Discussion in 'Sports Zone' started by darthseinfeld, Jun 25, 2017.
George is better player, but chemistry is chemistry amd Klay fits what the Warriors do to a T
I like Ball. His IQ, vision, and passing ability is superb for a prospect.
He isn't going to be the type of player that breaks down defenses with his drives then dish. He can drive, but he isn't going to be a Westbrook type. He can push the ball in transition and orchestrate the half court offense. His shot has horrible form but it's clearly practiced enough it should be ok.
I don't know how good he will be, but I'd be surprised if he wasn't a top PG
I'm not a Boston fan, so obviously you are more plugged in for that...
But Tatum is just such a smooth scorer, can do it a variety of ways, and doesn't need to be a ball dominant player to do that.
I think his scoring potential could easily outstrip the rest of the draft class... And I wonder if getting a legit #1 option was the primary goal.
Weird thing but in the last 20 years the #1 pick and the #9 pick has had the most all stars. 10 different #9 picks have made an all star team
Including Dirk Nowitzki, Tracy McGrady, Shawn Marion, Amare Stoudemire, Andre Iguodala, DeMar Derozan and Gordan Hayward
Doesn't change fact that Stockton didn't have to rely on athleticism to succeed. Anyways, I think Lonzo is quicker and a better athlete than the Lakers prior pg, D'Angelo Russell.
From what was said right before and after the trade was that Fultz wasnt at the the top of there board, that they believed the best player would be there at 3. However in the run up to the draft there were rumors they were looking to move down again with Smith as the target.
As for Tatum, I much prefered him to Jackson. Jackson's 2 way game could be very nice, but scoring is king and has much more offensive potential. Tatum's game is also refined enough that he could be a quaility second team scorer on a good team as a rookie
That is odd. Looking at some of those names, Nowitzki, McGrady, and Stoudamire in particular, it could be a spot in lottery where teams look to hit home runs based on raw potential
Agreed. I've heard George is a bit of a locker room malcontent.
completely fair, but also fair to note he sat out the 1 summer league game versus the same opponent.
in the summer league he is averaging ~18p, 9 ast, and ~8 rebounds so he is filling the stats sheet.
BUT he is also shooting less than 20% from 3 and only 38% overall.
going to be interesting to watch because he is a great passer and he is so long he will always be a plus rebounding PG... but there are negatives as well that may make for challenges to how the lakers fill out around him.
when dallas had steve nash they had real issues guarding quick point guards.
nash couldn't handle tony parker and that was a big reason cuban didn't pay him more to stay.
I was never a fan of Russell either. Didn't like him pre-draft. I said he was soft. But I don't think his quickness or athleticism was an issue. Hard to know given unlike the NFL combine almost none of the top NBA cats test publicly. But Russell to me is a 2G and plenty quick for that position. He's certainly a better shooter than Ball but far from as good a passer or rebounder and apparently team mate.
The young Laker who is really darn good is Ingram. That kid can flat play. Worth building around. Prolly only reason he is playing summer league is to build rapport with Ball.
Skill vs athleticism...
Not sure what we are debating really. Ball is no where near as skilled of a shooter as Stockton or Nash or any of these "skill" guys.
That's my point. Ball is averaging less than 20% from 3PT thus far and has an ugly shot.
They really aren't in the same world from a shooting standpoint.
Ball is a generational passer tho and that's a big plus.
I just don't think he is a top 10 PG at his peak and I wouldn't have drafted him #2 overall.
But you can bet I'd have loved him at 9 (tho hated the sideshow his family name brought) and Dallas would have started him at PG.
It's hard for to me to figure out what player he can become. He's definitely not Magic who could play PF and had elite strength. He's far too good a passer to be Ron Harper.
No where near the athlete or turnover machine to be a Westbrook. He's never gonna be a Glove type defender.
But he has some elite qualities to mix in.
Lol, you're banking on the fact I'm not going to dig up those posts, huh?
Any mavericks updates? I'm not expecting much.
Stockton was a horrible three point shooter for his first three seasons
He shot over 50% from the field for his career.
That's amazing for a guard.
Over 38% percent from behind the arc.
Stockton could shoot.
I didn't say he couldn't shoot, I said he was a horrible three point shooter his first three seasons, which can not be argued.
Nope. I hope you do.
stockton was a back up who didn't shoot the 3 his first 3 seasons. % was poor but he didn't even take shots. 1 attempt every 3 games through 3 seasons.
if lonzo is a back up playing 18 mpg this year i doubt anyone cares how he shoots the 3.
if he is going to be the starting PG then his shooting will be an issue.
stockton shot .384 for his career, made all defensive team 5 times and is the career assists leader.
but again this is a good point in context and the issue with young players.
no one gives them time to develop.
lonzo is not a plus defender and also lacks offensive skills.
he has some great assets in passing/rebounding but people expecting him to be great right now are being totally unfair to him, starting with his dad.
and the ones he did take, he didn't make. don't see why so many are arguing with this, when I said his first three seasons he was horrible beyond the arc.
and what does him being on the defensive team 5 times and being the all time leader in assists matter given the context of what I'm talking about. I never once knocked those attributes of his, nor his overall greatness
dude the argument is you are trying to make a point, that isn't a point.
stockton wasn't a starter during the period (so his offense wasn't a big deal at all) you are talking about and he didn't shoot enough 3's for his % to mean anything.
so you aren't factually incorrect you are just textually incorrect.
Stockton averaged over 20PPG without 3 point shooting the year he came out.
Lonzo averaged ~15.
if you are saying Lonzo could improve his 3PT shooting you are absolutely correct. no argument there.
but it's not just his % but his form that raises questions.
and that's a scarier/longer process.
if Lonzo can get to 35% at a 3PT % as a pro he will alleviate many of the issues he'll have lacking foot speed to take people off the dribble.
I'm again just struggling to see who he is as a pro.
What's his path to being elite.
What pro offense can he run?
He isn't a Pick and roll guy, not sure he's a triangle guy.
So that really leaves flex stuff and the run n gun bombs away from 3 offenses .
For GSW offense he has to shoot very well outside including off the dribble.
He has useful skills to be sure and he is most certainly an NBA player.
Can a team with him as it's best player win a playoff series?
If he is Ricky Rubio and that might be the best comparison I can think of, then that question above is hard to answer with a yes.
Intruguing young dude to watch that's for sure.
Ball might be a Dennis Johnson type guy. I mean, Johnson was a much better Defensive Player coming into the league, probably not as good of a guy on the break but similar physically and both were very smart players at a very young age.
I don't know, guess we'll see.