Readers want to know why the Lakers go passive

Mike Bresnahan covers the Lakers for The Times. Readers’ questions about the Lakers will be answered every Friday at latimes.com/sports.

Question: Many of the latest BMWs, Mercedes and other high-end cars have the option of “Active Cruise Control,” a new technology that accelerates and brakes as needed to keep the car cruising while avoiding crashing into cars in front of you.

The new-and-improved Lakers have a new feature called “Passive Cruise Control,” a ho-hum lethargy that results in blowout losses or barely eking out wins against subpar teams. But come playoffs, they’ll cut loose and the rhythmic swing of raucous hot jams will bring the Larry O’Brien Trophy back home to the Lakers again. At least, that’s what we Laker fans are hoping is the reason for this team’s lackluster approach to regular-season games.

—Marc Blatt, Henderson, Nev.

Answer: I’ve been searching for a way to describe this team and I’ve finally found it: “Passive Cruise Control.” Thank you, Marc Blatt.

The last few games have really been an eye-opener for me.

I went back and looked at my Twitter feed for the Charlotte game and had to laugh.

“I’m witnessing their worst effort of the season…” read one tweet.

“Lakers just had, like 26 offensive rebounds in one possession. And they still didn’t score,” read another.

Pretty harsh. And pretty deserving.

I hadn’t seen a Lakers team that unmotivated since the end of the hopeless 2004-05 season, the last time they failed to make the playoffs.

I’m afraid I don’t have much in the area of good news for Lakers followers.

Things will get especially gritty if Dallas passes the Lakers to clinch the top spot in the Western Conference.

Not only would it mean a potential Game 7 on the road in the conference finals, but a second-round series against, yep, the Denver Nuggets, who will probably be seeded No. 3 in the West.

Would now be a bad time to mention that the Lakers are already looking at a possible first-round series against the Portland Trail Blazers? Does “nine losses in a row” in Portland mean anything to anybody, even though the Lakers finally broke the Blazers’ jinx up there a month ago?

My best friend from college is getting married in Chicago the first weekend in June. I never thought I’d say this, but there’s a chance I’ll be able to attend. My work might be done by then if the Lakers don’t start taking this season seriously.

Q: I had to laugh at the preseason speculation that the Lakers might challenge the record of the Chicago Bulls. I knew they would lose a dozen games to the various division bottom-dwellers alone. Shoot, they would lose 12 if they had to play Charlotte 15 times a year.

Hmmmm ... tall, attractive and British. Uh, hey ... can you lob me Emma’s phone number so I can get her thoughts on next week’s games?

—Steve Liem, Huntington Beach

A: Steve seems to have taken a liking to Emma, who predicted for us last week that the Lakers would beat Orlando. (She was wrong.) Her phone number is 310- … wait, she’d kill me.

As for the Lakers, yeah, it’s pretty laughable that they thought they could go 72-10 this season. Heck, at this point, they’d be lucky to get 60 victories.

They really need to work on their pick-and-roll defense, which starts with their guards staying in front of people and their big men (specifically Andrew Bynum) not getting caught in a gray area underneath. Bynum needs to jump out on a penetrating point guard, cause some sort of distraction and get back to his man in enough time. Shaq had all sorts of problems with this concept, and Bynum is falling into the same trap.

Q: Just checked Vladimir Radmanovic’s numbers at Golden State: 33 games, 6.6 points a game, 39% field-goal percentage, 27% from three-point range.

At this rate he could be headed back to Staples Center … with the Clippers next season.

—Victor Bulaich

A: Not sure why I included this one, but it’s always fun to crack on Vladimir Radmanovic.

Q: What if the Lakers sign LeBron James this summer as a free agent? LeBron said he will sign for three years. Wait ... before you say no ... this is a once-in-a-lifetime chance to sign KING JAMES!!!!

—Tom L.

A: No. I said it. Sorry.

This e-mail came with the memo line “Secrets of Kobe and LeBron,” which made me open it immediately because I’m all for learning about the secrets of NBA stars.

But then I realized that Tom doesn’t grasp the concept of the NBA salary cap. Sadly, neither do some “reporters” who have written that the Lakers should sign LeBron.

Here’s the problem, and I’m going to say it’s a relatively big one: the Lakers can’t sign LeBron.

They’re currently more than $30 million over the projected salary cap for next season and can sign only A) their own free agents and B) a mid-level exception player who will make about $5 million in his first season. I don’t think KING JAMES!!!! (sorry, my ALL CAPS button got stuck, just like Tom’s) will play for the Lakers for $5 million next season when he’ll have more than a half dozen teams frantically clearing out upward of $20 million in salary-cap space for him next season.

Of course, the Lakers could always pursue a sign-and-trade with Cleveland, but James is under no obligation with the Cavaliers to do that. Translation: He’s going to go where he wants to go, just like free agents always do.

LeBron to the Lakers? Let me know when it happens. Thanks.

Readers can send their questions about the Lakers and the NBA to our beat reporters, but please put “Q&A” in the subject line. E-mail:

mike.bresnahan@latimes.com

broderick.turner@latimes.com