2001 Lakers vs Current Warriors

tlance · Dec 16, 2018

trojanfan12 said:
In 2001 he did.

Not even bothering to read the rest. Sorry, but you're better than this. The Lakers had good perimeter defenders, starting with Kobe. You seem to have ignored that.

And you do realize that PJ was a pretty average X and O guy, right?

He had assistants running both his offense and his defense. He was a big picture coach and a genius at getting great players to buy into working together. He was not an X and O guy.

trojanfan12 · Dec 16, 2018

tlance said:
And you do realize that PJ was a pretty average X and O guy, right?

He had assistants running both his offense and his defense. He was a big picture coach and a genius at getting great players to buy into working together. He was not an X and O guy.

Then his assistants would have figured something out. He was always smart enough to have top assistants.

Hornsstampede2.0 · Dec 16, 2018

Depends on how much In-N-Out Burger Shaq was eating that year.

1) In shape Shaq, the Lakers win by 20 in 4 straight

2) Semi-Fat Shaq still wins in 4 games with a few close wins

3) Fat Shaq wins in 6 games

4) Huffing and Puffing Morbidly obese Shaq loses in 7 games

The Early 2000s Shaq was the greatest player in NBA history when motivated and in shape.
Sadly he was only motivated and in shape about 1% of the time.

msgkings322 · Dec 17, 2018

Hornsstampede2.0 said:
The Early 2000s Shaq was the greatest player in NBA history when motivated and in shape.
Sadly he was only motivated and in shape about 1% of the time.

This is a bit much, man.

What 1% of the time was it, that's like 3 games in 3 years.

DJ · Dec 17, 2018

ChiefsLakers67 said:
I mean, if Hassan Whiteside can humiliate Tristan Thompson imagine what Shaq woulda done...

This.

Shaqdaddy11 · Dec 17, 2018

Hornsstampede2.0 said:
The Early 2000s Shaq was the greatest player in NBA history when motivated and in shape.

That's exactly right. Shaq between 2000 and 2002 is arguable to best and most dominant player the league as ever seen.

Lakers+USC=#1 · Dec 17, 2018

tlance said:
That is true.

But Shaq wasn't exactly known for his conditioning. And Phil wasn't known for in game adjustments.

Of course the Lakers would be looking to impose their pace. But, in all honesty it is a lot easier for the Warriors to impose theirs. And if they get Shaq in foul trouble, it is game over.

And if the Warriors aren't hitting 3's, then they have no chance what so ever.

CitySushi · Dec 17, 2018

O/U 5 possessions before Shaq stops running back on defense to only play offense.

Pace is very important when considering these drafts as well. Shaq would absolutely dominate the paint, but he also has to run with the Warriors too.

IMO the biggest thing that would factor in this match up is whether or not you're using the new defensive 3 second rule or if illegal defense is being called. If illegal defense is being called, the Warriors have no shot to win. Their defense, switching and rotations are all predicated on being able to hedge without over commitment of the double team.

Rules factor is the biggest deal here.

jontaejones · Dec 17, 2018

Those Lakers played in one of the weakest eras in NBA history.

Case in point, the next year, the NJ Nets made the NBA finals.

And I actually thought we had a chance to beat them. One of the best teams of all time? Hardly.

If you need more convincing, go back on Youtube and watch the 2001 NBA Finals just to see how limited that Sixers team was.

trojanfan12 · Dec 17, 2018

Hornsstampede2.0 said:
Depends on how much In-N-Out Burger Shaq was eating that year.

1) In shape Shaq, the Lakers win by 20 in 4 straight

2) Semi-Fat Shaq still wins in 4 games with a few close wins

3) Fat Shaq wins in 6 games

4) Huffing and Puffing Morbidly obese Shaq loses in 7 games

The Early 2000s Shaq was the greatest player in NBA history when motivated and in shape.

Shanemansj13 · Dec 18, 2018

Hornsstampede2.0 said:
Depends on how much In-N-Out Burger Shaq was eating that year.

1) In shape Shaq, the Lakers win by 20 in 4 straight

2) Semi-Fat Shaq still wins in 4 games with a few close wins

3) Fat Shaq wins in 6 games

4) Huffing and Puffing Morbidly obese Shaq loses in 7 games

The Early 2000s Shaq was the greatest player in NBA history when motivated and in shape.
Sadly he was only motivated and in shape about 1% of the time.

Well that's the reason why he is the 4th greatest center of all-time.
1a. Kareem
1b. Hakeem
2. Wilt
3. Shaq

tlance · Dec 19, 2018

jontaejones said:
Those Lakers played in one of the weakest eras in NBA history.

Case in point, the next year, the NJ Nets made the NBA finals.

And I actually thought we had a chance to beat them. One of the best teams of all time? Hardly.

If you need more convincing, go back on Youtube and watch the 2001 NBA Finals just to see how limited that Sixers team was.

Agree 100%.

Shaq and Kobe were great. Really great.

But the 2001 Lakers team was very overrated historically.

The Oldtimer · Dec 19, 2018

Shanemansj13 said:
Well that's the reason why he is the 4th greatest center of all-time.
1a. Kareem
1b. Hakeem
2. Wilt
3. Shaq

Bill Russell says hi.

msgkings322 · Dec 19, 2018

The Oldtimer said:
Bill Russell says hi.

Hey Bill, good to see ya! How are things? So, what can we help you with?

tlance · Dec 20, 2018

The Oldtimer said:
Bill Russell says hi.

Bill Russell was a great winner. The kind of competitor you want on your team.

But he isn't as good as those guys. Not even close.

jontaejones · Dec 20, 2018

tlance said:
Agree 100%.

Shaq and Kobe were great. Really great.

But the 2001 Lakers team was very overrated historically.

Agree.

The Warriors would just prey on the weak links on the team.

Shaq and Koke would keep them in games, but I'd say (neglecting the difference in eras, which is hard to do), Warriors in 6.

The Q · Dec 20, 2018

tlance said:
Nobody ever made him guard the perimeter either.

At least not the way modern teams do.

Sabonis and divac are the closest

tlance · Dec 20, 2018

The Q said:
Sabonis and divac are the closest

Very true.

And, the Lakers had a tough time with those teams. And neither was "great".

The Q · Dec 20, 2018

tlance said:
Very true.

And, the Lakers had a tough time with those teams. And neither was "great".

The Kings were very deep. They had a lot of talent.

The Blazers were able to take advantage of PF a lot in that 2000 series (no Grant). I'm pretty sure they destroyed the 2001 Blazers.

tlance · Dec 20, 2018

The Q said:
The Kings were very deep. They had a lot of talent.

The Blazers were able to take advantage of PF a lot in that 2000 series (no Grant). I'm pretty sure they destroyed the 2001 Blazers.

They were both good teams.

But as I know you are aware, saying a team is "deep" is another way of saying they lack star power. Webber was probably a top 5 player during that time frame. The early Kings had many other good players like Divac, Peja, Bobby Jackson, Christie, Pollard and the talented but highly overrated White Chocolate.

The 2001 Kings weren't really anything special. The '03 version with Bibby was much better. Even they were just good, not great.

2001 Lakers vs Current Warriors

Kyrie Hater

R.I.P. Robotic Dreams. Fight On!

Guy Who Never Responds

Throbbing Member

Generic line for rent here

MVP

Fuck CBS

Andrew Wiggin's burner account

Well-Known Member

R.I.P. Robotic Dreams. Fight On!

Finger Poppin Dat Pussy

Kyrie Hater

Older than dirt!!

Throbbing Member

Kyrie Hater

Well-Known Member

Hoop’s Villain, Reality’s Hero

Kyrie Hater

Hoop’s Villain, Reality’s Hero

Kyrie Hater

Similar threads