View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Gatekeeper Star Player
Joined: 11 Jan 2012 Posts: 5103 Location: Southland Native
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
umanasibo Starting Rotation
Joined: 10 Feb 2016 Posts: 110
|
Posted: 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 |
|
|
kikanga Retired Number
Joined: 15 Sep 2012 Posts: 29150 Location: La La Land
|
Posted: 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 |
|
|
ringfinger Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013 Posts: 29418
|
Posted: 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 |
|
|
ringfinger Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013 Posts: 29418
|
Posted: 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 |
|
|
kikanga Retired Number
Joined: 15 Sep 2012 Posts: 29150 Location: La La Land
|
Posted: 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 |
|
|
pio2u Retired Number
Joined: 26 Dec 2012 Posts: 54520
|
Posted: Fri Jul 29, 2016 9:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
98 - 0 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
unleasHell Franchise Player
Joined: 16 Apr 2001 Posts: 11591 Location: Stay Thirsty my Friends
|
Posted: 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 |
|
|
slavavov Star Player
Joined: 03 Oct 2003 Posts: 8288 Location: Santa Monica
|
Posted: 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 |
|
|
lakerhaterhater Starting Rotation
Joined: 03 May 2016 Posts: 402
|
Posted: 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 |
|
|
AY2043 Franchise Player
Joined: 26 Feb 2012 Posts: 10620
|
Posted: 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 |
|
|
the association Star Player
Joined: 03 Feb 2015 Posts: 1982
|
Posted: 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 |
|
|
True Lakers Fan Starting Rotation
Joined: 28 Oct 2011 Posts: 917 Location: Texas
|
Posted: 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 |
|
|
Dave20 Franchise Player
Joined: 15 Jun 2013 Posts: 11333
|
Posted: 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 |
|
|
ringfinger Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013 Posts: 29418
|
Posted: 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 |
|
|
deal Franchise Player
Joined: 17 Aug 2008 Posts: 14900 Location: Earth
|
Posted: 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 |
|
|
SoCaLjAy Star Player
Joined: 13 Jul 2006 Posts: 3480 Location: SoCal of course...
|
Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2016 8:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
True Lakers Fan wrote: | Mute point. |
Mute Point
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
KobeButler Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Nov 2004 Posts: 10179
|
Posted: 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 |
|
|
AY2043 Franchise Player
Joined: 26 Feb 2012 Posts: 10620
|
Posted: 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 |
|
|
ReaListik Star Player
Joined: 08 Jun 2008 Posts: 6542
|
Posted: 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 |
|
|
Truck Turner Star Player
Joined: 28 Apr 2011 Posts: 3937
|
Posted: 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 |
|
|
governator Franchise Player
Joined: 28 Jan 2006 Posts: 24996
|
Posted: 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 |
|
|
lakeshowtacular Starting Rotation
Joined: 22 Jul 2010 Posts: 699
|
Posted: 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 |
|
|
ringfinger Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013 Posts: 29418
|
Posted: 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 |
|
|
Lakersneuron Star Player
Joined: 21 Nov 2008 Posts: 4450
|
Posted: 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 |
|
|
|
|
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
|
|