Laker's supporting cast - over rated ?

[SimonAdebisi]

So who has a better supporting cast than Kobe?

[CuttingEdge]

This post holds no water. In years past Odom might not be the guy but this season he's better than most 3s out there period. Cavs team was a joke coming into Houston and getting completely owned like they had no business there. Zeke < Bynum or Gasol. Just timid in a bad way with an occasional jump shot.

[ponder276]

- Gasol is the best #2 option on any playoff team
- Bynum is a top 10 C
- Odom is one of the best 6th men in the league, and is definitely the best bench big in the league
- Ariza is a great glue-guy
- Fisher is a seasoned vet who can play d and shoot

That's an excellent supporting cast. And while Gasol is a touch soft, the other 4 players in the starting lineup are quite tough (Fisher, Kobe, Ariza and Bynum). This truly is a great supporting cast, and it's certainly a better supporting cast than what LeBron is working with.

And for people who say they have bad team defense, they had the 6th best defensive rating in the league, and it was even better when Bynum was in the lineup.

Kobe has a great supporting cast, and guess what? The Lakers are a great team! I think it's funny that some Kobe nut-huggers are already making excuses, the Lakers could very well win the championship this year!

Gasol being the best 2nd option is very debatable. Tony Parker, Boozer, Ben Gordon, Ray Allen, Carmelo Anthony, David West, Hedo/Lewis?

Fisher hustles and plays solid team defense but his man defense is horrid. He is clutch as fsck though.

Billups ?

btw, the best 2nd option would be Kevin Garnett - EASILY.

I was talking about these playoffs - KG is injured, so Boston's best player is Pierce, and their 2nd best is Allen. I'll take Gasol over Ray Allen. Tony Parker is real good too (the 2nd best Spur after Duncan), but I think Gasol still has the edge there. And I'll also give him the edge over Billups (no matter what ESPN says, Melo is the best player on the Nugs, Chauncey is #2), and over Artest (Yao is #1 on Houston). I'll also take him over Boozer. But yeah, it's real close with a lot of these #2s.

[EHL]

How is Gasol the 2nd option when he led the team in Win Shares.

I don't believe the question was aimed at you; it was meant for those who watch games and don't eat paint chips.

[G35]

How is Gasol the 2nd option when he led the team in Win Shares.

I don't believe the question was aimed at you; it was meant for those who watch games and don't eat paint chips.

[JordansBulls]

How is Gasol the 2nd option when he led the team in Win Shares.

I don't believe the question was aimed at you; it was meant for those who watch games and don't eat paint chips.

I watch games and the fact is that Kobe hasn't even shot a better fg% than his team average in 7 years. Nearly every other star player does.

[Bgil]

How is Gasol the 2nd option when he led the team in Win Shares.

I don't believe the question was aimed at you; it was meant for those who watch games and don't eat paint chips.

I watch games and the fact is that Kobe hasn't even shot a better fg% than his team average in 7 years. Nearly every other star player does.

Typical. Someone points out how you aren't judging games by live action analysis and you respond with a weak on-paper calculation.

Just to let you know, it's a weak calculation because I can take ANY 5 minutes of game footage from ANY game played in the past 40 years and point out dozens of instances where your overgeneralized statistical crap falls short. And I mean that... ANY 5 minutes. Garbage time, crunch time, playoffs, all-star games, preseason....

Secondly, you and your ilk have yet to give a solid rationale behind why such a stat/calculation is valid for evaluating players. And by solid I mean it should stand up to challenge on paper and on the court. For instance, the fact that a player who tries to raise the shooting percentages of his teammates by accepting (even welcoming) extreme defensive pressure will shoot a lower percentage than if he did the opposite: use his teammates to draw pressure off of him to allow him to shoot a higher percentage. Likewise, a player who takes the vast majority of the neccessary low percentage/hard shots (end of the shotclock, crunch time, two-for-ones, when the offense stalls, shots to spread the floor etc.) will shoot a lower percentage than one that defers those shots more often and only plays to his strengths. Further, given that "star" players in this league shoot less than 30% of their teams shots it makes more sense to maximize the percentage on the other 70%+ shots than that star player's sub-30%.

Not to mention the list of star players who don't shoot better than their team averages is pretty long. PP and Ray Allen, Ben Gordon and Loul Deng, Deron Williams, Steve Nash, Melo/Iverson/Billups/JR Smith, JJ/Bibby, Stephen Jackson and Monta Ellis, Granger, Hamilton/Sheed/AI/Stuckey/Prince, Vince Carter and Devin Harris, Lewis and Hedo, Gilbert Arenas...

There's also the fact that some star players are responsible for perimeter and mid-range shooting in a system designed to get other players layups or high percentage shots in the paint (or offensive putbacks). That's a pretty good description of what the Lakers and Pistons have done for years. It's also what Larry Brown had AI doing during his MVP season.

Then you have to consider that fg% comparisons are vastly more flawed than efg% and TS% comparisons. Of course, Jordan didn't shoot threes for much of his career and was a sub .300 shooter at the current distance so I wouldn't expect you to have any intellectual honesty on the matter.

Side note: using bball-reference.com to sort teams by eFG% is shows an interesting trend.... Boston, Cleveland, Orlando etc are at the bottom.
Many of the players who don't shot higher than their teams fg% do actually exceed the team's efg%.

Overall, I think you can argue for maximizing the shooting percentage of your star player but you also have to accept that maximizing the shooting percentages of the other players (70%+ of the shots) is an equal if not superior strategy. Of course, MJ didn't do it so I understand why you see no value in it.

[Baller 24]

Once again, anyone who thinks this supporting cast is overrated is just pumping it up to give Media Queen Bryant more hype. This is one of the best combination of players in terms of skill regarding passing, post play, high post play, defense, and simply out-matching the opponent, they've got tons of fire power, and I for one do not think they're overrated----the Cavs supporting cast is underrated by far.

[G35]

Once again, anyone who thinks this supporting cast is overrated is just pumping it up to give Media Queen Bryant more hype. This is one of the best combination of players in terms of skill regarding passing, post play, high post play, defense, and simply out-matching the opponent, they've got tons of fire power, and I for one do not think they're overrated----the Cavs supporting cast is underrated by far.

And once again anyone saying that this supporting cast doesn't have some very apparent and exploitable flaws is doing it to hate on the reigning MVP. This team has no physical presence, has a problem defending without fouling, shoddy 3pt shooting, and has a problem with success evident by the bench consistently giving up any lead the starters gain.

But you're right that the Cav's supporting is cast is underrated...by far........

[Bgil]

Once again, anyone who thinks this supporting cast is overrated is just pumping it up to give Media Queen Bryant more hype. This is one of the best combination of players in terms of skill regarding passing, post play, high post play, defense, and simply out-matching the opponent, they've got tons of fire power, and I for one do not think they're overrated----the Cavs supporting cast is underrated by far.

So assuming Okur is healthy, give me a comparison of Deron's supporting cast versus Kobe's. Do the same for Nash and the Suns assuming Amare is healthy. They both have better casts than the Lakers.
Once again the main problem with the Laker cast is their gigantic hole at PG. Both PHX and Utah have solid (or formerly solid in the case of Kinght) PG's coming off the bench.

IMO the Laker supporting cast is 5th or 6th best in the league behind Boston, Utah, Phoenix, and Portland. Even a healthy Chicago team is pretty damn loaded these days. Once they mature they're going to kill other teams.

The Rockets with a healthy T-Mac are loaded too. So are the Magic with a healthy Nelson. There's nothing special about the Laker supporting cast. They just have one of the best star players and the best coaching outside of the Spurs.

[Paydro70]

Side note: using bball-reference.com to sort teams by eFG% is shows an interesting trend.... Boston, Cleveland, Orlando etc are at the bottom.
Many of the players who don't shot higher than their teams fg% do actually exceed the team's efg%.

...huh? I think you selected eFG% ALLOWED, because Boston, Orlando, and Cleveland are 2-3-4, respectively, in eFG%. In eFG% allowed, as you might imagine, they are 3-1-2.

I think that your points are quite right in general, though... a star player can frequently be less efficient on offense than his teammates, because he is expected to take the shots in the more difficult situation and is frequently called upon to create shots rather than simply make them. It's no surprise, of course, that guys with the highest eFG% are usually spot-up shooters or dunks-only big men, and guys who carry a major offensive load fall far lower. Kobe is the one who shoulders the load for the Lakers, hence Gasol's major improvement in his offensive efficiency when he became the #2 option for the Lakers after being alone on the Grizz.

That said, Kobe's supporting cast is truly excellent. I'd prefer it to the Jazz... Odom-Gasol-Bynum is in my opinion better than Boozer-Millsap-Okur, and Ariza is better than Brewer... so it's AK-47 over the Laker PGs, but I don't think that makes up for the other 4 players. Portland? Odom-Bynum-Gasol over Aldridge-Oden-Przybilla all day, I'd rather have Ariza than Outlaw, and I don't think Blake has much on Fisher. So our extra guy here is Rudy, who again I don't think makes up for the gaps in the other positions. Chicago is no contest.

I'd rather have the Suns minus Nash than the Lakers minus Kobe, admittedly, and Boston is at least a difficult comparison (Gasol vs. Pierce? Odom vs. Allen? Bynum vs. Rondo?). At worst, though, the Lakers have to be the 3rd best team without its best player.

[SimonAdebisi]

That's typical Bgil nonsense. These Kobe homers are already making excuses for him in case LA doesn't win the title.

The Lakers supporting cast has a few weaknesses, just like any other supporting cast. The main flaws that I see are defensive inconsistency(Kobe himself is also guilty of this), and their moist nature.

Utah? LOL GTFO, Utah's supporting cast has the SAME flaws, AND they're less talented. The fact that Utah has NO interior presence on D in any way eliminates them from the conversation. Pau Gasol and Andrew Bynum's big bodies alone are more of a defensive presence than anybody on the Jazz can bring. Lamar Odom is a better defensive presence than anybody on the Jazz team. If you don't think Kobe benefits from the size of his front court, then I don't even know what to say.

Phoenix has the SAME flaws again. They're actually MUCH, MUCH worse than LA defensively, and they're even softer than the Lakers. They have 2 of the worst defensive big men in the NBA(Shaq isn't as bad as he's made out to be, but he can obviously be exposed significantly in the P&R) that anchor their D. Their backup PG makes Farmar look like Magic Johnson, and they have no depth behind Shaq and Stoudemire.

Portland is built the SAME way as the Lakers are right now, except they're individually worse, so I don't see much of an argument here. Gasol is simply clearly better than Aldridge, Bynum and Oden cancel each other out, Ariza has more impact than both Batum and Outlaw combined, Fisher is much more reliable than the choker Steve Blake. The rest pretty much cancel each other out, with Odom/Brown/Walton vs. Pryzbilla/Fernandez/Garcia.

Boston is better IMO, but it isn't really a "supporting cast". The Celtics are at the point where it's very arguable that they have 4 guys that they rely upon for equal offense in KG/Pierce/Allen/Rondo.

[Silver Bullet]

A point I think you guys are overlooking:

The Lakers have a sufficiently good supporting cast, that in a game against an inferior opponent, they are going to waltz to a win. The problem comes, when the opponent is up to par, and it is a pressure situation. The Lakers under pressure i.e. Game 7 of the NBA Finals is not the same team as the Lakers in the regular season. I am bewildered how a team that gives up leads of 20 plus points on a routine basis can be considered a favorite to win the title. I do think, the Lakers have one of the best supporting casts in the league for the first 44 mins, but -
- Fisher is extremely over rated on defense.
- Ariza and Odom have extremely inconsistent jumpers.
- Gasol is soft - I just saw John Salmons swish clutch free throw after free throw against the Celtics today and I remember Gasol clanging free throw after free throw in clutch situations, So who would you rather have - Gasol is clearly a much better player than Salmons, but that doesn't necessarily mean he is the better option down the stretch.
- Basically, the Lakers have no one to make a clutch jumper or make a clutch stop. Which results in the opposing team - on offense - swarming Kobe with defenders and in the end he has to take an extremely difficult shot or pass to an open team mate who is either going to fumble the pass or miss the jumper.

[Paydro70]

Silver Bullet, I find your post completely bewildering. Fisher and Kobe can't make a clutch jumper? Whatever a "clutch stop" is for an individual, surely Ariza, Kobe, or Bynum (if it's a block) are good enough for that. Gasol has been awesome this year in the clutch... he's shot .634 from the field and .890 from the line when it's close in the last 5 minutes. He's been almost as good a closer as Kobe.

Against opponents who are "up to par," the Lakers have been fantastic, as people in the MVP thread kept pointing out... 2-0 v. Cleveland, 2-0 v. Boston, 3-1 v. Denver, 2-1 v. San Antonio... only Orlando beat them twice. It doesn't matter how well you do in the last 4 minutes if you're already up 10.

Sure this team has had lapses of concentration, but they're still probably going to beat a very good team (and crazy good at home) 4-1. Seriously, cheer up.

[Old World Order]

One of the best supporting casts in the league, if not the best. Hard to overrate that.

[Sofa King]

Gasol is the best second option in the league. Without Gasol, the Lakers wouldn't have the 2nd best record and 1st in the West. Lakers are still missing some aspects like a good defensive point guard and a solid rebounder. Those are the weaknesses if you ask me.

[ShowtimeFan]

YES THEY ARE!!!

They are completely over rated, no need for any of the Teams we, oops I mean the Lakers play to even guard them, double and triple team Kobe!

Don't even worry about our, oops I mean the Lakers Bench...!

[Silver Bullet]

Silver Bullet, I find your post completely bewildering. Fisher and Kobe can't make a clutch jumper? Whatever a "clutch stop" is for an individual, surely Ariza, Kobe, or Bynum (if it's a block) are good enough for that. Gasol has been awesome this year in the clutch... he's shot .634 from the field and .890 from the line when it's close in the last 5 minutes. He's been almost as good a closer as Kobe.

Against opponents who are "up to par," the Lakers have been fantastic, as people in the MVP thread kept pointing out... 2-0 v. Cleveland, 2-0 v. Boston, 3-1 v. Denver, 2-1 v. San Antonio... only Orlando beat them twice. It doesn't matter how well you do in the last 4 minutes if you're already up 10.

Sure this team has had lapses of concentration, but they're still probably going to beat a very good team (and crazy good at home) 4-1. Seriously, cheer up.

IN THE REGULAR SEASON -

Nowitzki is clutch in the regular season, and most through the playoffs, but the two times he's really been pressed, he failed horribly - So does this mean he's clutch or not.

Btw, I never said Fisher is not clutch.

and It doesn't matter if Ariza is a good defender or not, if your help defender screws up, there is nothing you can do. Basic basketball. Please show me some footage of the Lakers getting a big stop, while they are giving up huge leads. I haven't seen it happen cept on an extremely irregular basis.

[Paydro70]

I mean, I don't know what a "big stop" is, during a huge comeback, and certainly not how I would get footage of that particular moment. Plus apparently I need to find this example during the WCF or Finals, or else it doesn't really apply, like Dirk's clutchness? I just think your standard is arbitrary, I don't know how much you can possibly expect.

If you think Fisher's clutch, then surely he's able to "make a clutch jumper" as you ask for. I just wonder what team you do think meets the standards you seem to have, if not the Lakers.

[Bgil]

That said, Kobe's supporting cast is truly excellent. I'd prefer it to the Jazz... Odom-Gasol-Bynum is in my opinion better than Boozer-Millsap-Okur, and Ariza is better than Brewer... so it's AK-47 over the Laker PGs, but I don't think that makes up for the other 4 players. Portland? Odom-Bynum-Gasol over Aldridge-Oden-Przybilla all day, I'd rather have Ariza than Outlaw, and I don't think Blake has much on Fisher. So our extra guy here is Rudy, who again I don't think makes up for the gaps in the other positions. Chicago is no contest.

I'd rather have the Suns minus Nash than the Lakers minus Kobe, admittedly, and Boston is at least a difficult comparison (Gasol vs. Pierce? Odom vs. Allen? Bynum vs. Rondo?). At worst, though, the Lakers have to be the 3rd best team without its best player.

Okur/Boozer/ak47/milsap is pretty damn similar in skill level to Bynum/Gasol/Ariza/Odom. Utah has more scoring talent and the Lakers have more length... which theoretically means better defense and rebounding although you couldnt tell that fromthis playoff series. I think Harpring is superior to Luke, and Korver superior to sasha although both guy will make you pull your hair out at times.

Outlaw is much better than Ariza. He's nearly as good defensively and far superior offensively. I'm not sold on Blake either but most Laker fans would give their left arm for Jared Jack, Sergio, and Rudy. Rudy has Manu Ginobili written all over him.

The backup PG I mentioned in phoenix was Barbosa although I guess you could say he's more of a two guard... If Shannon Brown can run point in our system the Barbosa sure could.