I didn?t say he was. In this era though, if he wanted to be as dominant as shaq, he could be. The skill and size are there.Originally Posted by AusPel
 |
| . |
|
I didn?t say he was. In this era though, if he wanted to be as dominant as shaq, he could be. The skill and size are there.
Like I said I don?t necessarily disagree with you, but if you are averaging 40 and 18 during an entire nba finals then I would say that the fact shaq was one dimensional wasn?t much of a factor. Shaq and a couple others are exceptions to the rule. It certainly doesn?t mean you are wrong.
I disagree completely. Embiid had to take and clank 17 mid range jumpers against us because he was too scared to attack Adams. That's his mindset
He isn't Shaq's big toenail
Last edited by AusPel; 04-14-2021 at 08:45 AM.
You are also talking about 20 years ago. Today, teams make more 3s in a quarter than they did in entire games back then.
You have anybody in the modern era who was the go to guy late and did all his scoring from one level?
And i agree that Embiid CAN do it but who are you going to bet on getting a good shot more times when each have 6 possessions in a tied game - Durant or Embiid
Again...its not CAN Zion do it. Its can he do it better than the other elite guys in the league in the final minutes of Game 6 when the whole defense is locked in as much as possible?
Modern history says that the hardest guy to stop in that situation is the one who can kill you from all 3 levels.
@mcnamara247
The reality has nothing to do with what number of levels of scoring you as an individual provide.
The reality is that regardless of how many levels you can score at, nobody in NBA history has ever one-manned a championship.
I am totally willing and happy to concede that Zion will not win a championship without other players on the roster who can force the defense to divide their attention to allow him advantages, and that this need will become more important in the playoffs when teams can gameplan more effectively.
I just don't think it's that big of a deal because the exact same thing is true of every player in NBA history.
Tell me the last time someone won a championship, even as a 3 level scorer, without a roster that was able to force defensive attention away from the ballhandler. Durant had Curry and Klay, Curry had Klay, Draymond, and Barnes, Lebron had AD (against a devastated Miami team which only had one guy due to injury), when Lebron was in Cleveland he had Kyrie and Love, when he was in Miami he had Wade and Bosh, Tim Duncan had Parker and Manu.
The closest anyone comes, maybe, is Dirk? But even then, while he didn't have a squad of absolute superstars surrounding him he did have a number of very competent players who played their roles extremely effectively.
The Giannis comparison is overblown to me; will teams attempt to ''build a wall'' on Zion the way they did on Giannis? Sure. Will it work as effectively? No, I don't think it will. Why do I think that?
1) Zion is already a better passer at age 20 than Giannis was at age 25; I see no reason to think that this will stagnate or go away, so assuming any progress at all Zion will be more equipped to handle it in terms of making the reads against that defense. Zion, in general, has better offensive awareness than Giannis imo (defense is a completely different situation)
2) Teams have already tried it, and it has failed miserably. We've played the Utah Jazz, where they've had the 2x rim-protecting DPOY on Zion and bolstered it with heavy help, and he's just shredded them. I think the fact that he's smaller than Giannis actually works to his advantage here, in that he can take advantage of smaller openings in the defense and his body control is at a higher level. We've played team after team that has gone with ''stick 4 guys in the paint'' on Zion and it just doesn't work on him. Do I think it might work better in the playoffs when players are allowed to get away with a little more shoving, and they can scheme in more nuanced ways? Probably, but I don't think it's this surefire ''Zion will get stopped'' mechanic that some people seem to think it is.
Historically, I've argued that Zion has the potential to become a reasonable shooting threat, which is something I still believe, and his improvements as a FT shooter as well as his success from deep (on a very very very small sample, admittedly; I am not trying to pretend he's doing something he isn't) makes me believe that to still be the case.
So what this boils down to is this: do I think Zion, scoring the way he does now, is good enough to build a championship roster around?
My Response is twofold.
1) It's absolutely wild that we're having this discussion and he's only 20, which shows you how quickly his offensive talent has skyrocketed him into these conversations. This isn't ''can he be an allstar'' or ''is he all NBA'', it's ''what do we need to make this kid a champion'', which is telling in the first place.
2) I think you can build a championship roster around this central scoring threat. The way that roster looks is fairly specific, which is why we want Zion to expand his game a bit - the more diverse his game, the more routes there are to building that roster, and therefore the easier it is to build that championship team, but I do think that roster exists and it's not some wild thing nobody can even imagine putting together. Much of this is bolstered by the fact that, as brilliant as Zion is on-ball (and he is all-time outlier great at what he does on ball), he's an excellent off-ball scorer as well and you don't need a HoF squad to take advantage of the leverage he creates off-ball as a threat, only a competent squad with a few key skills.
Basically, I think the concern over him being a one level scorer is massively overblown, and is based on a standard that applies to all NBA stars regardless of scoring diversity that is for some reason being focused particularly here when I don't think it has any extra applicability. Zion, as he is, won't win a chip on his own. Shock horror and surprise, because no player ever does, even the greatest names of all time.
Basketball.
All this said, i have been encouraged by Zion starting to take 1-2 mid range shots per game. He should be able to develop that. Had a nice little turnaround the other night too.
If he can get to Pierce level with his pull up game - where he can have one or two spots on the floor he can get to and hit at a high rate, it might be good enough as long as the roster is built correctly around him
Dont make a strawman Dae
Nobody is criticizing Zion because he cant win a title alone
This is all about how you construct the right roster. And my point is I dont construct it around "point Zion" and 4 shooters/defenders
You will need another high level creator with him who csn score on all 3 levels and potentially be the guy taking the last shots
THAT is the debate. You really gotta stop with the strawman stuff
You're saying this:
And I'm saying:You will need another high level creator with him who csn score on all 3 levels and potentially be the guy taking the last shots
The simple fact is that you're saying that because Zion is effectively a one-area scorer (in the paint/at the rim) there needs to be some one else who will score on all three levels and that person may have to be the ''clutch option'' (for lack of a better term). You do say that he would ''potentially'' be the guy taking the last shots in that particular line, but elsewhere you make it clear that you don't actually think there's any 'potential' about it:I am totally willing and happy to concede that Zion will not win a championship without other players on the roster who can force the defense to divide their attention to allow him advantages, and that this need will become more important in the playoffs when teams can gameplan more effectively.
I just don't think it's that big of a deal because the exact same thing is true of every player in NBA history.
That doesn't sound like an ambiguous ''well, it could be Zion or it could be someone else!'' argument, does it? It sounds very clearly like a ''it will have to be the other guy because Zion's skillset can't get it done'' position. You pre-load the concessions by saying things like ''potentially'' but then proceed to argue as though you mean ''definitely'', so I'm treating your position the way you're treating it, rather than the way you're presenting it.You have anybody in the modern era who was the go to guy late and did all his scoring from one level?
I'm saying that I don't believe that to necessarily be the case. Yes, you need other threats who can score from other areas - which is true for all players, ever - but they don't need to be all concentrated in Another One Guy, and even if they did the fact that they're providing that other offensive threat doesn't necessarily mean that they should be the person taking the clutch shots either in a plurality of instances.
What if, rather than the other guy taking the clutch shots, he's providing a tangible threat which forces the defense to split the attention that allows Zion to make the clutch shot?
Of course in reality, nobody actually cares who takes the final shot in a clutch situation, what you want is the best shot possible. If that means using Zion as the decoy and having someone else actually take the shot then who cares, but to begin the conversation with the premise that there will need to be a single other guy to do the clutch stuff is just kind of ridiculous.
I dont think he will be a closer. Hence why i would build the roster a slightly different way than most. But i dont think that is hating on the guy. Shaq won Finals MVP all 3 years but Kobe had to have the ball late in those games. And thata fine.
I just want to be real about what he might not be able to do ao you can build accordingly
Bottom Line: MJ. Bird, Kobe, KD and even Giannis could beat you more ways than current day Zion can. To deny this is to deny fact.
...and it becomes more apparent at playoff time.
(Disclaimer: This is not a knock on Zion; he will go down as an NBA great.)
Last edited by As I See It; 04-14-2021 at 12:18 PM.
I think you are agreeing with me. His mindset holds him back. Not his ability. All I?m saying is he has the ability - physical - to be a one level scorer and score at will- like shaq. We are agreeing.
I don't understand why Zion or Shaq wouldn't be trusted in a scenario like that. You're mentioning all this intangible abstract stuff like "outperforming the opponents alpha" but what does that actually mean in technical terms? What's preventing them from doing what they do for an entire game but in the final two minutes? It just seems like your reasoning is based on a philosophical idea of how the game works rather than a material one, and I don't see the sense in engineering your argument on those grounds.
Think we have to give him time and see how he develops before pigeon hole-ing him. What was Giannis at this point in his career?
You are comparing Embiid to one of the greatest scorers in NBA history. I think the comparison alone proves the point.
If Zion even sniffs the level of closer of Lebron or Durant then we should be fine. No doubt it will be more difficult for him because he is a one level scorer.
I agree completely with your last sentence.
I agree with your last sentence.
When Giannis was 20 he was averaging 13/6/2 on 55%TS, had a BPM of +0, an AST% lower than his TOV% (his AST% was more than 6% lower than Zion's is and his TOV% was 4.6% worse), and a +0.55 LEBRON rating.
Zion is 20, he's averaging 27/7/4 on 66%TS with a BPM of +5.6, and a LEBRON of +3.55
I also don't actually believe that present day Giannis is a more versatile passer or scorer than Zion. I absolutely agree that guys like KD and MJ and Bird, in their primes, were more versatile scorers than Zion (and in Bird's case, unquestionably a more versatile passer as well, though the style of passing is very different today than the mid-80s) but I don't think that's just a given for Giannis.
Zion is lightyears ahead of where Giannis was at the same age, which should surprise nobody because Giannis was pretty raw and physically underdeveloped when he got to the league, and also Zion is lightyears ahead of most players offensively regardless of age or experience.
Hence the way I framed my comment ("current day Zion"). I am very careful with my words in this forum as I know any criticism (true or otherwise) of Zion is intolerable.
(Disclaimer: This is not a knock on Zion; he will go down as a NBA great.)
Last edited by As I See It; 04-14-2021 at 12:56 PM.
I think developing that baseline jumper he has shown will be huge for Zion. Obviously as a slasher, if he can?t go route 1, he is often forced into that area near the baseline. Having a bit of touch in that area will serve him well as it gives him a backup plan just in case. It?s a good shot to add to his game
Man... I'd have to see how Zion perform in the playoffs, before I can make any assumptions about Game 6 Zion. We saw a lot of good players have struggling playoff resumes.
KAT
Kevin Garnett
Chris Paul
Paul George
Russell Westbrook
And plenty others... They where still given a fair shake to do it without doubt and some got better over time.
And he's already showing the form and touch to hit it which is great, great signs this early
Contributor
It’s hard for me to imagine taking the ball out of Zion’s hands late by choice unless the other guy is top 5 scorer in league level. Talking about Lillard, Curry, and Beal or even a tier below them like Mitchell, Kawhi, or Booker
I think even at the end of the day. You don't want to run a 4th QTR system exclusively of just Point Zion. If Ingram can keep improving and hopefully develop Kira into an All Star. I think a 3 headed monster at facilitating in the 4th is pretty valueble and almost required when sizing up an elite opponent and give yourself leverage to be flexible.
But you are comparing all-time stars with the benefit of their lengthy careers to Zion in current day form, thus the comment.
Then who would you compare him to...his contemporaries?
If so, I think Zion is be a better closer right now than RJ Barrett, Darius Garland, and Cam Reddish. I reserve judgement on Ja Morant.
I don't think that this is the basis of the current conversation. I might be wrong, but I don't think so.
(Disclaimer: This is not a knock on Zion; he will go down as a NBA great.)
Last edited by As I See It; 04-14-2021 at 01:14 PM.
I think that there also has to be a distinction made between a player having a struggle in the post-season and a team having a struggle in the post-season.
A lot of the time players are actually good-to-great in the postseason but their team loses for some reason, and people hold this against the player when in reality they did everything that could reasonably be asked of them and the failure was entirely out of their hands. You could call this the Lebron Finals Problem, if you like; Lebron gets clowned a lot for having a losing finals record overall but how many of those finals losses were actually his fault? Arguably only one of them, I would say.
Similarly, MJ got bounced in the first round a bunch of times. How many of those were his failure, versus just not having a good enough team situation at the time? Did MJ ''struggle'' in the post-season in his first 3 or 4 seasons? If so, was he struggling, or was he forced to struggle by a team that wasn't good enough to support him?
That's an interesting question that doesn't often get discussed when talking about players being ''playoff failures''.
That’s a very good piece. It's why I was pretty careful of picking certain players as examples. It's kind of why I wanted us to not be good for at least one more year to get a crack at drafting another elite player to grow with Zion. After getting done in by poor roster building with Chris Paul and AD. I'm always super concerned with roster building. At some point... There is a point of no return or going full rebuild in their prime. Then, these players want to jump ship and it's really heartbreaking to have to experience this twice in ten years.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote