2025 NBA PLAYOFFS West First Round: #3 LA Lakers vs #6 Minnesota Timberwolves (MIN leads 1-0)

[Klomp]

Knecht can be a lob threat & cutter in addition to 3-point shooter, all of which compliment Luka's game, but J.J. wants to play copy cat to the other winning teams in the league instead.

No coach is calling Luka/Knecht pick and roll lob plays, let's just be real....that's a one-way ticket to getting fired!

[simplyorange]

Knecht can be a lob threat & cutter in addition to 3-point shooter, all of which compliment Luka's game, but J.J. wants to play copy cat to the other winning teams in the league instead.

No coach is calling Luka/Knecht pick and roll lob plays, let's just be real....that's a one-way ticket to getting fired!

It doesn't have to be pick & roll.

Remember how DJJ on the Mavs would cut baseline from the 3 point lines for lobs from Luka???? Knecht can do the same thing since he is 6'8" I think & athletic.

On second thought, it's too late to make big changes now.

I think the Lakers are in trouble.

All because J.J. was coaching like the rookie coach he is in the last 2-3 months of the season solely trying to win every game he could to get the Lakers the best possible playoff seeding instead of preparing them for the playoffs.

[Bob8]

I'm rooting against the lakers but also for Bob, which makes no sense really.

It's over, Bisme37 and Dirk are already counting my posts, I might be over the limit very soon.

Maybe just a little reminder, Luka has lost first game against OKC 95:117 in last playoffs.

That was the Mavs, a good team.

That's exactly the point, Mavs were a good team losing their first game in series by 22 points against OKC. What do you think were reactions after game 1? OKC in 4. Mavs are not good enough to have any chances. Okc are going to be in the Finals. They are just superior team, too athletic for Mavs doing anything. Sounds familiar? Even on Mavs board, Luka is fat, not conditioned enough, can't play D...

And then game 2 happened and everything changed.
Just maybe we should stop making big conclusions after game 1 and see, if Wolves D is really that good and they can shoot wide open 3s with 70+ %.

[Bob8]

.....Reddick is stubborn, he’s young but has the mentality of an old coach.

Doesn't J.J. have to make a starting line-up change after the thrashing the Lakers took in game 1 though?????

If so, what????

I think he needs to do something drastic, but he probably feels that would be too risky & open him up to heavy criticism if it flops, so he will be too scared to do anything major & will maybe just do something minor instead like DFS replaces Hayes.

The problem for the Lakers is they can't beat the Wolves at their own game. A half-court & physical style the Wolves have too much of a size & strength advantage.

The Lakers have a big advantage over the Wolves as far as overall team skill & J.J. needs to find a way to exploit that.

I doubt it will happen, but he should probably move Reaves to the bench & start DFS alongside Luka at guard. He should start Len on Gobert & LeBron on Randle because at least size & strength in those matchups will be equal.

It would be really risky to start Knecht at SF, but if it could change the style of the game into to more of the Lakers favor then it would be more than worth it.

What the Wolves are deathly afraid of & every team that plays against Luka is deathly afraid of is Luka as playmaker. That is how the Mavs got to the Finals last season at all the pivotal moments it is how they won. When Luka is at the top of his game as playmaker, every opponent really has ZERO chance!!!

Sure, J.J. has said that is how the Lakers want to play, put the ball in Luka's hands & let him run the offense & they tried to do that a lot in the last couple months, but I don't think he has done ALL he could do as far as facilitating that game plan & now maybe the Lakers will pay for it dearly in the playoffs unless he acts quick.

Yea Luka needs to create more. I think JJ needs to bring either Lebron or Reaves off the bench. So the 2nd unit has its own primary creator. And bring a defender on the starting lineup. Because those two are bad on defense.

Lakers had lost the game in Q2, when LeBron and AR played without Luka. That was when the momentum has changed firmly in Wolves favour. If anything, Luka didn't took enough shots, knowing how hot he was. He had the same number of FGA as Ant, scoring 15 points more, only 4 Fga more than LeBron. If Wolves are not doubling him, he shouldn't go for 50+. Luka was shooting 50%+, other Lakers 30%+. Who do you want to take more shots?

[Johnny Firpo]

I don't think I'm coming to the wrong conclusion, because the league average is 36% on wide open threes. I really was just stating a fact that shooting luck played a huge part in this. I didn't really say it was all that, but it was certainly the most important factor (and it will be the most important factor when they will shoot around 30% from three in some games).

They only shoot 30% once out of every four or five games.

The Wolves are one of the best three point shooting teams in the league. Conley, DDV and Ant are all about 40% from three. Naw and Naz are about 38%. The last 20 games Randle has been 40% from 3 also.

https://www.nba.com/stats/player/203944/traditional?Split=lastn&SeasonType=Regular+Season

No one said they aren't, what we/I said was that they will not shoot this well on a regular basis, even if they are wide open shots, and my argument was (wouldn't even call it an argument, it's really just a fact) that shooting luck plays a huge part in the modern game, where teams shoot a ton of threes.

[simplyorange]

Lakers had lost the game in Q2, when LeBron and AR played without Luka. That was when the momentum has changed firmly in Wolves favour. If anything, Luka didn't took enough shots, knowing how hot he was. He had the same number of FGA as Ant, scoring 15 points more, only 4 Fga more than LeBron. If Wolves are not doubling him, he shouldn't go for 50+. Luka was shooting 50%+, other Lakers 30%+. Who do you want to take more shots?

How many easy shots did Luka miss though????

If he made all of those, he would have scored 45+ points at least.

The way Wolves are playing defense, Luka can get into the paint every time & they are not sending help & betting he will miss 50% or more shots in the 5 foot - 10 foot range.

Now that Luka knows this is how they are playing him, he has to make 90% or more of those shots in the next game & force them to adjust.

[Bob8]

Lakers had lost the game in Q2, when LeBron and AR played without Luka. That was when the momentum has changed firmly in Wolves favour. If anything, Luka didn't took enough shots, knowing how hot he was. He had the same number of FGA as Ant, scoring 15 points more, only 4 Fga more than LeBron. If Wolves are not doubling him, he shouldn't go for 50+. Luka was shooting 50%+, other Lakers 30%+. Who do you want to take more shots?

How many easy shots did Luka miss though????

If he made all of those, he would have scored 45+ points at least.

The way Wolves are playing defense, Luka can get into the paint every time & they are not sending help & betting he will miss 50% or more shots in the 5 foot - 10 foot range.

Now that Luka knows this is how they are playing him, he has to make 90% or more of those shots in the next game & force them to adjust.

I would said that scoring 37 points with 71 TS% is pretty good. He should have taken more shots though.

I doubt exceptions should be him having 100 TS% on a big volume. Btw. he was 80% 3-10 feet. (only 1 shot missed in that range.) That's elite for a Pg.

If Luka can break Wolves D 1/1, Lebron and AR should do something 1/1 too, if they can't then Luka might go for 60 and still won't be enough. It's far more likely Luka shooting worse in game 2 than in game 1. Luka's efficiency is not where Lakers have room for improvement.

[Domejandro]

People who continue to compare this matchup to Mavs/Wolves because of Luka will continue to be surprised, this is much closer to Nhggets and Suns than Mavs.
Mavs were confident in their rim protection and had the athletes to close out, the only gamr they didn't defend well was the game Lively missed.
Lakers were in clear panic each time ANT ran a P&R from the 2nd Q onwards.

This, along with how badly Minnesota got cooked by Luka's ability to find lob threats. People cite his iconic stepback over Rudy Gobert, but for most of the series, Rudy would do a solid job containing, just for Naz Reid and Karl-Anthony Towns to get absolutely COOKED by Lively and Gafford (they would fail to "help the helper"). Add Minnesota being healthy (they were spent after the Denver series), and the dynamic is just super different.

I said it prior to the series, but Austin Reaves' lack of defense is a huge problem for the Los Angeles Lakers. I thought that he would be able to operate against Mike Conley offensively, but barring him exploiting the size mismatch, the Lakers would be better off starting someone who doesn't completely fold every single time a player drives on him.

Dallas was an exceptionally well put together team who matched up perfectly against Minnesota and peaked at the perfect time. The Los Angeles Lakers could still win the series, but Minnesota is not an ideal matchup for them at all. I honestly think that they should have just eaten the long-term concerns over Mark Williams health. He's a pretty weak defender, but his ability to operate in the dunker's spot and rebound would have been an absolute game changer for this Lakers squad.

[thinktank]

It's over, Bisme37 and Dirk are already counting my posts, I might be over the limit very soon.

Maybe just a little reminder, Luka has lost first game against OKC 95:117 in last playoffs.

That was the Mavs, a good team.

That's exactly the point, Mavs were a good team losing their first game in series by 22 points against OKC. What do you think were reactions after game 1? OKC in 4. Mavs are not good enough to have any chances. Okc are going to be in the Finals. They are just superior team, too athletic for Mavs doing anything. Sounds familiar? Even on Mavs board, Luka is fat, not conditioned enough, can't play D...

And then game 2 happened and everything changed.
Just maybe we should stop making big conclusions after game 1 and see, if Wolves D is really that good and they can shoot wide open 3s with 70+ %.

Yes. you’re really “sailing” now, Bob!

[Bob8]

That was the Mavs, a good team.

That's exactly the point, Mavs were a good team losing their first game in series by 22 points against OKC. What do you think were reactions after game 1? OKC in 4. Mavs are not good enough to have any chances. Okc are going to be in the Finals. They are just superior team, too athletic for Mavs doing anything. Sounds familiar? Even on Mavs board, Luka is fat, not conditioned enough, can't play D...

And then game 2 happened and everything changed.
Just maybe we should stop making big conclusions after game 1 and see, if Wolves D is really that good and they can shoot wide open 3s with 70+ %.

Yes. you’re really “sailing” now, Bob!

You know, Bisme is banning me for every non basketball post. 75% of your posts are without basketball content but I guess that's ok, you're not writing much, except personal stuff about me.

[thinktank]

That's exactly the point, Mavs were a good team losing their first game in series by 22 points against OKC. What do you think were reactions after game 1? OKC in 4. Mavs are not good enough to have any chances. Okc are going to be in the Finals. They are just superior team, too athletic for Mavs doing anything. Sounds familiar? Even on Mavs board, Luka is fat, not conditioned enough, can't play D...

And then game 2 happened and everything changed.
Just maybe we should stop making big conclusions after game 1 and see, if Wolves D is really that good and they can shoot wide open 3s with 70+ %.

Yes. you’re really “sailing” now, Bob!

You know, Bisme is banning me for every non basketball post. 75% of your posts are without basketball content but I guess that's ok, you're not writing much, except personal stuff about me.

Well you were 100% wrong in game 1 and no one here was more confident than you.

Perhaps you should bring less attention to yourself.

[Bob8]

Yes. you’re really “sailing” now, Bob!

You know, Bisme is banning me for every non basketball post. 75% of your posts are without basketball content but I guess that's ok, you're not writing much, except personal stuff about me.

Well you were 100% wrong in game 1 and no one here was more confident than you.

Perhaps you should bring less attention to yourself.

I'm at least bringing arguments into discussion, you on the other hand...

[thinktank]

You know, Bisme is banning me for every non basketball post. 75% of your posts are without basketball content but I guess that's ok, you're not writing much, except personal stuff about me.

Well you were 100% wrong in game 1 and no one here was more confident than you.

Perhaps you should bring less attention to yourself.

I'm at least bringing arguments into discussion, you on the other hand...

I brought many cogent basketball arguments. You chose not to listen and instead got passive aggressive and attacked my memory. That’s how you got banned.

I continue to talk basketball. I said you were wrong that Gobert got played off the floor in Game 1. 25 minutes and +14. Jackson Hayes played 8 minutes and was -11, Bob. Which center got played off the floor in Game 1, Bob?

You never responded, Bob. Now who doesn’t want to talk basketball, Bob?

[guest81]

Lakers had lost the game in Q2, when LeBron and AR played without Luka. That was when the momentum has changed firmly in Wolves favour. If anything, Luka didn't took enough shots, knowing how hot he was. He had the same number of FGA as Ant, scoring 15 points more, only 4 Fga more than LeBron. If Wolves are not doubling him, he shouldn't go for 50+. Luka was shooting 50%+, other Lakers 30%+. Who do you want to take more shots?

How many easy shots did Luka miss though????

If he made all of those, he would have scored 45+ points at least.

The way Wolves are playing defense, Luka can get into the paint every time & they are not sending help & betting he will miss 50% or more shots in the 5 foot - 10 foot range.

Now that Luka knows this is how they are playing him, he has to make 90% or more of those shots in the next game & force them to adjust.

So Luka just has to shoot 90 percent and the Lakers will win. Got it.

[Bob8]

Well you were 100% wrong in game 1 and no one here was more confident than you.

Perhaps you should bring less attention to yourself.

I'm at least bringing arguments into discussion, you on the other hand...

I brought many cogent basketball arguments. You chose not to listen and instead got passive aggressive and attacked my memory. That’s how you got banned.

I continue to talk basketball. I said you were wrong that Gobert got played off the floor in Game 1. 25 minutes and +14. Jackson Hayes played 8 minutes and was -11, Bob. Which center got played off the floor in Game 1, Bob?

You never responded, Bob. Now who doesn’t want to talk basketball, Bob?

Players of a team, who has won by 22 points, would by default have much better +/- than those, who have lost by 22. Or maybe you believe Gobert was with 2 points much better than Luka with 37 points?

Secondly +/- is about lineups not about individual players. Or you believe that Gobert was more important for the win than Raz?

Gobert was not exactly game changer in game 1, he couldn't defend Luka in Q1 and he has played less than 2 bench players. Nobody expects Hayes to play big much in this series, he's a starter who plays far the least anyway.

My prediction before game 1 was, nobody stopping Luka and Gobert being non factor. Both true. On the other hand I was very wrong about LeBron's and AR's impact. They were disastrous. Raz and McDaniels having shooting games of their life, was a bit unexpected too.

[thinktank]

I'm at least bringing arguments into discussion, you on the other hand...

I brought many cogent basketball arguments. You chose not to listen and instead got passive aggressive and attacked my memory. That’s how you got banned.

I continue to talk basketball. I said you were wrong that Gobert got played off the floor in Game 1. 25 minutes and +14. Jackson Hayes played 8 minutes and was -11, Bob. Which center got played off the floor in Game 1, Bob?

You never responded, Bob. Now who doesn’t want to talk basketball, Bob?

Players of a team, who has won by 22 points, would by default have much better +/- than those, who have lost by 22. Or maybe you believe Gobert was with 2 points much better than Luka with 37 points?

Secondly +/- is about lineups not about individual players. Or you believe that Gobert was more important for the win that than Raz.

Gobert was not exactly game changer in game 1, he couldn't defend Luka in Q1 and he has played less than 2 bench players. Nobody expects Hayes to play big much in this series, he's a starter who plays far the least anyway.

So did Gobert get played off the floor? Yes or no? Gobert was +14 in 25 minutes.

Did Hayes get played off the floor? Yes or no? Hayes was -11 in 8 minutes.

Just Yes or No will suffice. You’re the one who said Gobert would get played off the floor. That’s why I’m asking Yes or No, simply.

[cupcakesnake]

I think at some point, Twolves will have to throw some early double team at Luka and it's still a question mark for me if Wolves can rotate well enough to be effective. Depending on Lakers adjustments, Twolves has more ceiling - a 40 pt game from Ant or double-double game from Gobert.

I'd would take a couple of adjustments to get to that point. Wolves wanted the Lakers to play 1-on-1, even if that meant Luka scoring a lot. We switched pick & rolls, even when it yielded a bad matchup (Gobert on Luka or Conley on Lebron), because we don't want to be put in rotation and get picked apart by Luka's passing. We love Lebron attacking Randle with the ball. We hate Lebron attacking Randle (or Ant last night) off the ball into space.

Lebron picking apart a 4-on-3 all game is scarier than Luka scoring 40, as long as Luka isn't also creating open 3s for teammates. AR getting to attack closeouts is scarier than AR attacking 1-on-1. We're playing a super vanilla scheme, trying to give the Lakers low-yield offense. What we're trying to avoid is the Lakers opening up a 3s and dunks machine.

Basically we'd rather let Luka score than send help and be put in rotation.

I don’t understand how this isn’t the defensive gameplan against all heliocentric, high usage ball handlers. That’s not to say it will work all the time, but this is the poison I would rather pick.

I think it's easier said than done. With any mega dangerous playmaker, teams try to force them to be scorers in the playoffs. We've seen it most with Steve Nash and Jokic. It's not as simple as just deciding to do it. It's not like you can just let the guy score, so you still have to show enough defensive attention to stop him from going for 60 points. Doncic can still break our defense, getting past defenders and/or threatening the hoop enough to force help to come. Once you do that, the help has to come or you're just giving up buckets. I guess I'm just saying, it's not entirely in the defenses control. You can go for that, but the offensive player might break you. Especially if you dont have the right defenders for him.

[Movics]

Lakers had lost the game in Q2, when LeBron and AR played without Luka. That was when the momentum has changed firmly in Wolves favour. If anything, Luka didn't took enough shots, knowing how hot he was. He had the same number of FGA as Ant, scoring 15 points more, only 4 Fga more than LeBron. If Wolves are not doubling him, he shouldn't go for 50+. Luka was shooting 50%+, other Lakers 30%+. Who do you want to take more shots?

How many easy shots did Luka miss though????

If he made all of those, he would have scored 45+ points at least.

The way Wolves are playing defense, Luka can get into the paint every time & they are not sending help & betting he will miss 50% or more shots in the 5 foot - 10 foot range.

Now that Luka knows this is how they are playing him, he has to make 90% or more of those shots in the next game & force them to adjust.

So Luka just has to shoot 90 percent and the Lakers will win. Got it.

We missed some wide open 3s as well, so maybe next game we can shoot 65% from three to counter Luka’s 90% FG. Wolves in 5

[Jta444]

Wonder why Silver gave Lakers two days off between games. Meanwhile 1st seed Thunder don’t have that luxury. Maybe to appease Lebron and give him more rest time? It does benefit him and his style of play, like how he benefited from the break and no travel time in 2020 en route to a bubble “championship”.

[cupcakesnake]

It's over, Bisme37 and Dirk are already counting my posts, I might be over the limit very soon.

Maybe just a little reminder, Luka has lost first game against OKC 95:117 in last playoffs.

That was the Mavs, a good team.

That's exactly the point, Mavs were a good team losing their first game in series by 22 points against OKC. What do you think were reactions after game 1? OKC in 4. Mavs are not good enough to have any chances. Okc are going to be in the Finals. They are just superior team, too athletic for Mavs doing anything. Sounds familiar? Even on Mavs board, Luka is fat, not conditioned enough, can't play D...

And then game 2 happened and everything changed.
Just maybe we should stop making big conclusions after game 1 and see, if Wolves D is really that good and they can shoot wide open 3s with 70+ %.

It is insane how definite people get after 1 game even though we've all been watching NBA basketball all our lives and have seen a million momentum shifts. I have my doubts about the Lakers abiity to defend, but I have no doubts the Lakers can and will play better on offense. This team is capable of putting up a 130 Ortg on any given night. They'll come back in game 2 with a plan of how to exploit how we're not sending help at Luka.

Lakers fans need to stop with the 3-point shooting luck thing. Yes, the Wolves could go cold, but when you're surrendering open 3s like that, you have to accept the consequences. It's not crazy for a team to hit 50% of their 3s when you leave every single 3 open or wide open. It's not a viable defensive strategy, it's just praying your opponent misses. If we were hitting contested threes like that, I'd understand Lakers fans calling it lucky.