Lakers this year's Pistons?

[housecall]

From the few games ive watched the Lakers play this season,the biggest difference on D i see is Bynum clogging up the paint more for them.Gasol and Odom was it last season in the paint on most D plays .L.Odom did a lot roaming on D last season also.Bynum definitely is making a difference on D so far for the Lakers because he is staying home a lot.Another point i remember was last year the West was not killing the league with D.The Lakers were probably the best team in the West that played any consistent D but theres wasn't at the level of the C's.They have only played West coast teams so far . There so called great D this season has yet to be put to a test from any top east coast teams .

[Steve Weinman]

It's worth remembering that the Lakers weren't exactly defensively slouches last year.  In fact, they finished fifth in basketball in defensive efficiency.  Thus far this season, they've indeed taken that to another level, and their interior defense really looks excellent - they blocked ten shots against Houston last night, and the Rockets seemed suffocated every time they tried to get in the lane.  Curious to see whether the Lakers can continue this level of play at that end of the floor.

-sw

Two comments. One, I saw Houston in Portland before they came down to play LA. Houston's offense is horrible right now. So, measuring the Lakers against the Rockets isn't saying much.

And second, the Lakers have had a pretty soft schedule thusfar (mostly home games).

In sum, I don't disagree with what you've said, but I'd put extra emphasis the part about being curious to see whether the Lakers can continue their admittedly strong defensive play. Personally, I think it will have to drop off some.

Hoops, I don't disagree about Houston's offense - in fact, if you see my Daily Babble on the front page, you'll note that I'm quite nonplussed by their play on that end so far.  That said, I do think the Lakers did a very impressive job through the final three quarters last night and that they really rotated well.

Further, while I agree with you about emphasizing the curiosity going forward, a big part of my point earlier was that even if they don't keep up this pace, I don't see a reason to believe they'll be worse than last year, and last year wasn't bad at all - again, fifth in defensive efficiency.

All that said, I think it's largely semantics between us - it seems clear that we agree on the whole.

-sw

[Hoops]

It's worth remembering that the Lakers weren't exactly defensively slouches last year.  In fact, they finished fifth in basketball in defensive efficiency.  Thus far this season, they've indeed taken that to another level, and their interior defense really looks excellent - they blocked ten shots against Houston last night, and the Rockets seemed suffocated every time they tried to get in the lane.  Curious to see whether the Lakers can continue this level of play at that end of the floor.

-sw

Two comments. One, I saw Houston in Portland before they came down to play LA. Houston's offense is horrible right now. So, measuring the Lakers against the Rockets isn't saying much.

And second, the Lakers have had a pretty soft schedule thusfar (mostly home games).

In sum, I don't disagree with what you've said, but I'd put extra emphasis the part about being curious to see whether the Lakers can continue their admittedly strong defensive play. Personally, I think it will have to drop off some.

Hoops, I don't disagree about Houston's offense - in fact, if you see my Daily Babble on the front page, you'll note that I'm quite nonplussed by their play on that end so far.  That said, I do think the Lakers did a very impressive job through the final three quarters last night and that they really rotated well.

Further, while I agree with you about emphasizing the curiosity going forward, a big part of my point earlier was that even if they don't keep up this pace, I don't see a reason to believe they'll be worse than last year, and last year wasn't bad at all - again, fifth in defensive efficiency.

All that said, I think it's largely semantics between us - it seems clear that we agree on the whole.

-sw

Agreed.

I'll add that my comments regarding the Lakers are probably an overreaction to the national media erroneously (in my opinion) granting "juggernaut" status to LA. But you're absolutely right, they're a very good team, with a very good defense - as you point out. But for those who are over-hyping the Lakers right now (not necessarily you, Steve), I think the descent back to Earth is going to be a major letdown.

As a side note (not directed at SW), I find it amusing that the media held back last year when Boston started out so ferociously - they had all kinds of excuses for why the C's hot start was a fluke or couldn't be maintained. Now that LA is off to a hot start, the Lakers are automatically the de facto 2009 NBA champs. The hypocrisy of it all doesn't bother me as much as the fact that I knew they were dead wrong then and I think they're dead wrong now. Anyhow, I'll get off my soapbox now.

[NoraG1]

It's worth remembering that the Lakers weren't exactly defensively slouches last year.  In fact, they finished fifth in basketball in defensive efficiency.  Thus far this season, they've indeed taken that to another level, and their interior defense really looks excellent - they blocked ten shots against Houston last night, and the Rockets seemed suffocated every time they tried to get in the lane.  Curious to see whether the Lakers can continue this level of play at that end of the floor.

-sw

Two comments. One, I saw Houston in Portland before they came down to play LA. Houston's offense is horrible right now. So, measuring the Lakers against the Rockets isn't saying much.

And second, the Lakers have had a pretty soft schedule thusfar (mostly home games).

In sum, I don't disagree with what you've said, but I'd put extra emphasis the part about being curious to see whether the Lakers can continue their admittedly strong defensive play. Personally, I think it will have to drop off some.

Hoops, I don't disagree about Houston's offense - in fact, if you see my Daily Babble on the front page, you'll note that I'm quite nonplussed by their play on that end so far.  That said, I do think the Lakers did a very impressive job through the final three quarters last night and that they really rotated well.

Further, while I agree with you about emphasizing the curiosity going forward, a big part of my point earlier was that even if they don't keep up this pace, I don't see a reason to believe they'll be worse than last year, and last year wasn't bad at all - again, fifth in defensive efficiency.

All that said, I think it's largely semantics between us - it seems clear that we agree on the whole.

-sw

Agreed.

I'll add that my comments regarding the Lakers are probably an overreaction to the national media erroneously (in my opinion) granting "juggernaut" status to LA. But you're absolutely right, they're a very good team, with a very good defense - as you point out. But for those who are over-hyping the Lakers right now (not necessarily you, Steve), I think the descent back to Earth is going to be a major letdown.

As a side note (not directed at SW), I find it amusing that the media held back last year when Boston started out so ferociously - they had all kinds of excuses for why the C's hot start was a fluke or couldn't be maintained. Now that LA is off to a hot start, the Lakers are automatically the de facto 2009 NBA champs. The hypocrisy of it all doesn't bother me as much as the fact that I knew they were dead wrong then and I think they're dead wrong now. Anyhow, I'll get off my soapbox now.

Really good point about the Lakers in your last 2 sentences. It is really annoying how hard the Celtics had to work for respect last season. It is just handed to LA even before the season. It is ridiculous.

[albert]

Lakers defensive system shares the same fundamentals of Celtics' system, for example. It's a quasi-zone, stressing over-help, with the goal of crowding the strongside and stop dribble penetrations. The C's put more emphasis in protecting the paint while the Lakers are more focused on attacking the ball and the passing lanes, fronting the post, creating havoc, trapping the ball handler and causing turnovers. The most similar system is probably the one that George Karl uses in Denver, he learned it from Coach Kloppenburg during his tenure in Seattle, I think.

This kind of defensive systems are generally vulnerable to crisp and quick ball movement, skip passes, good outside shooting from the weakside, bigs who can play in and out and are quick moving to the empty spaces, and balanced offensive weapons - it makes life more difficult for teams that rely on their stars to carry the scoring load (like most NBA teams). It's the kind of defense European teams play and the better way of beating it is by playing the kind of offense European teams use.

Anyway, defensive schemes don't matter that much. Verbal communication and good individual defenders are the foundations of good defense, not x's and o's. They added a strong defensive presence in Bynum, a healthy Ariza, who is a great player to have in this kind of system because his combination of length and quickness allows him to be a disruptive presence and Kobe, who is an excellent commander-in-chief and keeps everybody talking and accountable. More than the new schemes, those are factors that are making their defense so good. But when it's all said and done, it's going to be about execution. If their perimeter defenders can't force the opponent wings to the baseline or wherever they have the help, the system will eventually fall apart: over-help systems are great but, at some point, the help chain collapses.

Thanks for the breakdown cordorobes, much appreciated. I'm sure you've already gotten one but you're getting another TP anyway.

[Fafnir]

Lakers defensive system shares the same fundamentals of Celtics' system, for example. It's a quasi-zone, stressing over-help, with the goal of crowding the strongside and stop dribble penetrations. The C's put more emphasis in protecting the paint while the Lakers are more focused on attacking the ball and the passing lanes, fronting the post, creating havoc, trapping the ball handler and causing turnovers. The most similar system is probably the one that George Karl uses in Denver, he learned it from Coach Kloppenburg during his tenure in Seattle, I think.

This kind of defensive systems are generally vulnerable to crisp and quick ball movement, skip passes, good outside shooting from the weakside, bigs who can play in and out and are quick moving to the empty spaces, and balanced offensive weapons - it makes life more difficult for teams that rely on their stars to carry the scoring load (like most NBA teams). It's the kind of defense European teams play and the better way of beating it is by playing the kind of offense European teams use.

Anyway, defensive schemes don't matter that much. Verbal communication and good individual defenders are the foundations of good defense, not x's and o's. They added a strong defensive presence in Bynum, a healthy Ariza, who is a great player to have in this kind of system because his combination of length and quickness allows him to be a disruptive presence and Kobe, who is an excellent commander-in-chief and keeps everybody talking and accountable. More than the new schemes, those are factors that are making their defense so good. But when it's all said and done, it's going to be about execution. If their perimeter defenders can't force the opponent wings to the baseline or wherever they have the help, the system will eventually fall apart: over-help systems are great but, at some point, the help chain collapses.

Thanks for the breakdown cordorobes, much appreciated. I'm sure you've already gotten one but you're getting another TP anyway.

To expand on what cordobes describes take a look at Truehoop today. They linked to a great article on the Laker's scheme with helpful diagrams.

http://www.basketballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=438

I watched a lot of the Rockets/Lakers and to be honest the amount of defensive effort worries me. The Celtics have been turnover prone off and on throughout this year and last. This sort of defensive pressure could cause us serious issues in the Finals.

[zerophase]

its very hard to compare two teams based on their performance against other teams. we have to wait and see. as i remember correctly, the celtics lost the first game against detroit last year, as detroit was the better team at that point. i really hope the celtics don't plateau.

[houlana]

i have watched all their games this yr.
they look really good, especially with odom and ariza coming of the bench.

with ariza playing well, walton has not been on the floor at all this season.
still cant stand sasha

[NoraG1]

Lakers have had a pretty soft schedule and have barely been on the road. I think that they are going to have to face some elite quality teams on the road first. Playing 2 games against the Clippers already. They are doing what they should for the most part. But their sch. is going to be tougher sooner or later and we can see how good they really are.

[cordobes]

take a look at Truehoop today. They linked to a great article on the Laker's scheme with helpful diagrams.

http://www.basketballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=438

I watched a lot of the Rockets/Lakers and to be honest the amount of defensive effort worries me. The Celtics have been turnover prone off and on throughout this year and last. This sort of defensive pressure could cause us serious issues in the Finals.

That's an excellent article, very recommended reading.

The reference to the Monarchs' white line is funny. I had the chance to meet Ticha Penicheiro a few times in the past and once, about 3 years ago, we discussed if their hyper-aggressive help-defense could ever be used widely by NBA teams as a primary defensive system. I argued that the way the first step was called in the NBA, the court-vision, the passing and shooting skills of NBA players would make it impossible. I guess whether I over-appreciated the players' offensive skills or under-appreciated how big and quick are defensive players are these days. Probably I was wrong on both.

[xChopsx]

The Lakers will either make it to the finals again, or will lose in the Western Conference Finals..

[ACF]

The Pistons beat the Lakers!
So much for that winning streak 

[NoraG1]

The Pistons beat the Lakers!
So much for that winning streak 

Ironic considering the title of the thread. 

[albert]

The Pistons beat the Lakers!
So much for that winning streak 

Ironic considering the title of the thread. 

I'll take it! "Any day of the week and twice on Sundays"

TP's all around

[ACF]

The Pistons beat the Lakers!
So much for that winning streak 

Ironic considering the title of the thread. 

My thoughts exactly.