NBA Free Agency

[darthseinfeld]

The Warriors turned down Klay for Paul George.

http://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/n...d-a-paul-george-for-klay-thompson-mega-offer/

George is better player, but chemistry is chemistry amd Klay fits what the Warriors do to a T

 

[Vintage]

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

 

[Vintage]

An odd note: Smith was on our rader in another potential trade down with him as the target. This in the heals of Ainge saying he traded the chance for Fultz because they were liked what they had in there back court. I think more likely they saw something im Fultz they really didn't like in terms of being a franchise player

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.

 

[Elusive6thRing]

The thing with Smith is he has real franchise potential. Quite rare you get that with the 9th pick in the draft

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

 

[PJTHEDOORS]

different era of basketball but yes skill is a great equalizer.

again i watched fox obliterate ball with athleticism so that stuck with me.

lavar blamed it on the UCLA "white" players but reality is Ball looked pretty white to me.
i was shocked ball was rated top 3.

lonzo may be great tho for sure; i just dont see a generational talent with him. i will say his basketball iq and court vision are top of the class. i just worry the parts of his game you really cant improve, quickness, speed, vert; will hold him back.

steph curry is pretty average athletically too fwiw so i get it; i just dont see enough skill to overcome mediocre athleticism and am not used to seeing that get drafted top of draft.

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.

 

[darthseinfeld]

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.

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

 

[darthseinfeld]

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

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

 

[CalPolyTechnique]

George is better player, but chemistry is chemistry amd Klay fits what the Warriors do to a T

Agreed. I've heard George is a bit of a locker room malcontent.

 

[jterrell]

I'm not even a Lonzo Ball fan but in his defense his mother had a stroke right before that game and couldn't speak and his dad and brothers couldn't be at the game. I'm willing to give him a break for that one game and not judge his entire career on it

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.

 

[jterrell]

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.

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.

 

[CalPolyTechnique]

Not entirely true. I said that it could be a problem that effected the flow of the Offense, particularly 3 pt shooting, and that it could effect the roster. Not enough balls to go around essentially. I think if you look at it, that is exactly what happened. The numbers did go down for the big three, in particular, three point shooting. I never once said it wouldn't work. I said you don't know if it will work and you put yourself at risk.

I will say this, they have done much better then I ever thought they would. That is true.

Lol, you're banking on the fact I'm not going to dig up those posts, huh?

 

[LocimusPrime]

Any mavericks updates? I'm not expecting much.

 

[Manwiththeplan]

I
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.

Stockton was a horrible three point shooter for his first three seasons

 

[Vintage]

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.

 

[Manwiththeplan]

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.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

Lol, you're banking on the fact I'm not going to dig up those posts, huh?

Nope. I hope you do.

 

[jterrell]

Stockton was a horrible three point shooter for his first three seasons

rofl.
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.

 

[Manwiththeplan]

rofl.
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. .

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

 

[jterrell]

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.

 

[ABQCOWBOY]

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.