The Lakers are on the 2nd night of a back to back after a tough, but competitive loss to the Wizards on Thursday. In many ways that game reminded me of the game against the Pacers in Indiana earlier this year. In that game, the Lakers played well enough to win, but saw Paul George play to his all-star status by sinking shots down the stretch to pull out the win. In Washington, George’s role was played by John Wall who sunk several key jumpers in the closing minutes to fend off a Lakers team that battled back from a large deficit to put themselves in position to win.
The fact the Lakers couldn’t close isn’t a surprise, even if it is somewhat disappointing. The team didn’t do enough to put themselves in position, committing 20 turnovers and not showing enough defensive discipline earlier in the game when the Wizards started to pull away. Again, disappointing even if, at this stage of the season and with their level of play what it’s been, not surprising.
Heading into Boston, then, the Lakers have some things to feel good about even if their chances of winning this game are about the same (if not worse) than what they were Thursday. Boston is one of the better teams in the East and, though flawed, has a slew of really good players and another all-star PG who can do a ton of damage offensively in Isaiah Thomas. Slowing the diminutive PG becomes priority #1, but just like with Wall it is easier said than done.
If slowing Thomas were the only key to winning, the Lakers might actually be in okay shape. But that’s not the case at all. The Celtics also have Al Horfod who continues to be a wonderful player who can hurt you in several ways. His ability to hit the outside jumper via kickouts and in pick and pop situations, helps give Thomas the space he needs to create shots off the dribble for himself. Horford can also still score in the paint, is a terrific individual and team defender, and just a really smart player overall. And while he’s not the rebounder you’d like considering his position and size, he does so many other things well he must be accounted for on both ends.
Beyond these two, the C’s have several good role players who can impact the game — even if Avery Bradley doesn’t play due to his sore achilles. In Marcus Smart and Jae Crowder, Boston has defensive toughness on the wings and enough offensive versatility to play off of Thomas’ brilliance. Add to them guys like rookie Jaylen Brown (a wonderful athlete who does damage as a slasher and above the rim finisher) and Amir Johnson (who, as an LA native, always seems to do well against the Lakers), Boston has plenty of firepower to take advantage of a porous Lakers’ defense.
In order to get a W, then, the Lakers really have to three things:
- Slow Thomas just enough to put the game onto the shoulders of someone else for longer stretches. Thomas was brilliant in January and is the league’s top 4th quarter scorer. Stopping him entirely is not possible. But the hope is that the Lakers can throw enough looks at him defensively or, maybe better, get him in foul trouble via Russell post ups and by attacking him off the dribble, that he has to sit for longer than normal.
- Hit the 3 ball at a high rate. Boston’s defense has not been as strong this season as last and one area they are only middle of the pack is the number of 3 point attempts allowed. The Lakers typically have no issues getting off the long ball — not with Nick Young, Lou Williams, and D’Angelo Russell all in the lineup. If those three can have a hot night from the arc, they can keep the Lakers in the game.
- Hit the glass hard and get second chance points in bunches. Boston is the worst defensive rebounding team in the league. The Lakers, meanwhile are one of the NBA’s better offensive rebounding teams. If Tarik Black, Julius Randle (should he get more burn than Thursday), Zubac, and Mozgov can snare some extra offensive possessions due to their activity on the backboards, it could go a long way towards keeping this game close.
Make no mistake, as much as it pains me to type this about the Celtics, they are the better team. But the Lakers, even with their poor record, have shown they can compete with any team if their defensive focus is there and they find their groove offensively. In the 2nd half against the Wizards, we saw just that and were treated to a competitive game. I hope the same is true tonight.
Where you can watch: 5:00pm start time on Spectrum Sportsnet and ESPN.
CHearn says
In the 2011 draft, I implored the Lakers to select Isaiah
Thomas.Instead, the Lakers chose two
players that aren’t even in the league anymore.For the 41st pick, the Lakers selected Darius Morris and with
the 46th pick they drafted Andrew Goudelock. Oops! Meanwhile, Isaiah Thomas dropped to Sacramento
with the last pick in the draft and makes the 2017 All-Star roster for the East. Sigh!
Not one of the Lakers guards can guard Thomas. The Lakers should start Clarkson and allow
him to shadow Isaiah, Jordan at best, could slow the 5’9” guard’s offensive
game.
new rr says
Statistical trivia: going into tonight’s game, both the Lakers and Celtics have 3,252 wins. Lakers have lost 2169, and the Celtics have lost 2,275.
LKK says
I could be wrong, but I seem to remember that Thomas was anxious to join the Lakers as a free agent but the Lakers didn’t return the love. I didn’t even realize he’s currently # 2 in scoring at a shade under 30 pts. a game. little guy can really light it up.
KevTheBold says
Great game so far,.. Nick and Russ are lighting it up !
30twhite40 says
Nice response by the Lakers after giving up the first seven points of the game to lead after one quarter. If they play them even the rest of the way, Lakers will win.
fern16 says
If someone says that he envisioned Thomas becoming a 30ppg player he Is lying.
Still R says
fern16 If the Lakers FO says they envisioned Thomas becoming a 30 ppg player they are lying … after all, he wanted to come to the Lakers and Mitch and jimmy they were too involved with chasing ‘Melo … another feather in their cap.
Still R says
LKK You’re not wrong, actually.
Clay Bertrand says
LKK
YOU, are correct sir. Alas, we wanted some big fish and elected to sign the likes of Ronnie Price etc. Thomas’s DAD was a huge Laker fan and I believe wanted to name his son Earvin (I could be wrong on his preferred name) but lost a bet with his wife/Thomas’ mother, and he was named Isaiah.
He loved the Lakers and wanted to come after Sac let him go. Jim Buss’s grandiose schemes to hunt bigger game foiled any attempts to get the guy who is now the second highest scoring player in the League.
Another Bullet for Magic’s gun that’ll put Jim out of his Basketball Ops misery.
Clay Bertrand says
fern16
No, bro, we didn’t envision him being a 30ppg player. But being a 15ppg player who was young and WANTED to come here in an age when the volume shooting guard was/is the emerging trend, the FO was still mired in THE OLD WAYS. The FO had no vision whatsoever as to what the NBA was/is becoming. Thomas meanwhile, has performed well everywhere he’s been. SMH. Even if no one saw him approaching where he is now, he was clearly an effective player.
The Lakers saw him as a novelty small guard. Look at the Mozgov signing as proof they are stuck in the past.
My growing sentiment is one of desperation regarding the FO. They HAVE to be changed out before they further hamstring the team by signing dinosaurs and useless vets.
Enter Magic……..
Clay Bertrand says
Interesting article here I’m sure you guys may have seen regarding the best and worst offseason signings.
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2690450-reassessing-the-best-and-worst-contracts-from-2016-nba-offseason
It contains an ODD and poorly reasoned defense of the Deng contract and levels the crosshairs at the Mozzy deal. However, note the other WORST SIGNINGS and they appear to be basically, most of the other Center options that the Lakers COULD have signed.
It seems that PERHAPS, some of these guys should, in a perfect world, be traded for eachother. Biyombo would be a better fit on the Lakers. Mozgov would be a better fit on the SPARKS.
Interesting read……
SPOILER ALERT: WORST signing—Joachim Noah.
Phil for new Prez of Basketball Ops??????????? Uhhhhhhhh no thank you. GLAD that ish ain’t happenin!!!!!!!!!!
new rr says
Clay Bertrand
If the Lakers go outside the organization, this is the guy to talk to first IMO (no idea if this will be a realistic option):
Travis Schlenk, 41, is in his 12th season with the Golden State Warriors, and his fifth as assistant general manager. In this role, Schlenk reports directly to General Manager Bob Myers and assists in the management of all day-to-day basketball operations, including all player-related matters.
With more than 16 years of experience in the NBA, Schlenk has held jobs at virtually every level of basketball operations, including positions in the video room, on the bench, scouting and in the front office.
Prior to being promoted to his current position, Schlenk spent the previous two seasons as the team’s director of player personnel. In that role he assisted in all player personnel matters, while also assisting with trade & free agent discussions, player contracts, salary cap analysis and adherence to Collective Bargaining Agreement rules and regulations.
Clay Bertrand says
new rr Clay Bertrand
Sounds tailor made for our situation. I like it!!!!! Frankly, on the surface at least, I like his credentials better than Weaver as Schlenk is managing a “Big Market” team vs. Weaver having a different sort of organization. I realize the CAP applies to all teams but the Lakers are a different animal than the Thunder.
Great suggestion on Schlenk.
new rr says
Clay Bertrand new rr
Yeah. Also Schlenk has, presumably, worked directly or at least indirectly with Ryan West’s dad and with Luke Walton. No idea if it is a possibility, but as you say, on paper, it makes sense.
A Horse With No Name says
new rr Clay Bertrand Now you’re talk’in rr. Link to Walton is big. Hoping for this.
Clay Bertrand says
new rr Clay Bertrand
Exactly. Would be a seamless fit. The Spurs are a great franchise model to emulate. However, I think the Ws are the most progressive organization in the NBA top to bottom. Having a young guy steeped in their culture take over at the helm for us (especially with Luke being here too) would be a real godsend.
FredP says
Clay Bertrand fern16 One could also blame Phil Jackson for the lack of interest in short guards. Phil liked his guards tall to be able to switch on defense. Granted, Phil was out of the picture but the FO has continued to favor tall guards.
new rr says
FredP Clay Bertrand fern16
Thomas signed his current deal in the summer of 2014, with Phoenix, and is now unquestionably one of the NBA’s biggest bargains. The Lakers, during the window of Thomas’ deal, which has another year on it, gave a four-year guaranteed deal to Nick Young for 21M and a three-year guaranteed deal, also for 21M, to Lou Williams, who is not especially tall. Both Young and Williams are more more three years older than Thomas is.
Phil has never held a FO position with the Lakers and coached his last game in May 2011, three years before Thomas signed his deal and, of course, Jim made moves to purge Phil’s influence from the organization, starting with the decision to pass on Brian Shaw to hire Mike Brown.
So, suggesting that Phil is partially to blame for the Lakers’ decision to pass on Isaiah Thomas is, well, a reach.
FredP says
new rr FredP Clay Bertrand fern16 I believe that Thomas is one of the 3 shortest guards in the league. No it is not a reach. Williams was a proven scorer and 6th man of the year winner.
new rr says
FredP new rr Clay Bertrand fern16
So, your position is that Phil was influencing personnel decisions made three years after he coached his last game, even though he was never in the FO here, the team scrapped the Triangle right after he left, and he and Jim, according to just about everybody who might know, couldn’t and can’t stand one another? OK.
Also, of course, while Phil did go big in Chicago’s backcourt, Derek Fisher was always one of Phil’s guys, and the Lakers had Jordan Farmar and then Steve Blake under Phil. Finally, Phil always had room for smaller guards to go along with Jordan and Harper in Chicago as well: BJ Armstrong, John Paxson, Steve Kerr, Randy Brown. Ty Lue and Fisher were on the team that Kobe, Shaw, and Harper here.
Clay Bertrand says
FredP new rr Clay Bertrand fern16
To clarify the point of my original post, I am saying that the FO lacked/lacks the vision to appreciate something different from what they have known in the past and have been slow, if not outright UNABLE, to adapt the the changes in the game.
To me, this is clearly reflected in even their most recent FA signings.
I believe Phil Jackson’s preference for bigger guards had nothing to do with the FO’s pursuits during the time when Thomas was available. Their actions reflect more a reliance on their OLD SCHOOL beliefs about basketball and their inability to be progressive and innovative even as the game was changing right before their eyes.
Further, the preference for Tall INITIATOR type guards who essentially man the PG spot for Jackson’s teams is also part of his penchant for the Triangle. The Triangle has been a failure as the mainstay offense for every team that hasn’t had Jordan, Pippen, Kobe, Shaq, Pau etc. Clearly the Lakers have not endeavored to run the Triangle for a good number of years now so they would have no need to cling to the preferences of PJ IMO.
More to my actual point, IF as you contend, the Lakers WERE IN FACT relying on Phil Jackson’s preference for bigger guards when they didn’t sign Thomas, this is further blatant proof that they lack vision and show an inability to adapt to the changes in the game.
Phil was long gone and in the past and his team’s on court successes in 08 and 09 were several years in the past when Thomas was available. If they still had their wagon hitched to Jackson’s preferences, CLEARLY they were stuck in the past.
It just seems apparent that the FO’s philosophies for FA pursuit are years behind the current game. The Thomas non signing, though skewed toward more egregious when viewed thru a purely unfair hindsight lens, is just another example of being behind in the times and not willing to gamble a little IMO.
A Horse With No Name says
Small guards are novelty players. Isiah Thomas is a very good novelty player. He can beat you with his offense and rack up numbers impressively. He can’t defend a lick to save his life–he’s simply too small. Small guys defensive limitations are always exposed and exploited in the playoffs. They cannot have a primary role on a championship caliber team. The last guy to do it was the original Isiah Thomas, and he towers over IT 2.0. Size is incredibly crucial to success in basketball. For example, the Blazers start two very gifted offensive guards in Lillard and McCollum, both of whom are under 6’3″, and both are porous defenders, contributing mightily to a very poor team defense that has the team struggling to make the playoffs. Word is that Portland may try to move one of them for a big guard. Again, Isiah Thomas is a very, very undersized player that is thriving in the regular season in a system that maximizes his scoring gifts and minimizes his limitations. He really hasn’t done anything yet. Not anything that should make laker fans lament losing out on him. That isn’t going to change. He’s entertaining if you like high usuage, little guy one-way heroics, but that isn’t championship basketball. The Celtics won’t sniff a championship with Thomas as a starter. Best case scenario for the Celticsis a mini- microwave bench role for him.
Clay Bertrand says
A Horse With No Name
Fair Assessment. Although I would point out a clear omission on your part…..
“Small guys defensive limitations are always exposed and exploited in the playoffs. They cannot have a primary role on a championship caliber team. The last guy to do it was the original Isiah Thomas”
__________________________________________
I know you recall Allen Iverson. I wouldn’t put him in Zeke’s league but just sayin, he was a lot like Thomas 1.0 in that he was the PRIMARY role on a championship caliber team. IT 1.0 clearly had a stronger supporting cast than AI which led to the Pistons being champ caliber for a longer stretch.
As far as IT 2.0 goes, Let us see what the MARKET bears for him when he hits it this summer. Let’s see what Boston (or another team) pays him.
I’d wager they pay him much more than mini-microwave bench money. In this his 6th year, will soon have had back to back All Star appearances and RIGHT NOW, the Celtics are second in the East. HE is leading them in scoring and is only off Larry Birds record scoring avg. for a Celtic season by .2 pts.
In the olden days, I would say you are 100% correct. In the current NBA, I think guys that used to be mere novelties can be much more impactful.
Just the same, I HOPE you are right about them Turds never sniffin a ring!!!! BUCK FOSTON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
A Horse With No Name says
Nah brah. I’m still right. Nothing has changed. 2- way players win championships. Size matters: Iverson was taller, longer, quicker and much better than IT2. Not even close. You also claim above that volume shooters are en vogue now. I think it’s just the opposite. It’s why Durant left Westbrook and what Hardin will never win anything either. The Lakers are trying to build a movement offense with tons of passing where everyone touches the ball. Guys like IT2 dominate the ball and are much easier to stop. Unlike Westbrook however, his high usuage is not off set by defensive capability. He’s going to get paid–sure–but that doesn’t mean much in this hyper inflated market.
Clay Bertrand says
A Horse With No Name
OK a few things:
Well, I don’t know if you are “right” or not. Clearly, you were NOT RIGHT AT ALL saying that IT 1.0 was the last small guard to be the primary member on a championship team. Iverson was. That is factual. Iverson was also listed at 6’0″ but was said to be 5’10”. He was 20 pounds lighter than Thomas. I don’t know how much weight the TALLER argument carries here when both guys were under 6’0. Iverson was “BETTER”???? Perhaps. TOugh to compare eras and entire careers vs partial ones but Lets see:
After roughly the same amount of time in the league 6-7yrs) and at the same age (26-27), I will just compare their 6th seasons stats for a glimpse:
IT : 29.9 pts shooting 47% overall and 38.8% from 3pt this season
Iverson at the same point his 6th year was averaging:
31.4 pts shooting 39.8% overall and 29.1% from 3pt
In fact, Iverson NEVER shot higher than 46% in his career and that 46 was YEARS past his prime in Denver. If IT stays the course he could well have a better statistical career than Iverson. He MAY even win a ring at some point.
I am not trying to debate what WINS CHAMPIONSHIPS or compare Isaiah Thomas to PLAYER X per se. The Iverson thing arose because you failed to mention him is all. I AM SAYING that the FO is short sighted. That was my original point. And if you wish to dispute that (which I don’t think you do), I welcome your forthcoming rebuttal.
Your “argument” about volume shooters apparently being poor assets to a team is based on future speculation as to whether or not certain people will or will not ever win a Championship. A tenuous basis on which to base your position IMO.
***To be clear, I don’t entirely take issue with your points about short guards or volume shooting guards or the overlying notion that HERO BALLERs are not the keys to winning. I didn’t like Kobe’s hero ball, I don’t really like Westbrook’s stat hunting game and I hated Iverson’s low percentage volume shooting. On these issues, I think we feel the same***
My comment regarding the trend toward acceptance of volume shooters is more that Long Distance chucking guards who shoot high volumes of lower percentage (3 pt shots) are almost EMBRACED now where in past decades, that was considered irresponsible offense. Its just a clear a sign that times have changed.
Whether the game has changed for the better, whether the changes always produce championships, or whether YOU OR I AGREE with the way the game is changing is immaterial. I am not speaking to that issue either way.
NOR was I/am I stating that Isaiah Thomas would, by himself, have the Lakers in ring contention. My statement was that the Lakers FO is mired in yesteryear and not innovative enough to see value in what hasn’t worked for them in the past. They don’t see the way the game is changing.
Clearly, when a player is small, or slow, the make up of the surrounding team must be crafted to fit the shortcomings of said player.
My point can be best made by stating that I would rather have Isaiah Thomas than Nick Young, Lou Williams, Timo Mozgov, and Luol Deng. It would be money better spent. Whether he would be the Bell Cow that would shoulder the championship burden or not, it would have been a smarter signing.
Is he the BEST PLAYER IN THE WORLD?? Does he play shutdown Defense?? No and NO.
But in the context of who was AVAILABLE, and who was AFFORDABLE and had upside at the time, IT 2.0 was a player the Lakers FO whiffed on. Keep in mind, he wanted to come to LA. That was one of the reasons Nick Young was valued. Of the two, who would you rather have???
A Horse With No Name says
Clay Bertrand A Horse With No Name Facts? You don’t like alternate facts? (Sorry!) Anyway, you made an issue of my omission of Iverson, and I responded by saying Iverson was the better player. Your stat based response was solid, but I don’t think too many people consider IT2 a superior player to Iverson. Iverson was a far better athlete,able to play at the rim and get to the line when it counted. Iverson had elite athleticism, IT2 does not. The difference will be evident in the playoffs. That’s my contention. But really, I don’t even care about Iverson vs. IT2. My main point was and is that teams that feature undersized, one-way, high usage players like the Celtics with IT2 are teams that can be beaten readily by teams that move the ball and whose stars are two-way players.
To answer your question about whether I would want Nick Young or 2.0, let me say that if 2.0 was content to be a sixth man on a reasonable deal, sure, I’d be fine to have him on the roster playing the Lou Williams role–but I don’t even want that kind of player soaking up minutes. It’s fools gold. The laker’s didn’t whiff on 2.0; they understood that he wasn’t the kind of player you build around for the reasons already stated. Let’s see how 2.0 does in the playoffs, and revisit our conversation at that time.
Clay Bertrand says
A Horse With No Name Clay Bertrand
Fair Enough Amigo!!!
I’m on the same page as you regarding what wins in the Playoffs being much different than what wins in the Regular Season. Big difference. We’ve seen for years some teams that rack up regular season wins and stall out in the playoffs. Could well be exactly what happens with the Celtics.
I’m curious since we have had this discussion how IT 2.0 will fair in the playoffs. Will be interesting to see.
Let’s remind each other to continue this dialogue in a few months bro.