Update on AD Staying Rumours

[GuardianAngel25]

All I mean is it seems like an over reach to try and downplay his shooting. All indications are that he is a good shooter in college and has the potential for even more improvement in the NBA based on his already good foundation. Comparing his shooting to guys who have had years and years of NBA coaching and training isn't a good comparison. I think it's fair to say in the college ranks he's good and over 80% from the ft line should probably be considered great in college.

Yea I agree. You can nit pick and pull stats from any player to compare with another and make one look bad. Seems to happen quite often to pull any stat out of a hat that fits certain arguments while ignoring the same things for another player. I’m not the biggest Ja fan but pointing to his FT at 81% and comparing that it’s slightly ahead or behind this or that guy as if it’s some indicator on his success is ridiculous. He has the potential to turn into an elite scoring guard and I could honestly care less if he’s an elite scoring guard that shoots 80% from the FT line. His defense is the main question but he has the tools to turn into a decent defender. At just 19 y/o we really have people using he only shoots 81% instead of 85% and 36% instead of 39%.. give me a break!

[Pelicanidae]

Yea I agree. You can nit pick and pull stats from any player to compare with another and make one look bad. Seems to happen quite often to pull any stat out of a hat that fits certain arguments while ignoring the same things for another player. I’m not the biggest Ja fan but pointing to his FT at 81% and comparing that it’s slightly ahead or behind this or that guy as if it’s some indicator on his success is ridiculous. He has the potential to turn into an elite scoring guard and I could honestly care less if he’s an elite scoring guard that shoots 80% from the FT line. His defense is the main question but he has the tools to turn into a decent defender. At just 19 y/o we really have people using he only shoots 81% instead of 85% and 36% instead of 39%.. give me a break!

Your break was given at multiple times in the original post.

I've happily conceded multiple times that I could easily be wrong, that he's still very young and could easily improve, that it's possible that he actually improved within the season this year alone, and that none of his stats are bad, just not great enough to be immediately thrilling.

But to know that, you'd have to have actually read my points instead of (as usual) reading half of the first sentence and then making up the rest as you go along.

[Pelicanidae]

Honestly, anyone would think that I said Morant was garbage who shouldn't even go in the first round, let alone top ten, and who sucks at everything.

[Mount Zion]

Honestly, anyone would think that I said Morant was garbage who shouldn't even go in the first round, let alone top ten, and who sucks at everything.

I don't think it's unreasonable to have doubts about any player in the draft, including Zion or Morant. Every players has holes in their game, but a team has to make the best determination they can to project how that player will perform in the NBA based on their prior performance. While I also have doubts about Morant's future defensive ceiling, I believe that he will thrive as a shooter and as elite distributor. From what I can tell, Morant is not a shoot first player, but elevates his offensive game when he is needed.

My ideal scenario is for the Pelicans to win the lottery (taking Zion), Sacramento gets #2 (which conveys to Boston) and Memphis drops to #9 (which conveys to Boston). Boston then trades Tatum, Brown, #2, #9, and #20 to the Pelicans for AD. New Orleans takes Morant, Jaxson Hayes and Bruno Fernando with the picks. Lots of attractive options for the two second rounders, including taking international players, current depth or trades. If that happened, I would run naked in the street.

[PELICANSFAN]

When I say only 80% from the stripe, what I mean is that that's not elite or anything, especially for a star guard. 81.3% from the stripe would have ranked 56th in the league this year. That's definitely good, but it's not in rarefied air or anything. It's right around the same spot as Wesley Matthews and Spencer Dinwiddie. Good, but not great. It's not even 2% better than AD, Embiid, or Valanciunas. That is to say, 81.3% would be fantastic if he was 6'11, but he's not, he's a PG and for a PG, 81.3% is dead set decent.

While i agree with you that he is no sure thing, I think you are cherry-picking stats to back up your position. You say his FT% is right around Matthews and Dinwiddie to support he is just average. Yet, you do not say that he is also right around Klay Thompson and Bradley Beal and that many in the group that shoot better are backups who do not shoot alot of FTs. Shooting FTs in the 80s is nothing to be concerned about. If he were shooting in the 60s, then it would be an issue.

[SmontySwilliams]

I don't think it's unreasonable to have doubts about any player in the draft, including Zion or Morant. Every players has holes in their game, but a team has to make the best determination they can to project how that player will perform in the NBA based on their prior performance. While I also have doubts about Morant's future defensive ceiling, I believe that he will thrive as a shooter and as elite distributor. From what I can tell, Morant is not a shoot first player, but elevates his offensive game when he is needed.

My ideal scenario is for the Pelicans to win the lottery (taking Zion), Sacramento gets #2 (which conveys to Boston) and Memphis drops to #9 (which conveys to Boston). Boston then trades Tatum, Brown, #2, #9, and #20 to the Pelicans for AD. New Orleans takes Morant, Jaxson Hayes and Bruno Fernando with the picks. Lots of attractive options for the two second rounders, including taking international players, current depth or trades. If that happened, I would run naked in the street.

I don't think there are enough animals left in the world to sacrifice for this to happen, but yeah I'm down.

[Tinman]

I don't think it's unreasonable to have doubts about any player in the draft, including Zion or Morant. Every players has holes in their game, but a team has to make the best determination they can to project how that player will perform in the NBA based on their prior performance. While I also have doubts about Morant's future defensive ceiling, I believe that he will thrive as a shooter and as elite distributor. From what I can tell, Morant is not a shoot first player, but elevates his offensive game when he is needed.

My ideal scenario is for the Pelicans to win the lottery (taking Zion), Sacramento gets #2 (which conveys to Boston) and Memphis drops to #9 (which conveys to Boston). Boston then trades Tatum, Brown, #2, #9, and #20 to the Pelicans for AD. New Orleans takes Morant, Jaxson Hayes and Bruno Fernando with the picks. Lots of attractive options for the two second rounders, including taking international players, current depth or trades. If that happened, I would run naked in the street.

Why would you want the 9th pk this year? Why would you not rather have the Mem/Bos. Unprotected in 2021? I don't follow!

[Pelicanidae]

While i agree with you that he is no sure thing, I think you are cherry-picking stats to back up your position. You say his FT% is right around Matthews and Dinwiddie to support he is just average. Yet, you do not say that he is also right around Klay Thompson and Bradley Beal and that many in the group that shoot better are backups who do not shoot alot of FTs. Shooting FTs in the 80s is nothing to be concerned about. If he were shooting in the 60s, then it would be an issue.

I mean, it's not like I said he was a garbage FT shooter. He's not. He's just decent, especially for a PG. Klay is also not a stellar FT shooter. Obviously he shoots brilliantly from three, so we don't need to see his FT %age to try and estimate an NBA 3pt performance. We don't have that for Morant, so you can only go on what the stats are, and the stats show that he's not a stellar FT shooter (though again, not dreadful or anything) and a mediocre-to-poor three point shooter at a college level. The NBA 3pt line is harder for various reasons.

It's totally possible he'll improve it and become a sniper, I don't deny it. But part of player evaluation at a college level is the vibe you get, and like I said in my original post, the vibes I get from him aren't great, and the stats we have thus far don't scream anything different at me.

[Mount Zion]

Why would you want the 9th pk this year? Why would you not rather have the Mem/Bos. Unprotected in 2021? I don't follow!

I would be fine with taking the unprotected 2021 pick, but I really like Hayes, so MY ideal is to get Hayes in this draft to play alongside Zion, Morant, Jrue and Tatum.

I know that all of that is never going to happen, but it's what I dream of prior to Tuesday's events. See me Tuesday and I will have a new dream.

[Mythrol]

I think that's where the divide is coming. You keep saying his stats aren't impressive but 24.5 pts, 10 asts, 5.7 rebs, on 50% shooting, 55% from 2, 36% from 3, and 81% from ft while averaging 9 fta a game and a 61% TS is really pretty impressive in college ball.

I don't take issue that you're not high on Morant. That's cool with me, I don't follow college ball enough to have favorites really. I do find the minimizing of stats a bit disingenuous though.

For example you are huge on Culver but if you look at his stats both are two year guys but there's not one single shooting statistic that Morant isn't higher than Culver. Morant beats him across the board. Actually from a quick glance it looks like the only statistic at all that Culver beats Morant in is rebounding. This isn't comparing a freshman to a sophomore either because both have played 2 seasons.

So you like Culver better, which is absolutely fine. You prefer the eye test on him. Cool. But bring up Culver's stats too if you're going to try and point out flaws in Morant's game due to his stats.

[Tinman]

I would be fine with taking the unprotected 2021 pick, but I really like Hayes, so MY ideal is to get Hayes in this draft to play alongside Zion, Morant, Jrue and Tatum.

I know that all of that is never going to happen, but it's what I dream of prior to Tuesday's events. See me Tuesday and I will have a new dream.

Hayes is a project. He's at best a 10-12 a game player this year. He's not ready to be rotational in the NBA yet. Offensive game is very limited and he is very unpolished.

[Eman5805]

Thing is, I like Culver a lot too. Love his game. I just worry if he's got enough smooth savvy to get to the basket in the NBA too. But whatever. There isn't a college player who didn't need to improve their game to succeed in the NBA. I just feel like Morant's work ethic will take him extra far in the NBA.

[Pelicanidae]

I think that's where the divide is coming. You keep saying his stats aren't impressive but 24.5 pts, 10 asts, 5.7 rebs, on 50% shooting, 55% from 2, 36% from 3, and 81% from ft while averaging 9 fta a game and a 61% TS is really pretty impressive in college ball.

I don't take issue that you're not high on Morant. That's cool with me, I don't follow college ball enough to have favorites really. I do find the minimizing of stats a bit disingenuous though.

For example you are huge on Culver but if you look at his stats both are two year guys but there's not one single shooting statistic that Morant isn't higher than Culver. Morant beats him across the board. Actually from a quick glance it looks like the only statistic at all that Culver beats Morant in is rebounding. This isn't comparing a freshman to a sophomore either because both have played 2 seasons.

So you like Culver better, which is absolutely fine. You prefer the eye test on him. Cool. But bring up Culver's stats too if you're going to try and point out flaws in Morant's game due to his stats.

The reason I was specific about the stats I was talking about is because those are the stats that were relavent to my point. You're right, when I was talking about how I think he'll be as a shooter in the NBA, I didn't point out his assist numbers. That's not cause I was dodging them: it's cause they're totally irrelevant to his shooting.

As a passer, I like him a lot. I don't see the absolute playmaking genius that a lot of people have talked about, but he is a very good passer. For me, the hype around Morant as a passer has been like the hype Lonzo Ball had as a passer when he was in college. People were saying Ball was the second coming of Magic Johnson, and that he'd be the best passer since Lebron when he entered the league. Was he? No. He's a perfectly good passer, but he's not a top five passer in the league or anything. That's the kind of thing I see from Morant as a playmaker: he'll be good, but not the stellar world-shaker that people seem to thing he will be. Again, could be wrong.

The difference is partially that Culver passes the eye test better: he just does. But it's also that he's also played 2 years, and in his first year he was actually a very good shooter from behind the line: he shot 38% on 4 attempts a game, and he did it fairly consistently over the season rather than just having a wild flurry at the end. Yes, he's been worse this year, and that's something to be concerned about, I don't deny it. He is actually a poor FT shooter (somewhere in the 67% area) and that's concerning too, but the difference is that Culver has a much more NBA ready body and when he drives I don't fear that he's going to get snapped in half. Culver plays with a patience and a confidence, a smoothness, that I think will translate better to the NBA than Morant's wild athleticism that lacks control when challenged.

[Mythrol]

Right see that's what I'm talking about where your use of stats seem disingenuous against Morant. You try and say "Morant wasn't consistent with his 3pt shot if you only count this section of the season he actually only shot 33% not 36%." Yet in the case of Culver you kind of just brush over the fact that he actually REGRESSED from his freshman to sophomore season shooting the 3pt shot. Not by a tiny margin either. It was an 8% drop. Yet instead of focusing on the current season you point to how he shot 38% his freshman year. To me the much more relevant stats are this season.

Again, it's not an argument from me about how dare you not like Morant as much as Culver. I've got no dog in this fight since I don't have a big preference. However the way you are using shooting statistics to try and minimize Morant while just glossing over them in regards to Culver is where my issue lies.

If you want to compare them purely on eye test, have fun. If you want to say you're not big on Morant due to his size or what you've watched in games, again, that's cool with me. But I don't think you can make a statical based argument to lower Morant without tearing down Culver even more because he simply is worse in basically every category. Like, nearly all of them outside of rebounding.

[Pelicanidae]

Right see that's what I'm talking about where your use of stats seem disingenuous against Morant. You try and say "Morant wasn't consistent with his 3pt shot if you only count this section of the season he actually only shot 33% not 36%." Yet in the case of Culver you kind of just brush over the fact that he actually REGRESSED from his freshman to sophomore season shooting the 3pt shot. Not by a tiny margin either. It was an 8% drop. Yet instead of focusing on the current season you point to how he shot 38% his freshman year. To me the much more relevant stats are this season.

Again, it's not an argument from me about how dare you not like Morant as much as Culver. I've got no dog in this fight since I don't have a big preference. However the way you are using shooting statistics to try and minimize Morant while just glossing over them in regards to Culver is where my issue lies.

If you want to compare them purely on eye test, have fun. If you want to say you're not big on Morant due to his size or what you've watched in games, again, that's cool with me. But I don't think you can make a statical based argument to lower Morant without tearing down Culver even more because he simply is worse in basically every category. Like, nearly all of them outside of rebounding.

I didn't brush over anything. I quite clearly admitted that Culver has been worse this year. No question about it. He has. He was downright bad this year from behind the arc.

The reason I'm not going on about it is pretty simple: everyone knows and admits that. Talk to basically anyone about Culver and they'll tell you that he regressed in his shooting this year and was bad from deep. It's a fairly common topic of conversation. By contrast, talk about Morant with basically anyone and they won't even mention his flaws. Look at the media reporting on Morant, it's just fawning adulation and praise every minute without much in the way of criticism. I've seem more genuine criticism of Zion than of Morant, and Zion is clearly the better player with far fewer big faults, but for some reason Morant just got popular enough to the point where everyone agrees he's a lock for #2 in the draft, but not quite popular enough for anyone to bother discussing the issues in his game.

Edit: maybe I should be rephrase my original post that got criticised. When I said ''I don't want Morant'', what I should have said is ''I don't want Morant with the #2 pick.'' If we pick 4th and he's still on the board by some miracle, then I'd be pretty damn happy to take him. Depending on the day, I might even be happy taking him 3rd over Barrett. But I feel like if we get the #2 pick then we'll just draft Morant because it's already been decided by popular consensus that Morant is the #2 pick, and we'll just ride the wave.

[Mythrol]

I didn't brush over anything. I quite clearly admitted that Culver has been worse this year. No question about it. He has. He was downright bad this year from behind the arc.

The reason I'm not going on about it is pretty simple: everyone knows and admits that. Talk to basically anyone about Culver and they'll tell you that he regressed in his shooting this year and was bad from deep. It's a fairly common topic of conversation. By contrast, talk about Morant with basically anyone and they won't even mention his flaws. Look at the media reporting on Morant, it's just fawning adulation and praise every minute without much in the way of criticism. I've seem more genuine criticism of Zion than of Morant, and Zion is clearly the better player with far fewer big faults, but for some reason Morant just got popular enough to the point where everyone agrees he's a lock for #2 in the draft, but not quite popular enough for anyone to bother discussing the issues in his game.

I think we can both admit when you try and claim "If you only look at this subsection of the entire season Morant actually only shot 33% for 3." while in the next post saying, "Yes Culver shot worse this season but look how good he did his rookie year on 4 attempts a game."

It shows an at the least unintentional bias towards a player you prefer. For example, if I were to say, "If we only look at the games played this year from Culver he attempted 119 3pt shots and only made 30 for a 25.2%. This shows him to be much streaker than even Morant and if not for his hot start to the season from 3 he'd look a lot worse." I could say something like that, because those are Culver's actual numbers. There might even be merit to the argument because Morant showed improvement over the course of the season while Culver just continued and worsened his decline as the season went on.

However I don't think it'd be fair to try and nitpick stats when discussing shooting as players go through cycles.

As far as the rest of your statements, I don't know. I don't pay any attention to talking heads or listen to any pre-draft talk... At all. So I wouldn't know what the media is or isn't doing. I can only base my statements off of what I am seeing and interacting with here which is why I chose to post about the way you used statistics with Morant.

[Pelicanidae]

I think we can both admit when you try and claim "If you only look at this subsection of the entire season Morant actually only shot 33% for 3." while in the next post saying, "Yes Culver shot worse this season but look how good he did his rookie year on 4 attempts a game."

It shows an at the least unintentional bias towards a player you prefer. For example, if I were to say, "If we only look at the games played this year from Culver he attempted 119 3pt shots and only made 30 for a 25.2%. This shows him to be much streaker than even Morant and if not for his hot start to the season from 3 he'd look a lot worse." I could say something like that, because those are Culver's actual numbers. There might even be merit to the argument because Morant showed improvement over the course of the season while Culver just continued and worsened his decline as the season went on.

However I don't think it'd be fair to try and nitpick stats when discussing shooting as players go through cycles.

As far as the rest of your statements, I don't know. I don't pay any attention to talking heads or listen to any pre-draft talk... At all. So I wouldn't know what the media is or isn't doing. I can only base my statements off of what I am seeing and interacting with here which is why I chose to post about the way you used statistics with Morant.

That's fair enough. I don't actively try to have bias, but I think that it's inevitable for pretty much everyone, so there definitely could be an element of subconscious bias going on. I think that's why I've been so careful to wrap everything I've said in the shell of admitting that I could easily be wrong, cause I'm not concrete on any of this.

But yeah, that's kind of my intention. Not trying to just bash Morant for no reason, but just to start the discussion up because he's gotten away with very little criticism and if you're projected to go #2 then I think it's kind of silly to pretend there's nothing even questionable there. Not saying that you were doing that, by the way, just the general aura of the discussion surrounding Morant.

[Tinman]

That's fair enough. I don't actively try to have bias, but I think that it's inevitable for pretty much everyone, so there definitely could be an element of subconscious bias going on. I think that's why I've been so careful to wrap everything I've said in the shell of admitting that I could easily be wrong, cause I'm not concrete on any of this.

But yeah, that's kind of my intention. Not trying to just bash Morant for no reason, but just to start the discussion up because he's gotten away with very little criticism and if you're projected to go #2 then I think it's kind of silly to pretend there's nothing even questionable there. Not saying that you were doing that, by the way, just the general aura of the discussion surrounding Morant.

All I know is-->. F I'm looking for a Pg, I'm taking Morant 1st If I'm looking for a wing, I'm taking Culver 1st .That is, of course not counting Zion.
Continue!

[Mythrol]

That's fair enough. I don't actively try to have bias, but I think that it's inevitable for pretty much everyone, so there definitely could be an element of subconscious bias going on. I think that's why I've been so careful to wrap everything I've said in the shell of admitting that I could easily be wrong, cause I'm not concrete on any of this.

But yeah, that's kind of my intention. Not trying to just bash Morant for no reason, but just to start the discussion up because he's gotten away with very little criticism and if you're projected to go #2 then I think it's kind of silly to pretend there's nothing even questionable there. Not saying that you were doing that, by the way, just the general aura of the discussion surrounding Morant.

I can understand why you might want to do that with Morant especially if you like Culver better and it seems Morant is just getting a free pass. I know you aren't saying I'm giving him one because I think I've been very clear for months now that college ball just isn't my thing so I don't have any guys I'm really into outside of maybe Zion for obvious reasons.

I personally find the hype of players overall more interesting than actually getting wrapped up in liking certain players over others keeps it fun for me no matter who we draft. I do like everyone's thoughts though on players because it gives me points to think about.

[Mount Zion]

Hayes is a project. He's at best a 10-12 a game player this year. He's not ready to be rotational in the NBA yet. Offensive game is very limited and he is very unpolished.

I suppose you want me to justify why I am so high on Hayes. Of course he is a project. I don't expect any 18-19 year old to step into the NBA and not need significant development. The difference between Hayes and so many others in that category is how high that projection can be. In college, he was already a nimble, rim protector who could be dominant defensively in the paint and was a strong finisher offensively. I don't care that he didn't shoot threes and outside shots, because he made his living with dunks, layups, hooks and putbacks. He is a kid who played at 220 as an 18 year old, but easily projects to a heavier player as he matures (his dad played around 260 in the NFL) and not a player that you are afraid will be fragile like Bol Bol.

I see him as a kid who can contribute as a defensive player who can play well offensively around the basket immediately while he expands his game on the offensive end over time. Give me a high energy player with projectable skills every time, especially if you are filling out a team with other guys who you will expect to take a lot of shots. In my scenario, Hayes wouldn't be expected to be one of the top offensive options, but I believe he would get his points as well. I just think when people look back on this draft, Hayes will have one of the better careers of this class. He might not be that guy out of the gate, but I think picking him would age well.

[Tinman]

I suppose you want me to justify why I am so high on Hayes. Of course he is a project. I don't expect any 18-19 year old to step into the NBA and not need significant development. The difference between Hayes and so many others in that category is how high that projection can be. In college, he was already a nimble, rim protector who could be dominant defensively in the paint and was a strong finisher offensively. I don't care that he didn't shoot threes and outside shots, because he made his living with dunks, layups, hooks and putbacks. He is a kid who played at 220 as an 18 year old, but easily projects to a heavier player as he matures (his dad played around 260 in the NFL) and not a player that you are afraid will be fragile like Bol Bol. I see him as a kid who can contribute as a defensive player who can play well offensively around the basket immediately while he expands his game on the offensive end over time. Give me a high energy player with projectable skills every time, especially if you are filling out a team with other guys who you will expect to take a lot of shots. In my scenario, Hayes wouldn't be expected to be one of the top offensive options, but I believe he would get his points as well. I just think when people look back on this draft, Hayes will have one of the better careers of this class. He might not be that guy out of the gate, but I think picking him would age well.

Whew that was long, especially since I never asked you to justify anything. You don't have to justify your opinion.
I don't agree with your opinion, but that's no need for justification .
I think a top 5-ish pick in 2021 is more valuable than any pick past the top 2 in this one. You Don't. That's cool.

[Mount Zion]

Whew that was long, especially since I never asked you to justify anything. You don't have to justify your opinion.
I don't agree with your opinion, but that's no need for justification .
I think a top 5-ish pick in 2021 is more valuable than any pick past the top 2 in this one. You Don't. That's cool.

Maybe the lack of paragraphs made it seem long, so I edited it.

Certainly a top 5-ish pick should be more valuable, but the Memphis pick could also turn out to be a mid-teens pick in 2021. If there is a player to be had now that the Pelicans like, I would rather take him now. The old bird in the hand thing.

[tthier2]

I hope like hell we get a top 3 pick minimum preferably 1

[DroopyDawg]

Knicks will shift focus to a deal for Anthony Davis if they get the No. 1 pick, per @ShamsCharania pic.twitter.com/Z0aSXonVXA

— Bleacher Report (@BleacherReport) May 14, 2019

[GuardianAngel25]

Knicks will shift focus to a deal for Anthony Davis if they get the No. 1 pick, per @ShamsCharania pic.twitter.com/Z0aSXonVXA

— Bleacher Report (@BleacherReport) May 14, 2019

Yea I just saw this and came here.. awesome!! Was a little worried they wouldn’t be as interested as some might have thought.. No guarantee but it’s nice to get some reassurance they want AD.