Are the Lakers low key better without Lebron?

[infinite11285]

He's better than nothing, and since depth is a thing now,,,,,,,,,

that being said you can always use smarts. bbIQ never ages

the Vegas over under was 47.5. in a small sample size but the Lakers are way over that and Luka has carried teams by himself. lal was going to have probs in the West with or without LeBron. by the time LeBron gets back we'll know a lot more

This might be the closest you’ve ever come to complimenting LeBron. I’m proud of you.

[Enso]

He should come off the bench tbh

[liquidswords]

He took Reaves under his wing and taught him how to win. Reaves wouldn't have developed the same way if he wasn't going up against LeBron in practice. LeBron makes those practices warzones. Just another feather in LeBron's hat. He truly makes his teammates better.

Great so he's a player development coach. I agree with other posters that his on-court impact for others, at this point in his career, is vastly overrated. The unfortunate part is he has such an ego that he'll never truly take a back seat and let others lead for the betterment of the team.

When has it been shown that refuses to take a back to a teammate who is clearly better than LeBron. Where are the media stories that there's trouble in the lockeroom because LeBron refuses to relinquish his role? You're just making baseless assumptions with nothing to back it up.

I'm talking about right now. Not historically. He's not going to take a back seat because he's Mt Everest Ego James. Let's see how this plays out though...

[nbaguy1]

That’s a hot topic — and the answer depends on what you mean by “better off.” Let’s break it down from a few angles:

On-Court Performance

With LeBron: The Lakers get elite playmaking, leadership, and scoring efficiency even at age 40 (2025 season). He still demands defensive attention, which opens up opportunities for teammates.

Without LeBron: They might play faster and with more ball movement — especially if younger players like Austin Reaves, D’Angelo Russell, and Rui Hachimura take on bigger roles. But losing LeBron’s IQ and late-game control often leads to inconsistency.

Financial & Team-Building

With LeBron: His massive contract limits cap flexibility, making it harder to add another star or deep bench.

Without LeBron: They’d have more cap room for free agents and could focus on building around Anthony Davis and younger talent — but that’s a big gamble unless they land another superstar.

Intangibles

LeBron is still the face of the franchise — he brings global attention, TV ratings, and credibility.

Without him, the Lakers could pivot toward a long-term rebuild, but they’d lose that star power and championship expectation.

Bottom Line

Right now (2025), the Lakers are probably not better on the court without LeBron. But long-term — say, 2–3 years down the line — moving on might make sense if they can transition smoothly into a younger, deeper core.

Would you like me to include some current (2025 season) stats or standings to back this up?

[DonaldSanders]

Why do we get these threads every time a star is out and the team does OK without them?

Why isn't the logic that the team will be better when they return?

[The4thHorseman]

Great so he's a player development coach. I agree with other posters that his on-court impact for others, at this point in his career, is vastly overrated. The unfortunate part is he has such an ego that he'll never truly take a back seat and let others lead for the betterment of the team.

When has it been shown that refuses to take a back to a teammate who is clearly better than LeBron. Where are the media stories that there's trouble in the lockeroom because LeBron refuses to relinquish his role? You're just making baseless assumptions with nothing to back it up.

I'm talking about right now. Not historically. He's not going to take a back seat because he's Mt Everest Ego James. Let's see how this plays out though...

I realize you're talking about now, but why believe what you're saying, considering we've never seen examples of him doing what you're claiming he's going to do when he comes back this season?

[John Murdoch]

No much lower ceiling in the playoffs but reg season i wouldnt mind if rested up for a few months. Also gives us an early sneak preview as to what the team looks like when he retires which doesnt hurt. Im still conflicted on Reaves lomgterm next to Luka because rn is prob his highest trade value so its a legit convo to have in the FO but either way i get it. Free agency rly might be the play after all

[Lalouie]

He's better than nothing, and since depth is a thing now,,,,,,,,,

that being said you can always use smarts. bbIQ never ages

the Vegas over under was 47.5. in a small sample size but the Lakers are way over that and Luka has carried teams by himself. lal was going to have probs in the West with or without LeBron. by the time LeBron gets back we'll know a lot more

This might be the closest you’ve ever come to complimenting LeBron. I’m proud of you.

uh-oh. lemme go edit my post

[Yuri36]

He hasnt even played yet. They look better due to Luka being in PEAK form, Reaves improving, and the team having more time to build cohesion.

And more crucially due to have a decent big man this time in Ayton + having a great perimeter defender in Marcus Smart

[SkyHook]

That’s a hot topic — and the answer depends on what you mean by “better off.” Let’s break it down from a few angles:

On-Court Performance

With LeBron: The Lakers get elite playmaking, leadership, and scoring efficiency even at age 40 (2025 season). He still demands defensive attention, which opens up opportunities for teammates.

Without LeBron: They might play faster and with more ball movement — especially if younger players like Austin Reaves, D’Angelo Russell, and Rui Hachimura take on bigger roles. But losing LeBron’s IQ and late-game control often leads to inconsistency.

Financial & Team-Building

With LeBron: His massive contract limits cap flexibility, making it harder to add another star or deep bench.

Without LeBron: They’d have more cap room for free agents and could focus on building around Anthony Davis and younger talent — but that’s a big gamble unless they land another superstar.

Intangibles

LeBron is still the face of the franchise — he brings global attention, TV ratings, and credibility.

Without him, the Lakers could pivot toward a long-term rebuild, but they’d lose that star power and championship expectation.

Bottom Line

Right now (2025), the Lakers are probably not better on the court without LeBron. But long-term — say, 2–3 years down the line — moving on might make sense if they can transition smoothly into a younger, deeper core.

Would you like me to include some current (2025 season) stats or standings to back this up?

They we literally better on the court without Lebron last season.

It's a valid question. Over 70 games in which he played last season, in raw numbers the Lakers were -0.3 pts per100 when Lebron was on the court and +4.9 pts per100 when he was off. In the playoffs it was even worse; -11.1 on, +10.9 off. He can (at times) excel on offense, but his defense has absolutely fallen off a cliff—evident in the numbers and via the eye test. In a more limited role he can probably still be of some use.

[Tottery]

Not unless he has fallen off a lot from last season. He can still playmake and commands a double team.

Missing the first month could pay dividends down the stretch. Should leave a little more gas for him.

I still believe they need a solid 3 and D guy for the post season. If they can keep winning, don't be surprised if they trade Rui, DK, and their 1st rounder for someone.

[scrabbarista]

Silly thread. We had an 85+ game sample last year, and yes, the Lakers were better without LeBron. I'm sure they still are.

[HMFFL]

Not unless he has fallen off a lot from last season. He can still playmake and commands a double team.

Missing the first month could pay dividends down the stretch. Should leave a little more gas for him.

I still believe they need a solid 3 and D guy for the post season. If they can keep winning, don't be surprised if they trade Rui, DK, and their 1st rounder for someone.

If Lebron James actually played defense it would solve some of the D problems the Lakers have. Lakers are better without Lebron.

[NyKnicks1714]

It's a valid question. Over 70 games in which he played last season, in raw numbers the Lakers were -0.3 pts per100 when Lebron was on the court and +4.9 pts per100 when he was off. In the playoffs it was even worse; -11.1 on, +10.9 off. He can (at times) excel on offense, but his defense has absolutely fallen off a cliff—evident in the numbers and via the eye test. In a more limited role he can probably still be of some use.

Do you also think the Knicks were better without Jalen Brunson and OKC was better without Jalen Williams?

On/off over a season generally has some value but it's prone to outliers that come as a result of the lineups a player tends to play with when he's on the floor. When it goes against the picture that other advanced (and traditional) metrics paint, it's not worth much.

[SkyHook]

It's a valid question. Over 70 games in which he played last season, in raw numbers the Lakers were -0.3 pts per100 when Lebron was on the court and +4.9 pts per100 when he was off. In the playoffs it was even worse; -11.1 on, +10.9 off. He can (at times) excel on offense, but his defense has absolutely fallen off a cliff—evident in the numbers and via the eye test. In a more limited role he can probably still be of some use.

Do you also think the Knicks were better without Jalen Brunson and OKC was better without Jalen Williams?

On/off over a season generally has some value but it's prone to outliers that come as a result of the lineups a player tends to play with when he's on the floor. When it goes against the picture that other advanced (and traditional) metrics paint, it's not worth much.

It's true that the raw on/off numbers are far from perfect and the lineups one plays with has impact, but when you're one of two rotation players over a full season who have a negative impact on team performance then, yes, I'd assign some significance to that.

And pretty much all of the advanced metrics show that his defense has plummeted.

[Michael Lucky]

No, he's a 2nd team all NBA player still until proven otherwise

Don't over think it.

Not a huge overthink here. He took 18 shots a game and his efficiency was well Below Reaves and now he's turning 41. He should be the third option, not the second going forward.

[NyKnicks1714]

It's a valid question. Over 70 games in which he played last season, in raw numbers the Lakers were -0.3 pts per100 when Lebron was on the court and +4.9 pts per100 when he was off. In the playoffs it was even worse; -11.1 on, +10.9 off. He can (at times) excel on offense, but his defense has absolutely fallen off a cliff—evident in the numbers and via the eye test. In a more limited role he can probably still be of some use.

Do you also think the Knicks were better without Jalen Brunson and OKC was better without Jalen Williams?

On/off over a season generally has some value but it's prone to outliers that come as a result of the lineups a player tends to play with when he's on the floor. When it goes against the picture that other advanced (and traditional) metrics paint, it's not worth much.

It's true that the raw on/off numbers are far from perfect and the lineups one plays with has impact, but when you're one of two rotation players over a full season who have a negative impact on team performance then, yes, I'd assign some significance to that.

You didn't answer the question though. If you're giving that stat value for LeBron you have to do the same for Brunson and Jdub. Do you think the Knicks and Thunder were better without those two players?

Also where are these advanced stats that suggest LeBron's defense is terrible?

[Edrees]

They are better without Luka too. They have a better record without Luka than with right now.

Summary -

Lakers with Luka and Lebron -

Lose 2-4 to OKC in the WCF'

Lakers without Luka and Lebron

4-0 sweep versus OKC in the WCF.

[ballzboyee]

See my thread last season that got LOCKED because people thought I was trolling suggesting Lebron is no 3 behind Reaves.

https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2413615&hilit=Reaves

Good to see RealGM finally coming around to reality. Like I said a year ago, Reaves is the second best player or I expected him to be by the midway last year. If Lebron is taking 20+ shots, they won't win in the playoffs. If he can accept a more limited role as a defender in spurts adding physicality to their lineup and get his buckets as a third option being setup on cuts, down low in the dunker spot, rim running, and easy baskets on the break etc, then they will still be good. He would be great in a Gordon role in the dunker spot as both Reaves and Luka are both savant passers at finding passing lanes. These are are things that compliment Reaves and Luka style of play. If he's commanding the offense like always on the perimeter and has a crazy high usage penetrating and kickouts taking away from Reaves and Luka's production on the perimeter, then they will be worse with him on the floor. He's simply not as good as they are at this stage of his career. Father time is undefeated.

[SkyHook]

Do you also think the Knicks were better without Jalen Brunson and OKC was better without Jalen Williams?

On/off over a season generally has some value but it's prone to outliers that come as a result of the lineups a player tends to play with when he's on the floor. When it goes against the picture that other advanced (and traditional) metrics paint, it's not worth much.

It's true that the raw on/off numbers are far from perfect and the lineups one plays with has impact, but when you're one of two rotation players over a full season who have a negative impact on team performance then, yes, I'd assign some significance to that.

You didn't answer the question though. If you're giving that stat value for LeBron you have to do the same for Brunson and Jdub. Do you think the Knicks and Thunder were better without those two players?

Also where are these advanced stats that suggest LeBron's defense is terrible?

Brunson and Williams both had positive plus-minus numbers when on the court last season, JDub overwhelmingly so. While I haven't dived into the details of their on/off numbers (and don't intend to), the logical assumption would be that the Knicks and Thunder reserves who subbed for them beat up on the opponents reserves to a greater extent than the starters outpaced the opposing starters.

Lebron on the other hand was negative both in terms of his on court plus-minus and his on/off numbers. His league rankings in defensive advanced metrics are:

EPM, 204th
DPM, 210th
LEBRON, 233rd