I really wish they got significantly better. Their starters are the same and their bench players maybe got better. Bron is a year older…These
@Lakers team not good enough to win a chip. Thanks Pelinka
It’s a fair question, did the Lakers get significantly better? I liked all of their moves; each deal I thought ranged between fair to an incredible bargain. They didn’t get Mozgov-ed on any deal and maintained future flexibility.
I think 2 keys have to be recognized: 1. It was an extremely thin free agent class. The opportunity for landing an impact player wasn’t really there; and we’ve lived in a world where the Lakers try to force something in the name of adding talent. It’s a dark place. There was no obtainable Jokic-stopper (if one exists), and now have traceable contracts should one appear mid-season.
And 2. Part of the Lakers improvement is expected to come from within. The core group that they retained were thrown together a couple of months before the playoffs. There is organic growth to be had, though it’s fair to question if a decline from LeBron and/or AD mitigates it’s effects.
So did they get better? Most likely, yes. Maybe they didn’t swing for the fenced and add a big name talent, but let’s face it, had they done so the same analysts would be criticizing them for failing to learn from past mistakes.
It was a good offseason for the Lakers and, after seeing the specific strengths/weaknesses of this group on the floor, they are in position to make it even better mid-season should the right opportunity come along.