3-3 Since Sessions Trade: I Guess the PG was Not the Problem

Lakers News Surge Forum/Message Board » Lakers General Discussions
Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Search This Topic:
 
lakeshowsd
LNS HOF Silver
 Avatar
Posts: 14613
Location: North Bend, OR
us.gif
votes: 144
The Lakers are only 3-3; playing .500 ball since the acquisition of talented and productive young Ramon Sessions and the departure of a fading old Laker "legend" in Derek Fisher (and I use the term 'legend' loosely). It was assumed that once the Lakers got a good, reliable point guard, we would almost instantly become a much better basketball team but so far Sessions' presence hasn't proved to be the difference in the win/loss column. The point of this thread is not to blame Sessions for the team's uneven play over the last 2 weeks. It's more to discuss some of the problems that are still preventing the Lakers from playing consistently good basketball this month. A 9-5 record in March is okay, but the Lakers can do better and we should discuss why they're not doing better. In no particular order: Defense: The Lakers are playing noticeably worse defense in the recent weeks and it's been hard to watch. The Lakers have surrendered 100 or more points in 7 games this month (4 of them losses), while only surrendering 100 points in 6 games in the previous 2 months combined. This is a major problem and the Lakers need to rectify it immediately if they want to maintain their reputation as a high caliber defensive team this season. Additionally, on the defensive side Andrew Bynum's effort directly effects the Lakers wins and losses in March. In the Lakers 9 March wins, Bynum is averaging 12.8 rebounds per game. In the 5 March Losses, Drew is averaging 8.4 rebounds per game. That's a difference of over 4 rebounds per game in the wins VS losses, which proves just how important Bynum's energy and effort on the boards is to the Lakers defensive efforts. The statistics in this case are undeniable. Kobe's shooting: Kobe is 130....


SaVaGe-DeF
LNS HOF Gold
Posts: 19687
votes: 51

You forgot bench production.


GhostNugget
Laker GM
Posts: 4087
Location: Yorba Linda, CA
votes: 18

The point guard pick up was great and will be better. Sessions is still learning. But like what def-one said the bench production is worse and the defense just feel off for some unknown reason.


lakeshowsd
LNS HOF Silver
Posts: 14613
Location: North Bend, OR
us.gif
votes: 144

Def-one-24-2 wrote:
You forgot bench production.

I didn't think the lack of bench production was a significant reason for the wins and losses in March because the Lakers bench has been consistently bad this season, whether they win or lose. Still, I will have to look at the stats and see if there's a way to justify your statement in any way.


kbp24
LNS HOF Silver
Posts: 14862
votes: 40

Add Mike Brown's rotation problem to the list as well.


gemfow
LNS HOF Silver
Posts: 12402
Location: Maryland
us.gif
votes: 181

Lakeshowsd: Bynum can't board made shots, just missed ones, so that contributes as well.

The lakers defense took a hit when they started scoring more and even with last nights loss they put up 96 points. At the beginning of the season they could win with 96 points. I'm not sure if this lax D is reflective of Brown possibly losing players or just laziness.


Die-Hard-Laker-Dude
Laker GM
Posts: 4094
Location: Pasadena,Ca
votes: 15

3-3 since the trade? The Griz are 2-4 in their last 6 games since Randolph came back. At least 2 of the 3 losses - namely to Utah and Memphis - were purely from a lack of effort. Both games the team seemed lethargic and got out-hustled on the glass and turned the ball over quite a bit. Bynum pulling down 4 rebounds (the same # of turnovers he had) in 41 minutes isn't going to cut it. It wasn't the trade's fault that Kobe shot 3-20 in Houston. Bad games happen some times, and the Lakers just happen to be in a bad stretch right now but hopefully things get better.


Die-Hard-Laker-Dude
Laker GM
Posts: 4094
Location: Pasadena,Ca
votes: 15

Rotations/Coaching +

Small lineup for a long stretch +

Blake on Mayo +

No double on Gay early +

MWP for Kobe late when we needed points = loss


SaVaGe-DeF
LNS HOF Gold
Posts: 19687
votes: 51

lakeshowsd wrote:
Def-one-24-2 wrote:
You forgot bench production.

I didn't think the lack of bench production was a significant reason for the wins and losses in March because the Lakers bench has been consistently bad this season, whether they win or lose. Still, I will have to look at the stats and see if there's a way to justify your statement in any way.

41 pts from the Grizzlies bench against the Lakers bench 9 pts.

The game against Portland even though the Lakers won the bench had 13 pts against the Blazers 34 pts. The game against the Mav's when Sessions was coming of the bench the Lakers got 36 pts while the Mav's had 38 pts.

Matt Barnes is the only bench player playing consistent, Blake has lost his confidence again, McRoberts is good for rebounds and dunks, Murphy is horrible at shooting, and Goudelock probably the other bright side of the bench fell off the rotation.


lakernet79
Big-Time Laker Fan
Posts: 591
votes: 35

No disrespect intended but I didn't even bother reading the post and am just going to respond to the title.

Everyone makes the same mistake by judging the immediate results. I mean at the beginning of the year after 2 weeks all the analysts couldn't say enough about how great Portland and Dever were and how it was their conference to lose. Where are they now? I'm sure everyone here thought the Lakers were not going to be as good as they are (record wise).

It is the overall consensus that Sessions was a huge upgrade at PG. How this team adjusts to this new dynamic will be how I am going to judge them come playoff time when they have had a month under their belt and not a second before. Give it time, we are certainly flowing a lot better with Sessions, but we still are not closing out (which unfortunately has always been one of the knocks on MB).


TheMagicontinues
Big-Time Laker Fan
Posts: 877
votes: 5

lakeshowsd wrote:
The Lakers are only 3-3; playing .500 ball since the acquisition of talented and productive young Ramon Sessions and the departure of a fading old Laker "legend" in Derek Fisher (and I use the term 'legend' loosely)...

Let's give it more than 6 games shall we? roll Kobe is playing some of his worst ball I've ever seen as of late, hopefully he can turn it around before the playoffs. But our bench production is still our weakness, always has been this year. Can we overcome and win rings? Not sure, but we for sure should have gotten Beasley to help the bench. But let's not overeact after 6 games. roll


LakerDymes
Laker GM
 Avatar
Age: 31
Posts: 3741
votes: 19

i think we are still adjusting to sessions being on the team since hes a completely different pg then fisher and blake.

also you cant not mention the bench production. since not only does our bench not score points (other than barnes) but they also stink defensively. barnes is a good hustling guy but he is not even as good as metta as a 1 on 1 defender.

i agree with all of LSD' points especially the defense, we gotta step it up defensively. i think by the end of the season our defense will get back to the way it was early on.

one other point about the D is that mike brown is playing our guys too many heavy minutes and that might be why we are wearing down as a team offensively and defensively.

ive said it before about bynum getting worn down with all the extra minutes hes getting and i think it shows. drew isnt showing the same intesity he was showing earlier on on both ends. while he isnt a great defensive center yet, he was doing much better early in the season.

all in all i think mike browns bad rotations and him riding the big 3 too much has alot to do with our struggles as of late. he needs to play more guys or else our starters will be dead by the time the playoffs start.


gemfow
LNS HOF Silver
Posts: 12402
Location: Maryland
us.gif
votes: 181

^^^ Gay didn't roll us up like that to the point of sending a double team at him.mayo capitalized on open shots, the Grizz took advantage of bad shooting over contested hands and turnovers. Offensive rebounds, this was a team who lacked energy compared to the Grizz and it showed in the rebounding. I'm not sure if coach Brownsending players to double perimeter guys would have been a great thing. This team lost as a whole, I can't put this on Brown's rotations. The bench doesn't have great players, we can't expect the starters to play 45-48 minutes.


MrKFC
Laker GM
Posts: 2733
Location: Orange County
calif.gif
votes: 5

The coach is not the problem. Mike Brown is doing a good job. In my opinion, the Lakers bench still needs help. They should add players that can produce when Kobe is out of the game. The last game was the proof of it! The Lakers can't depend on Kobe for their points anymore. Kobe needs a personnel that can help him rest more.


mhf94
Die-Hard Laker Fan
Posts: 1974
Location: Portugal
votes: 14

I think it all comes down to our defense. if we were playing defense like we were earlier this season we would be 6-0. against memphis like die hard laker dude said the defensive rotations and adjustments were terrible, against houston we simply sucked on defense and against utah we also allowed 103.

This is kinda ramon's fault indirectly. he has improved the offense and guys like bynum are enjoying themselves offensively too much so they completely forget about the defensive end. this is obviously not to blame on ramon but on everyone else but IMO that's what's happened these last few games. still, there's no doubt in my mind we'll be much better because of this trade come playoff time.

btw, I think Kobe has been trying to rest himself these last few games, passing the ball a lot and being lazy on defense. he probably knows he needs some rest and can't take this kinda minutes per game.


LALayup
LNS HOF Silver
 Avatar
Posts: 13693
Location: RRTX
votes: 125

I believe the underlying problem is the long term overuse of players and particularly during a compacted and shortened season.

It's a mixed bag on this though. You can't fully blame Coach Brown because he was dealt a very difficult set of cards in the circumstances of the opening of the season. So he depended on Kobe and Pau initially and then Drew eventually to play heavy minutes. He needed to press the team hard during those early months of the season. But there came a point when he should have been extending the depth on the team and giving key guys rest too. He did the exact opposite. Consequently, the team has shut down a bit on their own.

At this point I hope we have time to gel and pull it back together. I'm not convinced we'll be able to do that, but I think we have a good shot. But I think we've shortened the bench at the wrong time considering the circumstances of this season. Guys need at least a few minutes of rest or they're going to take a break on the court. We don't want that, but we're certainly seeing it.


lakeshowsd
LNS HOF Silver
 Avatar
Posts: 14613
Location: North Bend, OR
us.gif
votes: 144

Def-one,

Here's the bench production this month in all 14 games:

L 3-9, 9 points

W 6-16, 13 points

W 15-29, 37 points

L 11-21, 29 points

L 9-24, 30 points

W 12-23, 31 points

W 4-9, 13 points

W 6-14, 18 points

W 7-11, 15 points

W 6-17, 15 points

L 8-19. 21 points

L 2-12, 7 points

W 4-13, 12 points

W 9-20, 22 points

Bench averages in wins: 45% shooting ,19.5 points

Bench averages in losses: 38% shooting, 19.2 points

So as you can see, it's not really a giant difference in the production off the bench in Laker Wins VS Losses in March. The bench is scoring pretty much the exact same amount in the 9 wins as they are in the 5 losses, and the shooting percentage difference is not nearly as significant as other offensive variables (Kobe's 47% shooting in wins VS 31% shooting in losses for example). Really, the bench is only marginally worse in Laker losses in March compared to Laker wins. Based on the stats, one can't say that the lack of bench production is one of the major or key reasons for the losses in March, because our bench production generally sucks whether we win or lose.

The Lakers are 2-2 with Ramon Sessions coming off the bench, and they are now 1-1 with him as a starter, so that also proves nothing. The bench was more productive with Ramon there, but it hasn't effected the Lakers positively in the wins and losses column.


TheMagicontinues
Big-Time Laker Fan
Posts: 877
votes: 5

Lakers never play well on sunday nights either, wish I had a stat for this, if they win we're 4-2 and this thread would not exist.


Die-Hard-Laker-Dude
Laker GM
Posts: 4094
Location: Pasadena,Ca
votes: 15

This team is the 5th best team in the NBA, IMO. For them to win a title they are going to have to play REALLY well.

  1. Chicago

  2. OKC

  3. Miami

  4. San Antonio

  5. Lakers

  6. Orlando

  7. Memphis


lakeshowsd
LNS HOF Silver
 Avatar
Posts: 14613
Location: North Bend, OR
us.gif
votes: 144

TheMagicontinues wrote:
lakeshowsd wrote:
The Lakers are only 3-3; playing .500 ball since the acquisition of talented and productive young Ramon Sessions and the departure of a fading old Laker "legend" in Derek Fisher (and I use the term 'legend' loosely)...

Let's give it more than 6 games shall we? roll Kobe is playing some of his worst ball I've ever seen as of late, hopefully he can turn it around before the playoffs. But our bench production is still our weakness, always has been this year. Can we overcome and win rings? Not sure, but we for sure should have gotten Beasley to help the bench. But let's not overeact after 6 games. roll

I'm not overreacting about anything. If you had read my whole post and digested the points I was making about the team as a whole in the month of March, you might better understand where I'm coming from. Instead you sampled one small part of my post, rolled your eyes, and dismissed it completely. Had you taken the time to really understand my points, you'd see that I was talking about how the Lakers problems go deeper than the point guard issue, which has been at the forefront of the Lakers assumed "biggest problems" this season. The Lakers are still losing games despite Sessions' presence and that speaks to the other significant flaws on the team: namely team defense, Bynum's inconsistent rebounding, and inconsistent offensive efficiency from Kobe; just for starters.


mhf94
Die-Hard Laker Fan
Posts: 1974
Location: Portugal
votes: 14

Die-Hard-Laker-Dude wrote:
This team is still right around the 5 best team in the NBA. For them to win a title they are going to have to play REALLY well.

  1. Chicago

  2. OKC

  3. Miami

  4. San Antonio

  5. Lakers

  6. Orlando

  7. Memphis

that doesn't mean a lot in the playoffs. it's all about matchups. I actually think Memphis can beat OKC if they face. I think San antonio is an easier opponent for us than Memphis. Ideally we'd face dallas in the first round, memphis would stay in the fourth seed and beat OKC in the second round, we'd beat dallas than the Spurs or Utah (they have a chance to beat the spurs as well), then we face memphis in the conf finals, and in the finals I think either Chicago or Miami are pretty hard, but miami would probably be a little easier since they suck on the boards and chicago is just to agressive for us.


MrKFC
Laker GM
Posts: 2733
Location: Orange County
calif.gif
votes: 5

lakeshowsd wrote:
Def-one,

Here's the bench production this month in all 14 games:

L 3-9, 9 points

W 6-16, 13 points

W 15-29, 37 points

L 11-21, 29 points

L 9-24, 30 points

W 12-23, 31 points

W 4-9, 13 points

W 6-14, 18 points

W 7-11, 15 points

W 6-17, 15 points

L 8-19. 21 points

L 2-12, 7 points

W 4-13, 12 points

W 9-20, 22 points

Bench averages in wins: 45% shooting ,19.5 points

Bench averages in losses: 38% shooting, 19.2 points

So as you can see, it's not really a giant difference in the production off the bench in Laker Wins VS Losses in March. The bench is scoring pretty much the exact same amount in the 9 wins as they are in the 5 losses, and the shooting percentage difference is not nearly as significant as other offensive variables (Kobe's 47% shooting in wins VS 31% shooting in losses for example). Really, the bench is only marginally worse in Laker losses in March compared to Laker wins. Based on the stats, one can't say that the lack of bench production is one of the major or key reasons for the losses in March, because our bench production generally sucks whether we win or lose.

The Lakers are 2-2 with Ramon Sessions coming off the bench, and they are now 1-1 with him as a starter, so that also proves nothing. The bench was more productive with Ramon there, but it hasn't effected the Lakers positively in the wins and losses column.

Then whose fault is it? I don't think it's the coach. I think Mike Brown was trying to proof a point last game by sitting Kobe.


DaAssasins
Big-Time Laker Fan
Posts: 974
votes: 18

Well no knock on Sessions, because he is playing well. But, like I said before the way this team is constructed, we do not necessarily need a true PG to win. We have won 5 championships in the past decade or so, and did we have a true PG?? We won back to back championships with pretty much the same roster and Dfish as our PG. Bottom line, our Big 3 is going to score regardless if we have Dfish as our starting PG our Chris Paul as our starting PG. What we need is for role players to step up and contribute. If you look back at our wins, we had not only contribution from the bench, but we had contributions from our main role players like MWP, Sessions, Barnes.

But more importantly, we will a title if our bigs, decide to show up and play big every night, and that means not just scoring, but rebounding, and defending the paint.


KB24*BM
Laker GM
Posts: 4393
votes: 33

We solved our point guard problem, but we have a bigger problem. Our BENCH is the worst in the league.

If our starters struggle, there is no other option on our bench.

Also, Mike Brown has the rotation all messed up. I am still trying to figure out why Goudelock, J Hill, and Ebanks cant play.


lakeshowsd
LNS HOF Silver
Posts: 14613
Location: North Bend, OR
us.gif
votes: 144

DaAssasins wrote:
Well no knock on Sessions, because he is playing well. But, like I said before the way this team is constructed, we do not necessarily need a true PG to win. We have won 5 championships in the past decade or so, and did we have a true PG?? We won back to back championships with pretty much the same roster and Dfish as our PG. Bottom line, our Big 3 is going to score regardless if we have Dfish as our starting PG our Chris Paul as our starting PG. What we need is for role players to step up and contribute. If you look back at our wins, we had not only contribution from the bench, but we had contributions from our main role players like MWP, Sessions, Barnes.

But more importantly, we will a title if our bigs, decide to show up and play big every night, and that means not just scoring, but rebounding, and defending the paint.

Don't forget that Kobe and the guards and wing players have to play better defense on the perimeter as well. The bigs have to play big, but that doesn't excuse the guards and wing players from doing their jobs defensively as well. Guys like Kobe and Sessions could do a lot better job getting steals and being disruptive forces on the defensive end; just for starters.

Defense is a team effort and guys like Kobe, Sessions, MWP, Barnes, and Blake need to be accountable just as much as Pau and Drew.


lakeshowsd
LNS HOF Silver
Posts: 14613
Location: North Bend, OR
us.gif
votes: 144

MrKFC wrote:

Then whose fault is it? I don't think it's the coach. I think Mike Brown was trying to proof a point last game by sitting Kobe.

Right now, I blame the losses mostly on Drew's poor rebounding in losses, Kobe's bad shooting in losses, and the poor team defense in losses. To me, all the other problems have been secondary in the 5 losses so far this month. The biggest blame is the poor team defense because that's harder to overcome than Bynum's rebounding or Kobe's poor shooting. I'd say Kobe's shooting and Bynum's rebounding are secondary problems compared to the team defense, which has not been consistently good all month long.


DaAssasins
Big-Time Laker Fan
Posts: 974
votes: 18

I agree LSD, our guards do need to play better D, but when you have a quick guard, they can always get to the lane, regardless of who is guarding them, especially with all the pick and rolls, that team runs nowadays. But, I think come playoff time, our Defense will pick it up.


SaVaGe-DeF
LNS HOF Gold
Posts: 19687
votes: 51

The Lakers are at the bottom 3 in 3pt shooting at 31.4 and they average 14.8 TO's.


AyeDGAF
LNS HOF Bronze
Posts: 6060
Location: Northridge, Los Angeles
rp.gif
votes: 7

our problem is the defesne now and bench... last time we had good defense but struggle to score.. now we score at ease but lazy at defesne;


SaVaGe-DeF
LNS HOF Gold
Posts: 19687
votes: 51

lakeshowsd wrote:
MrKFC wrote:

Then whose fault is it? I don't think it's the coach. I think Mike Brown was trying to proof a point last game by sitting Kobe.

Right now, I blame the losses mostly on Drew's poor rebounding in losses, Kobe's bad shooting in losses, and the poor team defense in losses. To me, all the other problems have been secondary in the 5 losses so far this month. The biggest blame is the poor team defense because that's harder to overcome than Bynum's rebounding or Kobe's poor shooting. I'd say Kobe's shooting and Bynum's rebounding are secondary problems compared to the team defense, which has not been consistently good all month long.

I agree with this.


MrMojo112
LNS HOF Bronze
Posts: 9565

calif.gif
votes: 38

I think we have to give it at least 15-20 games before we can judge if a trade was right or not. 6 games is not a big enough sample size, especially considering that Mike Brown just barely inserted Sessions into the starting lineup 2 games ago. I think they all need more time to get more acquainted with each other and gel.


MrKFC
Laker GM
Posts: 2733
Location: Orange County
calif.gif
votes: 5

Def-one-24-2 wrote:
lakeshowsd wrote:
MrKFC wrote:

Then whose fault is it? I don't think it's the coach. I think Mike Brown was trying to proof a point last game by sitting Kobe.

Right now, I blame the losses mostly on Drew's poor rebounding in losses, Kobe's bad shooting in losses, and the poor team defense in losses. To me, all the other problems have been secondary in the 5 losses so far this month. The biggest blame is the poor team defense because that's harder to overcome than Bynum's rebounding or Kobe's poor shooting. I'd say Kobe's shooting and Bynum's rebounding are secondary problems compared to the team defense, which has not been consistently good all month long.

I agree with this.

Yeah, me too. I can agree with that as well.


lakeshowsd
LNS HOF Silver
 Avatar
Posts: 14613
Location: North Bend, OR
us.gif
votes: 144

Def-one-24-2 wrote:
The Lakers are at the bottom 3 in 3pt shooting at 31.4 and they average 14.8 TO's.

I thought about mentioning the turnovers, but I looked at the numbers and the Lakers are turning the ball over a lot in both wins and losses, so it's hard to really blame the losses on turnovers. One can't really draw a direct correlation between the turnovers and their 5 losses so far in March, because the Lakers are averaging 15.6 turnovers per game in the 5 losses VS 15.6 turnovers in their 9 wins. So whether they win or lose, they're still averaging the same amount of turnovers, Def.

As for the 3-point shooting, the Lakers have shot 61-166 (36%) from downtown in their 9 March wins, VS 26-90 (28%) in their losses. That's a fairly significant difference, but certainly not unexpected. The Lakers have not been a good 3-point shooting team all season long, and as a team they rank 3rd worst in the NBA this season in 3-point percentage, so the Lakers have had to overcome a lot of bad 3-point shooting nights in order to win games. I prefer not to list the Lakers 3-point shooting woes as anything more than a secondary reason for the team's losses in March. Since 3-point shooting is not a major strength for the Lakers in the first place, it can't generally be more than marginally blamed for their losses and marginally credited for their wins, IMHO.


SaVaGe-DeF
LNS HOF Gold
Age: 26
Posts: 19687
votes: 51

lakeshowsd wrote:
Def-one-24-2 wrote:
The Lakers are at the bottom 3 in 3pt shooting at 31.4 and they average 14.8 TO's.

I thought about mentioning the turnovers, but I looked at the numbers and the Lakers are turning the ball over a lot in both wins and losses, so it's hard to really blame the losses on turnovers. One can't really draw a direct correlation between the turnovers and their 5 losses so far in March, because the Lakers are averaging 15.6 turnovers per game in the 5 losses VS 15.6 turnovers in their 9 wins. So whether they win or lose, they're still averaging the same amount of turnovers, Def.

As for the 3-point shooting, the Lakers have shot 61-166 (36%) from downtown in their 9 March wins, VS 26-90 (28%) in their losses. That's a fairly significant difference, but certainly not unexpected. The Lakers have not been a good 3-point shooting team all season long, and as a team they rank 3rd worst in the NBA this season in 3-point percentage, so the Lakers have had to overcome a lot of bad 3-point shooting nights in order to win games. I prefer not to list the Lakers 3-point shooting woes as anything more than a secondary reason for the team's losses in March.

So the blame comes down to the things I agreed with you on top. The Lakers need more effort on both ends then.


TheMagicontinues
Big-Time Laker Fan
Posts: 877
votes: 5

lakeshowsd wrote:
[I'mI was talking about how the Lakers problems go deeper than the point guard issue, .

then why did you name the topic "3-3 since the trade"???

roll

If you wanted to say we still have issues with a bench, or whatever, then don't contradit yourself by nameing a thread 3-3 since the trade. No person who knows the game thinks we are anything but better since the trade, sure our record is only 3-3, but we are a much better team now than we were before the trade, anyone who says otherwise doesn't know the game, so your point is moot. roll


mhf94
Die-Hard Laker Fan
Posts: 1974
Location: Portugal
votes: 14

I think Sessions should be the starter but should also play along with barnes in pratically all of barnes' minutes


lakeshowsd
LNS HOF Silver
Posts: 14613
Location: North Bend, OR
us.gif
votes: 144

MrMojo112 wrote:
I think we have to give it at least 15-20 games before we can judge if a trade was right or not. 6 games is not a big enough sample size, especially considering that Mike Brown just barely inserted Sessions into the starting lineup 2 games ago. I think they all need more time to get more acquainted with each other and gel.

I agree with you, but that's not really the point of the OP or the point of the discussion on this thread. Did you read the post? Have you read the discussions here? It really has nothing to do with whether the Sessions trade was good or not. It's about examining the flaws and the problems with the Lakers despite our improvement at the point guard position. I thought it was an important topic of discussion because it was previously thought that that the Lakers would solve a major problem by ditching Fisher for an upgrade like Sessions, but now we're finding that the team's problems go much further and deeper than the point guard issue. The 3-3 record since Sessions' arrival is evidence of that.


lakeshowsd
LNS HOF Silver
 Avatar
Posts: 14613
Location: North Bend, OR
us.gif
votes: 144

TheMagicontinues wrote:
lakeshowsd wrote:
[I'mI was talking about how the Lakers problems go deeper than the point guard issue, .

then why did you name the topic "3-3 since the trade"???

roll

If you wanted to say we still have issues with a bench, or whatever, then don't contradit yourself by nameing a thread 3-3 since the trade. No person who knows the game thinks we are anything but better since the trade, sure our record is only 3-3, but we are a much better team now than we were before the trade, anyone who says otherwise doesn't know the game, so your point is moot. roll

Wow, you really aren't understanding are you? How is the point moot? Yes, the Lakers are 3-3 since Sessions arrival, which is evidence to suggest that despite the obvious upgrade at the point guard position, the point guard situation was not our biggest problem as a team. The Lakers have other problems that are preventing them from playing more consistent winning basketball. That's really the point here. If you feel the title was misleading, then I'm sorry you feel that way, but I think all the people who took time to really read and absorb the post in it's entirety understand what I am saying.

If you feel like you want to argue with me, that's one thing, but I'm more interested in good basketball discussion rather than getting into it with people who don't really care to understand the points I'm making, and who instead prefer to just be dismissive and roll their eyes.


SourceCode
Laker GM
Posts: 3714
votes: 26

1st off, I never thought getting a solid pg would solve all our problems. I thought it would take care of a big problem though, which it did.

we could nitpick other things, and those things shouldn't be overlooked and improved, but the rotation is the lakers biggest problem. sure, the 1st unit could beat a lot of teams, and has, but we need bench production so the starters could get rest. when the starters are tired because they have to play so many minutes, it leads to sloppy play; lack of defense, lack of boxing out, lack of offense efficiency, etc.. we put in players that fail to produce, when we have players that can. our rotation is our biggest problem.


lakeshowsd
LNS HOF Silver
 Avatar
Posts: 14613
Location: North Bend, OR
us.gif
votes: 144

gemfow wrote:
Lakeshowsd: Bynum can't board made shots, just missed ones, so that contributes as well.

The lakers defense took a hit when they started scoring more and even with last nights loss they put up 96 points. At the beginning of the season they could win with 96 points. I'm not sure if this lax D is reflective of Brown possibly losing players or just laziness.

gem,

Sure, that does contribute, but we're seeing games where Gasol badly outrebounds Bynum (last night for example), so there's definitely rebounds to be had. Whatever his reasons, Drew is just not getting them in a number of our losses. Between Pau and Drew, the Lakers should be able to keep teams off the offensive glass, but we didn't see that happen last night against Memphis, which was one of the reasons for the loss.

As for the team defense, I agree with your points. I don't know why their defense has slipped so much in the recent weeks but it's definitely a problem now; I'd say the biggest problem with the team currently, and I think it's a major cause for concern. I hope Brown isn't losing players at this stage because the playoffs are just around the corner and the Lakers aren't going anywhere in the post-season without solid, reliable team defense.

The team defense so far this season is the only reason I have given the Lakers' a puncher's chance to win a title this year, so with that fading fast, a puncher's chance is quickly becoming no chance at all. Gotta defend to win a chip. Period.


lakeshowsd
LNS HOF Silver
Posts: 14613
Location: North Bend, OR
us.gif
votes: 144

SourceCode wrote:
1st off, I never thought getting a solid pg would solve all our problems. I thought it would take care of a big problem though, which it did.

we could nitpick other things, and those things shouldn't be overlooked and improved, but the rotation is the lakers biggest problem. sure, the 1st unit could beat a lot of teams, and has, but we need bench production so the starters could get rest. when the starters are tired because they have to play so many minutes, it leads to sloppy play; lack of defense, lack of boxing out, lack of offense efficiency, etc.. we put in players that fail to produce, when we have players that can. our rotation is our biggest problem.

Hard to fully agree with you because you're basically saying that our biggest problem is something that can't be fixed at this late stage of the season. The bench is what they are. Period. They aren't going to get any better and they won't improve their talent level at this point. Mike Brown can rest the starters more, and get a sub rotation that sees guys like Blake, Barnes, McBob and others getting more minutes, but that's not going to result in more wins; only more losses. Bottom line, our starters gotta play heavy minutes and they have to earn their countless millions by sacking up and playing consistently better defense. Otherwise, they'll lose more games than they should.


LakerDymes
Laker GM
 Avatar
Age: 31
Posts: 3741
votes: 19

SourceCode wrote:
1st off, I never thought getting a solid pg would solve all our problems. I thought it would take care of a big problem though, which it did.

the rotation is the lakers biggest problem. sure, we could nitpick other things and the 1st unit could beat a lot of teams, and has, but we need bench production so the starters could get rest. when the starters are tired because they have to play so many minutes, it leads to sloppy play; lack of defense, lack of boxing out, lack of offense efficiency, etc.. our rotation is our biggest problem.

if only we had gotten beasley huh? the dude is a chucker but theres no denying playing with a guy like sessions would have suited his strenghts.

theres no point in playing the "what if" game though. we have to make due with what we have. i still think that goudelock would do at least a little better than blake.

goudelock was the primary ball handler in college and i think thats why he hasnt really become the efficient 3pt shooter we envisioned him to be. i think if he were to play the point(like early in the season) and have the ball in his hands more he would produce more. its really hard for a guy who was the main option on a team in college to come in and be a spot up shooter, just ask jj redick. it took him a while before he was able to really contribute.

i would like to see Mike B take more risks with his rotations. maybe try ebanks or morris and see if we can catch lightning in a bottle heading into the playoffs, ala the knicks with Lin. you never know until you try and with the way the starters are playing as well, the rest would really be beneficial.


MrMojo112
LNS HOF Bronze
 Avatar
Age: 32
Posts: 9565

calif.gif
votes: 38

lakeshowsd wrote:
I agree with you, but that's not really the point of the OP or the point of the discussion on this thread. Did you read the post? Have you read the discussions here? It really has nothing to do with whether the Sessions trade was good or not. It's about examining the flaws and the problems with the Lakers despite our improvement at the point guard position. I thought it was an important topic of discussion because it was previously thought that that the Lakers would solve a major problem by ditching Fisher for an upgrade like Sessions, but now we're finding that the team's problems go much further and deeper than the point guard issue. The 3-3 record since Sessions' arrival is evidence of that.

Maybe I didn't get my point across too well because of that opening sentence. My bad on the miscommunication, I should have specified my intentions. But I wasn't necessarily trying to prove if the trade was bad. I was merely saying that maybe if we give them time to come together, that these problems that are being discussed in this thread might be solved. I just thought it was right to start of with the fact that it would only be right to give the Lakers more games to let them gel together with Sessions in the starting lineup. I feel like they need a bigger sample size to see what's really wrong, that is if Sessions stays in the starting lineup.

The bench is suffering a from the loss of Sessions and the switch back to Blake and there are some things for the team to get used to. Heck, we might even see Sessions return to the bench, just to give them the boost that it sorely needs. I think that once the Lakers finally get comfortable and the rotations are set in stone, we'll see them improve tenfold. That's just what I'm thinking though.


lakeshowsd
LNS HOF Silver
 Avatar
Posts: 14613
Location: North Bend, OR
us.gif
votes: 144

MrMojo112 wrote:
lakeshowsd wrote:
I agree with you, but that's not really the point of the OP or the point of the discussion on this thread. Did you read the post? Have you read the discussions here? It really has nothing to do with whether the Sessions trade was good or not. It's about examining the flaws and the problems with the Lakers despite our improvement at the point guard position. I thought it was an important topic of discussion because it was previously thought that that the Lakers would solve a major problem by ditching Fisher for an upgrade like Sessions, but now we're finding that the team's problems go much further and deeper than the point guard issue. The 3-3 record since Sessions' arrival is evidence of that.

Maybe I didn't get my point across too well because of that opening sentence. My bad on the miscommunication. But I wasn't necessarily trying to prove if the trade was bad. I was merely saying that maybe if we give them time to come together, that these problems that are being discussed in this thread might be solved. I just thought it was right to start of with the fact that it would only be right to give the Lakers more games to let them gel together with Sessions in the starting lineup. I feel like they need a bigger sample size to see what's really wrong, that is if Sessions stays in the starting lineup.

The bench is suffering a from the loss of Sessions and the switch back to Blake and there are some things for the team to get used to. Heck, we might even see Sessions return to the bench, just to give them the boost that it sorely needs. I think that once the Lakers finally get comfortable and the rotations are set in stone, we'll see them improve tenfold. That's just what I'm thinking though.

That's a fair point and I can understand that opinion. I'm certainly not trying to jump to conclusions on this thread, which is why I examined the entire month of Laker basketball in March and found the constant statistical trends in the wins and losses. I thought this was obvious but perhaps I also didn't make my point clearly enough. Thank you for clarifying your position, Mojo, and I do agree with the things you're saying.

I also try not to make too many excuses for the Lakers because Sessions was such a tremendous upgrade over Fisher that I really expected to see the results in the win/loss column after 6 games played. I think it's fair to say that most of us did. Unfortunately, that hasn't happened yet and I can only hope these other issues at the forefront of the Lakers problems (team defense, Drew's inconsistent rebounding, Kobe's inconsistent shooting) will be mostly resolved in the final month of the regular season; as Sessions gets more time to integrate himself into the team.

A road win tomorrow against the inferior Warriors, and then a decisive home win against the OKC Thunder on Thursday will go a long way towards alleviating my growing concerns about this Lakers team. Any other losses and poor team defensive efforts this week will only further justify the things I've been saying. Let's hope they pull it together because losing at home on Thursday against OKC will be 3 losses out of their last 4 home games; a place where the Lakers had been all but unbeatable until recently. That's another potentially disturbing trend....


Dundie2k
Big-Time Laker Fan
Posts: 946
votes: 2

The bench now is our biggest problem. I mean c'mon, they scored 9 points last night. I'd take a look at the waiver wire to see who we can sign that can give much-needed scoring. Also, may I just say that Steve is the worst piece of s*** ever. He must feel the pressure to match up to Sessions, but of course, he can't. Thanks for being the most useless piece of garbage on this team.


maraud
LNS HOF Bronze
Posts: 5827
votes: 28

Def-one-24-2 wrote:
lakeshowsd wrote:
Def-one-24-2 wrote:
You forgot bench production.

I didn't think the lack of bench production was a significant reason for the wins and losses in March because the Lakers bench has been consistently bad this season, whether they win or lose. Still, I will have to look at the stats and see if there's a way to justify your statement in any way.

41 pts from the Grizzlies bench against the Lakers bench 9 pts.

The game against Portland even though the Lakers won the bench had 13 pts against the Blazers 34 pts. The game against the Mav's when Sessions was coming of the bench the Lakers got 36 pts while the Mav's had 38 pts.

Matt Barnes is the only bench player playing consistent, Blake has lost his confidence again, McRoberts is good for rebounds and dunks, Murphy is horrible at shooting, and Goudelock probably the other bright side of the bench fell off the rotation.

Blake is the major problem with the bench. It is more than confidence, he is a second unit Fish replica. Until we get a good young and quick PG for the second unit they will remain stagnant and unproductive.


SourceCode
Laker GM
 Avatar
Posts: 3714
votes: 26

lakeshowsd wrote:

Hard to fully agree with you because you're basically saying that our biggest problem is something that can't be fixed at this late stage of the season. The bench is what they are. Period. They aren't going to get any better and they won't improve their talent level at this point. Mike Brown can rest the starters more, and get a sub rotation that sees guys like Blake, Barnes, McBob and others getting more minutes, but that's not going to result in more wins; only more losses. Bottom line, our starters gotta play heavy minutes and they have to earn their countless millions by sacking up and playing consistently better defense. Otherwise, they'll lose more games than they should.

the rotation could change, mike brown could simply try different players to back up our starters. we have players that will produce on the bench, this i'm sure of. right now, mike brown only plays particular players, 4 to be exact; blake, barnes, murphy, and mcroberts. barnes is the only one that has been producing, although I love mcroberts energy. now we have on the bench, ebanks, hill, morris, and goudelock just watching, waiting for their chance, but brown refuses to put them in; even if they do provide for us.

we seen the production glock gave us off the bench, but mike said "i'm not gonna play him." we seen how little to no production blake and murphy have given the lakers, but mike said, "i'm going with them."

and it's not solely replacing the 2nd unit. he also spaces out the minutes of the starters terrible. sessions was playing really good yesterday, then mike brown subbed him out for 8 minutes. while blake didn't do anything, that whole 8 minutes. he left bynum in there for basically the whole game. murphy was in there for a bulk of minutes, while pau just watched and murphy provided no production.. etc.

yesterday was just an example, but he has done this over the course of season.

these are the type of things that can be adjusted, he just doesn't and the more we rare our starters out, the less effective they will be.


jrdogg29
Serious Laker Fan
Posts: 363
votes: 0

coach has a plan he knows the weapons that he has on the bench and is not willing to spring them on our opponents just yet.Murphy wiill sit. Hill will brings some toughness.


Axle
LNS HOF Silver
Posts: 14954
Location: Axle
votes: 71

OH YES, the point guards we had and have were simply terrible, but Session is not going to be the Lakers savior. Blake has to play a lot better then what he is. We get no production from Blake in scoring and several turn overs every time he comes into the game, the Lakers have a problem. I would definitely bench him and work Goudelock as point guard coming off the bench. He showed me a lot when he was playing in place of Blake when Blake was injured. He had ice running through his veins and done a great job.

What I don't like about Blake is that he thinks Kobe is the only offense. I hate when a team is one dimensional. He passes to Kobe, Kobe kicks it to somebody else and it goes full circle only to end up again with Kobe with time running out. Even if players like Murphy are wide open, they will not shoot and you can not have that. It is poorly executed and a bad shot has to be forced out by Kobe. Now when you have Kobe, Session and Matt Barnes and our bigs, the offense moves smooth. Matt and Sessions work together real good and if Brown has any kind of brains, he should match those two together all the time.


SourceCode
Laker GM
 Avatar
Posts: 3714
votes: 26

jrdogg29 wrote:
coach has a plan he knows the weapons that he has on the bench and is not willing to spring them on our opponents just yet.Murphy wiill sit. Hill will brings some toughness.

mmm.. I like your thinking.



Options Quick Reply: RE: 3-3 Since Sessions Trade: I Guess the PG was Not the Problem
register
You are an anonymous user- or .
Quote the last message
Attach signature (signatures can be changed in profile)
Notify me when a reply is posted
Don't Check Spelling
Note: Twitter & Youtube BBCODE Tags are no longer necessary. The system will automatically convert links to tweets & youtube videos.
   
 
Go To the Top of the ThreadGo Home
Post new topic   Reply to topic
register
You are an anonymous user- Register now or Log in Now!


Add our Los Angeles Lakers Blog RSS Feed, the Lakers Rumors RSS Feed, the Lakers News RSS feed, and the Lakers Forum RSS feed to get the latest Laker News and Rumors and Lakers Game info in your RSS/XML reader!