How Good Is Our Bench?

Simple question how good will our bench be this season? They were deadlast in scoring last year along with the LOLcats. They've added Antawn Jamison who averaged 17 ppg for Cleveland last season and Jodie Meeks who averaged 9 ppg for Philly last season.

Broderick Turner did an article which I just posted, for today's L.A. Times. Searched first to see if anyone had picked up on it. Then saw your post TLF. Probably a good merge between the two. Ex Lakers gave a few comments in Turner's article.

Jamison and Meeks are really good pickups. Resigning Hill was also big.

Unlike most, I still hold out hope for Blake. GLock isn't afraid to shoot and I really hope he can give us some good minutes. Brown doesn't seem to like him though.

Ebanks is athletic, but he hasn't put it together yet and I doubt he'll be ready to provide solid minutes. We're really hurting at the 3 behind Ron.

The rest? Not much to say. They could get cut today and I wouldn't care.

To sum it up, the bench is better then last year, but still has a lot of holes. Most glaring is at the 3.

Glock will be most likely cut before the roster is final. I cannot imagine Brown having any plans for him even though he showed some scoring punch from the bench with that sweet floater and the 3 ball. He is just too exposed in other areas to stick around...undersized, no handles whatsoever, can't pass, can't defend, looked awful at summer league.

Unless he is lights out he will be cut before opening night and you can quote me on that.

Nash / Blake / Duhon / Morris
Bryant /Meeks
Artest / Ebanks
Pau / Jamison / Clark
Dwight / Hill

Sacre, DJO and Glock will fight for the last spot. I just don't see us keeping a 7th guard, especially knowing he literally won't play a single second with Meeks in the wings and even Blake getting prefered as a SG (which is absurd BTW).

Sacre sucks but he is a big body and we do not have any "big" dudes on the bench. He will also not complain.

I have a few quantifiable ways of looking at the bench. I'm looking at just Blake/Meeks/Ebanks/Jamison/Hill. And I'm basing this off their stats from last season.

1. Offensive Roles
What they do with their possessions:
Blake hands out an assist on 1/3 of his possessions consumed. Jamison 9.4, Meeks 9.1, Ebanks 8.8, and Hill 6.8 aren't big assist guys. This makes Blake the clear-cut distributor.

Meeks (78.8) and Jamison (74.5) shoot on the vast majority of their possessions consumed. This makes them both scoring options. Both have three-point ability and the ability to score inside if needed. That's nice versatility. And it's an area where our second unit is better than it was last season.

Hill shoots on 70.1% of his possessions; he doesn't pass well out of the post; he's a garbage man.

Ebanks shot on 65.2% of his possessions. He was fouled on 12.8% of his possessions (highest among our second unit), making him the driving/streaking option.

So, it sure seems as if the Lakers have pretty clearly defined roles on offense.

2. Individual Efficiency
Key: 90+ = star, 80+ = starter, 60+ = good backup, <50 = end of bench/DNP player

Hill 82
Jamison 64
Blake 56
Meeks 51
Ebanks 50 (I expect his number to be higher this season)
-What we're losing is McRoberts's high assist rate from the PF spot and Barnes's efficient hustling. In exchange, we're getting Ebanks, a raw version of Barnes; Meeks, a more proven and tested Goudelock-type player; and a better scoring option in the low post in Jamison. I think we're more experienced, have more scoring punch, and have better shooting ability. Although we're losing the high assist rate, this second unit might actually take care of the ball better than our second stringers did last year. I am mildly concerned about our defensive ability. Ebanks can defend 1 on 1, Hill can be effective, and Blake has a modicum of talent on D. Jamison and Meeks are regarded as poor defenders.

3. Synergy
Key = 1.10 is league average
This is a measure of how the players do as part of a unit, how well they capitalize on the talents of their teammates. Ebanks was the least efficient of these players last season, producing .9 points per possession consumed. That's bad. Hill also had a low number (.97), mostly because he turned it over a good deal and doesn't hand out assists. Jamison isn't all that efficient either, but it's a question of whether he'll be efficient enough to make teams stick to him at the perimeter; if he can do that, he'll help the others on his unit. That will clear up lanes for Ebanks and shots for Blake and Meeks. By the way, Meeks produced 1.13 points per possession (very low TO rate, so he doesn't waste possessions), and Blake produced 1.23 per possession (very high assist rate).

There is more talent than the last 3 years definitely but I want them to go perform well. Guys lose their shooting touch for whatever reason once they come here so there is expectations on Meeks and Jamison to provide some relief in that area

Look its not like even during Shaq/Kobe and Kobe/Gasol title eras we had a lights out bench, they routinely squandered leads in playoff games but we had bench guys who could step in with the starters and provide relief when Kobe and Gasol came in to put out the fire, those are the type of players we need

So when Ron is struggling you could put Meeks at the 2 and Kobe at the 3. When Gasol or Hill are in foul trouble or struggling or waht not and we need spacing upfront we put Jamison at the 4. We just need some alternatives in case one of the starters are struggling and we didnt have that the last few years, we do now

^ Good stuff trodgers.

Our bench is somewhere between good and very good. One thing that you can say for sure is that they won't be last in the league in scoring. Not with guys like Meeks and Jamison.

Defense could be a problem, but like I said in the other thread: I don't have any expectation of the entire bench unit being out there very often. With the amount of talent we have in our starting lineup, we shouldn't see too much of the full bench squad in games until blowouts happen.

When we've got 4 players that command as much attention and respect as Nash/Kobe/Howard/Gasol, we need to give them the opportunities to shine.

Our starting lineup has almost no weaknesses. Outside of Artest, these are established All-Stars that all mesh very well together. Together, I think they're the strongest team in the league by far (yes over Miami and OKC). But it's in smaller match-ups that they should shine.

A lineup on the floor should always have a big and small combo. Two duos that absolutely must be game planned for are: Kobe/Pau and Dwight/Nash. Those two combinations could take a team to the playoffs by themselves. Together, those are two duos that could carry a squad.

But if they want to go another direction and have entire bench mob come in at a time... well that team is pretty solid. Probably somewhere slightly above average in the league.

therealdeal wrote:^ Good stuff trodgers.

Our bench is somewhere between good and very good. One thing that you can say for sure is that they won't be last in the league in scoring. Not with guys like Meeks and Jamison.

Agreed. For their respective positions, Jamison and Hill get the job done. Meeks and Blake can shoot. Ebanks...well, I have some fairly high hopes for him. #1 for him is just strive for consistency. He played some excellent D against Durant and showed very effective offensive maneuvering at times. And at times he flat out sucked.

Defense could be a problem, but like I said in the other thread: I don't have any expectation of the entire bench unit being out there very often. With the amount of talent we have in our starting lineup, we shouldn't see too much of the full bench squad in games until blowouts happen.

Definitely. We have some intriguing matchup opportunities. Mostly I'm thinking that long scoring droughts for us will be far less common than last season. That will let the aging starters rest and give the bench more seasoning. And compared to last season, if we lose a PG, we're not looking at DLeague scraps. Duhon isn't good, but he's better than Morris.

The real staples as far as I'm concerned are Jamison, Meeks, and Hill in that order. We finally have a go to option with the 2nd unit, something we haven't had in some time (and no, I don't count LO as a go to option offensively). We have two players who can put up buckets and in a hurry, players who the other team have to scheme against. Two players who have started in this league and who could start on other teams.

If Hill continues from where he left off towards the end of the season and the post-season, he'll be huge for our 2nd unit. He's clean up responsibilities are key -- defense, rebounds, and put back buckets.

Offensively, our weak points are Ebanks and Blake. Ebanks due to inexperience and Blake due to his Laker slump. I'm hoping having defined roles will help both of them, however. A more traditional 2nd unit, training camp, and limiting Brown's duties will factor in too. Blake knows who to get the ball to during their halfcourt sets now, so offensively he'll be more of a distributor. With Barnes gone, Ebanks shouldn't be looking behind his back, waiting to be replaced or playing it too safe out there. A lot of time young players who are fighting for a spot play it conservative and over think, cause one screw up will get them benched. With this unit, I'd like to see him just slash and attack the rim. Watch some Barnes tape (regular season, when healthy) and due his best to imitate that.

Defensively it's up to Hill, Ebanks, and Meeks. Ebanks and Meeks both have the tools to be key contributors on the defensive end of the floor. Meeks is already a very good man-to-man defender, Brown should be able to get better team D out of him...that is his specialty after all. Ebanks has shown flashes,

Overall, we have one of the better bench squads we've had in several years. There are some weaknesses on both sides of the ball, but I think they'll be able to cover up one another's deficiencies. Not to mention that it shouldn't be all 5 of them out there at once when we aren't blowing a team out, there will be at least one starter out there with them. The biggest thing I'm looking forward to with this group is being able to put them in without the lead evaporating in a matter of seconds. Our starters might actually be able to get some rest and not have to come back in the game, after they thought they were done for the night, but because our bench sucked, they had to come save the day.

Our bench will be great!

I would say our bench is decent. Meeks, Jamison, and Hill are pretty much average NBA players, the rest though, is nothing to write home about. However, the three aforementioned players are good fits here, and will look great playing alongside Nash and co.

But seriously though, our bench isn't that great, but it's probably enough to get it done.

I would say our bench is good enough, as in good enough to win it all with. There really aren't a ton of great benches out there, and IMO now ours is one of the better ones instead of statistically one of worst. Blake, still has yet to live up to expectations here, but with players that can actually shoot or score now to pass it to he could look better. As stated by others, Meeks/Jamison/Hill is the real strength of the bench, Hill being a hustle guy, Meeks and Jamison being able to put up the points we have lacked from the bench. Ebanks has to just not be bad, if he's decent, average, good, whatever, we will be good enough.

I had this discussion with a friend of mine yesterday. And I told him that it doesn't really matter much how good our bench is as long as it's better than last year. Even having just a top 20 bench is a significant upgrade from having THE worst bench. That's the biggest thing.

Also, as Miami proved in 2011, your bench doesn't matter much when your team is so top heavy and stacked at 3+ positions. The Heat had a TERRIBLE team outside the big 3. Bibby was their starting PG and was the least efficient player ever in NBA Playoffs history. Big Z was their starting center and retired soon after the season. Mario Chalmers was their best player off the bench and he wasn't even as good as he was this past season. Then they had a banged up Mike Miller and Haslem. Joel Anthony was a one-trick pony (still is). And even still, if it weren't for that game 2 collapse in the Finals, they likely would have won it all. I know they play in the East, but it just goes to show that your bench players don't really matter if your team is so star studded and will have at least one all star on the floor at almost all times (for us, it's probably at least 2 come playoff time).

Comparing that to our team...we have a very stacked starting 5. We have a big 4 and Metta is a very good fifth option. Metta is probably better than anyone on the Heat's 2011 team outside the big 3. On top of that, a bench of Jamison, Hill, and Meeks is VERY good considering how good our starting five is. You have to consider that our starting five is so strong (like I said, it makes you rely on the bench less), because at least one of the big 4 will be playing with the second unit at all times. This is especially true come playoff time when rotations shorten out to about 8 players, where you WILL have at least 2 of our big 4 on the floor at all times. How deadly is that? The better your team, the less need for depth. That's the scary part. We already have the best starting five. And our bench is very good too, relative to the other teams. Rarely do you see that kind of combination. We are built to win now. Too often people look at our bench as if we're going to sub five bench players in at once. That's not how it works. We have arguably the best 8 man rotation in the league. That's all that matters.

Frank Dux wrote:I would say our bench is decent. Meeks, Jamison, and Hill are pretty much average NBA players, the rest though, is nothing to write home about. However, the three aforementioned players are good fits here, and will look great playing alongside Nash and co.

But seriously though, our bench isn't that great, but it's probably enough to get it done.

Jamison is still a 17 & 6 player. He's above average.

On paper much much better than last season.

i dont remember how many times i said 'man if we only have a somewhat decent bench, we could really mess with teams' during games last year


we now have a more than a 'somewhat decent bench'...and an even better starting unit...i wish it was opening night already

are you guys kidding me??
we have a great bench!!
Jamison, if we didnt have such a great starting five, would have been a contender for the 6th man award.
J Hill showed so much energy and potential. hes a perfect fit for a backup center.
Meeks hits the jackpott on 3 points missions when the offence gets stuck. young tallent.
and i still have faith in blake. he had some great games last season. and was really good against Denver in the playoffs. maybe now behind Nash and with no pressure he will kick [Swearing is not permitted at Clublakers. You must edit this post prior to submitting.] from the bench.
Ebanks is a mystery but very athletic. well know more when the season starts. have high hopes for him.

if we had last seasons starting five i would have said the bench wasent good enough. but it seems in every position we have the perfect fitt to fill the role.

Great is pushing it. Jamison is a 17 & 6 player and probably the best bench scorer we've had in the Kobe era. Meeks is a solid backup 2 who can really space the flood. Hill is just a great energy player. Solid defender and rebounder. Blake and Ebanks are question marks. I'd say it's a solid bench.

I like Jamison a lot off the bench.
Meeks is a wait and see but he has the most potential of any bench player we've had in a while that's for sure
Hill I'm still ambivalent toward in many ways..... he showed nothing prior to a 20 game stretch for us.... I hope that's the new norm....not what he did before he got paid....
Blake... He was killing it before the injury last year and never seemed to recover from it on the court. Hopefully this year his role definition will help him.... we'll see.

After those guys we have the same troubled unit of last year. I hope we don't have to rely on any of them longer than a few games at a time....

While McRoberts didn't have a good first year with us I really liked what he brought to the table in terms of overall ability at both ends..... if he could have gotten in the rotation on a more consistent basis I think he would have developed into a very valuable player off the bench... Oh well....

We seem to be a Big away from a full rotation IMO... Sacre or a vet min signing may be needed to round out the roster.... right now we seem thin in the front court.... especially when you look at Pau's age and Howard's injury and time needed to come back fully.

I think the bench is average now. Thats MUCH better then last.

I'm gonna have to say somewhere in the Top 30 for sure.

nthydro wrote:I'm gonna have to say somewhere in the Top 30 for sure.

Not sure I'd go that far.

We will have a top 15 bench this year if.....

Blake - Stays aggressive and shoots the 3 ball and can dish a few assists, while ONLY playing PG.

Meeks - Shoots 37-40% from 3 and plays solid defense. Takes on the perimeter scoring role off the bench.

Ebanks - Plays the defensive stopper role, energy guy and can hit an open shot here and there

Jamison - 6th man scoring levels, not much else expected defensively. Just needs to come in and light it up.

Hill - Defender, garbage man offense, energy guy.

Duhon, Morris, Clark - High fives and chest bumps

3 defenders - Meeks / Hill / Ebanks

3 shooters - Meeks / Jamison / Hopefully Blake

2 scorers - Meeks / Jamison

1 distributor - Blake

It's good, but not great. If Ebanks becomes Ariza 2.0 and Blake goes back to his Portland days where he shot the lights out from the 3, we'll have a bench that can compete with OKC's and Miami's.

Doc Brown wrote:Blake - Stays aggressive and shoots the 3 ball and can dish a few assists, while ONLY playing PG.

Why did you have to remind me of this? Brown having him play SG was pure torture. I've taken plenty of pills to forget about this........ and you bring it up!

Meeks - Shoots 37-40% from 3 and plays solid defense. Takes on the perimeter scoring role off the bench.

IMO, Laker fans are gonna love him.

Ebanks - Plays the defensive stopper role, energy guy and can hit an open shot here and there

Our biggest question mark and most crucial spot on the bench, because the SF position is our weak link among starters and the bench.

Jamison - 6th man scoring levels, not much else expected defensively. Just needs to come in and light it up.

I'm confident he will.

Hill - Defender, garbage man offense, energy guy.

I hope he continues to progress and eventually challenge for scarce minutes. Love his energy / rebounding.

Duhon, Morris, Clark - High fives and chest bumps

Scrubs that are nothing but practice fodder.