When the Lakers lost to the Celtics in the 2008 NBA Finals, the refrain began.  It picked up speed all off-season, and eventually took on a life of its own.  That refrain stated: The Lakers would have won the title last season if Andrew Bynum weren't hurt, and with his return this season the Lakers would reach the promised land.  I was skeptical.  When Bynum got injured again, I had a long argument with my friend Cole about whether or not the Lakers would lose more without Bynum.  I said that they would be just as good in the regular season, but Cole disagreed with me.

Well, yesterday Nuggets Coach George Karl raised that same question on the national stage.  "Don't you have to make the statement that maybe they're (the Lakers) better without Bynum?" Karl asked reporters on Thursday.  He later added, "Why do we always say Bynum? How many games has he played for this team? I like Bynum. I think he's a great player. But sometimes you can have too much talent out there and it can kind of be confusing."

I think Karl's point is well received.  Bynum is clearly a great talent, and when he's on the court his production just keeps getting better.  Bynum measures well in most of the advanced stats that measure personal production: his PER of 20.0 is third on the Lakers (just behind Kobe Bryant and Pau Gasol), and he is second on the team in offensive rating (Gasol) while leading the normal starters in defensive rating.  

The problem is that while Bynum is individually effective, his impact on the team hasn't been quite as strong as that of the man he forced to the bench: Lamar Odom.  While Bynum barely breaks even in the on-court/off-court +/- measure (+0.2), Odom leads the Lakers with a +14.2 mark despite having lower ratings in the individual box score stats like PER or Wins Produced.  How could this be?

My take is that for Bynum to be at his best, he needs the team to play a certain way.  His offensive forte is scoring on the block and his defensive forte is clogging the paint, both of which require more traditional half-court sets that rely upon Bynum.  When Odom is in there, on the other hand, his strengths on offense are passing and ball-handling while on  defense he has the speed and versatility to guard any frontcourt player while dominating the glass.  In other words, for Bynum to thrive the Lakers have to play to his skill set.  When Odom is in there, his skillset allows the Lakers to play to the strengths of Bryant and Gasol, both of whom are better than Bynum.

Now, I don't want to take over-analysis too far.  Obviously the Lakers are better off with Bynum available, especially in the postseason where his style of play is more conducive to wins anyway against physical teams.  But I also don't think it's coincidence that since Gasol was traded to the team, the Lakers' record is just as good (34 - 6) with Gasol and Odom but no Bynum as it was with Bynum as the starter this year (37 - 9).  Bynum may help them get over the hump in the playoffs against bruising squads like the Celtics or Cavs, but up until then I think the Lakers have shown over a large sample size that they don't need him to dominate the league.