The NBA season is currently nearing its halfway point. By any metric, Paul George should be one of the happiest players in the league. He signed a four-year contract worth over $130 million with the Thunder this summer, and he is currently enjoying the best statistical season of his career. The Thunder are currently third in the Western Conference and look poised to make a deep playoff run.
With all of this being the case, is it possible to even consider that George made the wrong decision in free agency? Would he be in an even better position than he is if he signed with a different team? If so, could that team have been the Los Angeles Lakers?
When you take a look at the rosters for both teams, adding George takes both the Lakers and Thunder from simple playoff teams to potential championship contenders. The tandem of George and Russell Westbrook seems to work well for the Thunder, with George handling the majority of scoring and Westbrook assuming the duties of a facilitator.
Had George elected to sign with the Lakers, he would have encountered a somewhat similar dynamic with LeBron James. As James enters the latter stages of his career, having a player like George to handle the scoring duties would make his transition into those late stages much easier. LeBron, as we all know, is still capable of producing at a high level offensively. However, consider this: how good could LeBron (and by extension, the Lakers) be if he didn't have to exert himself to that extent every single game?
Most of the impact players on the Lakers; that is, the players considered to be just below LeBron in the team's hierarchy, are very young and don't have the experience of deep runs in the playoffs. This wouldn't be an issue for a player like Paul George, someone who led the Indiana Pacers to the Eastern Conference Finals at 22 and 23 years old, in his third and fourth season.
George is a legitimate superstar in the NBA, a player who could complement LeBron James like Dwyane Wade did during his Miami days or Kyrie Irving during his second stint with the Cleveland Cavaliers.
There's no denying that Paul George would have the opportunity to be successful on a team like the Lakers, but the question still remains: would he be more successful as a Laker than he currently is as a member of the Thunder?
The Lakers currently have a worse record than Oklahoma City, but only marginally so. Both teams have been hit by injury this season, to varying degrees. LeBron himself is expected to miss time at the moment after suffering a groin injury in the Lakers' win over the Warriors on Christmas Day. Russell Westbrook has missed time this season, and the Thunder also have yet to see the debut of Andre Roberson (the team's best on ball defender) following complications from a knee injury he suffered last season.
At the end of the day, Paul George's decision can only be measured by what each team does in the playoffs. Which team, the Lakers or the Thunder, is currently best equipped to make a run at the Golden State Warriors and unseat them at the top of the Western Conference?
At the moment, it may be too early to tell. The Thunder are currently 1-1 against Golden State this season, but each game came with a few caveats. Russell Westbrook missed the first game on opening night of the season, and the Warriors were without both Stephen Curry and Draymond Green when the Thunder beat them late in November.
Oklahoma City has one more game on their schedule against the Warriors on March 16. If both teams are fully healthy, it could go a long way towards determining whether or not the Thunder have what it takes to beat Golden State in a series.
The Lakers beat the Warriors on Christmas, and they managed to beat them at full strength, and with LeBron missing the majority of the second half. One game isn't enough of a sample size to determine whether or not they can do it during a seven game series, but the Lakers have at least demonstrated a capability to beat a healthy Warriors team, which is something to consider in this argument.
The answer to the question of whether or not Paul George would have been better off signing with the Lakers is not simple. We simply don't know enough about the two teams at this point in the season to make a definitive decision. However, the Thunder are marginally better than the Lakers, and they were able to pay George more when it came to the terms of his contract.
If you're basing your decision on the success of each team to this point in the season, as well as how much money George is making, the answer seems to be that staying in Oklahoma City is paying off (and paying well).
Follow Us
Subscribe