72 Suburbs in Search of a City: Anthony Davis to Los Angeles Lakers

Silverdude2167

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 9, 2006
2,899
NYC
I guess this is the Lakers 2019-20 thread.

What are the odds that Rondo broke his thumb with a hammer to get out of staying at his version of a "Motel 6"?
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
24,354
They don't really need a point guard with Lebron there, but losing both Rondo and Bradley does bite into the depth and the ability to defend PGs quite a bit. Can they still add a FA PG?
 

Smokey Joe

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 9, 2001
607
Rondo could return for the second round of playoffs. Under those circumstances, it seems unlikely that they would allow them to add a player. OTOH, who the heck knows?
 

InstaFace

MDLzera
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
14,995
Pittsburgh, PA
Personally, I'd have no problem with any team adding a player to their roster who's returning for injury, as long as they follow sufficient quarantining. These playoffs need all the integrity they can get, the fewer times you semi-arbitrarily exclude someone who would have been included in normal times, the better.
 

bbc23

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2009
881
They don't really need a point guard with Lebron there, but losing both Rondo and Bradley does bite into the depth and the ability to defend PGs quite a bit. Can they still add a FA PG?
Losing Rondo helps their ability to defend point guards.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
24,354
Losing Rondo helps their ability to defend point guards.
Not if some of those minutes float to JR Smith it doesn't. Rondo is not a great defender but let's not forget it is about alternatives, not whether the incumbent is great.
 

bbc23

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2009
881
Not if some of those minutes float to JR Smith it doesn't. Rondo is not a great defender but let's not forget it is about alternatives, not whether the incumbent is great.
He is quite literally the worst player in the league that was getting significant minutes by a ton of metrics, period. Brian Windhorst would be a better defender. Smith won't be called on to defend PGs (he'd still be better than Rondo though by default, that is how bad Rondo is). That'll fall on KCP, Caruso, Waiters, and a bit of Horton-Tucker presumably during the seeding games.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
24,354
He is quite literally the worst player in the league that was getting significant minutes by a ton of metrics, period. Brian Windhorst would be a better defender. Smith won't be called on to defend PGs (he'd still be better than Rondo though by default, that is how bad Rondo is). That'll fall on KCP, Caruso, Waiters, and a bit of Horton-Tucker presumably during the seeding games.
As I said, the point isn't that he's a great defender---it is that their alternatives are terrible overall. JR Smith is a much worse defender (as is Brian Windhorst). And JR Smith may we’ll end up with some of those minutes. KCP is already a full time player—he isn’t making up those minutes (and is weaker on PGs than others anyway). Caruso is limited and likely to be exposed more in more minutes. Waiters is terrible—worse in ball than Rondo.

I have been posting about analytics on this board for more than 15 years and I assure you one learning is that they are valuable but imperfect—especially when applied without context. I don't think Rondo is a great defensive player, but assuming that you can replace him with JAGs or crappy shooting guards from the FA pool and not lose something is mistaken most of the time.
 
Last edited:

slamminsammya

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
3,991
Palo Alto
He is quite literally the worst player in the league that was getting significant minutes by a ton of metrics, period. Brian Windhorst would be a better defender. Smith won't be called on to defend PGs (he'd still be better than Rondo though by default, that is how bad Rondo is). That'll fall on KCP, Caruso, Waiters, and a bit of Horton-Tucker presumably during the seeding games.
Which metrics?
 

bbc23

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 6, 2009
881
Which metrics?
Alright so we've got 238th in real +/-
In the 400s in PIPM
-5 Net RTG on the 2nd best regular season team in the league (by far the worst of any of the Lakers that played regularly)
So he played ~10 mpg with Lebron, 12 without. With LeBron their net was +3 (not exactly good for a Bron lineup), without he was a -5.5. In those minutes without LeBron, it was a race to see how quickly they'd be able to lose their lead in the last 3 minutes of the 1st quarter, where the majority of the Rondo on/Bron out minutes came.
These are the most damning ones

As I said, the point isn't that he's a great defender---it is that their alternatives are terrible overall. JR Smith is a much worse defender (as is Brian Windhorst). And JR Smith may we’ll end up with some of those minutes. KCP is already a full time player—he isn’t making up those minutes (and is weaker on PGs than others anyway). Caruso is limited and likely to be exposed more in more minutes. Waiters is terrible—worse in ball than Rondo.

I have been posting about analytics on this board for more than 15 years and I assure you one learning is that they are valuable but imperfect—especially when applied without context. I don't think Rondo is a great defensive player, but assuming that you can replace him with JAGs or crappy shooting guards from the FA pool and not lose something is mistaken most of the time.
Caruso may be limited but by being a decent man defender and very good help defender he's leagues ahead of Rondo. Where the Lakers are "hurt" is that LeBron is forced to bring the ball up more, but when Rondo is in he dribbles the air out of the ball on offense anyways neutering the offense. So the biggest asset Rondo provides is "can bring the ball up and set the offense" which generally goes poorly anyways as he'll just kill a good 15 seconds a good portion of the time anyways. Also, after starting out 26/52 from 3 to begin the season he ended up at 32%, which as I'm sure you're aware is with teams playing heavily off of him giving him a much higher percentage of wide open 3s than the average. There's also the fact that he's terrified to go to the free throw line/assist hunts so he does fuck all when he actually gets into the lane. With LeBron taking a heavier burden in the playoffs anyways (he probably goes up to his usual 40 minutes or so when the games start to matter) you're missing a player who can't shoot, can't defend, and doesn't move the ball in a LeBron led team which is beyond useless. I would be more than happy to provide clips showing off how worthless of a player he is if we've gone past the advanced stats part. Maybe he'll be more useful as a functional assistant coach with the claims everyone makes of how smart he is. I don't necessarily agree with the how much higher the Lakers odds get, but there's a reason betting sites like Sportsline have raised the Lakers odds of winning it all by a ton because of him being out.
 

slamminsammya

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
3,991
Palo Alto
Alright so we've got 238th in real +/-
In the 400s in PIPM
-5 Net RTG on the 2nd best regular season team in the league (by far the worst of any of the Lakers that played regularly)
So he played ~10 mpg with Lebron, 12 without. With LeBron their net was +3 (not exactly good for a Bron lineup), without he was a -5.5. In those minutes without LeBron, it was a race to see how quickly they'd be able to lose their lead in the last 3 minutes of the 1st quarter, where the majority of the Rondo on/Bron out minutes came.
These are the most damning ones


Caruso may be limited but by being a decent man defender and very good help defender he's leagues ahead of Rondo. Where the Lakers are "hurt" is that LeBron is forced to bring the ball up more, but when Rondo is in he dribbles the air out of the ball on offense anyways neutering the offense. So the biggest asset Rondo provides is "can bring the ball up and set the offense" which generally goes poorly anyways as he'll just kill a good 15 seconds a good portion of the time anyways. Also, after starting out 26/52 from 3 to begin the season he ended up at 32%, which as I'm sure you're aware is with teams playing heavily off of him giving him a much higher percentage of wide open 3s than the average. There's also the fact that he's terrified to go to the free throw line/assist hunts so he does fuck all when he actually gets into the lane. With LeBron taking a heavier burden in the playoffs anyways (he probably goes up to his usual 40 minutes or so when the games start to matter) you're missing a player who can't shoot, can't defend, and doesn't move the ball in a LeBron led team which is beyond useless. I would be more than happy to provide clips showing off how worthless of a player he is if we've gone past the advanced stats part. Maybe he'll be more useful as a functional assistant coach with the claims everyone makes of how smart he is. I don't necessarily agree with the how much higher the Lakers odds get, but there's a reason betting sites like Sportsline have raised the Lakers odds of winning it all by a ton because of him being out.
Your original post said he was "quite literally" the worst player with big minutes and neither RPM nor PIPM bear this out. RPM he is middle of the pack, even after filtering by minutes. PIPM he is near the bottom but not even close to "literally" the worst. Forgetting the rankings, the actual numerical difference of his PIPM and the worst 5 or so players is a very large gap.

I agree 2020 Rondo isn't a great player but this is pretty overblown. Worst player in the league? I don't think its particularly close.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
24,354
I am sure someone can find clips showing Rondo isn't a good (or very diligent) defender. If you find a basis for saying they are better off with JR Smith, Waiters, or Brian Windhorst taking those minutes defensively that would be interesting. But I think the reality is that this is an example of taking a super simple view of "hey, I looked up this number" combined with "let me make a really broad statement to have a take" and not actually being supportable. We should be better than that around here.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
19,084
Nice bump. Forgot this thread existed. Gonna have to scroll through this one.

Playoff Rondo makes this team go. That’s all I got.
 

Sam Ray Not

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
7,084
NYC
“No drama” = “winning games and now presumptive title favorites.”

Please, Denver, Miami or Boston: knock these a-holes out.
 

Gunfighter 09

wants to be caribou ken
Staff member
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2005
7,895
KPWT
“No drama” = “winning games and now presumptive title favorites.”

Please, Denver, Miami or Boston: knock these a-holes out.

You should feel better knowing that every Laker fan alive is rooting hard for the Celtics to come back on the other side.
 

McBride11

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
15,710
Charleston, SC
No drama is LbJ whining about not winning MVP.


"It pissed me off," James told reportersafter his Game 1 victory. "That's my true answer. It pissed me off because out of 101 votes I got 16 first-place votes. That's what pissed me off more than anything. I'm not saying that the winner wasn't deserving of the MVP, but that pissed me off. I finished second a lot in my career, either from a championship, and now four times as the MVP


 

Buster Olney the Lonely

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2006
3,554
Atlanta, GA
I really have no issue with that. I think he has a right to be pissed off because probably should have more than four. At some point the writers decide that you have enough and they stop voting for you. Happened to Jordan too.
 

johnmd20

figuratively like ebola
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
46,024
New York City
I really have no issue with that. I think he has a right to be pissed off because probably should have more than four. At some point the writers decide that you have enough and they stop voting for you. Happened to Jordan too.
Belichick, too. And it's ridiculous. Lebron should have 8 MVPs. Belichick should have 10 coach of the year awards. Bruce Arians has ONE less coach of the year award than Belichick. Bruce Fucking Arians.

Needless to say, these systems are broken because they are aligned against sustained success.
 

BaseballJones

goalpost mover
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
10,254
Belichick, too. And it's ridiculous. Lebron should have 8 MVPs. Belichick should have 10 coach of the year awards. Bruce Arians has ONE less coach of the year award than Belichick. Bruce Fucking Arians.

Needless to say, these systems are broken because they are aligned against sustained success.
Yep. 100%. Honestly, what year between 1987-88 to 1992-93, and then 1995-96 to 1997-98 was Jordan not the best and most valuable player in all of the NBA? Answer: None. He should have had 9 MVPs. Maybe as many as 10.
 

johnmd20

figuratively like ebola
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
46,024
New York City
Yep. 100%. Honestly, what year between 1987-88 to 1992-93, and then 1995-96 to 1997-98 was Jordan not the best and most valuable player in all of the NBA? Answer: None. He should have had 9 MVPs. Maybe as many as 10.
I do not disagree at all. It is pretty sad that the best ever are generally so incredible people get bored of it.

The Belichick thing really pisses me off. That is nonsense.
 

Tony C

Dope
Dope
Apr 13, 2000
12,655
Never thought of the Belichick analogy, but it's spot-on. It really is an indictment of sports media that there's this pattern, from Jordan to BB to LeBron -- chasing the shiny new thing. That said, in the NBA part of is that it makes no sense to have the criteria be so focused on the regular season. I don't really see it with any of the leagues, but at least with MLB and the NFL the regular season is a much greater part of the whole. But the NBA is really about passing a low bar into the playoffs -- the regular season is just a prelude. The playoffs are when greatness (or "value") shines and really needs to be part of the award. In MLB given the nature of the game if you include the playoffs you might be more likely to end up not giving a guy like Mike Trout his due. Not his fault his supporting cast sucks. But what MVP in the NBA isn't on a team that doesn't make the playoffs? The last time was in the mid-70s with Kareem (when fewer teams made the playoffs).

I have no problem with someone comparing Giannis and LeBron's regular seasons and giving Giannis the nod. But the playoffs make clear he's not of the same stature, and by a pretty considerable degree.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
13,272
Anyone who thinks LeBron should have like, 10 MVPs doesn’t understand what the award is for.
 

McBride11

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
15,710
Charleston, SC
Belichick, too. And it's ridiculous. Lebron should have 8 MVPs. Belichick should have 10 coach of the year awards. Bruce Arians has ONE less coach of the year award than Belichick. Bruce Fucking Arians.

Needless to say, these systems are broken because they are aligned against sustained success.
BB doesn’t whine about it though.
Clearly MvP has some vague criteria. This discussion has gone in circles on SoSH.

“valuable’ is ill defined

It isn’t best player or best coach right? Trout should have the last 6 MLB mvps (ok not 2018)
Or is it? If the best player is carrying their team shouldnt that mean something? How many more games do the Angels lose without Trout?
How about prime Pedro not getting MVp?

Maybe make a best player and mvp award


But LBJ whining (right or not) in that manner is pretty lame.
 

TheRooster

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2001
2,327
I have no problem with someone comparing Giannis and LeBron's regular seasons and giving Giannis the nod. But the playoffs make clear he's not of the same stature, and by a pretty considerable degree.
Serious question: if AD and Lopez switch teams, are the same teams playing/watching?
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
19,084
BB doesn’t whine about it though.
Clearly MvP has some vague criteria. This discussion has gone in circles on SoSH.

“valuable’ is ill defined

It isn’t best player or best coach right? Trout should have the last 6 MLB mvps (ok not 2018)
Or is it? If the best player is carrying their team shouldnt that mean something? How many more games do the Angels lose without Trout?
How about prime Pedro not getting MVp?

Maybe make a best player and mvp award


But LBJ whining (right or not) in that manner is pretty lame.
The Mike Trout comp doesn’t fly because when Trout is .500 with bad teammates there was LeBron winning 65 games with Antawn Jamison, Mo Williams and Delonte West starting with him.

Whether it’s the best player or the player most valuable to his team.....LeBron should have a dozen accumulated by now. I can make a case for LeBron or Giannis in this years regular season but I certainly can’t criticize LeBron for using the slight as more fuel on his way to another championship.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
13,272
He at least should have won over D Rose in 2010 and probably over Kobe in 2008.
I've said many times that the D-Rose pick was a crime scene, and I agree 2008 is interesting. There are years that LeBron did not win the MVP that I think that he should have won. However, there seems to be a disconnect with some people who think that because LeBron has been the best basketball player for the last 15 years, that means that logically he should be the MVP every season, and every year he was not, it was some sort of disaster and only took place because the media didn't want to vote for him again.

The MVP is not an award for "Who would you want to have in Game 7 of a Playoff Game?" it is "Who was the best player throughout this particular regular season?". Maybe the former question is a better way to asses true value, but the latter is the methodology used when it comes to voting for the MVP. LeBron has easily been the best overall player from the last ten years, but often times throughout the regular season he was not the best player night-in-and-night-out.

Let's look at this season. Per 36 minutes, this is how Giannis and LeBron compare.

Giannis: 35-16-6, 55% shooting, 61% True Shooting, 30% from Three, 63% from the line, 11 FTA per game, 4 Turnovers per game
LeBron: 26-8-10, 49% shooting, 57% True Shooting, 34% from Three, 69% from the line, 6 FTA per game, 4 Turnovers per game

So outside of LeBron being a bit better three point shooter and FT shooter (but still below average) and LeBron having superior assist numbers, Giannis had clearly better stats than LeBron during the regular season. He was also a much, much better defender than LeBron, as evidenced by his worthy DPOY win. He beats LeBron in every worthy advanced metric, PER, OWS, DWS, WS/48, OBPM, DBPM, BPM, VORP, etc. His team was more successful throughout the regular season as evidenced not only by their record, but by many advanced metrics as well.

So then the playoffs roll around, Giannis' weaknesses get more exposed, LeBron comes through, and then everyone retroactively decides that in fact, LeBron is the best player and should have won MVP and we feel stupid for giving Giannis the MVP. The voters must have gotten it wrong. Except that they didn't. It is a regular season award and all logic and statistics show that Giannis was the superior player during the regular season. It wasn't particularly close and a month ago when media members were talking about their ballots, all of the ones I heard had Giannis first, which was reflected in him running away with the award. It wasn't until the playoffs rolled around and people decided that LeBron should have won the MVP; except that isn't what the award is for. It isn't for the playoffs.

So that is why when people say "LeBron should have a dozen MVPs!" imo, they don't really understand what the award is for.
 

HowBoutDemSox

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 12, 2009
6,064
I’d quibble somewhat with using per 36 stats, since LeBron played over 4 minutes more per game than Giannis (34.6 for LeBron, 30.4 for Giannis). That’s a decent amount as a percentage of playing time and to the extent that MVP is at least somewhat an award for total accumulation of production, not just rate stats, it should be a factor that LeBron provided additional value to his team by playing those extra minutes.
 

McBride11

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
15,710
Charleston, SC
The Mike Trout comp doesn’t fly because when Trout is .500 with bad teammates there was LeBron winning 65 games with Antawn Jamison, Mo Williams and Delonte West starting with him.

Whether it’s the best player or the player most valuable to his team.....LeBron should have a dozen accumulated by now. I can make a case for LeBron or Giannis in this years regular season but I certainly can’t criticize LeBron for using the slight as more fuel on his way to another championship.
Surely an imperfect comparision. But in Basketball a player can more easily carry a team.
LBJ acts like he wants MVP to be ‘best player’, in which case Trout wins hands down most of the last decade.

‘Valuable’ is extremely vague and we all know the voters have biases. Like leaving Pedro off.
In the end just seemed really petty.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
13,272
I’d quibble somewhat with using per 36 stats, since LeBron played over 4 minutes more per game than Giannis (34.6 for LeBron, 30.4 for Giannis). That’s a decent amount as a percentage of playing time and to the extent that MVP is at least somewhat an award for total accumulation of production, not just rate stats, it should be a factor that LeBron provided additional value to his team by playing those extra minutes.
This is a logical argument, but Giannis only played 30 mpg largely because his team was pounding the shit out of their opponents and he didn't need to play the fourth quarter, and I don't want to penalize him for being too efficient over his minutes.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
6,929
Kiev, Ukraine
The NBA regular and postseasons are almost different sports. Everyone knows that the postseason is all that matters for player evaluation and team-building, but the MVP is defined as a regular season award.

Until we can just come out and say that NBA regular-season basketball is an extended preseason with some jockeying for seeding, we're stuck arguing about this every year.

Yes, Giannis supporters are correct that he should win the MVP by the current definition. The current definition, however, is dumb, because whomping Orlandos and Atlantas by 30 a night in January is about meaningful as the Celtics beating Charlotte in October preseason games.

This disconnect between regular and postseason is ~90% greater in basketball than in football or baseball, where regular season MVP has a lot more meaning.
 

Ale Xander

Lacks black ink
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
33,149
Vanessa Bryant sues LA County sheriff over release of crash photos

 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
19,084
Surely an imperfect comparision. But in Basketball a player can more easily carry a team.
LBJ acts like he wants MVP to be ‘best player’, in which case Trout wins hands down most of the last decade.

‘Valuable’ is extremely vague and we all know the voters have biases. Like leaving Pedro off.
In the end just seemed really petty.
In LeBron’s case you could make a case for both on a number of levels. If anything LeBron would lose the “best player” award to Giannis this year but I can’t see how he isn’t clearly the “most valuable” since he singlehandedly built this Laker team and brought AD there with him.
 

Tony C

Dope
Dope
Apr 13, 2000
12,655
And, just as importantly, LeBron is the rare star who is about elevating those around him. There's no Pippen-Jordan stuff here -- the way he wants AD to have the spotlight and the way he literally feeds teammates on the court and figuratively pumps them up off the court is part of his incredible value. Obviously the guy has an incredible ego ("I'm taking my talents to....") but I can't think of another megastar who is quite as invested in building up his teammates.
 

ElUno20

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
4,275
In LeBron’s case you could make a case for both on a number of levels. If anything LeBron would lose the “best player” award to Giannis this year but I can’t see how he isn’t clearly the “most valuable” since he singlehandedly built this Laker team and brought AD there with him.
Even if the nba is vague in defining mvp, general manger is definitely not a metric for its selection.

Lebron, as usual when it comes to basketball, is being a small petty bitch.
 
Aug 20, 2017
2,085
Portland
Even if the nba is vague in defining mvp, general manger is definitely not a metric for its selection.

Lebron, as usual when it comes to basketball, is being a small petty bitch.
But think about how difficult it was for him to tell AD not to play for the Pelicans, demand a trade to only the Lakers, and then spread lies to hurt trade value. All while throwing his teammates under the bus. It really was quite brilliant.
 

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
13,272
And, just as importantly, LeBron is the rare star who is about elevating those around him. There's no Pippen-Jordan stuff here -- the way he wants AD to have the spotlight and the way he literally feeds teammates on the court and figuratively pumps them up off the court is part of his incredible value. Obviously the guy has an incredible ego ("I'm taking my talents to....") but I can't think of another megastar who is quite as invested in building up his teammates.
Due to his success LeBron will always be compared to Jordan, but stylistically he has always been closer to Magic. Years ago Simmons compared LeBron to a "cross between Magic and Dr. J but in Karl Malone's body" and I still think that is the best way to describe his game.
 

ElUno20

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
4,275
Due to his success LeBron will always be compared to Jordan, but stylistically he has always been closer to Magic. Years ago Simmons compared LeBron to a "cross between Magic and Dr. J but in Karl Malone's body" and I still think that is the best way to describe his game.

I'd add also with the basketball brain of every great pg (Magic, Isiah, Kidd, etc). He's an alien.
 

Euclis20

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
3,602
Imaginationland
With the draft and most of free agency complete, it seems that the consensus is that the Lakers are the contender that did the best:


View: https://twitter.com/BleacherReport/status/1330897387620012032?s=20


Maybe it's just anti-Lakers bias, but I'm not seeing the same excellent offseason that most are. Gasol is 35 and pretty close to cooked - his regular season numbers were underwhelming and he was unplayable against the Celtics in the playoffs. Is he going to be more useful than Howard, who was surprisingly excellent as a backup last year? Schroder is a solid improvement over Rondo, in the regular season. Is he going to be better in the playoffs than Rondo, which is all that matters? Matthews at this point isn't much more than a mediocre wing for a good team, his shooting percentage has hovered around 40% for 5 years now, and he's a few months older than Danny Green. Harrell is immediately far and away the 3rd best Laker, which is nice, but his best position (power forward) happens to be Lebron's best position, as well as Kuzma's best position, as well as Davis' preferred position. Lebron is the swiss army knife that makes it all work, but this is absolutely not the best situation for his talent to shine.

As long as AD remains healthy and Lebron remains the best closer in the league none of it really matters. Maybe it's just contrasted with the relatively lousy weeks other top contenders have had (Clippers, Bucks, Warriors, Celtics), but I'm not blown away here.

*edit - I do believe this was a solid offseason for LA. Any team that wins a title, especially an older one with lots of free agents, is going to get worse the following season. I think the Lakers did an admirable job of replacing the guys that left, I just don't think simply plugging the holes makes for a winning offseason.
 
Last edited:

Kliq

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 31, 2013
13,272
With the draft and most of free agency complete, it seems that the consensus is that the Lakers are the contender that did the best:


View: https://twitter.com/BleacherReport/status/1330897387620012032?s=20


Maybe it's just anti-Lakers bias, but I'm not seeing the same excellent offseason that most are. Gasol is 35 and pretty close to cooked - his regular season numbers were underwhelming and he was unplayable against the Celtics in the playoffs. Is he going to be more useful than Howard, who was surprisingly excellent as a backup last year? Schroder is a solid improvement over Rondo, in the regular season. Is he going to be better in the playoffs than Rondo, which is all that matters? Matthews at this point isn't much more than a mediocre wing for a good team, his shooting percentage has hovered around 40% for 5 years now, and he's a few months older than Danny Green. Harrell is immediately far and away the 3rd best Laker, which is nice, but his best position (power forward) happens to be Lebron's best position, as well as Kuzma's best position, as well as Davis' preferred position. Lebron is the swiss army knife that makes it all work, but this is absolutely not the best situation for his talent to shine.

As long as AD remains healthy and Lebron remains the best closer in the league none of it really matters. Maybe it's just contrasted with the relatively lousy weeks other top contenders have had (Clippers, Bucks, Warriors, Celtics), but I'm not blown away here.

*edit - I do believe this was a solid offseason for LA. Any team that wins a title, especially an older one with lots of free agents, is going to get worse the following season. I think the Lakers did an admirable job of replacing the guys that left, I just don't think simply plugging the holes makes for a winning offseason.
The thing with Gasol is that the Lakers are not going to need him to play 30+ minutes in a playoff game; they are always going to be at their best with Davis at the 5. What they need is a guy who can soak up regular season minutes and bang bodies so that Davis doesn't have to wrestle with Steven Adams, Gobert, Nurkic, etc. during the regular season. Gasol doesn't offer the kind of athleticism that the JaVale/Howard combo did, but he is still an excellent passer and intelligent player who can also space the floor. If he can stay healthy he is an upgrade.

Schroeder was an excellent player last season. The knock on him has been he has been kind of a knucklehead, but the Lakers also just won a title with JR Smith, Dion Waiters and JaVale on the team. Matthews is a JAG.

Not sure want to think about Harrell, he was terrible in the bubble but he also had a lot going on in his personal life. The Clippers as a whole did not adjust to the bubble well at all, so I'm curious to see if his drop-off in the playoffs was related to that, or more because his game, which relies a lot on energy and hustle, is not as effective in the playoffs when teams are more locked in and pace slows down.
 

Tony C

Dope
Dope
Apr 13, 2000
12,655
I don't understand the "Gasol is cooked" theme on this thread and the other. He had not good but great defensive #s last year and can still hit the outside shot. As a complementary player he's very useful, and seems like the anti-Harrell (and anti-Kief Morris, who played C in the playoffs, too). Depending on opponent the Lakers will have a tool. Seems like a much deeper team than last season. Same with the Schroeder (who really has game), KCP, Matthews signings -- they'll have tools for a lot of different situations, obviously anchored by 2 great players. They lost Avery Bradley whose defense is very overrated, the center duo of McGee and D Howard -- the first of whom is pretty bad and the 2nd of whom was good last year but is old and also only suitable for certain opponents/games, and Rondo who was flat out bad last year until he revived playoff Rondo. Maybe they'll miss Rondo in the playoffs, but overall they're significantly better and I don't really see the debate about it.
 

luckiestman

Son of the Harpy
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
17,890
I don't understand the "Gasol is cooked" theme on this thread and the other.
Oh, that’s easy. I was thrilled to see him check in the game during the Raps playoff series. I thought he was awful. I had no opinion prior to that because I mostly only watch every Celtics game and not too many non Cs games.
 

benhogan

Granite is his new binky
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
9,355
Santa Monica
I don't understand the "Gasol is cooked" theme on this thread and the other. He had not good but great defensive #s last year and can still hit the outside shot. As a complementary player he's very useful, and seems like the anti-Harrell (and anti-Kief Morris, who played C in the playoffs, too). Depending on opponent the Lakers will have a tool. Seems like a much deeper team than last season. Same with the Schroeder (who really has game), KCP, Matthews signings -- they'll have tools for a lot of different situations, obviously anchored by 2 great players. They lost Avery Bradley whose defense is very overrated, the center duo of McGee and D Howard -- the first of whom is pretty bad and the 2nd of whom was good last year but is old and also only suitable for certain opponents/games, and Rondo who was flat out bad last year until he revived playoff Rondo. Maybe they'll miss Rondo in the playoffs, but overall they're significantly better and I don't really see the debate about it.
Gasol had a long Championship run with Toronto in 2018-19 season, then played all 2019 Summer with Spain, then straight back to Toronto. He was pretty fried after that.
I'd expect him to better this season after a few months off and in limited minutes with the Lake Show.

The Lakers did well this offseason, but Bron got another year older, and until he starts acting his age the rest of the NBA will struggle to knock him off.