Laker's supporting cast - over rated ?

[kobeaki]

I don't understand how Kobe fans use "incredible defense" as an excuse

Don't you get it, whenever any team shuts down Kobe they HAVE to be one of the best defenses ever, otherwise *gasp* maybe Kobe isn't the god some fans think he is.

This thread separates the LA fans from the Kobe fans. I mean any LA fan would be standing up for their team, I mean they have a great lineup but once again Kobe fans need a mental 'out' so their heads don't explode if they face another failed attempt at a title. Of course they may face Cleveland and if they lose well Cleveland would be the next best defensive team ever.

What separates a Kobe fan from a real Lakers fan is the 2004 finals. Kobe fans would say they lost because Shaq was out of shape or the Detroit defense, when in effect Shaq averaged 27 and 11 on 63% FG.


What's funny is they use that as their excuse. But what about the 2000 finals against Indiana? He averaged 15.6 ppg on 37% FG. That Indiana team in 2000 nearly lost in round 1 and won the deciding game by 1 point at home. Indiana was much better in 1998 (that's when they had that extra body of Antonio Davis down low) and MJ averaged 31.7 ppg on 46% on them in the conference finals.

Um yeah... you should really stop and think about what you post esp if you are as old as you say you are. BR

[Silver Bullet]

that's because he's freaking shaq. that's what he does to everyone. he even put up great numbers as a young'un vs. a prime hakeem. a prime shaq? who can actually stop that?

Alright, Kobe shot 38% that series, but why does that turn into an excuse for Laker fans saying that Detroit team had unbelievable defense? D-Wade two years after, where that Detroit team won 64 games (league leading), and Prince was twice the defender he was when he faced Kobe, averaged:

Code: Select all

FG   REB   AST   PTS
.818   3   5   25
.550   7   5   32
.765   8   4   35
.727   6   5   31
.550   3   4   23
.400   4   10   14

I don't understand how Kobe fans use "incredible defense" as an excuse to justify how Jordan wouldn't do that against an "incredible defense" kobeaki when he consistently did it against the 90s Knicks, who are considered one of the top 5-8 greatest defensive teams in league history anchored by Ewing.

ummm ... because it was clear that the Pistons didn't have great defense. You had Saunders coaching the team instead of Brown for starters, which in itself means that they didn't have great defense.

Ben Wallace had slowed down considerably by then.

And Prince IMO, is just a bad match-up for Kobe in particular, because of his length. Kobe is not as quick as Lebron or Wade. But at the same time, look at Kobe vs. Bruce Bowen or Artest, he has never struggled against them (not that i know of anyway). Every player is defended well by different players. Artest would be insanely effective against Lebron, but he's never had any great success against Kobe.

So ure premise is wrong, the 2006 Pistons are not considered by anybody to be a great defensive team. The 2003 Pistons rank as on of the greatest defensive teams statistically. They held opponents to 41.3% FG% through the season, even though they got Rasheed at the All-Star break.
Post All Star Break they held opponents to 39% FG% which would be, by a very wide margin, the lowest FG% ever.
In the playoffs again, they held opponents to 39% FG%, which again

Just as a reference point your 97 Knicks allowed 43.2% FG% in the playoffs. The 98 Knicks allowed 42.8% in the regular season. The 93 Knicks allowed 42.6%, the 95 Knicks allowed 43.7%.
This holds up anyway you look at it.

The Pistons had a defensive rating of 95.4, The 99 Knicks - 103.

Pull up any other stat you want, you can look at differentials, you can adjust for changes in rules, The 03 Pistons would still come out way ahead of the Knicks, it's not even comparable. There are only two teams that fare well statistically when compared to the Pistons, and both of them happen to be in the modern era.

[Silver Bullet]

How old are u kind? You know the defense Wade played against wasn't the same 04 defense? The Pistons were a very physical and allowed to hand-check. They really started to force the hand-check rule after than 04 series.

But Kobe played bad. And what does this have to do with Jordan? FYI, Jordan had his bad bad days against the Pistons.

And stay on topic

I'm just responding to kobeaki in the previous pages. That Pistons team perimeter defense got stronger, one of the reasons they won 64 games that season, Prince was twice the player he was from '04, and everyone on their team knew their entire role.

Nobody who watches basketball on a regular basis can possibly infer that the 06 Pistons were better or even comparable to the 03 Pistons. In fact, this is the first time I've ever heard anybody say it.

[Silver Bullet]

1. Lakers' supporting cast, by now, has been analyzed ad nauseum. They are the most talented supporting cast. Sometimes they get complacent. They aren't dominant defensively. They score easily.

2. Cavs' supporting cast still gets underappreciated. They are top-notch defensively, if not the best in this league. Mo provides enough scoring punch by himself to complement LeBron. They are scrappy and never ease up.

3. Lakers lost on 04 because of a host of reasons. Everyone not named Shaq shot poorly. Malone was a shell of his former self at that point. Payton didn't work well within the triangle. The Pistons were hungry, and more importantly was coached by Larry Brown, something glaringly apparent as a missing factor for the Pistons after that.

A talented supporting cast is not the same as a good supporting cast. Hakeem didn't have a particularly talented supporting cast, but it was a very good one. The 03 Spurs did not have a talented supporting cast (one of the worst ever, if you look at it paper only) but it was one of the best supporting casts I've seen. Players who make clutch shots, insane defense, Good outside shooting. The Lakers have a "talented supporting" cast - and that's all I'll say for now.

People look at Odom's skill and drool, but he disappears for long stretches - ussually important stretches. His jumper does not need to be defended, and is ussually not. This packs the paint, makes it harder for Kobe to drive and kick it to open shooters, who then miss big shots.

Could the Cavs win game 7 of the NBA Finals with Lebron having a bad shooting night, Yes. Did they almost beat the Celtics last year when Lebron shot horrendously (much worse than Kobe btw)? Yes.
Did the Lakers even look like they could belonged, when Kobe shot horrendously? No.

When was the last time the Cavs blew a 20 plus point lead ?
How many times have the Lakers blown a 20 plus point lead in the last two seasons alone ?

[shobe_81]

The sad thing about JordansBulls guy is he sits here and claims that real Lakers fans would acknowledge Kobe didn't play well against the Pistons or Pacers in the finals and Kobe fans would blah blah blah.

Yet, 90+% of his posts consist of coming in Kobe/Lakers related threads and whining about Kobe and then concluding: Jordan did this.

I have never if at all seen this guy post like he's the fan of a team, his agenda has always been to bow down to Jordan and degrade anyone who is even in discussion with him. PATHETIC for someone calling people not fans of a team!

He reminds me of Jay Marriotie from Around the Horn with: "There was a player by the name of Michael Jeffery Jordan..."

[SimonAdebisi]

Honestly though, can Laker fans actually tell me that Kobe didn't have a huge part in the Lakers losing the 2004 finals? That was arguably the most selfish performance I've ever seen in any sport. I've never seen more revisionist history than the 2004 finals, it's like these people didn't watch this series.

[That Nicka]

Kobe sucked in the 2004 Finals. As did every other Laker outside of Shaq. Kobe tried to do way too much, everyone else laid an egg (except Shaq). Kobe was a big reason why we lost, but definitely not the only reason. Him shooting too much was as (or almost as) detrimental as 1) Karl Malone being hurt (his backup was Medvedenko) 2) Payton and Fisher averaging a combined 10ppg on 31% while giving up 21ppg on 51%.... And of course George and the bench sucked it up big time as well (but you cant RELY on role players to win you the championship which is why I wont include it in the main 3 reasons.

1) Kobe
2) Malone injury
3) PG play on both ends

I dunno how to appropriately attribute the blame between these 3. But haters seem to want to give Kobe ALL of the blame, and it shouldnt be that way either. Also, Kobe actually did win us a game as well and that was the only game we won (which of course means absolutely nothing now)

[SimonAdebisi]

Of course it's not all on Kobe. I actually think Detroit doesn't get enough credit for the series as well.

[That Nicka]

I think I would give all three of those things 33% weight. Because I feel like the Lakers would have needed AT LEAST 2 out of 3 of any of those things to go right in order to win.

[JordansBulls]

Your star gets the blame when you lose a series with HCA. And the star that played bad was Kobe in that series and got outplayed by a guy who wasn't even a star yet in Billups.

[That Nicka]

Your star gets the blame when you lose a series with HCA. And the star that played bad was Kobe in that series and got outplayed by a guy who wasn't even a star yet in Billups.

Kobe was a star, but Shaq was still better than him at that point... And I dunno if you read my post, but Kobe gets blamed, Shaq gets no blame... He played pretty great... I dont know why you posted this

[supaflash]

Making excuses? Hardly. LA has no excuses. If they don't win the title they either choked or someone else put together a extrodinary series.

LA has the most talent but it is percieved better then it actually is if you consider consistency and defence among others. You also need to consider roles. Guys like Vujacek and Walton among others would be terrible in other systems and on other teams. They are built around Kobe and the triangle just the same as the Suns were built around D'Antoni and Nash and the Cavs around Bron, Spurs around Duncan, etc. Not the greatest individual players but great for their intended roles. They are much better when inserted along with most of the starters but when they are in as a whole unit, they have not been very good.

There are some debateable casts, Portland is very deep and talented, arguable more talented potential wise but they need a lot of polishing and experience. Phoenix has had stellar talent for the last few years but they don't focus on D. Better then LA's? on Paper maybe.

I think Clevelands is NOT better in terms of talent and ability, I think they ARE better when it comes to consistency, playing defense, and playing at their maximum ability. IF LA's cast played the same way they would be by far better but that just isn't the case right now.

The debate lies in max potential vs. acheived potential.

if I had to rate it in my humble opionon

Boston and Orlando are the two best teams 1-5 (when fully healthy)
Then LA, then Cleveland

Although if Bynum plays like that one week span pre injury LA is the best 1-5

LA is the best 1-6 though

Clevland is best 1-8 (at least with Smith)

LA is the best 1-12

[spurket]

Honestly though, can Laker fans actually tell me that Kobe didn't have a huge part in the Lakers losing the 2004 finals? That was arguably the most selfish performance I've ever seen in any sport. I've never seen more revisionist history than the 2004 finals, it's like these people didn't watch this series.

Shaq was dominating but Kobe wanted the Finals MVP so he wanted to outplay Shaq and cost the Lakers a chance to win by taking shots away from Shaq and shooting poorly himself.

[Showtime:Part2]

LA's bench sucks this year, with the exception of lamar (he plays starter minutes though). if you are consistently giving up a 20 pt lead that the starting unit built up, you suck.

[supaflash]

oh as for the 2004 finals, Kobe played terrible and moderately selfish but not as much as some people like to think. He averaged almost the same amount of shots as the regular season, thats hardly uber selfish. He definitely shot them out of a couple games (he also shot them into the one win) but there were a lot of reasons for it. Shaq did NOT play well that series. He had one really good game but he was exceptionally abysmal from the line and he wasn't totally himself. He was out of shape and slow and even Phil called him out on it. Half the time in the other games he didn't fight for position and let Ben Wallace push him out of the paint and play him 1v1. Then he'd just whine that he didn't get the ball enough. Giving Shaq the ball at 10 ft was useless.

Give Detroit credit, their defense was fantastic and they were the first team to succussfully play Shaq straight up most of the time with minimal but very effective Sheed double teams and not pay for it. Some of it was Kobe's fault but a lot was Shaqs. They designed it to force Kobe to take shots over a young Tayshaun and he didn't knock them down. The rest of the team was horrendusly useless and with Shaq playing half assed most of the time what was he supposed to do? ANY star player in that situation HAS to keep shooting and trying to get it going. He got it going game 2 they win. He only takes 13 shots the next game, going 4-9 in the second half and they get blown out. Let me guess, his fault Shaq only got 14 shots too? He was in a no win situation. The injuries, the 9 days off that screwed their rhythm, the age, Detroit's desire, defense, and great rhythm they were in...

If Kobe was selfish in that series then so was Lebron in the finals and vs Boston last year, he shot them out of that series. Wade is being selfish vs the Hawks right now. Great players HAVE to shoot the ball, they can't just avoid it because they might miss or the defense is too tough.

Kobe makes those shots and gets some calls and LA wins, suddenly he's Wade, best finals ever, misses them and he's 'selfish' 'no Jordan' yadda yadda. People forget Wade passed to Shaq less then Kobe did and shot it himself way more (and didn't really shoot it that well), yet they get some lucky calls and bounces and Wade got his 20 FTA per game and suddenly he's a final's god. Shaq was starting to complain again too after they went 0-2. They don't get that miracle comeback in game 3 and go down 0-3 I guarantee a bitchfest from Shaq would have started and that team woudl have fallen apart as well and Wade would be right there with Kobe with a crappy selfish finals performance.

Nobody is perfect, Kobe sucked in that finals just like every great player has at some point in time.

[Jordan23Forever]

And Prince IMO, is just a bad match-up for Kobe in particular, because of his length. Kobe is not as quick as Lebron or Wade. But at the same time, look at Kobe vs. Bruce Bowen or Artest, he has never struggled against them (not that i know of anyway). Every player is defended well by different players. Artest would be insanely effective against Lebron, but he's never had any great success against Kobe.

Actually, both Bowen and Artest had considerable success against Kobe until 2006, the year when the league banned perimeter contact and every perimeter star blew up.

Kobe averaged 23.4 ppg/42.9% FG vs. Artest between 2000-2003 (7 meetings). Compare that to his season averages of 26.6 ppg/46.3% FG. Bowen between 2000-2005 held him to 25.5 ppg/40.4% FG over 17 games. Compare that to his season averages of 26.3 ppg/45.4% FG. This is relevant because you're comparing them to Prince in 2004.

[SimonAdebisi]

Those are some very interesting numbers J23.

[KrazyP]

Which of these players would you be comfortable with taking a game winning bucket ?
Now I know Gasol is an all star, but so is Chris Bosh and the guy deserves to be an all star if the award were for the first 3 and a half quarters. But in the last 4-5 minutes of a close game, I'd rather have Jarron or Jason Collins over Bosh (at least they'd play some defense).

Bosh scores 34.2 ppg on 48.3 efg% in the clutch which is the best or close to the best for all big men in the NBA. Maybe you should actually watch games and do a little research before taking craps?

http://www.82games.com/0809/08TOR15.HTM#clutch

[Silver Bullet]

Which of these players would you be comfortable with taking a game winning bucket ?
Now I know Gasol is an all star, but so is Chris Bosh and the guy deserves to be an all star if the award were for the first 3 and a half quarters. But in the last 4-5 minutes of a close game, I'd rather have Jarron or Jason Collins over Bosh (at least they'd play some defense).

Bosh scores 34.2 ppg on 48.3 efg% in the clutch which is the best or close to the best for all big men in the NBA. Maybe you should actually watch games and do a little research before taking craps?

http://www.82games.com/0809/08TOR15.HTM#clutch

ummm ... I'm a season ticket holder. I don't care what the stats say, Bosh is a choker.

[Silver Bullet]

And Prince IMO, is just a bad match-up for Kobe in particular, because of his length. Kobe is not as quick as Lebron or Wade. But at the same time, look at Kobe vs. Bruce Bowen or Artest, he has never struggled against them (not that i know of anyway). Every player is defended well by different players. Artest would be insanely effective against Lebron, but he's never had any great success against Kobe.

Actually, both Bowen and Artest had considerable success against Kobe until 2006, the year when the league banned perimeter contact and every perimeter star blew up.

Kobe averaged 23.4 ppg/42.9% FG vs. Artest between 2000-2003 (7 meetings). Compare that to his season averages of 26.6 ppg/46.3% FG. Bowen between 2000-2005 held him to 25.5 ppg/40.4% FG over 17 games. Compare that to his season averages of 26.3 ppg/45.4% FG. This is relevant because you're comparing them to Prince in 2004.

1. The sample size for Artest is small.

2. Yes, they managed to slow him down, as you would expect, but I wouldn't call it struggling.

3. I don't remember Kobe struggling against either, and I'm sure I've seen all their match ups - could be a case of him struggling through 3 quarters and turning it on in the fourth, I don't know. Or could be that he gets open shots and misses them... My point is when I see Kobe going against some one like Prince or Battier, I get the feeling that Kobe is having a hard time getting open or getting into the lane or creating any space at all. I haven't gotten the same feeling when he's up against either Artest or Bowen.

So my original point still stands, Prince is an especially bad match up for Kobe, as is Battier. However, I would expect Lebron to fare better against Battier and less so against Artest.

The point being - that just because Lebron does better against defender X than Kobe does, is not proof of anything. There are several defensive players, who would fare better against Lebron than Kobe.