Any truth in Lakers winning three straight with TMac instead of Kobe

[migya]

Not sure if anyone here has read or seen videos on TMac saying that he'd have won three straight with Shaq if he was in Kobe's place 2000-02. Shaq has also said they would have won also.

Would this have happened with TMac instead of Kobe those years?

I don't think they win three straight but only in 2001 as they ran away with it. Kobe was better and particularly defensively.

[One_and_Done]

Yes, but I think the better choice is Ray Allen, Paul Pierce, or Vince Carter. Those are worse players than both T-Mac and Kobe, but the fit is better than Kobe and the health is a better match than T-Mac.

If Ray Allen was drafted to the Lakers in 96, I'm pretty sure he and Shaq win more than 3 rings together. People forget how athletic and dynamic Ray Allen was in his prime. Dude was like a Dwayne Wade who could hit 3s on offense, though not as good on D.

[ceoofkobefans]

01 is realistically the only one they win. 00 they barely made the finals with Kobe and that required a heroic effort from in g7. Tracy McGrady was a notorious playoff dropper especially in those clutch do or die moments with the season on the line and TMac, while still a good player in 2000, didn’t breakout into a superstar until 2001 (and like even the 3 games we have of him in the 2000 playoffs in real life he was terrible and I doubt he performs that much better in LA). If they can get to the finals they still prolly win but I imagine the blazers beat the lakers in the WCF.

2001 the lakers are just too dominant in the playoffs even without Kobe, I’d only really be concerned about the spurs but they still prolly win the finals.

2002 again I just doubt TMac performs well enough deep in the playoffs (especially with how close the WCF were) to get to the finals to get a ring

Any year outside of the 3peat years yea they aren’t winning a ring.

[Joao Saraiva]

Players would have done anything and be very good only in scenarios that didn't exist. It's always easy to talk.

[IlikeSHAIguys]

feel like they're similar so 2001 should be a win with the Lakers stomping everyone. Kobe's not really Kobe in 2000 so maybe? Though it's weird since they weren't the best at the same time.

[tsherkin]

Interesting to think about.

In 2000, McGrady was still in Toronto in actual history. He broke out a year later, but he certainly had the ability in 2000. His playoff stats are based on a 3-game sample. He had a decent first game and then two bad games against a fairly physical Knicks defense. Kobe, for his part, was pretty weak for 3 games in the first round for LA, and incendiary in the other two. Hard to really tell the difference, especially since McGrady didn't have Shaq and good spacing to work off of. The Raptors were a solid 3pt shooting team on average... because Vince was great. Their actual spread of 3pt shooting did not stun, and it was a big difference compared to Shaq and a stretch 4, coupled to Fox and Fisher, etc. The Raptors offense wasn't exactly high-end stuff. Vince was brilliant, but they were still dead average on the season.

Second round, Kobe was hot for 2 games, then cooled off considerably.

Had two nice games and was otherwise pretty tepid against Portland. One, of course, happened to be a critical Game 6 against the Blazers, which was a brilliant performance. But they might not have needed that had he performed better earlier.

And then he sucked in the Finals.

So strictly looking at 2000, there's a possibility that McGrady could have slotted in and roughly replicated what Kobe was doing. And then he did break out over the next couple of years with the Magic, and he was incendiary in 2003.

So it's quite possible. McGrady was very, very good, but he labored on some truly wretched rosters in Orlando, burning himself out. And then after, his back was gone, and his Houston team was typically thin and/or injured anyway. So looking at his postseason performances does require some context.

I wonder, though, if it wouldn't be more 2002-2004 that they would win 3 in a row. Or if they might go 2000, 2002, 2003, or something like that. Lots of things had to happen for LA to rock 3 in a row, it was a pretty special run. And especially 2001 was a pretty wild ride.

[Cavsfansince84]

It definitely seems possible that they'd 3 peat with TMac. No one really knows in these kinds of questions. Was Tracy basically on the same level as Kobe prior to the injuries? Honestly, having lived through that and the way they were being covered I'd say yes. There were multiple national journalists even then saying that TMac has the superior potential as a player and would become the best player of that generation until LeBron showed up and then it became a Kobe-LeBron-Wade thing until 09 or whenever you think LeBron became the clear best player in the league. It's hard to say how well TMac would have played in Shaq's shadow but ego wise I think he might have had an easier time of it than Kobe did.

[An Unbiased Fan]

feel like they're similar so 2001 should be a win with the Lakers stomping everyone. Kobe's not really Kobe in 2000 so maybe? Though it's weird since they weren't the best at the same time.

They weren't that similar though. And they don't get by the Kings or Spurs with Tmac. The only person who might gains rings is TD in the threepeat stretch.

[xinxin]

Interesting to think about.

In 2000, McGrady was still in Toronto in actual history. He broke out a year later, but he certainly had the ability in 2000. His playoff stats are based on a 3-game sample. He had a decent first game and then two bad games against a fairly physical Knicks defense. Kobe, for his part, was pretty weak for 3 games in the first round for LA, and incendiary in the other two. Hard to really tell the difference, especially since McGrady didn't have Shaq and good spacing to work off of. The Raptors were a solid 3pt shooting team on average... because Vince was great. Their actual spread of 3pt shooting did not stun, and it was a big difference compared to Shaq and a stretch 4, coupled to Fox and Fisher, etc. The Raptors offense wasn't exactly high-end stuff. Vince was brilliant, but they were still dead average on the season.

Second round, Kobe was hot for 2 games, then cooled off considerably.

Had two nice games and was otherwise pretty tepid against Portland. One, of course, happened to be a critical Game 6 against the Blazers, which was a brilliant performance. But they might not have needed that had he performed better earlier.

And then he sucked in the Finals.

So strictly looking at 2000, there's a possibility that McGrady could have slotted in and roughly replicated what Kobe was doing. And then he did break out over the next couple of years with the Magic, and he was incendiary in 2003.

So it's quite possible. McGrady was very, very good, but he labored on some truly wretched rosters in Orlando, burning himself out. And then after, his back was gone, and his Houston team was typically thin and/or injured anyway. So looking at his postseason performances does require some context.

I wonder, though, if it wouldn't be more 2002-2004 that they would win 3 in a row. Or if they might go 2000, 2002, 2003, or something like that. Lots of things had to happen for LA to rock 3 in a row, it was a pretty special run. And especially 2001 was a pretty wild ride.

Could it be that Kobe sucked in the 2000 finals since he was injured ?

People forget Kobe was intentionally injured by Jaylen Rose in Game 2 and was out for most of that game and Game 3. He only came back with limited time in Game 4 and bailed out the lakers in the 4th and OT after Shaq fouled out.., giving the lakers a 3-1 lead in the series

Without this context and you’re only looking at stats, yes his numbers would be down.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[One_and_Done]

How is Kobe being injured relevant? It doesn't matter why he wasn't as good, only that he was. If T-Mac had perfect health then this comparison wouldn't even be close.

[iggymcfrack]

01 is realistically the only one they win. 00 they barely made the finals with Kobe and that required a heroic effort from in g7. Tracy McGrady was a notorious playoff dropper especially in those clutch do or die moments with the season on the line and TMac, while still a good player in 2000, didn’t breakout into a superstar until 2001 (and like even the 3 games we have of him in the 2000 playoffs in real life he was terrible and I doubt he performs that much better in LA). If they can get to the finals they still prolly win but I imagine the blazers beat the lakers in the WCF.

2001 the lakers are just too dominant in the playoffs even without Kobe, I’d only really be concerned about the spurs but they still prolly win the finals.

2002 again I just doubt TMac performs well enough deep in the playoffs (especially with how close the WCF were) to get to the finals to get a ring

Any year outside of the 3peat years yea they aren’t winning a ring.

Kobe had a TS% of .491 in the 2002 WCF. I doubt T-Mac could have played any worse.

[Primedeion]

They have zero chance of winning three with T-Mac and he's certainly not going to be the best postseason player/performer on the best postseason team in history like 01 Bryant was.

[One_and_Done]

They have zero chance of winning three with T-Mac and he's certainly not going to be the best postseason player/performer on the best postseason team in history like 01 Bryant was.

He will be if he's guarded by the scrub guard rotation the Spurs had.

[xinxin]

How is Kobe being injured relevant? It doesn't matter why he wasn't as good, only that he was. If T-Mac had perfect health then this comparison wouldn't even be close.

My comment/question was only about the statement that Kobe sucked in the 2000 finals.

I wasn’t even addressing the comparison between Tmac and Kobe.

But to comment on the proposition of the OP, it wouldn’t shock me if Tmac won 2 or even 3 with Shaq on the lakers. Kobe himself said that Tmac could do everything he did except that Tmac was even taller than him which implied that Tmac could have more if he had better teammates..

Btw, I’m a lakers fan more than that of particular laker player , so I could care less who wins it for the purple and gold, as long as the team wins. & I’ve embraced LeBron as part of the Lakers family even if was a self confessed LeBron hater back in the day. Even Kobe & Shaq whom I felt could have won more if their immaturity or pride didn’t get in the way of them staying together..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[falcolombardi]

They could indeed win rings, but tmac broke out a bit later than kobe so his early prime timeline wouldnt fit so neatly with the last of shaq prime

Also not a sure thingh at all regardless they grt past portland or sacramento, kobe was a more efficient scorer and a better passer generally than tmac

[MiamiBulls]

Tracy Mcgrady didn't say he could 3peat with Shaq, he said he could A championship with Shaq which is very likely.

As far the 3peat goes, that run had far less to do with "Shaq's dominance" & mainly to do with luck and clutch performances. The 2000 run was a Blazers ice cold shooting drought(5-20 FG in 4th Q) away from eliminating the Lakers, in a Game 7 where Bryant was the best player on the floor both Defensively & Offensively.

Shaq in Game 6 & 7 of 2000 WCF averaged 17 PPG | 3.5 TOV | 49% TS

Save for a few clutch plays in '02 West Semis v Spurs, the Lakers could have been easily eliminated in a series the Spurs loss only by a 5 PT margin. In that Series Shaq shot 44% FG, where the Spurs led in the 4th Quarter of every single game of that 5 gm series. Shaq in the 4th Quarter shot 8 for 26 | 42% TS. Bryant in the 4th Quarter of the series averaged 9 PPG on 65% TS.

Against the Sacramento Kings, the Lakers didn't win that series the Kings choked. Game 7 Peja Stojakovic airballed a wide open game winning 3P shot in the 4th Quarter that would have eliminated the LAL from the Playoffs. Doug Christie in OT bricked a game winning wide open 3P shot off the backboard that would have eliminated the Lakers. If the Kings didn't brick 15 Free Throws in Game 7, Lakers lose this series. If the Kings didn't miss a whopping 70 Free Throws in the series overall, the Lakers likely lose in 5 or 6 games.

Shaq's defense in the '02 WCF was absolutely putrid, he steadfastly refused to guard anyone that moves outside of 8FT from the basket.

Playing replacement hypotheticals when the margin for error was fairly slim to begin with seems futile.

[Cavsfansince84]

Tracy Mcgrady didn't say he could 3peat with Shaq, he said he could A championship with Shaq which is very likely.

As far the 3peat goes, that run had far less to do with "Shaq's dominance" & mainly to do with luck and clutch performances. The 2000 run was a Blazers ice cold shooting drought(5-20 FG in 4th Q) away from eliminating the Lakers, in a Game 7 where Bryant was the best player on the floor both Defensively & Offensively.

Shaq in Game 6 & 7 of 2000 WCF averaged 17 PPG | 3.5 TOV | 49% TS

Save for a few clutch plays in '02 West Semis v Spurs, the Lakers could have been easily eliminated in a series the Spurs loss only by a 5 PT margin. In that Series Shaq shot 44% FG, where the Spurs led in the 4th Quarter of every single game of that 5 gm series. Shaq in the 4th Quarter shot 8 for 26 | 42% TS. Bryant in the 4th Quarter of the series averaged 9 PPG on 65% TS.

Against the Sacramento Kings, the Lakers didn't win that series the Kings choked. Game 7 Peja Stojakovic airballed a wide open game winning 3P shot in the 4th Quarter that would have eliminated the LAL from the Playoffs. Doug Christie in OT bricked a game winning wide open 3P shot off the backboard that would have eliminated the Lakers. If the Kings didn't brick 15 Free Throws in Game 7, Lakers lose this series. If the Kings didn't miss a whopping 70 Free Throws in the series overall, the Lakers likely lose in 5 or 6 games.

Shaq's defense in the '02 WCF was absolutely putrid, he steadfastly refused to guard anyone that moves outside of 8FT from the basket.

Playing replacement hypotheticals when the margin for error was fairly slim to begin with seems futile.

I don't think that margin of error makes all that much difference. Yes the Lakers barely pulled out series wins in the 00&02 wcf's. You can't just point at one or two games during a 7 game series where Kobe played well though to act like TMac couldn't possibly got the same result. It's no different than bringing up game 5 of the 00 wcf to say 'Kobe went 4-13 and played awful in a Lakers loss so of course TMac could do better'. It's all hypothetical regardless. We gotta look at both the good and bad games, especially with a guy like Kobe who is well known for having high high's and low low's.

[tsherkin]

Could it be that Kobe sucked in the 2000 finals since he was injured ?

People forget Kobe was intentionally injured by Jaylen Rose in Game 2 and was out for most of that game and Game 3. He only came back with limited time in Game 4 and bailed out the lakers in the 4th and OT after Shaq fouled out.., giving the lakers a 3-1 lead in the series

Without this context and you’re only looking at stats, yes his numbers would be down.

Sure, but then it became a pattern for the rest of his career, so him being injured the one time matters only so much, you know?

That's not to say he didn't have important moments in the series, but he had a career-long trend of dropping HARD in the Finals.

[xinxin]

Could it be that Kobe sucked in the 2000 finals since he was injured ?

People forget Kobe was intentionally injured by Jaylen Rose in Game 2 and was out for most of that game and Game 3. He only came back with limited time in Game 4 and bailed out the lakers in the 4th and OT after Shaq fouled out.., giving the lakers a 3-1 lead in the series

Without this context and you’re only looking at stats, yes his numbers would be down.

Sure, but then it became a pattern for the rest of his career, so him being injured the one time matters only so much, you know?

That's not to say he didn't have important moments in the series, but he had a career-long trend of dropping HARD in the Finals.

i'll just repeat what I said in another post:


My comment/question was only about the statement that Kobe sucked in the 2000 finals.

I wasn’t even addressing the comparison between Tmac and Kobe.

But to comment on the proposition of the OP, it wouldn’t shock me if Tmac won 2 or even 3 with Shaq on the lakers. Kobe himself said that Tmac could do everything he did except that Tmac was even taller than him which implied that Tmac could have more if he had better teammates..

Btw, I’m a lakers fan more than that of particular laker player , so I could care less who wins it for the purple and gold, as long as the team wins. & I’ve embraced LeBron as part of the Lakers family even if was a self confessed LeBron hater back in the day. Even Kobe & Shaq whom I felt could have won more if their immaturity or pride didn’t get in the way of them staying together..

[tsherkin]

My comment/question was only about the statement that Kobe sucked in the 2000 finals.

That's fine, but it definitely influenced the treatment of the situation. If it was an outlier among his performances, then it likely would get a little more attention on the injury and everything else. But since it became the de facto standard performance for him, it doesn't really stand out much. That's my stance on the subject