Printable View
This is all very obvious.
After 2018, if your point guard can't shoot free throws, can't shoot 3s, can't finish at the rim, is inefficient, and is also high turnover prone, you will not win many basketball games in this era.
The league went extremely heavy with the 3 pointer at around 2017/2018.
[QUOTE=RRR3;14743510]Who could they have signed that made them a good team with WB? You're also ignoring the team played mediocre even when LeBron and AD were healthy.[/QUOTE]
They didn't have any depth in the front court before Bryant & Rui and they looked pretty solid when healthy for a stretch there. They got robbed on some of the end of game calls as well but were still an above .500 team despite Bran & AD injuries from Nov 13th up until the ASB (25 - 22 in that stretch). The 2 - 10 start was mostly due to historically bad shooting (Beverley, Walker and Lebron played a big part in it) and Russ was like the only one knocking down 3s at that time (36% from 3 in those 12 games). Schroder has also been a game changer for them as well and he wasn't available for the start of the season.
I'm not saying the Lakers needed Russ but he wasn't THAT bad this season, especially with him accepting the bench role. It's just tough to win games when your two superstars constantly get hurt and you don't have great depth nor shooting around them. Clippers & Warriors are only 1 game ahead and they're supposed to be a lot deeper than the Lakers.
[QUOTE=ImKobe;14743572]They didn't have any depth in the front court before Bryant & Rui and they looked pretty solid when healthy for a stretch there. They got robbed on some of the end of game calls as well but were still an above .500 team despite Bran & AD injuries from Nov 13th up until the ASB (25 - 22 in that stretch). The 2 - 10 start was mostly due to historically bad shooting (Beverley, Walker and Lebron played a big part in it) and Russ was like the only one knocking down 3s at that time (36% from 3 in those 12 games). Schroder has also been a game changer for them as well and he wasn't available for the start of the season.
I'm not saying the Lakers needed Russ but [B]he wasn't THAT bad this season[/B], especially with him accepting the bench role. It's just tough to win games when your two superstars constantly get hurt and you don't have great depth nor shooting around them. Clippers & Warriors are only 1 game ahead and they're supposed to be a lot deeper than the Lakers.[/QUOTE]
49.6 TS% with the Lakers this season.
He was atrocious. But then again, you have a thing for chuckers, ala kobe. The fact that we are starting to win games once he left says alot.
[QUOTE=1987_Lakers;14743574]49.6 TS% with the Lakers this season.
He was atrocious. But then again, you have a thing for chuckers, ala kobe. The fact that we are starting to win games once he left says alot.[/QUOTE]
Like I said, they were 25 - 22 for a 47-game stretch once they got some depth with T.Bryant, Schroder & eventually Rui, and that's with Bran & AD being out with injuries for a bunch of those games. Everyone knows his TS% number is awful, it's been that way for 5 years now, but they didn't get him for his scoring ability.
Even had LA simply gotten rid of WB and not picked up Vanderbilt/DLo/Beasley, their record would still be notably better. All impact data has WB as a massive net-negative. The team was always going to be better off without his mere presence alone. You stop playing a high-usage guy who can't shoot, finish, defend and is allergic to sound decision making and suddenly winning becomes a lot easier. That's what's happening in LA right now.
[QUOTE=Indian guy;14743597][B]Even had LA simply gotten rid of WB and not picked up Vanderbilt/DLo/Beasley, [/B]their record would still be notably better. All impact data has WB as a massive net-negative. The team was always going to be better off without his mere presence alone. You stop playing a high-usage guy who can't shoot, finish, defend and is allergic to sound decision making and suddenly winning becomes a lot easier. That's what's happening in LA right now.[/QUOTE]
I was thinking this earlier. Just removing Westbrook off the team without replacing him with anyone likely pays dividends in the W/L column. Good chance the Clippers win alot more of the games they've lost since they got him. He's simply not starter worthy when his athleticism is no longer good enough to balance out his shaky decision making. If he had some semblance of a respectable jumpshot you could move him off-ball but he's managed to get worse in the dept over the past 6-7 years.
[QUOTE=Indian guy;14743597]Even had LA simply gotten rid of WB and not picked up Vanderbilt/DLo/Beasley, their record would still be notably better. All impact data has WB as a massive net-negative. The team was always going to be better off without his mere presence alone. You stop playing a high-usage guy who can't shoot, finish, defend and is allergic to sound decision making and suddenly winning becomes a lot easier. That's what's happening in LA right now.[/QUOTE]
I don't think so with the depth issues they had. He was pretty neutral by all the metrics so he wasn't killing the team offensively if you're looking at his RAPTOR/EPM or just the raw On/Off numbers. Lakers would have been worse off, especially during the time when Lebron was injured and Russ was basically the only player setting up AD for easy baskets.
There's value in what he does but it's on the coaches to not have him out there deciding close games. Clippers had injury issues and played some tough teams when they started out 0 - 5 with him and he was a positive on the court in a few of those losses with the non-Russ minutes being an issue. He's been a net-positive player on the Clippers and a positive in 4 out of 7 games by raw +/- numbers with decent offensive production.
[QUOTE=ImKobe;14743581]Like I said, they were 25 - 22 for a 47-game stretch once they got some depth with T.Bryant, Schroder & eventually Rui, and that's with Bran & AD being out with injuries for a bunch of those games. Everyone knows his TS% number is awful, it's been that way for 5 years now, but they didn't get him for his scoring ability.[/QUOTE]
You can’t just remove the 2-10 start, you’re cherry-picking like you always do. 22-23 with all 3 of them healthy over 1.5 years. That’s atrocious. LeBron and AD won a ring together and with WB they couldn’t even play .500 ball. Clearly on WB
[QUOTE=Phoenix;14743601]I was thinking this earlier. Just removing Westbrook off the team without replacing him with anyone likely pays dividends in the W/L column. Good chance the Clippers win alot more of the games they've lost since they got him. He's simply not starter worthy when his athleticism is no longer good enough to balance out his shaky decision making. If he had some semblance of a respectable jumpshot you could move him off-ball but he's managed to get worse in the dept over the past 6-7 years.[/QUOTE]
Westbrook would still be useful if he played intelligently but he refuses to do so.
[QUOTE=RRR3;14743625]You can’t just remove the 2-10 start, you’re cherry-picking like you always do. 22-23 with all 3 of them healthy over 1.5 years. That’s atrocious. LeBron and AD won a ring together and with WB they couldn’t even play .500 ball. Clearly on WB[/QUOTE]
They were in the play in in 2021 with Ad and Lebron missing 62 combined games of 72 and had to beat the warriors to go and missed the play in the next season by a single game with Lebron and AD missing nearly 70 games. Obviously an extra 70 games of Lebron and or AD gets them a win or 3 extra and they’re in the same
boat.
In the play in not really mattering.
Nothing Westbrook does or doesn’t do makes that team matter when these guys miss 70 gotdamn games. You’re talking about if a team is gonna be shit or piss.
Injuries are the culprit. The record in games from 3 day stretches of health dropped at random doesn’t change it. Have they ever played 10 games in a row?
The way their stars sit out they’re a play in team no matter what. Throw an extra 70 games of chemistry building and sheer star power they would stumble into the few more wins to be in the playoffs. They just climbed into the picture without Lebron. They’re always a hot week from going up 2-3 seeds and dozens of extra games of star power would make that likely.
Might as well go talk about the clippers underachieving the last few years.
[QUOTE=Kblaze8855;14743630]They were in the play in in 2021 with Ad and Lebron missing 62 combined games of 72 and had to beat the warriors to go and missed the play in the next season by a single game with Lebron and AD missing nearly 70 games. Obviously an extra 70 games of Lebron and or AD gets them a win or 3 extra and they’re in the same
boat.
In the play in not really mattering.
Nothing Westbrook does or doesn’t do makes that team matter when these guys miss 70 gotdamn games. You’re talking about if a team is gonna be shit or piss.
Injuries are the culprit. The record in games from 3 day stretches of health dropped at random doesn’t change it. Have they ever played 10 games in a row?
The way their stars sit out they’re a play in team no matter what. Throw an extra 70 games of chemistry building and sheer star power they would stumble into the few more wins to be in the playoffs. They just climbed into the picture without Lebron. They’re always a hot week from going up 2-3 seeds and dozens of extra games of star power would make that likely.
Might as well go talk about the clippers underachieving the last few years.[/QUOTE]
Why are you acting like a 42-30 team is similar to a 33-49 one?
Why are you acting like it matters if you’re a play in team or miss it by one game? None of this shit matters. Just extra attention on injury ravaged teams because Lebron is one of the injured stars. They went from being the Knicks to being the Pelicans(winning percentage wise). Would you rather be the Knicks? Sure if the better pick doesn’t interest you. Does it….matter? No.
It’s an injured ass team vs an injured ass team with a different lineup…
As I said…with the dozens of extra games by Lebron and AD they obviously win more than the one more needed to be in the play in they were in the season before. And with extra games the season before they would have been even better.
But with those injuries as a constant it’s just a question of how much the injuries make them suck not if they will suck or not.
Lebron and AD being injury prone is the reason the lakers don’t matter. Westbrook doesnt make them good or bad on his own.
Westbrook being the difference between a 48 win team (over an 82 game season) and a 33 win team is notable whether you like it or not. Westbrook failing to even reach .500 playing 45 games with two of the best players in the league is notable as well.
At a glance 9 of the top 12 players in total minutes on the 2021 Lakers weren’t on the 2022 Lakers but whatever. “Notable”.
Keep up what I’m sure you think is the good fight. You’re obviously very invested in your repetitive daily posts about the same people tangentially related to Lebron discussion and I only have so much of it in me at any given moment. I’ll be back when the Bucks and warriors play later but hopefully it will keep my attention instead of your crusade to downplay the impact of stars never playing or developing chemistry with all new teammates.
[QUOTE=ImKobe;14743606]He was pretty neutral by all the metrics so he wasn't killing the team offensively if you're looking at his RAPTOR/EPM or just the raw On/Off numbers.[/quote]
I don't know where you're getting neutral from.
- His on/off on LA was -1.7, which was the 3rd worst of any rotation player on the team
- His RAPTOR is -2.2, ranked 207th in the league
- His RPM is -2.96, ranked 305th in the league
- Only notable stat where he isn't in the negatives is EPM at +0.2, ranking 129th in the league
Lakers would've comfortably been a better team without Westbrook even without those other acquisitions.