

KB24 wrote:no, don't pull the complacency excuse card please...its inaccurate and a broken record here on CL.
This team doesn't play defense, plain and simple. They lack speed, athleticism and energy and its got nothing to do with them thinking they are awesome.



KB24 wrote:no, don't pull the complacency excuse card please...its inaccurate and a broken record here on CL.
This team doesn't play defense, plain and simple. They lack speed, athleticism and energy and its got nothing to do with them thinking they are awesome.


lotus wrote:Two poor coaching hires by the same guy. And and a roster not built for either.

karacha wrote:We can all agree that Lakers are inconsistent. Why is that? In my opinion there are really only three reasons:
1. We had many injuries and very limited time to develop chemistry. And, as we all know, chemistry is absolutely essential if you have championship aspirations.
2. Coaching change and a completely different system in place. This is big, obviously. MDA might not be the best coach in the world, but he's OK... better then Brown, for sure. His style is totally different though and now players have to adapt again. This is not easy to do.
3. This one might be the most important: With Steve Nash running the point, the Lakers are the most potent offensive team in the league, believe it or not. Currently, the best overall ORtg team is OKC with 110.1, which is really impressive. Our team, with Nash has an ORtg of 113.3. But due to the lack of chemistry (mentioned earlier) and therefore the lack of communication, our defense is slightly below average. This has to change. We don't need to be the top defensive team in the league, but slightly above average with better communication would do.



JGC wrote:Yeah, I think the issue with the team not competing or giving effort is a symptom of a problem, not the cause of the problem.
The reason we see lapses on the defensive end, IMO, has more to do with the offensive end than anything else. We are often completely out of sync on the offensive end. There hasn't been much rhythm or flow. And when you have an offensive minded team like we do, their focus trails off when things are out of order.
When you have an offensive minded team, they will play defense and communicate and give extra effort when things are clicking offensively. With a defensive minded team, the opposite is true. When things are clicking on all cylinders defensively, suddenly you have guys who may not be otherwise offensively talented scoring points.
The key to getting this team to playing good defense is to get in to rhythm offensively. Get people involved. Move the ball. This prevents people from standing around. When the ball doesn't move, people stand around and it carries through to the defensive end.
karacha wrote:The only question is: is our team too old to become better defensively, on a consistent basis? Do we have the speed and athleticism? That is the main issue here. But then, the Celtics were pretty good defensively few years ago, and they were fairly old and not very athletic, save for Rondo.
karacha wrote:We can all agree that Lakers are inconsistent. Why is that? In my opinion there are really only three reasons:
1. We had many injuries and very limited time to develop chemistry. And, as we all know, chemistry is absolutely essential if you have championship aspirations.
2. Coaching change and a completely different system in place. This is big, obviously. MDA might not be the best coach in the world, but he's OK... better then Brown, for sure. His style is totally different though and now players have to adapt again. This is not easy to do.
3. This one might be the most important: With Steve Nash running the point, the Lakers are the most potent offensive team in the league, believe it or not. Currently, the best overall ORtg team is OKC with 110.1, which is really impressive. Our team, with Nash has an ORtg of 113.3. But due to the lack of chemistry (mentioned earlier) and therefore the lack of communication, our defense is slightly below average. This has to change. We don't need to be the top defensive team in the league, but slightly above average with better communication would do.
Lakerjones wrote:karacha wrote:The only question is: is our team too old to become better defensively, on a consistent basis? Do we have the speed and athleticism? That is the main issue here. But then, the Celtics were pretty good defensively few years ago, and they were fairly old and not very athletic, save for Rondo.
^^ True about the Celtics. Which is why I don't think it's a hopeless cause. However, you have to look at the coaching, too in this regard.
The Celtics had Thibodeau at the helm on that end. They had a brilliant defensive mind on board and they all bought into the scheme even though none were spring chickens.
"Antoni no D" has never been one to emphasize that end of the court. I'm guessing that Chuck Person might be in charge of the D, but it really hasn't been talked about much. Chuck did a good job I thought under Phil, but I guess we'll see.
These guys only have so much energy given their age. D' Antoni seems to want them to spend most of it on the other end pushing tempo. Something's got to give. Maybe after these guys are more comfortable with the offensive system they can strike more of a balance on the other end.
The defense is one of the reasons I was so adamant that we should go after Sloan as coach. I thought his offense was better suited to the personnel and more half court oriented. Then on D I thought he could work with these guys and get the most out of them.

Jerry Buss wrote:One of the biggest reasons I bought the Lakers was to beat the Celtics …..you just got it into your soul that you couldn't stand the Celtics anymore
JGC wrote:Yeah, I think the issue with the team not competing or giving effort is a symptom of a problem, not the cause of the problem.
The reason we see lapses on the defensive end, IMO, has more to do with the offensive end than anything else. We are often completely out of sync on the offensive end. There hasn't been much rhythm or flow. And when you have an offensive minded team like we do, their focus trails off when things are out of order. People look at the box score and see a high number of points and think the offense isn't the problem but you have to look at how those points were produced. Was it produced by great ball movement with multiple teammates involved in every possession? I don't think that is always the case. It was produced because we have a number of offensively talented individuals.
When you have an offensive minded team, they will play defense and communicate and give extra effort when things are clicking offensively. With a defensive minded team, the opposite is true. When things are clicking on all cylinders defensively, suddenly you have guys who may not be otherwise offensively talented scoring points.
The key to getting this team to playing good defense is to get in to rhythm offensively. Get people involved. Move the ball. This prevents people from standing around. When the ball doesn't move, people stand around and it carries through to the defensive end.
And one more thing, the 6-1 is a bit of a mirage. We nearly lost to a team that has lost 18 straight. We had to outscore the Bobcats by 8 in the fourth quarter to beat them by a point. At home. We lost two of the four quarters to the worst team in the league while playing at home. We didn't even play well, we just played well enough to win. That's not an indication of turning things around.
I do think this team can turn it around but I don't think a championship this year is very likely at all. We're looking at a lower half seed and the success rate of lower half seeds is very, very low. I can't think of any championship team that has gone through the struggles this team has this season and ended up winning. Are there any? Has a team ever played nearly 40% of a season, not once been above .500, and won the championship? Did they have 3 head coaches by this time? Did they have the injuries and health concerns this team has had?
It certainly looks like a long shot for this year but hey, history is made all the time so I guess that's what we've gotta do.![]()
But if you're right and the issue with this team is giving effort because they're playing down to the level of their competition, then I sure hope they realize that it's now a long shot from here and thus give the type of effort and competitiveness every single night from here on out.
karacha wrote:We can all agree that Lakers are inconsistent. Why is that? In my opinion there are really only three reasons:
1. We had many injuries and very limited time to develop chemistry. And, as we all know, chemistry is absolutely essential if you have championship aspirations.
2. Coaching change and a completely different system in place. This is big, obviously. MDA might not be the best coach in the world, but he's OK... better then Brown, for sure. His style is totally different though and now players have to adapt again. This is not easy to do.
3. This one might be the most important: With Steve Nash running the point, the Lakers are the most potent offensive team in the league, believe it or not. Currently, the best overall ORtg team is OKC with 110.1, which is really impressive. Our team, with Nash has an ORtg of 113.3. But due to the lack of chemistry (mentioned earlier) and therefore the lack of communication, our defense is slightly below average. This has to change. We don't need to be the top defensive team in the league, but slightly above average with better communication would do.
karacha wrote:The only question is: is our team too old to become better defensively, on a consistent basis? Do we have the speed and athleticism? That is the main issue here. But then, the Celtics were pretty good defensively few years ago, and they were fairly old and not very athletic, save for Rondo.
lotus wrote:Two poor coaching hires by the same guy. And and a roster not built for either.

Users browsing this forum: funkychunky, Google [Bot], KOBE G.O.A.T. and 9 guests