PDA

View Full Version : Would the Lakers have won a game if Kobe was healthy?



Apatel684
04-25-2013, 01:17 PM
Just wanted to see what people though. Ball movement looks good at times which could mean it would be worse if Kobe was in the game. But at other times the Lakers just look lost and Kobe could be a positive there.

Just wanted to see what people thought. This isn't a bashing thread or anything, Knicks fan here who is glad playoff basketball is finally back in NY

Bruno
04-25-2013, 01:20 PM
Just wanted to see what people though. Ball movement looks good at times which could mean it would be worse if Kobe was in the game. But at other times the Lakers just look lost and Kobe could be a positive there.

Just wanted to see what people thought. This isn't a bashing thread or anything, Knicks fan here who is glad playoff basketball is finally back in NY

let me just point out that mamba or no mamba, TWO LAKER PERIMETER PLAYERS (Steve Blake and Ron Artest) took more FGAs than Dwight Howard and Pau Gasol, in a PLAYOFF game against the Spurs, ON THE ROAD.

let that digest because i know it seems absurd. if steve blake and ron artest are taking more FGA in a playoff game than either big, then maybe the problems the offense, Gasols distance from the basket, howards lack of post moves, and not kobe hoggin' the ball game in and game out. if howard and gasol can't get their shots up without kobe in the PLAYOFFS, then what does that tell us? honestly.

HYFR
04-25-2013, 01:21 PM
Healthy Kobe I think it goes 7

ManRam
04-25-2013, 02:20 PM
i think they'd steal a game at home. but they still wouldn't have stood a chance.

remember, this is a team that went ~4 months without beating a west playoff team on the road, even with kobe. they just don't play enough defense, period.

TeamSeattle
04-25-2013, 02:21 PM
i think they'd steal a game at home. but they still wouldn't have stood a chance.

remember, this is a team that went ~4 months without beating a west playoff team on the road, even with kobe. they just don't play enough defense, period.

This.

Chronz
04-25-2013, 02:38 PM
Well if they defend as well as they have, only with Kobe, then they could have stolen one. I think it depends on who their coach would start, if Kobe's in the lineup, I dont think he would thrust Nash into a starting role so quickly. But if he does, then its back to having the worst backcourt defense in the league.

Avenged
04-25-2013, 02:40 PM
Series is not over yet, they can still steal 1 game.. But then again, what does it even matter? Winning 1 game out of 4 means nothing.

Bruno
04-25-2013, 02:45 PM
i think they'd steal a game at home. but they still wouldn't have stood a chance.

remember, this is a team that went ~4 months without beating a west playoff team on the road, even with kobe. they just don't play enough defense, period.

96.5 ppg for SA through two games. they average 103 ppg on the season. SA is shooting 44% from the field for the series, compared to 48% for the season.

Laker defense against SA has been okay. their offense has been horrible. Gasol has taken more FGAs than he has scored points, Howard is averaging 18 ppg without Kobe, and Steve Blake has taken more shots than Nash and Howard have individually, and only one less FGA than Pau for the series.

kobes absence hasn't resulted in post dominant offense, perimeter players are still jacking up shots. Gasol isn't getting to his spots efficiently, and Howard isn't a force to be reckoned with in back to the basket situations.

shep33
04-25-2013, 02:51 PM
Let's not forget that Kobe was putting up some ridiculous numbers before going down.

Lakers need offense, specifically perimeter offense. I think we maybe could've stolen a game. We just can't score without him.

i.got.the.nutz
04-25-2013, 03:20 PM
No, Lakers lose in 3 with Kobe.

Bruno
04-25-2013, 04:39 PM
let me just point out that mamba or no mamba, TWO LAKER PERIMETER PLAYERS (Steve Blake and Ron Artest) took more FGAs than Dwight Howard and Pau Gasol, in a PLAYOFF game against the Spurs, ON THE ROAD.

let that digest because i know it seems absurd. if steve blake and ron artest are taking more FGA in a playoff game than either big, then maybe the problems the offense, Gasols distance from the basket, howards lack of post moves, and not kobe hoggin' the ball game in and game out. if howard and gasol can't get their shots up without kobe in the PLAYOFFS, then what does that tell us? honestly.

i LOVE how posters who talk NON-STOP about kobe chucking, lack of ball movement, or lack of feeding the bigs have NOTHING to say about this. i'm the second post in and this thread is practically dead. classic PSD.

Bruno
04-25-2013, 04:39 PM
it would be split 1-1 going back to LA.

Avenged
04-25-2013, 04:44 PM
i LOVE how posters who talk NON-STOP about kobe chucking, lack of ball movement, or lack of feeding the bigs have NOTHING to say about this. i'm the second post in and this thread is practically dead. classic PSD.

Ironic enough Kobe is the one who feeds the bigs in the 1st place so Blake and Metta shooting more isn't really surprising if you actually follow the Lakers.

Heck Kobe was the one who told Pau to get in the post and stay there no matter what (Pau has even admitted to this).

49ersLALSFGiant
04-25-2013, 04:47 PM
If Kobe was healthy Lakers would have won in 6. Everyone's confidence was really high during the stretch run that got them in the playoffs and Kobe was playing out if this world. Pau and Dwight had the high low working, it would have been fun to watch. But our season is done so **** these what ifs

kdspurman
04-25-2013, 05:14 PM
If Kobe is healthy, does this also mean Tony and Manu are 100% healthy, or against the current circumstances? Cause against the current Spurs team, it'd probably be split. But if both TP & Manu are healthy, I think it'd still be 2-0

oballerc75
04-25-2013, 05:32 PM
This team finally started to play good ball with kobe at the end of the season. They would def have a chance in the series

b@llhog24
04-25-2013, 05:35 PM
i think they'd steal a game at home. but they still wouldn't have stood a chance.

remember, this is a team that went ~4 months without beating a west playoff team on the road, even with kobe. they just don't play enough defense, period.

Yep.

Trinidad
04-25-2013, 05:45 PM
I say no. The Spurs are just too well coached and disciplined in their roles. Their execution would just overwhelm them even with Kobe.

Burgo
04-25-2013, 05:59 PM
i think they'd steal a game at home. but they still wouldn't have stood a chance.

remember, this is a team that went ~4 months without beating a west playoff team on the road, even with kobe. they just don't play enough defense, period.

Agreed.

Might have made it 4-1 or 4-2 with a bit of luck, but the way it looks now it's hard to see them winning one. Strange that at the start of the year just about everyone had them locked in for a finals showdown with the Heat. I know I did.

Kobe2324
04-25-2013, 06:06 PM
with all the other injuries i would say maybe, if lakers healthy played spurs healthy I would call Lakers , but thats not really the scenario we are looking at

ManRam
04-25-2013, 06:07 PM
96.5 ppg for SA through two games. they average 103 ppg on the season. SA is shooting 44% from the field for the series, compared to 48% for the season.

Laker defense against SA has been okay. their offense has been horrible. Gasol has taken more FGAs than he has scored points, Howard is averaging 18 ppg without Kobe, and Steve Blake has taken more shots than Nash and Howard have individually, and only one less FGA than Pau for the series.

kobes absence hasn't resulted in post dominant offense, perimeter players are still jacking up shots. Gasol isn't getting to his spots efficiently, and Howard isn't a force to be reckoned with in back to the basket situations.

this is fair. it's obvious the lakers have a huge hole in terms of perimeter scoring, and the offense is horrible without him (where are those kobe trolls saying the offense would be better without him now?). i just don't think anyone can com to the conclusion based on how they played all year that the lakers could win more than a game or two even at full health against the spurs. there's just nothing they've done this year that suggests that's possible.


as for the defense, they certainly have looked good in the playoffs. the spurs have a 107.2 offensive rating in two games compared to 108.3 for the regular season. the pace has been a bit slower hence the more drastic drop off in PPG for the spurs. it's been better though for sure.

lakers fans can bash me for saying so, but i think the lakers are better defensively without kobe...but just slightly. all the on/off stats in the world suggest that too.

beliges
04-25-2013, 06:13 PM
Healthy Kobe the Lakers wouldve most probably gotten passed the Spurs. But thats about it as the Lakers do not have the talent or athleticism to compete with the other teams in the league.

WARRIORS@GR
04-25-2013, 06:43 PM
Healthy Kobe the Lakers wouldve most probably gotten passed the Spurs.
That's an idiotic comment.Can you prove that?
Kobe makes their offense much better,and their D much worse.

We have seen that all season long.
They were just not good enough to win playoff teams,let alone the best coached team in the league.

With Parker,Manu and Kobe at 100% this is a Spurs in 6 series at most.

Purple_n_Gold
04-25-2013, 07:47 PM
That's an idiotic comment.Can you prove that?
Kobe makes their offense much better,and their D much worse.

We have seen that all season long.
They were just not good enough to win playoff teams,let alone the best coached team in the league.

With Parker,Manu and Kobe at 100% this is a Spurs in 6 series at most.
Lol @ makes our defense much worse. We have Meeks in his spot. Meeks might be slightly better at defense but the huge valley between their offensive games is leaps and bounds different. So this is a pretty ignorant comment. To say his defensive play overshadows his offense especially on this team is simply not true.

WARRIORS@GR
04-25-2013, 08:34 PM
Lol @ makes our defense much worse. We have Meeks in his spot. Meeks might be slightly better at defense but the huge valley between their offensive games is leaps and bounds different. So this is a pretty ignorant comment. To say his defensive play overshadows his offense especially on this team is simply not true.
All i said is you will never touch the Spurs in the playoffs,with the Nash-Kobe duo guarding Parker or Manu.
I never said Meeks makes the team better,neither that kobes defense overshadows his offense.
Btw,Blake gets more minutes and that helps defense a bit.

ElChinoLatino
04-25-2013, 10:34 PM
Would the Lakers have won a game against the Spurs if Kobe was healthy? No. Does he increase the Lakers' chances of winning a game against the Spurs? Yes.

DODGERS&LAKERS
04-25-2013, 10:59 PM
this is fair. it's obvious the lakers have a huge hole in terms of perimeter scoring, and the offense is horrible without him (where are those kobe trolls saying the offense would be better without him now?). i just don't think anyone can com to the conclusion based on how they played all year that the lakers could win more than a game or two even at full health against the spurs. there's just nothing they've done this year that suggests that's possible.

I disagree about them not showing anything all year. The past 40 games they were 28-12. 4th best record in the league. In that time they beat OKC, Spurs, Grizzlies, Pacers, Celtics when they were hot, Warriors, Rockets, Hawks, and pretty much everyone else. I dont think we can say what the Lakers look like at full health since that has not been the case for one game all season. In the last week of the season, they beat the Grizz, Spurs, Warriors and Rockets. They may have been fighting for the 8th spot but they had the best 40 game stretch any 8th seed has ever seen. People forget that the Heat were 9-8 after their first 17 games. But they got to play those 17 games with the same roster in a row and continued after that. The Lakers did not have the same starting lineup for more than 7 games in a row for the entire season due to one guy coming off injury right when another goes on the IL. That messes with a teams chemistry especially since they were trying to incorporate guys like Nash and Howard.



as for the defense, they certainly have looked good in the playoffs. the spurs have a 107.2 offensive rating in two games compared to 108.3 for the regular season. the pace has been a bit slower hence the more drastic drop off in PPG for the spurs. it's been better though for sure.

Agreed. They have played better defense for the past 40 games. They went from being 25th in defensive efficiency to 20th. They got as high as 18 but I guess they regressed at the end of the season once Portland and the Warriors lit them up.

lakers fans can bash me for saying so, but i think the lakers are better defensively without kobe...but just slightly. all the on/off stats in the world suggest that too.

This is true. I dont know if Meeks is that much better of a defender than Bryant or the guys reacted to losing their best player by simply playing harder because they saw that they were going to struggle on offense.

DODGERS&LAKERS
04-25-2013, 11:04 PM
That's an idiotic comment.Can you prove that?
Kobe makes their offense much better,and their D much worse.

We have seen that all season long.
They were just not good enough to win playoff teams,let alone the best coached team in the league.

With Parker,Manu and Kobe at 100% this is a Spurs in 6 series at most.

Can we have Nash, Meeks, Blake, Hill, Jamison, Howard, World Peace and Gasol at 100% too? Because Nash should not be walking let alone playing. Meeks cant walk, Blake is done, Hill who is our best bench big just got 2 minutes after missing 60 games, Jamison needs surgery on his wrist, Howard still needs surgery on his labrum, Peace just has knee surgery 2 weeks ago, and Gasol is still having issues with his plantar fascia since missing the last two months.

Give us all that and Parker, Manu and Boris can all be 110%

ghettosean
04-26-2013, 12:08 AM
Can we have Nash, Meeks, Blake, Hill, Jamison, Howard, World Peace and Gasol at 100% too? Because Nash should not be walking let alone playing. Meeks cant walk, Blake is done, Hill who is our best bench big just got 2 minutes after missing 60 games, Jamison needs surgery on his wrist, Howard still needs surgery on his labrum, Peace just has knee surgery 2 weeks ago, and Gasol is still having issues with his plantar fascia since missing the last two months.

Give us all that and Parker, Manu and Boris can all be 110%

LOL... Damn when you put it like that I might have to swing towards the lakers....

Oh and your sig is wicked.. LOL

WARRIORS@GR
04-26-2013, 05:32 AM
Can we have Nash, Meeks, Blake, Hill, Jamison, Howard, World Peace and Gasol at 100% too? Because Nash should not be walking let alone playing. Meeks cant walk, Blake is done, Hill who is our best bench big just got 2 minutes after missing 60 games, Jamison needs surgery on his wrist, Howard still needs surgery on his labrum, Peace just has knee surgery 2 weeks ago, and Gasol is still having issues with his plantar fascia since missing the last two months.

Give us all that and Parker, Manu and Boris can all be 110%Well,the thread was about Kobe.
It was my bad i mentioned Parker and Manu,because they are actually playing now.

To the point,the Lakers we are watching right now,with Kobe healthy COULD make it an interesting series.

What he said in the post i quoted(that the Lakers would most probably win the series) is not true,and has no basis.

beliges
04-26-2013, 12:54 PM
That's an idiotic comment.Can you prove that?
Kobe makes their offense much better,and their D much worse.

We have seen that all season long.
They were just not good enough to win playoff teams,let alone the best coached team in the league.

With Parker,Manu and Kobe at 100% this is a Spurs in 6 series at most.

Can you prove otherwise? Kobe has owned the Spurs in the playoffs for the past decade. Call me crazy but if the Lakers added the best player on the floor between both teams to their roster, their chances of winning would be significantly higher. Clearly the Spurs have the much better team, but with Kobe, Lakers can clearly win that series and my money would be on the Lakers in that case. Unfortunately, Lakers dont have Kobe and they dont have much of a chance to win a game.

Sneaky
04-26-2013, 01:12 PM
I say one or two at most.

TornadoOfSouls
04-28-2013, 07:47 AM
it would be split 1-1 going back to LA.

How do you figure that, considering LA has been pathetic on the road all season. Hell, they've been pathetic against .500 opposition. Their late season sun was fool's gold since they feasted on mostly garbage teams. Their SRS was actually better at the start of the season.

TornadoOfSouls
04-28-2013, 07:52 AM
Can you prove otherwise?

Spurs are 3-0 against Kobe the past two years. One of them being a near 30 point blowout. Interestingly enough, the two times SA has lost to LA, these last two seasons, Kobe wasn't playing.


Kobe has owned the Spurs in the playoffs for the past decade.

Phil Jackson and Shaq aren't around to hold Kobe's hand anymore.

sventhedog
04-28-2013, 11:12 AM
no question they would've won a game or 2. but their defense is really bad so the spurs would still dissect them.

KnicksorBust
04-28-2013, 11:15 AM
Of course. They would have had a chance to win the series.

kdspurman
04-29-2013, 11:45 AM
Kobe & Pop-

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BJB3sppCQAASS_0.jpg:large

Tony_Starks
04-29-2013, 03:18 PM
Kobe gets you all your home wins and pushes it to 7 but they still lose.

Also for those keeping score Dwight took a total of 3 shots in the first half with no Kobe so what's the excuse now?

Mcdoh
04-29-2013, 03:46 PM
they can push it to game 7 but TP will still owned our pgs..

SportsFanatic10
04-29-2013, 03:48 PM
1 game max

amos1er
04-29-2013, 04:20 PM
For sure. Only time Kobe was ever swept was in 2011 and he was playing with no cartilage in his knees. That and Pau played like a complete vagina.

BHF
04-29-2013, 04:22 PM
Healthy Kobe I think it goes 7

healthy Kobe and healthy Stern and healthy Joe Crawford and it would have gone to game 7

He115ing
04-29-2013, 04:28 PM
would have won 1 or 2 games.

bucketss
04-29-2013, 04:49 PM
Can you prove otherwise? Kobe has owned the Spurs in the playoffs for the past decade. Call me crazy but if the Lakers added the best player on the floor between both teams to their roster, their chances of winning would be significantly higher. Clearly the Spurs have the much better team, but with Kobe, Lakers can clearly win that series and my money would be on the Lakers in that case. Unfortunately, Lakers dont have Kobe and they dont have much of a chance to win a game.

what a homer.

DumDum
04-29-2013, 07:06 PM
Not a one the spurs big 3 and Tracy McGrady please

c.c.
04-29-2013, 08:40 PM
No

dalton749
04-29-2013, 08:43 PM
nope

zn23
04-29-2013, 09:28 PM
Yea probably 1 game.

jerellh528
04-29-2013, 09:43 PM
They probably would have won the series. The lakers closed out the season as one of the hottest nba teams largely due to Kobe's stellar performances. There's no reason to believe he couldn't have translated that into postseason wins.

zn23
04-29-2013, 10:00 PM
They probably would have won the series. The lakers closed out the season as one of the hottest nba teams largely due to Kobe's stellar performances. There's no reason to believe he couldn't have translated that into postseason wins.

notsureifsrs

justinnum1
04-29-2013, 10:08 PM
no

jerellh528
04-29-2013, 10:22 PM
There's really no telling. But a top 5 player in the world can make a big difference in a series.

Hawkeye15
04-29-2013, 10:25 PM
They probably would have won the series. The lakers closed out the season as one of the hottest nba teams largely due to Kobe's stellar performances. There's no reason to believe he couldn't have translated that into postseason wins.

won the series? Cmon. Won a game, or maybe 2? Sure, who not.

Hawkeye15
04-29-2013, 10:26 PM
There's really no telling. But a top 5 player in the world can make a big difference in a series.

OKC is about to discover that

pedrofan45
04-29-2013, 10:59 PM
They'd win maybe 1 or 2 more

LakersIn5
04-29-2013, 11:27 PM
with a healthy kobe, dwight, nash, blake lakers would win

LakersIn5
04-29-2013, 11:35 PM
dwight got doubled and tripled team. with kobe in, the spurs wont be able to do that because the defense would focus on kobe. in the regular season the lakers lost game 1 by 2 without nash and blake. in game 2 lakers lost by 3 without dwight and pau so it wouldnt be a guaranteed win for the spurs in the PO. people would say its just the regular season. but the last 4 years the spurs have been more of a regular season team and slow down come playoff time compared to the regular season.

DumDum
04-29-2013, 11:37 PM
kobe would have scored 40 in two games but the lakers would still have been swept

cahawk
04-30-2013, 05:00 AM
Healthy Lakers with kobe would be swept 4-0.
And if he had played with the other 3 guards also being out, kobe would have averaged 30+ shots & shot well below 40%.
How do you think this superteam maybe the worst collapse in NBA history with kobe leading them?

cahawk
04-30-2013, 05:02 AM
Get Real....
Lakers with kobe would be swept 4-0.
It was kobe that led this laker superteam to a historic collapse.

kdspurman
04-30-2013, 08:09 AM
dwight got doubled and tripled team. with kobe in, the spurs wont be able to do that because the defense would focus on kobe. in the regular season the lakers lost game 1 by 2 without nash and blake. in game 2 lakers lost by 3 without dwight and pau so it wouldnt be a guaranteed win for the spurs in the PO. people would say its just the regular season. but the last 4 years the spurs have been more of a regular season team and slow down come playoff time compared to the regular season.

The Spurs were in the WCF finals last year..... & it was a disappointment. I'd say they got further than anyone thought. a pretty different team than the one that you saw lose against Memphis. Very different. You can't compare what they did in years past. The last 2 years, the Lakers lost in 5 and got swept in the 2nd round. What does that say? It wouldn't be fair to use that, cause there are different guys on the team now. (BTW, those regular season matchups dont tell the whole story)

Pop would adjust to having Kobe in there. He might even give him the "Amare" treatment and let him get his, and shut everyone else down. I think the Spurs win in 6 with Kobe there, just based off the Lakers struggles defensively. I have no doubt they'd score more, but the defense would still be an issue.

4milesperday
04-30-2013, 09:41 AM
Did the Lakers win games against good teams when Kobe was healthy? well, that's your answer...

gwrighter
04-30-2013, 11:09 AM
Yes. They would have won at least 1 game.

RaiderLakersA's
04-30-2013, 11:13 AM
There's really no telling. But a top 5 player in the world can make a big difference in a series.

This.

Whether people love or hate him, Kobe has to be accounted for at all times. There is no one else on the Lakers that wills the best effort from his team, while at the same time commanding the best effort from the opposing team.

Nash, when healthy, is the only one that comes close. But he wasn't healthy and even Nash would never veto D'Antoni's game plan the way Kobe would, if the situation called for it.

torocan
04-30-2013, 11:25 AM
No telling for sure, but even with Kobe I don't see how the Lakers stop the Spurs on the defensive end. Steal a game or two, maybe. Win the series? Long shot at best.

The Spurs are like a well oiled machine. Some games their ball movement is so amazing it's literally breath taking. Even their bench can be downright scary when they play their system.

Pops isn't considered by many to be the best coach in the NBA because his half time interviews...

pedrofan45
04-30-2013, 11:32 AM
The Lakers sucked this year with Kobe, this thread is going nowhere.

heyman321
04-30-2013, 03:41 PM
thye would have been swept worse cuase Kobe would have been something like 10-28 every game.

DumDum
04-30-2013, 03:43 PM
The Lakers sucked this year with Kobe, this thread is going nowhere.

& he's not in the top 30 active players anymore

DumDum
04-30-2013, 03:44 PM
There's really no telling. But a top 5 player in the world can make a big difference in a series.

he's no where near top 5 and everyone on PSD knows it

Sota4Ever
04-30-2013, 04:01 PM
& he's not in the top 30 active players anymore

I respect your trolling. Must have taken years to perfect it..

SportsFanatic10
04-30-2013, 04:02 PM
some of the lakers fan in here are hilarious, no they wouldn't of pushed it to 7, or won the series. that's crazy talk.

b@llhog24
04-30-2013, 04:02 PM
There's really no telling. But a top 5 player in the world can make a big difference in a series.

Who's that guy?

DumDum
04-30-2013, 04:04 PM
I respect your trolling. Must have taken years to perfect it..

I would take 30 names before I get to his but thats just me

Sota4Ever
04-30-2013, 08:16 PM
I would take 30 names before I get to his but thats just me

No you would not. No basketball fan would ever take 30 people over Kobe. Only person that would is a complete troll.

RapOZo
04-30-2013, 08:32 PM
Get Real....
Lakers with kobe would be swept 4-0.
It was kobe that led this laker superteam to a historic collapse.

Dude, Kobe wasn't playing and they just got swept, but you still use the blame-kobe garbage :confused:

DumDum
05-01-2013, 01:54 AM
No you would not. No basketball fan would ever take 30 people over Kobe. Only person that would is a complete troll.

I'm a fan of basketball and other sports I would take 30 Active players before I Scrape the bottom of the barrel with Colby

cahawk
05-01-2013, 09:57 AM
kobe is good but mainly an overhyped marketing tool.
Lakers with kobe would have been swept 4-0.
Only game lakers beat Spurs this year, kobe was out.

todu82
05-01-2013, 01:25 PM
They probably would of still lost the series but it would have went to 6 or 7 games.

TornadoOfSouls
05-01-2013, 07:24 PM
dwight got doubled and tripled team. with kobe in, the spurs wont be able to do that because the defense would focus on kobe. in the regular season the lakers lost game 1 by 2 without nash and blake. in game 2 lakers lost by 3 without dwight and pau so it wouldnt be a guaranteed win for the spurs in the PO. people would say its just the regular season. but the last 4 years the spurs have been more of a regular season team and slow down come playoff time compared to the regular season.

The Lakers were down 16 that second game for most of the fourth. They scored a lot of points in garbage time to make it a three point game but that game was never close.


And are we pretending the Spurs didn't have injuries during the regular season as well?

MISSED REGULAR SEASON GAMES 2012-13

Lakers:
Dwight Howard -- 06
Pau Gasol -- 33
Kobe Bryant -- 04
Steve Nash -- 32
TOTAL FOR LAKERS BIG FOUR = 75
LAL REGULAR SEASON RECORD = 45-37

Spurs:
Manu Ginobili = 22
Tony Parker = 16
Tim Duncan = 13
Kawhi Leonard = 24
TOTAL FOR SPURS BIG FOUR = 75
SAS REGULAR SEASON RECORD = 58-24

Difference between the Spurs and Lakers is that Spurs don't use injuries as an excuse and play through them. The Lakers fans, players, media went on and on about how the injuries are the reason why they weren't playing well. Those type of whiny teams never make it far(in fact the Lakers probably didn't deserve to make the playoffs considering the free throw discrepancy in their late season run)

mightybosstone
05-01-2013, 08:01 PM
I'd pretty comfortably say the Lakers would have one won game, possibly two with Bryant on the roster. But I do not think they could have stretched it to seven or had any legitimate chance to win the series.

lakerskbp24
05-01-2013, 08:18 PM
The Lakers were down 16 that second game for most of the fourth. They scored a lot of points in garbage time to make it a three point game but that game was never close.


And are we pretending the Spurs didn't have injuries during the regular season as well?

MISSED REGULAR SEASON GAMES 2012-13

Lakers:
Dwight Howard -- 06
Pau Gasol -- 33
Kobe Bryant -- 04
Steve Nash -- 32
TOTAL FOR LAKERS BIG FOUR = 75
LAL REGULAR SEASON RECORD = 45-37

Spurs:
Manu Ginobili = 22
Tony Parker = 16
Tim Duncan = 13
Kawhi Leonard = 24
TOTAL FOR SPURS BIG FOUR = 75
SAS REGULAR SEASON RECORD = 58-24

Difference between the Spurs and Lakers is that Spurs don't use injuries as an excuse and play through them. The Lakers fans, players, media went on and on about how the injuries are the reason why they weren't playing well. Those type of whiny teams never make it far(in fact the Lakers probably didn't deserve to make the playoffs considering the free throw discrepancy in their late season run)
That is not a fair comparison IMO. The Spurs have been together for a number of years. They know how to play with each other. The Lakers on the other hand, have never played together. They couldn't afford any injuries this year and unfortunately injuries came in bunches. For that reason, the Lakers never could really develop any kind of cohesiveness and team chemistry on the court. Simply put, it was a tough year.

AIRMAR72
05-02-2013, 01:49 PM
For sure. Only time Kobe was ever swept was in 2011 and he was playing with no cartilage in his knees. That and Pau played like a complete vagina.

back to back sweep(tornado style) for kobe and the lake show