2021 NBA PLAYOFFS THREAD

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taker597

That sounds about white. .

How insightful... Zion game isn't gonna work in the playoffs before he plays in the playoff sounds like the old the Zion game isn't going to work in the NBA on draft night. You might want to let it play out.

Is it going to win you championship.... Nah. But one player can't win you championship. If this was true... KD and Lebron wouldn't need to Super Team for Chips.

---

Quite colorful, Basketball Gugu!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

He needs to become AT LEAST Jimmy Butler on levels two and three. At least. And it is possible, but he needs to get there, and thats why I dont care about all his paint scoring stats. Its great, but that will be much, much harder to do in the playoffs. That said, if he can become a legit threat off the dribble from mid and even deep, the guy could be the best offensive weapon in the league. But I need to see it first before I just assume he can become that. No player in NBA history took so few shots outside the paint in his first two years and then eventually became an off the dribble 3-level threat. He would be the outlier of outliers, and yet some just act like its a given. I hope they are right.

---

As do I.

If Chris Paul's shoulder holds up, CP3 might finally get his title.

Phoenix can handle Brooklyn.

The Bucks are a prime example of what awaits a paint-centric superstar in today?s league. I expect Zion to add a bit more to his repertoire, but this is why we need more dynamic scoring from him or at the very least spacing around him. Fingers crossed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by luckyman

If Chris Paul's shoulder holds up, CP3 might finally get his title.

Phoenix can handle Brooklyn.

---

Monty too

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

Bucks being thoroughly outcoached.

---

Yeah I can see them kicking him to curb for Jason Kidd

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JJackisangry

The Bucks are a prime example of what awaits a paint-centric superstar in today?s league. I expect Zion to add a bit more to his repertoire, but this is why we need more dynamic scoring from him or at the very least spacing around him. Fingers crossed.

---

It wasn't just Giannis tho... the whole team built houses in Brooklyn with all the bricks they were shooting. This is a shot making league if you can't make shots... you're gonna get boat-raced like the Bucks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DroopyDawg

It wasn't just Giannis tho... the whole team built houses in Brooklyn with all the bricks they were shooting. This is a shot making league if you can't make shots... you're gonna get boat-raced like the Bucks.

---

You made my point. Giannis is limited so he relies on others to space for him to allow him to take over games, and as I elaborated in my post Zion needs to add more to his game or we need more dynamic scoring/spacing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JJackisangry

You made my point. Giannis is limited so he relies on others to space for him to allow him to take over games, and as I elaborated in my post Zion needs to add more to his game or we need more dynamic scoring/spacing.

---

This is true for every playerthough, regardless of their play style. Literally every team needs more than one guy who can create offense, either for themselves or others. Regardless of whether they're paint or perimeter based.

Go back and watch the Raptors/Warriors Finals. Curry is the greatest shooter of all time, but because none of his team mates could use the space he created for them effectively and hit the shots they got, the Warriors lost. Curry averaged 30/5/6 in that series, taking 11 threes a night, and the Raptors won. Nobody else stepped up to give him anything.

If you back to game 1 of this series, Nets/Bucks, Khris Middleton (a guy who was less than 1% away from the 50/40/90 club last year, and shot 47/41/89 this year) shot 6/23 from the floor and 0/5 from 3. If he even has just an average game for him, or even just a slightly bad game, and shoots low 40s in percentage instead of low 26%, and hits two threes. What happens then? Well, Bucks win, is what happens.

Everyone needs teammates that step up. If you don't have them, it doesn't matter if you're at the rim or at 30 feet, you're not winning long playoff series against good teams which do have their roleplayers step up.

Case in point, lets go back to game 1 Nets/Bucks; neither Kyrie nor Durant had particularly good games! Kyrie shot 42% from the floor and 27% from 3, Durant went 1/4 from 3 and nearly fouled out and Harden didn't even play. How did they win? Well, Mike James gave them 12/7 off the bench on 46% shooting and 50% from 3, Joe Harris went 5/9 from deep and 2/3 from 2, and Blake Griffin went for 18/14/3 on 54/44 splits. They got their 4th, 5th, and 6th options giving them something. That let them survive a mediocre-to-poor game from their perimeter-centric superstars. Bucks haven't had that yet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelicanidae

This is true for every playerthough, regardless of their play style. Literally every team needs more than one guy who can create offense, either for themselves or others. Regardless of whether they're paint or perimeter based.

Go back and watch the Raptors/Warriors Finals. Curry is the greatest shooter of all time, but because none of his team mates could use the space he created for them effectively and hit the shots they got, the Warriors lost. Curry averaged 30/5/6 in that series, taking 11 threes a night, and the Raptors won. Nobody else stepped up to give him anything.

If you back to game 1 of this series, Nets/Bucks, Khris Middleton (a guy who was less than 1% away from the 50/40/90 club last year, and shot 47/41/89 this year) shot 6/23 from the floor and 0/5 from 3. If he even has just an average game for him, or even just a slightly bad game, and shoots low 40s in percentage instead of low 26%, and hits two threes. What happens then? Well, Bucks win, is what happens.

Everyone needs teammates that step up. If you don't have them, it doesn't matter if you're at the rim or at 30 feet, you're not winning long playoff series against good teams which do have their roleplayers step up.

Case in point, lets go back to game 1 Nets/Bucks; neither Kyrie nor Durant had particularly good games! Kyrie shot 42% from the floor and 27% from 3, Durant went 1/4 from 3 and nearly fouled out and Harden didn't even play. How did they win? Well, Mike James gave them 12/7 off the bench on 46% shooting and 50% from 3, Joe Harris went 5/9 from deep and 2/3 from 2, and Blake Griffin went for 18/14/3 on 54/44 splits. They got their 4th, 5th, and 6th options giving them something. That let them survive a mediocre-to-poor game from their perimeter-centric superstars. Bucks haven't had that yet.

---

In both games the Bucks shot below 30 percent from 3. The Nets never shot below 37 percent in either game. And the Nets took a higher volume, so whilst the stars weren’t red hot in either game the team picked up the slack from downtown. That is the difference. As AD says, it is the ultimate equalizer and the Bucks don’t have an answer if Brooklyn keeps hitting.

And I think we are on the same page, but yeah, Zion definitely needs to add some other element or he could face the Giannis treatment.

There is no debate that Zion will have to add to his game -- the questions are: How much is realistic, based on what we have seen and NBA history? Like, there is no way he becomes Steph. But is Russell Westbrook realistic? Or is that too low a bar and maybe its more Paul Pierce where he can get to spots in mid range and kill teams.

And then based on the realistic growth of his offensive game, how good would the other player have to be to compliment him? As we see for Giannis, if he tops out at that, you need far better than good, but not great 20ppg scorers.

No matter how good he is doing his thing (and he is amazing), Zion is no Giannis and, at this point, and it's not even close. Maybe one day, but no time soon. We found out that AD is more of a support player than an 'Alpha-Dog' in terms of playoff basketball and I think it's fair to say that AD has much more game than Zion. Now those who will lament that Zion has only played 85 games and is only 20 years old, my response is, at this point in time, what else do we have to go on?

You can't make this 1 on 1 comparison between Giannis and Zion. Giannis is a different player that attacks differently. He does not have the same burst, quickness, nor leverage of Zion. Giannis relies more on length and euro steps while Zion relies more on burst and contorting his body.

Does that mean Zion wouldn't struggle scoring with his limited range in the playoffs? No. But I don't think he'd struggle as much as Giannis is either. I've seen Zion identify the double, then just quickly attack it from the weakest side. Giannis doesn't do that.

Zion needs to expand his game, but it's not as dire a situation as with Giannis.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JJackisangry

In both games the Bucks shot below 30 percent from 3. The Nets never shot below 37 percent in either game. And the Nets took a higher volume, so whilst the stars weren’t red hot in either game the team picked up the slack from downtown. That is the difference. As AD says, it is the ultimate equalizer and the Bucks don’t have an answer if Brooklyn keeps hitting.

And I think we are on the same page, but yeah, Zion definitely needs to add some other element or he could face the Giannis treatment.

---

Yeah that was kind of my point. Giannis isn't losing because he's Giannis and being a paint-based player means you're doomed, he's losing because his team has failed to pick up any of the slack (and Bud has made some baffling decisions). Meanwhile, there have been games where the Nets megastars having been red hot either, despite being perimeter based stars, but they've won anyway because the team played well to compensate.

It doesn't matter whether you do your damage in the paint or on the perimeter: if you don't have teammates hitting shots, you're just going to lose. It's that simple. Teams need more than one guy who can adequately create a shot, and they need more than one guy who can be trusted to make shots in general - if you're relying on one guy to do it all and everyone else is ice cold, you lose.

I'm with luckyman; I don't think Zion would face as much of a drop in the playoffs as Giannis has recently because while both score at the rim the actual way they do that is quite different. That said, I do think Zion will expand his range of counters, as well as add stuff to his game, because he's 21 and 21 year olds generally do that unless they're called Ben Simmons.

Yes, he will improve.... But give me an exact level that you think is realistic? Are you saying Giannis level from mid and 3? Westbrook? Jimmy? Give me a player that you think it is realistic for him to be from the 2nd and 3rd level

Lost in all this Jrue Holday won the NBA Sportsmanship award. Congrats to him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Yes, he will improve.... But give me an exact level that you think is realistic? Are you saying Giannis level from mid and 3? Westbrook? Jimmy? Give me a player that you think it is realistic for him to be from the 2nd and 3rd level

---

Charles Barkley

10x+ All Star
Multiple First-Team All NBA
League MVP
NBA Hall of Fame

And the Winner is (and rightfully so)......

https://sports.yahoo.com/report-denv...213705481.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by new city champ

Charles Barkley

10x+ All Star
Multiple First-Team All NBA
League MVP
NBA Hall of Fame

---

That is mine too (I think that's the ceiling). Somewhere between Barkley on the high end and Wes Unseld on the low end with regard to his range.

As to third level, neither Barkley or Karl Malone—the two guys Zion most reminds of—ever became consistent threats from behind the arc. Though that was a different era. They might have in today’s game.

Zion’s set shot seems much like the kind of 3 pointers developed by Magic and Jason Kidd. Both became decent 3 point shooters later in their careers, taking 3-4 attempts per game. 35% +/- on 3-4 attempts per game seems around where Zion will land.

I think Zion can develop a pull-up and floater because his handle is good enough for him to drive and stop if need be. The question is how fluid will the jumper be off the dribble and can he show enough consistency to either punish defenses or force them to second guess goal hanging. I think he has a good touch, and he has even shown range from the 3 point line. I do think he will add it. Question is when

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JJackisangry

I think Zion can develop a pull-up and floater because his handle is good enough for him to drive and stop if need be. The question is how fluid will the jumper be off the dribble and can he show enough consistency to either punish defenses or force them to second guess goal hanging. I think he has a good touch, and he has even shown range from the 3 point line. I do think he will add it. Question is when

---

A sub 70% foul-shooter has a long way to go to become a proficient shooter. If sub-70% is the best you can do with nobody in your face, I think it would be much more difficult against bigger man's hand in your face in live action.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by new city champ

Charles Barkley

10x+ All Star
Multiple First-Team All NBA
League MVP
NBA Hall of Fame

---

And if you took Barkley's efficiency from the mid range and deep into todays game, could he be the #1 on a title team?

Hakeem was AMAZING but in 2021, he aint the #1 on a great team. If he is your #1, you are getting bounced in the first round in 2021

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JJackisangry

I think Zion can develop a pull-up and floater because his handle is good enough for him to drive and stop if need be. The question is how fluid will the jumper be off the dribble and can he show enough consistency to either punish defenses or force them to second guess goal hanging. I think he has a good touch, and he has even shown range from the 3 point line. I do think he will add it. Question is when

---

Add it TO WHAT LEVEL?? This is what I keep asking to see what the baseline of expectations are. A ton of guys shoot a mid range off the dribble. But there are different level threats. Same with 3. I hate when people reduce 3 to the percentage when some guys get there solely off catch and shoot and others create the majority of their looks.

I am asking people to give me a current player that they think is a realistic, median outcome for Zion from levels 2 and 3 when he hits his prime. Mine would be Westbrook from 2nd level. I think he can get defenders on their heels and have a solid pull up that is wide open because defender is terrified of him getting to the rim. For 3rd level, I would say Rondo - in that he can get his own but most of his looks will be spot ups and he will shoot an overall bad percentage but will hit some when it matters.

People expecting more or less than what I laid out?

A free throw vs a jumper (off the dribble or c&s) are all different shots. Different pace, different rhythm, different muscle memory. Shooting in rhythm during a game vs shooting flat footed with plenty time to think about it all require separate practice and separate expertise.

Many players have been proficient at one but not the others. JR Smith and Jason Richardson are two examples. DeMar Derozan the opposite example of those. Even Klay Thompson shoots free throws at a rate much lower than you'd think.

I wonder if Philly sees how easy it is to score when Trae has to guard. He basically just moves out of the way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Add it TO WHAT LEVEL?? This is what I keep asking to see what the baseline of expectations are. A ton of guys shoot a mid range off the dribble. But there are different level threats. Same with 3. I hate when people reduce 3 to the percentage when some guys get there solely off catch and shoot and others create the majority of their looks.

I am asking people to give me a current player that they think is a realistic, median outcome for Zion from levels 2 and 3 when he hits his prime. Mine would be Westbrook from 2nd level. I think he can get defenders on their heels and have a solid pull up that is wide open because defender is terrified of him getting to the rim. For 3rd level, I would say Rondo - in that he can get his own but most of his looks will be spot ups and he will shoot an overall bad percentage but will hit some when it matters.

People expecting more or less than what I laid out?

---

I think he can be pretty damned respectable in the sense that I think his touch is good. But I cannot give you an exact estimate because I still have a questions as to how fluid his shooting motion will be off the pull-up. We have to see how it goes with Vinson in the offseason as that may give me a better view of where he stands. But as I said, I think his touch is good and he understands the distance to the basket (which is why he can nail threes despite having a janky shot).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JJackisangry

I think he can be pretty damned respectable in the sense that I think his touch is good. But I cannot give you an exact estimate because I still have a questions as to how fluid his shooting motion will be off the pull-up. We have to see how it goes with Vinson in the offseason as that may give me a better view of where he stands. But as I said, I think his touch is good and he understands the distance to the basket (which is why he can nail threes despite having a janky shot).

---

I mean, take out that first fluke game and he has made an average of .1 three's per game at a clip of under 30%

I am not asking anybody to predict it exactly right, or hold it against you if you are wrong. But you have to have some kind of baseline of realistic expectation to roster construct. If you think he will be Ben Simmons from 2nd and 3rd level, you build one way. Westbrook, another. Giannis, another. But if you think he can slowly evolve the way Lebron has, then you build another way. You have to have some idea of what you expect, otherwise how do you build your roster accordingly?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

I mean, take out that first fluke game and he has made an average of .1 three's per game at a clip of under 30%

I am not asking anybody to predict it exactly right, or hold it against you if you are wrong. But you have to have some kind of baseline of realistic expectation to roster construct. If you think he will be Ben Simmons from 2nd and 3rd level, you build one way. Westbrook, another. Giannis, another. But if you think he can slowly evolve the way Lebron has, then you build another way. You have to have some idea of what you expect, otherwise how do you build your roster accordingly?

---

Either way you build the roster according to his strengths Mac. I am not debating that. I do however think Zion is very capable of expanding his game (and range) to a competent level (maybe even a good one), but much of it hinges on how quickly he can make the necessary adjustments to his release. Some players take multiple off seasons and others learn very quickly. I think as it stands, it will take a while. But Vinson has shown what he can do already with Lonzo. I see no reason why Zion can’t fix it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JJackisangry

Either way you build the roster according to his strengths Mac. I am not debating that. I do however think Zion is very capable of expanding his game (and range) to a competent level (maybe even a good one), but much of it hinges on how quickly he can make the necessary adjustments to his release. Some players take multiple off seasons and others learn very quickly. I think as it stands, it will take a while. But Vinson has shown what he can do already with Lonzo. I see no reason why Zion can’t fix it.

---

I wouldnt build to his current strengths, because if those current strengths are his future strengths, you arent going to build a championship roster. As for Vinson, I am so tired of hearing about that dude. Sure, Lonzo got a little better and Ingram went back to his rookie form and became a good FT shooter. But how come nobody ever mentions all the players who didnt improve with us? Or even more, why dont people mention all the guys who got way better after they left? Like Randle, like Kenrich, and so many more.

Fred Vinson is another guy. Every team has one, you just dont know their names because you arent a fan of other teams. But trust me, Vinson is nothing special and isnt the cure for Zion's jumper. Lonzo shot over 40% in college. Ingram has had a great stroke all his life. Zion's jumper looks like someone having a seizure. To go from what he is now to even average would be an outlier in NBA history. Which is why I think its a cop out when everyone says he will get better but wont specify what exactly they expect. I think that is incredibly important to plan this roster

It's funny!! Every time we speak about the future of this team, it's centered on one player who is pretty much a one dimensional player offensively at this point.

May I be so bold as to mention that, OFFENSIVELY, we already have an All Star who is already capable at all three levels and has continued to demonstrate the work ethic required to improve? Yet, many in here are ready to trade him away for whatever 'name' we can get in return ASAP to make the other guy happy. I fully admit that BI is not the physical specimen that #1, and that he will never be the player that Zion is in the paint, but I proffer that Zion will never be the offensive threat that BI is at all three levels.

Does BI have warts? Absolutely, especially on the defensive end. But let's also call it for what it is; Zion has plenty of warts too. Is he a finished product? I hope not, but I say the same thing about BI too. Also, BI gets criticized for his 'body-type', but let's not kid ourselves. There are a lot more NBA players who look like BI then Zion. This could be a positive for Zion, or it could also be a career killer if not managed properly.

So as we salivate over elite stars we don't have, let's not forget the ones we do have....both of them

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

I wouldnt build to his current strengths, because if those current strengths are his future strengths, you arent going to build a championship roster. As for Vinson, I am so tired of hearing about that dude. Sure, Lonzo got a little better and Ingram went back to his rookie form and became a good FT shooter. But how come nobody ever mentions all the players who didnt improve with us? Or even more, why dont people mention all the guys who got way better after they left? Like Randle, like Kenrich, and so many more.

Fred Vinson is another guy. Every team has one, you just dont know their names because you arent a fan of other teams. But trust me, Vinson is nothing special and isnt the cure for Zion's jumper. Lonzo shot over 40% in college. Ingram has had a great stroke all his life. Zion's jumper looks like someone having a seizure. To go from what he is now to even average would be an outlier in NBA history. Which is why I think its a cop out when everyone says he will get better but wont specify what exactly they expect. I think that is incredibly important to plan this roster

---

At this point you are arguing to argue. Hedge your bets all you want Mac. Nobody is impressed. Good night

Who is arguing? I have asked a very simple question and only one dude who said Barkley is kind of giving a concrete answer. Everyone else just says a vague "he will improve" - which means nothing considering he basically never shot from the 2nd or 3rd level. Every fan likes to think themselves a message board GM - well, these are the kind of convos you have to have as you build a team around a guy. You cant just wait around and see. You have to have a realistic projection. I am simply asking what that is. I have laid out mine and asked if you guys see similar or am I being "optimistic" or "pessimistic" with my projection.

Sorry, if I was in a front office with a guy who worked for me/with me, I wouldnt accept "he will get better" and let the convo end there. Gotta dig deeper

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

I wouldnt build to his current strengths, because if those current strengths are his future strengths, you arent going to build a championship roster. As for Vinson, I am so tired of hearing about that dude. Sure, Lonzo got a little better and Ingram went back to his rookie form and became a good FT shooter. But how come nobody ever mentions all the players who didnt improve with us? Or even more, why dont people mention all the guys who got way better after they left? Like Randle, like Kenrich, and so many more.

Fred Vinson is another guy. Every team has one, you just dont know their names because you arent a fan of other teams. But trust me, Vinson is nothing special and isnt the cure for Zion's jumper. Lonzo shot over 40% in college. Ingram has had a great stroke all his life. Zion's jumper looks like someone having a seizure. To go from what he is now to even average would be an outlier in NBA history. Which is why I think its a cop out when everyone says he will get better but wont specify what exactly they expect. I think that is incredibly important to plan this roster

---

Mac, you quite frankly aren’t worth responding to anymore. I tried to give you a chance. I did. But one comment from Lucky and all of a sudden you are throwing the toys out of the pram again. You have good insight at times, but ultimately your takes are horribly bad and you continue to be condescending to everyone even though most are trying to be civil. Easy mute. Farewell sweet prince

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JJackisangry

Mac, you quite frankly aren’t worth responding to anymore. I tried to give you a chance. I did. But one comment from Lucky and all of a sudden you are throwing the toys out of the pram again. You have good insight at times, but ultimately your takes are horribly bad and you continue to be condescending to everyone even though most are trying to be civil. Easy mute. Farewell sweet prince

---

But you still responded

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 13 - 3

But you still responded

---

I had to say good night first

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JJackisangry

Mac, you quite frankly aren’t worth responding to anymore. I tried to give you a chance. I did. But one comment from Lucky and all of a sudden you are throwing the toys out of the pram again. You have good insight at times, but ultimately your takes are horribly bad and you continue to be condescending to everyone even though most are trying to be civil. Easy mute. Farewell sweet prince

---

MAC asks the questions nobody cares to address. I remember when he simply said that Zion wasn't the clear cut choice over Ja that everybody was talking about in the 2019 draft and everyone balked. Today, I think there is a case to be made that Morvant was the better choice in that draft if for no other reason than the position he plays and the effect he has had on his team. This question will ultimately be decided over the course of two careers, but if this was a heavyweight fight, most would have given rounds one and two to Morant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by As I See It

MAC asks the questions nobody cares to address. I remember when he simply said that Zion wasn't the clear cut choice over Ja that everybody was talking about in the 2019 draft and everyone balked. Today, I think there is a case to be made that Morvant was the better choice in that draft if for no other reason than the position he plays and the effect he has had on his team. This question will ultimately be decided over the course of two careers, but if this was a heavyweight fight, most would have given rounds one and two to Morant.

---

The guy just said that you shouldn’t build around a franchise cornerstone because of what he may or may not add to his game in the future. It is an actual brain dead take. I don’t think he even believes it, but he said it to be contrarian. Any guy that throws out a hundred guesses a day can be right once. Good for him.

Also, Zion is by far the better talent. Another brain dead take about Jah

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JJackisangry

The guy just said that you shouldn’t build around a franchise cornerstone because of what he may or may not add to his game in the future. It is an actual brain dead take. I don’t think he even believes it, but he said it to be contrarian. Any guy that throws out a hundred guesses a day can be right once. Good for him.

---

I cant keep track. People say "Zion is only 20, has only played X games" - and inherent in that is that they are saying he is still going to evolve. Now, I ask, "Exactly what do you expect him to evolve to?" and its "Build around what he currently does!"

No, what he currently is wont be what he is in 4 years. And if it is, like Ben Simmons, it will be a massive disappointment. He must become multi dimensional, and he likely will. And we have to project the level to build the right roster around him. I cant even believe this is some kind of controversial take. Its common sense

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JJackisangry

Also, Zion is by far the better talent. Another brain dead take about Jah

---

Zion is the better talent. My argument would be that Ja might be easily to construct a roster around. He has a clear position and at least some outside game, so you have more options available. If Zion never develops an outside game, you cant have another non shooting threat. He is also a perimeter player who cant defend perimeter players, and really cant defend interior ones either.

So, while more supremely talented, I could argue Ja could be easier to construct around and he has already shown alpha leadership qualities. Still waiting to see those from Zion. Again, all of it (leadership, shooting, defense) might come. Also have to acknowledge some may not

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JJackisangry

Also, Zion is by far the better talent. Another brain dead take about Jah

---

I thought you called it a night?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JJackisangry

The guy just said that you shouldn’t build around a franchise cornerstone because of what he may or may not add to his game in the future. It is an actual brain dead take. I don’t think he even believes it, but he said it to be contrarian. Any guy that throws out a hundred guesses a day can be right once. Good for him.

---

You have to project. It's exactly what Griff and company did with JAX. You have to plan based on your best estimates of his future. If you think Zion will be 'A', you have to add 'X'. If Zion turn out to be something different, then 'X' might not work.

To say you are going to build around a player without projecting what that player will be in three to five years is simply foolhardy. I kind of think that's what Dumps did with AD; 'throw something at the wall and hope sticks'. Asik anyone?

I dont know how this got hostile so fast. Didnt talk down to anybody or any of the other things people accuse me of doing. Maybe its others who are the issue?

I simply am asking how people are projecting Zion moving forward. Then, based on these playoffs, how do you add around that to beat these top teams. Sorry if any feathers were ruffled

Zion has a pretty smooth pull up from 10ft. Its his 3 pointers that looks awkward. His form could definitely improve but he already looks much less clunky and mechanical than Giannis looks. His 3-10 ft shooting this year is better than Giannis has had in his whole career. Giannis is a 35% shooter from midrange for his career which is gross. Westbrook is a decent projection. I could see Zion getting to 40%, mid 70s ft %, 35% from 3 on low volume. You can still gameplan against that level of a shooter but that would still be a good enough mark that there will be some games where Zion burns you for playing off him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara

Yes, he will improve.... But give me an exact level that you think is realistic? Are you saying Giannis level from mid and 3? Westbrook? Jimmy? Give me a player that you think it is realistic for him to be from the 2nd and 3rd level

---

I see Zion level as being like Shawn Kemp...

hell I'm the person who said we should trade Lonzo to Memphis and draft Morant and get as many picks and players from the deal because I believe we can build faster and easy around Morant and Ingram from the Memphis picks,, Lakers picks, and picks from a jrue trade that we was going to make...I still believe this today while Zion is doing all these amazing things as of now...

I also believe until we get our curry, dame, Tre, luka type player at the pg or sg position we won't be contending anytime soon...

Here are all of Zion's pull ups (or something kind of equivalent) from the season

https://www.nba.com/stats/events/?fl...player&sct=hex

Only 11 in total, so you can watch them all in about a minute.

It's not impossible that he can become proficient at that. And quite quickly. He's already started working on it. He just needs to dedicate himself to it. He'll surely find that it'll prolong his career and take considerably less stamina in the process.

Utah fans telling the truth about Paul George

Gobert just showed why he is the best defensive player in the NBA period