How do we reach the next level ?

[Freyfamilyreuni]

I wonder what numbers are actually important to some people. The offense has been, inarguably, better since Zion took on more responsibilities as a ballhandler. The team's success has gone up, his assist rate has gone up, the team's efficiency has gone up, and the team's record with both Ingram and Zion healthy but with Zion getting his current rate of offense is 9-3, which is well above the standard win rate of the season. Yes, part of that is due to the team's we've played and circumstance, but it's something to be taken into account.

Further, as Zion's usg% in the clutch has increased, the team's clutch time ORTg has gone up as well; these are not difficult numbers to find.

So why is it that some people are so utterly opposed to the idea of Zion being Point Zion when it's clearly benefiting the team overall and is, generally, resulting in more wins as well?

Of course you need to give Ingram time with the ball in his hands, he's an on-ball threat and he's proved himself to be very good at creating offense for himself and for others. He's earned those minutes and those responsibilities and he's also getting them, he runs the offense a lot when he's on the floor in general and splits it about 50/50 with Zion when they're both on the floor; then Zion generally gets ballhandler run with the bench unit (the Kira-Jax-Zion bench trio annihilates other bench units, by the way), what's wrong with that? Where's the issue?

Am I misunderstanding the conversation?

No, you're not. Basically he said that since he saw a bad play in last night's game, and Zion gets blocked a lot, he wants to get rid of point Zion. Oh and Brandon's assists numbers are higher. I'm pretty sure he's kind of low key trolling us on this.

[As I See It]

No, you're not. Basically he said that since he saw a bad play in last night's game, and Zion gets blocked a lot, he wants to get rid of point Zion. Oh and Brandon's assists numbers are higher. I'm pretty sure he's kind of low key trolling us on this.

I said none of that.

You either...

A.) have a comprehension problem.

or

B.) you are a sick puppy.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say "A".

[Pelicanidae]

No, you're not. Basically he said that since he saw a bad play in last night's game, and Zion gets blocked a lot, he wants to get rid of point Zion. Oh and Brandon's assists numbers are higher. I'm pretty sure he's kind of low key trolling us on this.

Did you know the single most blocked player of all time is Tim Duncan? Followed by Carmelo, AI, Kobe, Pau Gasol, and Paul Pierce in the top ten.

Zion gets blocked a lot because he takes an all time record volume of shots at the rim. If more players could get there as often as he does, they'd be blocked more as well.

[As I See It]

Did you know the single most blocked player of all time is Tim Duncan? Followed by Carmelo, AI, Kobe, Pau Gasol, and Paul Pierce in the top ten.

Zion gets blocked a lot because he takes an all time record volume of shots at the rim. If more players could get there as often as he does, they'd be blocked more as well.

A blocked shot is akin to a turnover if the ball is lost. In this case, it represents a lost possession and chance at scoring. If you can't deal with reality, who am I to convert you? Or even try?

[Freyfamilyreuni]

I said none of that.

You either...

A.) have a comprehension problem.

or

B.) you are a sick puppy.

I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say "A".

You lost all credibility when you said ISO Brandon is more effecient than ISO Zion.

[As I See It]

You lost all credibility when you said ISO Brandon is more effecient than ISO Zion.

Didn't say that either.

I did say:

But Brandon is accused of too much ISO Ball and Zion is lauded for the same

Yep, it's definitely a comprehension problem!!

[MichaelMcNamara]

Ingram isnt a better iso option, but he has the ability to threaten the defense from all 3 levels. I have asked this for months, and will continue to ask -- Can anybody name a reliable, top level closer who could only score from one level?

Now, if people believe Zion will eventually develop a solid iso mid range game, that might one day evolve into an off the dribble 3 point threat as well, then that is one thing. But to argue he can be a reliable closer now would be to argue he is an outlier of all outliers.

[heybigmatt]

Ingram isnt a better iso option, but he has the ability to threaten the defense from all 3 levels. I have asked this for months, and will continue to ask -- Can anybody name a reliable, top level closer who could only score from one level?

Now, if people believe Zion will eventually develop a solid iso mid range game, that might one day evolve into an off the dribble 3 point threat as well, then that is one thing. But to argue he can be a reliable closer now would be to argue he is an outlier of all outliers.

Embiid. If he wanted to, he could easily score from one level. There is no reason for him to leave the paint. He just does it because he is lazy, not because of any scheme. Also, looking back, the most recent and most
Obvious is shaq.

[As I See It]

Embiid. If he wanted to, he could easily score from one level. There is no reason for him to leave the paint. He just does it because he is lazy, not because of any scheme. Also, looking back, the most recent and most
Obvious is shaq.

Embiid can only score from all three levels, and does. Zion? Maybe one day.

SHAQ parked his butt on the blocks and posted up. That's a far different animal than ISO-ball.

[Freyfamilyreuni]

Didn't say that either.

I did say:



Yep, it's definitely a comprehension problem!!

It's a comprehension problem only in that you don't really understand what "Point Zion" is. Zion isn't running the team like a point guard by setting up the offense. It means putting the ball in Zion's hands and letting him initiate the action in half court sets. So Zion attacks the basket and plays off of what the other team does.
Brandon does the same thing. He gets the ball in his hands and either drives to the basket or tries to get to certain spots in the court for a mid range jumper.

Zion is clearly more effecient, even taking into account Brandon's higher assist numbers.

[As I See It]

It's a comprehension problem only in that you don't really understand what "Point Zion" is. Zion isn't running the team like a point guard by setting up the offense. It means putting the ball in Zion's hands and letting him initiate the action in half court sets. So Zion attacks the basket and plays off of what the other team does.
Brandon does the same thing. He gets the ball in his hands and either drives to the basket or tries to get to certain spots in the court for a mid range jumper.

Zion is clearly more effecient, even taking into account Brandon's higher assist numbers.

HUH?!?!? This is contradictory and just silly.

[Freyfamilyreuni]

HUH?!?!? This is contradictory and just silly.

Sigh. Let’s put it this way forget “point” and forget “iso” because neither Zion nor Brandon truly play a “point” position with the team. And both players often at least rely on screens from their teammates when they initiate the offense so it’s probably unfair to truly call it “iso” ball.

The issue is whether the offense is more effective when Brandon is forcing the action or whether Zion is forcing the action. And clearly the answer is Zion is the more effective than Brandon in this role. It’s really not up for debate.

Now if you’re arguing that we’re putting too much stress and energy on Zion by having him bring the ball up the court and initiate the action, that’s another issue. You may have an argument there. But so far he seems to be handling it just fine.

SVG probably decided to go to this strategy because we had way too many possession where Zion never touched the ball on the offense. And yes, many of those possession were Brandon completely controlling the ball throughout. When you have the most efficient offensive player in the league, you have to give him the ball.

[As I See It]

The issue is whether the offense is more effective when Brandon is forcing the action or whether Zion is forcing the action. And clearly the answer is Zion is the more effective than Brandon in this role. It’s really not up for debate.

The issue isn't Brandon vs. Zion at all. A valid point was made by Luckyman that the team was walking the ball up late in the game. I responded that the reason was a "By-Product of Point Zion". Frankly, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out.

As far as who is better in that role (Zion or BI) , my good friend, dae's, post proves that it is open to debate.

[heybigmatt]

Embiid can only score from all three levels, and does. Zion? Maybe one day.

SHAQ parked his butt on the blocks and posted up. That's a far different animal than ISO-ball.

Just because he ?can? isn?t operative. If he wants to only score in the post he can - and the same is true if he were a 0 percent shooter from every other place on the floor. His ability to score at the other levels in no way opens up his ability to score in the post. Those areas are independent of each other.

[As I See It]

Just because he ?can? isn?t operative. If he wants to only score in the post he can - and the same is true if he were a 0 percent shooter from every other place on the floor. His ability to score at the other levels in no way opens up his ability to score in the post. Those areas are independent of each other.

So a question please.

If you know a player can only really hurt you at the rim, wouldn't you forsake the rest of "his game" and build a defense to take the rim away from him?

That is precisely what the lowly Sacramento King Defense did yesterday in crunch time. ...and what all teams do in crunch time against us.

Remind me, how many leads have we squandered this year late in crunch time?

(Disclaimer: This is not a knock on Zion; rather, it's a knock on the philosophy.)

[heybigmatt]

So a question please.

If you know a player can only really hurt you at the rim, wouldn't you forsake the rest of "his game" and build a defense to take the rim away from him?

That is precisely what the lowly Sacramento King Defense did yesterday in crunch time. ...and what all teams do in crunch time against us.

Remind me, how many leads have we squandered this year late in crunch time?

(Disclaimer: This is not a knock on Zion; rather, it's a knock on the philosophy.)

I don't know why you are quoting me, because I was simply answer Mac's question about a consistent high tier closer that can only score at one level. I answered Embiid and Shaq.

To specifically answer your question, yes if a player can only score at the rim, you try and take that away. How do you take that away, by putting more bodies at the rim. How do you stop teams from putting all their players at the rim? Get other players who shoot well from 3. Right now we do not have that. MJ relied on Kerr and Paxson to win games.

[Pelicanidae]

Also worth noting, Mac said that if you think Zion can get it done only at the rim you have to believe he is an outlier of all outliers for that to be a realistic path to a title.

The reality is that if you inspect any of the statistics, he does appear to be precisely that level of outlier.

There are two players in NBA history who have ever posted the scoring volume Zion has posted this year, on the efficiency Zion has posted this year. Two.

One is Zion (2020-21), the other is Steph Curry, who did it in 2015-16, 2017-18, and this year.

Nobody else has even really come particularly close. The closest anyone else comes is Adrian Dantley in '83-'84, and he was averaging almost 3 points per 100 fewer and still not meeting Zion and Steph's efficiency.

Here's a chart from Seth Partnow, writer for the Athletic and ex-head of analytics for the Milwaukee Bucks showing how truly outlier Zion's scoring is.

I don’t think I’ll ever get tired of figuring out ways to illustrate Zion’s absurdity. pic.twitter.com/L6eL2axqNT

— Anchorage Man (@SethPartnow) April 12, 2021

Nobody at least in the last decade and a half has come anywhere even in the vague vicinity of Zion's rim pressure, and this is without taking his offensive rebounding into account; he gets his own and puts it back more than once per game, which drives up the practical efficiency a touch higher.

Of course, it's only been one season and we need to see it in the playoffs and we need to see it in a normal year that isn't so weird, but the reality is that if you think Zion might be that outlier of all outliers, the data thus far is on your side

[As I See It]

I don't know why you are quoting me, because I was simply answer Mac's question about a consistent high tier closer that can only score at one level. I answered Embiid and Shaq.

To specifically answer your question, yes if a player can only score at the rim, you try and take that away. How do you take that away, by putting more bodies at the rim. How do you stop teams from putting all their players at the rim? Get other players who shoot well from 3. Right now we do not have that. MJ relied on Kerr and Paxson to win games.

Only because you quoted me.

I agree with every word of your last paragraph.

That's why Point Zion is a bad idea in crunch time. All of our players have to get engaged, and Zion should be working off of them rather than the other players working off of Zion. Putting the rock in Zion's hands 25 feet from the basket actually limits his ability to be a finisher. I remember seeing an article one time that said about 60%+ of Zion's points are assisted (more if you you factor in the FT's that would have been assisted FG's had he not been fouled). Why limit him in crunch time? Unfortunately, the pace, when in 'Point Zion' mode, comes to a screeching halt and it becomes impossible for Zion to play off his teammates. If we had a Steve Kerr, John Paxson, Duncan Robinson, or Bogdan Bogdanovic I might feel differently, but we don't.

Bottom Line: We dare opponents to cash in on threes and get murdered by it. Opponent dare us to cash in on threes in crunch time and we mis-fire time, after time, after time.

[MichaelMcNamara]

I don't know why you are quoting me, because I was simply answer Mac's question about a consistent high tier closer that can only score at one level. I answered Embiid and Shaq.

To specifically answer your question, yes if a player can only score at the rim, you try and take that away. How do you take that away, by putting more bodies at the rim. How do you stop teams from putting all their players at the rim? Get other players who shoot well from 3. Right now we do not have that. MJ relied on Kerr and Paxson to win games.

But neither Shaq or Embiid have shown themselves yo be high quality closers. Shaq needed Kobe and Wade to have that role and Embiid will consistently get beat in playoff series until he gets a closer too.

Its not knocking a guy when you are talking the best of the best. Giannis isnt a scrub when he gets to the playoffs, he just loses to a Kawhi or a Butler. This year, Durant.

History says you need a 3 level scorer. I can give a few examples of guys who were only two. But in the last 30-40 years, cant give an example of a guy who was only 1

[Erose]

Ingram isnt a better iso option, but he has the ability to threaten the defense from all 3 levels. I have asked this for months, and will continue to ask -- Can anybody name a reliable, top level closer who could only score from one level?

Now, if people believe Zion will eventually develop a solid iso mid range game, that might one day evolve into an off the dribble 3 point threat as well, then that is one thing. But to argue he can be a reliable closer now would be to argue he is an outlier of all outliers.

More and more each day Zion is showing that he that outlier. If no one can stop you from getting to the rim, why do anything else?

That being said, I do not think Zion at this time is a ?closer?, or do I think BI is one either. A closer is something this team has missed since Chris Paul was traded.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[MichaelMcNamara]

Because nobody can stop Giannis either. And then they suddenly do in the playoffs. And does he stink? No, its just another guy is slightly better

Again, this is an issue with discourse. We have to clarify EXACTLY what we are saying. I am talking about Zion being the guy who leads his team to 4 playoff series wins one day. My point is that the guy who does that is always a multi level scorer and creator. He isnt getting his buckets at the rim in those levels of games.

[new city champ]

Sure, any one-trick-pony offense can be countered with concerted effort and detailed planning over a 7-game series. Which is why you need failsafes built in. Zion’s trick is a very potent one, but he will need to develop counters, expand his range and tighten up his ball handling and passing. I have every confidence he can do those things.

So to will the team need to surround him with better shooting as his massive gravitational pull sucks defenders into the paint. The images of Cavs defenders the other night literally turning their backs on Bledsoe, Lewis and other Pels spacers as they tried to keep Zion from penetrating the lane was comical.

And Zion will need help from alternate ball handlers who allow him to move off ball for stretches to force defenses to change and adapt and account for him moving freely in space.

The great thing is it is now apparent that Zion can threaten opponents from multiple platforms and last time I checked you really can’t just have bunch of guys stand around in front of the rim to stop him. If he can stay healthy and take his conditioning up a strake or two he is absolutely a player you can build a contender around.

[heybigmatt]

Because nobody can stop Giannis either. And then they suddenly do in the playoffs. And does he stink? No, its just another guy is slightly better

Again, this is an issue with discourse. We have to clarify EXACTLY what we are saying. I am talking about Zion being the guy who leads his team to 4 playoff series wins one day. My point is that the guy who does that is always a multi level scorer and creator. He isnt getting his buckets at the rim in those levels of games.

I disagree with your assessment of Shaq. He dominated in the playoffs. Sure he had Kobe, but that doesn?t mean he still did not dominate. I think his playoff numbers are some of the greatest ever.

Embiid, if he cared and wanted to could do the same as Shaq. And he would hit his free throws.

The fact that I can only think of two guys, proves your point. But the only ones you are going to find are centers. Kareem, Wilt, Olajuwon. Two level guys - Malone, Robinson, Ewing, Duncan, etc.

[MichaelMcNamara]

Again....closer. Two minutes left, down 1. Who gets the ball there and outperforms the opponents alpha?

[AusPel]

I disagree with your assessment of Shaq. He dominated in the playoffs. Sure he had Kobe, but that doesn?t mean he still did not dominate. I think his playoff numbers are some of the greatest ever.

Embiid, if he cared and wanted to could do the same as Shaq. And he would hit his free throws.

The fact that I can only think of two guys, proves your point. But the only ones you are going to find are centers. Kareem, Wilt, Olajuwon. Two level guys - Malone, Robinson, Ewing, Duncan, etc.

Embiid has nowhere near the dominance of Shaq

Put some respek on the man's name