|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
audioaxes
Franchise Player
Joined: 26 Apr 2004
Posts: 12573
|
 Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2019 11:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Swagron wrote: | | Japago wrote: | Not drafting De'Aaron Fox has been the real miss, IMO. I haven't seen a lot of D'Angelo, but he still isn't that efficient. He doesn't get to the FT line. His defense still seems to be an issue.
De'Aaron is amazing. He's already one of the hardest PGs to defend. He gets to the rim or draws fouls at will. He shoots 3s at a decent percentage. He has defensive potential as well. He'll find open guys. He already draws enough defensive attention to get other guys open. |
You’re right...Fox was the guy I wanted all along. We swung and missed big time. In addition to what you just mentioned as positive attributes is his passion on the court...not that sleepy stoic look our guy has. |
I dont blame the Lakers for not going for Fox. Shoot first PGs are hardly a good building block for a championship team |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
BigGameHames
Star Player
Joined: 24 May 2015
Posts: 7982
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2019 11:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The God Particle wrote: | | BigGameHames wrote: | | The God Particle wrote: | | BigGameHames wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | Joe Pesci wrote: | | Jump-shooting is the easiest thing to fix. History is littered with players who couldn't shoot a lick and became great shooters. |
Ball is 21 years old, has played over 3000 minutes in the NBA, and has taken almost 1000 shots. At this point in the season, his TS% is .482 and his 3P% is .327. I don't doubt that there have been players with shooting deficiencies when they hit the league who later became great shooters. I can't think of anyone analogous to Ball who went on to become a great shooter.
Jason Kidd is the optimistic analogy, but he never became a great shooter. His TS% in his prime years was about .500. He was an all-star because he had other qualities that Ball lacks (at least so far). Ricky Rubio is another common analogy. His peak TS% has been .539. I've heard Kyle Lowry used as an analogy, but he never shot as badly as Ball. His TS% was always well over .500.
You could be right that his shooting is fixable, but it's going to take a lot to fix Ball's game as a scorer. He shoots the three more comfortably now, which is a good thing. But part of this is that defenses leave him wide open. Offhand, I don't remember him taking any kind of contested three. He's sort of the Mario Mendoza of the Lakers. If he gets a hit, it's a pleasant surprise. |
The numbers don’t support the idea that he never takes contested 3s. According to NBA.com, he’s taken and made the second most 3 point shots against “tight coverage” on the team. The idea that teams are leaving him wide open is statistically false and I struggle understanding where that comes from watching the games. Teams consistently go under screens with him so I guess that’s it. |
I always feared that his mechanics weren't going to translate to the NBA. His release was going to turn uncontested NBA length 3s in college into contested NBA 3s in the league. Threes that worked in college despite his release, weren't going to work now with taller, faster, more athletic defenders closer to him at the point of release.
If the numbers show he doesn't take uncontested 3's - with as poorly as he's shot it so far - then maybe changing the mechanics would convert many of these contested 3s into uncontested ones. Quicker more efficient release would enable that. |
No he takes plenty of open ones too. He takes a lot of 3s and his frequency of open/contested ones is pretty standard when looking at the rest of the team. His mechanics limit shots going to his right and in the midrange off the dribble but the numbers have never insinuated he can’t get his shot off or make contested shots from 3. Nor do they paint him as a historically bad shooter that many insinuate. He’s a pretty standard bad shooter just like most of our team but his mechanics are an eye sore for many and lead to exaggerations and fabricated statements regarding his shot. |
Curious, what's he shooting on open ones vs contested ones?
Link to this data? |
https://stats.nba.com/players/shots-closest-defender/?Season=2018-19&SeasonType=Regular%20Season&CloseDefDistRange=2-4%20Feet%20-%20Tight&TeamID=1610612747&PerMode=Totals&sort=FG3A&dir=1
Sorry I did that poorly. It’s from NBA.com and i linked the total numbers with tight defenders. You can toggle through the open and per game numbers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MJST
Retired Number
Joined: 06 Jul 2014
Posts: 26309
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2019 11:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
"Lonzo needs to hire KCP's shooting coach, KCP's shooting has been great this year."
KCP's Three Point Shooting after entire off-season with shooting coach
35.2%
Lonzo's three point shooting without an off-season to work on his three
32.7%
KCP's Field Goal Percentage after entire off-season with shooting coach
42.0%
Lonzo's Field Goal Percentage without an off-season to work on his shot
40.0%
Seems like he's not doing much better than Lonzo, but people like to view him through different lenses it seems.
Also
Rookie Lonzo
Field Goal Percentage 36.0%
Three Point Percentage 30.5%
Sophomore Lonzo (without an off-season to work on his game):
Field Goal Percentage 40.0%
Three Point Percentage 32.7%
Despite not having an off-season to work on his game, his field goal percentage has improved.
I can imagine what he'd do with an entire off-season. But some people want to ignore he didn't have an off-season to work on his game outside of the weight and film room and are on the "he's all he'll ever be and can only be slightly insignificantly better" bandwagon.
Almost as bad as Ingram gets where he can have a GOOD GAME and people go "well he can't just be "good" as the 2nd pick of the draft..."
and the goalposts keep on moving.
_________________
How NBA 2K18 failed the All-Time Lakers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxMBYm3wwxk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Baron Von Humongous
Retired Number
Joined: 02 Jul 2015
Posts: 32979
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2019 11:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| audioaxes wrote: | | Swagron wrote: | | Japago wrote: | Not drafting De'Aaron Fox has been the real miss, IMO. I haven't seen a lot of D'Angelo, but he still isn't that efficient. He doesn't get to the FT line. His defense still seems to be an issue.
De'Aaron is amazing. He's already one of the hardest PGs to defend. He gets to the rim or draws fouls at will. He shoots 3s at a decent percentage. He has defensive potential as well. He'll find open guys. He already draws enough defensive attention to get other guys open. |
You’re right...Fox was the guy I wanted all along. We swung and missed big time. In addition to what you just mentioned as positive attributes is his passion on the court...not that sleepy stoic look our guy has. |
I dont blame the Lakers for not going for Fox. Shoot first PGs are hardly a good building block for a championship team |
Fox wasn't much of a shooter in college at all. His improvement as a 3pt shooter is pretty unprecedented, so huge credit to him.
And it's not even like his pullup 2P% was great. It was good-ish, but worse than Fultz's pullup jumper %ages and on par with DSJ's. I believe Lonzo was superior there, as well, but the sample size was miniscule.
Lastly, huge credit to Fox who made the leap in year two, but that doesn't close the door on other guys making the leap in the next couple seasons and surpassing him in the future - and I'm not just talking about Zo, because it could be Fultz, Markkanen, Ntilikina, Isaac, Anunoby, who knows?
_________________
Under New Management |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lakersibleed
Starting Rotation
Joined: 15 Jul 2009
Posts: 343
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2019 12:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
If we lose tonight .... i have a feeling that the patience for Lonzo will run out....
I wouldnt hate to see the Lakers trade Zo, KCP and change for Kemba |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BigGameHames
Star Player
Joined: 24 May 2015
Posts: 7982
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2019 12:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| lakersibleed wrote: | If we lose tonight .... i have a feeling that the patience for Lonzo will run out....
I wouldnt hate to see the Lakers trade Zo, KCP and change for Kemba |
Just Zo or all the young guys? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Japago
Star Player
Joined: 21 Jun 2018
Posts: 1284
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2019 12:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MJST wrote: | | Mike@LG wrote: | | OCWA wrote: | | krisobe wrote: | well DLO had 34/7/5 being the #1 option for the Nets.. tonight 
DLO = 18/6/4 on 43% FG, 35% 3PT, and 82% FT shooting on 29 minutes a game this season.
ZO = 9/5/5 on 40% FG, 32% 3PT, and 41% yes 41% FT shooting on 30 minutes a game this season.
Even if Bron, Kuzma, Rondo or whoever is out.. Lonzo doesn't have it in him to be #1 option.
|
Zo nor DLO was supposed to be a #1 option. But if that is the comparison you are making, then yes, DLO is a better #1 scoring option than Zo. But a team with DLO as a number 1 option won't be a very good team.
Both were drafted to be leaders/facilitators. Neither has successfully fulfilled what they were drafted for. |
*Optimized. At least DAR is playing in the system he should be in and is surrounded by shooters.
Ideally, it would have been Russell and Zo in shooting guard actions with Ingram initiating.
But, it's either Russell, or caproom for LeBron + 2nd star opportunity.
Russell and Randle are what happens when their skills/talent get the opportunity to mature after 3-4 years from being drafted as 19 year old kids. Imagine Zo, Kuzma, Ingram (it's getting there), and Hart with that kind of NBA experience.
Russell is light years away from his 4 drives per game per 28. Now, 11.6 per game. |
Russell and Randle show what happens when you give up on guys before you let them develop their games and assume they are all they are by their 2ndish seasons.
The mistake some are still repeating with Ingram and Lonzo.
The draft picks that these people call "busts" turn out to be hits, but after the Lakers already gave up on them, assumed all they would be, after a season or two.
It's amazing though people seem to have it out for Zo in the way they had it out for Randle given that they were giving him credit for an additional off-season he didn't have as he was recovering from injury. |
Russell and Randle still seem pretty limited too me. Both aren't good defenders. Russell is still fairly inefficient and doesn't get to the FT line. He has high volume numbers because he's 9th in usage rate. Randle is still a bully-ball player who gets tunnel-vision. Think David Lee, who's never really been a very impactful player despite big stats. Both aren't big misses, as they have flaws that will ultimately stop them from being stars.
Again, why do fans ignore the plenty of examples of other young guys drafted who have thrived by their 3rd seasons? There are rookies this season look a lot better than any of the Lakers' young core.
The young guys will get better. They just have limitations that limit how good they will eventually be, just like Randle and Russell. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2019 12:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BigGameHames wrote: | | The numbers don’t support the idea that he never takes contested 3s. According to NBA.com, he’s taken and made the second most 3 point shots against “tight coverage” on the team. The idea that teams are leaving him wide open is statistically false and I struggle understanding where that comes from watching the games. Teams consistently go under screens with him so I guess that’s it. |
If I recall correctly, "tight coverage" is defined as two to four feet. If the defender is four feet away on a three point shot, you are not tightly covered. Anyway, Ball isn't shooting many, if any, contested threes. I honestly cannot imagine how you would think otherwise. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BigGameHames
Star Player
Joined: 24 May 2015
Posts: 7982
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2019 12:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | BigGameHames wrote: | | The numbers don’t support the idea that he never takes contested 3s. According to NBA.com, he’s taken and made the second most 3 point shots against “tight coverage” on the team. The idea that teams are leaving him wide open is statistically false and I struggle understanding where that comes from watching the games. Teams consistently go under screens with him so I guess that’s it. |
If I recall correctly, "tight coverage" is defined as two to four feet. If the defender is four feet away on a three point shot, you are not tightly covered. Anyway, Ball isn't shooting many, if any, contested threes. I honestly cannot imagine how you would think otherwise. |
Yes 2-4 feet. The Lakers have taken a total of 6 “very tight” shots from 3 all year. Those are within 2 feet and nobody is taking those. So you think Lonzo only takes shots with guys 3-4 feet away and everybody else is fine taking them with defenders 2-3 feet away?
This has gotten ridiculous. He takes contested shots and the defenses haven’t been leaving him wide open. The numbers back that up but believe what you want. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2019 12:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The God Particle wrote: | Curious, what's he shooting on open ones vs contested ones?
Link to this data? |
https://stats.nba.com/player/1628366/shots-dash/
Go down to "Closest Defender."
4.1% of his shots are "tightly defended" (2-4 feet) threes, and he makes 29.4%.
22.4% of his shots are "open" (4-6 feet) threes, and he makes 31.2%.
23.6% of his shots are "wide open" (6+ feet) threes, and he makes 34.7%.
So about 8% of his threes have a defender four feet away or closer. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
epak
Retired Number
Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 34147
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2019 1:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | The God Particle wrote: | Curious, what's he shooting on open ones vs contested ones?
Link to this data? |
https://stats.nba.com/player/1628366/shots-dash/
Go down to "Closest Defender."
4.1% of his shots are "tightly defended" (2-4 feet) threes, and he makes 29.4%.
22.4% of his shots are "open" (4-6 feet) threes, and he makes 31.2%.
23.6% of his shots are "wide open" (6+ feet) threes, and he makes 34.7%.
So about 8% of his threes have a defender four feet away or closer. |
Sweet. Hopefully he keeps taking only open shots.
Gotta lift the averages, but the attempts are solid. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16135
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2019 1:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | The God Particle wrote: | Curious, what's he shooting on open ones vs contested ones?
Link to this data? |
https://stats.nba.com/player/1628366/shots-dash/
Go down to "Closest Defender."
4.1% of his shots are "tightly defended" (2-4 feet) threes, and he makes 29.4%.
22.4% of his shots are "open" (4-6 feet) threes, and he makes 31.2%.
23.6% of his shots are "wide open" (6+ feet) threes, and he makes 34.7%.
So about 8% of his threes have a defender four feet away or closer. |
Is that a typo or how did you get 8% from 4.1%? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2019 1:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LongBeachPoly wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | The God Particle wrote: | Curious, what's he shooting on open ones vs contested ones?
Link to this data? |
https://stats.nba.com/player/1628366/shots-dash/
Go down to "Closest Defender."
4.1% of his shots are "tightly defended" (2-4 feet) threes, and he makes 29.4%.
22.4% of his shots are "open" (4-6 feet) threes, and he makes 31.2%.
23.6% of his shots are "wide open" (6+ feet) threes, and he makes 34.7%.
So about 8% of his threes have a defender four feet away or closer. |
Is that a typo or how did you get 8% from 4.1%? |
Because 4.1% of ALL of his shots (all shots not just threes) are tightly defended threes.
Threes make up about half of all of shots.
So he's doubling it to get to just his 3s. 8.2% of all three point attempts are tightly defended, or 4.1% all shot attempts are tightly defended threes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The God Particle
Star Player
Joined: 01 May 2015
Posts: 2196
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2019 1:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BigGameHames wrote: | | The God Particle wrote: | | BigGameHames wrote: | | The God Particle wrote: | | BigGameHames wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | Joe Pesci wrote: | | Jump-shooting is the easiest thing to fix. History is littered with players who couldn't shoot a lick and became great shooters. |
Ball is 21 years old, has played over 3000 minutes in the NBA, and has taken almost 1000 shots. At this point in the season, his TS% is .482 and his 3P% is .327. I don't doubt that there have been players with shooting deficiencies when they hit the league who later became great shooters. I can't think of anyone analogous to Ball who went on to become a great shooter.
Jason Kidd is the optimistic analogy, but he never became a great shooter. His TS% in his prime years was about .500. He was an all-star because he had other qualities that Ball lacks (at least so far). Ricky Rubio is another common analogy. His peak TS% has been .539. I've heard Kyle Lowry used as an analogy, but he never shot as badly as Ball. His TS% was always well over .500.
You could be right that his shooting is fixable, but it's going to take a lot to fix Ball's game as a scorer. He shoots the three more comfortably now, which is a good thing. But part of this is that defenses leave him wide open. Offhand, I don't remember him taking any kind of contested three. He's sort of the Mario Mendoza of the Lakers. If he gets a hit, it's a pleasant surprise. |
The numbers don’t support the idea that he never takes contested 3s. According to NBA.com, he’s taken and made the second most 3 point shots against “tight coverage” on the team. The idea that teams are leaving him wide open is statistically false and I struggle understanding where that comes from watching the games. Teams consistently go under screens with him so I guess that’s it. |
I always feared that his mechanics weren't going to translate to the NBA. His release was going to turn uncontested NBA length 3s in college into contested NBA 3s in the league. Threes that worked in college despite his release, weren't going to work now with taller, faster, more athletic defenders closer to him at the point of release.
If the numbers show he doesn't take uncontested 3's - with as poorly as he's shot it so far - then maybe changing the mechanics would convert many of these contested 3s into uncontested ones. Quicker more efficient release would enable that. |
No he takes plenty of open ones too. He takes a lot of 3s and his frequency of open/contested ones is pretty standard when looking at the rest of the team. His mechanics limit shots going to his right and in the midrange off the dribble but the numbers have never insinuated he can’t get his shot off or make contested shots from 3. Nor do they paint him as a historically bad shooter that many insinuate. He’s a pretty standard bad shooter just like most of our team but his mechanics are an eye sore for many and lead to exaggerations and fabricated statements regarding his shot. |
Curious, what's he shooting on open ones vs contested ones?
Link to this data? |
https://stats.nba.com/players/shots-closest-defender/?Season=2018-19&SeasonType=Regular%20Season&CloseDefDistRange=2-4%20Feet%20-%20Tight&TeamID=1610612747&PerMode=Totals&sort=FG3A&dir=1
Sorry I did that poorly. It’s from NBA.com and i linked the total numbers with tight defenders. You can toggle through the open and per game numbers. |
Thank you sir. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2019 2:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ringfinger wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | The God Particle wrote: | Curious, what's he shooting on open ones vs contested ones?
Link to this data? |
https://stats.nba.com/player/1628366/shots-dash/
Go down to "Closest Defender."
4.1% of his shots are "tightly defended" (2-4 feet) threes, and he makes 29.4%.
22.4% of his shots are "open" (4-6 feet) threes, and he makes 31.2%.
23.6% of his shots are "wide open" (6+ feet) threes, and he makes 34.7%.
So about 8% of his threes have a defender four feet away or closer. |
Is that a typo or how did you get 8% from 4.1%? |
Because 4.1% of ALL of his shots (all shots not just threes) are tightly defended threes.
Threes make up about half of all of shots.
So he's doubling it to get to just his 3s. 8.2% of all three point attempts are tightly defended, or 4.1% all shot attempts are tightly defended threes. |
Right. To put this into more concrete terms, Ball has taken 415 shots this year, of which 208 were threes. Applying the percentages, this works out to a grand total of 17 shots in 44 games that were three pointers with a defender four feet away or closer. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The God Particle
Star Player
Joined: 01 May 2015
Posts: 2196
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2019 2:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aeneas Hunter wrote: | | The God Particle wrote: | Curious, what's he shooting on open ones vs contested ones?
Link to this data? |
https://stats.nba.com/player/1628366/shots-dash/
Go down to "Closest Defender."
4.1% of his shots are "tightly defended" (2-4 feet) threes, and he makes 29.4%.
22.4% of his shots are "open" (4-6 feet) threes, and he makes 31.2%.
23.6% of his shots are "wide open" (6+ feet) threes, and he makes 34.7%.
So about 8% of his threes have a defender four feet away or closer. |
So.....you're telling me he's a below average shooter no matter how you slice and dice it?
Wide open 3s...poor
Open 3s...poor
Contested 3s...poor
I wonder if the FO has given/or will give serious consideration to rebuilding his shot this off-season. It's not lack of attempts, like you said, he's put up 1000 shots already.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aeneas Hunter
Retired Number
Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 31763
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2019 2:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The God Particle wrote: | So.....you're telling me he's a below average shooter no matter how you slice and dice it?
Wide open 3s...poor
Open 3s...poor
Contested 3s...poor
I wonder if the FO has given/or will give serious consideration to rebuilding his shot this off-season. It's not lack of attempts, like you said, he's put up 1000 shots already.... |
Well, it isn't exactly newsworthy that he's a below average shooter.
However, I am giving full-season stats. If you break out the last 15 days, you see that he is up to about 35% overall. Weirdly enough, the proximity of the defender seems to be working in the reverse direction. He has been shooting worse when he is wide open.
https://stats.nba.com/player/1628366/shots-dash/?Season=2018-19&SeasonType=Regular%20Season&LastNGames=15
Still, his percentage over the last 15 games is 3% higher than his season average. He has looked more comfortable, so maybe he really is making progress. Or it could just be a statistical blip.
But yes, if the conclusion is that his shot is broken, then it accomplishes little to have him constantly practice a broken shot. That's the NBA equivalent of the definition of insanity. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Baron Von Humongous
Retired Number
Joined: 02 Jul 2015
Posts: 32979
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2019 3:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Japago wrote: | | MJST wrote: | | Mike@LG wrote: | | OCWA wrote: | | krisobe wrote: | well DLO had 34/7/5 being the #1 option for the Nets.. tonight
DLO = 18/6/4 on 43% FG, 35% 3PT, and 82% FT shooting on 29 minutes a game this season.
ZO = 9/5/5 on 40% FG, 32% 3PT, and 41% yes 41% FT shooting on 30 minutes a game this season.
Even if Bron, Kuzma, Rondo or whoever is out.. Lonzo doesn't have it in him to be #1 option.
|
Zo nor DLO was supposed to be a #1 option. But if that is the comparison you are making, then yes, DLO is a better #1 scoring option than Zo. But a team with DLO as a number 1 option won't be a very good team.
Both were drafted to be leaders/facilitators. Neither has successfully fulfilled what they were drafted for. |
*Optimized. At least DAR is playing in the system he should be in and is surrounded by shooters.
Ideally, it would have been Russell and Zo in shooting guard actions with Ingram initiating.
But, it's either Russell, or caproom for LeBron + 2nd star opportunity.
Russell and Randle are what happens when their skills/talent get the opportunity to mature after 3-4 years from being drafted as 19 year old kids. Imagine Zo, Kuzma, Ingram (it's getting there), and Hart with that kind of NBA experience.
Russell is light years away from his 4 drives per game per 28. Now, 11.6 per game. |
Russell and Randle show what happens when you give up on guys before you let them develop their games and assume they are all they are by their 2ndish seasons.
The mistake some are still repeating with Ingram and Lonzo.
The draft picks that these people call "busts" turn out to be hits, but after the Lakers already gave up on them, assumed all they would be, after a season or two.
It's amazing though people seem to have it out for Zo in the way they had it out for Randle given that they were giving him credit for an additional off-season he didn't have as he was recovering from injury. |
Russell and Randle still seem pretty limited too me. Both aren't good defenders. Russell is still fairly inefficient and doesn't get to the FT line. He has high volume numbers because he's 9th in usage rate. Randle is still a bully-ball player who gets tunnel-vision. Think David Lee, who's never really been a very impactful player despite big stats. Both aren't big misses, as they have flaws that will ultimately stop them from being stars.
Again, why do fans ignore the plenty of examples of other young guys drafted who have thrived by their 3rd seasons? There are rookies this season look a lot better than any of the Lakers' young core.
The young guys will get better. They just have limitations that limit how good they will eventually be, just like Randle and Russell. |
I'm curious what you thought of De'Aaron Fox's rookie season.
_________________
Under New Management |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BennyLava
Star Player
Joined: 14 Dec 2012
Posts: 3582
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2019 3:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| lakersibleed wrote: | If we lose tonight .... i have a feeling that the patience for Lonzo will run out....
I wouldnt hate to see the Lakers trade Zo, KCP and change for Kemba |
If patience is lost with the youth, I can guarantee you it will be Ingram first. Hart next as a filler, Kuzma and Lonzo last.
Lonzo works on a team of superstars as a role player alone. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
anth2000
Franchise Player
Joined: 16 Apr 2001
Posts: 12165
Location: Pasadena, CA
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2019 4:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bottom line is that Lonzo and Ingram are players that need a few years to find their way. They are not what I call "NBA Ready", meaning be able to come in and really be fundamentally sound. Both have flaws. I also have to say that I don't think either one has been well coached. Case in point, Ingram dribbling down and playing ISO ball over and over and over....with bad results. Most "good" coaches would not allow that.....game after game... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lakersibleed
Starting Rotation
Joined: 15 Jul 2009
Posts: 343
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2019 4:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BennyLava wrote: | | lakersibleed wrote: | If we lose tonight .... i have a feeling that the patience for Lonzo will run out....
I wouldnt hate to see the Lakers trade Zo, KCP and change for Kemba |
If patience is lost with the youth, I can guarantee you it will be Ingram first. Hart next as a filler, Kuzma and Lonzo last.
Lonzo works on a team of superstars as a role player alone. |
To be honest... It really could be any of the young guys that gets traded....My thought was for Lonzo because of the guy's that I feel are on the market... im not saying Kemba is on the market, i just THINK he is...I just cant see MJ offering ANYONE max dollars...{not that i would want to pay Kemba max dolars
None of our young players have played well enough to avoid the possibility of trade...
I was looking for one IMPACT player that could save this season, without loosing our flexibility and without giving up multiple young players...
PLUS mitch is down there, so he might give us a laker discount
Also... If we lose tonight i would totally trade BI and Kcp for Butler to save this season... or even KUZ and KCP for Butler to save this season.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kobe8One
Starting Rotation
Joined: 23 May 2011
Posts: 633
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2019 4:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I still think Lonzo should follow Jason Kidd's game and our offense should run similar to the 2000 Nets. Our offense is the biggest problem and Lonzo gets exposed because lack of outside shot.
BI wants to be the Star.
Kuz almost a Star.
Zo don't want to be the Star.
Hart no where close to a Star.
Zu will be a Star. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ringfinger
Retired Number
Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 29418
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2019 4:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| lakersibleed wrote: | | BennyLava wrote: | | lakersibleed wrote: | If we lose tonight .... i have a feeling that the patience for Lonzo will run out....
I wouldnt hate to see the Lakers trade Zo, KCP and change for Kemba |
If patience is lost with the youth, I can guarantee you it will be Ingram first. Hart next as a filler, Kuzma and Lonzo last.
Lonzo works on a team of superstars as a role player alone. |
To be honest... It really could be any of the young guys that gets traded....My thought was for Lonzo because of the guy's that I feel are on the market... im not saying Kemba is on the market, i just THINK he is...I just cant see MJ offering ANYONE max dollars...{not that i would want to pay Kemba max dolars
None of our young players have played well enough to avoid the possibility of trade...
I was looking for one IMPACT player that could save this season, without loosing our flexibility and without giving up multiple young players...
PLUS mitch is down there, so he might give us a laker discount
Also... If we lose tonight i would totally trade BI and Kcp for Butler to save this season... or even KUZ and KCP for Butler to save this season.... |
You think Mitch would give the team that fired him a discount? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ExPatLkrFan
Star Player
Joined: 29 Jul 2004
Posts: 3983
Location: Mukdahan, Thailand
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2019 5:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| lakersibleed wrote: | | BennyLava wrote: | | lakersibleed wrote: | If we lose tonight .... i have a feeling that the patience for Lonzo will run out....
I wouldnt hate to see the Lakers trade Zo, KCP and change for Kemba |
If patience is lost with the youth, I can guarantee you it will be Ingram first. Hart next as a filler, Kuzma and Lonzo last.
Lonzo works on a team of superstars as a role player alone. |
To be honest... It really could be any of the young guys that gets traded....My thought was for Lonzo because of the guy's that I feel are on the market... im not saying Kemba is on the market, i just THINK he is...I just cant see MJ offering ANYONE max dollars...{not that i would want to pay Kemba max dolars
None of our young players have played well enough to avoid the possibility of trade...
I was looking for one IMPACT player that could save this season, without loosing our flexibility and without giving up multiple young players...
PLUS mitch is down there, so he might give us a laker discount
Also... If we lose tonight i would totally trade BI and Kcp for Butler to save this season... or even KUZ and KCP for Butler to save this season.... |
Mitch will give us a Lakers discount ? That's rich! Given the way he was shown the door, the only deal theat Mitch makes with the Lakers is one where he gives the Lakers a Royal ass (bleep). No lube. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MJST
Retired Number
Joined: 06 Jul 2014
Posts: 26309
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2019 5:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| audioaxes wrote: | | Swagron wrote: | | Japago wrote: | Not drafting De'Aaron Fox has been the real miss, IMO. I haven't seen a lot of D'Angelo, but he still isn't that efficient. He doesn't get to the FT line. His defense still seems to be an issue.
De'Aaron is amazing. He's already one of the hardest PGs to defend. He gets to the rim or draws fouls at will. He shoots 3s at a decent percentage. He has defensive potential as well. He'll find open guys. He already draws enough defensive attention to get other guys open. |
You’re right...Fox was the guy I wanted all along. We swung and missed big time. In addition to what you just mentioned as positive attributes is his passion on the court...not that sleepy stoic look our guy has. |
I dont blame the Lakers for not going for Fox. Shoot first PGs are hardly a good building block for a championship team |
People go on and on about Fox because at the start of the season and a stretch in November throughout the month where he was shooting 45% from three and they considered it a tremendous feat. Had they been following him lately they'd see that he's now been shooting 25% from three across his last 11 games and that 45% three point percentage he had throughout November has dropped down to 37% for the season, which is still solid, and an improvement over his 30% last year however.
I think when people look at Fox they say "He impacts the game with his scoring and Lonzo doesn't, therefore I wish we'd drafted him."
But when we had a point guard that impacted the game with his scoring, all you heard was "he needs to be more of a complete point guard, if he isn't scoring he isn't doing much else, his defense will never improve, we need a true leader that's well rounded and can impact the game without scoring."
No matter what, fans that decide they want to hate on a player will find some way where they are always right. There is no point in trying to understand it at this juncture.
If we got rid of Lonzo, and picked up a scoring point guard in the next draft that averaged 17 in their 2nd year but didn't play defense or rebound, all we'd hear about is those aspects of his game, and that he's a 2 trapped in a 1s body. Or also how he doesn't mesh well with LeBron because he needs the ball in his hands to be effective and is not an off-ball shooter but an iso scorer.
Either way, it would have been something, no matter who we drafted.
_________________
How NBA 2K18 failed the All-Time Lakers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxMBYm3wwxk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
