EnigmaticProblem wrote:This is something I've never understood. . . All this talk about the Lakers' lack of depth.
Who does Oklahoma City have coming off that bench? Let''s assume James Harden is a starter in the scenario. That leaves Nick Collison, Daequan Cook, Eric Maynor, Daniel Orton, and Thabo Sefolosha. How is that better than what the Lakers have? I'd take Jordan Hill over Nick Collison; I'd take Jodie Meeks over Daequan Cook; I'd also take Antawn Jamison over Daniel Orton (or Perry Jones III). That leaves Eric Maynor, who's coming off an ACL injury, and Thabo Sefolosha.
Am I missing something, here?
EDIT: However, Miami is much deeper than us, provided their bench is healthy. You have Battier, Miller, Allen, along with Haslem. This isn't a bad thing, though. All of those players are wing players, and anyone keeping Wade and LeBron off the floor can't be a bad thing. They have an oversaturation in perimeter players, and no front court depth-- It'll be interesting seeing how all of those minutes are distributed.
You're missing something for sure. James Harden is NOT a starter. Why would you assume it that he is. It's like when we placed Odom on our bench, we had a decent bench. Thabo Selfolosha is wonderful off the bench. All-NBA Defensive Second Team in 2010. That alone makes him more valuable than everybody on our bench.
This is absolutely a nonsensical reply. It needs to be stated that Lamar Odom's situation has little similarity to James Harden's. Lamar Odom came off the bench 'cause having him in the starting line up would create a major redundancy. There would have been 4 post players in the starting line up, which wouldn't work with the triangle. The issue here is of redundancy/luxury versus necessity.
Now, let's address the rest of your drivel. Sure, technically James Harden doesn't start games. However, his role is not that of a bench player's. Last year, Sefolosha averaged just a touch over 20 minutes per game, whereas Harden averaged just a touch under 32. Moreover, Sefolosha's minutes have gone down (considerably) every year he's been in Oklahoma City. The most cardinal tangent here is the fact that their roles do not overlap, in any way whatsoever. Harden is, in essence, a starter
. Why is Harden relegated to the bench? I'd say it's 'cause the Thunder's bench would be absolutely atrocious-- Like, epically atrocious-- Without him providing a slight spark. So, where Lamar Odom was a luxury, James Harden is a necessity.
Nonetheless, you didn't address the rest of my post. Outside of Harden, do you not think OKC's bench is worse than the Lakers'? Do you not think Jordan Hill is considerably better than Nick Collison? Don't answer that unless you know their stats. You can pretty much do this player versus player comparison for both benches, and the Lakers would come out on top. The Lakers, overall, have a much better roster than the Thunder. They have five players capable of scoring 20+ points, any given night (Steve, Kobe, Pau, Dwight, Antawn). In comparison, the Thunder have three. lol..