In the wake of the Dallas Mavericks' deconstruction of the Los Angeles Lakers comes the inevitable question, should we have seen their victory coming?
I can claim no prognosticative powers here. I didn't think Dallas would lose to the Blazers, but that was due more to pessimism about Portland than optimism concerning the Mavericks. I didn't think the Mavericks had much of a chance against Los Angeles, and even tweeted, when the playoffs began, about the easy road the Lakers had to the Western Conference Finals. Why was I so wrong? I think there were three main factors.
The first factor was that I underestimated how good Dallas is. I saw a team that went 57-25 with a plus 4.2 point differential, which is good, but hardly elite. However, if you eliminate games missed by Dirk Nowitzki and Tyson Chandler, Dallas' two best players (JET's heroics nonwithstanding), that record becomes 52-13 with a point differential over 6, which is "best in the Western Conference" territory.
The second factor was that I bought into the Laker narrative. Sure, they had plenty of weaknesses, and they struggled against a weak Hornets team, but they could turn it on when they wanted to, right? I thought they were just too big and too talented to lose this way. It turns out that they were until they weren't. Like the Spurs-Suns sweep of last year, this series is a reminder of how relying on established narratives can become lazy and inaccurate without asking if the reasons behind those narratives are still valid, in this case L.A's particular matchup advantages that Dallas was able to neutralize.
The third factor was the matchups, and I have said in the past that Dallas matches up well against the Lakers, but I didn't realize just how true that was. The Lakers' biggest weakness has always been small, quick guards, and their biggest strength has been imposing size and skill up front. Dallas was uniquely poised to take advantage, with Jason Terry and J.J. Barea shredding their perimeter defense, and their own trio of 7 footers (Chandler, Nowitzki, Haywood) neutralizing the Lakers' biggest strength.
On the other side, Dallas' biggest weakness the past few years has been, like L.A., quick guards. Exhibit A was their loss to San Antonio last year in the playoff series that briefly fooled people into thinking George Hill was a potential star. The Lakers (or the Blazers, for that matter) had no one who could exploit this weakness. Bryant's game is built around guile and precision instead of speed, making him the one type of good player Jason Kidd can still guard, and Derek Fisher, Steve Blake, and Shannon Brown provide the Mavericks with three of the only NBA players Terry or Barea can guard without looking atrocious.
Why did the Lakers get to the NBA Finals three straight years? One of the biggest reasons was that it was extremely difficult to score inside against them, and when an opponent takes your most efficient shot away from you, disaster often ensues. Fortunately for them, the Mavericks' biggest strength has been scoring from the outside, which they were able to do with ease against the Lakers' lackluster perimeter defense.
Oh, and for some reason Pau Gasol played terribly. Otherwise this series goes 6 or 7, maybe with the Lakers winning anyway.
Showing posts with label los angeles lakers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label los angeles lakers. Show all posts
Sunday, May 8, 2011
Monday, May 3, 2010
A Final Thought On Lakers-Thunder
I know the series ended a few days ago, and no one cares about it anymore other than the people who are going to raid the game footage for their Luke Walton highlight videos, but as a follow up to my (subjective) observation that Collison played much better defense on Bynum and Gasol than Kristic did, I took a look at each player's plus/minus numbers for the series.
Using traditional boxscore stats, Kristic looked better than Collison. Each player was on the court of 129 minutes, 21.5 a game. Kristic averaged 7 points, 6 rebounds, and a 14.6 PER. Nick Collison averaged 3 points, 5 rebounds, and had a 5.1 (that's not a typo) PER. And yet (per ESPN's boxscores) plus/minus tells a completely different story, with Kristic at -41 for the series and Collison at +33.
Small sample size caveats apply, but I think it's safe to say something was going on here, and there's a good chance that something was what I noticed subjectively-that Collison was not allowing whichever Laker big he was guarding to get good positioning down low, while the Lakers were dominating down low when Kristic was in the game.
It seems that Scottie Brooks might have noticed this too, because after subbing Collison in for Kristic in the third quarter of Game 6, he kept Collison in for the rest of the game. Initially, it seemed not to matter because, even though the Lakers couldn't get anything going inside, their scrubs got hot from downtown (the Lakers went 12-24 from three on the game). However, Collison's defense, and a couple of absolutely beautiful picks he set to free Durant and Westbrook for key three pointers down the stretch, were a big part of what allowed the Thunder to catch the Lakers and almost win the game. All of which just goes to show that a player with a 5.1 PER can be valuable.
Using traditional boxscore stats, Kristic looked better than Collison. Each player was on the court of 129 minutes, 21.5 a game. Kristic averaged 7 points, 6 rebounds, and a 14.6 PER. Nick Collison averaged 3 points, 5 rebounds, and had a 5.1 (that's not a typo) PER. And yet (per ESPN's boxscores) plus/minus tells a completely different story, with Kristic at -41 for the series and Collison at +33.
Small sample size caveats apply, but I think it's safe to say something was going on here, and there's a good chance that something was what I noticed subjectively-that Collison was not allowing whichever Laker big he was guarding to get good positioning down low, while the Lakers were dominating down low when Kristic was in the game.
It seems that Scottie Brooks might have noticed this too, because after subbing Collison in for Kristic in the third quarter of Game 6, he kept Collison in for the rest of the game. Initially, it seemed not to matter because, even though the Lakers couldn't get anything going inside, their scrubs got hot from downtown (the Lakers went 12-24 from three on the game). However, Collison's defense, and a couple of absolutely beautiful picks he set to free Durant and Westbrook for key three pointers down the stretch, were a big part of what allowed the Thunder to catch the Lakers and almost win the game. All of which just goes to show that a player with a 5.1 PER can be valuable.
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Defensive Basketball Writing Challenge
Inspired by this Henry Abbott post, here goes my attempt at writing the "game story" for last night's Lakers-Thunder game beatdown from a defensive perspective.
Lakers Use Stifling Defense To Take Series Lead
Andrew Bynum and the Los Angeles Lakers turned up the defensive intensity for Game 5, and it showed. Their demolition of the Thunder was based on two simple principles, protecting the paint and defending in transition, executed to perfection.
Whenever the Thunder tried taking the ball inside they were stymied, first by the defense of Bynum, who closed off the paint and prevented any Thunder big men from consistently getting good post position, and second by the Lakers strategy of packing the paint with three or four players (including 7 footers Bynum, Pau Gasol, and Lamar Odom, along with defensive standouts Ron Artest and Kobe Bryant), giving the Thunder no room to operate.
This strategy may have backfired if the referees had called this game uncharacteristically tight, but the zebras opted to let the teams play, especially in the first half, only sending players to the line when there was particularly egregious contact.
Because of the Lakers' dominance in the paint, in the half court the smaller Thunder were forced into settling for outside jumpshots, their kryptonite. Making matters worse, their only dangerous jump shooter, Kevin Durant, was bothered all night by the stellar defense of Artest, who gave Durant no room to operate, a strategy which worked excellently when combined with the Lakers' successful efforts to protect the paint.
The second key to the Lakers triumph was their transition defense. The Lakers used their exceptional length and athleticism to disrupt and derail the Thunder attack. Oklahoma City roasted Los Angeles in transition in Game 4, but the Lakers were ready for it in Game 5, hustling back on every play, and not allowing an uncontested transition basket while the game was competitive.
Once the Lakers were hustling back on every play, they used their superior length to get into the passing lanes, making life hell for Thunder point guard Russell Westbrook, who finished with eight turnovers. Even when the Thunder made it to the basket, the Lakers were still able to block, contest, and alter shots, turning what should have been easy scoring opportunities into fast breaks headed the other way. Deprived of baskets in transition and in the paint, the Thunder were forced to rely on contested jump shots, seldom a winning formula.
On the other side of the ball, the Thunder gave a good effort, but couldn't stop the Laker offense. They generally played very good defense at the point of attack, but the Lakers were making an extra pass or two on every possession, and the Thunder's rotations couldn't keep up, leading to easy lay-ups for Gasol, Artest, and company. However, even if OKC's rotations had been crisper, they would still have been in trouble as Bynum and Gasol were able to get excellent position in the low post against Nenad Kristic and Jeff Green whenever they wanted, leading to easy baskets of the assisted and put-back varieties.
The only man able to contain the Laker bigs at all was Thunder center Nick Collison, who played for a ten minute stretch in the late first quarter and early second quarter. Collison, the only member of the Thunder to draw a charge on Tuesday, replaced Kristic at center and was able to keep the Lakers guards from penetrating at will, as well as preventing Bynum from setting up shop in front of the basket. This forced the Lakers to settle for more jumpers. Not coincidentally, this stretch of the ballgame was mildly competitive, the Thunder only losing 21-18. However, once Kristic returned to the game, the lay-up line resumed, en route to the trouncing.
Lakers Use Stifling Defense To Take Series Lead
Andrew Bynum and the Los Angeles Lakers turned up the defensive intensity for Game 5, and it showed. Their demolition of the Thunder was based on two simple principles, protecting the paint and defending in transition, executed to perfection.
Whenever the Thunder tried taking the ball inside they were stymied, first by the defense of Bynum, who closed off the paint and prevented any Thunder big men from consistently getting good post position, and second by the Lakers strategy of packing the paint with three or four players (including 7 footers Bynum, Pau Gasol, and Lamar Odom, along with defensive standouts Ron Artest and Kobe Bryant), giving the Thunder no room to operate.
This strategy may have backfired if the referees had called this game uncharacteristically tight, but the zebras opted to let the teams play, especially in the first half, only sending players to the line when there was particularly egregious contact.
Because of the Lakers' dominance in the paint, in the half court the smaller Thunder were forced into settling for outside jumpshots, their kryptonite. Making matters worse, their only dangerous jump shooter, Kevin Durant, was bothered all night by the stellar defense of Artest, who gave Durant no room to operate, a strategy which worked excellently when combined with the Lakers' successful efforts to protect the paint.
The second key to the Lakers triumph was their transition defense. The Lakers used their exceptional length and athleticism to disrupt and derail the Thunder attack. Oklahoma City roasted Los Angeles in transition in Game 4, but the Lakers were ready for it in Game 5, hustling back on every play, and not allowing an uncontested transition basket while the game was competitive.
Once the Lakers were hustling back on every play, they used their superior length to get into the passing lanes, making life hell for Thunder point guard Russell Westbrook, who finished with eight turnovers. Even when the Thunder made it to the basket, the Lakers were still able to block, contest, and alter shots, turning what should have been easy scoring opportunities into fast breaks headed the other way. Deprived of baskets in transition and in the paint, the Thunder were forced to rely on contested jump shots, seldom a winning formula.
On the other side of the ball, the Thunder gave a good effort, but couldn't stop the Laker offense. They generally played very good defense at the point of attack, but the Lakers were making an extra pass or two on every possession, and the Thunder's rotations couldn't keep up, leading to easy lay-ups for Gasol, Artest, and company. However, even if OKC's rotations had been crisper, they would still have been in trouble as Bynum and Gasol were able to get excellent position in the low post against Nenad Kristic and Jeff Green whenever they wanted, leading to easy baskets of the assisted and put-back varieties.
The only man able to contain the Laker bigs at all was Thunder center Nick Collison, who played for a ten minute stretch in the late first quarter and early second quarter. Collison, the only member of the Thunder to draw a charge on Tuesday, replaced Kristic at center and was able to keep the Lakers guards from penetrating at will, as well as preventing Bynum from setting up shop in front of the basket. This forced the Lakers to settle for more jumpers. Not coincidentally, this stretch of the ballgame was mildly competitive, the Thunder only losing 21-18. However, once Kristic returned to the game, the lay-up line resumed, en route to the trouncing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)