2024-25 NBA Season Discussion

[Doctor MJ]

Only players with 2 rings in the 2020s:

KCP - Jrue - Caruso

Fascinating! Totally tells a story about what the NBA has been in this era.

The fact that the only throughline is that KCP & Caruso were on the championship Lakers, and both got let go after the first struggles because of superteam chasing superstars which went nowhere near where they thought they would, is noteworthy to me. As is the fact that the same stuff happens to Jrue though at a much higher stature and salary.

[GSP]

Stone has been hitting it out of the park for the Rockets in every move. He is by far the lead for Eoy so far. Hes def more consistent than Morey from what I remember. They still have pieces to make a big move while keeping Amen, Kd and Sengun

Rockets have a real shot next season depending on another move. The timing couldnt be better for them

We're gonna be out of the title mix w/o Jayson
Pacers w/o Hali
Kyrie Acl and rookie Flagg they arent going all the way even if he comes back
Denver needs to make moves and theyre constrained
Lac paper tigers
Memphis might be blowing it up and even if they go for it Ja will just get injured eventually
Lakers have to figure out defense and bigs
Went 7 w/ Golden State while Jalen was a liability all but 1 game
Spurs a few years away and Wemby literally went monk mode
Wolves are good but flawed Warriors wouldve handled them if Steph didnt get hurt

Obviously theres Okc but if Im Houston Im looking at everyone else and feeling confident

[parsnips33]

Just wait until you see the un-flawed Warriors (make a move already Mike!)

[Special_Puppy]

Pelicans trading a potential top 5 pick to move from 23 to 13 is insane lol

[tsherkin]

Only players with 2 rings in the 2020s:

KCP - Jrue - Caruso

Fascinating! Totally tells a story about what the NBA has been in this era.

The fact that the only throughline is that KCP & Caruso were on the championship Lakers, and both got let go after the first struggles because of superteam chasing superstars which went nowhere near where they thought they would, is noteworthy to me. As is the fact that the same stuff happens to Jrue though at a much higher stature and salary.

True, although it's worth noting that the 2020s have also been marked by Lebron and Steph being old, with some health issues for a lot of stars. I wouldn't project too hard about the multiple rings situation when we were experiencing a dearth of superstars with dynastic supporting casts. Although yes, LA definitely shot themselves in the foot.

[parsnips33]

Mike D with 2 picks in the 50s

Where does Jimmy Butler rank all time after this ring

[Doctor MJ]

Only players with 2 rings in the 2020s:

KCP - Jrue - Caruso

Fascinating! Totally tells a story about what the NBA has been in this era.

The fact that the only throughline is that KCP & Caruso were on the championship Lakers, and both got let go after the first struggles because of superteam chasing superstars which went nowhere near where they thought they would, is noteworthy to me. As is the fact that the same stuff happens to Jrue though at a much higher stature and salary.

True, although it's worth noting that the 2020s have also been marked by Lebron and Steph being old, with some health issues for a lot of stars. I wouldn't project too hard about the multiple rings situation when we were experiencing a dearth of superstars with dynastic supporting casts. Although yes, LA definitely shot themselves in the foot.

I would say LeBron the player may well have won a chip in the 2020s if he wasn't being affected by LeBron the GM. He pushed hard to get Westbrook, and in doing so ended his time playing on contenders specifically because he fell prey to the superteam argument - that he spearheaded in Miami - where everyone who isn't a star is disposable.

And so I'd say the lesson learned in the 2020s is that non-stars aren't disposable at all, and the best way to build around a star is with quality role players.

That'll be a temporary lesson of course - there will be more superteams in the future - but we've just seen again and again that the best teams have role players that having tremendous impact, and when you build the superteam, that's what you give up in the short term. If you stick around in the long-term, you might be able to bring in a Battier, but if you're pushing for new teammates every time you don't win the chip, the only guarantee is that eventually you'll have "no help", because you didn't think you need it.

[tsherkin]

I would say LeBron the player may well have won a chip in the 2020s if he wasn't being affected by LeBron the GM. He pushed hard to get Westbrook, and in doing so ended his time playing on contenders specifically because he fell prey to the superteam argument - that he spearheaded in Miami - where everyone who isn't a star is disposable.

It's possible, but even by then, he had lost enough on defense and the upper bound of his take-over ability that it's possible he might not have done. Milwaukee, Golden State, Denver, Boston, OKC... heck, Indy pre-Hali injury. All of those teams would have given any edition of Lebron-led Lakers squads some seriously trouble after 2020.

And so I'd say the lesson learned in the 2020s is that non-stars aren't disposable at all, and the best way to build around a star is with quality role players.

Yes, but we've kind of always known that depth was critical to protracted contention, and that single-star squads don't work. And even on the multi-star squads which people make a fuss about these past 15 years or so, they had positive contributors around the core stars.

I think the deal is a team needs to have a sense of what sort of value synergizes with other talent, right? And where are the diminishing returns. And what other things do you need from guys, especially the kinds of things you tend not to see higher-end stars doing as much of. The screening, the scrapping for loose balls, the rebounding, the rest of defense besides just shooting the gaps to pick off passes, etc.

One of the big things we see with these star guys is how much of the team's cap they tie up with their large salaries, and then yeah... they lose out on defensive roleplayers and bench depth, for sure. Sound team structure with reasonable deals are pretty important. And it's very hard to put three star players on a team and afford depth. Plus with the availability issues we see...

[falcolombardi]

I would say LeBron the player may well have won a chip in the 2020s if he wasn't being affected by LeBron the GM. He pushed hard to get Westbrook, and in doing so ended his time playing on contenders specifically because he fell prey to the superteam argument - that he spearheaded in Miami - where everyone who isn't a star is disposable.

It's possible, but even by then, he had lost enough on defense and the upper bound of his take-over ability that it's possible he might not have done. Milwaukee, Golden State, Denver, Boston, OKC... heck, Indy pre-Hali injury. All of those teams would have given any edition of Lebron-led Lakers squads some seriously trouble after 2020.

And so I'd say the lesson learned in the 2020s is that non-stars aren't disposable at all, and the best way to build around a star is with quality role players.

Yes, but we've kind of always known that depth was critical to protracted contention, and that single-star squads don't work. And even on the multi-star squads which people make a fuss about these past 15 years or so, they had positive contributors around the core stars.

I think the deal is a team needs to have a sense of what sort of value synergizes with other talent, right? And where are the diminishing returns. And what other things do you need from guys, especially the kinds of things you tend not to see higher-end stars doing as much of. The screening, the scrapping for loose balls, the rebounding, the rest of defense besides just shooting the gaps to pick off passes, etc.

One of the big things we see with these star guys is how much of the team's cap they tie up with their large salaries, and then yeah... they lose out on defensive roleplayers and bench depth, for sure. Sound team structure with reasonable deals are pretty important. And it's very hard to put three star players on a team and afford depth. Plus with the availability issues we see...

Case in point, lakers had the same core in 2021 losing some useful players like but gaining others (like marc gasol) and got injured before facing a strong suns team (not saying it is a guarantee they would have beaten phoenix but surely would have had better odds)

By 2022 which is the westbrook trade year that people put completely on lebron blame for some reason instead of front office lebron would be 37

2020 lakers outside caruso were a old and/or fragile core as it was

[jalengreen]

I still think the 2023 Lakers straight up win the chip if LeBron was healthy & they were willing to pay Caruso (which was not a LeGM casualty - that was just the Lakers cheaping out!)

[falcolombardi]

I still think the 2023 Lakers straight up win the chip if LeBron was healthy & they were willing to pay Caruso (which was not a LeGM casualty - that was just the Lakers cheaping out!)

Really doubtful

Jokic was a bad 1vs1 matchup for davis as he was undersized for it and it took his help defense away to use him on jokic, the fact lakers needed to use lebron and rui for stretches against jokic in 23 and 24 is both impressive for them but also a indictment on lakers big options/versatility

Whereas in offense they lacked the shooting/spacing to punish denver defense

Okc, minnesota or clippers (all the 3 teams to take to 7/beat denver in the last 3 years) had a combo of sturdy centers/double bigs and great perimeter defenders to put pressure on passing lanes. Lakers didnt

[jalengreen]

I still think the 2023 Lakers straight up win the chip if LeBron was healthy & they were willing to pay Caruso (which was not a LeGM casualty - that was just the Lakers cheaping out!)

Really doubtful

Jokic was a bad 1vs1 matchup for davis as he was undersized for it and it took his help defense away to use him on jokic, the fact lakers needed to use lebron and rui for stretches against jokic in 23 and 24 is both impressive for them but also a indictment on lakers big options/versatility

Whereas in offense they lacked the shooting/spacing to punish denver defense

Okc, minnesota or clippers (all the 3 teams to take to 7/beat denver in the last 3 years) had a combo of sturdy centers/double bigs and great perimeter defenders to put pressure on passing lanes. Lakers didnt

I think the good but not great PG who put up 33 PPG on 65% TS% against a DLo/Reaves backcourt was the x factor in that series and not Jokic, who played at his usual great level (and all four games were nonetheless competitive)

[falcolombardi]

I still think the 2023 Lakers straight up win the chip if LeBron was healthy & they were willing to pay Caruso (which was not a LeGM casualty - that was just the Lakers cheaping out!)

Really doubtful

Jokic was a bad 1vs1 matchup for davis as he was undersized for it and it took his help defense away to use him on jokic, the fact lakers needed to use lebron and rui for stretches against jokic in 23 and 24 is both impressive for them but also a indictment on lakers big options/versatility

Whereas in offense they lacked the shooting/spacing to punish denver defense

Okc, minnesota or clippers (all the 3 teams to take to 7/beat denver in the last 3 years) had a combo of sturdy centers/double bigs and great perimeter defenders to put pressure on passing lanes. Lakers didnt

I think the good but not great PG who put up 33 PPG on 65% TS% against a DLo/Reaves backcourt was the x factor in that series and not Jokic, who played at his usual great level (and all four games were nonetheless competitive)

Davis being on jokic and not being able to roam for help and lakers lack of good defensive guards, however, likely played a part in said offensive explosion didnt it?

Compare that to oklahoma where harstentein or sometines jaylin williams could take the sturdy big role on jokic while chet roamed as either a help defender against jokic, a rim protector or blowing up actions outside the paint (to say nothingh of the on ball pressure and passing lines chaos caruso, jalen or dort unleashed) and murray doesnt have quite as easy of a time

But even outside thunder, clippers with zubac and the likes of kris dunn or wolves with towns on jokic and gobert more of a roamer had success slowing down denver and jokic offense

[jalengreen]

Really doubtful

Jokic was a bad 1vs1 matchup for davis as he was undersized for it and it took his help defense away to use him on jokic, the fact lakers needed to use lebron and rui for stretches against jokic in 23 and 24 is both impressive for them but also a indictment on lakers big options/versatility

Whereas in offense they lacked the shooting/spacing to punish denver defense

Okc, minnesota or clippers (all the 3 teams to take to 7/beat denver in the last 3 years) had a combo of sturdy centers/double bigs and great perimeter defenders to put pressure on passing lanes. Lakers didnt

I think the good but not great PG who put up 33 PPG on 65% TS% against a DLo/Reaves backcourt was the x factor in that series and not Jokic, who played at his usual great level (and all four games were nonetheless competitive)

Davis being on jokic and not being able to roam for help and lakers lack of good defensive guards, however, likely played a part in said offensive explosion didnt it?

Compare that to oklahoma where harstentein or sometines jaylin williams could take the sturdy big role on jokic while chet roamed as either a help defender against jokic, a rim protector or blowing up actions outside the paint (to say nothingh of the on ball pressure and passing lines chaos caruso, jalen or dort unleashed) and murray doesnt have quite as easy of a time

But even outside thunder, clippers with zubac and the likes of kris dunn or wolves with towns on jokic and gobert more of a roamer had success slowing down denver and jokic offense

Regarding the lack of good defensive guards, in this hypothetical I'm saying Caruso is on the Lakers, so they'd get one good defensive guard at least. Of course i have no doubt abt okc being better equipped to defend Jokic and the Nuggets offense in general, even in this hypothetical where LA has Caruso - but I also trust LA's half court offense against Denver more than I'd trust OKC's, so there's a tradeoff there as well.

LeBron put up 28 on 60.5% TS%, AD put up 27 on 50.4% TS% - both of them produced with ease, even with LeBron being cold asf from 3 (foot injury). DEN being able to throw a zone at OKC and give their offense trouble at times is something I don't remember them ever doing to LA. Problem was always defense and yeah Jokic would still get his but I think having Caruso chasing Murray legitimately has a hugee impact alone. The lack of POA defense was damning

[parsnips33]

I still think the 2023 Lakers straight up win the chip if LeBron was healthy & they were willing to pay Caruso (which was not a LeGM casualty - that was just the Lakers cheaping out!)

Should I even bring up my "Lakers lose the first game in the play-ins and stay out of the Warriors half of the bracket" hypothetical?

Ant had to go 3/17 and 0/9 from 3 lol

[jalengreen]

I still think the 2023 Lakers straight up win the chip if LeBron was healthy & they were willing to pay Caruso (which was not a LeGM casualty - that was just the Lakers cheaping out!)

Should I even bring up my "Lakers lose the first game in the play-ins and stay out of the Warriors half of the bracket" hypothetical?

Ant had to go 3/17 and 0/9 from 3 lol

Go ahead lmao that’s the great part of hypotheticals, everybody can have their opinion

But Conley shot 6/8 from 3 and as a team the Timberwolves shot 39% from 3, above their season average in both makes and % (compared to 32% for LA). So the “well imagine if they shot even better from 3” argument doesn’t move me personally ngl

[Doctor MJ]

I still think the 2023 Lakers straight up win the chip if LeBron was healthy & they were willing to pay Caruso (which was not a LeGM casualty - that was just the Lakers cheaping out!)

While we talk about the Lakers being cheap though, we do need to remember that when they let Caruso go, their payroll got more expensive and went up to having the 5th highest payroll in the league by adding a new player who made more money per year than any Laker had ever done previously.

So:
1. Lakers were wrong to not keep Caruso.
2. The Buss family was cheap compared to modern NBA owners as a rule because they were a lesser tier of wealth generally who became owners at a time when that tier was just fine for the NBA.
3. But this was also them making moves and spending more money to give LeBron what he thought he really needed in Russell Westbrook, which seems like a pretty reasonable thing for an owner to do. "Okay, we're going to make the big move and spend more money to get what you say you need, and we're not going to prioritize some of these minor players you don't seem concerned with."

This then to say, I'm not going to pretend the Busses did everything perfectly, but the reality is the big thing they were asked to do was pay what needed to be paid to bring Westbrook in, and as soon as Westbrook got there, title contention became completely impossible.

Now, by the 2023 playoffs, Westbrook was gone so there was hope again in theory, but it's not like the Lakers got off Westbrook and got a bunch of great role player assets that would give LeBron/AD just what they needed to contend. Realistically I don't think you can expect to contend with DLo as one of your Big 3 either.

As I say all of that, I am more of a fan of Austin Reaves, and while I'm not sure he was ready to a Big 3 guy at that moment, he was in the process of getting there and if you have that, Caruso, and other quality role players, that is something I think has a chance to compete.

[jalengreen]

I still think the 2023 Lakers straight up win the chip if LeBron was healthy & they were willing to pay Caruso (which was not a LeGM casualty - that was just the Lakers cheaping out!)

While we talk about the Lakers being cheap though, we do need to remember that when they let Caruso go, their payroll got more expensive and went up to having the 5th highest payroll in the league by adding a new player who made more money per year than any Laker had ever done previously.

So:
1. Lakers were wrong to not keep Caruso.
2. The Buss family was cheap compared to modern NBA owners as a rule because they were a lesser tier of wealth generally who became owners at a time when that tier was just fine for the NBA.
3. But this was also them making moves and spending more money to give LeBron what he thought he really needed in Russell Westbrook, which seems like a pretty reasonable thing for an owner to do. "Okay, we're going to make the big move and spend more money to get what you say you need, and we're not going to prioritize some of these minor players you don't seem concerned with."

This then to say, I'm not going to pretend the Busses did everything perfectly, but the reality is the big thing they were asked to do was pay what needed to be paid to bring Westbrook in, and as soon as Westbrook got there, title contention became completely impossible.

Now, by the 2023 playoffs, Westbrook was gone so there was hope again in theory, but it's not like the Lakers got off Westbrook and got a bunch of great role player assets that would give LeBron/AD just what they needed to contend. Realistically I don't think you can expect to contend with DLo as one of your Big 3 either.

As I say all of that, I am more of a fan of Austin Reaves, and while I'm not sure he was ready to a Big 3 guy at that moment, he was in the process of getting there and if you have that, Caruso, and other quality role players, that is something I think has a chance to compete.

The report we have isn't that LeBron wasn't concerned with Caruso fwiw.

From Stein:

LeBron James was a strong advocate for the trade that brought Westbrook to Hollywood and thus has to wear his considerable slice of culpability for how poorly things are working out. Yet one source did point out at least one counter on James’ behalf, noting that he was also one of the organization’s staunchest Alex Caruso fans and badly wanted the Lakers to re-sign the defensive-minded guard. The Lakers, despite all of their considerable revenue streams, refused to offer a contract on par with the four-year, $37 million deal Caruso landed from Chicago because of the luxury-tax implications.

And we already know that the Lakers don't just do everything that LeBron wants, right? He tried to push for Lue, he tried to push for Caruso being re-signed, Haynes reported in 2022 that LeBron wanted DeMar before Westbrook but the FO didn't want to give him a 3 year deal, Dudley himself said LeBron/AD pushed for him being re-signed but the FO didn't want him, and that's just off the top of my head

So the holistic image we have, to me, points to a franchise that has pretty clearly not just gone along with whatever LeBron wants. I don't actually see any reason to believe that LeBron is disproportionately responsible for the Westbrook trade and that Pelinka/the FO did not approve of it themselves, because the track record we see actually points to the opposite. Seems like a situation where they just happened to be aligned on a bad decision

[Cavsfansince84]

Does a forum mod want to sticky an off season thread for off season talk?

[Doctor MJ]

I still think the 2023 Lakers straight up win the chip if LeBron was healthy & they were willing to pay Caruso (which was not a LeGM casualty - that was just the Lakers cheaping out!)

While we talk about the Lakers being cheap though, we do need to remember that when they let Caruso go, their payroll got more expensive and went up to having the 5th highest payroll in the league by adding a new player who made more money per year than any Laker had ever done previously.

So:
1. Lakers were wrong to not keep Caruso.
2. The Buss family was cheap compared to modern NBA owners as a rule because they were a lesser tier of wealth generally who became owners at a time when that tier was just fine for the NBA.
3. But this was also them making moves and spending more money to give LeBron what he thought he really needed in Russell Westbrook, which seems like a pretty reasonable thing for an owner to do. "Okay, we're going to make the big move and spend more money to get what you say you need, and we're not going to prioritize some of these minor players you don't seem concerned with."

This then to say, I'm not going to pretend the Busses did everything perfectly, but the reality is the big thing they were asked to do was pay what needed to be paid to bring Westbrook in, and as soon as Westbrook got there, title contention became completely impossible.

Now, by the 2023 playoffs, Westbrook was gone so there was hope again in theory, but it's not like the Lakers got off Westbrook and got a bunch of great role player assets that would give LeBron/AD just what they needed to contend. Realistically I don't think you can expect to contend with DLo as one of your Big 3 either.

As I say all of that, I am more of a fan of Austin Reaves, and while I'm not sure he was ready to a Big 3 guy at that moment, he was in the process of getting there and if you have that, Caruso, and other quality role players, that is something I think has a chance to compete.

The report we have isn't that LeBron wasn't concerned with Caruso fwiw.

From Stein:

LeBron James was a strong advocate for the trade that brought Westbrook to Hollywood and thus has to wear his considerable slice of culpability for how poorly things are working out. Yet one source did point out at least one counter on James’ behalf, noting that he was also one of the organization’s staunchest Alex Caruso fans and badly wanted the Lakers to re-sign the defensive-minded guard. The Lakers, despite all of their considerable revenue streams, refused to offer a contract on par with the four-year, $37 million deal Caruso landed from Chicago because of the luxury-tax implications.

And we already know that the Lakers don't just do everything that LeBron wants, right? He tried to push for Lue, he tried to push for Caruso being re-signed, Haynes reported in 2022 that LeBron wanted DeMar before Westbrook but the FO didn't want to give him a 3 year deal, Dudley himself said LeBron/AD pushed for him being re-signed but the FO didn't want him, and that's just off the top of my head

So the holistic image we have, to me, points to a franchise that has pretty clearly not just gone along with whatever LeBron wants. I don't actually see any reason to believe that LeBron is disproportionately responsible for the Westbrook trade and that Pelinka/the FO did not approve of it themselves, because the track record we see actually points to the opposite. Seems like a situation where they just happened to be aligned on a bad decision

Good stuff to bring up, and yeah, I'm not saying Laker management didn't screw up with Caruso, but note the whole "despite all of their considerable revenue streams" about a family who has since sold the team. People have always tended to talk about the Lakers as if they are swimming in money...but the Buss really wasn't. Oh sure, if you own a thing worth billions then you're technically a billionaire, but that's not the same as having billions in liquid assets, and the precariousness of being an NBA owner who has the bulk of his/their wealth tied up in the NBA itself is getting dicier and dicier each season.

Perfectly reasonable for people to have doubted that was actually their situation previously...but now that they are selling the majority of the team (while still keeping governor control for now apparently), I think the debate is over.

Also, in theory one might think it was reasonable for LeBron to be able to expect that whatever team was lucky enough to have him should be spending as much as the NBA lets them...but the Buss family were there before LeBron was. The tea leaves were there to be read by LeBron ahead of time, he just chose to ignore them.

And again, if what we were talking about was the Lakers actually chopping salary from one year to the next I'd feel differently, but that's not what happened. The Lakers spent more money on basketball after that off-season giving up assets to get the extremely expensive superstar LeBron coveted, and we're supposed to feel like the problem was they didn't do enough because of Caruso? Doesn't seem reasonable to me even before we remember that acquiring Westbrook meant contention was impossible.