ESPN

Sometimes with a night's rest, the dawn of a new morning, and the opportunity for some fresh perspective, in the rear view mirror a game can look a little different.

Sometimes.





Game 2 Wednesday in Oklahoma City doesn't qualify. As we stepped into the studio about 17 hours after those fateful two minutes in the fourth quarter in which the Lakers blew a seven point lead, the sense of what they gave away was just as strong. I'm not going to lie, those hoping to be uplifted by the newest edition of the Land O'Lakers PodKast aren't going to like what you hear. After noting another critical example of poor execution -- Andy and I unwittingly showed up at the office in nearly identical outfits, among the more mockable things a brother writing/radio tandem can do -- we dive into the the big issues ...

• After briefly touching on L.A.'s final play, we get into why the loss in Game 2 was so significant. Yeah, it's nice the Lakers played OKC tight after the Game 1 blowout, but in a playoff series the lesser team can't afford to lose games they ought to win. In the process, we shoot down just about every moral-victory-encouraging-going-forward argument out there. Again, it's fairly depressing, which is why we make sure to drop a little Double Rainbow Guy in there.
• Is there any hope going forward for the Lakers to pull the upset?
• Ramon Sessions. He hasn't played well in the postseason. Why? What can change, and how does his poor playoff run impact his decision whether to become a free agent, and whether the Lakers should re-sign him?
• A quick look at the Clippers vs. San Antonio. We're no more optimistic about the chances of the red, white, and blue.

We're normally pretty chipper folk, but not today. Listen, but be prepared to shed a tear.

The last few weeks have been dominated by questions about Andrew Bynum. Petulant behavior punctuated by a pair of needless ejections will certainly get folks talking, after all. Certainly we'll all be talking about him today following his incredible 30-rebound game Wednesday in San Antonio.

But or all the controversy surrounding technical fouls or questionable postgame commentary or "Club 17" or his respect for Mike Brown or anything else, the most unnerving element has been what appears to be a willingness to compromise his own effort. Too many moments where he simply wasn't playing hard.

Wednesday, Bynum reminded everyone what it looks like when he's fully invested defensively. It wasn't simply the 30 boards but the way in which he protected the paint and changed what the Spurs could accomplish near the basket. Bynum rotated with aggression, challenging every shot his go-go-Gadget arms could reach, all on a night where he struggled with his shot. Not surprisingly, results showed on the scoreboard, as the Lakers put together their most complete performance in weeks at their own end.

It was a throwback to the early weeks of the season, when Bynum anchored a D putting up elite numbers in the half court, embracing a role built on rebounding and paint protection before points. Yes, he scored too, but on nights when he didn't or was inefficient in the process, Bynum still showed up to play at the other end.

Lakers fans -- along with Lakers coaches and players, I can only assume -- welcomed the return of that guy. That guy allows them to conjure playoff daydreams with far happier endings.

(Read full post)

Go ahead and sing.

Wednesday's win over the Clippers was significant not simply for being a quality effort against a strong opponent, though it was, but for what it did to the standings. The Lakers now own the season series and accompanying tiebreaker over the Clippers, giving them what amounts to a three game lead in the Pacific Division with only 11 games remaining.

Meanwhile, one rung up on the playoff ladder, the Lakers are 4.5 games behind San Antonio for the Western Conference's second seed. Put it all together, and barring the unusual and unexpected, the Lakers likely enter the postseason exactly where they are now, as the third seed.

The team should keep its collective eye on the games in front of them, since the schedule still contains three games against San Antonio, and dates with Denver, Dallas, and Oklahoma City. The goal is to enter the postseason playing at as high a level as possible, and in that regard the Lakers still have plenty of i's to dot and t's to cross. They need to go one day at a time. (Go ahead and sing.) The rest of us can look ahead at potential playoff opponents. The bottom half of the W.C. is tightly packed, meaning any of five teams have a reasonable shot of finishing sixth.

Who should the Lakers want? Is there a nightmare opponent out there? Here are the squads they're most likely to face, starting from the bottom, up... though the order is likely to change almost daily until the end of the regular season.

DENVER NUGGETS

Current Position: 29-25 (8th, 1.5 games behind sixth seed)

Matchup: The problem with Denver hasn't been talent, but health. Basically everyone on their roster has missed games, and in the case of key talent like Danilo Gallinari, a significant amount of them. But the tide might turn by playoff time. Wilson Chandler, who returned from China only to hurt his groin, will soon be back in the lineup. Gallinari (thumb) is practicing again, too. Rudy Fernandez, despite back surgery, could return for the playoffs. Keep in mind, the Nuggets started 14-5, including a win over L.A., and when whole are a dangerous bunch. They have good point guards in Ty Lawson and Andre Miller, a wing who can defend Kobe Bryant (Arron Afflalo), and a ton of depth. Most playoff rotations get shorter, but the Nuggets can still come in waves.

Fear Factor (scale of 1-10, keeping in mind the Lakers have shown an ability to lose to anyone, so all opponents deserve respect): 5 if injuries persist, 6.5 if healthy. Even if Denver gets their pieces back, how well will they fit with so little time together?

HOUSTON ROCKETS

Current Position: 29-25 (7th, 1.5 behind sixth seed)

Matchup: Kyle Lowry is back on the practice floor, and could return by the postseason. Obviously that changes the dynamic considerably for the Rockets, given how well Lowry has performed this season. Kevin Martin has also been banged up, but should be on the floor by the postseason. Houston beat the Lakers on March 20th without either one of those guys, so they'd have to be taken seriously. The Rockets don't excel in any one area, but are average to above average in a wide range of key statistical categories, and don't have a lot of clear soft points ripe for exploitation. Luis Scola is still a solid player, Chandler Parsons has earned his way into the starting lineup, and with Marcus Camby and Sam Dalembert, there's at least a little size.

Fear Factor: 5. Houston will force 48 minutes of solid play every game, but ultimately don't have enough top end players to beat the Lakers in a series.

(Read full post)

In the newest edition of The Forum, 710 ESPN's Dave Miller joins us as we look at the dynamic between Mike Brown and his roster.

Anyone making a list of reasons the Lakers lost to Memphis Sunday night at Staples shouldn't put the "benching" of Kobe Bryant by Mike Brown at the 5:45 mark of the fourth quarter in the top five, or even the top 10. They were terrible defensively both in the half court and in transition, soft on the glass (Andrew Bynum finished with four rebounds), got virtually nothing from the bench, rarely rotated the ball effectively on offense, and saw Pau Gasol and Metta World Peace shoot a combined six-of-24. Just to name a few.

At the point Brown pulled Kobe, Memphis had pushed a three point at the start of the quarter to 14, and in the three-plus minutes Bryant was on the sidelines L.A. actually cut the deficit to eight. Point being, it's hard to say Brown wrecked a good thing when Bryant went to the bench, or completely eliminated any chance for the Lakers to win. They weren't going to, anyway.

The Lakers lost Sunday because they played lousy basketball against a good opponent.

More instructive are the big picture implications. All season long, we've wondered whether Brown could stand up to Kobe, or what might happen when Brown for whatever reason did something like this. Asked after the game to explain the move, Brown went cryptic. "I just decided to make a sub. I felt I wanted to make a sub at the time, so I did."

Later, he elaborated only slightly, saying (though not definitively) he wanted to keep Bryant from playing the entire second half, as happened in L.A.'s double OT win over the Grizzlies earlier this month in Memphis. He also said, and rightly so, he didn't feel it necessary to discuss the decision with Kobe. Brown didn't want to discuss it with us, either, perhaps to avoid opening himself up to second guessing or because he just didn't feel publicly criticizing Bryant for not playing the way he wanted was worth the trouble. I'm not sure. Either way, by not tackling the issue head on with a clear, concise answer, Brown left filling in the blanks to others.

A few minutes later, Kobe stood at his locker and delivered the ideal response, Hoovering as much air out of the controversy balloon as was possible.

(Read full post)

I was working on something like this, but it turns out Zach Lowe of SI.com not only beat me to the punch, he picked cooler numbers to look at. The eyeball test shows how much better the Lakers have been offensively since the arrival of Ramon Sessions, so it's not all that surprising to see the math tells the same story.

The sample size is small (four games, 100 minutes) and certain numbers are unsustainable (Sessions isn't going to shoot 57 percent, as he's done in purple and gold, for the rest of the year), but early returns are very solid. Writes Lowe:

In the 100 minutes Sessions has played, the Lakers have scored 114 points per 100 possessions, a mark that would lead the league by a mile, according to NBA.com’s stats tool. The Lakers have been more efficient in just about every way possible during those 100 minutes, but two micro-trends stick out:

" They have shot many more three-pointers per minute with Sessions on the floor and made them at a very high rate. This is a great thing for a team that has been one of the two or three worst three-point-shooting teams all season, a damaging flaw that prevents the Lakers from spacing the floor and playing the kind of inside-outside game a team with such great post players should be able to play. The Lakers have attempted the equivalent of 20 threes per 48 minutes with Sessions manning the point, hitting 48 percent. In the 92 minutes Sessions has sat during those four games, the Lakers are still the Lakers, clanking away to the tune of 25 percent from deep on just 14.6 tries.

Some of this has to do with personnel. Sessions has spent half his minutes with Troy Murphy and only 12 minutes total with the Pau Gasol/Andrew Bynum duo. This helps explain not just the three-point tries, but also why the Lakers have gotten to the free-throw line much less often with Sessions playing. Sessions has also shared 91 of his 100 minutes with Matt Barnes, with whom he has immediately developed a nice chemistry, especially in transition. But part of this has to do with the simple fact that Sessions can, you know, run a pick-and-roll (usually with Gasol), get into the lane, draw defenders and make good passes....Bryant has shot more often and more accurately with Sessions on the court, per NBA.com. He has attempted 28 field goals per 48 minutes, a giant number that is nonetheless about equivalent to how often Bryant shot before the Sessions deal. But he has shot 46 percent with Sessions, compared to just 33 percent without him over four games and 43 percent for the season, and he has been deadly from three-point range with Sessions running things. Kobe has hit 6-of-10 from deep since the trade, and at least a few of those looks have been more open spot-up chances than he usually gets."

The impact of Sessions on the offense can be measured in other ways, too.

(Read full post)

It's been a while since the Lakers had a clunker at home. Sunday's loss to Utah certainly qualifies.

On tonight's edition of Lakers Late Night, we hit on all the high points:

• Turnovers. The Lakers gave the ball away 24 times. What gives?
• A brutal shooting night for Kobe Bryant (3-of-20) and a cartoonishly efficient one from Andrew Bynum (12-of-14 en route to 33 points) led to interesting postgame comments from Mike Brown about touches and the nature of the team's shot selection, and then to a debate between the two of us. What should happen on a night where Kobe is taking good shots -- and generally speaking he did Sunday night -- and not overdoing it, but missing anyway? What should the team's offense look like?
• Ramon Sessions vs. Steve Blake. Is it a problem Brown plans on starting Blake for the forseeable future?

All this, plus a poor display of geographical knowledge from yours truly.



Click below for more video from Brown on offensive balance, Kobe's shot selection, and getting touches for Andrew Bynum. Plus comments from Pau Gasol. Both talk about the team's recent slippage defensively.

(Read full post)

Once again it required extra basketball -- not exactly ideal against a 10-win team -- but the Lakers overcame a slow first half to grind out an important win over New Orleans Wednesday night. Once again, Kobe Bryant and Andrew Bynum led the way, but Metta World Peace came up with a few big plays late as well.

We discuss their work, the incredible endurance of Bryant over the last two nights, the determination shown by the Lakers this week, and of course the trade deadline. What would it mean to add Michael Beasley? Who else might be coming, and who is on his way out?

Plus, vintage 7-Up commercials.

Monday afternoon, Mike Bresnahan of the L.A. Times sat down with general manager Mitch Kupchak, talking about this week's trade deadline, Pau Gasol, and the team's relationship with Magic Johnson. What has garnered the most headlines, however, are his comments about Jim Buss:

"Jim gets way too much criticism and not enough credit with the success this team has had," Kupchak said. "He is following in the footsteps of the most successful owner maybe of all time, which is hard to do. But since he's gotten more and more involved, which has been about seven or eight years, we've had some pretty good moments."

These are things Kupchak has said before, and you'd expect him to say again, particularly because he's talking about his boss. Even if he was monumentally frustrated with the dynamics of the front office and feel he's not given the freedom to shape the roster as he'd like, to his credit Kupchak would never say so. It's just not how he operates.

L.A.'s G.M. also says it's unfair to pin every decision on Jim Buss:

"It is inaccurate because there are three of us that are involved in all the basketball decisions," Kupchak said. "Dr. Buss still makes, to my knowledge, all the final decisions in the organization. He's always deferred basketball decisions at some level to his basketball people, and Jimmy is a part of the basketball people."

While I do think fans aren't always completely fair, there are plenty of totally legitimate reasons to question Jim Buss and harbor concerns. The smoke coming out of El Segundo certainly has many ready to call the fire department, even if the flames aren't actually visible yet, and I think Buss does himself a horrible disservice by so rarely putting himself in front of media and fans.

Still, the biggest reason for chewing induced cuticle destruction comes at the end of the second quote: "... Jimmy is a part of the basketball people."

That Jim Buss isn't widely respected as a personnel guy/talent evaluator isn't the point. In professional sports, it's very rarely a good idea for the same guy to sign the checks and decide who should get one. Dr. Buss has never been a passive bystander with the Lakers, weighing in on different moves and always providing the final say. But never have I ever heard him referred to as one of "the basketball people."

Had he, I suspect Dr. Buss wouldn't have led the team to such great heights. The same principle holds true for Jimmy.

In the newest edition of The Forum, 710 ESPN's Beto Duran stops by and we talk about why Pau Gasol has become the member of the Big Three most likely to be traded, when a few months ago that role was filled by Andrew Bynum.

Plus, a look at Lakers vs. Celtics on Sunday, and what a point guard in the mold of Rajon Rondo would do for the Lakers.

Thud.

As you might expect on a night the Lakers double down on Tuesday's loss to the Pistons with an even worse loss to the Wizards, folks were a little upset. Tonight, we talk about a second straight bad night from Kobe Bryant, a total collapse defensively in the second half, and then try to figure out how the Lakers can look so good on Sunday, and then flounder so badly against two awful teams.

Can't say we have a definitive answer, but there are an awful lot of questions, and the next few games will be instructive.

Angry crowd today. Can't imagine why.

Click here for the transcript.

Ask a hundred Lakers fans to list the ways the Lakers can improve themselves before the postseason, and most will start with a trade. Getting a gettable, non-elite-but-damn-helpful piece, like Ramon Sessions and/or Michael Beasley to shore up the point and frontcourt, respectively, or flipping a prime chip like Pau Gasol or Andrew Bynum for elite-level talent. Something where the Lakers use assets to get assets.

Others, though far fewer than a month ago, would look to a street free agent like Gilbert Arenas.

There is one more way: For guys already on the roster to pick up their production. As much as it might give folks the heebie-jeebies to put their eggs in his basket, the best candidate (thanks both to his skill set and abysmal early-season performance) is Metta World Peace. It's not really a question of his defensive prowess, though obviously he can make a major impact on that end. The Lakers are already an elite-level team in the half court, rated third in points per possession by Synergy (.817). Where they break down is in transition (1.14 ppp, 21st in the NBA), in part because of their two 7-footers but more thanks to an offense that, for much of the year, has turned the ball over, launched awkward shots and fueled the other team's break.

A major offender was World Peace, who showed up to camp out of shape, made only two of his first 27 3-pointers and shot a shocking 27.5 percent from the floor during a December in which he averaged only 3.6 points a game. February didn't start with a bang, either, with just four points a night on 23 percent shooting through the six-game Grammy trip.

That's a special kind of bad.

Slowly, though, as Metta has rounded into form less round, his play has improved. Sunday's 17-point outburst against the Heat was his best game of the year, but not totally out of the blue. Over his past five games, he's averaged 10.3 points, 5.0 rebounds, 3.8 assists and 1.6 steals, shooting 50 percent overall (18-for-36) and 47 percent from downtown (8-for-17). A small sample size, no doubt, but real production nonetheless. Combined with an uptick in his defensive consistency, the return of some of that old Ron Artest style swagger, and claims to be healthier than he's been in a while, the past week or two has been good enough reason to at least entertain the idea MWP can be a positive contributor the rest of the way.

Optimism under heavy guard, so to speak.

(Read full post)

Ramona Shelburne joins in as we ask what was learned about the Lakers in the first half, and what to expect in the second.

It doesn't necessarily get any easier from here for the purple and gold, sitting at 20-14, good for fifth in the Western Conference. Can Mike Brown learn to read his team a little better? Will some member of the supporting cast step up and give some support for the Big Three? If so, who?

Ramona Shelburne joins in as we ask when the Lakers will next make an NBA Finals.