| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
SuperboyReformed
Star Player
Joined: 07 Oct 2012
Posts: 4083
|
 Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 12:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ringfinger, you engagef the poster. and then you end it by mocking the poster saying that it's hypothetical and ANY scenario is possible, and that trying to explore any specific possibility is useless because literally anything is possible.
if you don't care for the subject, why even take part? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Lakersneuron
Star Player
Joined: 21 Nov 2008
Posts: 4450
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 12:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Lakersneuron wrote: | | Prime Kobe on this team gets us to the second round of the playoffs (Kobe only). The following year we are the conference finals facing the warriors (Kobe + Westbrook who will surely come to play with arguably the Laker goat in his hometown). The year after that, we win a chip (Kobe + Westbrook + young guns have developed). |
_________________
"I don’t give a [expletive] what you say. If I go out there and miss game winners, and people say, 'Kobe choked, or Kobe is seven for whatever in pressure situations.' Well, [expletive] you. Because I don’t play for your [expletive] approval." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SuperboyReformed
Star Player
Joined: 07 Oct 2012
Posts: 4083
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 12:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
add prime kobe? it would make the lakers instant contenders.
the lakers almost beat the suns (the pre-warriors) with kwame and smush with prime kobe. add prime kobe to Dlo and Randle, plus the rest who are young and not bad, and the new vets...instant contender. If they won nobody would be surprised. And I imagine we would have expectations somewhere between what okc and warriors had last year.
maybe a good real example to look at is lebron joining cleveland again. instantly made them contenders, and perhaps that team starting out wasn't even good as this roster. kobe's impact should be even more IMO. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AY2043
Franchise Player
Joined: 26 Feb 2012
Posts: 10621
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 12:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ringfinger wrote: | | AY2043 wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | AY2043 wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | Lakers2015 wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | With Phil or without?
With Phil... maybe the second round.
Without Phil, borderline playoff team. |
Even without Phil Kobe makes us 25-30 wins better. He was THAT good. |
Yah, he just had much greater success with Phil, than he did without.
I'm not sure if he's even won a second round playoff game without Phil. |
I obviously agree that a Phil-coached team is probably better than a non Phil-coached team, and it's technically true that Kobe had more success with Phil than he did without. But, I think it's disingenuous to argue that last point based solely on what transpired on the court; the circumstances of the Lakers teams over the course of Kobe's career that Phil didn't coach are MUCH different than the ones that he did coach.
Phil coached the Lakers from '99-00 to '03-'04, and '05-'06 to '10-'11. That's Kobe's career from the time he was 21 until he was 32, so pretty much his entire prime. The years that Phil did not coach Kobe were either when Kobe was very young (age 18-20), old and perpetually injured (age 33-37), or facing extraneous circumstances ('04-'05, when he was coming off Colorado, coming off his 4th straight Finals, coming off the Shaq trade, and dealing with a coach leaving the team due to a heart attack). It's really impossible to make any sort of judgement on how Kobe's career would have turned out without Phil as his coach, especially if you're trying to base it on the small and extremely biased sample size when that was actually the case.
As to your second point, yes he did win a 2nd round playoff game without Phil. 2012 against the Thunder. But to that point, he's only made the playoffs 4 times in his career without Phil as his coach. 3 of which were his first 3 years of his career, and the 4th was that 2012 year, in which he was playing through bone on bone contact in his knees and a torn ligament in his wrist for the entire year. |
I don't necessarily disagree with all that. I just have more confidence that if Kobe were playing in his prime with THIS team, that with those hypothetical set of circumstances, we'd likely fare better with Phil at the helm than anyone else.
And of course we can't know that. We also can't know that this team, with Kobe in his prime, wouldn't also be a lottery team. But I think that would unlikely.
What we do know, is that Kobe did not have as much success without Phil. Even in the non-ring years, he had better individual numbers and win totals with Phil than he did in the non-ring years without Phil. Both rosters, similarly talentless.
So I'm not sure what your point is. I've said simply that I believe Kobe would have had more success with Phil leading the charge. Your point is, that one should not believe that because it cannot be empirically proven in a vacuum? |
I agree with all of the italicized. Phil is the GOAT coach, so of course a team coached by him is better than a team not coached by him.
The bolded part is where my argument comes in. I just don't think you can draw any definitive conclusions about how Kobe's career would have gone without Phil by simply looking at years he wasn't coached by him. There are too many extraneous circumstances surrounding those years that negatively bias the results of those years.
So yes, my argument essentially boils down to semantics, as I agree with what seems to be your larger point. I just disagree with the choice of evidence you used to prove it. |
There are no definitive conclusions one can draw from this thread topic as it is purely hypothetical.
We have no idea how a prime Kobe would have fared with THIS set of players, in this era. They could win anywhere between 0 and 82 games. That is the only definitive conclusion we can draw if definitive is what you are looking for here. ANY assertion other than 0-82 wins is not definitive, and is subject to being entirely incorrect.
Congrats. You've managed to show that a hypothetical scenario is nothing more than purely hypothetical  |
Ok. It seems we have missed each other's points. I'm done  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 12:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SuperboyReformed wrote: | ringfinger, you engagef the poster. and then you end it by mocking the poster saying that it's hypothetical and ANY scenario is possible, and that trying to explore any specific possibility is useless because literally anything is possible.
if you don't care for the subject, why even take part? |
Didn't engage anyone.
I just answered the thread question. Borderline playoff team with Kobe and no Phil. 2nd round playoff team with Phil. AYSO engaged me with the "that cannot be definitively concluded" nonsense. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AY2043
Franchise Player
Joined: 26 Feb 2012
Posts: 10621
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 1:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ringfinger wrote: | | SuperboyReformed wrote: | ringfinger, you engagef the poster. and then you end it by mocking the poster saying that it's hypothetical and ANY scenario is possible, and that trying to explore any specific possibility is useless because literally anything is possible.
if you don't care for the subject, why even take part? |
Didn't engage anyone.
I just answered the thread question. Borderline playoff team with Kobe and no Phil. 2nd round playoff team with Phil. AYSO engaged me with the "that cannot be definitively concluded" nonsense. |
Ok look, I'm done after this. Of course I know this thread is purely hypothetical and this situation would never materialize. I know none of us can prove anything.
All I said was that I don't think that you can use Kobe's years without Phil as a barometer of how his career would have fared if Phil was never his coach. That's it. If that wasn't your original argument, I apologize. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 2:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| AY2043 wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | SuperboyReformed wrote: | ringfinger, you engagef the poster. and then you end it by mocking the poster saying that it's hypothetical and ANY scenario is possible, and that trying to explore any specific possibility is useless because literally anything is possible.
if you don't care for the subject, why even take part? |
Didn't engage anyone.
I just answered the thread question. Borderline playoff team with Kobe and no Phil. 2nd round playoff team with Phil. AYSO engaged me with the "that cannot be definitively concluded" nonsense. |
Ok look, I'm done after this. Of course I know this thread is purely hypothetical and this situation would never materialize. I know none of us can prove anything.
All I said was that I don't think that you can use Kobe's years without Phil as a barometer of how his career would have fared if Phil was never his coach. That's it. If that wasn't your original argument, I apologize. |
Sure. And one can't use Kobe's performance during his prime years as a barometer of how he would have fared with this current Laker team, in this era, either, but I don't see you pointing that out to other people who are throwing out win totals.
Why? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
JerryMagicKobe
Moderator
Joined: 28 Jul 2005
Posts: 15100
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 2:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ringfinger wrote: | | AY2043 wrote: | | ringfinger wrote: | | SuperboyReformed wrote: | ringfinger, you engagef the poster. and then you end it by mocking the poster saying that it's hypothetical and ANY scenario is possible, and that trying to explore any specific possibility is useless because literally anything is possible.
if you don't care for the subject, why even take part? |
Didn't engage anyone.
I just answered the thread question. Borderline playoff team with Kobe and no Phil. 2nd round playoff team with Phil. AYSO engaged me with the "that cannot be definitively concluded" nonsense. |
Ok look, I'm done after this. Of course I know this thread is purely hypothetical and this situation would never materialize. I know none of us can prove anything.
All I said was that I don't think that you can use Kobe's years without Phil as a barometer of how his career would have fared if Phil was never his coach. That's it. If that wasn't your original argument, I apologize. |
Sure. And one can't use Kobe's performance during his prime years as a barometer of how he would have fared with this current Laker team, in this era, either, but I don't see you pointing that out to other people who are throwing out win totals.
Why? |
Time for you to move along... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 2:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Would prime Kobe even beat out JC for the SG spot?
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ReaListik
Star Player
Joined: 08 Jun 2008
Posts: 6574
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 3:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| yinoma2001 wrote: | | Would prime Kobe even beat out JC for the SG spot? |
Depends, Javaris Crittenton or Jordan Clarkson.....
_________________
"We are the goodest." - Shaq ESPN interview |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
panamaniac
Franchise Player
Joined: 28 May 2011
Posts: 11240
Location: PTY
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 3:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| the association wrote: | | Anyway, the timing of this strategy dovetailed perfectly with the rise of ESPN-driven highlight packages (which we now know disproportionately focus on volume shooters and plays involving a higher degree of difficulty, regardless of efficiency or outcome), the NBA's marketing push domestically and abroad (e.g., China), and the expansion of the global internet footprint over the past twenty years. And YouTube ... plenty of (bleep) YouTube to carry the water forward for the ESPN highlight package model. This confluence represented a perfect storm of marketing potential for a player like Kobe and 21st century fans. |
So Kobe's overseas popularity is due to YouTube videos/over-zealous fans and not his own merits which cement him as an all time great? Way to throw every international fan under the bus. This has got to be one of the most high-and-mighty, self-promoting, and ironically, out-of-tune (bleep) that I've read here in a long time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 3:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The Grind wrote: | | the association wrote: | | Anyway, the timing of this strategy dovetailed perfectly with the rise of ESPN-driven highlight packages (which we now know disproportionately focus on volume shooters and plays involving a higher degree of difficulty, regardless of efficiency or outcome), the NBA's marketing push domestically and abroad (e.g., China), and the expansion of the global internet footprint over the past twenty years. And YouTube ... plenty of (bleep) YouTube to carry the water forward for the ESPN highlight package model. This confluence represented a perfect storm of marketing potential for a player like Kobe and 21st century fans. |
So Kobe's overseas popularity is due to YouTube videos/over-zealous fans and not his own merits which cement him as an all time great? Way to throw every international fan under the bus. This has got to be one of the most high-and-mighty, self-promoting, and ironically, out-of-tune (bleep) that I've read here in a long time. |
That's not what he was saying at all. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Laker's Fan
Franchise Player
Joined: 27 Jun 2002
Posts: 12876
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 3:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Prime Kobe would be exactly the perfect fit for what this team needs. Superstar, check. Two way wing, check. Vet alpha, check.
_________________
Austin Reaves keeps his game tight, like Kobe Bryant on game night. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SuperboyReformed
Star Player
Joined: 07 Oct 2012
Posts: 4083
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 5:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
hmmm....for anyone willing to answer...
let's say the same question were asked, but replace kobe with MJ. What would your opinion there be? I have to say I'm a little surprised at the low opinion of kobe in this thread. Without Phil...a low playoff seed. With phil, maybe a 5th seed.
btw of course i agree with those who think prime kobe on any decent team makes them an instant contender. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 6:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SuperboyReformed wrote: | hmmm....for anyone willing to answer...
let's say the same question were asked, but replace kobe with MJ. What would your opinion there be? I have to say I'm a little surprised at the low opinion of kobe in this thread. Without Phil...a low playoff seed. With phil, maybe a 5th seed.
btw of course i agree with those who think prime kobe on any decent team makes them an instant contender. |
I'd project pretty similar win totals for MJ too.
The lower win totals are less an indictment of Kobe, and more a reflection of how young this team is. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
the association
Star Player
Joined: 03 Feb 2015
Posts: 1982
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 6:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The Grind wrote: | | the association wrote: | | Anyway, the timing of this strategy dovetailed perfectly with the rise of ESPN-driven highlight packages (which we now know disproportionately focus on volume shooters and plays involving a higher degree of difficulty, regardless of efficiency or outcome), the NBA's marketing push domestically and abroad (e.g., China), and the expansion of the global internet footprint over the past twenty years. And YouTube ... plenty of (bleep) YouTube to carry the water forward for the ESPN highlight package model. This confluence represented a perfect storm of marketing potential for a player like Kobe and 21st century fans. |
So Kobe's overseas popularity is due to YouTube videos/over-zealous fans and not his own merits which cement him as an all time great? Way to throw every international fan under the bus. This has got to be one of the most high-and-mighty, self-promoting, and ironically, out-of-tune (bleep) that I've read here in a long time. |
The view I expressed is mine. It's neither high-and-mighty, nor self-promoting. It's also not out-of-touch (I'm assuming that's what you meant).
Instead, the issue is that you just don't like the implications of my views. But guess what? I disagree with almost everything you post here. Literally ... almost every single thought that leaves your keyboard and travels through the ether ... I find myself in disagreement. However, I don't recall ever responding to a post of yours, much less in an aggressive manner. So maybe you should simply ignore what I have to say if you can't respond with anything other than false accusations and anger. You distorted what I said and attributed conclusions to me that weren't even made in my post ... so please save the straw men fallacies for others. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ReaListik
Star Player
Joined: 08 Jun 2008
Posts: 6574
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 6:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| the association wrote: | | The Grind wrote: | | the association wrote: | | Anyway, the timing of this strategy dovetailed perfectly with the rise of ESPN-driven highlight packages (which we now know disproportionately focus on volume shooters and plays involving a higher degree of difficulty, regardless of efficiency or outcome), the NBA's marketing push domestically and abroad (e.g., China), and the expansion of the global internet footprint over the past twenty years. And YouTube ... plenty of (bleep) YouTube to carry the water forward for the ESPN highlight package model. This confluence represented a perfect storm of marketing potential for a player like Kobe and 21st century fans. |
So Kobe's overseas popularity is due to YouTube videos/over-zealous fans and not his own merits which cement him as an all time great? Way to throw every international fan under the bus. This has got to be one of the most high-and-mighty, self-promoting, and ironically, out-of-tune (bleep) that I've read here in a long time. |
The view I expressed is mine. It's neither high-and-mighty, nor self-promoting. It's also not out-of-touch (I'm assuming that's what you meant).
Instead, the issue is that you just don't like the implications of my views. But guess what? I disagree with almost everything you post here. Literally ... almost every single thought that leaves your keyboard and travels through the ether ... I find myself in disagreement. However, I don't recall ever responding to a post of yours, much less in an aggressive manner. So maybe you should simply ignore what I have to say if you can't respond with anything other than false accusations and anger. You distorted what I said and attributed conclusions to me that weren't even made in my post ... so please save the straw men fallacies for others. |
 I think that the timing was right when Kobe took off and from a tech standpoint it really allowed for more marketing avenues.
_________________
"We are the goodest." - Shaq ESPN interview |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Halflife
Franchise Player
Joined: 15 Aug 2015
Posts: 16799
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 7:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Kobe:
* owns Blazers in prime
* owns gsw in prime
* clippers choke
* owns sas in prime
Looks to me at minimum we would be in finals |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Villain6Activated
Star Player
Joined: 22 Dec 2011
Posts: 6697
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 7:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Halflife wrote: | Kobe:
* owns Blazers in prime
* owns gsw in prime
* clippers choke
* owns sas in prime
Looks to me at minimum we would be in finals |
stop it, we're not getting passed the GSW no matter what Kobe Bryant does. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Halflife
Franchise Player
Joined: 15 Aug 2015
Posts: 16799
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 7:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LilJay24 wrote: | | Halflife wrote: | Kobe:
* owns Blazers in prime
* owns gsw in prime
* clippers choke
* owns sas in prime
Looks to me at minimum we would be in finals |
stop it, we're not getting passed the GSW no matter what Kobe Bryant does. |
No way okc loses when up 3-1 and no way gsw loses when up 3-1 .
Kobes prime is close to mj. We got it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DShotMaker1824
Star Player
Joined: 16 Feb 2012
Posts: 8769
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 7:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'd think we'd win the championship because we'd trade D'Lo and Clarkson for Westbrook. We'd also trade Randle, Deng, Calrderon, Mosgov for Cousins. Then sign LeBron.
_________________
"Through the legs to the left, through the legs to the right, we don't run them Laker plays, we just Kobe fadeaway..."
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
panamaniac
Franchise Player
Joined: 28 May 2011
Posts: 11240
Location: PTY
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 7:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| diando wrote: | | I'd think we'd win the championship because we'd trade D'Lo and Clarkson for Westbrook. We'd also trade Randle, Deng, Calrderon, Mosgov for Cousins. Then sign LeBron. |
It'd make for an interesting what if to see if a prime Kobe could draw a star FA with this current roster. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
krisobe
Star Player
Joined: 24 Jun 2005
Posts: 3309
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 8:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If we had Prime Kobe 2005-2006, KD would've signed. Horford would've signed. PRIME KOBE AND PRIME KD on the same team at age 27. Game over.
DLO. 12/4/3
KOBE. 28/5/5
KD. 26/6/4
RANDLE. 10/6/3
HORFORD. 12/8/4 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kobeandgary
Star Player
Joined: 18 Apr 2004
Posts: 6344
Location: Virginia
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 8:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| yinoma2001 wrote: | | Would prime Kobe even beat out JC for the SG spot? |
Pretty sure it wouldn't even be a competition, the spot would belong to Kobe. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Boldarblood
Starting Rotation
Joined: 24 Jun 2005
Posts: 296
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 8:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| krisobe wrote: | If we had Prime Kobe 2005-2006, KD would've signed. Horford would've signed. PRIME KOBE AND PRIME KD on the same team at age 27. Game over.
DLO. 12/4/3
KOBE. 28/5/5
KD. 26/6/4
RANDLE. 10/6/3
HORFORD. 12/8/4 |
Of course, but that wasn't the question. It was same team, replace Lou with Kobe.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
