Game 3 Adjustments: What’s Still Untapped?

Matchups, tactics, and early series stats that make you think

Photo by Anadolu / Getty Images

The Lakers hit back in Game 2. Now we’ve got ourselves a series.

Game 3 and Game 4 shift to Minnesota, but for the Lakers, it’s Game 3 that feels like the real opportunity. It’s the last game with two full days of rest—something 40-year-old LeBron James, Luka Dončić, and the rest of L.A.’s short rotation could really use. After that, the turnaround between Games 3 and 4 gets much tighter.

And here’s the other part: listen closely to the Wolves' media sessions, and you’ll hear a hint of unease. Last postseason, Minnesota dropped five of their last six home games against Dallas and Denver. Add in their shaky starts in both games so far, and there’s pressure building. If the Lakers can punch first again and control the early tempo, it might inject even more doubt and pressure into Anthony Edwards and Julius Randle—especially in the way they read and react. As you’ll see in the breakdown below, their hesitation and indecisiveness might be the swing factor in this series.

A quick note for new subscribers: I’ll be breaking down every Lakers playoff game with Game Observations and next-game adjustment deep dives like this one. Game 1 observations for each series will remain free and available to all readers. For the rest of the games—and other analysis—some sections of each article will be reserved for paid subscribers.

If you have the means, consider supporting the work. Your support is what keeps this going.

---

Today’s highlights:

1. Same defensive plan, but Game 2 force and execution needed again (🎞️VIDEO)

2. Shot-making or struggle: threes need to start falling

3. More structure and better matchup selection

4. LeBron vs. Randle: a matchup the Lakers have to win

5. The swing factor in this series

---

1–Same defensive plan, but Game 2 force and execution needed again (🎞️VIDEO)

I mentioned before that making Anthony Edwards think and hesitate is the key to this series defensively. In my Game 2 Observations, I highlighted Edwards’ own comments—he said it felt like the Lakers were playing a defense he was seeing for the first time, calling it “kind of confusing” and “kind of a zone.” In reality, it was the same shrink-the-floor scheme the Lakers have used all season, something both Luka Dončić and Wolves head coach Chris Finch confirmed after the game.

This first action of the second half in Game 2 perfectly encapsulates the Lakers’ shrink-the-floor approach. The Wolves run a Chicago action (a pin-down screen followed by a dribble hand-off) for Edwards. Austin Reaves fights over the screen and stays attached. Edwards then takes a couple of seconds to scan the floor—just enough time for the Lakers, led by LeBron James, to load up, cut off the drive, and force a contested three. Not exactly the result you want from your first set play out of the break.

Finch referred to that moment as “over surveying,” pointing out the need for quicker decisions and a faster tempo.

The key for the Lakers is to execute their game plan like they did in Game 2. Disrupt the initial actions with ball pressure and denials. Press the ball much higher above the three-point line. And, if possible, provide early resistance on Edwards’ drives if he attacks quickly. The key for the Lakers is to force Edwards and Randle to second-guess themselves, making their decisions later in the shot clock and under more pressure.

Timberwolves shot distribution by shot clock range (play length)

I think J.J. Redick doubles down on this plan tonight, shrinking even more against Edwards and making Randle the primary playmaker or isolation scorer, like he was for most of Game 2. Most of the other Wolves aren’t great passers, so the goal should be to force them into decisions with aggressive closeouts and rotation pressure.

2-Shot-making or struggle: threes need to start falling

My first focus was on defense, but it’s the offense that’s really been struggling. The Lakers scored just 95 and 94 points in the first two games, and it’s unrealistic to expect them to win three more games while scoring at such a low rate—just 107.1 points per 100 possessions for the series.

Much has been said about the Lakers’ offense—how organized or disorganized it’s looked, and their over-insistence on attacking Rudy Gobert. I’ll get into more of that in the next point, but the other key issue has been poor outside shooting.

The Lakers have made just 21 threes on 70 attempts in this series—30 percent overall. If you take out Dončić, who’s shot making has been solid in the first two games, the rest of the team is just 14-of-52, or 27 percent. Everyone except Gabe Vincent is shooting well below expected, based on the shot quality profile of the looks they’re getting. Reaves and James are a combined 5-of-24 from three, and the Lakers will need both to knock them down at a much better rate for the remainder of the series.

3-More structure and better matchup selection

I won’t harp too much again on the organization and the Lakers relying too heavily on stagnant switch and isolation hunting. I covered that in my Game 2 Adjustments piece, and we saw the team respond by running more actions to start Game 2—a big reason for their early success. I talked about changing the angles of attack, and I still think the Lakers should run more dribble handoff actions to get their three playmakers attacking on the move from the side. The Lakers simply need more unpredictability and pace in their half-court offense (see last point). Another way to achieve that is by using Dončić and James more often from the post or wing, shifting the court geometry and making help defense more difficult with East-West actions, rather than consistently attacking North-South from the top.

Matchup hunting—especially going at Gobert—has dominated the sidelines, with various (and often partial) data being shared to argue for or against it. The Lakers, especially Dončić, had much more success going at Gobert than the selective shooting data suggests. That data often leaves out key context like drawn fouls, passes, and shots that come after the initial breakdown. The best argument for their success is the way Finch adjusted his help scheme, sending more and more help as both games progressed.

Now, that doesn’t mean attacking the four-time Defensive Player of the Year is always the best option. Dončić had even more success attacking Randle in Game 2, who doesn’t have the length to contest his drives or step-backs. Reaves, with his speed, has been the most effective at attacking both Gobert and Naz Reid. On the other hand, James is shooting just 39 percent against bigs, compared to 50 percent against guards and wings so far in this series. Attacking Mike Conley and the Wolves’ other guards remains a button that both James and Dončić could press more as the series progresses.

4-LeBron vs. Randle: a matchup the Lakers have to win