Let's analyze today's game for everyone.
Hamm's adjustments and ideas
First of all, after this game, I know that there will be a lot of people spraying Hamm, but I want to analyze his thinking for everyone:
In this game, the biggest controversy about Hamm is the confrontation between the back three and Jokic.
But in fact, friends who have seen my foresight should know that the choice of these two strategies has a feasible logic behind it.
The first logic: the choice of the lineup of the three guards is derived from Davis' set of counterpoint choices against Jokic.
Davis' opposition to Jokic means that Jokic is more likely to pull high than attack Davis — and because of the Nuggets' open-cut threat, Davis will almost certainly choose to sink back to defend some of Jokic's shots and hand-offs to protect the basket and rebounds.
Then it is known - Davis to Jokic, Shou Shen retreated.
How to choose the rest of the lineup? Naturally, it is to squeeze through the lineup with stronger cover ability, the three-guard lineup, take Schroder, who has the strongest ability to squeeze cover, and try to interfere with Murray's hand-to-hand shot.
The second logic: the three-guard lineup, according to the original plan, should be able to improve the Lakers' offense
First of all, the offensive end removed Vanderbilt, a non-shooting point that affects space, and an additional ball carrier on the court can better open up space, name Jokic and target Porter Jr. - the latter point [three guards named Jokic] is actually considered by many people before the game to be the "key to winning". (I am bearish in the public comment area, and there are many people who oppose this.) ）
Logically, there is definitely something feasible for the back three, but what about the result? We saw some unexpected content.
The first unexpected thing is that the Lakers' hand-to-hand cover of Murray and Jokic is extremely bad.
Schroder, who faced Curry and Thompson in the second round, had no problems, but could barely squeeze through Jokic's cover, allowing Murray to get too many easy shots - Murray's 31 points today is what really killed the Lakers.
(Almost everyone I've met so far has almost ignored the impact of Jokic's system of covering advantage, and I doubt Hamm is included.)
The second unexpected thing is that there is a problem with rebounding protection, the Nuggets' rebounding rush and card position are quite fierce, James can't stand it, and Davis and Jokic also fall into the rush battle.
The Lakers lost 17 rebounds in this game, especially offensive rebounds that allowed the Nuggets to steal 15 and score 18 points through secondary offense, which is definitely a weight that the Lakers can't bear.
Third, Porter's punishment of the Lakers' short guard was more effective than expected.
There's not much to say about this other than Kwabot, who is very aggressive and has a grasp of difficult shots - in fact, Porter's big and small effects are unstable, but he did it today.
Fourth, the issue of attacking the three defenders.
Porter Jr. vs. Schroder, Murray vs. Reeves, what is the main offensive choice for the Lakers at the beginning - is thick eyebrows attacking Jokic, Russell holding the ball and playing Pope - that is, Schroder is actually only used as a space point and a leader.
Schroeder's pull-out space effect itself is very limited, coupled with the failure of the defensive function, it is logical for this lineup to lose points.
(But of course, you can't say that James' opening attack was wrong, only that Jokic did a good job of foul protection today)
The third point of logic, Davis' reason for vigning Jokic.
First of all, I know that Hamm did a good job of defending Jokic in the fourth quarter, but I still have to explain why Hamm didn't take this set of alignment from the start.
It's really a matter of choice: Do you defend Jokic, or the rest of the Nuggets — or even narrow it down a bit, do you defend Jokic, or Murray?
I want you to recall a fact about this game: In this game, did the Nuggets really score more in the open after the high position?
In fact, the Nuggets' basketball scoring in this game came either from the fast break, from the secondary offense, or from Jokic — their cut points were actually very few. (You can review the statistics to see if this is the case)
This is what I said on Weibo yesterday about the first arrangement of the Lakers: they use Davis to defend Jokic, and then focus on emphasizing the defense of the air.
And then we said — Jokic is known to be the center scoring leader in this year's playoffs, averaging 30+ output per game, and the Nuggets have a lot of dynamic low-post tactics for Jokic to catch the basket and score.
So in fact, there is no problem for the Lakers to take this line of thinking - ideally, Davis limits Jokic to more than 20 points, and then prevents the Nuggets' open cuts, and Schroder squeezes through the outside to cover, and the Nuggets can kill the Lakers by shooting from Murray, Porter, and Pop?
(Supplemented by better space on the offensive end, stronger "roll call" ability, and Zhan Mei's constant killing...) ）
But as a result, it can only be said that the plan cannot catch up with the change - Murray's unexpected outburst really "killed" the Lakers.
Let's talk about the option of Hachimura vs. Jokic.
I want to emphasize one point - the "change" of Hachimura against Jokic is definitely not something that Hamm came up with on the spot, but a counterposition strategy that the Lakers have long prepared.
There are two reasons why it was not taken out early:
1. They don't want Jokic to open too early;
2. They want to test Murray and use this as a "change" after the attack.
In fact, I don't think Hamm was wrong even now — the Lakers almost reversed the game, like G4 against the Warriors — but this game the Nuggets Murray and Jokic really shot too many "fairy balls" to suppress the Lakers' counterattack.
It's a pity that the Lakers didn't achieve what they wanted this time - and as I said after the G4 game, this controversial adjustment, once successful, Hamm will be crowned; And in the event of failure, Hamm will be drowned in the saliva of public opinion.
After talking about the Lakers, let's talk about the Nuggets of this game.
Three improvements for the Nuggets
In the preview, I have already explained the power of the Denver Nuggets - no one should say that I am worried now, right?
In this game, the three improvements of the Denver Nuggets that I mentioned in my preview compared to 2020 all showed:
1. Progress on the defensive end
Although in terms of offensive efficiency, the Nuggets only defended the Lakers half, but those of you who have watched the game must understand what I am talking about.
Caldwell Pope's restriction of Russell was so vividly displayed that it even led to Russell's fourth quarter being DNP;
Although Anthony Davis scored 40 points in this game, his performance in the first quarter of the individual ball impact Jokizi can also be said to be bad - shooting 2 of 7 and not causing a single foul, which is one of the biggest reasons why the Lakers fell behind in the first quarter;
I'm not saying the Nuggets have evolved into a defensive powerhouse — but because their offense is so strong, just a little bit of improvement can have a big impact on the game.
2. Conversion offensive progress
I have given a statistic before the game: Nuggets 2020, the sixth in the league in positional offensive efficiency and eleventh in the league in conversion offensive efficiency; This year, they are second in the league in offensive efficiency in positional positions and second in conversion offensive efficiency.
I was mentally prepared for the Nuggets' conversion offensive strength - but I still didn't expect that the Nuggets would dare to take the initiative to push against the Lakers.
In this game, Denver pushed the number of rounds to 102 in the first half, and they scored 19 points through fast break, beating the Lakers in what they do best.
All I can say is that the Lakers weren't prepared for the Nuggets' conversion offense in this game — they had to do a better job of retreating and showing the enthusiasm to retire against the Grizzlies in the first round.
3. Jokic's personal progress
In the preview, I said that when the Lakers met Jokic three years ago, he was just a fledgling second-team center averaging 20+9 per game, and now he is a two-time MVP, a dominant monster, the strongest center in the playoffs - that year's series, the best individual was in the Lakers - and this year's best individual was in the Nuggets.
Jokic today, I think, showed that — although Davis scored higher, he couldn't limit Jokic on the defensive end where he was good at it.
The Lakers' strategy was to limit Jokic through Davis against Jokic, and then limit others — and as a result, not only did others not limit, but even Jokic, which is why the Lakers lost today.
One obvious fact — Jokic averaged 20 points per game in the 2020 series — regardless of how the Nuggets attacked today, if Davis had limited Jokic to about 20 points today as planned — it would have been the Lakers who won.
The Lakers' response
There is actually nothing to say about the Lakers' response, and the fourth quarter has already been presented:
1. Give up the ineffective three defenders and consider taking Hachimura as the starter, including some underperforming points such as Russell can appropriately reduce time and try others;
2. Since Davis can't prevent Jokic from being in position, it's better to simply use Hachimura to top, and let Davis squat directly under the basket to protect the frame and collect the rebound;
3. Do a good job of execution of some details: anti-conversion, grabbing rebounds.
But frankly speaking, I am not as optimistic as Tencent's Yang teachers, believing that although the Lakers lost this game, they have "found a way to win, and there is a lot to do next"...
I feel very bad about the Lakers losing this game.
We've already said above — the strategy of using Hachimura or someone else against Jokic is not something the Lakers came up with on the spot, but a counterpoint strategy option that has always existed.
This option, the Lakers know, the Nuggets also know.
(It's like the Warriors have long known that LeBron is named and Davis changes defenses.)
The difficulty now is that the Lakers adopted a theoretically correct strategy this time and were defeated by the Nuggets' outside touch (the first three quarters); In the fourth quarter, they came up with a "back hand" and a "change of move", but still failed to win the game - now, the Nuggets have really seen the effect of the Lakers' "change of move" and this "change of move" - they have more time and cases to reflect and respond.
With my understanding of Coach Malone, Jokic's ability, and the depth of the Nuggets, they will definitely find a way to target and crack this "trick" of the Lakers in the next game - just like the Warriors G5 also cracked the Lakers G4 trick.
We have always said that the playoff "adjustment side" is the advantage, normally speaking, after the Lakers lose a game, the next Lakers should be the "adjustment side"; But they came up with a "change move" in the fourth quarter, which led to the Nuggets becoming an "adjustment side" in the next game...
In my opinion, this is not good news for the Lakers.
The next game will be a tough battle no less than G1.
(The above is the author's analysis and review based on the game notes and live broadcast perception, and the specific round-by-round details review will be released tomorrow)