and the best years of their careers, that Lakers team put up a 105 in the finals the next year which is a recipe these days to get run off the court in the Finals.

105 what? LA posted a 110.0 ORTG in the 2009 Finals, which was +2.3 over playoff league average and only 2.8 worse than their RS average.

Translating into a different era with a different style of play, their offensive performance would also be different. Don't forget, that series was played at 87.8 possessions per game. The Finals this year was played at 97.9 possessions per game, and OKC posted a 111.6 ORTG in that series. It wasn't THAT different, and Indy wasn't even a noted defensive titan.

[165bows]

The point is Dwight carried a crap ton of mediocre guys that year to the finals and the best years of their careers, that Lakers team put up a 105 in the finals the next year which is a recipe these days to get run off the court in the Finals.

105 what? LA posted a 110.0 ORTG in the 2009 Finals, which was +2.3 over playoff league average and only 2.8 worse than their RS average.

Translating into a different era with a different style of play, their offensive performance would also be different. Don't forget, that series was played at 87.8 possessions per game. The Finals this year was played at 97.9 possessions per game, and OKC posted a 111.6 ORTG in that series. It wasn't THAT different, and Indy wasn't even a noted defensive titan.

I said 105 the next year. Maybe just read and not be so knee jerk assuming everyone is wrong.

[tsherkin]

I said 105 the next year. Maybe just read and not be so knee jerk assuming everyone is wrong.

Oh, so you did. That's my bad.

But that was also a different team, with Artest instead of Ariza, an extra year of aging and mileage, and they were facing a high-end Boston defense which specifically flustered Kobe (who dominated against Orlando) as they had in 08, so it's not contextually similar to the 09 Finals at all.

[165bows]

I said 105 the next year. Maybe just read and not be so knee jerk assuming everyone is wrong.

Oh, so you did. That's my bad.

Cool thanks.

[tsherkin]

Ah, bugger; hit Submit too early on my last post.

Finals ORTGs for the past 6 years.

2025: 111.6, 108.8 (OKC vs IND), 97.9 pace
2024: 111.0, 108.4 (BOS vs DAL), 91.5 pace
2023: 114.7, 105.7 (DEN vs MIA), 91.2 pace
2022: 110.0, 105.8 (GSW vs BOS), 95.3 pace
2021: 116.3, 113.8 (MIL vs PHO), 96.0 pace
2020: 116.9, 111.1 (LAL vs MIA), 94.1 pace

So, circling back, with the large difference in pace, the change in approach to 3pt shooting and what-not, it's hard to compare the current-day Finals to something a decade, decade and a half ago in straight play. On raw tempo change alone, never mind FG% around the rim, the older Lakers would look different in today's game, even the 2010 version.
A
And then you look at the Pacers in this past Finals series, where at 10 more poss/g, they were still only about 4 points of ORTG better than those 2010 Lakers. And they certainly didn't get "run out of the Finals" as a result.

Yes, when MIA and BOS threw out around 106, it was a huge problem for them because they couldn't successfully contain the offenses they were facing. That said, Tatum was objectionably bad in 2022, and both Bam and Jimmy were terrible in the Finals. And it's not like Denver was some defensive titan at the time, either. Certainly better in the playoffs than in the RS, but like, no bench, Gabe Vincent no-showed, and their two focal scorers couldn't get it done at all against Denver.

So that's a little different. Denver, for example, surely would have eaten it pretty badly from Kobe, which would have changed the texture of the team ORTG considerably.

[165bows]

There's almost no correlation between pace and ortg.

Edit: point is, the kobe/pau Lakers averaged ~106 ortg over three straight finals, which isn't a mark that has won a title in ten years. Sure maybe the times have changed and we shouldn't compare but also maybe just post that right after the op I guess.

[LeBronSpaghetti]

I find it so odd that so many people think Kobe would become a smart offensive player if he had simply played 10 years later. He had significant overlap with guys like Durant, LeBron, Wade, Dirk, Nash, etc. who all were able to figure out how to be efficient in Kobe’s era. Kobe seems to be the one who couldn’t figure it out, but we just say “Oh but today he would’ve been efficient, trust me bro you don’t understand that mamba mentality.”

[tsherkin]

There's almost no correlation between pace and ortg.

Edit: point is, the kobe/pau Lakers averaged ~106 ortg over three straight finals, which isn't a mark that has won a title in ten years. Sure maybe the times have changed and we shouldn't compare but also maybe just post that right after the op I guess.

Sure. And they faced Boston twice, and the first time was during a historical defensive season. I don't know that it's the best overall perspective to take on LA's offensive potential. In 08, Boston was a -8.6 defense in the RS. In 2010, they were only a -3.8 defense, but they also had a bunch of injuries. They were a -6.9, 2nd-ranked defense in the postseason.

So they were considerable competition which didn't an explicitly good job against Kobe.

Like, I'm with you in the sense that if a team came and dropped a flat 105 ORTG in the Finals, there is a strong chance they wouldn't win unless they were also hellaciously dominant on defense. The counterpoint is that it's unlikely that LA would do that in this environment. Maybe against OKC, because they were a comparably dominant defense, of course, but not against your average Finals competition from the last half-dozen years. And you'll notice that three of the teams who won the title in that stretch posted an ORTG similar to the 09 Lakers.

Meantime, while the relationship of pace and ORTG isn't linear, it's clear that there are thresholds and skill sets which change things. The 80s, for example, were a lot more efficient than the late 90s and early 2000s. Pace dropping with concurrent denial of transition opportunities was definitely a factor in that. Halfcourt offense is definitively less efficient than transition offense, for example. And then of course, it's worth mentioning that we are in an era where pacing has seen FG% from 0-3 rise 10% compared to 2004, and where 3PAr has run rampant, which opens things up even further. It's a meaningful consideration. Spacing plus tempo very definitely changes the name of the game on offense. That's why we've seen such an explosion of team ORTG over the past half-decade or so.

Anyway. LA would have adapting to do, for sure, but they wouldn't be as far off as that raw ORTG-based analysis might indicate.

[tsherkin]

I find it so odd that so many people think Kobe would become a smart offensive player if he had simply played 10 years later. He had significant overlap with guys like Durant, LeBron, Wade, Dirk, Nash, etc. who all were able to figure out how to be efficient in Kobe’s era. Kobe seems to be the one who couldn’t figure it out, but we just say “Oh but today he would’ve been efficient, trust me bro you don’t understand that mamba mentality.”

You realize he specifically showed adaptation in his own career, right? That's part of how he maintained his efficacy in the 05-and-later era. And how he posted 58% and 57.6% in 2007 and 2008, and then 57.0% again in 2013, yeah? And he did adopt the 3 in his own time to a degree fairly similar to someone like Lebron James. And meantime, Dirk and Nash didn't score on similar volume, so they're dubious examples at best. And KD is a 7-foot nightmare, and one of the greatest mid-range scorers in league history, plus an elite 3pt and FT shooter. Using him as an example doesn't make the first bit of sense.

[165bows]

I find it so odd that so many people think Kobe would become a smart offensive player if he had simply played 10 years later. He had significant overlap with guys like Durant, LeBron, Wade, Dirk, Nash, etc. who all were able to figure out how to be efficient in Kobe’s era. Kobe seems to be the one who couldn’t figure it out, but we just say “Oh but today he would’ve been efficient, trust me bro you don’t understand that mamba mentality.”

I kind of agree with this a lot - if we are giving him credit for his elite training and mindset (which we should), shouldn't that have given him the perspective to say eff it I'm going to do what's most efficient I don't care if tv analysts don't like my elite volume and percentage 3PT game, and my adherence to mathematical principles over conventional wisdom?

[dhsilv2]

It just wasn't a good team for the Finals. The entire team outside of Howard and maybe a couple other guys were out of the league or completely irrelevant within a year or two, one career AS appearance among the entire rest of the roster outside Howard.

They were ahead of their time re: shooting and roster construction though so they were def a sum of the parts is greater than the pieces kind of team so kudos for that.

I mean...I assume you're skipping Nelson because he was hurt in the playoffs. But the team literally had two guys make the allstar team other than Howard that year.

But Rashard Lewis, Turkaglu, JJ Redick, Gortat...all were around after and all had or were pretty good at their best.

Lee played another 11 years.

Alston and Anthony Johnson were the only guys out of the league soon after.

And this was 2 years after the 2007 Cavs made the finals.

Well I did forget about Nelson but it's the same point, he was not at all an all-star caliber player and that he and Lewis pulled AS appearances is exactly what I'm saying, that whole team was carried by Dwight, and Van Gundy being ahead of his time.

But that's not really true about the rest of the team, Lee was salary dumped off his next deal (4th in total minutes) and Pietrus flamed out the next year as well (6th in total minutes).

The point is Dwight carried a crap ton of mediocre guys that year to the finals and the best years of their careers, that Lakers team put up a 105 in the finals the next year which is a recipe these days to get run off the court in the Finals.

I see. Perhaps our bigger difference here is our perception of Lewis then.

https://xrapm.com/table_pages/RAPM_29y.html

He was imo a better version of Klay. Not as good a shooter but unlike Klay he was a true defensive standout. He wasn't again all nba defense, but a tier below who could use his size and strength on ball and off. He could give Lebron trouble with his strength and stay in front of even a Kobe type well enough. Combine that with strong 3point shooting at seriously high volume.

I'll add in both Turk and Lewis were in their age 29 seasons. That's kinda the age where so many guys peak. 26-31 is kinda the prime and 29 is that perfect age for a playoff guy. Enough experience and maturity with your body not yet starting to give out. So it doesn't really shock me either that they kinda had that one magic season with those two.

[tsherkin]

I'll add in both Turk and Lewis were in their age 29 seasons. That's kinda the age where so many guys peak. 26-31 is kinda the prime and 29 is that perfect age for a playoff guy. Enough experience and maturity with your body not yet starting to give out. So it doesn't really shock me either that they kinda had that one magic season with those two.

Yeah, missing Nelson but for 5 games in the 09 postseason was a fairly big deal. It changed the distribution of ball-handling, and he was also an elite 3pt shooter.

After 09, Hedo was part of Bryan Colangelo's scrambling to unscrew his various panic moves, so he found himself in Toronto. Then he floated around a bunch of other places which weren't as well-oiled and orchestrated as the Magic before injuries eventually washed him out of the league.

Shard was very good, and he had a nice 16-year career. He had a good 10-year prime. In 2010, the Magic had added Vince Carter, so his scoring responsibilities had dropped off, and then injuries also slowly washed him out over his final few seasons. It had nothing to do with his inability to perform without Dwight, particularly having already been a quality scorer in Seattle well before he even hit Orlando... and he was an All-Star 3 or 4 years before he hit the Magic, on top of that.

[bledredwine]

Of course they would. Shaq and Kobe would dominate the league, no question. Kobe and Pau is no different. Great players are great players.

[ConSarnit]

There's almost no correlation between pace and ortg.

Edit: point is, the kobe/pau Lakers averaged ~106 ortg over three straight finals, which isn't a mark that has won a title in ten years. Sure maybe the times have changed and we shouldn't compare but also maybe just post that right after the op I guess.

Sure. And they faced Boston twice, and the first time was during a historical defensive season. I don't know that it's the best overall perspective to take on LA's offensive potential. In 08, Boston was a -8.6 defense in the RS. In 2010, they were only a -3.8 defense, but they also had a bunch of injuries. They were a -6.9, 2nd-ranked defense in the postseason.

So they were considerable competition which didn't an explicitly good job against Kobe.

Like, I'm with you in the sense that if a team came and dropped a flat 105 ORTG in the Finals, there is a strong chance they wouldn't win unless they were also hellaciously dominant on defense. The counterpoint is that it's unlikely that LA would do that in this environment. Maybe against OKC, because they were a comparably dominant defense, of course, but not against your average Finals competition from the last half-dozen years. And you'll notice that three of the teams who won the title in that stretch posted an ORTG similar to the 09 Lakers.

Meantime, while the relationship of pace and ORTG isn't linear, it's clear that there are thresholds and skill sets which change things. The 80s, for example, were a lot more efficient than the late 90s and early 2000s. Pace dropping with concurrent denial of transition opportunities was definitely a factor in that. Halfcourt offense is definitively less efficient than transition offense, for example. And then of course, it's worth mentioning that we are in an era where pacing has seen FG% from 0-3 rise 10% compared to 2004, and where 3PAr has run rampant, which opens things up even further. It's a meaningful consideration. Spacing plus tempo very definitely changes the name of the game on offense. That's why we've seen such an explosion of team ORTG over the past half-decade or so.

Anyway. LA would have adapting to do, for sure, but they wouldn't be as far off as that raw ORTG-based analysis might indicate.

I don’t know if we can extrapolate LAL’s offense like this. Teams today are taking far more average-to-early FGA than in the past. Compared to 2013-14 (as far back as data goes) current teams take almost 14 more FGA in the “average-early” shot clock range. I don’t know if LA’s methodical offense is able to generate the same shots if forced to play at a faster pace in the half-court. And if they insist on slowing down the pace of play they are going to get seriously out-possessioned by modern teams. By all accounts LA would play slower in transition and half court than almost any modern team and I don’t know if methodically hunting good shots out of the triangle would scale in today’s game. If LA insists on playing their system I’d assume their output per 100 would drop as they would be forced to play faster and generate less efficient half court shots.

[LeBronSpaghetti]

I find it so odd that so many people think Kobe would become a smart offensive player if he had simply played 10 years later. He had significant overlap with guys like Durant, LeBron, Wade, Dirk, Nash, etc. who all were able to figure out how to be efficient in Kobe’s era. Kobe seems to be the one who couldn’t figure it out, but we just say “Oh but today he would’ve been efficient, trust me bro you don’t understand that mamba mentality.”

You realize he specifically showed adaptation in his own career, right? That's part of how he maintained his efficacy in the 05-and-later era. And how he posted 58% and 57.6% in 2007 and 2008, and then 57.0% again in 2013, yeah? And he did adopt the 3 in his own time to a degree fairly similar to someone like Lebron James. And meantime, Dirk and Nash didn't score on similar volume, so they're dubious examples at best. And KD is a 7-foot nightmare, and one of the greatest mid-range scorers in league history, plus an elite 3pt and FT shooter. Using him as an example doesn't make the first bit of sense.

Not nearly enough adaptation to keep up with the truly elite scorers of his era. And Dirk didn’t score with enough volume? Ok… you know what, maybe you’re right. Compared to Kobe he certainly didn’t “score on a similar volume”. In fact, nobody did! And therein lies the problem. Others quickly realized that chucking was a stupid strategy but Kobe never learned. And Nash didn’t score at volume because he was more concerned with running an elite offense as a team (which he did every single year) rather than chucking to increase PPG numbers like Kobe.

And your point about Durant could be simplified to say “Durant was simply a better player”, which is obviously true. So I guess you’re right that it doesn’t make sense to compare the two since it’s unfair to Kobe. But hey, I’m not the one ranking Kobe as a top 5 player all time, then claiming it was impossible to be efficient in his era, then saying it’s unfair to compare him to players in his very same era because they’re too good. How does that make any sense at all? And to be clear, I’m not saying YOU rank Kobe top 5 all time (maybe you do maybe you don’t, I have no idea), but many do, and they make these ridiculous excuses for him and others simply don’t get that same benefit.

[ConSarnit]

I find it so odd that so many people think Kobe would become a smart offensive player if he had simply played 10 years later. He had significant overlap with guys like Durant, LeBron, Wade, Dirk, Nash, etc. who all were able to figure out how to be efficient in Kobe’s era. Kobe seems to be the one who couldn’t figure it out, but we just say “Oh but today he would’ve been efficient, trust me bro you don’t understand that mamba mentality.”

You realize he specifically showed adaptation in his own career, right? That's part of how he maintained his efficacy in the 05-and-later era. And how he posted 58% and 57.6% in 2007 and 2008, and then 57.0% again in 2013, yeah? And he did adopt the 3 in his own time to a degree fairly similar to someone like Lebron James. And meantime, Dirk and Nash didn't score on similar volume, so they're dubious examples at best. And KD is a 7-foot nightmare, and one of the greatest mid-range scorers in league history, plus an elite 3pt and FT shooter. Using him as an example doesn't make the first bit of sense.

I'm not sure I agree with this. Comparing Kobe's first 9 years vs last 8 years (I removed the post injury years) he improved his 3pt average by 1%. Lebron improved his 3pt% by 3%. Kobe had 3 3P+ seasons in his career, 2 of them in the first half of is career. Lebron has 10 3P+ seasons, the majority in the second half. If by adopting it you mean "shoots more" then I agree. If you're talking about effectiveness or efficiency, I disagree.

[An Unbiased Fan]

I find it so odd that so many people think Kobe would become a smart offensive player if he had simply played 10 years later. He had significant overlap with guys like Durant, LeBron, Wade, Dirk, Nash, etc. who all were able to figure out how to be efficient in Kobe’s era. Kobe seems to be the one who couldn’t figure it out, but we just say “Oh but today he would’ve been efficient, trust me bro you don’t understand that mamba mentality.”

Kobe WAS efficient though

[John Murdoch]

Def a timeless title team u can drop in any era and would take 7 games to beat if u beat them at all

[tsherkin]

Not nearly enough adaptation to keep up with the truly elite scorers of his era. And Dirk didn’t score with enough volume? Ok… you know what, maybe you’re right. Compared to Kobe he certainly didn’t “score on a similar volume”. In fact, nobody did! And therein lies the problem. Others quickly realized that chucking was a stupid strategy but Kobe never learned. And Nash didn’t score at volume because he was more concerned with running an elite offense as a team (which he did every single year) rather than chucking to increase PPG numbers like Kobe.

Certainly enough to maintain his own deviation from league average, though, until age and injury took away his effectiveness as happens to largely everyone. Meantime, Kobe's strategy of shooting volume worked out reasonably well. He didn't have the luxury of another volume scorer next to him after Shaq, and someone had to float volume. The idea that he compelled management not to find someone who could play alongside him doesn't fit the narrative at all. He was screaming for help the entire time, and they got him Lamar Odom, Jordan Farmar, Kwame Brown, Sasha Vujacic, etc, until the Pau trade. And he played great alongside Pau. And while he was with Shaq, he was one of the most efficient volume guys in the league. He certainly didn't deviate like Shaq, or like Ray Allen, but Shaq's a different animal entirely and Ray had like one season where he was anywhere near Kobe's volume.

And again, like I said, his relative efficiency was very good until he was in his 30s... and he'd played 31,571 minutes in his 20s, which on its own was good for 134th in league history. And that's without his playoff mileage. That's more than Dave Debusschere, Walt Frazier, Tim Hardaway, Byron Scott, James Worthy, Rodman, Peja, etc. And some of those guys were WASHED by the end.

And then he had a revival season in 2013 with a different coach and a new offensive strategy that was as efficient as anything he'd done.

And your point about Durant could be simplified to say “Durant was simply a better player”, which is obviously true. So I guess you’re right that it doesn’t make sense to compare the two since it’s unfair to Kobe.

Yes, it's fair to say that Durant is a better scorer than Kobe. He's taller, he's a considerably better shooter, he's a fantastic iso player, I mean... it's no shame at all. The only guys with as many or more scoring titles as KD are Wilt, AI, MJ, and George Gervin. George Mikan, James Harden, Bob McAdoo, Neil Johnston, and Dr J (ABA only) all had 3, so only 1 less. And of course, KD's efficiency is insane.

So yeah, I have no problem describing KD as better in that regard. I'd say "scorer," though, since we're really only talking about that, and Bryant was both a better defender and better playmaker than Durant, but yeah.

And to be clear, I’m not saying YOU rank Kobe top 5 all time (maybe you do maybe you don’t, I have no idea), but many do, and they make these ridiculous excuses for him and others simply don’t get that same benefit.

Yes, ranking him top 5 is excessive and I find it to be largely without substantive defense. That's a bit much, but ITT, I'm focused more on the detasils of the Kobe/Pau Lakers and the Finals, and then relative to playoff offenses in the Finals today. That stuff. Just getting stuck in the mud with the contextual details, you know?

There are better scorers than Kobe out there. Dunno if they are all better players, but some of them are, certainly. And that's fine, because you're talking about guys who are each themselves all-time greats.

But specifically in the context of this thread, I was trying to show that Kobe's numbers did adapt as the rules changed. He maintained. It doesn't mean he optimized, but it does mean that his game did alter with the league changes. He wasn't so inelastic that he didn't benefit as the league changed. And even when he was older, slower, worn down from tens of thousands of minutes played, he was still able to break out of the triangle and into a fresher system and look fantastic... until the Achilles effectively ended his relevance (as well as advancing age).

I'm not sure I agree with this. Comparing Kobe's first 9 years vs last 8 years (I removed the post injury years) he improved his 3pt average by 1%. Lebron improved his 3pt% by 3%. Kobe had 3 3P+ seasons in his career, 2 of them in the first half of is career. Lebron has 10 3P+ seasons, the majority in the second half. If by adopting it you mean "shoots more" then I agree. If you're talking about effectiveness or efficiency, I disagree.

I covered this above. He maintained his efficiency through his physical prime across the league change, and then showed a 107 TS+ season as late as 2013. After that, age and his Achilles largely answer everything else. And to be frank, his roster and the triangle were not optimal for his individual efficacy at that time, either, so even 2010-2012 (which was a lockout-shortened season where efficiency suffered league-wide) is explicable to one degree or another.

People treat Kobe as if he was an inefficient volume shooter, but he wasn't Dominique Wilkins. From 98-08, Kobe was a 106 TS+ guy, with five seasons of 107 TS+ (and then, as stated, another in 2013).

[tsherkin]

Def a timeless title team u can drop in any era and would take 7 games to beat if u beat them at all

That, however, is hyperbole. There are definitely some teams who wouldn't take 7 games to beat them. Hell, Boston took them in 6 in 2008. There are definitely teams forward and backward which would have handled them more easily. Matchups are a thing, after all.