Add prime Kobe to the 2016-17 Lakers. How far do we go?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Gatekeeper
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 11 Jan 2012
Posts: 5103
Location: Southland Native

PostPosted: Fri Jul 29, 2016 7:35 pm    Post subject:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006%E2%80%9307_Los_Angeles_Lakers_season
_________________
Character
Manchester United | Greatest European Moments
Fabric of United - Our Belief
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
umanasibo
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 10 Feb 2016
Posts: 110

PostPosted: Fri Jul 29, 2016 7:36 pm    Post subject:

Prime Kobe with this team? We'd win it all.

There. I said it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
kikanga
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Posts: 29150
Location: La La Land

PostPosted: Fri Jul 29, 2016 8:19 pm    Post subject:

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 love Phil more than most people here at LG. But your point is based on a false equivalency.
If Phil coached 20 consecutive years in the league. He'd have much greater success when he had MJ and Kobe then the off years he would've had to coach outside Chicago and LA.
Phil and Kobe's relationship was mutually symbiotic.
Phil always had the luxury to not coach bad teams. But Kobe had to lace 'em up every year, no matter what crappy roster he had a teammates.
_________________
"Every hurt is a lesson, and every lesson makes you better”
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Fri Jul 29, 2016 8:28 pm    Post subject:

kikanga 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 love Phil more than most people here at LG. But your point is based on a false equivalency.
If Phil coached 20 consecutive years in the league. He'd have much greater success when he had MJ and Kobe then the off years he would've had to coach outside Chicago and LA.
Phil and Kobe's relationship was mutually symbiotic.
Phil always had the luxury to not coach bad teams. But Kobe had to lace 'em up every year, no matter what crappy roster he had a teammates.


Ok. This doesn't change the fact that Kobe had better success with Phil than he did without Phil though. Phil optimized Kobe, other coaches didn't.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Fri Jul 29, 2016 8:38 pm    Post subject:

Rivershow 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.


Kobe with Phil coincided with him having a good to great supporting cast. Without Phil he didn't so I don't think that is a assumption you can make.

You can make the argument that Kobe's best team without Phil was Nash and Dwight but then you had Dwight and Nash playing with significant injuries.


Kobe had a great supporting cast in 2005-2006, 2006-2007?

I disagree. Strongly.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
kikanga
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 15 Sep 2012
Posts: 29150
Location: La La Land

PostPosted: Fri Jul 29, 2016 8:57 pm    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
kikanga 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 love Phil more than most people here at LG. But your point is based on a false equivalency.
If Phil coached 20 consecutive years in the league. He'd have much greater success when he had MJ and Kobe then the off years he would've had to coach outside Chicago and LA.
Phil and Kobe's relationship was mutually symbiotic.
Phil always had the luxury to not coach bad teams. But Kobe had to lace 'em up every year, no matter what crappy roster he had a teammates.


Ok. This doesn't change the fact that Kobe had better success with Phil than he did without Phil though. Phil optimized Kobe, other coaches didn't.


Your right about that.
Do you think Luke could tap into what made Phil and Kobe such a great match?
Or do you have to see what Luke does this year before you can make that call?
_________________
"Every hurt is a lesson, and every lesson makes you better”
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
pio2u
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 26 Dec 2012
Posts: 54520

PostPosted: Fri Jul 29, 2016 9:17 pm    Post subject:

98 - 0
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
unleasHell
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 16 Apr 2001
Posts: 11591
Location: Stay Thirsty my Friends

PostPosted: Fri Jul 29, 2016 10:07 pm    Post subject:

Really?

Why stop at adding Kobe?

I want to add Shaq, Magic and Larry Bird, so we can contend with the Warriors...
_________________
“Always remember... Rumors are carried by haters, spread by fools, and accepted by idiots.”
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
slavavov
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 03 Oct 2003
Posts: 8288
Location: Santa Monica

PostPosted: Fri Jul 29, 2016 10:55 pm    Post subject:

I feel like Kobe, in theory, could've taken any team with a decent supporting cast to at least the WCF because he could've gotten hot, and also because of his leadership. As long as he and his teammates played consistent, solid defense and limited the opponent to one shot, technically anything is possible with a player of that caliber.

We almost beat Phoenix in 2006 thanks to Kobe (and Phil). If we had one solid big who gave us a consistent 15/10 (Lamar doesn't count), maybe we would've reached the WCF that year.
_________________
Lakers 49ers Chargers Dodgers
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
lakerhaterhater
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 03 May 2016
Posts: 402

PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 12:30 am    Post subject:

We're a 50 win team, if not very nearly.
Kobe was that damn good.

In 05-06 kobe went for 35pg with LO and Smush as the only other scorers in double figures.
I think our team right now is better than that team that went 45-37 sans Kobe....much better.
We make the playoffs, that certain but we probably run into some problems after that because of inexperience.

Russell, Kobe, Deng, Randle/Ljr, Mozgov- JC

Smush, Kobe, LO, Cook, Mihm/Kwame- Walton
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
AY2043
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 26 Feb 2012
Posts: 10620

PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 12:49 am    Post subject:

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.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
the association
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 03 Feb 2015
Posts: 1982

PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 3:36 am    Post subject:

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.


As to the OP's original question, I would predict a second round ceiling, at best, for this hypothetical team. Far more likely, I would guess a first round exit after a fairly competitive series.

But re: the above ...

1. We didn't advance to the NBA Finals for four straight appearances at any point during Kobe's career. Our three straight NBA Finals appearances during the 2000 - 2002 window were bracketed by WCSF losses in 1999 and 2003. And our three straight NBA Finals appearances during the 2008 - 2010 window were bracketed by a first round loss in 2007 and a WCSF loss in 2011. And the latter was much more than merely a series loss. At the end, it involved another one of our humiliating 25+ point elimination game losses (of which we had far too many over the past two decades, unfortunately).

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/LAL/

2. Per Kobe and/or his inner circle, his wrist injury was completely healed months before the conclusion of the 2011/2012 season. And his knee condition was apparently treated successfully well before season's end, as well.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1058972-kobe-bryant-lakers-star-claims-torn-wrist-ligament-has-healed

http://grantland.com/features/kobe-bryant-dr-chris-renna-regenokine-knee-treatment/

Furthermore, this injury narrative is one of the irksome aspects of Kobe's career for me. It seemed apparent to me early on that Kobe was very much unlike other professional athletes who play through injuries all the time without constantly leaking details to the media (either himself or through "sources"). Once he, Vitti, Black and the Lakers org. realized his marketability and "legend" (especially amongst the legion who adore him) was burnished by this notion that he played through injuries like a "warrior" on the court, it became almost comically predictable when the injury card would appear next. It was like clockwork. Kobe would have a stretch of poor-shooting games or missteps on the court, and all of a sudden, the injury or illness talk would materialize after a magical hiatus ...

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.

Regardless, I don't think this hypothetical team would get very far because other teams would simply key on Kobe. And any version of Kobe from 2001 - 2003 or 2005 - 2009 would have really struggled sharing the ball with others on this young roster. We're talking 28 - 32 FGA per game territory. Given that possibility, teams like the 2016/2017 Warriors or Spurs (and really most EC and WC playoff entrants) would make quick work of a one-man team, so yeah ... first round exit, possible WCSF appearance.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
True Lakers Fan
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 28 Oct 2011
Posts: 917
Location: Texas

PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 5:07 am    Post subject:

Mute point.
_________________
I can accept failure, but I can't accept not trying.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Reply with quote
Dave20
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 15 Jun 2013
Posts: 11333

PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 6:40 am    Post subject:

52 wins and 1st round exit. Kobe's ego at 26 was at an all time high. He wouldn't be able to co-exist with two guards that likes the ball in their hands like Clarkson and Russell.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 7:33 am    Post subject:

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?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
deal
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 17 Aug 2008
Posts: 14900
Location: Earth

PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 7:34 am    Post subject:

Prime Kobe would ask for a trade...
_________________
Lakers need to build a freaking team !
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
SoCaLjAy
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 13 Jul 2006
Posts: 3480
Location: SoCal of course...

PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 8:21 am    Post subject:

True Lakers Fan wrote:
Mute point.

Mute Point
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
KobeButler
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 14 Nov 2004
Posts: 10179

PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 10:40 am    Post subject:

7-8th seed and thats being generous.. Even a prime kobe wont take this team to the promise land. I dont trust randle down low. Dlo would regulated to a spot up shooter. This team is too young to demand anything from kobe...their will be alot kobe shots going up and ball watching from his teammate.
_________________
Pain is temporary, at the end of pain is success...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
AY2043
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 26 Feb 2012
Posts: 10620

PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 11:28 am    Post subject:

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.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ReaListik
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 08 Jun 2008
Posts: 6542

PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 11:43 am    Post subject:

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.


It just happens to be that Kobe had Phil as his sole coach for the vast majority of his prime years, whereas if he had another coach at some length between age 21-32 then there would be another body of evidence to analyze for that debate. Personally I think he would have taken this team to the first round going 5-6 vs GS.
_________________
"We are the goodest." - Shaq ESPN interview
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Truck Turner
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 28 Apr 2011
Posts: 3937

PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 11:45 am    Post subject:

Hard to say without seeing more of the young guys play, but I'd say it's a safe bet Kobe could lead this team to and 8th or 7th seed depending on how much of a step back OKC takes after losing Durant.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
governator
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 28 Jan 2006
Posts: 24996

PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 11:52 am    Post subject:

Dave20 wrote:
52 wins and 1st round exit. Kobe's ego at 26 was at an all time high. He wouldn't be able to co-exist with two guards that likes the ball in their hands like Clarkson and Russell.


Cmon Dave, outside of a prime MJ, all perimeter players will yield to a prime Kobe as teammate. Even prime LeBron, prime KD and prime Wade defer to prime Kobe in the redeem team. JC will have zero problem deferring to prime Kobe
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
lakeshowtacular
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 22 Jul 2010
Posts: 699

PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 12:01 pm    Post subject:

kobeandgary wrote:
Always felt like prime Kobe gave us a chance to win it all and I'd feel no differently if he was on this team.


Yep, he was that good.
_________________
Magic*Kobe*LBJ*AD*Cap
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418

PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 12:12 pm    Post subject:

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
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Lakersneuron
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 21 Nov 2008
Posts: 4450

PostPosted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 12:17 pm    Post subject:

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."


Last edited by Lakersneuron on Sat Jul 30, 2016 12:18 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 2 of 6
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2018 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB