Stephen A. Pinpoints Lakers’ LACK OF SIZE, Not Luka & LeBron, as Reason for Low Ceiling
The Los Angeles Lakers have a roster filled with star power, featuring two of the league’s biggest names in LeBron James and Anthony Davis. Despite this, their potential for success has been a subject of debate, especially as the team struggles to consistently compete with the league’s elite. ESPN’s Stephen A. Smith, known for his bold and unfiltered opinions, recently weighed in on the Lakers’ championship hopes, and his reasoning might surprise some.
Rather than pointing to the team’s star players like LeBron or the rise of Luka Dončić and the Dallas Mavericks, Stephen A. identified the Lakers’ lack of size as the primary issue limiting their ceiling. While LeBron’s brilliance and Davis’ defensive prowess are undeniable, Smith argues that the Lakers’ inability to match up physically with other top teams, particularly in the frontcourt, is what’s keeping them from reaching the ultimate goal.
The Lakers’ Star Power: LeBron and Davis
There’s no denying that LeBron James is still one of the best players in the NBA, and Anthony Davis, when healthy, is one of the most dominant defenders and versatile big men in the game. Together, the duo has proven to be capable of carrying the team to the postseason and even a championship, as evidenced by their 2020 title run. LeBron continues to defy age, and Davis is capable of taking over games both offensively and defensively.
However, Stephen A. Smith suggests that the issue isn’t with these two superstars; it’s the lack of supporting pieces to complement their play. He points out that despite having LeBron and Davis, the Lakers are frequently exposed by teams that have better overall depth, particularly in the frontcourt.
The Importance of Size in Today’s NBA
Stephen A. argues that in today’s NBA, the game is evolving in a way that size has become an even more important factor in determining team success. While the NBA has traditionally been a league that places a premium on skill and shooting, the modern game has shifted toward teams that can dominate physically, both in the paint and on the boards.
Size allows teams to compete on the defensive end and in rebounding battles—two areas where the Lakers have struggled. While Davis provides exceptional rim protection and is an excellent rebounder, the Lakers’ lack of a consistent second big man behind him has exposed them against teams with size and depth. Whether it’s matching up against physical teams like the Denver Nuggets or Milwaukee Bucks, or handling versatile forwards in smaller lineups, the Lakers’ frontcourt depth has been a glaring weakness.
The Lakers’ Lack of Depth Beyond LeBron and Davis
While the Lakers have made efforts to add pieces around LeBron and Davis, particularly with younger players like Austin Reaves, D’Angelo Russell, and Rui Hachimura, they still lack the type of size and depth that many of their competitors have. The team is too often reliant on their two stars to carry the load on both ends of the floor, especially when it comes to physicality.
Stephen A. points out that even with solid role players, the Lakers are still vulnerable when they face teams with a deeper and more physical roster. Teams like the Phoenix Suns, Denver Nuggets, and Memphis Grizzlies are much better equipped to impose their will physically, especially in the post, where size and muscle can dominate. The Lakers simply don’t have the depth to match up with those teams for an entire playoff series.
The Impact of Luka and the Mavericks
While much of the focus in the West has been on Luka Dončić and the Dallas Mavericks, Stephen A. suggests that the Lakers’ main problem is not the talent of teams like the Mavericks or LeBron’s individual efforts. Instead, it’s about building a team that can physically compete for an entire series. While Luka is a transcendent talent, and his pairing with Kyrie Irving gives the Mavericks a potent offensive threat, Stephen A. believes that the Lakers’ inability to match up physically is a bigger factor in their low ceiling.
Dončić and the Mavs have their own weaknesses, especially defensively, but Stephen A. argues that the Lakers are too reliant on LeBron and Davis, with a lack of players who can step in and help impose size or physicality when the stars aren’t on the court. The Lakers need to develop more of that depth and physical presence in order to compete with top teams, especially in the playoffs when games are won in the trenches.
The Need for a More Balanced Roster
To reach their full potential, Stephen A. believes the Lakers must focus on adding more size and physicality to their roster. That means adding another strong, reliable big man who can support Davis, giving them the ability to match up with teams that have multiple dominant frontcourt players. It also means ensuring the role players, especially on the defensive end, have the physical tools to compete with the top teams in the West.
This doesn’t mean the Lakers should ignore the guard and wing positions, but they must address the imbalance in their current roster. A better-balanced team, with more size and depth, could alleviate the pressure on LeBron and Davis to do it all themselves. More contributors on both sides of the ball would allow the team to compete at the highest level.
Conclusion: The Lakers’ Path Forward
The Lakers are undeniably a team with immense star power in LeBron James and Anthony Davis. However, as Stephen A. Smith points out, their lack of size and frontcourt depth could hold them back from truly contending for a championship. The league’s best teams are increasingly built to out-physical opponents, and the Lakers need to find a way to compete in this evolving NBA landscape.
While LeBron and Davis are enough to keep the Lakers in the hunt, a stronger supporting cast and a more physical presence would be necessary to push them over the top. If the Lakers can address their lack of size and add more depth to their roster, they could return to championship contention. Until then, the ceiling for this team may remain lower than many fans hope for.
