So after 2 years where does he stand compared to a) Hall of famers, b) all-stars, and C) regular players that have peaked with his numbers?
We post his "at this point in his career" stats all the time and you guys aren't tryna hear it.
That's because it obliterates their argument (if you can even call it that).
Could you post them again and in the format I requested? I'm trying to understand why these analysts keep saying what they are saying. Thanks in advance
With control of their pick now established and a jump up to No. 2 overall, it’s more likely than not that either Markelle Fultz or Lonzo Ball will be pairing up with Russell in the Lakers’ backcourt next year.
Each prospect is capable of playing off the ball, but it is more likely that they’ll reach their potential if entrusted with the duties of a lead guard. This experiment of Russell as the “shooting guard” (positions are dead in 2017, catch up world) was more to see whether or not the second-year guard would be able to fit next to another primary ball-handler.
Okafor was the scoring leader of his class, who knows if he can post raw numbers on an efficient fashion in the future?
I believe Mudiay is the player with a huge question mark.
We have Kareem to play with Zubac, Kobe with Ingram, Worthy with Julius and Magic possibly working with Ball. Maybe we can convince Byron to help Russell, he did a good job mentoring Kobe
The problem with Okafor is not his capacity to score. And it's not even his capacity to score efficiently: his TS% was >60% when he played with a real point guard in Ish Smith who could get it to him in spots that he liked. Okafor's problem was despite having an effective rookie year in terms of what he's good at (17 ppg @ 53% TS% for a rookie isn't bad), he was God awful to the team in terms of helping them win (worst RPM/ RAPM in the league). And he was awful on offense, due to his playstyle.
But if you told me Okafor would end up with Enes Kanter type efficiency numbers in his prime, I wouldn't be surprised either. He'd probably still suck and make your team worse, though.
Okafor was the scoring leader of his class, who knows if he can post raw numbers on an efficient fashion in the future?
I believe Mudiay is the player with a huge question mark.
We have Kareem to play with Zubac, Kobe with Ingram, Worthy with Julius and Magic possibly working with Ball. Maybe we can convince Byron to help Russell, he did a good job mentoring Kobe
The problem with Okafor is not his capacity to score. And it's not even his capacity to score efficiently: his TS% was >60% when he played with a real point guard in Ish Smith who could get it to him in spots that he liked. Okafor's problem was despite having an effective rookie year in terms of what he's good at (17 ppg @ 53% TS% for a rookie isn't bad), he was God awful to the team in terms of helping them win (worst RPM/ RAPM in the league). And he was awful on offense, due to his playstyle.
But if you told me Okafor would end up with Enes Kanter type efficiency numbers in his prime, I wouldn't be surprised either. He'd probably still suck and make your team worse, though.
Got a question,
Would you trade Clarkson and the 28th for Okafor and Timothe Luwawu-Cabarrot.
Who knows, maybe Okafor at 8% bodyfat would wind up better and more conditioned on both ends of the court _________________ How NBA 2K18 failed the All-Time Lakers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxMBYm3wwxk
Okafor was the scoring leader of his class, who knows if he can post raw numbers on an efficient fashion in the future?
I believe Mudiay is the player with a huge question mark.
We have Kareem to play with Zubac, Kobe with Ingram, Worthy with Julius and Magic possibly working with Ball. Maybe we can convince Byron to help Russell, he did a good job mentoring Kobe
The problem with Okafor is not his capacity to score. And it's not even his capacity to score efficiently: his TS% was >60% when he played with a real point guard in Ish Smith who could get it to him in spots that he liked. Okafor's problem was despite having an effective rookie year in terms of what he's good at (17 ppg @ 53% TS% for a rookie isn't bad), he was God awful to the team in terms of helping them win (worst RPM/ RAPM in the league). And he was awful on offense, due to his playstyle.
But if you told me Okafor would end up with Enes Kanter type efficiency numbers in his prime, I wouldn't be surprised either. He'd probably still suck and make your team worse, though.
Got a question,
Would you trade Clarkson and the 28th for Okafor and Timothe Luwawu-Cabarrot
I don't know -- I didn't watch enough Sixers to have an opinion on TLC. I wouldn't trade Clarkson straight up for Okafor so you're really asking me if TLC has more value than the 28th pick, and I don't know about that.
okafor is beyond horrible. I wouldn't want him taking up a valuable roster spot even if I didn't have to trade a single asset for him. no defense, no rebounding.. no way I would want him in a lakers uniform.
why not make the minutes under 29 because that's how many minutes DLO got?
For BPM? It accounts for minutes.
Oh, I don't know much about that stat but I don't think that's the main thing we should be looking at when comparing his numbers to other guys at the same age. _________________ “Life is too short. You have to keep it moving.” - Kobe
why not make the minutes under 29 because that's how many minutes DLO got?
I don't find advanced stats reliable for players that don't play at least 20 minutes.I was not trying to nitpick anything, just show the advanced stats of all players of his age since 2000.
wow. Mike Schmitz from draft express isn't too high on Russell. He says that he's super talented but has a low motor and laissez faire attitude. He's higher on Ingram and thinks his upside is through the roof. He discusses it here with GT on laker film room at minute 51.
So we keep hearing this sort of thing about Russell. Magic said a relatively similar thing in a roundabout way when he says " Russell has it, it just has to come out of him" in the Ingram is untouchable interview.
I wonder if his laid back style of play is mistaken for low motor/intensity, or if this truly is a problem. Honestly though I think this will all go away with the addition of Lonzo. Russell's a scorer that has been asked to change his style of play to be a "point guard." I think he overthinks the game out there. The unit he played with last year also didn't help him very much. Not enough passing, not enough player movement. I think Russell and Lonzo will really feed off of each other.
Russell will break out this year imo. He'll score 20+ ppg and increase that TS% into the mid 50s.
I'll not be surprised with a 20 pts season, I believe he can be a elite shooter and he is a scorer by nature, but not a one trick pony like Booker.
The lack of motor is evident, but I still have to see how he plays in elite conditioning to draw a conclusion if it is him or his lack of conditioning.
I can't care less if he is or is not enjoyable off the court.
Last edited by nash on Tue May 30, 2017 8:00 am; edited 1 time in total
Joined: 23 Jun 2005 Posts: 8488 Location: The (real) short corner
Posted: Tue May 30, 2017 4:47 am Post subject:
dao wrote:
wow. Mike Schmitz from draft express isn't too high on Russell. He says that he's super talented but has a low motor and laissez faire attitude. He's higher on Ingram and thinks his upside is through the roof. He discusses it here with GT on laker film room at minute 51.
So we keep hearing this sort of thing about Russell. Magic said a relatively similar thing in a roundabout way when he says " Russell has it, it just has to come out of him" in the Ingram is untouchable interview.
I wonder if his laid back style of play is mistaken for low motor/intensity, or if this truly is a problem. Honestly though I think this will all go away with the addition of Lonzo. Russell's a scorer that has been asked to change his style of play to be a "point guard." I think he overthinks the game out there. The unit he played with last year also didn't help him very much. Not enough passing, not enough player movement. I think Russell and Lonzo will really feed off of each other.
Russell will break out this year imo. He'll score 20+ ppg and increase that TS% into the mid 50s.
I think a lot of the national guys look at the tire fire that is the Lakers defensive ranking and assume that it must be the non-athletic point guard that's the main problem, rather than Randle and the still raw Ingram. Doesn't help that some of the advanced stats use priors that make the same mistake.
Depending on whether we get PG13 this year, I think he's going to be around 18/4/5 this year. _________________ From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
The most compelling thing with me when it comes to keeping DAR and pairing him up with Lonzo is how well he played down the stretch as a shooting guard and how much of a better shooter he is in a catch and shoot as opposed to him creating his own shots.
Having both of them on the floor could also potentially be a big problem for opposing teams because of their ability to create, assuming DAR can make better decisions with the ball in his hands but I think a lot of that has to do with the roster currently lacking a true pick and pop post player.
The most compelling thing with me when it comes to keeping DAR and pairing him up with Lonzo is how well he played down the stretch as a shooting guard and how much of a better shooter he is in a catch and shoot as opposed to him creating his own shots.
Having both of them on the floor could also potentially be a big problem for opposing teams because of their ability to create, assuming DAR can make better decisions with the ball in his hands but I think a lot of that has to do with the roster currently lacking a true pick and pop post player.
It may not be a mostly "he can't create for himself" problem more so than no one else on his team really fed him the ball.
You had Swaggy/Deng/Jules/Moz as the first starting group, and aside from Jules, no one passed him the ball for a shot.
Now, you have multiple guys who opportunistically will move the ball in Ball/Ingram/Jules.
I think a lot of players would have struggled as much or worse than DLO given the circumstances and personnel, yet he managed some respectable averages across this season. _________________ From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
wow. Mike Schmitz from draft express isn't too high on Russell. He says that he's super talented but has a low motor and laissez faire attitude. He's higher on Ingram and thinks his upside is through the roof. He discusses it here with GT on laker film room at minute 51.
So we keep hearing this sort of thing about Russell. Magic said a relatively similar thing in a roundabout way when he says " Russell has it, it just has to come out of him" in the Ingram is untouchable interview.
I wonder if his laid back style of play is mistaken for low motor/intensity, or if this truly is a problem. Honestly though I think this will all go away with the addition of Lonzo. Russell's a scorer that has been asked to change his style of play to be a "point guard." I think he overthinks the game out there. The unit he played with last year also didn't help him very much. Not enough passing, not enough player movement. I think Russell and Lonzo will really feed off of each other.
Russell will break out this year imo. He'll score 20+ ppg and increase that TS% into the mid 50s.
I think a lot of the national guys look at the tire fire that is the Lakers defensive ranking and assume that it must be the non-athletic point guard that's the main problem, rather than Randle and the still raw Ingram. Doesn't help that some of the advanced stats use priors that make the same mistake.
Actually, the thing that bothers me about DLo is that laissez faire perception. I just don't know if he is being that or of it just looks like he is.
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