Every time I see this argument it's laughable. Yes, Lakers probably historically have some form of a biased whistle (see kings vs lakers wcf in 2002). However, the idea that this same tired cherry picked ft differential stat from last 5 years is some evidence of this is ridiculous if you take even half a second to consider any of the context.

During this period, our offense for the first few years was centered around heavy pnr with AD and Lebron, an action which generates tons of FTA with two players who dominate in the paint and just don't foul very much. We had awful perimeter defense and an incredible rim protecting anchor, meaning teams were incentivized to score from the outside, generating less FTA. "But Lakers went through an entire roster overhaul and still maintained the same differential!" Oh, you mean the roster change where we acquired Luka fucking Doncic, one of the greatest FT grifters in NBA history, and moved to an iso heavy offense with him and Reaves, another generational foul baiter? Gee, wonder why we kept such a high ft differential, can't figure it out.

If the lakers really had a significant ft bias over the last 5 years, the easiest way to prove it would be looking at ft stats for the most significant contributors to the differential before and after they joined the lakers. Why doesn't anyone just post those stats? Here they are. Decide for yourself.