After Poking the Bear, Grizzlies Are Buried in the Paint by Lakers
The L.A. Lakers overpowered the Memphis Grizzlies en route to a 125-85 game six win that propelled the Lakers into the second round and sent the Grizzlies home for the summer. D'Angelo Russell had his best and most impactful performance since rejoining the Lakers, scoring a playoff career-high 31 points on 12-17 field goal shooting--but the most significant story in this game is that Anthony Davis and LeBron James dominated in the paint at both ends of the court. Davis' boxscore numbers may not look overwhelming--16 points, 14 rebounds, five blocked shots--but he pushed the Grizzlies around at both ends of the court, igniting the Lakers' offense and thwarting the Grizzlies from scoring in the paint not only by blocking shots but also by altering and discouraging shots. Meanwhile, instead of hanging out on the perimeter and stat padding while his team loses, James attacked the paint on offense and was actively engaged on defense. His numbers (22 points, six assists, five rebounds) do not reflect how dominant he was. The Lakers outscored the Grizzlies in the paint 52-32, and the Lakers won the rebounding battle 52-45. The Lakers' three point shooting was adequate (15-44, .341) but not exceptional.
This game vividly illustrates the point that I keep making about the "transformed Lakers." The Lakers are not "transformed," at least in terms of having "lasers" and more talent than they had in the first part of the season. The only "transformation" is that Davis and James are playing every game and they are playing hard in most games. If Davis and James had done that from the start of the season, this team would never have fallen to 13th in the West.
The Grizzlies did not show up to compete. The Lakers deserve some credit for that, but the Grizzlies also deserve a lot of blame. No Memphis player scored more than 16 points. No Memphis starter shot better than .400 from the field. Kenny Smith does not show his "pictures" at halftime during blowouts, and after this game the Grizzlies do not deserve to have their individual statistics mentioned. After game two, Dillon Brooks declared that he "pokes bears" and he called LeBron James "old." Brooks' words proved to be as off the mark as his errant shot attempts. The Grizzlies would be wise to let Brooks take his big mouth and small game elsewhere.
In the first half, the Lakers outscored the Grizzlies in the paint 36-16 and went into halftime with a 59-42 lead. James scored 16 first half points, shooting 7-9 from the field--and 6-6 from inside the arc. Davis added 11 points on 4-7 field goal shooting, 10 rebounds, and three blocked shots. Russell scored 14 points--and even if he had not made a single shot, the Lakers would have still had the lead thanks to the paint dominance of James and Davis.
The second half turned into what Marv Albert used to call "extensive garbage time"--a mop up/stat padding operation as the Grizzlies surrendered meekly. The cliche about every NBA team making a run did not apply in this game.
The Lakers have received a lot of praise regarding the three players
who they acquired in exchange for Russell Westbrook. Here are their game six statistics:
D'Angelo Russell had 31 points on 12-17 field goal shooting. He averaged 16.7 ppg on .435 field goal shooting (37-85) during this series.
Jarred Vanderbilt had nine points on 3-8 field goal shooting. He averaged 7.2 ppg on
.548 field goal shooting (17-31) during this series.
Malik Beasley has fallen out of the rotation. He did not play until the fourth quarter, when the game was out of hand. He finished with nine points on 2-6 field goal shooting. He averaged 4.2 ppg on .292 field goal shooting (7-24) during this series.
The prevailing narrative is that jettisoning Westbrook in exchange for these three role players transformed the Lakers. The reality is that when James and Davis are healthy, engaged, and playing in the paint the Lakers can be good; when James and Davis are not playing in the paint, the Lakers are not very good. If anything, the main thing that the trade accomplished--whether by accident or design--is open up an opportunity for Austin Reaves, who has pushed Beasley out of the lineup and emerged as the Lakers' third best all-around player.
The Lakers will get some rest before facing the winner of Sunday's game seven battle pitting the Sacramento Kings versus the Golden State Warriors. Sacramento enjoys homecourt advantage in game seven after winning game six on the road.
Labels: Anthony Davis, D'Angelo Russell, L.A. Lakers, LeBron James, Memphis Grizzlies
posted by David Friedman @ 2:02 AM
15 Comments:
Marcel
5 diff players led the team in scoring in the 6 games
Ad scored 20ppg
LeBron. 22ppg
In series and they won comfortably
This team is much better since the trade
U also miss the fact they got rid of Beverly and Nunn.
It opened up the game for Reeves and Schroeder.
This team is deep and can score with anyone
The Lakers are a tough out, and also ad can play harder on defense cause he doesn't have the burden of having to score 30+ for them to have a chance.
U got 6 or 7 players who could score 20 plus points.
With Westbrook, Beverly, Nunn, Bryant
They can't shoot, too many turnovers and played no defense
A blind man can see both trades was great for lakers
If I'm Memphis, Brooks is not resigned and I look to get athleticism at that 3 spot. Try to get someone like Anunoby from the Raptors.
Or Jaylen Brown if he's available. Gotta fire Dillon Brooks into the sun tho. Too volatile and worse lacks self awareness that he ain't that guy
Marcel:
When Davis and James play effectively in the paint at both ends of the court, the Lakers have a good chance to win. When they don't play at all, or they drift away from the paint, the Lakers tend to lose. Those things are true regardless of the supporting cast the Lakers had before or after the Westbrook trade.
The Lakers are playing better now than they did earlier in the season because now Davis and James are not missing games, and they are engaged (most of the time) when they play.
The Lakers' outside shooting is not better now than it was before the trade. Look up the numbers for yourself, or read my recaps that recite the numbers.
Getting rid of Westbrook did not make the Lakers better, nor did acquiring a bunch of role players. Davis and James deciding to play and play in the paint made the Lakers better.
I agree with you that getting rid of Beverley and expanding Reaves' role both helped the Lakers.
Anonymous:
We agree about getting rid of Brooks. I would be surprised if Jaylen Brown is available.
I mostly agree with you about the Lakers David but I do think it's clear that Vanderbilt has been a significant upgrade on defense. They needed an actually good perimeter defender in the worst way and whatever his offense numbers (meh), he provides that.
Anonymous:
Vanderbilt may be an upgrade on defense, but the Lakers gave up a HoF guard who is a big-time scorer, rebounder, and playmaker even if he may not be an elite defender.
I am not saying that the Lakers are not playing better now than they played earlier in the season; I am saying that the Westbrook trade is not the reason that they are playing better.
This is a distinction that many people either fail to understand or refuse to accept.
I don't think any serious person would say Vanderbilt is a better player than Westbrook, but he may be a better fit for the Lakers.
To your point Westbrook is a good scorer, rebounder, and playmaker. But (when healthY) the Lakers have two elite scorers without him, an elite playmaker without him, and a few passable secondary ones, and two near-elite rebounders without him.
Vanderbilt fills a need for them, while Westbrook was kind of a hat on a hat, duplicating things they already were strong at without helping much with the things they were weak at. That's not to say he provided no value by any means, but he provided value in areas of less dramatic need.
Westbrook is no longer a big-time scorer nor rebounder, though probably still a big-time playmaker. He is still a good player, but not at an AS level anymore. The Lakers big difference post Westbrook is they are playing harder(everyone, not just James/Davis). Their defense has been elite, at least vs Memphis. James can still be somewhat valuable defensively, but it's not like he's a great defensive player or anything overall, hasn't been for years. Davis is great defensively, when engaged. The whole team is buying in, too. The whole thing with the Lakers and Westbrook is kinda weird. But Ham had Westbrook coming off the bench and playing Beverley, Schroeder, Reaves, etc over him often. Unless someone believes Ham is not trying to win games with Westbrook, there has to be a reason for this.
Anonymous:
Whatever Vanderbilt provides is meaningless without Davis and James (1) playing and (2) playing effectively in the paint. The Lakers struggled during the first half of the season when "Street Clothes" was MIA (either not playing or not playing well consistently) and James was chasing the scoring record. Swap Vanberbilt and the other role players for Westbrook at that time, and nothing would have changed.
Also, as I mentioned to Marcel in an earlier thread, trading Westbrook and making the other deals only works for the Lakers if (1) the Lakers are legit championship contenders now or (2) the deals position them well for the post-LeBron era.
I don't believe that the Lakers are championship contenders now (the second round matchup versus the Warriors will test my theory), and I believe that the Lakers are not well-positioned for the post-LeBron era. How far is a team with Davis as the best player and D'Angelo Russell as the point guard going to go?
I kind of think everyone who's left at this point is a contender because everyone who's left is deeply flawed.
You've covered the concerns about LA well. Warriors are old. Suns haven't played together and can't guard anybody. Heat are a crippled eight seed. Knicks don't have one of the best 15 players in the league. Philly is a joke.
Boston and Denver look the most compelling, but Boston's got coaching and focus issues (and Williams is always an injury concern), and Denver is very vulnerable defensively relative to most title teams.
This feels like one of those years where the team that wins is whoever gets the luckiest/stays the healthiest.
To your main point, I do think the Westbrook trade increased their title odd this year, though probably only from like 0% to 10%, but I don't think it (or anything they've done) has positioned them well for the post-Lebron era.
I guess it helped develop Reaves by freeing up some touches? If they can keep him? But he may be playing himself out of their price range with that new CBA on the way.
Anonymous:
Despite splitting time between two teams and juggling various different roles Westbrook averaged 16-8-6 this season. How many other guards are putting up comparable numbers? The Lakers and LeBron's media friends trashed Westbrook's reputation for a solid year, but objectively Westbrook still played at or near All-Star level.
Westbrook was the hardest playing Laker when he was there. It was not his fault that Davis and James were often unavailable or distinterested.
I don't know what went into Ham's thinking in terms of player rotations, but--other than in Miami--LeBron tends to have a large role in deciding such things, and LeBron clearly soured on Westbrook.
Lue is a championship coach with autonomy who is trying to win games, and he immediately made Westbrook the starting pg on a team that had legit championship aspirations had Kawhi and PG stayed healthy.
I'm not sure that everyone who is left is a contender. Boston is the best team left. I can't see any other team winning the East barring major injuries or a meltdown by Boston. Denver is the best team in the West. The Lakers are not winning one more series, let alone three more series. Perhaps I underestimate the Warriors ("Never underestimate the heart of a champion!"), but I can't see them going all the way again this year. I think that Denver will beat Phoenix, but if Phoenix figures out how to beat Denver then they can probably beat the Warriors, too--but Boston is a cut above everyone who is left.
I mostly agree except that I think:
1) A major injury or meltdown by Boston is reasonably likely based on their personnel and the way they've played this year. It should not have taken them six games to beat Atlanta on paper, and yet.
2) I have a little more confidence in the Warriors than you do, but they're also an old team so if Curry rolls an ankle the Lakers can get by them just fine.
3) In the event the Lakers do get by GSW, they have maybe the one guy in the league who can really give Jokic trouble in AD, as we saw in the Bubble.
Anonymous:
Each series takes on its own character. I don't read too much into Atlanta winning a couple games. I see no reason to expect a meltdown from a team that has reached the ECF four times in the past six seasons. I am not sure why you are so skeptical of Boston. There are many more plausible questions about the other remaining teams.
The Lakers needed six games to beat a Memphis team without Adams and Clarke, and with Morant playing with one hand (not to mention Brooks playing with half a brain and zero shooting touch). The Lakers will lose to any reasonably engaged, legit playoff team.
If the Lakers beat the Warriors we can talk about how the Lakers match up with the Nuggets.
I expect a meltdown mostly because they've had focus problems all year and it doesn't seem like they have the same level of intensity under Mazzulla they did under Udoka. I also think they're a little over-committed to Marcus Smart, who seems like a much weaker defender this year than he was last year. In general I think they've looked better with White or Brogdon on the floor instead of of him, but still play him more minutes than either, particularly in crunch time.
They are still a very good defensive team but despite an upgraded roster they are allowing 7 more PPG than they did last season. I know you like defensive field goal percentage, and this year they are allowing opponents to shoot 3% better than they did last year. Some of that might be because Williams was out more this year but Williams, like Embiid, has yet to show he can stay healthy through a sustained playoff run so I am not sure him having that much influence is good news for them if that is in fact the explanation.
They also seem more willing under Mazzulla than they were under Udoka to default into being a lazy pull-up three team, but that version of them is much more beatable than when they attack the basket with force. Some nights they still do, but in the playoffs every night matters and giving away a game or two to a team like Miami or Denver by settling for those shots could swing a series.
They also seem kind of panicky in crunchtime some nights. I think that's also potentially due to the coaching change.
Maybe I am wrong and they will be fine. If forced to rank the contenders right now I would still have them second behind Denver, maybe third behind Golden State, whom I think is still kind of in their heads, if we grant everyone the benefit of assumed health. But I think all eight teams look more vulnerable than most championship teams, and the last team standing is as likely to be the healthiest as it is the most talented.
Anonymous:
The Celtics won six more games this season than they won last season under Udoka. Of course, we don't know yet if these Celtics will match or exceed last year's Celtics' playoff run, but based on what we have already seen I am skeptical of the notion that these Celtics are a worse team or a less well-coached team than last year's Celtics.
We won't know if the Warriors are in the Celtics' heads unless/until they both reach the Finals. It looks much more likely that the Celtics will be there than the Warriors.
I agree that this season there is not a historically dominant team like the '96 Bulls or '01 Lakers--but most seasons don't have a historically dominant team, by the very definition of historically dominant. Boston is the best team left until further notice, though.
Post a Comment
<< Home