PDA

View Full Version : Kings-Lakers game


MavsFanFinley
02-27-2004, 12:21 AM
Amazing how this Kings team continues to find ways to win without key players.

dirno2000
02-27-2004, 12:27 AM
It is amazing. Bibby turned into Mr Clutch again. He was busting Paytons ass i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif. You could see the fear in "The guard formerly known as the Gloves eyes after Bibby hit the first three and Payton knew he was going to shoot again. A truly entertaining game.

rakesh.s
02-27-2004, 01:02 AM
this really looks like sacramento's year..i'm not buying the whole "window of opportunity closed 2 years ago" argument

bibby was on fire..if that bibby shows up in the playoffs with a frontline of webber,miller and divac..look out..they may steamroll through the playoffs

WayOutWest
02-27-2004, 01:02 AM
Pretty embarrising game.

Lakers go into Sactown undermanned and get blown out by 20.
Kings go into Staples undermanned and pull out a 2 point win.

I wish I had tickets to that game so I could put my foot in Kobe's arse for that stupid last shot, then I'd put my other foot in PJ's arse for not letting Shaq TOUCH the ball on the last SIX strait possesions.

FreshJive
02-27-2004, 01:13 AM
Wasn't that Oop attempt one of the last six posessions? Shaq showed on those FT attempts why they can't go to Shaq at the end of the game. That last attempt was pathetic.

dirno2000
02-27-2004, 01:14 AM
Kobe definitely has a flair for the dramatic, but tonight he let it get the best of him. There was really no reason to go for the win. He had time to drive to the basket and possibly get a foul. Not going to get it shooting a three, even though he was fouled.

rakesh.s
02-27-2004, 01:14 AM
Originally posted by: FreshJive
Wasn't that Oop attempt one of the last six posessions? Shaq showed on those FT attempts why they can't go to Shaq at the end of the game. That last attempt was pathetic.

they're paying shaq $30 mill/year..i think it's about time that they feed him the ball and let him take the responsibility for the missed free throws if they lose the game

WayOutWest
02-27-2004, 01:25 AM
Originally posted by: rakesh.s

Originally posted by: FreshJive
Wasn't that Oop attempt one of the last six posessions? Shaq showed on those FT attempts why they can't go to Shaq at the end of the game. That last attempt was pathetic.

they're paying shaq $30 mill/year..i think it's about time that they feed him the ball and let him take the responsibility for the missed free throws if they lose the game

Totally agree, Shaq always boasts he makes them when they count!

FreshJive
02-27-2004, 01:37 AM
Originally posted by: rakesh.s

Originally posted by: FreshJive
Wasn't that Oop attempt one of the last six posessions? Shaq showed on those FT attempts why they can't go to Shaq at the end of the game. That last attempt was pathetic.

they're paying shaq $30 mill/year..i think it's about time that they feed him the ball and let him take the responsibility for the missed free throws if they lose the game

Unless they would rather win.

Shaq Attack2
02-27-2004, 03:21 AM
Unless they would rather win.


Yeah, just like 3 of the last 4 years. lol

Shaq shooting 12 times in a game where Miller and Webber don't play is totally, without a doubt, inexcusable.

Kobe ball hogged badly tonight. Thankfully he doesn't do so that often.

DubOverdose
02-27-2004, 07:57 AM
I'm happy the Kings pulled it off. Now the Mavs are ahead of the Lakers with more wins and the same amount of losses. The Spurs now also have 20 losses. This means, the 3rd spot in the West is up for grabs as far as I see it. Lakers, Spurs, and Mavs can't afford to lose right now. I see this game as a huge break for the Mavs. There's not much that could happen to bring the Kings or Timberwolves down, so I'm hoping those teams take down the rest of the West (minus the mavs). Back on subject of the game, I can't believe the Lakers didn't play harder in the last minute. Kobe made a horrible choice. They needed to use Shaq to pull a defender off of someone else so they could get an easy/uncontested shot.

stevie_franchise3
02-27-2004, 08:01 AM
Originally posted by: Shaq Attack2

Unless they would rather win.



Kobe ball hogged badly tonight. Thankfully he doesn't do so that often.

Yeah right.

Shaq Attack2
02-27-2004, 08:12 AM
Originally posted by: stevie_franchise3

Originally posted by: Shaq Attack2

Unless they would rather win.



Kobe ball hogged badly tonight. Thankfully he doesn't do so that often.

Yeah right.

You know you don't watch the Lakers, don't talk.

Murphy3
02-27-2004, 08:58 AM
This is great for the Mavs. The Mavs picked up games on the two teams that they have the best chance of passing last night.

Murphy3
02-27-2004, 09:07 AM
12 attempts for Shaq is totally inexcusable.

Shaq Attack2
02-27-2004, 10:57 AM
Originally posted by: Murphy3
12 attempts for Shaq is totally inexcusable.

Agreed. I feel like shooting Phil. Either him or Kobe.

Drbio
02-27-2004, 11:14 AM
Kobe was an embarassment. Ball Hog extroirdinaire. Is he playing himself into bad graces intentionally so his decision to leave after the season will be made for him?

What do you Lakers guys think?

WayOutWest
02-27-2004, 11:22 AM
Originally posted by: Drbio
Kobe was an embarassment. Ball Hog extroirdinaire. Is he playing himself into bad graces intentionally so his decision to leave after the season will be made for him?

What do you Lakers guys think?

I think Kobe is trying to assert himself now that he feels healthy. Kobe plays this poorly every now and then, he usually saves these type of selfish performances for the Spurs. On the other hand, throughout that game he didn't play that bad and I EXPECT him to dominate the ball and take the big shots in the 4th quarter just like he's done over the past 4 years, and we all know how the Lakers faired in 3 of those 4 years. My only complaint about Kobe last night was the last shot he took, he should have gone to the rim and played for OT. I'm alot more pissed at PJ for not getting the ball into Shaq. Teams cannot beat the Lakers by fouling Shaq if the keepts his FT's above 50% because jumpshooting teams will not shoot 50% or better in tight games very often so the numbers favor LA even with Shaq shooting like Shaq. On the flip side the Lakers where 2 for 6 (33%) from the field in the closing minutes, excluding that foul on Kobe by Christie under the Kings basket.

Just horrid execution in the closing minutes, something PJ's Lakers have always done well.

FreshJive
02-27-2004, 11:56 AM
Originally posted by: Shaq Attack2

Unless they would rather win.


Yeah, just like 3 of the last 4 years. lol

Shaq shooting 12 times in a game where Miller and Webber don't play is totally, without a doubt, inexcusable.

Kobe ball hogged badly tonight. Thankfully he doesn't do so that often.

Well, obviously Shaq should get more than 12 shots, but Shaq is not the clutchest of players. Going to a fifty percent FT shooter in the last couple of possessions is not that smart when you have Kobe, GP, and a healthy Malone on your team IMO. And while Kobe's shot was not the smartest of shots, it looked to me that it was the shot Phil asked for and Shaq was screening and dishing for.



Teams cannot beat the Lakers by fouling Shaq if the keepts his FT's above 50% because jumpshooting teams will not shoot 50% or better in tight games very often so the numbers favor LA even with Shaq shooting like Shaq.

It only takes 25% shooting to equal 50%ft shooting. And that's IF Shaq keeps his FT shooting above 50 %. It was obvious that Sac was not going to let Shaq get a makeable shot up at the end of the game.

LRB
02-27-2004, 12:19 PM
It only takes 25% shooting to equal 50%ft shooting. And that's IF Shaq keeps his FT shooting above 50 %. It was obvious that Sac was not going to let Shaq get a makeable shot up at the end of the game.


i/expressions/face-icon-small-confused.gif

Lets see 100 FG's = 200 FT's since if a 2pt shot is missed while the player shooting was fouled then 2 FT's are awarded for the 1 shot. Hence the 2 to 1 ratio of FT's to 2pt FG's.

So 100FG * 0.25 * 2 pts/FG = 50 pts
and 200 FT * 0.50 * 1 pts/FT = 100 pts

There for 25% shooting of 2pt FG's does not = 50% shooting on FT's.

Let's look at 3pt shooting versus FT shooting assuming that the FT's come before a shot so only 2 are awarded.

So 100 3FG * 0.25 * 3 pts/3FG = 75 pts.

So even if the other team was hitting 3's at a 25% clip they wouldn't come out ahead of their opponents hitting 50% of 2 FT's for every 3pt attempt.

FreshJive
02-27-2004, 12:56 PM
Yeah, if your going to cheat and use a 2 for 1( how it works in the real worldi/expressions/face-icon-small-blush.gif). My point was that in the last couple possessions I would rather have a fifty percent shot(or below) at two than a one hundred percent chance at 1. The FG percentage can even dip below the fifty percent (mabye not quite 25%), and it still seems like a better gamble to go for more the one pont since it is likely your opponent will score more than one point on thier possesions.

WayOutWest
02-27-2004, 01:05 PM
Originally posted by: LRB

It only takes 25% shooting to equal 50%ft shooting. And that's IF Shaq keeps his FT shooting above 50 %. It was obvious that Sac was not going to let Shaq get a makeable shot up at the end of the game.


i/expressions/face-icon-small-confused.gif

Lets see 100 FG's = 200 FT's since if a 2pt shot is missed while the player shooting was fouled then 2 FT's are awarded for the 1 shot. Hence the 2 to 1 ratio of FT's to 2pt FG's.

So 100FG * 0.25 * 2 pts/FG = 50 pts
and 200 FT * 0.50 * 1 pts/FT = 100 pts

There for 25% shooting of 2pt FG's does not = 50% shooting on FT's.

Let's look at 3pt shooting versus FT shooting assuming that the FT's come before a shot so only 2 are awarded.

So 100 3FG * 0.25 * 3 pts/3FG = 75 pts.

So even if the other team was hitting 3's at a 25% clip they wouldn't come out ahead of their opponents hitting 50% of 2 FT's for every 3pt attempt.

Thanks LRB, I've had that discussion over a 100 times, and I shoot at 100% clip in that debate. i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif

I love it when they pull out the "what if" card. What if Shaq misses two and the other team comes down and hits a 3. I could "what if" 10 points out of one missed FT by Shaq but that would be pointless, the only thing we can go by are stats in that regard.

Shaq shoots 50.7% from the line.

The best FG shooting team is the Wolves at 46.9%, so they can't beat Shaq, plus the Lakers hold teams to 44.4% from the field.

The best 3pt FG shooting team is the Kings at 41.1%, so if a team relied exclusively on the 3 pt shot (2002 Celtics), they could beat Shat at the FT but the Lakers hold teams to 33.7% so Shaq would squeek out a win there as well.

WayOutWest
02-27-2004, 01:08 PM
Originally posted by: FreshJive
Yeah, if your going to cheat and use a 2 for 1( how it works in the real worldi/expressions/face-icon-small-blush.gif). My point was that in the last couple possessions I would rather have a fifty percent shot(or below) at two than a one hundred percent chance at 1. The FG percentage can even dip below the fifty percent (mabye not quite 25%), and it still seems like a better gamble to go for more the one pont since it is likely your opponent will score more than one point on thier possesions.

Unfortunately that's not how the game works, not to mention a 50% shot at two points is the same as 100% shot at one point per possesion.

LRB
02-27-2004, 01:16 PM
Originally posted by: FreshJive
Yeah, if your going to cheat and use a 2 for 1( how it works in the real worldi/expressions/face-icon-small-blush.gif). My point was that in the last couple possessions I would rather have a fifty percent shot(or below) at two than a one hundred percent chance at 1. The FG percentage can even dip below the fifty percent (mabye not quite 25%), and it still seems like a better gamble to go for more the one pont since it is likely your opponent will score more than one point on thier possesions.

Fresh Jive it may seem like it's the better bet to go for the 49% 2pt shot over the 50% for 2 FT's, but it isn't. Over the course of 100 possesions if the percentages hold true, you will always come out better with the 50% FT for 2 shots. With percentages this close the side shooting 49% from 2pt land could luck out any given possesion, but the odds are definitely not in the favor of that happening.

LRB
02-27-2004, 01:20 PM
Originally posted by: WayOutWest

Originally posted by: FreshJive
Yeah, if your going to cheat and use a 2 for 1( how it works in the real worldi/expressions/face-icon-small-blush.gif). My point was that in the last couple possessions I would rather have a fifty percent shot(or below) at two than a one hundred percent chance at 1. The FG percentage can even dip below the fifty percent (mabye not quite 25%), and it still seems like a better gamble to go for more the one pont since it is likely your opponent will score more than one point on thier possesions.

Unfortunately that's not how the game works, not to mention a 50% shot at two points is the same as 100% shot at one point per possesion.

Even if it did, the odds would still favor take 1 point every possesion over anything less than 50% shooting from 2pt land. Compare 49% 2ptFG shooting to 1 point every possesion over 100 possesion. 100 shots * 0.49 * 2pts/shot = 98 pts is < 100 pts.

FreshJive
02-27-2004, 01:21 PM
Yes it's the same mathematically, but which one yields the highest reward? So you are saying that if your team only had one possesion left, and you knew the opponent would get one more possesion after you, then you would rather give Shaq a chance to hit two at the line then give Kobe a 50% chance at hitting a two or even better a shot at going to the line?

FreshJive
02-27-2004, 01:24 PM
Over the course of 100 possesions

Yeah I know but, Im talking about crunch time.

LRB
02-27-2004, 01:27 PM
Originally posted by: FreshJive
Yes it's the same mathematically, but which one yields the highest reward? So you are saying that if your team only had one possesion left, and you knew the opponent would get one more possesion after you, then you would rather give Shaq a chance to hit two at the line then give Kobe a 50% chance at hitting a two or even better a shot at going to the line?


If the score was tied and each team would get 1 possesion each and Kobe was routinely shooting 50.0% in that situation and Shaq was routinely shooting 50.7% in that situation and there were no other factors which might indicate that those percentages would change, then yes, I would rather have Shaq shooting the FT's because it would give me a slightly better chance to win.

LRB
02-27-2004, 01:29 PM
Originally posted by: FreshJive

Over the course of 100 possesions

Yeah I know but, Im talking about crunch time.


You still have a better chance in crunch time if the percentages for the players hold true. Now if Kobe shoots 65% in crunch time and Shaq shoots 45% from the line during crunch time, that means that the percentages aren't holding true.

FreshJive
02-27-2004, 01:47 PM
Percentages rarely hold true over a tiny sample of outcomes. I guess we just have different philosophies. I don't want to give the other team a good chance to beat me by hitting a fg.

Also, We know that if Shaq gets the ball it is pretty certain he is going to the line where he is likely to come away with one point. If Kobe has the ball there are three possible outcomes: he could miss a shot, he could make a shot , he could go to the line where he shoots in the 80-90 % range I would guess. This is in no way reflected in your percentage breakdowns.

WayOutWest
02-27-2004, 01:59 PM
Originally posted by: FreshJive
Percentages rarely hold true over a tiny sample of outcomes. I guess we just have different philosophies. I don't want to give the other team a good chance to beat me by hitting a fg.

Also, We know that if Shaq gets the ball it is pretty certain he is going to the line where he is likely to come away with one point. If Kobe has the ball there are three possible outcomes: he could miss a shot, he could make a shot , he could go to the line where he shoots in the 80-90 % range I would guess. This is in no way reflected in your percentage breakdowns.

Yes it does BECAUSE you have the same possible outcomes for Shaq BUT Shaq is MORE likely to make a basket than Kobe, Shaq is LESS likely to miss a shot than Kobe BUT Shaq is LESS likely to make a FT than Kobe. If I'm coaching the Lakers I put the ball in Shaq's hands based on your criteria.

EDIT: You basically can't argue this point unless you're going to play the "what if" card, in which case I could "what if" anywhere from 1 to a dozen points off one missed FT.

LRB
02-27-2004, 02:05 PM
Thanks Wow, the multiple possible outcomes need to be applied for both sides. But unless we can put hard mathimatical numbers to our chances, we are dealing with pure subjectiveness.

FreshJive
02-27-2004, 02:22 PM
I think it is more likely than not that the other team does not let Shaq get a high percentage shot off. Shaq's "make a field goal" outcome should be weighted differently than Kobe's. If Shaq gets the ball in the lane in a good position, the other team will foul him in most cases. This is especially true at the end of the game. Kobe will most likely be allowed to shoot unless he drives, and if he is fouled then that's even better. I believe that Kobe's points per posession would be higher than Shaq's in crunch time due to the strategy of the other team and Kobe's FT percentage.

LRB
02-27-2004, 02:38 PM
That's all subjective and depends on a lot of what ifs FreshJive. How about putting some numbers to therory. For example I don't think that teams would be much less or more likely to foul Shaq than on average. Remember most teams try to foul Shaq before the shot when Shaq has position during any situation. With the game tied, very few coaches would intentionally foul even a 50% FT shooter. Nellie would probably do that, but most wouldn't.

WayOutWest
02-27-2004, 02:41 PM
Originally posted by: LRB
That's all subjective and depends on a lot of what ifs FreshJive. How about putting some numbers to therory. For example I don't think that teams would be much less or more likely to foul Shaq than on average. Remember most teams try to foul Shaq before the shot when Shaq has position during any situation. With the game tied, very few coaches would intentionally foul even a 50% FT shooter. Nellie would probably do that, but most wouldn't.

Not to mention the off ball foul rule that you have to be careful of in the last two minutes. You have to wait for Shaq to catch the ball before you can foul him and at that point you greatly risk the and-one. Again, we're playing a game of what-ifs. Like what-if Kobe pulls up for a 3 pointer and gets fouled on the shot but no call from the refs and the Lakers lose the game.

LRB
02-27-2004, 02:56 PM
Good point Wow. The refs might also ignore any fouls until Shaq goes up for the shot. You have to really foul Shaq hard to absolutely prevent him from getting a shot off and then you risk a flagrant foul.

FreshJive
02-27-2004, 10:58 PM
Of course its subjective. There are too many variables for there to be a concrete correct answer. I find it hard to believe that most teams wouldn't foul Shaq when he is in position to make a shot that he is almost sure to make. Sac wasn't going for the block on that oop play. I think it's pretty subjective to suggest that the defensive player can't foul Shaq in a timely and effective manner.

Just as you guys think it would be a bad idea to just defensively give up an almost certain point from the ft line (per Shaq's percentage), I think it is a bad idea to only go for the likely one point offensively. Obviously Phil saw it the same way. And according to you Nellie might also think that (From your opinion of Nellie, LRB, I know that was a jabi/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif)

Fidel
02-28-2004, 12:48 AM
Sorry WOW and LRB I think you got it wrong here.

First the 100 possesions thing. We are comparing Shaq whos only shooting FTs vs. a team shooting 44% from the floor here right? So Shaq with his 50.7% FT shooting would score 101 points if he was sent to the line every time.

Now WOW you say that the Lakers are holding opponents to 44% shooting. Wich would mean out of 100 possesions theyd score 88 points (if all the shots were to be twos). But how do they do that, how do the Lakers hold opponents to 44%? By playing defense, which means contesting shots, which will lead to fouls in the process. So youd have to take a look at the points per shot stat against the Lakers too. Because thats where 3s and FTs come into play. You cant just go with your 44% shooting percentage, because without any defense and without any fouls the opposing team would probably shoot something like 70% from the floor, or maybe better (players like Dirk or Nash, which means good shooters, hit at an insanely high clip when there is no D and no contact at all, a la playing horse).

Now how many pps do the Lakers allow? 1.17. That means an opposing team would score 117 points average on 100 possesions. Which means the team will beat Shaq shooting FTs at a 50% clip, because Shaq shooting free throws only averages 1.01 pps, which is again good for 101 points. When comparing FT shooting to FG shooting you cant look at the percentage to determine points scored. Because some of the field goals will be and ones, some will be threes, some attempts will lead to just two (or three) FTs. Thats how it works. FTs are just that FTs, so you can calculate a players pps shot stat for FTs out of his FT percentage pretty easily. Its 1.01 for Shaq, which is by the way horrible.

This is why Hack a Shaq, or Hack a Bowen works. This is also why excessive hack a somebody tactics are only used on players shooting FTs in the 50-60% range or worse. Someone whos shooting over 60% will score 120 points with FTs on 100 possesions. Most teams are holding opponents between 1.15 and 1.20 pps, which means 115-120 points. So statisticly for these teams it doesnt make sense to "hack a someone" when hes shooting between 57 and 60% from the line (or better), depending on the team. For the Spurs hacking someone only makes sense statistically (and Im not speaking about the foul to stop the clock here, but about excessive hacking throughout the game, like discussed) if hes shooting worse the 54% from the line cause they hold opponents to 1.07 pps.

So again, to calculate the statistical production per 100 possesions in the theoretical case we are discussing you have to look at pps not shooting %. The FT situation might trick you into thinking that comparing percentages is enough, cause theres nothing else to FTs. But if you want to compare it with a teams production through FG attempts (like you did above WOW) you have to look at pps shot instaed of %. And that is for both FTs and FGs.

As for the last possesion. If it is guaranteed that Shaq goes to the line to shoot two he has a 50,7% chance to score 1 point. Hes got that chance twice which means his average pps stat in that situation is 1.01. Thats why he is fouled emediatly after touching the ball in that situation cause if he gets something going his normal pps stat is 1.57. Now compare it to Kobe. Hes shooting FTs at a 85% clip. So if youd play hack a Kobe and hed go to the line hed have a pps stat of 1.70 for the possesion (over the course of 100 possesions hed score 170 which is why youll never see Hack a Kobe throughout a game). So hell score 1.70 points on the possesion if he was fouled compared to 1.01 for Shaq if he was fouled. Most likely Kobe wont be fouled, at least not "hacked". Which brings us to his normal pps stat of 1.35. Thats the best the Lakers can go with for the last possesion in a tied game. Shaqs 1.57 pps shot dont come into play as he will be fouled imediatly. Kobes 1.70 pps shot on FTs dont come into play, at least the Lakers cant count on it. And Shaqs 1.01 pps shot on FTs are just horrible. If you look at the pps per shot stats for other Laker players the Lakers are better off giving the ball to allmost anyone except Shaq for the last possesion and thats what they usually do.

One last point. Why does Shaq get the ball at all then? Because he has an insanly high normal pps shot stat which kind of counters his pour FT shooting. And the opposing team cant foul him on every possesion cause thed run out of players pretty soon (I know thats also working against my point above, but WOW made the hypothesis about Shaq shooting FTs every possesion, in reality it cant happen, or the Lakers would lose nearly every game, except those where they hold opposing teams under 1.01 pps which seldomly happens). So Shaq will get his shots, and hell score at an insanly efficient rate. But he definitly cant beat anyone from the FT line and hes not a good option at all for the last possession of a game.

Fidel
02-29-2004, 06:19 PM
Well, no answer is still an answer.

MightyToine
02-29-2004, 09:30 PM
Originally posted by: Fidel


This is why Hack a Shaq, or Hack a Bowen works. This is also why excessive hack a somebody tactics are only used on players shooting FTs in the 50-60% range or worse.


That could've been a concern for US had Walker shown no signs of getting his s*** together at the Free-Throw line recently, don't you think? i/expressions/face-icon-small-happy.gif

WayOutWest
03-01-2004, 11:29 AM
Originally posted by: Fidel
Well, no answer is still an answer.

Fidel,

Missed this tread after a while, even after you sent me the message I didn't find it right away. I didn't follow your link cause when I do that through the messages it logs me out of the site.

Anyway....

Your analysis is solid except that you're talking about a normal game, when in fact Hack-a-Shaq changes the game completely. The Lakers biggest weakness, other than the pick and roll, has been transition defense. There will be fast break points because the Lakers defense will be set. The Lakers set D can be very good when they pay attention.

The Lakers don't play hack-a-whoever, rules change in the last two minutes and the game changes durring hack-a-Shaq. So how do you compare the time slice where the hack-a-Shaq is being played, the game is alot different then when your pps is being generated durring a normal game?

The simpliest and most direct comparrison is FG to FT% because your pps takes into account alot of other "what ifs", and-one's, offensive fouls, 3 PT shots etc... that are not being played out durring hack-a-Shaq time.

All that being said, I would play hack-a-whoever if I'm behind but would never consider it when I'm in the lead, that's so weak and embarrising. Hacking in a game not only gives you a chance to win via points scored, but it also extends the game and gives you more time to do something/anything.

LRB
03-01-2004, 11:52 AM
Fidel PPS is a very useful statistic because it helps show how much a player gets to the FT line. It does not equate exactly with points per possesion. A player on one possesion may shoot and miss with the other team getting the rebound. On the next possesion he shoots a 2pt. shot and make it and on the 3rd possession get fouled while missing and then make 2 FT's. So for 3 shots he's scored 4 points which would give him a PPS of 2.0. However his points per possesion would be 1.33. Since Kobe has a lot of possesions where he is fouled, misses the shot and gets FT's instead. Kobe also shoots FT's for technical fouls (which Shaq doesn't i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif ). Therefore Kobe's points per possesion would be less than the 1.35 PPS he has.

Now it is assumed that Shaq will be fouled without having a chance to make a shot from the field. That is not necessarily the case. Shaq would have an extreme advantage in the last 2 minutes because if the defense fouled him without the ball it would be the Lakers with 1 shot and the ball out of bounds. This means that Shaq would have a much easier time getting position than he normally does. If the opposing team double or triple teamed Shaq without the ball to negate position then that would leave one or more of his teammates wide open for a high percentage shot. So assuming that the opponents don't want to give the Lakers a totally wide open shot, Shaq would get the ball in excellent position and very close to the basket in all likelyhood. It's extremely hard to foul Shaq after he gets the ball and keep him from getting the shot off when Shaq immediately shoots after recieving the ball. Shaq is so strong that most fouls won't do much when he's very close to the basket. So I still feel that Shaq would have at least a decent chance of making the shot and then having around a 50% chance at a 3pt play.

As far as Kobe getting fouled, I feel that he would have much less chance than normal. Refs are reluctant to call fouls in end of game situations. Usually the foul has to be pretty blatant. The other team would especially try not to foul a jump shooter. They would focus on taking the drive away and making Kobe shoot, where he's making only around 44% from the field.

Even if the team is assumed to be smart enough to always foul Shaq, it should be assumed that they would be smart enough not to foul Kobe. Kobe shoots much lower from the field than Shaq does from the Line. Also with a 50.7% FT shooter there is a better than 75% chance that the Lakers will score at least 1 point. This may look like this is less than the 1.17 PPS the Lakers allow, but that isn't points per possession. Also the Lakers will be playing much harder on D for the final possession than through out the game. I wouldn't be surprised if their opponents average less than 1 pt per possesion in close games in the final 2 minutes when the Lakers lead by less than 2 pts. The other team would have the game clock on their back as well.

So, I'll definitely stick with my original opinion that I'd have gone to Shaq as the primary option.