I mean….DLo and Beasley are good shooters. Even as disappointing as Beasley was, he shot 36% and DLo was 39%. Reaves can shoot. We were very hot and cold though and it seems like everyone was hot or cold instead of it balancing out. That implies to me we didn’t respond well or quickly to changes in defensive pressure.

Kind of crazy with how shit Beasley looked, he shot 36%. I feel like FO should re-sign him and give him another chance. If he still ass, trade him at the deadline

Basically. I wonder if we could negotiate a cheaper deal. We have his bird rights so I wonder if we could do like a 3/21 or something that’s slightly more fit to his skillset right now But even with as bad as he looked he shot 36% and averaged 11 points.

Beasley is a good volume shooter he's just streaky. Now before you say "lets get a consistent 3 and d player" then realistically who do you want to get? Everyone who fits that description is unobtainable. Heck even warriors fans were pissed at Klay Thompsons inconsistency. Ray Allen during his celtics run was criticized as inconsistent. The best VOLUME 3 shooters this year accordijg to statsmuse are Tyrese Maxey, buddy held, kcp, Luke Kennard, Joe Harris. The last 2 play no defense and play no minutes. Some of the best consistent shooters like trey young and steph are not obtainable and even they suffer defensively. We famously hated Danny Green and KCP for being inconsistent shooters So before you say let's get consistent volume shooters who play D, ask how? You have to have tradeoffs. You can get a streaky volume shooter with no d. You can get a nice 3 and d with no volume and no gravity. You can get high 3 point percentage with no volume. You can get all of the above and no d in Kennard or Trae young. It's just tough to be idealistic but you have to look statistically at what actually exists in the NBA.

You need three point shooters arent streaky (ideally) and who don’t get played off the floor. Dlo and Beasley, our two best volume three point threats, are neither

And this directly answers the question as to why we've struggled bringing them in: they're just too valuable. If you look at 3PM leaders from this past season, it's pretty much all max guys. If you look at 3P% leaders it's the same story, plus guys like Kennard, Joe Harris, and Corey Kispert, who get played off the court due to their defensive liabilities.

True but at least guys like Luke are guaranteed wet when in. Thats the difference. If you are a 40 percent 3 point shooter that is guaranteed to make the good ones, thats even an improvement. But being streaky and bad at defense, bad combo

Simply put Most shooters will never shoot better coming to the Lakers cause of the pressure . Hopefully we start making more plays for the shooters we have like the heat or the warriors. That's the only way Lakers will solve those dreadful offensive droughts they always get

Is there actual data that supports this? Seems like it's something we all say, but I'm just wondering if any Laker blogger has actually run an analysis proving that there is shooting regression on the Lakers. I feel like there have been exceptions in the other direction too (Ariza 2009 Playoffs, Rondo 2020 Playoffs)

Gotta have your feet on the ground. We cannot get the perfect 3&D player in our current situation unless you give up someone of equal value, and those equal value players are way too valuable for us to just trade away. Also for everyone saying that we *need* more 3 pointers, we beat the Warriors shooting incredible from three because we could roll inside with no contest. If anything you looking at our guard rotation is bad. We would need a stretch 5 to have the paint open since our guards are good at drawing fouls when attacking the rim, and AD and Lebron feast on the paint too.