Post-Game Analysis: Lakers 112, Rockets 110

I agree, and I don't think Hayes is 100% healed from that rolled ankle.....they should have played Jeffries over him last night, IMO.

DD

 

Some observations:

1. Budinger showed flashes of great offensive ability but also showed his inexperience (couple of TOs come to mind, some situations where his spacing wasn't quite right, got the ball a couple of times and didn't know what to do exactly) ... should improve

2. Brad Miller made some great passes to cutters who weren't ready to finish; some blown opportunities IMO

3. Yao hasn't played for a year, will take some time to get back to his old self but he can get there

4. Rotation seems pretty solid, players were being rotated in and out and we didn't seem to lose much rhythm

5. We have some clear defensive liabilities on the team but also some great team defenders, let's see how the liabilities develop into better defenders

 

I agree. Another defensive player with size definitely would've helped. Even Hill would have helped when i think about it. Should we just chalk this up to bad coaching?

 

look at the advanced metrics , turnovers are the reason we lost, period

 

Awesome find..lol....and if anything after the night of emotions, i awoke from my slumber with realization of just how good this team is. If u think about it...brooks had 9 assists! also, scola was off, and kmart wasnt exactly on either. I see this team getting much better throughout the year with more experience...think how scary that is..we put up 110, and we were not on fire...and really only lost because of an unusual sighting...shannon was hitting shots..and blake got lucky as hell for pau to miss the pass and he catch it and drain the 3...if we start meshing and keep moving the ball around like we did early on in the la game, we can dominate...only thing still sketchy is our D. if that improves and everyone stays healthy... we have a good chance to be contenders for the ring.

 

Perhaps...but we can chalk it up to having too many players......

I think this may plague the team all year, how to play guys that don't really fit on some nights and then sit them on others.

DD

 

You got that right! Anytime you have 21 turnovers that result in 20 pts., you're bound to lose.

 

Right, why don't you check your own head before calling others "dumb and stupid". Nowhere in my post did I state you didn't believe in Lowry. Hence, the "we". Comprehension?

And if you haven't realized already, Kobe and Gasol were making big shots late in the quarter. Steve Blake and Shannon Brown made big shots as well, but it was Kobe and Gasol keeping the Laker's lead when we were catching up.

Don't use the hypothetical "if we made our shots we would've won argument". That's ridiculous. If the Lakers were making more of their wide open shots earlier, they wouldn't be down in the first place. Bynum was missing from their lineup as well. He may not be an offensive presence, but he and Gasol are a rebounding and defensive presence.

And if you think a closer is "mythical", why do you call Brooks our closer?

 

I like to look at it this way. There will be at least 18 games where those guys get to shine. It makes me feel better.

 

Then make one

 

whoa whoa whoa..hold it there big guy....who you calling an attention w****?

if there was one title for the attention w**** of the board.. i'd have to give it to you...with your irrational love for brooks one day and budinger the next. from maggette to whichever other player another...

Dude, we lost the game. . What more do I need to say?

 

haha.

 

To pander to the folks who think too small about the game of basketball.

Our closer is the open man.....

DD

 

....and our team is the superstar! :grin:

 

I thought about it, then my brain kicked in and realized I'll just post in the regular post-game threads like everyone else does.

 

i see brooks developing into our closer...a legitimate one..lol..
hopefully

 

And I posted a new thread due to my liking. So far the world is still alive.

 

that was idiotic? Excuse me, it was far from idiotic. We lost this game, for instance. I could go on but I won't.

But I'm going to give this team a chance to prove me wrong. So far, I'm making myself cautiously optimistic that this team has a chance of proving me wrong.
I'll remain generally positive for this team for as long the team will allow me to last.

But the bottom line is we lost this game. The result is what matters, no?

 

So Brooks is the open man every time?

 

Usually people post their own thoughts in a separate thread when they're comments were ignored in the game thread.

Usually that means most people don't care or agree. Starting a thread won't change that.