Who’s the Better End-of-Game Option for Lakers: Pau Gasol or Antawn Jamison?

For the 8-9 Los Angeles Lakers, it's a situation that hasn't forced its way to the forefront.

Only two of the team's 16 games have been decided by four points or fewer. In fact, only three others have been decided by single digits.

For the myriad of problems facing this organization, crunch-time execution has largely steered clear of the public forum. But over the course of the 82-game regular season, it's one that could very well emerge as the hottest topic in L.A.

With Pau Gasol continuing to struggle in coach Mike D'Antoni's system (12.6 points on 42.0 percent shooting), the questions about an increased role for stretch forward Antawn Jamison have been voiced.

The questions have a logical base for D'Antoni. The perimeter-savvy Jamison is more similar to the stretch bigs that the coach has found success with in the past. He preferred players like Channing Frye and Shawn Marion in Phoenix and Steve Novak in New York.

Furthering the argument for Jamison is the fact that Lakers center Dwight Howard has had a successful past with similar players, such as Rashard Lewis and Ryan Anderson in Orlando.

Jamison has the ability to contribute offense from the perimeter and near the basket. He may not offer much defensively, but that's no different than Frye, Novak, Lewis or Anderson.

Jamison hasn't enjoyed the rebounding successes in his career that Gasol has (7.8 per game to 9.2), but he has closed the gap this season (8.8 to 9.1 per 36 minutes, respectively).

So Jamison is the slam-dunk choice, right?

Well, it's a little more complicated than that.

For one thing, Gasol's size advantage (7'0" compared to the 6'8" Jamison) has obvious benefits. Gasol will more effectively challenge shots and protect the glass.

He's also a superior passer, capable of forming a nice high-low post attack with Howard. If Gasol rediscovers his confidence from mid-ran...

About the Author