Speaker 1: The volume Lakers Tonight is presented by FanDuel Sports Book.
Speaker 1: There's no better place to make every moment more than
Speaker 1: with FanDuel. You get great odds in markets for the
Speaker 1: NBA and HL college and so much more. It's America's
Speaker 1: number one sports book. It's super easy to use. Plus
Speaker 1: you can combine multiple bets from the same game into
Speaker 1: a same game parlay. If you are new, just download
Speaker 1: the FanDuel Sports Book app to get started. Now sign
Speaker 1: up with promo cod json T so they know I
Speaker 1: sent you. Twenty one plus in president Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Indiana, Louisiana,
Speaker 1: Permitted parishes only, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Tennessee, Virginia
Speaker 1: or West Virginia. First online real money wager only. Refund
Speaker 1: issued as non withdrawalable site credit that expires in fourteen days.
Speaker 1: Restrictions apply see terms at sports book dot FanDuel dot com.
Speaker 1: Gambling problem called one eight hundred, next step or text
Speaker 1: next step to five three three four two in Arizona
Speaker 1: one eight eight eight seven eight nine seven seven seven
Speaker 1: seven or visit CCPG dot org slash chat in Connecticut
Speaker 1: one eight hundred gambler or visit FanDuel dot com slash
Speaker 1: RG in Colorado, Indiana, New Jersey, in Virginia one eight
Speaker 1: seven seven seven seven zero stop in Louisiana one eight
Speaker 1: hundred to seven zero seven one one seven for confidential
Speaker 1: help in Michigan one eight seven seven eight hope and
Speaker 1: why or text hope and Why to four six seven
Speaker 1: three six nine in New York. In Tennessee redline dial
Speaker 1: one eight hundred eight eight nine nine seven eight nine
Speaker 1: in Tennessee. Visit www one eight dot one eight hundred
Speaker 1: gambler dot net in West Virginia. So let's get started
Speaker 1: with this game. I said to you guys throughout this series,
Speaker 1: and much to the chagrine of Miami fans, I said
Speaker 1: that Boston is by far the better team on both
Speaker 1: ends of the floor. And obviously, and I'm strictly talking
Speaker 1: about talent there, because most frequently I'll get people that
Speaker 1: will say things like, hey, if they're a Jekyl and
Speaker 1: High team, that means they're not a good basketball team.
Speaker 1: That's a fair point. Hey, if they're too two with
Speaker 1: the Miami Heat, maybe they're not that much better than Miami.
Speaker 1: That's also a fair point. I don't disagree with those details,
Speaker 1: but in a vacuum strictly looking at talent, Boston is
Speaker 1: significantly more talented then Miami both ends of the floor.
Speaker 1: To give you an idea, coming into tonight, Boston was
Speaker 1: twelve points better then Miami in half court settings per
Speaker 1: one possessions. Miami was giving you about ninety points per
Speaker 1: every one half court possessions was actually pretty good, about
Speaker 1: eight points better than Milwaukee faired against this Boston defense.
Speaker 1: But Boston, for all their limitations, against a very good
Speaker 1: Miami defense, they were averaging about a hundred and two
Speaker 1: points per half court possession. But that static half court
Speaker 1: environment is just one part of the game of basketball. Now,
Speaker 1: that's where your overall talent will be most on display,
Speaker 1: because when teams are squared up and there's no advantage
Speaker 1: either way, that's where talent has to take over. You'll
Speaker 1: see freakishly athletic teams succeed in transition. You'll see really
Speaker 1: skilled players like Lucas thrive in slow pace environments. You'll
Speaker 1: see really big teams thrive in offensive rebounding and depending
Speaker 1: defending the paint and things like that. But those are
Speaker 1: all ancillary factors. Those are all, like I said, swing
Speaker 1: factors that occur outside of that static half court environment,
Speaker 1: and the story of this entire playoff run for Boston
Speaker 1: has been losing games outside of the static half court environment.
Speaker 1: They were a much better half court offensive team than
Speaker 1: both of Milwaukee and Miami, and for all the limitations
Speaker 1: that Brooklyn had, and they were a very good offensive team.
Speaker 1: That was where Boston had to win in some of
Speaker 1: the swing factors of the game. But as you saw
Speaker 1: again in the first half tonight, Miami goes into the halftime,
Speaker 1: I believe they were up by four. I can't remember exactly,
Speaker 1: but that a little bit of a lead, and it
Speaker 1: was textbook. They were getting destroyed on the offensive glass.
Speaker 1: I believe Miami had a twelve to two second chance
Speaker 1: points advantage in the first half. Boston only had ten
Speaker 1: at ten to seven turnover disadvantage, but Miami was running
Speaker 1: out and getting layups on every single one of them.
Speaker 1: Boston's transition defense has been awful in this entire playoff run.
Speaker 1: They're giving up a hundred and forty points per one
Speaker 1: hundred transition opportunities, which is last among all four teams
Speaker 1: in the in the conference finals. So Miami knows because
Speaker 1: They're well coached, and they're great in those details, and
Speaker 1: they're great in those swing factors. If they try to
Speaker 1: avoid the half court environment at all costs, they can
Speaker 1: win games, and they did. I told you guys coming
Speaker 1: into this series that I thought Boston was good enough
Speaker 1: to sweep Miami, but that I expected Miami to push
Speaker 1: it to six because I figured they'd take a couple
Speaker 1: of games off of Boston because of all of that
Speaker 1: sloppiness that I talked about, and you've seen that resoundingly
Speaker 1: displayed in that series. I've been wrong about a lot
Speaker 1: of things in this playoff run, just like everybody is predicting.
Speaker 1: Predicting sports is a huge pain in the ass. But
Speaker 1: this particular Boston team I've had a really good feel for.
Speaker 1: For the most part, Miami's offense is not bad. I had.
Speaker 1: I was pessimistic about them compared to some of the contenders.
Speaker 1: Like when people would ask me, is my Miami a contender,
Speaker 1: I'd routinely say no, because I didn't think they had
Speaker 1: the top end offensive talent to be able to hang
Speaker 1: with some of the best teams in the league. But overall,
Speaker 1: they're a good offensive team. They were twelve in offense
Speaker 1: this season, which is not bad. That's above average, right.
Speaker 1: They have two All Stars on the team, all Star
Speaker 1: caliber players in the form of bamb At a Bio
Speaker 1: and Jimmy Butler. Tyler Harrow obviously he missed part of
Speaker 1: this series with injury, but even when he was on
Speaker 1: the floor, Miami struggled to score. Overall, this is a
Speaker 1: decent Miami offense, and Boston has utterly and completely shut
Speaker 1: them down over the course of this series. I thought
Speaker 1: early on they struggle with some coverage stuff. I thought
Speaker 1: they were dropping way too much. They still dropped way
Speaker 1: more than I thought they would in this series, but
Speaker 1: early on Miami made them pay for that. But over
Speaker 1: the course of the last twelve quarters, so three games,
Speaker 1: twelve quarters, Boston has held Miami to twenty five points
Speaker 1: or less in ten of the twelve quarters. The two
Speaker 1: outliers were that first quarter in Game three when Boston
Speaker 1: mailed it in and it cost him the game and
Speaker 1: the series be over by now if it wasn't for that,
Speaker 1: And then the fourth quarter of Game four when Boston
Speaker 1: was up by a million points and all the bench
Speaker 1: players were in the game. So basically, at any point
Speaker 1: in time where Boston was engaged defensively, Miami could not
Speaker 1: score the basketball. Jimmy Butler was a complete ship show
Speaker 1: again tonight after being a ship show in the last game.
Speaker 1: And I understand so many people are gonna be like,
Speaker 1: he's hurt, and I get that, and I'm I'm not
Speaker 1: undercutting the injuries to Jimmy Butler, Tyler Harrow, and Kyle Lowry.
Speaker 1: They are real. They are a thing that was absolutely
Speaker 1: had a factor in this series. It's very possible that
Speaker 1: some of these games are closer if those guys are healthy.
Speaker 1: But also, the better you are, the more Boston respects
Speaker 1: you as an opponent, and they don't do what they
Speaker 1: did in Game three. Everything is depending on each other
Speaker 1: in that regard. But Janis and kd their efficiency tanked
Speaker 1: against this Boston defense. Both of them utterly fell apart
Speaker 1: in terms of their ability to put the ball in
Speaker 1: the basket efficiently compared to their regular season performance against
Speaker 1: this Boston defense. So, guess what did you think Jimmy
Speaker 1: Butler was above that? Did you think Jimmy Butler was
Speaker 1: gonna succeed where Kadie and Janice failed? It wasn't gonna happen.
Speaker 1: And so yeah, did. I thought the drop coverage early
Speaker 1: in the series, Jimmy was able to get downhill way
Speaker 1: too easily, way too often, and he got a bunch
Speaker 1: of easy shots. And then in Game two was all
Speaker 1: transition stuff. I mean it was like pick six, pick six,
Speaker 1: pick six, right, But overall I expected Jimmy Butler to
Speaker 1: have a nightmare series against Boston's defense, and he has,
Speaker 1: And even if his knee was perfectly healthy, I still
Speaker 1: believe to some extent he would have had that type
Speaker 1: of nightmare series. Baman a bio same thing. Like, again,
Speaker 1: this is an all star level talent, and he's a
Speaker 1: whole bunch of issues with aggression that need to be
Speaker 1: addressed by this Miami team in the off season. Like
Speaker 1: if Miami loses the series, which I expect him to.
Speaker 1: I understand the culture. I understand the power of that culture.
Speaker 1: I understand the power of coaching. I think Erik Spoelstra
Speaker 1: might be the best coach in all of basketball, and
Speaker 1: his performance in this series was excellent, capitalizing on those
Speaker 1: swing factors versus Boston. But there's a limitation to that.
Speaker 1: There's a ceiling, and the ceiling is lower than what
Speaker 1: talent can bring because this is a Boston team that's
Speaker 1: not sharp in all of those areas I thought he made.
Speaker 1: Judoka got soundly out coached in this series. I thoroughly
Speaker 1: disagreed with his defensive strategy, and it's still worked because
Speaker 1: of the overall talent gap and just how ridiculously talented
Speaker 1: this Boston defense is. But this is if you're Miami
Speaker 1: at a certain point, as as powerful as your culture is,
Speaker 1: you have to identify somebody out there that you can
Speaker 1: bring into this system that can be a supreme offensive
Speaker 1: engine for you, because I think as a as Jimmy
Speaker 1: Butler can lead you to the two near the mountaintop
Speaker 1: in down years like the bubble guys, like what happened
Speaker 1: that year. If you guys remember Kde was out, Kyrie
Speaker 1: was out, Steph Curry was out. There were a lot
Speaker 1: of swing factors that allowed a weaker Miami team to
Speaker 1: rise to the top of that pile. And at a
Speaker 1: certain point Miami is gonna have to confront that. I
Speaker 1: wanted to talk a little bit about the third quarter
Speaker 1: run from Boston because I thought it was inevitable and
Speaker 1: they outscored Miami thirty two to sixteen in that In
Speaker 1: that quarter, and that was where they cleaned up those details.
Speaker 1: When you have that big of an advantage in the
Speaker 1: half court, all you have to do is clean up
Speaker 1: those details, and you're just about guaranteed to go on
Speaker 1: the run. You Know what's funny is Tatum had a
Speaker 1: pretty bad game in terms of his ability to make shots.
Speaker 1: But this is the advantage of the way Boston's offense
Speaker 1: is put together because if you look at if you
Speaker 1: look at Boston's offensive construct, it's a driving kick offense, right,
Speaker 1: and it's you've got Jason Tatum, who's this supremely talented
Speaker 1: offensive wing. You've got Jalen Brown who's this supremely talented
Speaker 1: offensive wing. You've got Marcus Smart who's a great driving
Speaker 1: kick guard. You've got Derek White who is every bit
Speaker 1: is capable of being that type of dribble drive guard
Speaker 1: that Marcus Smart is. You've got Al Horford and Great
Speaker 1: Williams are a great spot up players. You've got Peyton
Speaker 1: Pritchard bringing scoring punch off the bench. When you've got
Speaker 1: that type of talent depth on offense, it's kind of
Speaker 1: like a it's kind of like a game of whack
Speaker 1: a mole, and like, okay, congrats. You've got Marcus Smarten
Speaker 1: to have Jayson Tatum to have a rough night. But
Speaker 1: tonight Jalen Brown had it going and Derek White got
Speaker 1: it going, and that was enough to carry you offensively.
Speaker 1: You could go into Game six and Derek White could
Speaker 1: have a rough night and Jalen Brown could have a
Speaker 1: rough night, But chances are Tatum will play a lot better,
Speaker 1: and chances are Marcus Smart will play a lot better.
Speaker 1: You might have a crazy four or five three night
Speaker 1: from Peyton Pritchard. Right when you have this type of
Speaker 1: depth of offensive talent, just by virtue of odds, there's
Speaker 1: a good chance for a couple of those guys to
Speaker 1: get hot. I remember I was talking with Colin Coward
Speaker 1: on Sunday about how to compete with luck, because to
Speaker 1: win in the NBA playoffs, you need luck. You need
Speaker 1: some things to go your way, whether that's injury luck
Speaker 1: or whether that's shooting luck, guys getting hot. But I
Speaker 1: said to Colin, the way you combat that is by
Speaker 1: getting multiple cracks at the table. The more opportunity ease
Speaker 1: you have. If I told you you've got seven polls
Speaker 1: at the slot machine or the roulette table instead of
Speaker 1: two chances are you're gonna win three or four of them, right,
Speaker 1: And that's kind of the way I look at it.
Speaker 1: And when you've got six guys that are capable of
Speaker 1: going for twenty plus points, chances are two or three
Speaker 1: of them are gonna get hot on any given night.
Speaker 1: And that's the advantage of Boston's overall offensive depth and
Speaker 1: the way that that can carry them for stretches in
Speaker 1: the NBA playoffs. Let's look forward for Boston here, and
Speaker 1: to be clear, it's not over. This is a team
Speaker 1: that is routinely every single opportunity they've had to close
Speaker 1: a deal to take a lead in a series, they
Speaker 1: have shown their ugly side the basically Game five of
Speaker 1: this series in Game seven of last series against Milwaukee
Speaker 1: are the only two times I can think of in
Speaker 1: his last two Hounds where Boston put multiple good performances together.
Speaker 1: They fell down one out of Milwaukee with a sloppy effort,
Speaker 1: and then they kicked their ass in Game two. Then
Speaker 1: they came out in Game three and they were sloppy
Speaker 1: again and dug themselves in a big hole. Then they
Speaker 1: came out in Game four and smacked them again. Then
Speaker 1: they came out in Game five on their home floor
Speaker 1: and laid an egg. Then they went on the road
Speaker 1: in game six, they controlled them again, and then they
Speaker 1: come back in game seven, and finally they have a
Speaker 1: second good performance in a row, and it's enough to
Speaker 1: win the series. You look at this series, my They
Speaker 1: come out and play really well in the first half
Speaker 1: and take the lead, and then they get smacked in
Speaker 1: the second half and a third quarter run where they
Speaker 1: look unrecognizable. Then they go in game two on the
Speaker 1: road and beat the ship out of them, and then
Speaker 1: go home in game three and lay the mother of
Speaker 1: all eggs at home in front of your own crowd,
Speaker 1: before you blow them out again in game four, and
Speaker 1: then finally tonight they put a second good performance together.
Speaker 1: That is routine evidence that tells us we should not
Speaker 1: trust these guys, which again, regardless of what happens in
Speaker 1: this series. And my guess is they're gonna be able
Speaker 1: to close out Miami in game six because Miami is
Speaker 1: not as good as Milwaukee was. And I don't think
Speaker 1: they said, I simply don't think they have the talent
Speaker 1: to get this job done. Even that horrific performance from
Speaker 1: Boston in Game three, they still were a couple of
Speaker 1: shots away from stealing that game. I think Miami's gonna
Speaker 1: close it out and get or Boston's gonna close it
Speaker 1: out in game six. So looking forward, I think Golden
Speaker 1: State's gonna close out Dallas. This inconsistent effort, this inconsistent
Speaker 1: attention to detail that might get you beat against Golden State.
Speaker 1: Like we talked about earlier, Boston's given up a hundred
Speaker 1: and forty points per hundred possessions in transition, which is
Speaker 1: last among the four teams in the conference finals. That's
Speaker 1: a swing factor. Boston is giving up more offensive rebounds
Speaker 1: than Miami and Golden State. They're turning the ball over
Speaker 1: more than Dallas in Miami. That's Golden State's one weakness.
Speaker 1: They are weak in the details compared to the competition
Speaker 1: that's remaining in this field, Golden State is going. I'm
Speaker 1: super interested to see this matchup because Golden State only
Speaker 1: managed about a hundred eight points per one hundred possessions
Speaker 1: against Memphis, and I couldn't figure out how to filter
Speaker 1: that for John moranch just because of some limitations of
Speaker 1: the the uh second spectrum stats on NBA dot Com.
Speaker 1: I'd love to see it specifically without John morand because
Speaker 1: I bet you it's significantly lower because Golden State lit
Speaker 1: the Grizzlies on fire when John Randt was on the floor,
Speaker 1: but they didn't score efficiently against Memphis relative to the
Speaker 1: other two teams. So I'm super curious to see what
Speaker 1: this matchup looks like. I'm gonna dive way further into
Speaker 1: it in the film once we get out of these series.
Speaker 1: And again, you're gonna want to follow me on Twitter
Speaker 1: at Underscore Jason and lt to see that breakdown when
Speaker 1: the time comes. But against Golden State, you're gonna be
Speaker 1: put in some predicaments that Miami didn't put you in.
Speaker 1: If you bring a weak defensive effort at any stretch
Speaker 1: during Golden State, you're gonna get beat. Dallas is a
Speaker 1: good defensive team, and they gave up what sixty eight
Speaker 1: points in the second half of that game through a
Speaker 1: Game two that they blew. When a Golden State is
Speaker 1: gonna space you out and put you in real five
Speaker 1: out predicaments, there's gonna be some predicaments that Boston is
Speaker 1: gonna put them in, right, I mean, like they might
Speaker 1: have to play Kevon Looney the whole series just to
Speaker 1: match up physically with the Al Horford Robert Williams front court.
Speaker 1: So there's gonna be predicaments going both ways. And again,
Speaker 1: I don't want to dive too much further into the
Speaker 1: details because I'd rather do a whole video about this
Speaker 1: once we get out of these series. But all I'm
Speaker 1: saying is these series are defined and decided by the
Speaker 1: tiniest of margins, and you can't afford to be sloppy.
Speaker 1: And if you are, this Golden State team is gonna
Speaker 1: beat you. And as of right now, even though I
Speaker 1: think Boston is just a hair better overall in talent,
Speaker 1: I think Golden States a better offensive team, but I
Speaker 1: think Boston is a significantly better defensive team. And so
Speaker 1: from that standpoint, you know, I'm Boston has the tools
Speaker 1: to get the job done in the next round. But
Speaker 1: this is a Golden State team that's been there before.
Speaker 1: We talked a lot about scar tissue in the last show,
Speaker 1: and I had Boston fans in my mentions and in
Speaker 1: commons saying things like, oh, we've been in the conference
Speaker 1: finals all these times. These guys have been there, they've
Speaker 1: lost they have scar tissue. Two. No, they don't. If
Speaker 1: they did, you'd see it on the floor, you'd see
Speaker 1: it in their effort, you'd see it in the attention
Speaker 1: to detail, and it's not there. So maybe they do
Speaker 1: have scar tissue, but it's not enough. I know for
Speaker 1: a fact that Golden State is gonna come out tomorrow
Speaker 1: with an incredible effort to try to close that series.
Speaker 1: Can Dallas still win? Yeah, they're really good and they're
Speaker 1: con persistently generating quality three. So if they go in
Speaker 1: there and they you really well, Dallas might still upset them.
Speaker 1: But there's no concern from anybody watching that game whether
Speaker 1: or not Golden State's gonna come out focused. I have
Speaker 1: no idea whether or not Boston's gonna come out focused.
Speaker 1: In fact, I haven't looked at it yet, but there
Speaker 1: might be an interesting little first quarter spread bet for
Speaker 1: Miami and that in that game six, because it's a
Speaker 1: coin flip whether or not they're gonna come out and
Speaker 1: care enough to do the job. And that's a huge
Speaker 1: monumental difference between this Boston team and this Golden State team,
Speaker 1: and it's why I pick Golden State as of right now. Alright,
Speaker 1: we're gonna switch gears here a little bit. We're gonna
Speaker 1: talk some Lakers. Okay, So, like I said earlier, I
Speaker 1: covered the Lakers over the course the last two years.
Speaker 1: That's uh, was the original inception of this show, although
Speaker 1: things have been shifted, and um, it's a team that
Speaker 1: you know, again, I'm not a Laker fan. This is
Speaker 1: something I have to encounter with Laker fans all the time.
Speaker 1: I'm not a Laker fan. I just covered them over
Speaker 1: the course of the last two years. That said, that
Speaker 1: team in particular, I fell in love with that team.
Speaker 1: I fell in love with their approach. I thought they
Speaker 1: were one of the toughest teams that I can remember watching.
Speaker 1: They very rarely lost multiple games in a row. They
Speaker 1: were incredible with their focus and their commitment to the details.
Speaker 1: And that's what's so interesting about the decline, you know.
Speaker 1: I I We're gonna talk about the coaching search here
Speaker 1: in a second, but like, it's pretty bizarre to see
Speaker 1: Lebron and a d the same two guys that were
Speaker 1: so bought into Frank Vogel and what he did in
Speaker 1: that season, come out flat and just simply not caring.
Speaker 1: And it's just part of that downfall. And ironically, the Lakers,
Speaker 1: as much as I fell in love with them as
Speaker 1: a basketball team in twenty I despise them now they
Speaker 1: offend me as a basketball fan watching their approach day
Speaker 1: to day from the front office down, the way the
Speaker 1: owner behaves, the way the general manager behaves, the stubbornness
Speaker 1: of Frank Vogel all season, the commitment from the players.
Speaker 1: It was awful. It was offensive to watch, and it
Speaker 1: was kind of a pain that I had to cover
Speaker 1: them the way that I did. But that's such as
Speaker 1: life covering the NBA, and things can change quickly. But
Speaker 1: I wanted to take some time tonight to talk a
Speaker 1: little bit about the Russell Westbrook trade rumors that have
Speaker 1: been flying around, my thoughts on the head coaching search,
Speaker 1: and then just overall what I think needs to happen
Speaker 1: this offseason for the Lakers to recover. So with this
Speaker 1: rush trade, and you're seeing a lot of intel coming
Speaker 1: out from a bunch of different sources about whether or
Speaker 1: not they're going to trade Russell Westbrook. And there's two
Speaker 1: specific rumors that are that are kind of leading this charge.
Speaker 1: The first is the Lakers brass is asking coaches when
Speaker 1: they're interviewing them, what would you do with Russell Westbrook.
Speaker 1: We've seen that report, right, and then I even saw
Speaker 1: one today that Terry Stotts is particularly excited about all
Speaker 1: the things that he could do with Russ, which don't
Speaker 1: even get me started on that. The second thing is
Speaker 1: there's extensive reporting that says that the Lakers feel like
Speaker 1: they can't attach a first round pick to Russ, which
Speaker 1: is stupid on like seven different levels. First of all,
Speaker 1: that's just pride talking. Okay, you're concerned, you're concerned about
Speaker 1: the optics of attaching a first round pick to get
Speaker 1: rid of Russ. Are you aware that you're a dumpster fire?
Speaker 1: Are you aware that everyone in the league already thinks
Speaker 1: you're the most poorly run franchise in the league. Are
Speaker 1: you aware that most coaches wouldn't even consider the idea
Speaker 1: of going to you like we heard about with Quinn
Speaker 1: Snyder because of your micro management and your lack of
Speaker 1: organization in general unprofessionalism. You're already a dumpster fire. Your
Speaker 1: reputation is already in the trash. So you expecting to
Speaker 1: to heal that or repair that to some extent because
Speaker 1: you managed to flip Russ without a first round pick.
Speaker 1: That's ridiculous. And then, secondly, the only thing that should
Speaker 1: factor into whether or not you a hatch a first
Speaker 1: round pick should be what is coming in return, because
Speaker 1: if good players are coming, if you're gonna get good
Speaker 1: basketball players back, then you have to give out assets.
Speaker 1: And so if you're under the impression that you can
Speaker 1: get good basketball players in return, for us, who cares
Speaker 1: about the optics of attaching a first round draft pick.
Speaker 1: It's just such a twisted approach to the whole thing,
Speaker 1: and it's just the latest indicator of how much of
Speaker 1: a disaster this ownership in front offices. But let's let's
Speaker 1: talk about this Rush trade from the standpoint of how
Speaker 1: important it is to get him off the roster. The
Speaker 1: thing with Russ this year was toxic. It was toxic
Speaker 1: with the fans, It was toxic with the coach, It
Speaker 1: was toxic with the weird you know, the weird posturing
Speaker 1: of clutch sports and the Lakers front office. It was
Speaker 1: toxic with Russ himself. It the way that he would
Speaker 1: go to the press and refuse to accept blame for
Speaker 1: anything that he did during the entire season. The whole
Speaker 1: thing was toxic. So I don't care what Russ says
Speaker 1: to apologize. I don't care what Terry Stotts thinks he
Speaker 1: can do with Russ. If you bring him back into
Speaker 1: training camp, you are willingly signing up for a toxic
Speaker 1: environment and thus punting the season, namely the twentie season
Speaker 1: of Lebron James. And I said last night on the show,
Speaker 1: I think it will be the last truly great season
Speaker 1: of Lebron james career potentially. So it's a big time
Speaker 1: punt that you're signing up for there. And I've had
Speaker 1: Leaker fans be like, Oh, it's posturing. They're doing it
Speaker 1: for for you know, to try to help with the
Speaker 1: trade value in these negotiations. Calling himself said that on
Speaker 1: his show, and again I hope that's the case. But
Speaker 1: for me personally, I can't give the like is the
Speaker 1: benefit of the doubt? They have burned that down For me,
Speaker 1: when I see the Lakers do something and I have
Speaker 1: to decide whether or not it's them operating on some
Speaker 1: higher plane mentally or them not knowing what they're doing,
Speaker 1: I'm gonna error on the side of not knowing what
Speaker 1: they're doing because routinely they have demonstrated that to us.
Speaker 1: And so as far as the rush trate goes, you
Speaker 1: simply have to get rid of him because of the
Speaker 1: fact that he will propagate a toxic environment if you
Speaker 1: allow him to come into training camp. And then secondly,
Speaker 1: it's what you get in return. Now there's a fear, Oh,
Speaker 1: you're gonna bring back these bad contracts. Oh man, I'm
Speaker 1: not sure if I want to pay Gordon Hayward two
Speaker 1: years at sixty million or two years at thirty million
Speaker 1: a year, or oh, I'm not sure I want to
Speaker 1: take on that that uh you know that that Buddy
Speaker 1: Hell contract or whatever whatever it is that you're concerned about.
Speaker 1: Here's the deal, guys, Russ is a bad contracts. You're
Speaker 1: gonna get Russ. You're gonna get back contracts in return.
Speaker 1: That's the deal. That's what you're signing up for. But
Speaker 1: here's the difference. I thought Russ was a net negative
Speaker 1: player this year. I thought he had an overall negative
Speaker 1: basketball effect, even if we ditch all the toxicity. The
Speaker 1: only people who feel otherwise about that are Russ stands
Speaker 1: and people who routinely overlooked most of the things that
Speaker 1: he did this year out of their own fanhood, which
Speaker 1: again I grew up a lebron stance. I'm not I'm
Speaker 1: not hating on people who behave that way. I'm just
Speaker 1: calling it what it is. It clouded their judgment. Russ
Speaker 1: was a negative basketball player with this team because of
Speaker 1: his inability to be effective off the ball, because of
Speaker 1: his inconsistent defensive effort and focus, because of his shot selection,
Speaker 1: because of his attitude, because of especially in key moments
Speaker 1: at the end of games, his inability to finish around
Speaker 1: the rim and the way that hurt the Lakers and
Speaker 1: transition defense, his propensity to make catastrophic mistakes at the
Speaker 1: end of basketball games. It was mad. It was all that.
Speaker 1: And so the way I look at it, you have
Speaker 1: to look at the Andrew Wiggins example. Now, Andrew Wiggins
Speaker 1: is the supreme example. You have almost no chance of
Speaker 1: hitting that much of a home run. But if you
Speaker 1: can get a smaller version of the Andrew Wiggins example,
Speaker 1: that's what you're looking for here. Andrew Wiggins was considered
Speaker 1: a disaster in Minnesota on a max contract. I think
Speaker 1: he had to promise he was gonna work hard when
Speaker 1: he signed when he signed the deal, if I remember correctly.
Speaker 1: Don't quote me on that because I could be wrong,
Speaker 1: But what happened with Andrew Wiggins, he got traded to
Speaker 1: the Warriors, which was the latest example of brilliant asset management.
Speaker 1: And it's the thing that the Nets have to be
Speaker 1: thinking with Kyrie and it's the thing that Philly has
Speaker 1: to be thinking with James Harden. Never allow yourself to
Speaker 1: lose a player for nothing. Because the them flipping k
Speaker 1: D for D'Angelo Russell and then flipping d' angelo Russell
Speaker 1: for Andrew Wiggins and retaining and taking back picks in
Speaker 1: the process. Not only was that genius asset management. Now
Speaker 1: Andrew Wiggins is this pivotal piece of the team that
Speaker 1: I think is gonna win the NBA Championship. Like he's
Speaker 1: been just flat out better than Klay Thompson on this team.
Speaker 1: That's how good he's been. And so Andrew Wiggins lacked
Speaker 1: the audacity in the upstairs aggression to be a lead
Speaker 1: swing man, a superstar wing but and a tertiary role
Speaker 1: or even further down than that. When he's able to
Speaker 1: fall into the background and focus on the little things,
Speaker 1: he's great at it. Because that's what happens when you
Speaker 1: take supremely talented individuals, talent individuals that are so talented
Speaker 1: that they dictated large contracts and you put them in
Speaker 1: a position where they can focus on specific things that
Speaker 1: they're good at. And so that needs to be the
Speaker 1: thought process with this Russell Westbrook thing. They're overpaid role
Speaker 1: players all around the league. The classic example of this
Speaker 1: was Otto Porter Jr. Remember when he was so good?
Speaker 1: It when he was with Washington and everyone's like, oh,
Speaker 1: do we pay him? Do we not? And Washington didn't
Speaker 1: want to pay him, and so he ended up signing
Speaker 1: that big deal and go into Chicago. Right. I actually
Speaker 1: think they they might have signed him and then traded
Speaker 1: him to Chicago. I can't remember exactly, but my point
Speaker 1: is Auto Porter Jr. Dictating that massive contract as a
Speaker 1: role player. Since then, he's been an overpaid role player
Speaker 1: right until he signed in but in it when he's
Speaker 1: been healthy with Golden State, he's been a monster. He's
Speaker 1: been huge for their spacing. He's given them one trivil
Speaker 1: pull up game like, the ability to attack close outs
Speaker 1: and get pull up jump shots. He's been huge for
Speaker 1: their rebounding and in allowing them to play some of
Speaker 1: their smaller lineups. That's an overpaid role player who slotted
Speaker 1: in on a great team and was great. That's the
Speaker 1: type of guy you gotta be targeting with the rush trade.
Speaker 1: You need to bring back two or three guys that
Speaker 1: are massively overpaid for their position, but at the same time,
Speaker 1: next to Lebron James and Anthony Davis in smaller roles,
Speaker 1: they can excel. And that's the way I look at it.
Speaker 1: With this rust steal, You're flipping one terrible contract that
Speaker 1: actively hurts you on the court for two or three
Speaker 1: massive overpaid contracts that can functionally help your basketball team.
Speaker 1: That's the approach that they need to take. So let's
Speaker 1: move on to this coaching starts really quick. So the
Speaker 1: three names that have been thrown out or Terry Stotts
Speaker 1: fired from Portland, Kenny Atkinson fired from Brooklyn famously for
Speaker 1: not playing DeAndre Jordan's like Katie and Kyrie wanted him to.
Speaker 1: And then Darvin Ham, an assistant from the Milwaukee Bucks.
Speaker 1: So I'm huge on Darvin Ham for two reasons. First
Speaker 1: of all, this the defensive scheme that Milwaukee ran is
Speaker 1: extremely similar to what I think the Lakers will need
Speaker 1: to run next year. So the way that Milwaukee ran
Speaker 1: their defense, if you guys remember, is they played like
Speaker 1: a twin shot blocker scheme, they play Jannie at the four,
Speaker 1: brook Lopez at the five, and with Jannat's mobility, they
Speaker 1: usually have him guard the pick and roll screener from
Speaker 1: the other team so that he navigates the pick and
Speaker 1: roll coverages because he's more mobile, and then they'll talk
Speaker 1: brook Lopez usually on the four man whoever it is
Speaker 1: that's their worst shooter, and have him weighed around at
Speaker 1: the basket right, and functionally with that, because Janice is
Speaker 1: up at the screen and they're funneling guys to brook Lopez,
Speaker 1: they gave up a crazy amount of three's, but they
Speaker 1: absolutely shut down the pain right and as a result,
Speaker 1: they have a functional defense over the course of the
Speaker 1: last two years, one that was good enough to win
Speaker 1: an NBA championship and one that really through Boston for
Speaker 1: a loop. Right. That concept is a seamless transition to
Speaker 1: the Lebron in a d front court. As a matter
Speaker 1: of fact, like now again, is Lebron the same level
Speaker 1: of shot blocker as a brook lopezer A honest no.
Speaker 1: But he's an amazing back line defender and he's great
Speaker 1: at navigating pick and roll coverages if you need him to,
Speaker 1: so you can run a very similar setup that what
Speaker 1: to to what Milwaukee ran with Lebron and a D.
Speaker 1: Plus they're interchangeable. You can have Lebron work the screen,
Speaker 1: or Lebron run the back line, or Anthony Davis can
Speaker 1: do either as well, and you can They even give
Speaker 1: you the added flexibility of switching they have. You know,
Speaker 1: Lebron and a D is a better defensive front court
Speaker 1: than Janis and brook Lopez when they're engaged. It's just
Speaker 1: you can't get him to try hard, which we're gonna get,
Speaker 1: which we're gonna get to here in a minute. But
Speaker 1: my point is, especially with the Lakers lack of perimeter defense,
Speaker 1: this is the Lakers team that was horrific in containing
Speaker 1: ball handlers this year. Chances are, unless they hit a
Speaker 1: bunch of home runs in the off season, that's going
Speaker 1: to be in a weakness for them again next year.
Speaker 1: So you're not going to be able to be a
Speaker 1: team that plays, you know, really switchy, spread the floor
Speaker 1: defensive scheme. Everybody, just hold onto your man type of deal.
Speaker 1: You're going to have to play into your shop blocking.
Speaker 1: You're going to have to funnel teams into the paint.
Speaker 1: So that is the ideal example of where the Milwaukee
Speaker 1: defensive schemes slide right in. So I love the idea
Speaker 1: of Darvin Ham coming in and sliding right in to
Speaker 1: two and executing basically Milwaukee's defensive scheme with the Lakers now,
Speaker 1: offensive organization is a huge deal, and I don't know
Speaker 1: a ton about Darvin Ham on the offensive end of
Speaker 1: the floor, having at the time in this playoff runer
Speaker 1: really dive into it. But I'm less concerned about that
Speaker 1: specifically for this this Laker team because Lebron and a
Speaker 1: d are a brute force offense. They accomplish everything on
Speaker 1: the sheer power of their talent. So I'm more concerned
Speaker 1: about spacing concepts on the offensive end of the floor
Speaker 1: that I am about running, you know, coherent sets all
Speaker 1: the time. I like the Dallas Mavericks model getting guys
Speaker 1: that are routinely in the same spots on the floor,
Speaker 1: especially for a guy like Anthony Davis who's not a
Speaker 1: great passer, if you can simplify his reads to the
Speaker 1: point where it's like, hey, a d if you ever
Speaker 1: find yourself in trouble, you know for a fact there's
Speaker 1: there's a guy in this spot, there's guy in that spot,
Speaker 1: and there's a guy in these other two spots. Because
Speaker 1: that's the way we routinely set up our spacing. That
Speaker 1: the way that I think they need to set up
Speaker 1: their offensive vent. I'd love to see what Kenny Atkinson
Speaker 1: can do on on the offensive vent. I'd love to
Speaker 1: see what Terry Stotts can do on the offensive vent.
Speaker 1: And hopefully you can get him as an assistant, right
Speaker 1: But you know, the spacing concepts are are what I'm
Speaker 1: most interested in. And then last, it's the egos. You know,
Speaker 1: Lebron and a d tuned Frank Vogel out. They were
Speaker 1: so bought in to everything that the team was doing,
Speaker 1: and they just they just bought out, They tuned them out.
Speaker 1: It's it's a crazy thing, and I think it has
Speaker 1: a lot to do with egos. This is not the
Speaker 1: first time Lebron is tuned to coach out. He pretty
Speaker 1: much tuned out David Blatt right now. David Blatt. If
Speaker 1: you've ever read Brian hit Windhorse and David Benneman's book
Speaker 1: about that year, David Blatt was also a huge pain
Speaker 1: in the butt to deal with, and he had a
Speaker 1: massive ego and there's other stuff going on. There. My
Speaker 1: point is is that the establishment guys, these big coach personalities,
Speaker 1: seemed to clash with the egotistical titles, the guys like
Speaker 1: Lebron the guy. Right, if you have a Steph Curry,
Speaker 1: if you have like a supremely coachable player Tim Duncan,
Speaker 1: then you can have those guys play for all time
Speaker 1: great coaches because those coaches are gonna resonate with that
Speaker 1: player on a certain level. Right, I think there's I
Speaker 1: think it's I don't think it's a coincidence that Tyler
Speaker 1: has succeeded, that Jason Kidd has succeeded, the Email Udoka
Speaker 1: has succeeded. These former players that recently played in the league.
Speaker 1: Darvin Ham played in the league in this century. These
Speaker 1: recent NBA players specifically tough guys, guys that represented toughness
Speaker 1: when they were playing, which Tyler and Jason Kidd and
Speaker 1: Email Udoka and Darvin Ham absolutely did. I feel like
Speaker 1: that specific archetype of coach has a better chance of
Speaker 1: resonating and getting buy in from the egotistical stars around
Speaker 1: the league. Look at what he look at what Emai
Speaker 1: Udoka did to turn around the psychology of that Boston
Speaker 1: Celtics team. Look at how Jason Kidd in one season
Speaker 1: got the Dallas Mavericks to buy into defense. Look at
Speaker 1: the job that tylu has done with l a Clippers.
Speaker 1: I don't think it's a coincidence that those guys have
Speaker 1: gotten buying. And like, if I actually thought that Lebron
Speaker 1: and a D would sit there and listen to Kenny
Speaker 1: Atkinson's you know, approach to offense and go like, hey, Kenny,
Speaker 1: you know that's a great idea. Let's try that. If
Speaker 1: I actually thought they'd do that, then maybe you want
Speaker 1: to target an offensive minded coach, right, I just don't
Speaker 1: know that they necessarily would. And so having a real
Speaker 1: trenches type of guy, a guy like Darvin Hand that
Speaker 1: can look at Lebron and A D and be like,
Speaker 1: I need you guys to try every night, I need
Speaker 1: you guys to buy into training camp, I think that
Speaker 1: brings the most value In this specific case, I would
Speaker 1: argue that the most important detail for the Lakers to
Speaker 1: get back to contention next year, outside of anything else,
Speaker 1: is Lebron James and Anthony Davis being on the floor
Speaker 1: and playing hard, which neither of those two things happened
Speaker 1: consistently this year, and I think Darvin Ham has the
Speaker 1: best opportunity to accomplish that with those guys, especially with
Speaker 1: him bringing over the defensive scheme from Milwaukee. Last but
Speaker 1: not least, I just wanted to quickly kind of go
Speaker 1: over and I'll be really quick with us just the
Speaker 1: just the what I think are the overall offense off
Speaker 1: season needs for the Lakers. So when I do this
Speaker 1: kind of stuff, I always want to pay close attention
Speaker 1: to what is working in this playoff front, pay attention
Speaker 1: to what what types of constructs are working and what's not.
Speaker 1: So first of all, I think I just talked about this,
Speaker 1: so I won't get into it again. But spacing concepts,
Speaker 1: which the Lakers were awful at this here copy what
Speaker 1: Dallas did in the form of just making sure that
Speaker 1: guys are always in the consistent spots on the floor
Speaker 1: that allow your stars the best amount of space to operate. Then,
Speaker 1: in terms of personnel, we are once again seeing size
Speaker 1: in strength, specifically on the perimeter working not interior size.
Speaker 1: Again the Brook Lopez I told you guys, Milwaukee got
Speaker 1: destroyed with Brook Lopez on the floor in the Boston series.
Speaker 1: It was the biggest mistake that Mike Budenholz Aer made
Speaker 1: in Game seven was playing brook Lopez thirty seven minutes.
Speaker 1: They got destroyed with brook Lopez on the floor. When
Speaker 1: they went small, they were great in the outscored Boston.
Speaker 1: Robert Williams. He's a big, but he's a mobile big
Speaker 1: that can run up and down the floor, hanging in transition,
Speaker 1: cover ground when he needs to in five out situations,
Speaker 1: switch out onto perimeter players and succeed Kevin Looney all
Speaker 1: of the same things. Great defensive player can switch out
Speaker 1: onto guards, dominant on the glass, those kinds of things.
Speaker 1: If you are not. The Lakers need to avoid the
Speaker 1: traditional center archetype at all costs this summer and target
Speaker 1: guys like Maxi Kleiba, like Kivan Looney, like Rob Williams.
Speaker 1: You can You're not gonna be able to get guys
Speaker 1: that caliber, but if you can find guys that are
Speaker 1: of that for the veteran minimum, guy like Damian Jones
Speaker 1: who played for the Lakers a little bit this year,
Speaker 1: a younger player who's more mobile, that plays hard every night,
Speaker 1: those are the kind of guys you should target about overall.
Speaker 1: The what this postseason has proved once again is the
Speaker 1: number one place where size matters is a perimeter. Your
Speaker 1: guards need to be big, strong guards. Your wings need
Speaker 1: to be big, strong wings, not thin wings that are
Speaker 1: gonna struggle in the physicality the environment. That's what destroyed
Speaker 1: Brooklyn in the first round. They had no size and
Speaker 1: strength on the perimeter, and Boston bullied them as a result.
Speaker 1: So flip flip Russ for overpaid role players that will
Speaker 1: fit alongside Lebron and a d and with your veteran
Speaker 1: minimum contracts or mid level exception or whatever it is,
Speaker 1: you opt to use this summer target big strong perimeter players.
Speaker 1: And and if all those things happen, if they get
Speaker 1: Darvin ham and if Lebron James and Anthony Davis are
Speaker 1: healthy and on the floor and caring, I genuinely believe
Speaker 1: the Lakers can rejoin contention now. Last but not least,
Speaker 1: do not have faith in that the Lakers have not
Speaker 1: demonstrated an ability to coherently follow a smart basketball plan.
Speaker 1: So chances are those things will not happen. And that's
Speaker 1: the unfortunate reality of the circumstance with Genie Buss at
Speaker 1: the Helm. But it's a possible outcome. And that's the
Speaker 1: way that I think it needs to go down for
Speaker 1: the Lakers to get back. All Right, guys, that is
Speaker 1: all I have for tonight. As always, I sincerely appreciate
Speaker 1: you guys supporting the show and rocking with me. If
Speaker 1: you guys could take the time to like this video,
Speaker 1: I it sincerely appreciate that it helps us a lot. Also,
Speaker 1: subscribe to the YouTube channel so you don't miss any
Speaker 1: more of our shows. If you miss part of this
Speaker 1: show and you don't have time to go back and
Speaker 1: check it out on YouTube, check out our podcast feed
Speaker 1: under Lakers Tonight and subscribe to that as well, and
Speaker 1: then follow me on Twitter. I underscore Jason LT. I'll
Speaker 1: be having a lot of videos coming out, especially once
Speaker 1: we get into the NBA Finals. All right, guys, we
Speaker 1: will be live tomorrow night four, Game five of the
Speaker 1: Warriors in Neverick Series. I'll see you guys right after
Speaker 1: the final buzzer. Volume