OFFICIAL BRANDON INGRAM THREAD
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 798, 799, 800 ... 1883, 1884, 1885  Next
 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> General Basketball Discussion Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 9:19 am    Post subject:

I think BI is fine. I'm not sure if he'll be a top 10-level player, but he's really impressed me this year. I totally get GT's argument about increased minutes leading to increased aggregate stats too. But then I remember he is in his 2nd year and just turned 20 too. I think getting 2 max players will actually help him (notwithstanding possibility he may be traded but I hope not) develop more. I don't think he's ready yet (operative word) to be a #1 option on a playoff or contending team.

Then again he's 20. He will be a nice piece IMO going forward.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144432
Location: The Gold Coast

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 9:52 am    Post subject:

adkindo wrote:
venturalakersfan wrote:
KeepItRealOrElse wrote:
venturalakersfan wrote:
KeepItRealOrElse wrote:
Kuz played 3 years in college neot 4


Red shirt so it was 4 years


Oh didn't know that, his age is that if someone coming out after being a true JR. Ok


It is, he must have started young. Maybe why he redshirted.


it is still just 3 years of playing


4 years of being on the team and participating in practices.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144432
Location: The Gold Coast

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 9:55 am    Post subject:

yinoma2001 wrote:
adkindo wrote:
venturalakersfan wrote:
KeepItRealOrElse wrote:
venturalakersfan wrote:
KeepItRealOrElse wrote:
Kuz played 3 years in college neot 4


Red shirt so it was 4 years


Oh didn't know that, his age is that if someone coming out after being a true JR. Ok


It is, he must have started young. Maybe why he redshirted.


it is still just 3 years of playing


I think VLF rightfully reminds us with Jules that he has only played 3 full years (+1 game). Why shouldn’t we with Kuz?


I guess if one isn’t smart enough to understand the difference between being healthy and participating in every practice and being injured and being unable to do anything on the court. Seems simple, but I guess not.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
manlisten
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 09 Jul 2004
Posts: 3169

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 9:58 am    Post subject:

LakerSanity wrote:
manlisten wrote:
GoldenThroat wrote:
If I can put my extreme hater hat on for a moment...how much is the perception of Ingram's progress shaped by how many minutes he's getting? He's the 5th-leading scorer on the team Per-36, 404th out of 444 players in RPM, still below replacement level in BPM, and the Lakers are scoring 9 points per 100 possessions more when he's off of the court than when he's on...but he's playing 33.7mpg (no one played more than 29.2 last year), so he's now at 16ppg. He's become really good at driving to the basket - which is not insignificant - but has he really grown all that much outside of that? If he got last year's minutes (28.8) he'd be at 13.7ppg right now, scoring at the same rate.


Putting the same hat on, how much of this take is influenced by the fact that you didn't believe he had much potential as a scorer and are sticking to it until he undeniably proves that idea to be wrong?


That's uncalled for... and he's a mod by the way, so clearly you have forgotten the rules of this forum. Address the post, not the poster.


I addressed the idea. Never said anything personal.
_________________
It was reminiscent of one of those Most Interesting Man in the World advertisements: "I don't always shoot 6-for-28 from the field, but when I do, I become the youngest player in league history to score 28,000 career points."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144432
Location: The Gold Coast

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 9:59 am    Post subject:

dao wrote:
The Juggernaut wrote:
dao wrote:
the impressive thing about Ingram's play is his ability to score relatively efficiently without having three point range. His TS% of 52.6% is higher than, say, D'angelo Russell's second season. Russell's TS% was 51.6, despite him having three point range.

If Ingram's three point shooting comes around, he's going to be a very efficient scorer. He does things that the defense can't take away.

You can't complain about a 20 year old scoring 17.1 points per 36 shooting 52.6 TS%. He's compared to Tayshaun Prince a lot. Well, prince never scored 17 points per 36, not even in his prime. Ingram's 52.6 TS% is also higher than Prince's career average of 51.3%.

Ingram is ahead of schedule.


but his analytics tell me he sucks /s

Seriously though when you watch the game do you really think Ingram is a net negative like the advanced stats say? Cuz I don't at all.
he's still a net negative, but being a net negative at age 20 isn't a horrible thing. ingram's BPM of -2.2 is better than Booker's -2.3 at age 20.

Ingram is on track to be a very good player. He's a much better defender than most wing players his age. He projects as an All NBA defender. He doesn't have to be a great offensive player to have All Star level impact.


He seems to excel when we struggle, as in the past 6-7 games. I don’t blame the struggles on him, I don’t even know if there is a correlation. Just as last season when he improved once we were tanking, his best games this season have been when we are on a losing streak. Again, I am not sure it means anything, just an observation.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
epak
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 34147

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 10:01 am    Post subject:

CandyCanes wrote:
Eindhoven wrote:
epak wrote:
Who's his competition for MIP?


Still early, but the strongest name so far is Clint Capela, I believe. Oladipo, Porky and Aaron Gordon also come to mind.


I would say Giannis too. He was already good last year, but he's an MVP level player this year.


Very stiff competition.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Wildchild027
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 17 Jul 2002
Posts: 3846
Location: A-T-L-A-N-T-A

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 10:09 am    Post subject:

epak wrote:
Who's his competition for MIP?


Second year players don't usually win MIP.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
defense
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Jan 2010
Posts: 39317

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 10:10 am    Post subject:

The points serve to mask over all the other issues but he is improving. I don't think as much as some think, though you can clearly see hes getting better. Shooting and defensively I have been a bit let down but I'm really hard on the Lakers about defense lol.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 144432
Location: The Gold Coast

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 10:24 am    Post subject:

defense wrote:
The points serve to mask over all the other issues but he is improving. I don't think as much as some think, though you can clearly see hes getting better. Shooting and defensively I have been a bit let down but I'm really hard on the Lakers about defense lol.


Yes, we see improvement in an area or two, not so much in others. All part of developing a very young player.
_________________
RIP mom. 11-21-1933 to 6-14-2023.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LakerSanity
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 33474
Location: Long Beach, California

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 11:29 am    Post subject:

manlisten wrote:
LakerSanity wrote:
manlisten wrote:
GoldenThroat wrote:
If I can put my extreme hater hat on for a moment...how much is the perception of Ingram's progress shaped by how many minutes he's getting? He's the 5th-leading scorer on the team Per-36, 404th out of 444 players in RPM, still below replacement level in BPM, and the Lakers are scoring 9 points per 100 possessions more when he's off of the court than when he's on...but he's playing 33.7mpg (no one played more than 29.2 last year), so he's now at 16ppg. He's become really good at driving to the basket - which is not insignificant - but has he really grown all that much outside of that? If he got last year's minutes (28.8) he'd be at 13.7ppg right now, scoring at the same rate.


Putting the same hat on, how much of this take is influenced by the fact that you didn't believe he had much potential as a scorer and are sticking to it until he undeniably proves that idea to be wrong?


That's uncalled for... and he's a mod by the way, so clearly you have forgotten the rules of this forum. Address the post, not the poster.


I addressed the idea. Never said anything personal.


Your entire post was about how HE didn't believe Ingram had potential and that he is somehow stubbornly sticking to it contrary to proof which undermines his perspective, as if he has some kind of agenda.

That's addressing HIM and HIS perceived biases or perceived agenda, not whether the idea of Ingram still having ways to improve are valid or not.

No, you did not address the post... you addressed the poster. I do hope you get that distinction now (and that everyone else reading this does as well).
_________________
LakersGround's Terms of Service

Twitter: @DeleteThisPost
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
epak
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 34147

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 11:54 am    Post subject:

^ I have thought the team looked better without BI on the floor offensively. Not sure about defensively. And I'm not saying I want BI to stop what he's doing at this time. Enjoying the progress.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
The Juggernaut
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 24 Aug 2017
Posts: 4572

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 12:00 pm    Post subject:

LakerSanity wrote:
manlisten wrote:
LakerSanity wrote:
manlisten wrote:
GoldenThroat wrote:
If I can put my extreme hater hat on for a moment...how much is the perception of Ingram's progress shaped by how many minutes he's getting? He's the 5th-leading scorer on the team Per-36, 404th out of 444 players in RPM, still below replacement level in BPM, and the Lakers are scoring 9 points per 100 possessions more when he's off of the court than when he's on...but he's playing 33.7mpg (no one played more than 29.2 last year), so he's now at 16ppg. He's become really good at driving to the basket - which is not insignificant - but has he really grown all that much outside of that? If he got last year's minutes (28.8) he'd be at 13.7ppg right now, scoring at the same rate.


Putting the same hat on, how much of this take is influenced by the fact that you didn't believe he had much potential as a scorer and are sticking to it until he undeniably proves that idea to be wrong?


That's uncalled for... and he's a mod by the way, so clearly you have forgotten the rules of this forum. Address the post, not the poster.


I addressed the idea. Never said anything personal.


Your entire post was about how HE didn't believe Ingram had potential and that he is somehow stubbornly sticking to it contrary to proof which undermines his perspective, as if he has some kind of agenda.

That's addressing HIM and HIS perceived biases or perceived agenda, not whether the idea of Ingram still having ways to improve are valid or not.

No, you did not address the post... you addressed the poster. I do hope you get that distinction now (and that everyone else reading this does as well).


Dude you're overreacting. His post was about GT's posts about BI not being a scorer which is well established in this thread. He didn't mention anything personal.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LakerSanity
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 33474
Location: Long Beach, California

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 12:10 pm    Post subject:

The Juggernaut wrote:
LakerSanity wrote:
manlisten wrote:
LakerSanity wrote:
manlisten wrote:
Putting the same hat on, how much of this take is influenced by the fact that you didn't believe he had much potential as a scorer and are sticking to it until he undeniably proves that idea to be wrong?


That's uncalled for... and he's a mod by the way, so clearly you have forgotten the rules of this forum. Address the post, not the poster.


I addressed the idea. Never said anything personal.


Your entire post was about how HE didn't believe Ingram had potential and that he is somehow stubbornly sticking to it contrary to proof which undermines his perspective, as if he has some kind of agenda.

That's addressing HIM and HIS perceived biases or perceived agenda, not whether the idea of Ingram still having ways to improve are valid or not.

No, you did not address the post... you addressed the poster. I do hope you get that distinction now (and that everyone else reading this does as well).


Dude you're overreacting. His post was about GT's posts about BI not being a scorer which is well established in this thread. He didn't mention anything personal.


Leave the moderation to the moderators. This forum is the way it is because mods like me "overreact."

And, no, he was addressing GT's perceived biases, as if GT was being unreasonable because he had some kind of agenda. That is going after a post (i.e. GT lacking neutrality) rather than the argument itself (Brandom needing to improve). That's the distinction.

Do not respond to this post. If you don't agree with my moderation style, feel free to PM me.
_________________
LakersGround's Terms of Service

Twitter: @DeleteThisPost
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
GoldenThroat
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 37474

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 12:16 pm    Post subject:

manlisten wrote:
GoldenThroat wrote:
If I can put my extreme hater hat on for a moment...how much is the perception of Ingram's progress shaped by how many minutes he's getting? He's the 5th-leading scorer on the team Per-36, 404th out of 444 players in RPM, still below replacement level in BPM, and the Lakers are scoring 9 points per 100 possessions more when he's off of the court than when he's on...but he's playing 33.7mpg (no one played more than 29.2 last year), so he's now at 16ppg. He's become really good at driving to the basket - which is not insignificant - but has he really grown all that much outside of that? If he got last year's minutes (28.8) he'd be at 13.7ppg right now, scoring at the same rate.


Putting the same hat on, how much of this take is influenced by the fact that you didn't believe he had much potential as a scorer and are sticking to it until he undeniably proves that idea to be wrong?


How about he proves my POV of him as a scorer wrong first, rather than undeniably wrong?

The biggest difference, by far, is his minutes. I expected Ingram to be a 13-14ppg guy based on the types of minutes that guys got last year. At the rate he's scored this year, he'd be averaging 13.7ppg based on the minutes he got last year (28.8). Had you told me before the year that he'd be getting 33.7mpg, I'd have guessed he'd be in the 15-16ppg range.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
epak
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 34147

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 12:21 pm    Post subject:

GoldenThroat wrote:
manlisten wrote:
GoldenThroat wrote:
If I can put my extreme hater hat on for a moment...how much is the perception of Ingram's progress shaped by how many minutes he's getting? He's the 5th-leading scorer on the team Per-36, 404th out of 444 players in RPM, still below replacement level in BPM, and the Lakers are scoring 9 points per 100 possessions more when he's off of the court than when he's on...but he's playing 33.7mpg (no one played more than 29.2 last year), so he's now at 16ppg. He's become really good at driving to the basket - which is not insignificant - but has he really grown all that much outside of that? If he got last year's minutes (28.8) he'd be at 13.7ppg right now, scoring at the same rate.


Putting the same hat on, how much of this take is influenced by the fact that you didn't believe he had much potential as a scorer and are sticking to it until he undeniably proves that idea to be wrong?


How about he proves my POV of him as a scorer wrong first, rather than undeniably wrong?

The biggest difference, by far, is his minutes. I expected Ingram to be a 13-14ppg guy based on the types of minutes that guys got last year. At the rate he's scored this year, he'd be averaging 13.7ppg based on the minutes he got last year (28.8). Had you told me before the year that he'd be getting 33.7mpg, I'd have guessed he'd be in the 15-16ppg range.


I wouldn't have guessed at the start of the season that we'd have 4 guys: KCP, BI, Lonzo and Kuzma all averaging over 30 mpg.

2 rookies and a 1 year player at 30+ mpg.
That's insane. Rare to find a team with that recipe w/o a superstar going to the playoffs. But I still believe! hahah.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
GoldenThroat
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 37474

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 12:33 pm    Post subject:

epak wrote:
I wouldn't have guessed at the start of the season that we'd have 4 guys: KCP, BI, Lonzo and Kuzma all averaging over 30 mpg.

2 rookies and a 1 year player at 30+ mpg.
That's insane. Rare to find a team with that recipe w/o a superstar going to the playoffs. But I still believe! hahah.


Yeah, it's quite a shift for Luke. JC led the team last year with 29.2mpg, and that'd be 5th most on the team this year.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
mookielala
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 29 Jul 2012
Posts: 3026

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 12:44 pm    Post subject:

Ingram is getting minutes partly because we are are shallow at SF, also he's one of the few starters who doesn't at times look like a liability (lonzo, lopez). It's pretty amazing Kuzma is getting so many minutes considering he's sharing time with LNJ and Julius. I'd like to see Julius get more minutes, so I think we should go small ball as much as we can.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
GoldenThroat
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 37474

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 12:46 pm    Post subject:

mookielala wrote:
Ingram is getting minutes partly because we are are shallow at SF, also he's one of the few starters who doesn't at times look like a liability (lonzo, lopez). It's pretty amazing Kuzma is getting so many minutes considering he's sharing time with LNJ and Julius. I'd like to see Julius get more minutes, so I think we should go small ball as much as we can.


To be clear, I'm perfectly fine with Ingram's minutes. I'm glad him, Lonzo, & Kuzma especially are getting so much run. It just wasn't what I expected before the season based on how Luke handled minutes last year.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
mookielala
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 29 Jul 2012
Posts: 3026

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 12:47 pm    Post subject:

GoldenThroat wrote:
mookielala wrote:
Ingram is getting minutes partly because we are are shallow at SF, also he's one of the few starters who doesn't at times look like a liability (lonzo, lopez). It's pretty amazing Kuzma is getting so many minutes considering he's sharing time with LNJ and Julius. I'd like to see Julius get more minutes, so I think we should go small ball as much as we can.


To be clear, I'm perfectly fine with Ingram's minutes. I'm glad him, Lonzo, & Kuzma especially are getting so much run. It just wasn't what I expected before the season based on how Luke handled minutes last year.


Totally clear. Are you still making that BI vid?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
defense
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 12 Jan 2010
Posts: 39317

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 12:49 pm    Post subject:

GoldenThroat wrote:
epak wrote:
I wouldn't have guessed at the start of the season that we'd have 4 guys: KCP, BI, Lonzo and Kuzma all averaging over 30 mpg.

2 rookies and a 1 year player at 30+ mpg.
That's insane. Rare to find a team with that recipe w/o a superstar going to the playoffs. But I still believe! hahah.


Yeah, it's quite a shift for Luke. JC led the team last year with 29.2mpg, and that'd be 5th most on the team this year.


Not sure where to go with this question so I'll just ask here. Quite a few people on LG believe the Lakers are a better team if Randle and Kuzma start next the Lonzo/KCP/Ingram. You mind giving me your opinion on this projected line up? I'm trying to figure out if I'm missing something because I think that line up wouldn't make us any better, maybe even worse.

Also can you give us your preferred starting line up?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
yinoma2001
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 19 Jun 2010
Posts: 119487

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 12:50 pm    Post subject:

IIRC DLO's minutes in his 2nd year were about the same as year 1.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/r/russeda01.html

But his PPG (+2.4PPG), APG (+1.3) went up despite modest +.5 MPG. That was as close of a static representation of MPG/increase in stats as you can get. Ingram went from about 29mpg to 34mpg, which is a pretty big jump. His numbers also jumped too naturally.
_________________
From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
GoldenThroat
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 37474

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 12:51 pm    Post subject:

mookielala wrote:
GoldenThroat wrote:
mookielala wrote:
Ingram is getting minutes partly because we are are shallow at SF, also he's one of the few starters who doesn't at times look like a liability (lonzo, lopez). It's pretty amazing Kuzma is getting so many minutes considering he's sharing time with LNJ and Julius. I'd like to see Julius get more minutes, so I think we should go small ball as much as we can.


To be clear, I'm perfectly fine with Ingram's minutes. I'm glad him, Lonzo, & Kuzma especially are getting so much run. It just wasn't what I expected before the season based on how Luke handled minutes last year.


Totally clear. Are you still making that BI vid?


Yeah, I've just decided to push it back because as of right this moment, there's a chance that I'll get to talk to Brian Keefe for a few minutes about the development stuff that they've worked on over the last year. They don't usually let media talk to assistant coaches (they don't want an assistant to contradict the head coach on anything), and they still might not let me, but it's looking promising because my intent is to strictly talk about Ingram's development.

But as a result, I gotta wait for them to get back from the road trip. It's mostly done aside from that and the voiceovers.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
socalsp3
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 07 Jul 2016
Posts: 3501

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 12:55 pm    Post subject:

Food for though KD was the worse in the NBA in RPM his first two years.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
GoldenThroat
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 37474

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 12:57 pm    Post subject:

defense wrote:
GoldenThroat wrote:
epak wrote:
I wouldn't have guessed at the start of the season that we'd have 4 guys: KCP, BI, Lonzo and Kuzma all averaging over 30 mpg.

2 rookies and a 1 year player at 30+ mpg.
That's insane. Rare to find a team with that recipe w/o a superstar going to the playoffs. But I still believe! hahah.


Yeah, it's quite a shift for Luke. JC led the team last year with 29.2mpg, and that'd be 5th most on the team this year.


Not sure where to go with this question so I'll just ask here. Quite a few people on LG believe the Lakers are a better team if Randle and Kuzma start next the Lonzo/KCP/Ingram. You mind giving me your opinion on this projected line up? I'm trying to figure out if I'm missing something because I think that line up wouldn't make us any better, maybe even worse.

Also can you give us your preferred starting line up?


I think that's our best lineup, and the numbers reflect that. That particular grouping has gotten the 4th most minutes of any 5-man unit. And I think you of all people would appreciate a particular stat category here.



I think it alleviates some of the playmaking burden off of Lonzo, and allows the first unit to effectively switch everything, at least in most cases.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
GoldenThroat
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 37474

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 12:58 pm    Post subject:

socalsp3 wrote:
Food for though KD was the worse in the NBA in RPM his first two years.


I don't think RPM was available before 2013-14. Where did you hear that? Has someone calculated it for previous years?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> General Basketball Discussion All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 798, 799, 800 ... 1883, 1884, 1885  Next
Page 799 of 1885
Jump to:  

 
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






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2018 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB