The Lakers have won the last two games in impressive fashion without their consensus top overall player and won last night against a top team, in the form of the Spurs, without two top players.
The victories were highlighted by great performance in particular from Lamar Odom and Ron Artest. Last night Andrew Bynum also missed the game, but the Lakers have proven they can win without him (they made the finals two years ago without him at all, and won it all last year with a banged up version). However, the Lakers are now “proving” they can win without Kobe Bryant as well, and they have done so against two tough opponents (the Blazers in Portland and a healthy Spurs team). All of this begs the question… Do the Lakers need Kobe anymore?
Two games is hardly enough of a sample size to make a full judgement, especially when teams are potentially letting their guard down thinking, oh Kobe is out we will have an easy time tonight. The Lakers as a whole (and Lamar and Artest in particular) also come out to play with full focus when Kobe is out. Everyone is sharper and everyone plays their role to the max, knowing that Kobe will not be there to bail them out. Ultimately the best example of what the Lakers would be like without Kobe is the 1993-94 Bulls after Jordan first retired. Those Bulls played with focus and obviously had talent. They won 50 games, but flamed out in the playoffs, where the stakes are high and everyone is focused, without the talents of number 23 to win some games.
Do the Lakers need Kobe? Absolutely.
{ 1 comment… read it below or add one }
3 games in a row now. Quick edit: They won it all without Bynum last year, not a banged up version.
You must log in to post a comment.