Giannis on The Jump today. Showing his hands, really, really not human.
Nichol's goes on to say how earlier in Jordan's GM days he got obsessed with who could and couldn't palm the ball. "He found out too late that Kwame couldn't". hahah
https://youtu.be/mGyOvNjUr_Y?t=8m39s Giannis on The Jump today. Showing his hands, really, really not human.
Nichol's goes on to say how earlier in Jordan's GM days he got obsessed with who could and couldn't palm the ball. "He found out too late that Kwame couldn't". hahah
Joined: 10 Apr 2001 Posts: 65135 Location: Orange County, CA
Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2017 3:49 pm Post subject:
Quote:
MJST
I think you're reaching dude. I don't criticize Lonzo Ball's percentages. I do criticize his ability to attack the paint and get off midrange shots. That is VERY fair criticism considering the low volume 2pt. attempts.
Then Josh? Yeah I think it's fair criticism about his shooting too. How bad of a flag is it, when the guy shoots over 30% FT worse than Tatum, and has a lower TS%, despite the increase in 3pt FG% lately?
I wouldn't compare it to Winslow either. Winslow was more of a set shooter behind the arc. At least Josh takes legit jumpshots behind the arc, but just because Bruce Bowen was a poor FT% shooter and legit 3pt. shooter, doesn't mean it'll hold for Jackson.
But is there plenty of reason to believe that Tatum can increase his FG%? Why wouldn't there be? The form is legit from the FT line. Same form on his Iso creation shots, where he's able to create space. Then he did it off the dribble and in catch and shoot situations against VA. I'm not saying the guy is going to be 44% behind the arc, but where we're happy if Josh Jackson goes 2 of 4 or 4 of 4 (once), Tatum finally had a near perfect 3pt game on over 6 attempts. To me, that is due to translate, and it wasn't just role player shooting either.
I don't even buy into the fact that because Ingram did extraordinarily well in Iso but didn't in the NBA, that Tatum will have the same result. Ingram never had that many moves. Straight line drives and a spin move in the paint. That is it. Jab steps? Fades? Change of direction on the fly? No.
I still have concerns about his ability to defend (I'd hope he could defend PF/SF effectively), but at least this is SF-like skills in a PF/SF body.
In the end, I'm most biased to Fultz and Tatum, because they repeatedly break guys down in halfcourt sets. That's the easiest for me to eye test. But, I just want the BPA. _________________ Resident Car Nut.
https://youtu.be/mGyOvNjUr_Y?t=8m39s Giannis on The Jump today. Showing his hands, really, really not human.
Nichol's goes on to say how earlier in Jordan's GM days he got obsessed with who could and couldn't palm the ball. "He found out too late that Kwame couldn't". hahah
I think you're reaching dude. I don't criticize Lonzo Ball's percentages. I do criticize his ability to attack the paint and get off midrange shots. That is VERY fair criticism considering the low volume 2pt. attempts.
Then Josh? Yeah I think it's fair criticism about his shooting too. How bad of a flag is it, when the guy shoots over 30% FT worse than Tatum, and has a lower TS%, despite the increase in 3pt FG% lately?
I wouldn't compare it to Winslow either. Winslow was more of a set shooter behind the arc. At least Josh takes legit jumpshots behind the arc, but just because Bruce Bowen was a poor FT% shooter and legit 3pt. shooter, doesn't mean it'll hold for Jackson.
But is there plenty of reason to believe that Tatum can increase his FG%? Why wouldn't there be? The form is legit from the FT line. Same form on his Iso creation shots, where he's able to create space. Then he did it off the dribble and in catch and shoot situations against VA. I'm not saying the guy is going to be 44% behind the arc, but where we're happy if Josh Jackson goes 2 of 4 or 4 of 4 (once), Tatum finally had a near perfect 3pt game on over 6 attempts. To me, that is due to translate, and it wasn't just role player shooting either.
I don't even buy into the fact that because Ingram did extraordinarily well in Iso but didn't in the NBA, that Tatum will have the same result. Ingram never had that many moves. Straight line drives and a spin move in the paint. That is it. Jab steps? Fades? Change of direction on the fly? No.
I still have concerns about his ability to defend (I'd hope he could defend PF/SF effectively), but at least this is SF-like skills in a PF/SF body.
In the end, I'm most biased to Fultz and Tatum, because they repeatedly break guys down in halfcourt sets. That's the easiest for me to eye test. But, I just want the BPA.
I'm pretty much on the same boat. I used to Fultz or bust, but at the moment, I still feel that way but Tatum looks like a guy I could settle with instead of being like "trade the pick immediately if it's not 1st overall". _________________ Darvin Scam: https://media.tenor.com/images/3c15249955860a4b16b59e8ae035fb75/tenor.gif
https://youtu.be/mGyOvNjUr_Y?t=8m39s Giannis on The Jump today. Showing his hands, really, really not human.
Nichol's goes on to say how earlier in Jordan's GM days he got obsessed with who could and couldn't palm the ball. "He found out too late that Kwame couldn't". hahah
What the (bleep).
As a pianist, I'd kill to have hands that large.
Although maybe they'd look a little weird on a 5'9 guy
https://youtu.be/mGyOvNjUr_Y?t=8m39s Giannis on The Jump today. Showing his hands, really, really not human.
Nichol's goes on to say how earlier in Jordan's GM days he got obsessed with who could and couldn't palm the ball. "He found out too late that Kwame couldn't". hahah
What the (bleep).
As a pianist, I'd kill to have hands that large.
Although maybe they'd look a little weird on a 5'9 guy
I think you're reaching dude. I don't criticize Lonzo Ball's percentages. I do criticize his ability to attack the paint and get off midrange shots. That is VERY fair criticism considering the low volume 2pt. attempts.
Yet when he gets them he finishes them and has even been driving to the basket more as of late. He shoots 55% from the field and 43% from three. and 70% on all shots inside the arc. That's impressive, no matter how you slice it.
He's shot 111 shots inside the arc(making 78) and 141 from behind the arc(making 63). That means he's actually made more shots inside the arc than outside the arc this year on less shot attempts. What that should say is that he's efficient when he goes to the basket as well as effective from mid at a very high rate. And as far as Tatum goes, he's taken only 30 more FG from inside the arc than Ball has and considering his game was mainly from mid to inside should say something. Fultz is the one that takes a higher volume than both. Even still, Ball's efficiency finishing inside and from mid shouldn't be glossed over. 70% from 2 as a WING is darn impressive no matter who you are and shouldn't be scoffed at.
Mike@LG wrote:
Then Josh? Yeah I think it's fair criticism about his shooting too. How bad of a flag is it, when the guy shoots over 30% FT worse than Tatum, and has a lower TS%, despite the increase in 3pt FG% lately?
Yeah but we're talking about Jackson's jump shot improvement. Which you can obviously see has improved and the hitch is minuscule compared to what it once was. You look at the change in form of his jump shot and see it's big from its start in the season. Can we admit that at least? His jump shot and form on his jumper has improved tremendously from the start of the season.
Mike@LG wrote:
I wouldn't compare it to Winslow either. Winslow was more of a set shooter behind the arc. At least Josh takes legit jumpshots behind the arc, but just because Bruce Bowen was a poor FT% shooter and legit 3pt. shooter, doesn't mean it'll hold for Jackson.
Just as Tatum being a good free throw shooter doesn't mean he'll have a good three point shot. Jordan never did, Kobe never did either, and neither does Derozan despite being an 85% free throw shooter. So I'm not judging Jackson on the same kind of scale in reverse. I look at his jump shot's improvement in general, and as you said it's real jump shots. That hitch is near gone, which is great advancement in his jumper.
Mike@LG wrote:
But is there plenty of reason to believe that Tatum can increase his FG%? Why wouldn't there be? The form is legit from the FT line. Same form on his Iso creation shots, where he's able to create space.
He definitely can score in some iso situations
Mike@LG wrote:
Then he did it off the dribble and in catch and shoot situations against VA. I'm not saying the guy is going to be 44% behind the arc, but where we're happy if Josh Jackson goes 2 of 4 or 4 of 4 (once), Tatum finally had a near perfect 3pt game on over 6 attempts. To me, that is due to translate, and it wasn't just role player shooting either.
No it was not, but as was your stance with Jackson, anyone can get hot for some games, let's see how long it lasts for. I'm not taking any of a different stance.
Don't forget, I was also one of the first people to tout Tatum here, during last season when I compared him to Ingram and said that his handle was already in high school where I wanted Ingram's to be in college.
Mike@LG wrote:
I don't even buy into the fact that because Ingram did extraordinarily well in Iso but didn't in the NBA, that Tatum will have the same result. Ingram never had that many moves. Straight line drives and a spin move in the paint. That is it. Jab steps? Fades? Change of direction on the fly? No.
Look at the above point. Neither did I. In fact, when Tatum was in high school, I said he was better at it than Ingram was in college.
Mike@LG wrote:
I still have concerns about his ability to defend (I'd hope he could defend PF/SF effectively), but at least this is SF-like skills in a PF/SF body.
I'm actually less concerned about his defensive prospects actually.
Mike@LG wrote:
In the end, I'm most biased to Fultz and Tatum, because they repeatedly break guys down in halfcourt sets. That's the easiest for me to eye test. But, I just want the BPA.
Joined: 10 Apr 2001 Posts: 65135 Location: Orange County, CA
Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2017 7:30 pm Post subject:
Quote:
Yet when he gets them he finishes them and has even been driving to the basket more as of late. He shoots 55% from the field and 43% from three. and 70% on all shots inside the arc. That's impressive, no matter how you slice it...
Yeah but we're talking about Jackson's jump shot improvement. Which you can obviously see has improved and the hitch is minuscule compared to what it once was. You look at the change in form of his jump shot and see it's big from its start in the season. Can we admit that at least? His jump shot and form on his jumper has improved tremendously from the start of the season.
But I have freely admitted that a long time ago. Why is this a problem?
Quote:
And just because Tatum is a good free throw shooter doesn't mean he'll have a three point shot.
And just because Jackson is raising his 3pt% doesn't mean it'll stick at the NBA level.
Quote:
No it was not, but as was your stance with Jackson, anyone can get hot for some games, let's see how long it lasts for. I'm not taking any of a different stance.
Don't forget, I was also one of the first people to tout Tatum here, during last season when I compared him to Ingram and said that his handle was already in high school where I wanted Ingram's to be in college.
Personal opinion, I just thought it was a matter of time before it started to click. I mean, Tatum's season 3pt% jumped what, 4% after one game? We don't see that jump out of Josh Jackson's FT%. It's not like he doesn't get chances.
Quote:
In fact, when Tatum was in high school, I said he was better at it than Ingram was in college.
Are you searching for credit?
I don't understand these arguments. They're objective and definitely not about you. I've been eyeing Tatum more than all other prospects on the board, just out of preference. He's easier for me to notice trends compared to other players. I don't track Josh Jackson's catch and shoot 3s vs off the dribble 3s. I don't pay much attention to Lonzo Ball's 3-pointers, because everything I'm looking for is inside the paint. _________________ Resident Car Nut.
Also for those who love Tatum, he loves the Lakers, said the Lakers is where he wanted to be in 5 years.
NBADraft.net: Where do you see yourself five years from now?
Jayson Tatum: Hopefully playing for the Los Angeles Lakers. That would be a dream of mine. I’m a big Kobe Bryant fan and if I got a chance to play for the Lakers, get drafted, that would be a dream come true.
http://www.nbadraft.net/jayson-tatum-interview-0
Yet when he gets them he finishes them and has even been driving to the basket more as of late. He shoots 55% from the field and 43% from three. and 70% on all shots inside the arc. That's impressive, no matter how you slice it...
Basically your argument is that he's super efficient driving it inside, but he doesn't do it enough to your liking and you're worried that's because he can't? Wanting him to do it more often and being worried he can't be efficient at it are two different ways to look at it entirely imo.
If he doesn't do it enough to your liking that's one thing. But it's not like he struggles with it either.
Mike@LG wrote:
Quote:
Yeah but we're talking about Jackson's jump shot improvement. Which you can obviously see has improved and the hitch is minuscule compared to what it once was. You look at the change in form of his jump shot and see it's big from its start in the season. Can we admit that at least? His jump shot and form on his jumper has improved tremendously from the start of the season.
But I have freely admitted that a long time ago. Why is this a problem?
It's not. But using his free throw percentage to correlate with the worry his shot won't translate when his jumper he's fixed his form on I don't understand. Maybe his problem isn't going to be his jumper but getting his free throw form and his jumper form the same. Which again, considering how much he's changed his jumper which was deemed broken at the start of the season is a good sign for the future in terms of working on it.
Mike@LG wrote:
Quote:
And just because Tatum is a good free throw shooter doesn't mean he'll have a three point shot.
And just because Jackson is raising his 3pt% doesn't mean it'll stick at the NBA level.
And that's fine if you feel that way. Like I said, it's not an exact science.
Mike@LG wrote:
Quote:
No it was not, but as was your stance with Jackson, anyone can get hot for some games, let's see how long it lasts for. I'm not taking any of a different stance.
Don't forget, I was also one of the first people to tout Tatum here, during last season when I compared him to Ingram and said that his handle was already in high school where I wanted Ingram's to be in college.
Personal opinion, I just thought it was a matter of time before it started to click. I mean, Tatum's season 3pt% jumped what, 4% after one game? We don't see that jump out of Josh Jackson's FT%. It's not like he doesn't get chances.
No, but we did in his jumper.
Mike@LG wrote:
Quote:
In fact, when Tatum was in high school, I said he was better at it than Ingram was in college.
Are you searching for credit?
Nope, just making the point that what you're saying about Ingram and the 'iso translating' in comparison to Tatum is preaching to the choir with me because I was saying that about him way back last year in comparison to Tatum when Tatum was in high school. It was glaringly obvious then, and it continues to be at the college level.
Mike@LG wrote:
I don't understand these arguments. They're objective and definitely not about you. I've been eyeing Tatum more than all other prospects on the board, just out of preference. He's easier for me to notice trends compared to other players. I don't track Josh Jackson's catch and shoot 3s vs off the dribble 3s. I don't pay much attention to Lonzo Ball's 3-pointers, because everything I'm looking for is inside the paint.
And that's fine, but as I said, I don't make it an exact correlation between free throw percentage and jump shooting and vice versa and translatability therin.
Because as I said, there's been enough people that have shot great from the free throw and were bad three point shooters, and those that shot bad from free throw and were good three point shooters to not correlate the two as near absolutes.
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
