The Lakers' Season after Starting 1-4

Three straight wins for the Lakers as they head out for a 7 game 'Grammy' road trip.

This is the 3rd game in a row where Kobe is the primary facilitator. He doesn't want to be the one that brings the ball up and is hounded the length of the court, but once they get into a set, it is extremely difficult to stop Kobe from either scoring or finding the open man. If a team tries to cover Kobe one on one, he can score on a regular basis. The Lakers now have many more open looks then they have had in the past. Meeks, Jamison and Earl Clark are getting and hitting open shots with Kobe as the playmaker. Speaking of Earl Clark, what a find he has been. His defense, rebounding and shooting has been fantastic since he has played regular minutes. Earl has probably played himself into a 2 year $8m contract after this season.

Concerning Kobe, I think Celtics fans should be banned from calling him KoME if he leads the team in assists in a game or does not take the most shot attempts in a game.

Anyway, heading out to a lunch meeting. I ran out of time to discuss last nights game in more detail.

tjmakz wrote:Three straight wins for the Lakers as they head out for a 7 game 'Grammy' road trip.

This is the 3rd game in a row where Kobe is the primary facilitator. He doesn't want to be the one that brings the ball up and is hounded the length of the court, but once they get into a set, it is extremely difficult to stop Kobe from either scoring or finding the open man. If a team tries to cover Kobe one on one, he can score on a regular basis. The Lakers now have many more open looks then they have had in the past. Meeks, Jamison and Earl Clark are getting and hitting open shots with Kobe as the playmaker. Speaking of Earl Clark, what a find he has been. His defense, rebounding and shooting has been fantastic since he has played regular minutes. Earl has probably played himself into a 2 year $8m contract after this season.

Concerning Kobe, I think Celtics fans should be banned from calling him KoME if he leads the team in assists in a game or does not take the most shot attempts in a game.

Anyway, heading out to a lunch meeting. I ran out of time to discuss last nights game in more detail.

TJ,

Fair enough.

How about the games where he takes 30% of their fgas and shoots 40%?


bob


.

Lakers making effort to do the extra pass, seems at least can beat the bad teams.

cowens/oldschool wrote:Lakers making effort to do the extra pass, seems at least can beat the bad teams.

cowens,

And, as evidenced by their win over OKC, some pretty damn good teams too.

Due to their awful start, they need to play really good ball the rest of the way. No losing streaks unless it is followed up by a monster winning streak. This is hardly impossible, especially if they can beat OKC.

Some pundits (and take that with a tablespoon of salt) say that you need 48 wins to make the playoffs in the west. Personally, that sounds a little steep for me, but let's say you need 45 wins. The Lakers are 20-25. That means they would need another 25 wins. With only 37 games left (20+25=45; 82-45=37), that would mean they would have to go 25-12 (.675) the rest of this season, averaging slightly better than 2 out of every 3. Doable, especially if they are healthy and playing well, but tough. And that's just to qualify. If there is another team with 45 wins they'd have to own the tie-breakers against that team too, otherwise they'd need 46 wins to advance (requiring 26-11, .702) and if the #8 team has 46 wins instead of 45 then the hill gets correspondingly steeper, etc. That's why I said it's doable but losing streaks, even small ones, can't be allowed without a monster winning streak right on its tail (a 2 game winning streak would need a 4 game winning streak, a 3 game losing streak needing a 6 game winning streak). The Lakers don't and can't know what the teams in front of them will do the rest of this season, so they have to play like it's the worst possible scenario and hope they get lucky. If the pundits are right and you need 48 wins, then the Lakers would need to go 28-9 (.757) and own the tiebreaker to boot. Going .757 would be the equivalent of a 62 win season. If they pulled that off they would deserve to win the Championship, because that would be a historic rally.

A big difference between the Lakers and the Celtics now is that the Lakers are finally getting it together and are getting stronger (whether they can pull it off with the games left remains to be seen) while the Celtics are in the eighth slot, but are reeling from the loss of Rondo and may slide from here.

I think the fans of both teams are going to be biting their nails the last week or two of the season. I'm thinking of getting some Lee Press Ons, since I've already taken mine down to the cuticle following the Celtics so far.


bob


.

bob I'm thinking everyone will have to pick it up without Rondo and hoping for inspired play from us, our defense could be better with AB and Lee playing together. Instead of relying on Rondo for so much, alot of guys will get oppurtunities to initate offense and create for themselves and others. I'm hoping this will enable players like Green, AB and Lee to develop more of their games and take it up a notch/level, in the long run, it could be good, in the immediate, its necessary.

cowens/oldschool wrote:bob I'm thinking everyone will have to pick it up without Rondo and hoping for inspired play from us, our defense could be better with AB and Lee playing together. Instead of relying on Rondo for so much, alot of guys will get oppurtunities to initate offense and create for themselves and others. I'm hoping this will enable players like Green, AB and Lee to develop more of their games and take it up a notch/level, in the long run, it could be good, in the immediate, its necessary.

cow,

From your mouth to God's ear, brother.


bob


.

bob we can still win enough to make playoffs, maybe even 5th or 6th seed, keep the faith....after that it will get dicey, it will be exciting and we could be great spoilers. There is such a thing as CELTIC PRIDE!!!

....I forgot to add Sully to that list, hes gonna pick it up going forward.

I didn't watch much of the Laker-Hornet game, but I did hear an interesting observation from Stu Lantz, commentator for Laker broadcasts.

He said that when Kobe is in "shooter" mode, the rest of the team tends to stand around and watch when Kobe has the ball, but these recent games when he's in "facilitator" mode, players move and cut when Kobe has the ball because they know he'll pass it to them.

Even though Kobe has been extraordinarily efficient as a scorer this season, team ball is still better than hero ball, even efficient hero ball.

cowens/oldschool wrote:Lakers making effort to do the extra pass, seems at least can beat the bad teams.

Cow, they did beat OKC, but at this point, I think they'll take any wins they can get. Their next games are against Phoenix, Minnesota, and Detroit, and they'll be more than happy to win those games. If they'd consistently beaten lesser teams, they wouldn't be in the position they're in.

New Orleans has some potential. They're not deep and they've been hit with injuries, but Eric Gordon's back and can make a huge difference for them (he had 25 last night). Gordon, Anthony Davis, Grevious Vasquez, and Ryan Anderson are a nice group, Robin Lopez, Al-Farouq Aminu, Jason Smith, and Roger Mason are decent, and maybe Austin Rivers will develop into a decent player (he shoulda stayed in school). They need to stay healthy, get some experience, and get some depth. They're not the next OKC or anything, but I like their prospects better than, say, Phoenix, Sacramento, and Dallas.

The West is so deep that New Orleans will have trouble getting into the playoffs anytime soon, but there's a lot to like about their team. I won't be surprised to see them creeping up the standings in the second half.

bobheckler wrote:Some pundits (and take that with a tablespoon of salt) say that you need 48 wins to make the playoffs in the west. Personally, that sounds a little steep for me, but let's say you need 45 wins. The Lakers are 20-25. That means they would need another 25 wins. With only 37 games left (20+25=45; 82-45=37), that would mean they would have to go 25-12 (.675) the rest of this season, averaging slightly better than 2 out of every 3. Doable, especially if they are healthy and playing well, but tough. And that's just to qualify. If there is another team with 45 wins they'd have to own the tie-breakers against that team too, otherwise they'd need 46 wins to advance (requiring 26-11, .702) and if the #8 team has 46 wins instead of 45 then the hill gets correspondingly steeper, etc. That's why I said it's doable but losing streaks, even small ones, can't be allowed without a monster winning streak right on its tail (a 2 game winning streak would need a 4 game winning streak, a 3 game losing streak needing a 6 game winning streak). The Lakers don't and can't know what the teams in front of them will do the rest of this season, so they have to play like it's the worst possible scenario and hope they get lucky. If the pundits are right and you need 48 wins, then the Lakers would need to go 28-9 (.757) and own the tiebreaker to boot. Going .757 would be the equivalent of a 62 win season. If they pulled that off they would deserve to win the Championship, because that would be a historic rally.

When you look at what the Lakers need based on projected wins for the eighth seed and how many they'd have to win to get there, it seems darn near impossible. But if you look at the current standings, they're only four games out of a playoff spot -- three in the loss column -- and that doesn't seem insurmountable at all. They're currently in 10th, and of the teams ahead of them (Portland, Houston, and Utah), they need to pass two of those three to get the 8th spot. That seems a lot more doable than going 28-9 or something like that.

I made the point earlier (I think on this thread) that it won't take as many wins to make the playoffs in the West as in years past because the bottom teams have gotten better, which means fewer wins over lousy teams for the playoff teams to fatten up their records. I still think that's the case. I think 24-13 or 25-12 will get them in. In addition, the Lakers have had the third toughest strength of schedule (SOS) in the West, which means their schedule is relatively easier the rest of the way, while Utah and Portland have the two weakest SOS in the West, which means their schedules will be relatively tougher.

It all depends on whether their recent play sets the tone for the rest of the way or is only a fleeting ray of hope in an otherwise lost season, but I don't think gaining four games in the standings is unreasonable.

Houston is in 8th place right now with a winning percentage of .532. That works out to be 43 or 44 wins for an 82 game schedule. Making up 3 games is not really a big deal if the Lakers are playing up to their capabilities.

Cowens is right about the Lakers passing. Their being patient while looking for the best shot attempt has allowed them to score many easy baskets. Jamison excels is constantly moving without the ball and he puts himself in great position for lay ups or easy shot attempts. The Lakers had 34 assists on 39 fg's last night and have averaged 30 assists over the last three games, compared to 22 per game before these three games.

The Lakers have also played much better defense recently despite giving up over 100 points last night. LA was up 98-80 with 5 1/2 minutes left and then NO hit 8 straight shots, 2 of which were 3 pointers and one was an and-one. They scored 19 points in less than 3 minutes to make the game look closer then it really was. When Eric Gordon and Ryan Anderson get hot, they can drain 3 after 3.

There are bad losses and there are really bad losses.
The Lakers had a really, really bad loss last night.
Truly, a self-inflicted embarrassing loss.
Some nights the other team will be in a zone and you are lucky to stay in the game. That happened when Boston played at the Clippers and the Kings this season and when the Lakers played at the Knicks. The Clippers, Kings and Knicks were just plain flat-out hot. You accept those losses and move on.

In last night's Lakers/Suns game, the Suns didn't play very well at all outside of Beasley. The Lakers had 19 assists and 19 turnovers which isn't exactly a formula for success. One person I am hating on today is Pau. I can accept that Pau's game has diminished. He does not score down on the low block like he used to even when Dwight is out of the game. Pau had a very ineffective 14 pt, 5 reb, 4 TO game in 37 minutes. What I don't like about Pau is how he stabs D'Antoni in the back with any chance he gets. When Pau was benched in the 4th quarter against New Orleans due to NO going with a very small lineup, Pau voiced his displeasure. Here was D'Antoni's response to Pau's comments.

Dave McMenamin: D'Antoni on Pau expressing his frustration about being benched: "I guess the 'all for one' lasted about 48 hours. Not bad"

Last night before Dwight left with his shoulder injury (UGH), I was hoping that D'Antoni would replace Gasol with a more energized and more effective player in Jamison. Pau has been great as a Laker and has mostly been a trooper, but I look forward to the day when the Lakers get pieces that fit better then Pau does.

My aspirations for this season have gone from championship contender to making the playoffs, hoping they could get two games of playoff revenue. I think they could compete with San Antonio but would be dismantled by OKC. I will always be a Lakers junkie who spends way too much time in my life worrying about, reading about, and watching them even if it means that I will get no more then 4 1/2 hours of sleep for all west coast games. The Lakers are in my bloodstream but I feel like I am being slowly poisoned this season.

TJ,

I think that sometimes, when a team's having a disappointing season, something clicks in and they suddenly "get it." Often, something dramatic is required for the turnaround to be "real." For example, I had hoped that the five-game winning streak would be a catalyst for the Celtics, but it turned out there was nothing catalytic enough for it to be "real.

I now hope that the upside of the very unfortunate Rondo departure is proving dramatic enough to jump start the team in a more constructive direction. But, even if it is, I expect some backsliding along the way. Acclimating to a different approach seldom happens seamlessly.

I won't be at all surprised if last night's Lakers' loss will serve as a speed bump along the new (and much more positive) road on which the Lakers seem to be embarking. I know you won't quit on them, just as I will never quit on the Celtics.

I even recall once making an error in the third grade right in the middle of my meteoric ascension to perfection.

Sam

Kobe Bryant dishes on Celtics:

BOSTON -- The Boston Celtics have lost their court leader for the season and are clinging to the final playoff spot in the Eastern Conference. The Los Angeles Lakers are battling an array of injuries (the most recent a torn plantar fascia that will sideline Pau Gasol for at least a month) and are languishing in 10th place in the Western Conference, excluded from the current postseason parameters.

Even so, good luck trying to tell Kobe Bryant that the Celtics-Lakers rivalry is dead, or that Thursday's game at TD Garden doesn't matter. Normally, Boston vs. LA generates an edginess (and bitterness) that stokes the fires of this long-time rivalry, and usually Kobe revels in the misfortunes of the men in green. But Bryant takes no pleasure in the torn ACL suffered by Rajon Rondo or the uncertainty surrounding the futures of two of his most ardent foes, Paul Pierce and Kevin Garnett.

Brian Babineau/NBAE/Getty ImagesKobe Bryant says he's sorry the Celtics are without Rajon Rondo and scoffs at the idea that the point guard's absence makes Boston better.

"I'm not happy about what's happening to them," Bryant said. "We're all running out of time. So I understand."

Kobe likes Rondo. For the rest, see:

http://espn.go.com/boston/nba/story/_/id/8924289/kobe-bryant-feels-pain-rajon-rondo-boston-celtics

Kobe calls out Howard. This is pressure Howard has never felt before (that's according to Kobe too).

And he thinks the pressure in Brooklyn would be less? He doesn't know NYers like I do if he does...



http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=espn:8925252



bob


.

poor Lakers, its getting really UGLY, Howard Sr now chimes in making everyone feel uncomfortable....Nash and Howard argue in-game. poor Dwight Howard, he had a whole franchise that catered to him, NOW? what a sad mess. I would be shocked if Howard resigned with this team, I think he'll go to Atlanta.

cowens/oldschool wrote:poor Lakers, its getting really UGLY, Howard Sr now chimes in making everyone feel uncomfortable....Nash and Howard argue in-game. poor Dwight Howard, he had a whole franchise that catered to him, NOW? what a sad mess. I would be shocked if Howard resigned with this team, I think he'll go to Atlanta.

Most people who know Dwight, including his father, think that Dwight will re-sign with the Lakers.
Today, the following came out about Dwight and Atlanta:

Howard, who is struggling through a nightmarish season with the Los Angeles Lakers, will become a free-agent this summer, and Atlanta will join Dallas and Houston in offering him a max-salary contract. Sources have said Howard has little interest in playing in Atlanta. ESPN.com

Dwight has never shown any interest in playing for Atlanta. Also, there is a good chance that Josh Smith might not be on the Hawks next season.
Why would Dwight walk away from $30m in guaranteed money to play for a non-championship contending middle of the pack team and have few endorsement opportunities?

I'd still like to see Dwight in Boston. With the right coach/psychiatrist I think he could reemerge as one of the dominant players in the NBA.

Current rumor-du-jour has Josh Smith being traded before the deadline.

It would be ironic if LAL traded an unhappy and disappointing Dwight Howard to Atlanta for Josh Smith. I don't see it happening, Atlanta would be fools to do that trade unless Howard agreed to re-signing with them, but it would be funny.

I think Dwight's unwillingness to commit contractually, neither to Orlando nor to LAL, until the free agency period begins and everybody comes wooing, is hurting his market value. Who wants to deal with that?


bob


.

bobheckler wrote:Current rumor-du-jour has Josh Smith being traded before the deadline.

It would be ironic if LAL traded an unhappy and disappointing Dwight Howard to Atlanta for Josh Smith. I don't see it happening, Atlanta would be fools to do that trade unless Howard agreed to re-signing with them, but it would be funny.

I think Dwight's unwillingness to commit contractually, neither to Orlando nor to LAL, until the free agency period begins and everybody comes wooing, is hurting his market value. Who wants to deal with that?


bob


.

bob,


Dwight, Bynum, Josh Smith and other soon to be free agents would be fools to sign now or to verbally commit to a team.
They can only sign for 3 years now, but 5 years in July.

The Lakers would be stupid to trade Dwight to Atlanta.
Atlanta also wouldn't do it because why would Dwight stay there?
They are a small market team with not a great future.

worcester wrote:I'd still like to see Dwight in Boston. With the right coach/psychiatrist I think he could reemerge as one of the dominant players in the NBA.

When healthy, he is one of the most dominant players in the NBA.
He was recognized as the 3rd best player in the NBA going into this season.

I don't see how Dwight could ever land in Boston.
LA can't sign and trade him and Boston has no cap space.

worcester wrote:I'd still like to see Dwight in Boston. With the right coach/psychiatrist I think he could reemerge as one of the dominant players in the NBA.

Hard to argue with you on this one.

I'd love to see what Rondo, Bradley and Green could do with Howard cleaning the glass. The lineup; Howard, Sullinger (for now), Green, Rondo and Bradley with Lee and Bass off the bench. Sounds OK to me.

As always, money is as big an issue as location. KG isn't going anywhere and if Pierce is still with us I'm not sure we can do it. Of course he would have to even want to come here, and I've never seen an indication he does, but I don't know how we make the money work. We kept KG and Pierce too long in that scenario.

The only other problem I could forsee would be his back. We already have a forward with back issues; would we want to risk having two key bigs who might break down?

I wouldn't envision a trade from LA. The only scenario I could see would be see Dwight signing straight up as a free agent in July. How Danny could swing that cap wise is way above my pay grade.

IF LA gets to keep Dwight, I think they'll rebound (pun intended) to the top of the Western division soon enough to make Kobe happy.

Realistically, I just don't see DH wanting to move to a cold weather city. Celtics, Schmeltics. He likes the sun too much.

As much as I hate to join in here, I have one thing to say (or maybe two). First of all, I question Dwight's heart. He has the world by it's tail out there in LA. I know at times it is tough to play with Kobe, but, he is playing with the best of the best. How can he sit there and whine the way he does. It is beyond me why Boston would take a guy like that. BUT...... on the other hand, can you just imagine what the offense would look like with Dwight in the middle taking lob after lob from Rondo???? Add Green, Sully, Bradley, and your front line is unbelievable. If he came and played one year or two with KG, he would learn what the heart of a champion really is.

This is all moot, as we will never see it happen. I have never seen a guy with so much talent peak in his early 20's and never return to peak form. He is not for me.

Rosalie