|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Who you got after Fultz? |
| Lonzo Ball |
|
75% |
[ 315 ] |
| Josh Jackson |
|
15% |
[ 64 ] |
| Jayson Tatum |
|
1% |
[ 8 ] |
| De'Aaron Fox |
|
4% |
[ 20 ] |
| Malik Monk |
|
1% |
[ 5 ] |
| Jonathan Isaac |
|
0% |
[ 4 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 416 |
|
| Author |
Message |
44TheLogo
Star Player
Joined: 21 Feb 2009
Posts: 6364
|
 Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 1:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| pjiddy wrote: | | 44TheLogo wrote: | | Isn't the point of an internet forum to discuss things and offer opinions? |
As I said: give your opinion. But what's the use of bullying someone who has your #2 as his #3, etc? Let's say you even succeeded at convincing him to align with yours. Now what? Are we forming a consensus to forward to Magic? |
OK i agree with not bullying. but conversation should be encouraged.
_________________
substance over style |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
LakerSD
Franchise Player
Joined: 10 Nov 2016
Posts: 23778
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 1:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| AC Green's V-Card wrote: | | I gotta say, with all the great analysis on this thread, I'm going to be ecstatic if we keep our pick because we're going to add a great player to an already promising young core. Whether it's Fultz, Ball, Jackson, Tatum, Monk, or (insert your favorite player), we're going to have the pieces in place to start attracting free agents in off-seasons to come. I have no doubt our scouting department will make the right choice for us moving forward. The future is very bright. Let's just hope the ping pong balls bounce our way. |
Let's hope that's the case. I am excited about adding one of these top players should we hold on to the pick. Get the lakers closer to competing for a playoff spot and building towards a very bright future.
Although what I could see happening is the trashing of Ingram vs. Russell vs. the new rookie depending on #agenda  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
44TheLogo
Star Player
Joined: 21 Feb 2009
Posts: 6364
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 1:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BynumForThree wrote: | | 44TheLogo wrote: | | GoldenThroat wrote: | If we can take a step back from bashing each other over the head for a moment to advocate our favorite prospects, I just want to take a moment to appreciate that we're going to get a pretty damn good player if we keep our pick. I would have taken each of the Fultz, Ball, Jackson trio either first or second last year.
I'm two games into Tatum footage and he's pretty skilled as well, although my initial impressions are that he's behind those 3. Still open to changing my mind though. |
Maybe I'm outta my mind but I SWEAR that Monk belongs in that top 3 convo |
I don't have a super-strong opinion on Monk, but I don't think I see an All-Star in him. I do think he could be a 18+ppg guy, whether that's as a super-6th type or as a starting SG on team like Philly which desperately needs perimeter offense. He's obviously small as a SG, and will probably never be a great defender or stat-sheet stuffer.
Some sites have him pegged as a possible PG, but I don't know, when he's in create mode, he's looking to score. Plus he definitely has more of a 2-guard handle than a PG handle, but he just turned 19 so I'm not going to write him off there. Guys like Lou and Monta were PGs back in the day and had the handle (but Monk's J is much further along at the same age). Functionally speaking, if he pans out, I see him more like a skinny/lite version of Eric Gordon. |
Monk is very, very similar to DLo as a prospect and I think had he been on a team without Fox and played the 1 he'd be much more highly regarded by a lot of draft aficionados. As it is he's being used off ball exclusively, and kentucky runs a ton of stuff that teams used to run for iverson for monk. but put monk in PNR as the pnr ballhandler and he makes some really electrifying passes.
_________________
substance over style |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BigGameHames
Star Player
Joined: 24 May 2015
Posts: 7982
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 1:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BynumForThree wrote: | | 44TheLogo wrote: | | GoldenThroat wrote: | If we can take a step back from bashing each other over the head for a moment to advocate our favorite prospects, I just want to take a moment to appreciate that we're going to get a pretty damn good player if we keep our pick. I would have taken each of the Fultz, Ball, Jackson trio either first or second last year.
I'm two games into Tatum footage and he's pretty skilled as well, although my initial impressions are that he's behind those 3. Still open to changing my mind though. |
Maybe I'm outta my mind but I SWEAR that Monk belongs in that top 3 convo |
I don't have a super-strong opinion on Monk, but I don't think I see an All-Star in him. I do think he could be a 18+ppg guy, whether that's as a super-6th type or as a starting SG on team like Philly which desperately needs perimeter offense. He's obviously small as a SG, and will probably never be a great defender or stat-sheet stuffer.
Some sites have him pegged as a possible PG, but I don't know, when he's in create mode, he's looking to score. Plus he definitely has more of a 2-guard handle than a PG handle, but he just turned 19 so I'm not going to write him off there. Guys like Lou and Monta were PGs back in the day and had the handle (but Monk's J is much further along at the same age). Functionally speaking, if he pans out, I see him more like a skinny/lite version of Eric Gordon. |
The Sixers getting #1 and our pick dropping to 4th or 5th is a scary idea. They get Fultz and Monk to defend the one and 2 spots but play wings on offense with Simmons at PG and Saric/Embiid front court. I'll never forgive Adam Silver if he always something like that to happen. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
44TheLogo
Star Player
Joined: 21 Feb 2009
Posts: 6364
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 1:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BigGameHames wrote: | | BynumForThree wrote: | | 44TheLogo wrote: | | GoldenThroat wrote: | If we can take a step back from bashing each other over the head for a moment to advocate our favorite prospects, I just want to take a moment to appreciate that we're going to get a pretty damn good player if we keep our pick. I would have taken each of the Fultz, Ball, Jackson trio either first or second last year.
I'm two games into Tatum footage and he's pretty skilled as well, although my initial impressions are that he's behind those 3. Still open to changing my mind though. |
Maybe I'm outta my mind but I SWEAR that Monk belongs in that top 3 convo |
I don't have a super-strong opinion on Monk, but I don't think I see an All-Star in him. I do think he could be a 18+ppg guy, whether that's as a super-6th type or as a starting SG on team like Philly which desperately needs perimeter offense. He's obviously small as a SG, and will probably never be a great defender or stat-sheet stuffer.
Some sites have him pegged as a possible PG, but I don't know, when he's in create mode, he's looking to score. Plus he definitely has more of a 2-guard handle than a PG handle, but he just turned 19 so I'm not going to write him off there. Guys like Lou and Monta were PGs back in the day and had the handle (but Monk's J is much further along at the same age). Functionally speaking, if he pans out, I see him more like a skinny/lite version of Eric Gordon. |
The Sixers getting #1 and our pick dropping to 4th or 5th is a scary idea. They get Fultz and Monk to defend the one and 2 spots but play wings on offense with Simmons at PG and Saric/Embiid front court. I'll never forgive Adam Silver if he always something like that to happen. |
fultz monk covington simmons saric embiid holmes mcconnell anderson timcab just kill me now fam
_________________
substance over style |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AC Green's V-Card
Star Player
Joined: 09 Aug 2012
Posts: 3063
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 1:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LakerSD wrote: | | AC Green's V-Card wrote: | | I gotta say, with all the great analysis on this thread, I'm going to be ecstatic if we keep our pick because we're going to add a great player to an already promising young core. Whether it's Fultz, Ball, Jackson, Tatum, Monk, or (insert your favorite player), we're going to have the pieces in place to start attracting free agents in off-seasons to come. I have no doubt our scouting department will make the right choice for us moving forward. The future is very bright. Let's just hope the ping pong balls bounce our way. |
Let's hope that's the case. I am excited about adding one of these top players should we hold on to the pick. Get the lakers closer to competing for a playoff spot and building towards a very bright future.
Although what I could see happening is the trashing of Ingram vs. Russell vs. the new rookie depending on #agenda |
Yeah, there's always going to be a vocal part of the community who's going to second guess draft decisions. I wanted Okafor over Russell at the time. I really liked Russell's game at Ohio State (had him 3rd in my preference list), but I thought Okafor could give us an advantage over the rest of the league with his interior skills. But the moment we drafted Russell, never once thought the front office made the wrong decision. Have been one of his biggest supporters ever since.
Russell has taken a ton of pressure off Ingram and even Randle. I think whoever we draft (knock on wood) will be sharing the spotlight, so the weight of the franchise, media, and fans won't be completely on their shoulders. I hope. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bard207
Star Player
Joined: 08 Jan 2013
Posts: 7713
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 1:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Even if Philly has to wait another year for the LA pick to convey, they should have a decent chance of making the 2018 playoffs if a .500 record will be enough for the 8th spot. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GoldenThroat
Moderator
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 37474
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 1:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| pjiddy wrote: | | 44TheLogo wrote: | | Isn't the point of an internet forum to discuss things and offer opinions? |
As I said: give your opinion. But what's the use of bullying someone who has your #2 as his #3, etc? Let's say you even succeeded at convincing him to align with yours. Now what? Are we forming a consensus to forward to Magic? |
1) 44TheLogo
2) KeepItRealOrElse
3) pjiddy
tbh |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LakerSD
Franchise Player
Joined: 10 Nov 2016
Posts: 23778
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 1:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| AC Green's V-Card wrote: | | LakerSD wrote: | | AC Green's V-Card wrote: | | I gotta say, with all the great analysis on this thread, I'm going to be ecstatic if we keep our pick because we're going to add a great player to an already promising young core. Whether it's Fultz, Ball, Jackson, Tatum, Monk, or (insert your favorite player), we're going to have the pieces in place to start attracting free agents in off-seasons to come. I have no doubt our scouting department will make the right choice for us moving forward. The future is very bright. Let's just hope the ping pong balls bounce our way. |
Let's hope that's the case. I am excited about adding one of these top players should we hold on to the pick. Get the lakers closer to competing for a playoff spot and building towards a very bright future.
Although what I could see happening is the trashing of Ingram vs. Russell vs. the new rookie depending on #agenda |
Yeah, there's always going to be a vocal part of the community who's going to second guess draft decisions. I wanted Okafor over Russell at the time. I really liked Russell's game at Ohio State (had him 3rd in my preference list), but I thought Okafor could give us an advantage over the rest of the league with his interior skills. But the moment we drafted Russell, never once thought the front office made the wrong decision. Have been one of his biggest supporters ever since.
Russell has taken a ton of pressure off Ingram and even Randle. I think whoever we draft (knock on wood) will be sharing the spotlight, so the weight of the franchise, media, and fans won't be completely on their shoulders. I hope. |
Nice, respect for owning up to it and supporting what's best for the lakers. I was never a huge okafor fan so I was intrigued by the Russell pick. I was beginning to get concerned until he started to show pretty darn good progress and quieted the noise that was coming from every direction about his immaturity.
Ingram is ahead of schedule imo, which is great to see. I also think the top 3 pick, should we keep it, will be a tremendous player. Future looks bright imo, that's why I hope they don't do something stupid by trading top 3, DLO, Ingram or Zubac. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
44TheLogo
Star Player
Joined: 21 Feb 2009
Posts: 6364
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 1:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| GoldenThroat wrote: | | pjiddy wrote: | | 44TheLogo wrote: | | Isn't the point of an internet forum to discuss things and offer opinions? |
As I said: give your opinion. But what's the use of bullying someone who has your #2 as his #3, etc? Let's say you even succeeded at convincing him to align with yours. Now what? Are we forming a consensus to forward to Magic? |
1) 44TheLogo
2) KeepItRealOrElse
3) pjiddy
tbh |
i'd like to see the analytics on my posting patterns
100 posts per minute during work hours - 0 posts during off work hours
_________________
substance over style |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AC Green's V-Card
Star Player
Joined: 09 Aug 2012
Posts: 3063
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 1:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| GoldenThroat wrote: | | pjiddy wrote: | | 44TheLogo wrote: | | Isn't the point of an internet forum to discuss things and offer opinions? |
As I said: give your opinion. But what's the use of bullying someone who has your #2 as his #3, etc? Let's say you even succeeded at convincing him to align with yours. Now what? Are we forming a consensus to forward to Magic? |
1) 44TheLogo
2) KeepItRealOrElse
3) pjiddy
tbh |
I think you're really underrating pjiddy's quote game. Guy is a monster on the text blocks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GoldenThroat
Moderator
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 37474
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 1:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| AC Green's V-Card wrote: | | GoldenThroat wrote: | | pjiddy wrote: | | 44TheLogo wrote: | | Isn't the point of an internet forum to discuss things and offer opinions? |
As I said: give your opinion. But what's the use of bullying someone who has your #2 as his #3, etc? Let's say you even succeeded at convincing him to align with yours. Now what? Are we forming a consensus to forward to Magic? |
1) 44TheLogo
2) KeepItRealOrElse
3) pjiddy
tbh |
I think you're really underrating pjiddy's quote game. Guy is a monster on the text blocks. |
High efficiency yes, but look at his usage. There are long stretches of time where he's barely there! No way he's higher than #3! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
adkindo
Retired Number
Joined: 16 Jun 2005
Posts: 40345
Location: Dirty South
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 1:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 44TheLogo wrote: | | dao wrote: | | GoldenThroat wrote: | If we can take a step back from bashing each other over the head for a moment to advocate our favorite prospects, I just want to take a moment to appreciate that we're going to get a pretty damn good player if we keep our pick. I would have taken each of the Fultz, Ball, Jackson trio either first or second last year.
I'm two games into Tatum footage and he's pretty skilled as well, although my initial impressions are that he's behind those 3. Still open to changing my mind though. |
Damn. Comparing their college stats, Jackson actually is a better prospect than Ingram was last year.
Per 40
Ingram: 20.0 points, 7.8 rebounds, 2.3 assists, 1.3 steals, 1.6 blocks, 55.2 TS%, 7.5 BPM
Jackson: 21.6 points, 9.3 rebounds, 3.8 assists, 2.1 steals, 1.4 blocks, 56.3 TS%, 10.6 BPM
Jackson is better at everything other than free throw shooting and 3 point shooting. Ingram shot 41% from 3, 68.2 FT%. Jackson is 38.6% from three, horrible 56.7% from the line.
He looks like an extremely impressive prospect overall, but his biggest question mark is the single most important tangible skill: shooting. The terrible free throw percentage and the low volume of threes attempted (he attempts less than half as many threes per game as Ingram did) give me pause.
I have officially warmed up to Jackson, though his shooting scares sheetless. We see how mightily Ingram has struggled knocking down shots, though he's finally starting to turn it around. If Jackson can't shoot at the next level, that's a big deal. But his all around game is stronger than Ingram's was by a sizeable margin. More rebounds, more steals, significantly higher 2 point percentage (55.1% for Jackson, 46.4% for Ingram)...indicates that he's a more dynamic athlete. And I like Ingram a lot. |
don't compare Jackson to Ingram, that's just not a good comparison. Because guess what? Jackson is half a year OLDER than ingram. |
this is so played out...really. by this logic, we cant compare Fultz and Ball because Ball is 7 months older than Fultz. Its just deflection. Sometimes a year matters, sometimes it does not. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AC Green's V-Card
Star Player
Joined: 09 Aug 2012
Posts: 3063
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 1:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| GoldenThroat wrote: | | AC Green's V-Card wrote: | | GoldenThroat wrote: | | pjiddy wrote: | | 44TheLogo wrote: | | Isn't the point of an internet forum to discuss things and offer opinions? |
As I said: give your opinion. But what's the use of bullying someone who has your #2 as his #3, etc? Let's say you even succeeded at convincing him to align with yours. Now what? Are we forming a consensus to forward to Magic? |
1) 44TheLogo
2) KeepItRealOrElse
3) pjiddy
tbh |
I think you're really underrating pjiddy's quote game. Guy is a monster on the text blocks. |
High efficiency yes, but look at his usage. There are long stretches of time where he's barely there! No way he's higher than #3! |
Are you kidding, me?! He's got 17,000+ posts in 12 years! With that kind of high phpBBIQ, he's going to be GM of this board in due time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
adkindo
Retired Number
Joined: 16 Jun 2005
Posts: 40345
Location: Dirty South
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 1:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| pjiddy wrote: | | 44TheLogo wrote: | | Isn't the point of an internet forum to discuss things and offer opinions? |
As I said: give your opinion. But what's the use of bullying someone who has your #2 as his #3, etc? Let's say you even succeeded at convincing him to align with yours. Now what? Are we forming a consensus to forward to Magic? |
I send him a daily email....you guys do not do that?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
44TheLogo
Star Player
Joined: 21 Feb 2009
Posts: 6364
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 2:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| adkindo wrote: | | 44TheLogo wrote: | | dao wrote: | | GoldenThroat wrote: | If we can take a step back from bashing each other over the head for a moment to advocate our favorite prospects, I just want to take a moment to appreciate that we're going to get a pretty damn good player if we keep our pick. I would have taken each of the Fultz, Ball, Jackson trio either first or second last year.
I'm two games into Tatum footage and he's pretty skilled as well, although my initial impressions are that he's behind those 3. Still open to changing my mind though. |
Damn. Comparing their college stats, Jackson actually is a better prospect than Ingram was last year.
Per 40
Ingram: 20.0 points, 7.8 rebounds, 2.3 assists, 1.3 steals, 1.6 blocks, 55.2 TS%, 7.5 BPM
Jackson: 21.6 points, 9.3 rebounds, 3.8 assists, 2.1 steals, 1.4 blocks, 56.3 TS%, 10.6 BPM
Jackson is better at everything other than free throw shooting and 3 point shooting. Ingram shot 41% from 3, 68.2 FT%. Jackson is 38.6% from three, horrible 56.7% from the line.
He looks like an extremely impressive prospect overall, but his biggest question mark is the single most important tangible skill: shooting. The terrible free throw percentage and the low volume of threes attempted (he attempts less than half as many threes per game as Ingram did) give me pause.
I have officially warmed up to Jackson, though his shooting scares sheetless. We see how mightily Ingram has struggled knocking down shots, though he's finally starting to turn it around. If Jackson can't shoot at the next level, that's a big deal. But his all around game is stronger than Ingram's was by a sizeable margin. More rebounds, more steals, significantly higher 2 point percentage (55.1% for Jackson, 46.4% for Ingram)...indicates that he's a more dynamic athlete. And I like Ingram a lot. |
don't compare Jackson to Ingram, that's just not a good comparison. Because guess what? Jackson is half a year OLDER than ingram. |
this is so played out...really. by this logic, we cant compare Fultz and Ball because Ball is 7 months older than Fultz. Its just deflection. Sometimes a year matters, sometimes it does not. |
so you are saying that it doesn't matter, but then you say sometimes a year matters...?
_________________
substance over style |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
adkindo
Retired Number
Joined: 16 Jun 2005
Posts: 40345
Location: Dirty South
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 2:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 44TheLogo wrote: | | adkindo wrote: | | 44TheLogo wrote: | | dao wrote: | | GoldenThroat wrote: | If we can take a step back from bashing each other over the head for a moment to advocate our favorite prospects, I just want to take a moment to appreciate that we're going to get a pretty damn good player if we keep our pick. I would have taken each of the Fultz, Ball, Jackson trio either first or second last year.
I'm two games into Tatum footage and he's pretty skilled as well, although my initial impressions are that he's behind those 3. Still open to changing my mind though. |
Damn. Comparing their college stats, Jackson actually is a better prospect than Ingram was last year.
Per 40
Ingram: 20.0 points, 7.8 rebounds, 2.3 assists, 1.3 steals, 1.6 blocks, 55.2 TS%, 7.5 BPM
Jackson: 21.6 points, 9.3 rebounds, 3.8 assists, 2.1 steals, 1.4 blocks, 56.3 TS%, 10.6 BPM
Jackson is better at everything other than free throw shooting and 3 point shooting. Ingram shot 41% from 3, 68.2 FT%. Jackson is 38.6% from three, horrible 56.7% from the line.
He looks like an extremely impressive prospect overall, but his biggest question mark is the single most important tangible skill: shooting. The terrible free throw percentage and the low volume of threes attempted (he attempts less than half as many threes per game as Ingram did) give me pause.
I have officially warmed up to Jackson, though his shooting scares sheetless. We see how mightily Ingram has struggled knocking down shots, though he's finally starting to turn it around. If Jackson can't shoot at the next level, that's a big deal. But his all around game is stronger than Ingram's was by a sizeable margin. More rebounds, more steals, significantly higher 2 point percentage (55.1% for Jackson, 46.4% for Ingram)...indicates that he's a more dynamic athlete. And I like Ingram a lot. |
don't compare Jackson to Ingram, that's just not a good comparison. Because guess what? Jackson is half a year OLDER than ingram. |
this is so played out...really. by this logic, we cant compare Fultz and Ball because Ball is 7 months older than Fultz. Its just deflection. Sometimes a year matters, sometimes it does not. |
so you are saying that it doesn't matter, but then you say sometimes a year matters...? |
I am saying you only know in hindsight |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
44TheLogo
Star Player
Joined: 21 Feb 2009
Posts: 6364
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 2:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| adkindo wrote: | | pjiddy wrote: | | 44TheLogo wrote: | | Isn't the point of an internet forum to discuss things and offer opinions? |
As I said: give your opinion. But what's the use of bullying someone who has your #2 as his #3, etc? Let's say you even succeeded at convincing him to align with yours. Now what? Are we forming a consensus to forward to Magic? |
I send him a daily email....you guys do not do that? |
i imagine someday being a courtside season ticket holder and if i ever get a chance to share my thoughts with the FO i will print out a screenshot of all 4000+ of my LG posts and bring them with me
_________________
substance over style |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ChickenStu
Retired Number
Joined: 25 Apr 2015
Posts: 31912
Location: Anaheim, CA
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 2:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| GoldenThroat wrote: | | AC Green's V-Card wrote: | | GoldenThroat wrote: | | pjiddy wrote: | | 44TheLogo wrote: | | Isn't the point of an internet forum to discuss things and offer opinions? |
As I said: give your opinion. But what's the use of bullying someone who has your #2 as his #3, etc? Let's say you even succeeded at convincing him to align with yours. Now what? Are we forming a consensus to forward to Magic? |
1) 44TheLogo
2) KeepItRealOrElse
3) pjiddy
tbh |
I think you're really underrating pjiddy's quote game. Guy is a monster on the text blocks. |
High efficiency yes, but look at his usage. There are long stretches of time where he's barely there! No way he's higher than #3! |
I would like to ask for your consideration for the #28 overall pick. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
44TheLogo
Star Player
Joined: 21 Feb 2009
Posts: 6364
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 2:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| adkindo wrote: |
I am saying you only know in hindsight |
what i'm saying is that ingram is younger than jackson, meaning, he could feasibly have been transported back to college today and enter the NCAA tournament. and he would be destroying the field.
_________________
substance over style |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ChickenStu
Retired Number
Joined: 25 Apr 2015
Posts: 31912
Location: Anaheim, CA
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 2:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
^^
I'm also with 44TheLogo in liking Monk a lot. Dude can flat-out shoot it and fill it up.
I know that Devin Booker is something like 3 inches taller than Monk, but how do we think Monk compares to him, both offensively and defensively? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
adkindo
Retired Number
Joined: 16 Jun 2005
Posts: 40345
Location: Dirty South
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 2:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 44TheLogo wrote: | | adkindo wrote: |
I am saying you only know in hindsight |
what i'm saying is that ingram is younger than jackson, meaning, he could feasibly have been transported back to college today and enter the NCAA tournament. and he would be destroying the field. |
I do not think Ingram as he is today would even project in the top #3 in this years draft.....but that is all opinion. Ingram is not now what "many" would have projected 10 months ago....Wiggins is not what "many" would have projected 34 months ago? One the flipside, I think KAT is further along than the majority may have projected 22 months ago. These guys are on very unique individual clocks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dao
Star Player
Joined: 02 Jan 2013
Posts: 5572
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 2:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| adkindo wrote: | | 44TheLogo wrote: | | dao wrote: | | GoldenThroat wrote: | If we can take a step back from bashing each other over the head for a moment to advocate our favorite prospects, I just want to take a moment to appreciate that we're going to get a pretty damn good player if we keep our pick. I would have taken each of the Fultz, Ball, Jackson trio either first or second last year.
I'm two games into Tatum footage and he's pretty skilled as well, although my initial impressions are that he's behind those 3. Still open to changing my mind though. |
Damn. Comparing their college stats, Jackson actually is a better prospect than Ingram was last year.
Per 40
Ingram: 20.0 points, 7.8 rebounds, 2.3 assists, 1.3 steals, 1.6 blocks, 55.2 TS%, 7.5 BPM
Jackson: 21.6 points, 9.3 rebounds, 3.8 assists, 2.1 steals, 1.4 blocks, 56.3 TS%, 10.6 BPM
Jackson is better at everything other than free throw shooting and 3 point shooting. Ingram shot 41% from 3, 68.2 FT%. Jackson is 38.6% from three, horrible 56.7% from the line.
He looks like an extremely impressive prospect overall, but his biggest question mark is the single most important tangible skill: shooting. The terrible free throw percentage and the low volume of threes attempted (he attempts less than half as many threes per game as Ingram did) give me pause.
I have officially warmed up to Jackson, though his shooting scares sheetless. We see how mightily Ingram has struggled knocking down shots, though he's finally starting to turn it around. If Jackson can't shoot at the next level, that's a big deal. But his all around game is stronger than Ingram's was by a sizeable margin. More rebounds, more steals, significantly higher 2 point percentage (55.1% for Jackson, 46.4% for Ingram)...indicates that he's a more dynamic athlete. And I like Ingram a lot. |
don't compare Jackson to Ingram, that's just not a good comparison. Because guess what? Jackson is half a year OLDER than ingram. |
this is so played out...really. by this logic, we cant compare Fultz and Ball because Ball is 7 months older than Fultz. Its just deflection. Sometimes a year matters, sometimes it does not. |
sometimes it can be, but comparing freshman Ingram to freshman Jackson, Ingram was 1 year and 7 months younger. That's a big difference in physical development. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
adkindo
Retired Number
Joined: 16 Jun 2005
Posts: 40345
Location: Dirty South
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 2:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| adkindo wrote: | | 44TheLogo wrote: | | adkindo wrote: |
I am saying you only know in hindsight |
what i'm saying is that ingram is younger than jackson, meaning, he could feasibly have been transported back to college today and enter the NCAA tournament. and he would be destroying the field. |
I do not think Ingram as he is today would even project in the top #3 in this years draft.....but that is all opinion. Ingram is not now what "many" would have projected 10 months ago....Wiggins is not what "many" would have projected 34 months ago? One the flipside, I think KAT is further along than the majority may have projected 22 months ago. These guys are on very unique individual clocks. |
btw, isnt Fultz younger than like 3 of the top 4 prospects in 2018? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
adkindo
Retired Number
Joined: 16 Jun 2005
Posts: 40345
Location: Dirty South
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 20, 2017 2:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| dao wrote: | | adkindo wrote: | | 44TheLogo wrote: | | dao wrote: | | GoldenThroat wrote: | If we can take a step back from bashing each other over the head for a moment to advocate our favorite prospects, I just want to take a moment to appreciate that we're going to get a pretty damn good player if we keep our pick. I would have taken each of the Fultz, Ball, Jackson trio either first or second last year.
I'm two games into Tatum footage and he's pretty skilled as well, although my initial impressions are that he's behind those 3. Still open to changing my mind though. |
Damn. Comparing their college stats, Jackson actually is a better prospect than Ingram was last year.
Per 40
Ingram: 20.0 points, 7.8 rebounds, 2.3 assists, 1.3 steals, 1.6 blocks, 55.2 TS%, 7.5 BPM
Jackson: 21.6 points, 9.3 rebounds, 3.8 assists, 2.1 steals, 1.4 blocks, 56.3 TS%, 10.6 BPM
Jackson is better at everything other than free throw shooting and 3 point shooting. Ingram shot 41% from 3, 68.2 FT%. Jackson is 38.6% from three, horrible 56.7% from the line.
He looks like an extremely impressive prospect overall, but his biggest question mark is the single most important tangible skill: shooting. The terrible free throw percentage and the low volume of threes attempted (he attempts less than half as many threes per game as Ingram did) give me pause.
I have officially warmed up to Jackson, though his shooting scares sheetless. We see how mightily Ingram has struggled knocking down shots, though he's finally starting to turn it around. If Jackson can't shoot at the next level, that's a big deal. But his all around game is stronger than Ingram's was by a sizeable margin. More rebounds, more steals, significantly higher 2 point percentage (55.1% for Jackson, 46.4% for Ingram)...indicates that he's a more dynamic athlete. And I like Ingram a lot. |
don't compare Jackson to Ingram, that's just not a good comparison. Because guess what? Jackson is half a year OLDER than ingram. |
this is so played out...really. by this logic, we cant compare Fultz and Ball because Ball is 7 months older than Fultz. Its just deflection. Sometimes a year matters, sometimes it does not. |
sometimes it can be, but comparing freshman Ingram to freshman Jackson, Ingram was 1 year and 7 months younger. That's a big difference in physical development. |
i think in reality, its a factor of consideration, but not a universal barrier. On LG, people are quick to point out how old Jackson is.....which he is 7 months older than Ball....but if they prefer Ball, some of the same people have zero issues with Ball being 7 months older than Fultz. On message boards, it mostly used as a negative tool against someone the person does not prefer. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
