OFFICIAL BRANDON INGRAM THREAD!!
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 803, 804, 805 ... 833, 834, 835  Next

 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
epak
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 15730

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 1:23 pm    Post subject:

The Juggernaut wrote:
GoldenThroat wrote:
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.

https://i.imgur.com/Xa7FOzj.png

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.


Ball/KCP/BI/JR/Kuz lineup is our best lineup by far. I don't know why Luke won't give them more burn let alone start them.



Seriously. Just start them, so we can know if that lineup is for real or not. I want to see if Jules can handle the workload at his high impact rate.
_________________
2018: Lonzo . PG12 . BI . Kuzma . Dedmon
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
SocalDevin
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 26 May 2016
Posts: 2558
Location: Long Beach

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 1:24 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.


The main problem with this theory is that you could give more minutes to quite a few players.. and not see an increase in their scoring and field goal percentage. Not see an increase in their blocks and rebounds. You actually stated that you believed that Clarkson would average more rebounds and blocks with 5 more minutes of playing time. And that Corey Brewer would average more points and a higher FG% with more playing time. No way to prove you wrong but I doubt you find too many individuals who'd agree with that.

First the narrative was "our" perspective is nuanced and has more validity because we base our analysis on actual data, "you guys" base your analysis on the eye test. Now we have data that clearly shows progression across the board and it's dismissed because it's being attributed to more playing time.

Debate is futile for the most part, in regards to player value. Perspectives are rarely changed. I suppose we can all continue to bump heads respectfully until Ingram definitively makes it apparent that many were just flat out wrong about him.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
GoldenThroat
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 35158

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 1:25 pm    Post subject:

defense wrote:
Hopefully we get to see it this season. I'm dying to know if would work long term. I have my doubts.


I have some skepticism as well, and they're definitely not staying at +28 over a larger sample, but I think it's worth going to ASAP. It's not like the current starters have done a great job, and they've gotten a good deal of minutes at this point. There are some politics in benching Lopez though.
_________________
If you have any tickets to buy for anything coming up, use the Promo Code: LFR to get $20 your first order on SeatGeek. Sign-up Here: https://sg.app.link/lfr
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
GoldenThroat
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 35158

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 1:31 pm    Post subject:

SocalDevin wrote:
The main problem with this theory is that you could give more minutes to quite a few players.. and not see an increase in their scoring and field goal percentage. Not see an increase in their blocks and rebounds. You actually stated that you believed that Clarkson would average more rebounds and blocks with 5 more minutes of playing time. And that Corey Brewer would average more points and a higher FG% with more playing time. No way to prove you wrong but I doubt you find too many individuals who'd agree with that.

First the narrative was "our" perspective is nuanced and has more validity because we base our analysis on actual data, "you guys" base your analysis on the eye test. Now we have data that clearly shows progression across the board and it's dismissed because it's being attributed to more playing time.

Debate is futile for the most part, in regards to player value. Perspectives are rarely changed. I suppose we can all continue to bump heads respectfully until Ingram definitively makes it apparent that many were just flat out wrong about him.


I did not say that Brewer would average a higher FG% with more playing time. But yes, he and Clarkson would average more points, rebounds, blocks, etc. if given 5 more minutes per game, and it would likely be pretty close to whatever increase 5 more minutes per game would represent. A player is going to put up more counting numbers in 30 minutes than they do in 25. If you want to argue that, we have nothing to discuss as it pertains to that.

We have data that suggests a significant increase in his ability to drive to the basket, and marginal improvement in other areas, with perhaps the exception of shot-blocking. That's what the data suggests.
_________________
If you have any tickets to buy for anything coming up, use the Promo Code: LFR to get $20 your first order on SeatGeek. Sign-up Here: https://sg.app.link/lfr
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
SocalDevin
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 26 May 2016
Posts: 2558
Location: Long Beach

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 1:48 pm    Post subject:

GoldenThroat wrote:
SocalDevin wrote:
The main problem with this theory is that you could give more minutes to quite a few players.. and not see an increase in their scoring and field goal percentage. Not see an increase in their blocks and rebounds. You actually stated that you believed that Clarkson would average more rebounds and blocks with 5 more minutes of playing time. And that Corey Brewer would average more points and a higher FG% with more playing time. No way to prove you wrong but I doubt you find too many individuals who'd agree with that.

First the narrative was "our" perspective is nuanced and has more validity because we base our analysis on actual data, "you guys" base your analysis on the eye test. Now we have data that clearly shows progression across the board and it's dismissed because it's being attributed to more playing time.

Debate is futile for the most part, in regards to player value. Perspectives are rarely changed. I suppose we can all continue to bump heads respectfully until Ingram definitively makes it apparent that many were just flat out wrong about him.


I did not say that Brewer would average a higher FG% with more playing time. But yes, he and Clarkson would average more points, rebounds, blocks, etc. if given 5 more minutes per game, and it would likely be pretty close to whatever increase 5 more minutes per game would represent. A player is going to put up more counting numbers in 30 minutes than they do in 25. If you want to argue that, we have nothing to discuss as it pertains to that.

We have data that suggests a significant increase in his ability to drive to the basket, and marginal improvement in other areas, with perhaps the exception of shot-blocking. That's what the data suggests.


My point is Ingram has scored more with a higher FG percentage. Which is key, which indicates an advancement in skill level. Not all players you give more minutes to will increase their scoring and FG percentage. We can agree to disagree though.

Marginal improvement across the board, with major improvement in scoring efficiency certainly qualifies as progress considering where he started last season. And I wouldn't characterize shooting almost 70% from the ft line after shooting close to 60 last season as marginal.

We wanted better FT shooting, Done..
We wanted more blocks, Done.
We wanted better off ball defense, Done.

Progression beats stagnation.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
epak
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 15730

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 2:00 pm    Post subject:

Per 36:

Year 1: 11.7 pts, 5 rebs, 2.6 asst, 40% fg, 29% 3pt, 62% ft
Year 2: 17.1 pts, 5.8 rebs, 3.1 asst, 46% fg, 30% 3pt, 68% ft

That's pretty good. The thing that I thought would push him over to the Magic Johnson expectation was an increase in ftr. He's at .405 (5.6 fta per 36) compared to .312 (3.4 fta per 36) last year.

Just as a barometer, James Harden has a ftr of .43 this year; has been over .500 the last 7 years. I think the league cracking down on BS foul calls at the 3 point line is dropping his attempts.
_________________
2018: Lonzo . PG12 . BI . Kuzma . Dedmon
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
SocalDevin
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 26 May 2016
Posts: 2558
Location: Long Beach

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 2:03 pm    Post subject:

epak wrote:
Per 36:

Year 1: 11.7 pts, 5 rebs, 2.6 asst, 40% fg, 29% 3pt, 62% ft
Year 2: 17.1 pts, 5.8 rebs, 3.1 asst, 46% fg, 30% 3pt, 68% ft

That's pretty good. The thing that I thought would push him over to the Magic Johnson expectation was an increase in ftr. He's at .405 (5.6 fta per 36) compared to .312 (3.4 fta per 36) last year.

Just as a barometer, James Harden has a ftr of .43 this year; has been over .500 the last 7 years. I think the league cracking down on BS foul calls at the 3 point line is dropping his attempts.


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Mike@LG
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 10 Apr 2001
Posts: 56408
Location: Orange County, CA

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 2:55 pm    Post subject:

epak wrote:
Per 36:

Year 1: 11.7 pts, 5 rebs, 2.6 asst, 40% fg, 29% 3pt, 62% ft
Year 2: 17.1 pts, 5.8 rebs, 3.1 asst, 46% fg, 30% 3pt, 68% ft

That's pretty good. The thing that I thought would push him over to the Magic Johnson expectation was an increase in ftr. He's at .405 (5.6 fta per 36) compared to .312 (3.4 fta per 36) last year.

Just as a barometer, James Harden has a ftr of .43 this year; has been over .500 the last 7 years. I think the league cracking down on BS foul calls at the 3 point line is dropping his attempts.


That's elite development. It's so rare that it gets that good from year 1 to year 2.
_________________
Resident Car Nut.
Top 3 Pick: Fultz, Ball, Tatum
LAL ended w 3 of 4 guys of my '17 Draft list.
Fultz, Ball, Tatum, Jackson, DSJ, Monk, Markkanen, Collins, Kennard, Mitchell

https://hoop-math.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
TheBlackMamba
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 23 Apr 2007
Posts: 5527

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 3:36 pm    Post subject:

Is it fair to say that he's improved significantly as an individual scorer from where he was at this point last year, but his lack of a jumpshot and tendency to ISO (without good shooters to kick out to on his drives) are what play into his negative offensive box score plus/minus metrics since both are detrimental to the team's offensive flow and efficiency? I don't think it's just his own shooting that holds back his impact, but the lack of shooting around him, which is obviously a team-wide issue. Put shooters around him and space the floor better, all of a sudden we're much better positioned to play off of his driving ability, which is really his one gift on offense and something that's worked well for him individually even without spacing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
GoldenThroat
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 35158

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 3:48 pm    Post subject:

TheBlackMamba wrote:
Is it fair to say that he's improved significantly as an individual scorer from where he was at this point last year, but his lack of a jumpshot and tendency to ISO (without good shooters to kick out to on his drives) are what play into his negative offensive box score plus/minus metrics since both are detrimental to the team's offensive flow and efficiency? I don't think it's just his own shooting that holds back his impact, but the lack of shooting around him, which is obviously a team-wide issue. Put shooters around him and space the floor better, all of a sudden we're much better positioned to play off of his driving ability, which is really his one gift on offense and something that's worked well for him individually even without spacing.


Jeremias Engelmann (the guy who came up with RPM) addressed this the other day. He said that the two main factors in ORPM disliking Ingram are his poor A:TO ratio and the fact that the Lakers score 9 points per 100 possessions more when he's off of the court.
_________________
If you have any tickets to buy for anything coming up, use the Promo Code: LFR to get $20 your first order on SeatGeek. Sign-up Here: https://sg.app.link/lfr
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
manlisten
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 09 Jul 2004
Posts: 1233

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 4:00 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).


It's interesting that there was a post directly above mine clearly addressing a poster's intelligence or lack of that went under the radar.
_________________
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
manlisten
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 09 Jul 2004
Posts: 1233

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 4:05 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.


Do you honestly believe that last year's Brandon given this year's minutes puts up the numbers and games he's been having so far? I don't.
_________________
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
Daphanabe
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 24 Nov 2007
Posts: 1571

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 4:08 pm    Post subject:

manlisten wrote:
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).


It's interesting that there was a post directly above mine clearly addressing a poster's intelligence or lack of that went under the radar.


For some reason that poster gets a pass every single time despite spamming pretty much every thread with his nonsense.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
GoldenThroat
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 35158

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 4:11 pm    Post subject:

manlisten wrote:
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.


Do you honestly believe that last year's Brandon given this year's minutes puts up the numbers and games he's been having so far? I don't.


No, which is why he put up 9.4ppg in those minutes.
_________________
If you have any tickets to buy for anything coming up, use the Promo Code: LFR to get $20 your first order on SeatGeek. Sign-up Here: https://sg.app.link/lfr
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
manlisten
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 09 Jul 2004
Posts: 1233

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 4:13 pm    Post subject:

GoldenThroat wrote:
manlisten wrote:
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.


Do you honestly believe that last year's Brandon given this year's minutes puts up the numbers and games he's been having so far? I don't.


No, which is why he put up 9.4ppg in those minutes.


Lol...sooo the perception of his progress is not just a result of his minutes then?
_________________
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
GoldenThroat
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 35158

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 4:16 pm    Post subject:

manlisten wrote:
GoldenThroat wrote:
manlisten wrote:
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.


Do you honestly believe that last year's Brandon given this year's minutes puts up the numbers and games he's been having so far? I don't.


No, which is why he put up 9.4ppg in those minutes.


Lol...sooo the perception of his progress is not just a result of his minutes then?


Have I argued that he hasn't progressed?

I'm sorry, let me try that again.

Lollll....sooooo didja read what I said?

(did I do the whole "being unnecessarily snarky" thing right?)
_________________
If you have any tickets to buy for anything coming up, use the Promo Code: LFR to get $20 your first order on SeatGeek. Sign-up Here: https://sg.app.link/lfr
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
manlisten
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 09 Jul 2004
Posts: 1233

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 4:20 pm    Post subject:

Did I say that you argued that he hasn't progressed? You better take it down a notch before I get LakerSanity to read you the riot act
_________________
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
governator
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 28 Jan 2006
Posts: 6982

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 4:24 pm    Post subject:

oh boy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Mike@LG
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 10 Apr 2001
Posts: 56408
Location: Orange County, CA

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 4:24 pm    Post subject:

Quote:

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


Oh, it's not shaped by the minutes. I just figure it's around 30.

But the end of last season into this season, reminds me of Ingram's in-season development at Duke. 4th/5th option guy, more catch and shoot. Became #2 guy (behind Grayson Allen) and more effective on his attacks to the basket, with far more frequency.
_________________
Resident Car Nut.
Top 3 Pick: Fultz, Ball, Tatum
LAL ended w 3 of 4 guys of my '17 Draft list.
Fultz, Ball, Tatum, Jackson, DSJ, Monk, Markkanen, Collins, Kennard, Mitchell

https://hoop-math.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Mike@LG
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 10 Apr 2001
Posts: 56408
Location: Orange County, CA

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 4:25 pm    Post subject:

governator wrote:
oh boy



_________________
Resident Car Nut.
Top 3 Pick: Fultz, Ball, Tatum
LAL ended w 3 of 4 guys of my '17 Draft list.
Fultz, Ball, Tatum, Jackson, DSJ, Monk, Markkanen, Collins, Kennard, Mitchell

https://hoop-math.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
SocalDevin
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 26 May 2016
Posts: 2558
Location: Long Beach

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 4:33 pm    Post subject:

"If he got last year's minutes (28.8) he'd be at 13.7ppg right now, scoring at the same rate."

"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?"

"FWIW, the one-number metrics that I put value in have Lonzo having a better year than Ingram. BPM has Lonzo at -1.0, with Ingram at -2.2. RPM has Lonzo at -1.92, with Ingram at -2.57. Ingram's improved as a scorer, while Lonzo is a grease fire in that respect, but outside of that Lonzo outpaces Ingram in a lot of respects."

Again.. the argument falls apart because an increase in minutes won't improve free throw shooting.. Nor will it improve field goal percentages. Our perceptions of his improvement are based on those key factors.

Then to suggest that Ball is having a better year than Ingram?? I'd love to know how many here actually believes that.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
epak
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 15730

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 4:41 pm    Post subject:

Apart from shooting:

Player A: TRB% 11, AST% 29, STL% 1.9, BLK% 2.0, TOV% 19.3, VORP 0.2
Player B: TRB% 8.5, AST% 13, STL% 1.3, BLK% 1.9, TOV% 14.0, VORP 0.0
_________________
2018: Lonzo . PG12 . BI . Kuzma . Dedmon
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
TheBlackMamba
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 23 Apr 2007
Posts: 5527

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 5:43 pm    Post subject:

epak wrote:
Apart from shooting:

Player A: TRB% 11, AST% 29, STL% 1.9, BLK% 2.0, TOV% 19.3, VORP 0.2
Player B: TRB% 8.5, AST% 13, STL% 1.3, BLK% 1.9, TOV% 14.0, VORP 0.0


I just patted myself on the back for guessing Player A correctly

That block percentage, which nearly threw me off, is crazy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LakerSanity
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 29769
Location: Long Beach, California

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 5:55 pm    Post subject:

manlisten wrote:
Did I say that you argued that he hasn't progressed? You better take it down a notch before I get LakerSanity to read you the riot act


Posting here is a privilege, not a right. Hopefully you will realize that when you come back from your 3 day suspension.
_________________
LakersGround's Terms of Service
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LakerSanity
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 30 Nov 2006
Posts: 29769
Location: Long Beach, California

PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2017 6:03 pm    Post subject:

GoldenThroat wrote:
TheBlackMamba wrote:
Is it fair to say that he's improved significantly as an individual scorer from where he was at this point last year, but his lack of a jumpshot and tendency to ISO (without good shooters to kick out to on his drives) are what play into his negative offensive box score plus/minus metrics since both are detrimental to the team's offensive flow and efficiency? I don't think it's just his own shooting that holds back his impact, but the lack of shooting around him, which is obviously a team-wide issue. Put shooters around him and space the floor better, all of a sudden we're much better positioned to play off of his driving ability, which is really his one gift on offense and something that's worked well for him individually even without spacing.


Jeremias Engelmann (the guy who came up with RPM) addressed this the other day. He said that the two main factors in ORPM disliking Ingram are his poor A:TO ratio and the fact that the Lakers score 9 points per 100 possessions more when he's off of the court.


Those explanations amount to the same thing - a TO hurts your team probably more than just about anything you can do. Wastes an offensive possession for your team while giving the other team a statistically enhanced offensive possession. A double whammy.

Fortunately, turnovers also are an indication of youth and one of those things that tend to improve the most as one ages/gains more experience. Ingram has played more aggressively both as a scorer and a facility. He's exploring that role while also still trying to develop physically - those two factors explain a lot of turnovers. I don't see this problem being part of his long-term projection.
_________________
LakersGround's Terms of Service
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> LA Lakers Lounge All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 803, 804, 805 ... 833, 834, 835  Next
Page 804 of 835
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
© 1995-2010 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