Joined: 10 Apr 2001 Posts: 65135 Location: Orange County, CA
Posted: Sat Apr 30, 2016 8:44 pm Post subject:
kikanga wrote:
Mike@LG wrote:
kikanga wrote:
I think Luke has Jamal Murray VERY high on his draft board. He was 12 threes away from breaking Curry's freshman 3PT record.
Dude will shoot 40%+ from 3 in a GS like offense.
Might be, bye bye Jordan Clarkson if we have any good-great luck in FA.
This may be odd. While I think GT thinks of Murray in a Klay role, I think of Dunn as a PG with DLO in the Klay role.
Upgrade defensively. Still get shooting/playmaking both spots. Physical tools are there.
Personally I think Dunn is ready to contribute in more ways than Murray Day 1.
Just think Luke values 3PT shooting waaaaay more than any other skill (including 1 on 1 perimeter defense, and playmaking via P&R ball handler). Murray (if we draft him) is likely the best spot up 3pt shooter on the roster. And since Luke wants to turn us into GS South. I think that's his guy with the 3rd pick. Maybe even at the 2nd pick.
I agree that 3-point shooting is a premium, but I also think that the ability to attack and draw in the defense to create open 3-point shots is a big deal too.
I think Luke can create GSW South but in a different way. We have no Klay Thompson. We have no Curry. We have no Iguodala. So, what ways could the Lakers be better? One way? Dribble penetration. Another? Defense.
As I mentioned before, I love the idea of Dunn as a playmaker, defender, polishing shooter. Have DLO and Clarkson play the Klay Thompson role. DLO is more 3pt friendly. Clarkson is more attack friendly.
But defensively, there's so much more length along the perimeter and they can force turnovers at a high clip.
If the Lakers go #1, with the premium on shooting, do you really think they take Ingram over Simmons? Or take Simmons' ability to play "Iguodala" and then open up shots? I have my preferences, but I think even Walton would take the playmaker over the shooter.
Apply that same philosophy to guard if you'd like.
Any of those 3 guys, Dunn, Clarkson, DLO, works. Murray would work too, but IMHO, not as a primary scoring option. Frankly, the Lakers don't really have a primary scoring option. Right now it's a bunch of 15ppg guys but no stand out #1 guy. The team really struggles with shot creation if a play breaks down. I think Dunn could make someone like DLO or Clarkson #1 options with more open looks. I don't think Murray has that level of creativity.
I especially think that those in favor of Murray are all talking about how he fits within a system. It's not the same rationale as BPA IMHO.
When I watch Klay and Curry, sure, a majority of the time they are spot up shooters.
But they will attack open spaces. Klay has been more aggressive attacking the rim the past couple of years. I can't imagine Murray being as effective. That's also how Murray got figured out and shut down in the tourney.
I understand the highlight of 1.51ppp off screens. Personally, I'd just rather have DLO run the Klay role because I know he's got that mid-range game and can create a shot at the cup. I can't imagine that of Murray.
The Lakers need help everywhere already. The guy that IMHO plays most closely to Klay is Hield. The issue is Hield's A/TO ratio. The work ethic isn't in question. Ability to get to the basket? Much improved. PPP off screens, contested, all sorts of scenarios? Awfully good.
I guess my thing is, if Jeff Teague can go from 22% from the 3pt line as a rookie to 40% this season, why can't Kris Dunn?
Or, if we want to go crazy... trade the pick + player (if possible) for Booker. Then freak out. _________________ Resident Car Nut.
I did an aggregate of the ESPN, SI, DX, Nbadraft.net, CBS, Bleacher Report, & HoopsHype draft rankings. Here are the Top 10, with their average ranking, after I tossed out the highest and lowest ranking for each player:
1) Ben Simmons..........1.2
2) Brandon Ingram.......1.8
3) Dragan Bender.........3.4
4) Jamal Murray...........5.0
5) Kris Dunn................5.2
6) Buddy Hield.............6.0
7) Jaylen Brown...........6.8
8) Jakob Poeltl.............8.2
9) Henry Ellenson.......12.0
10) Skal Labissiere......12.2
I did an aggregate of the ESPN, SI, DX, Nbadraft.net, CBS, Bleacher Report, & HoopsHype draft rankings. Here are the Top 10, with their average ranking, after I tossed out the highest and lowest ranking for each player:
1) Ben Simmons..........1.2
2) Brandon Ingram.......1.8
3) Dragan Bender.........3.4
4) Jamal Murray...........5.0
5) Kris Dunn................5.2
6) Buddy Hield.............6.0
7) Jaylen Brown...........6.8
8) Jakob Poeltl.............8.2
9) Henry Ellenson.......12.0
10) Skal Labissiere......12.2
Sounds about right. Hield and Dunn can be switched depending on who has the 5th pick and 6th pick. Looking at the projections, the T-Wolves are projected 5th and Pelicans projected 6th. I think either of those two teams that's the 5th pick would draft Hield over Dunn IMO. _________________ Darvin Scam: https://media.tenor.com/images/3c15249955860a4b16b59e8ae035fb75/tenor.gif
Joined: 10 Apr 2001 Posts: 65135 Location: Orange County, CA
Posted: Sat Apr 30, 2016 10:14 pm Post subject:
Quote:
Sounds about right. Hield and Dunn can be switched depending on who has the 5th pick and 6th pick. Looking at the projections, the T-Wolves are projected 5th and Pelicans projected 6th. I think either of those two teams that's the 5th pick would draft Hield over Dunn IMO.
From prior experience, it's just far too early to tell. I expect some switching of those positions after the lottery, workouts, and interviews.
There's a part of me that is going to think that Murray will be a workout warrior in terms of 3/4 court speed and vert. Hield may not show as well athletically, but there's no doubt about his shooting abilities through various situations.
I'm still looking for the latest Bender footage, to the point of watching game recaps of Maccabi Tel Aviv. 5 games in, little footage.
I think Walton would take Simmons over Ingram, even if shooting is a premium. Simmons is the better defender, passer, athlete. Ball-dominant.
But if I apply that same thinking to Dunn, others would still prefer Hield or Murray.
The only difference is the position played. _________________ Resident Car Nut.
If we get the number three pick and go with a guard, I would take Hield over Murray and Dunn.
Btw, on NBAdraft.net the player they compare Kris Dunn to is...wait for it...Jordan Clarkson. Maybe we should just stick with the actual Jordan Clarkson.
If we get the number three pick and go with a guard, I would take Hield over Murray and Dunn.
Btw, on NBAdraft.net the player they compare Kris Dunn to is...wait for it...Jordan Clarkson. Maybe we should just stick with the actual Jordan Clarkson.
I did an aggregate of the ESPN, SI, DX, Nbadraft.net, CBS, Bleacher Report, & HoopsHype draft rankings. Here are the Top 10, with their average ranking, after I tossed out the highest and lowest ranking for each player:
1) Ben Simmons..........1.2
2) Brandon Ingram.......1.8
3) Dragan Bender.........3.4
4) Jamal Murray...........5.0
5) Kris Dunn................5.2
6) Buddy Hield.............6.0
7) Jaylen Brown...........6.8
8) Jakob Poeltl.............8.2
9) Henry Ellenson.......12.0
10) Skal Labissiere......12.2
Nice. Thank you.
Can't wait to see KD in the NBA next year.
This mightve already been posted but since there's discussion for if we get the 3rd pick, here's Buddy Hield going 36 for 37 from 3 in a pre draft workout last week
Bender is the most logical choice if we were to have the 3rd pick. Not that it matters since we will get the 1st pick but for the sake of conversation...
Option A: Dragan Bender
+ 18 years old
+ 7'1. Due to his age, could even grow another inch or two possibly.
+ Very athletic
+ Has a shooting touch anywhere on offense
+ Solid defender
+ Can play either SF, PF, or Center depending on how he trains physically.
+ A freaking amazing name
+ plays for Tel Aviv. Yay Israel!
- Weak Rebounder
- Skinny. Needs to bulk up
- Doesn't seem to have much of a post game
- Might be raw for the first year or so.
His potential in the NBA will depend a lot on how he builds and bulks himself up physically and as long as he is a hard worker. If he works hard, he can easily be a great player next to Randle and would complement him perfectly. Mitch has also scouted him a month or so ago and was very interested in him. He also played one of his better games with Mitch there.
Now with that said, if Bender doesn't do so well in the workouts, than there is only one other logical option...
Option B: Buddy Hield
+ Outstanding Shooting
+ An even better player when he plays off ball.
+ Would complement Russell amazingly well
+ Fits Luke's offense
+ Also a fantastic name
- Age
- Not exactly a wonderful defender
While I don't think Hield is a top 3 pick, he is IMO MUCH BETTER than Dunn and would take him over Murray. Besides the fact I'm not impressed with Dunn at all, he hogs the ball too much, streaky jump shot and isn't really a fit with this roster or with Luke. As another poster here wonderfully put it, it would be like drafting lineman to play the 4-3 instead of 3-4.
Murray is intriguing and I agree with other people that on this team, he is higher on the draft list then Dunn due to being a better fit and much younger, but he's also basically a 6'3 SG. His shooting is great too but will probably have trouble driving against bigger players in the line just like he did in College.
None of this will matter when we get the 1st pick and pick Simmons/Ingram but in the case of the 3rd pick, Dragan Bender is IMO the most logical choice for this team due to his upside and potential and age. As well as Mitch being impressed by him when he scouted him earlier. Of course this could change during workouts but he's an ideal fit with this roster.
For some reason I think Hield is destined to be a Laker.
Joined: 15 Sep 2012 Posts: 29286 Location: La La Land
Posted: Sun May 01, 2016 1:32 am Post subject:
Mike@LG wrote:
kikanga wrote:
Mike@LG wrote:
kikanga wrote:
I think Luke has Jamal Murray VERY high on his draft board. He was 12 threes away from breaking Curry's freshman 3PT record.
Dude will shoot 40%+ from 3 in a GS like offense.
Might be, bye bye Jordan Clarkson if we have any good-great luck in FA.
This may be odd. While I think GT thinks of Murray in a Klay role, I think of Dunn as a PG with DLO in the Klay role.
Upgrade defensively. Still get shooting/playmaking both spots. Physical tools are there.
Personally I think Dunn is ready to contribute in more ways than Murray Day 1.
Just think Luke values 3PT shooting waaaaay more than any other skill (including 1 on 1 perimeter defense, and playmaking via P&R ball handler). Murray (if we draft him) is likely the best spot up 3pt shooter on the roster. And since Luke wants to turn us into GS South. I think that's his guy with the 3rd pick. Maybe even at the 2nd pick.
I agree that 3-point shooting is a premium, but I also think that the ability to attack and draw in the defense to create open 3-point shots is a big deal too.
I think Luke can create GSW South but in a different way. We have no Klay Thompson. We have no Curry. We have no Iguodala. So, what ways could the Lakers be better? One way? Dribble penetration. Another? Defense.
As I mentioned before, I love the idea of Dunn as a playmaker, defender, polishing shooter. Have DLO and Clarkson play the Klay Thompson role. DLO is more 3pt friendly. Clarkson is more attack friendly.
But defensively, there's so much more length along the perimeter and they can force turnovers at a high clip.
If the Lakers go #1, with the premium on shooting, do you really think they take Ingram over Simmons? Or take Simmons' ability to play "Iguodala" and then open up shots? I have my preferences, but I think even Walton would take the playmaker over the shooter.
Apply that same philosophy to guard if you'd like.
Any of those 3 guys, Dunn, Clarkson, DLO, works. Murray would work too, but IMHO, not as a primary scoring option. Frankly, the Lakers don't really have a primary scoring option. Right now it's a bunch of 15ppg guys but no stand out #1 guy. The team really struggles with shot creation if a play breaks down. I think Dunn could make someone like DLO or Clarkson #1 options with more open looks. I don't think Murray has that level of creativity.
I especially think that those in favor of Murray are all talking about how he fits within a system. It's not the same rationale as BPA IMHO.
When I watch Klay and Curry, sure, a majority of the time they are spot up shooters.
But they will attack open spaces. Klay has been more aggressive attacking the rim the past couple of years. I can't imagine Murray being as effective. That's also how Murray got figured out and shut down in the tourney.
I understand the highlight of 1.51ppp off screens. Personally, I'd just rather have DLO run the Klay role because I know he's got that mid-range game and can create a shot at the cup. I can't imagine that of Murray.
The Lakers need help everywhere already. The guy that IMHO plays most closely to Klay is Hield. The issue is Hield's A/TO ratio. The work ethic isn't in question. Ability to get to the basket? Much improved. PPP off screens, contested, all sorts of scenarios? Awfully good.
I guess my thing is, if Jeff Teague can go from 22% from the 3pt line as a rookie to 40% this season, why can't Kris Dunn?
Or, if we want to go crazy... trade the pick + player (if possible) for Booker. Then freak out.
You're a smart man Mike. In terms of prospect evaluation. I hold you in the highest regard.
Listening to you make the argument for Dunn. I can relate to it on a personal level.
From a simplistic point of view, I hold Dunn in the same category as Derozan and Simmons. All 3 guys are half court play makers that can contribute with a 25% usage rate, Day 1 on the lakers.
All those guys can create for themselves (and others) against 1 on 1 defense and in P&R sets more than their peers (Derozan for Batum, Simmons for Ingram, Dunn for Murray).
Overall Derozan>Batum, Simmons>Ingram, and Dunn>Murray. But that isn't the argument.
The argument is what Luke wants. And in that vain, Murray might be the best spot up shooting Guard in the draft in the last 5 years. Especially if you factor in age and future aptitude.
Who can catch and shoot, with space, off an offball screen better than Murray at his age? The answer is Steph Curry and VERY few other people. That's why I say we WILL select Murray over Dunn and MAY select Murray over Simmons (at the #2 pick). This is the "Luke Walton head coach" world we live in (in Lakerland). For better or worse.
I can't stress this enough, your reasoning is sound. But creating via P&R (especially with the PG) is more of an Atlanta system than a GS system. If we had hired the Assistant Coach from ATL (where Teague and Schroder thrive) I would agree with you. But that's not the case.
Coming from a guy who wanted Lavine and/or Hood > Randle and Mudiay > Russell (because I knew he'd create more shots for Kobe in the halfcourt with his P&R dribble penetration), I can relate to you. But sometimes, we gotta just let our personal preference go. Because it's obvious what direction our franchise wants to go.
We're Golden State South. We're trying to be the bootleg Warriors. And a bootleg Curry and Thompson Is Murray and DLO.
A point forward might be our leader in assists if Luke's system works optimally (by his standards). Depends on how much better DLO's playmaking is compared to Klay's and Curry's. _________________ "Every hurt is a lesson, and every lesson makes you better”
One name that does well in my metrics is Kansas' Brannen Greene. The dude had a true shooting percentage of 75% this year. !!!!
Even when you break it down, he was 61% on 2's, 49% on threes, 84% from the line and drew fouls incredibly well. Granted, he didn't play much at all, but all that offensive goodness (plus hitting 6.6 threes per 40 minutes) plus a very good 0.19 assist rate for a wing player--we might be looking at a very good offensive player. Also put up fairly good rebounding stats too.
Sure, the dude has absolutely zero athleticism to speak of, with nonexistent steal and block rates, but you rarely see all that offensive goodness in combination. I'd take a big flyer on him with a later pick, especially since I'm betting he can find ways to score in the league with his shooting in the forefront.
Okay, I'm pretty much decided that Simmons is my no.1. I used to waiver back and forth with him and Ingram, but my instincts tell me that Simmons is the better and safer bet.
In the same boat here, he has looked like he's threatened to stagnate a bit there, but I think coming into this side would light a fire under him again. Ingram made big strides but hasn't quite closed the gap for me. I want that passing touch in the interior, just waiting for the drive and oop to Nance as the defence comes over to block the lane. _________________ "I got Wheaties!"
Joined: 10 Apr 2001 Posts: 65135 Location: Orange County, CA
Posted: Sun May 01, 2016 12:08 pm Post subject:
Quote:
We're Golden State South. We're trying to be the bootleg Warriors.
Yeah, I appreciate your comments. I just have an issue thinking Murray is "Klay II". Klay was a slasher in HS before he was a shooter in college. He found a way to fit both into the NBA.
The thing about GSW South is, while Walton wants to implement a GSW-type system to the Lakers, I also think it has to be adapted to the current talent.
The young talent on the team is focused around slashing, namely Randle and Clarkson. While I don't like the complete lack of shooting talent on the team, I do think the priority is still in "franchise players or BPAs first" and then fitting the system accordingly.
While this Laker team may not be taking a lot of long 2s from the perimeter or erratic shot selection 3s (Curry's shot selection is horrid, but rhythmic), I do think the current Lakers would be a LOT more athletic around the hoop, a lot of driving and some kicking out.
Just think Dunn fits it best. Really love the idea of Dunn attacking and opening shots up for Nance, Brown, and DLO. If there's a shot off screen, he'll hit an average clip.
Can't imagine Murray doing that if the initial shot off screen isn't there.
All of the Pick and Pop for Dunn and Vezenkov please.
Joined: 10 Apr 2001 Posts: 65135 Location: Orange County, CA
Posted: Sun May 01, 2016 12:09 pm Post subject:
jorkerjork wrote:
One name that does well in my metrics is Kansas' Brannen Greene. The dude had a true shooting percentage of 75% this year. !!!!
Even when you break it down, he was 61% on 2's, 49% on threes, 84% from the line and drew fouls incredibly well. Granted, he didn't play much at all, but all that offensive goodness (plus hitting 6.6 threes per 40 minutes) plus a very good 0.19 assist rate for a wing player--we might be looking at a very good offensive player. Also put up fairly good rebounding stats too.
Sure, the dude has absolutely zero athleticism to speak of, with nonexistent steal and block rates, but you rarely see all that offensive goodness in combination. I'd take a big flyer on him with a later pick, especially since I'm betting he can find ways to score in the league with his shooting in the forefront.
Did he declare? What about Alexander Vezenkov? _________________ Resident Car Nut.
Joined: 10 Apr 2001 Posts: 65135 Location: Orange County, CA
Posted: Sun May 01, 2016 12:25 pm Post subject:
Fan0Bynum17 wrote:
If we're gonna take a shooter, I'd rather just go for Hield and not fail to get a pretty damn good one.
I agree with Hield. At least I can trust him to shoot under various situations, nearly equally as effecitve across the board. _________________ Resident Car Nut.
If we're gonna take a shooter, I'd rather just go for Hield and not fail to get a pretty damn good one.
I agree with Hield. At least I can trust him to shoot under various situations, nearly equally as effecitve across the board.
Yeah, he's a very safe bet as far as shooting goes. So if we're going to narrow our focus like that, then just go all in and do it. I'm ultimately with you though, I say if we get the relatively unfortunate position of 3rd pick in this 2-player (at best) draft, and we keep it, take the BPA, which is Dunn IMO, and just find a way to make it work.
Joined: 10 Apr 2001 Posts: 65135 Location: Orange County, CA
Posted: Sun May 01, 2016 12:41 pm Post subject:
Fan0Bynum17 wrote:
So do we think there's any chance Bender could be a good fit for us? Could he eventually be molded into a 2-way center?
I don't think of Bender as a center. I know he has the height and standing reach, but I still see him as a stretch four. He needs the height/standing reach to compensate for total lack of post base.
What I do like about Bender is that he has at least shown that he can run the floor, have 3pt. range, and be a willing passer. I just don't think he's anywhere near as polished as Porzingis was last year. Porzingis lacked base, but had a lot more motor and fight, played physical in the paint when going for boards. _________________ Resident Car Nut.
Joined: 15 Sep 2012 Posts: 29286 Location: La La Land
Posted: Sun May 01, 2016 1:28 pm Post subject:
Mike@LG wrote:
Fan0Bynum17 wrote:
So do we think there's any chance Bender could be a good fit for us? Could he eventually be molded into a 2-way center?
I don't think of Bender as a center. I know he has the height and standing reach, but I still see him as a stretch four. He needs the height/standing reach to compensate for total lack of post base.
What I do like about Bender is that he has at least shown that he can run the floor, have 3pt. range, and be a willing passer. I just don't think he's anywhere near as polished as Porzingis was last year. Porzingis lacked base, but had a lot more motor and fight, played physical in the paint when going for boards.
Couldn't agree more with the bolded. _________________ "Every hurt is a lesson, and every lesson makes you better”
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
