Lakers vs Denver Game 4, Trapdoor

Does the Lakers Bench Need Fixing?

The bench has had a tough time, especially the past three games, giving up big leads in the second quarter in Houston and in San Antonio; then giving up a 15 point third quarter lead at home vs Dallas, when Kobe went out for his normal break.  This is a disturbing trend, especially considering one of my recent articles on how vital I think this Lakers bench is to their eventual success.

Is it really that bad?

Bench Plus/Minus the past three games:

Houston

• Luke        0
• Farmar    -3
• Sasha    +6

San Antonio

• Luke        -12
• Farmar     -1
• Sasha      -5
• Powell      -7

Dallas

• Luke        -11
• Farmar     -3
• Sasha      -16
• Powell      -12

So what do you do?

I heard Jon Barry & Jack Ramsey both suggest Andrew Bynum should come back and play off the bench.  Coincidentally, I had that same thought during the Rockets game and was getting ready to write about it, when I noticed Barry and Ramsey were on the same page.  You have to look at it this way:  Lamar Odom is such an emotional player, as we all know, and I think sending him back to the bench would be devastating for his mental make-up.  You cannot mess with him.  It was well documented that he did not take the demotion at the beginning of the year very well and if Bynum comes back to the starting lineup, then I think LO will simply disappear.

Ramsey also mentioned that Luke Walton was in fact the one that went to Phil Jackson after the Portland loss and told him he would be better suited for the second unit because they were in need of a passer.  I love that.  It is so true.  Trevor Ariza shined in his start vs the Spurs and Luke was probably our most effective bench player.  Ariza backed it up today vs the Mavs with a career high in points.  I think with Jordan Farmar struggling the way he is and Lamar currently starting, you need a guy that can move the ball, create for others, and is a willing passer.  Luke might become the gel to that unit and if Bynum comes off the bench, you don’t think Luke will be able to get him some easy buckets?!?

How good is the Lakers bench?

The Lakers bench might be the key to everything

I want to compare the top five teams — LAL, CLE, BOS, ORL, SAS — to see whose reserves play a bigger role.

I first want to point out that many will argue the significance of bench play come playoff time, considering most coaches use an 8-man rotation, thus lessening the impact of bench players.  I would argue that if that was the case, wouldn’t teams like the Magic and Celtics — who play their starters nearly ten minutes per game more than both the Lakers and Cavs, and 20 more minutes than the Spurs, but that is expected seeing the Spurs have one of the oldest teams in the league — have the advantage seeing their starting lineups do more for their respective teams?  Or, will guys like Kobe, Duncan, and Manu be fresh for the playoffs, having played fewer minutes over the course of the season?  Personally, in most cases I do not think the bench plays a significant role in a teams’ success in the playoffs; however, this Lakers team is constructed like no other and, as I will point out below, their bench play as important a role as any to the overall success of the team.

*Numbers as of 3/9/09

Points per 100 possessions:

• The Lakers starters score 13.3 more points per 100 possessions than their reserves.
• The Cavs starters score 5.7 more points per 100 possessions than their reserves.
• The Celtics starters score 2.3 more points per 100 possessions than their reserves.
• The Magic starters score 2.8 more points per 100 possessions than their reserves.
• The Spurs starters score 1.1 less points per 100 possessions than their reserves.

*This is the most surprising stat of all, the Lakers starters actually play at a much faster pace, or at least score more efficiently than the bench mob, according to the 13.3 more points scored.

Bench scoring:

• The Lakers bench scores 28% of their total points.
• The Cavs bench scores 26% of their total points.
• The Celtics bench scores 27% of their total points.
• The Magic bench scores 22% of their total points.
• The Spurs bench scores 33% of their total points.

*The Spurs lean on their bench to score significantly more than their counterparts, while the Magic’s glaring need is some more bench scoring.

Rebounds:

• The Lakers bench grabs 33% of their total rebounds.
• The Cavs bench grabs 32% of their total rebounds.
• The Celtics bench 29% of their total rebounds.
• The Magic bench 27% of their total rebounds.
• The Spurs bench 39% of their total rebounds.

*Again, the Spurs rely heavily on their bench to contribute some rebounds; the Lakers and Cavs are not far behind; the Magic and Cavs do not have as strong rebounders coming off the bench.

Steals:

• The Lakers bench snatches 52% of their total steals.
• The Cavs bench snatches 27% of their total steals.
• The Celtics bench snatches 33% of their total steals.
• The Magic bench snatches 30% of their total steals.
• The Spurs bench snatches 49% of their total steals.

*The Lakers bench, as I have documented before, relies heavily on their ability to force turnovers, more importantly, get steals so that they may get out on the fast break, evidenced by their 52% contribution.  Meanwhile, LeBron’s bench only contribute about a fourth of their steals.

Blocks:

• The Lakers bench rejects 34% of their total blocks.
• The Cavs bench rejects 25% of their total blocks.
• The Celtics bench rejects 28% of their total blocks.
• The Magic bench rejects 23% of their total blocks.
• The Spurs bench rejects 41% of their total blocks.

*It is clear that the heavy minutes given to the Spurs subs (Gregg Popovich has always found a way to rest his stars more than other coaches) has a direct effect on what they contribute to the team.  It also shows that the Spurs bench is much deeper than even I thought.  The Magic prove once again they do not ask much of their bench.

Turnovers:

• The Lakers bench contributes 36% of their total turnovers.
• The Cavs bench contributes 28% of their total turnovers.
• The Celtics bench contributes 28% of their total turnovers.
• The Magic bench contributes 21% of their total turnovers.
• The Spurs bench contributes 38% of their total turnovers.

*This is difficult to judge seeing the Magic play their bench less, so you would figure their turnovers would be lower, but does that mean their bench is more careful than the other benches?

All in all, I would conclude that the Lakers bench clearly plays a vital role in their success, and will continue to play important minutes, even as Phil Jackson shortens his rotation for the playoffs.  The idea behind our deep bench is to change the pace of the game, tire out the opponent, and keep our best players fresh for the fourth quarter, in case they are needed.  The bench has also proved, more times than not, that they are more than capable of not only keeping the game even, but extending a lead or cutting into a deficit.

The Bench Mob — Road Warriors?

The bench needs to rediscover that pesky D & energy

The bench got off to such a hot start the first month of the season.  Their strengths come from the front three:  Jordan Farmar, Sasha Vujacic, and Trevor Ariza (as well as Lamar Odom when Andrew Bynum starts).  At the start of the year, Phil knew he could rely on three or four guys coming in putting up double digit scoring, and the Lakers breezed through November.  What they brought was high intensity, pressuring the ball handler, forcing turnovers, and using their length and athleticism to effectively get out and run.  Lately, the bench has found themselves in quite the funk, and have been sliding since Bynum’s injury.  This makes sense seeing Lamar was removed from his sixth man role and thrust into the starting lineup.  While his play, along with Pau Gasol and Kobe Bryant,  found new heights, the second unit lost the energy and fire that used to define them.  Knowing how important role players are to Phil Jacksons’ success, I want to take a look and see if anyone off the bench can actually step up and help us come playoff time.  That means performing on the road.

Fisher is a prime example of veteran leadership, as he has performed better on the road this year:  He is more aggressive, scoring 0.4 more points per game with a better FG% (45% v 41.5%); he has hit 0.2 more threes while shooting 1.5 percentage points better; he is taking and making a higher percentage of free throws (0.7 more & 88.7% vs 83%); turning the ball over less (0.4 fewer per game); and even playing an extra minute.  Who said he was getting old?

Now on to that youthful bench of ours.

Ariza

The sixth man role has been designated to him, even when Radmanovic fell out of favor, and Ariza was clearly a better player than Luke, he still came off the bench.  Every great team relies on key bench players, and while Ariza certainly doesn’t score like Manu, he brings intangibles like timely steals, great cuts, and all out effort that this team needs, and frankly has lacked the past couple weeks.  Although scoring isn’t his forteit, his numbers have been going down the past three months — 8.8 ppg on 47% shooting in January; 7.1 ppg on 41.6% shooting in February; 6.5 ppg on 26.9% shooting in four March games.

Home (33 games, as of 3/11/09):

8.9 ppg  2.2 apg  4.6 rpg  1.79 spg  0.8 3pg on 33.3%  1.0 tpg  43.97% FG

Road (30 games):

7.9 ppg  1.6 apg  3.9 rpg  1.43 spg  0.7 3pg on 30.8%  1.2 tpg  46.04% FG

I also compared his performances vs good teams (+.500) to that against weaker opponents (sub-.500) and there is not much of a difference.  He scores 0.5 fewer points and shoots two percentage points lower, but makes 0.3 more 3s at almost 3% better vs the good teams.  Everything else is about the same, which is good, because you know what to expect from him no matter the competition.  He also plays better in wins, scoring almost three more points, nearly doubling his assists, and shoots more than 11 percentage points higher in wins.

Farmar

It has been a trying year for Farmar.  He has yet to take over the starting role from Fisher and his injury in Dec/Jan slowed him down.

Home (23 games):

7.9 ppg  2.5 apg  2.4 rpg  1.0 spg  0.7 3pg on 30.9%  1.4 tpg  41.07% FG

Road (23 games):

6.7 ppg  2.4 apg  1.6 rpg  1.0 spg  1.0 3pg on 41.5%  1.3 tpg  41.33% FG

He does score 1.2 more points at home, but shoots the same percentage.  The other two biggest things that stand out are his 41.5% threes on the road vs 30.9% at home (strange, but a good sign), and his 65.85% free throw percentage at home vs 47.37% on the road.  He doesn’t get to the line much at any arena, so that does not matter as much.  The difference between the good and bad teams is negligible.  He too performs the same (for better or worse) no matter the competition.  The biggest difference in his game is the drop off from last year.  He is playing 1.6 fewer minutes, scoring 1.8 fewer points on 0.8 fewer attempts; he shot 46.1% FG & 37.1% threes last year to 41.2% FG & 36.1% this year.  He needs to build confidence on his own, so that Phil can trust to play him more.  The other thing might be that he is not yet playing at 100%.  Either way, he brings a fast pace transition to that second unit.

Sasha

Sasha has yet to find himself this year and seems to have been lost in the rotation at times.  He still knows his role — fearless gunslinger with a pesky defense — but he too suffers from a lack of confidence.  If you remember, Sasha was in at the end of games all last year because he could spread the floor as well as Radmanovic, but played solid defense as well.

Home (33 games):

17.6 mpg  7.2 ppg  1.6 apg  1.9 rpg  1.06 spg  1.3 3pg on 38.3%  0.5 tpg  40.8% FG

Road (28 games):

14.6 mpg  3.9 ppg  1.5 apg  1.6 rpg  0.82 spg  0.7 3pg on 29.9%  0.4 tpg  32.14% FG

A good indicator of how a player is doing on the road is the minutes he gets.  Sasha plays three less minutes per game.  Phil does not show the same trust in him as was the case last year.  Not only does he shoot 8.65 percentage points less on the road, his fewer minutes obviously lead to less output (3.3 fewer ppg).  Not that he is the reason why we win, but in wins, he is averaging 1.5 more minutes, 2.3 more points, 1 more assist, almost twice as many steals, 0.6 more FT attempts, all while shooting 39.16% (vs 30%) on 1.2 more shots.  

When the bench is agressive, good things happen. In wins, the bench scores 32.1 ppg, shoots 45%, and 35% from the three.  In losses, they only score 24.2 ppg, shoot 40%, and only hit 31% of their threes.

While Sasha and Farmar might not be playing at the same level as last year, they are, at the very least, averaging about 1 three and 1 steal per game, exactly what they need to be doing; pressuring the ball on D and spreading the floor on offense.  They could still be doing it more efficiently, however, neither is turning the ball over much, so it could be worse.  

Hopefully, Bynum can come back and move Lamar to the bench to strengthen that second unit.  There is a lot more that needs to happen before the end of the regular season.  Ariza, while one of the best passing lane defenders, still needs to get better on the ball; Farmar needs to get healthy and show that confidence, because he is one of the few who can create his own shot, get in the lane and either finish or find an open teammate, and push the ball.  

The real question will be, who will finish games for us?  As of now, it is Fisher/Kobe/Ariza/LO/Gasol, but does Ariza spread the floor as well as Sasha?  No.  With Fisher and Sasha in, the floor is open for Kobe and Gasol to play pick and roll/pop, and allow Lamar to cut to the basket for a lay up or put back on a missed shot. It looks like Farmar and Ariza will continue to play important minutes whether at home or away, while Sasha may only be able to provide quality minutes in the comfort of STAPLES Center.  

It will be Kobe who might have to continue to carry the team on the road and through the playoffs.