Pelicans vs Lakers game thread

[UNO Gracias]

So you would take Mitchell over Ball. Why?

I like Mitchell where he is in Utah. He is a scorer, and he is having a CP3 impact on that team. He fills a major need there.

In LA? I’m not sure Mitchell is shooting as much given the amount of scorers on the Lakers.

They are both fine where they are.

[Mythrol]

I like Mitchell where he is in Utah. He is a scorer, and he is having a CP3 impact on that team. He fills a major need there.

In LA? I’m not sure Mitchell is shooting as much given the amount of scorers on the Lakers.

They are both fine where they are.

Ok let me rephrase the question. If you were building a team from the ground up, Who would you pick?

My point was, people were arguing "oh look lonzo gets rebounds and assists he's actually good" but when presented with the option of trading someone who is mainly a scorer that doesn't rebound or assist as well as Lonzo, people would still pick the guy who is a guard that can break down the defense and score. Rebounds and assists are nice but in the new NBA a guard MUST be able to score efficiently or he's not going to be a starter.

[UNO Gracias]

Ok let me rephrase the question. If you were building a team from the ground up, Who would you pick?

My point was, people were arguing "oh look lonzo gets rebounds and assists he's actually good" but when presented with the option of trading someone who is mainly a scorer that doesn't rebound or assist as well as Lonzo, people would still pick the guy who is a guard that can break down the defense and score. Rebounds and assists are nice but in the new NBA a guard MUST be able to score efficiently or he's not going to be a starter.

Good question, I would take Mitchell. That doesn’t mean that Lonzo is a garbage player. Mitchell is older than Ball, so obviously he is going to be more developed, but if I need a baller right now then yeah give me Mitchell. Next year, who knows?

[Mythrol]

Good question, I would take Mitchell. That doesn’t mean that Lonzo is a garbage player. Mitchell is older than Ball, so obviously he is going to be more developed, but if I need a baller right now then yeah give me Mitchell. Next year, who knows?

No one has called Lonzo garbage. He's having a bad season and was over hyped but I think everyone has been pretty consistent in saying *IF* Lonzo got a shot he would be really good. The problem is with the *if* part.

Some people default to "oh he's 20 and has potential to improve" but I look at how broken his shot mechanic is, and the fact that the coach is on record as saying they won't mess with his shot and I just can't imagine him ever improving that much. I see him going a very similar path as Elfrid Payton.

If this was late 90s to early 2000s then I think Lonzo would still have a good chance but in the new 3pt driven NBA, he feels like a relic of the past. I think even Lonzo recognized his need for a shot with him basically attempting 6 3pt shots a game.

[UNO Gracias]

I mean I guess you have a point, no player in NBA history has ever improved on anything after their rookie season. Well, sucks for LA.

Speaking of being a throwback, how are the Pelicans supposed to win anything when they aren’t building around shooters, but around bigs? We are running in the opposite direction of the rest of the league. Does that mean we aren’t going to win anything of note?

Obviously we are banking on the current trend in the NBA being a beatable trend, and obviously the Lakers are counting on a player like Lonzo not having to be Steph, Klay, Devin, Lillard, or Krover in order for them to win.

[Mythrol]

I mean I guess you have a point, no player in NBA history has ever improved on anything after their rookie season. Well, sucks for LA.

Speaking of being a throwback, how are the Pelicans supposed to win anything when they aren’t building around shooters, but around bigs? We are running in the opposite direction of the rest of the league. Does that mean we aren’t going to win anything of note?

Obviously we are banking on the current trend in the NBA being a beatable trend, and obviously the Lakers are counting on a player like Lonzo not having to be Steph, Klay, Devin, Lillard, or Krover in order for them to win.

Like GA, you seem to be trying to purposely misrepresent my argument to make it seem like I'm saying something I'm not.

I never said no player in NBA history has ever improved from their rookie season. I clearly laid out my argument that Lonzo's shot mechanic is so broken, and the head coach is on record as saying they will not attempt to change it that I find it highly unlikely he will be able to ever improve that much with his shot as is. Lonzo also doesn't have the handles to take his man off the dribble and be able to be an effective scorer without a shot. My argument is specific to the circumstances surrounding Lonzo, not every rookie ever to enter the NBA. I've also been very clear from the beginning that *if* Lonzo's shot is fixed then he would be a really good player.

The only argument I've seen for Lonzo is his age. So please explain to me, what went wrong with Elfrid Payton's development of his shot? What exactly makes Lonzo have a better chance than Payton of improving his shot? Exactly what has been shown, either on the court or through the words of the coaching staff that gives you reason to believe Lonzo will be the very very very rare exception to the rule, instead of just another guy who could never get his shot right?

In a redraft, knowing what we know now, would Lonzo still go 2nd overall or has it become clear already that he was overrated and overhyped and should not have been drafted so high?

As far as what the Pelicans are doing, we are VERY MUCH building our team around the new 3pt NBA, just using our bigs instead of guards. Both of our bigs have range all the way out to the 3pt line, can take their man off the dribble, and still operate around the basket. Most importantly they do it pretty efficiently. Our two bigs are in NO WAY a throw back to the old NBA where you throw the ball inside, post up, and score through that.

[pelicanchamp]

Like GA, you seem to be trying to purposely misrepresent my argument to make it seem like I'm saying something I'm not.

I never said no player in NBA history has ever improved from their rookie season. I clearly laid out my argument that Lonzo's shot mechanic is so broken, and the head coach is on record as saying they will not attempt to change it that I find it highly unlikely he will be able to ever improve that much with his shot as is. Lonzo also doesn't have the handles to take his man off the dribble and be able to be an effective scorer without a shot. My argument is specific to the circumstances surrounding Lonzo, not every rookie ever to enter the NBA. I've also been very clear from the beginning that *if* Lonzo's shot is fixed then he would be a really good player.

The only argument I've seen for Lonzo is his age. So please explain to me, what went wrong with Elfrid Payton's development of his shot? What exactly makes Lonzo have a better chance than Payton of improving his shot? Exactly what has been shown, either on the court or through the words of the coaching staff that gives you reason to believe Lonzo will be the very very very rare exception to the rule, instead of just another guy who could never get his shot right?

In a redraft, knowing what we know now, would Lonzo still go 2nd overall or has it become clear already that he was overrated and overhyped and should not have been drafted so high?

As far as what the Pelicans are doing, we are VERY MUCH building our team around the new 3pt NBA, just using our bigs instead of guards. Both of our bigs have range all the way out to the 3pt line, can take their man off the dribble, and still operate around the basket. Most importantly they do it pretty efficiently. Our two bigs are in NO WAY a throw back to the old NBA where you throw the ball inside, post up, and score through that.

Hopefully, cousins can still blow by defenders...



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk