| . |
 |
What is irrational is to look at a stat sheet and make a declaration that a guy is a stud. That ignores his BBIQ, his lack of defense and his terrible shot selection. Many claim he is a great shooter when he is not. He can be a pretty good bench player, but to claim he is some stud is off base. His best value right now is his low cost controlled contract. He has stuffed a stat sheet on a terrible team.Originally Posted by msusousaphone
Ball has two more seasons on his rookie deal. If we're in the playoffs and he's our starting point guard during that time, we've won the deal. If teams have to resort to "hack-a-Lonzo", that means we're leading or in a competitive series. It also means we get to the bonus faster.
Three PGs are going to get drafted in the lottery this year. Depending on who you trust, there are as many as 7 PGs projected in the lottery for next year. If Ball is as limited after the next 2 years as some expect, his next contract will average less than $10-12m. He'll get a Van Vleet or Smart type deal, and for what he does well, that would be a good deal. If he improves... that's a good problem to have.
This is exactly my point! If it's "bias", then show me where I'm wrong. Kuzma scores a lot on a bad team. He isn't efficient. He's a 30% three point shooter. He shoots 60% from the FT line. He doesn't really rebound that well for a 6'9 guy. His VORP, PER, BPM, Net Rating, and WS/48 are all below average at best and terrible in some places. He doesn't play D, and he's not a smart offensive player off ball.
Yet because he averaged like 18 points this year, we're supposed to ignore all of that and if we point it out, we're showing our "bias".
If any of that is wrong, show where it's wrong. But just sticking your fingers in your ears and claiming bias to dismiss all criticism is kind of lame.
Basketball.
Your most recent hyperboles have been "trash" and "hot garbage". The onus isn't on proving him to be "high level", it's simply in showing the ridiculousness of your claims. I have used the verbiage "stud" and "can't deny his game". Those don't equate to very high level. Just good.
Every time we discuss it, the people who hate the Lakers players get more and more ludicrously away from reality. When you began your stance on even ground, it was probably rational. Now it's ballooned to a point it just doesn't fit the real world.
Tell me what he's good at. Just saying "oh he's a stud" doesn't MEAN anything.
Is he good at shooting? No. Is he a very good passer? No. Does he rebound well? Not really. Is he a Harden-esque free throw machine? No. Is he a killer cutter? No. Does he play strong defense? No.
What does he do? Stop with "he's a stud" and "can't deny his game". What IS his game that I'm apparently denying? What is it that he is good enough at for you to see him as a viable, large piece in an AD trade?
If teams play hack a Lonzo we lose. His FT shooting is worse than Shaq’s.
If you Jimmer it, they will come.
Lonzo- 41% free throw shooter
Kuzma - 60% free throw shooter
Zion - 60% free throw shooter
Ingram - 67% free throw shooter.
Having these guys as the major focuses of our team is asking to lose games on the free throw line. Obviously there can be some improvement, especially for Zion who has never played in the NBA as of this point, but generally FT shooting is pretty consistent.
Cause Shaq loss a lot...
Lonzo shoots more like Andre Drummond (Drummond's first four years: 38%, Lonzo: 41%)
And Drummond's done a lot of losing. Guess which one Lonzo's career win rate looks more like right now?
Lonzo isn’t in the same stratosphere as Shaq. Lonzo would be a major liability in certain games.
Tbf I still love Drummond. But he is certainly a liability in many situations.
To go further of your point, looking at his stats considering both his nba and college averages Kuzma is a 15-20 point guy, shoots about 30% from 3, about 45% FG, 2-3 assists a game, and about a 70% FT shooter. These are average stats of many many many players in the league we can pick up at any time in free agency now or in the future for a decent price. If the focus of anyone's trade is Kumza you really have to look at the big picture.
It's impressive that you're trying to argue that Ball's lack of ability to make a free throw is an advantage for the Pelicans.
It’s a bold move for sure.
Having 4 guys who all shoot below 68% from the free throw line will be hard to watch in the crunch.
The mental gymnastics are astounding.
Man, not a dang one of those guys is a shooter either (well Ingram is), so that kills spacing.
I also think Drummond has some value. He does still shoot a very high percentage from the floor, he's still a fantastic rebounder on both ends, he's actually a better defender than most people give him credit for, and he's expanded his range from ''only at the rim'' to ''he can make a little 8 foot shot'' which isn't great but is at least something.
Definitely a liability though, sometimes. 23 missed FTs in a single game is painful.
Ingram is a career 32% three point shooter. He isn't a shooter, by any means. He sometimes gets hot, like a lot of players do, but he is no sniper or floor spacer.
It is obvious the lack of shooting on Lakers have been their downfall. We should stay away.
If Zion needs shooters around him, you don’t go and trade AD for guys who aren’t shooters or else Zion will not reach his potential.
I couldn't agree more
What is interesting is the Lakers had a -1.7 point differential to end the season. Some rough math shows their starting line up averaged in the low to mid 60s in free throw %. Few more made free throws wouldnt of hurt them unless you account for them not making the playoffs and winning a lottery ball.
https://syndication.bleacherreport.c...ffers.amp.html
More i think about it. It really a 2 man race with the Knicks and Celtics.
Knick is a long term conservative build
Celtics is an aggressive win culture change. Not a win now mindset.
Laker is throwing **** at the wall and seeing if it sticks build.
Did a little more research on the season's free throw rankings. The lakers finished 2nd to last with a 69.9% free throw percentage. The worse team was miami with 69.5%. The best team was San Antonio 81.4%, Toronto with 80.9%, and Golden State with 80.7%. Our home town heros finshed with 76.1%.
So what you're telling me is that, and correct me if I'm wrong here...
Good teams hit their free throws? Is that what you're saying?
I mean, it sounds intuitive, but I got told earlier that missing free throws was a good thing.
There are currently 35 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 35 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote