What’s you’re guys opinion on the Martin twins at Nevada?
Caleb can score, Cody is a pretty good defender and playmaker. Both have good size for the 3 and can handle the rock.
On a related note, Caroline probably isn’t an nba player, but he’d look good in shoulder pads...
have not watched them this season but was listening to an older (couple weeks) The Stepien podcast this morning and they were brought up...the one thing I recall them saying was Caleb is overrated on offense and underrated defense while Cody is overrated on defense and underrated offense.
Not athletic enough. I lived in Mocksville, NC for the last 5 years. I'm Statesville now, but The Martin twins went to Davie High. Saw them a few times live. They were much better than the competition, but IamO they aren't NBA players. Neither are athletic enough and neither are good enough at what they do best to make up for all they lack at the top level. Maybe Europe though.
Joined: 16 Jun 2005 Posts: 40345 Location: Dirty South
Posted: Sun Feb 18, 2018 11:26 am Post subject:
ChickenStu wrote:
If you think NBA officiating is bad, watch 10 minutes of a college basketball game. My God.
did you see the WVU @ Kansas game yesterday? Kansas shot 35 free throws....WVU shot 2. That is simply almost impossible in a properly called competitive basketball game.
If you think NBA officiating is bad, watch 10 minutes of a college basketball game. My God.
did you see the WVU @ Kansas game yesterday? Kansas shot 35 free throws....WVU shot 2. That is simply almost impossible in a properly called competitive basketball game.
wow that's nuts _________________ one dog goes that way the other dog goes the other way
I think the only thing people really hold against Bagley is his length. Everything else is elite, or potentially transcendent with potential.
When it comes down to it, people are going to monitor Bagley's jumper, and his length.
At the same time we've got a guy in Julius Randle whom is a 20/10/4 guy that shoots 55% from the field despite not having a consistent jumper yet.
There's no reason why Bagley wouldn't put up those kind of numbers in his prime.
I think this era sometimes focuses on the shots players don't take, rather than the shots they do take and their efficiency with it.
What helps a team more, someone that puts up 17/10 at 45% from the field but can shoot 37% from three, or someone that puts up 22/10 at 55% from the field but 25% from three.
Joined: 25 Apr 2015 Posts: 31912 Location: Anaheim, CA
Posted: Sun Feb 18, 2018 2:49 pm Post subject:
adkindo wrote:
ChickenStu wrote:
If you think NBA officiating is bad, watch 10 minutes of a college basketball game. My God.
did you see the WVU @ Kansas game yesterday? Kansas shot 35 free throws....WVU shot 2. That is simply almost impossible in a properly called competitive basketball game.
I only saw the SportsCenter highlights. The play with around 10 seconds to go with WVU down 4, the WVU player should have been going to the foul line for 2 shots, as the Kansas defender wasn't even facing the player, was moving, and there was obvious contact. I can only imagine how the rest of the game went, with that kind of free throw disparity. That is just embarrassing.
First we'll start at 2 guards, which I think is the Lakers most glaring position of need outside of center. Though I think that Zubac and Bryant should get their chances to develop and shine. Shooting guard however, outside of Hart we can start looking at some pieces to go after.
The first sleeper pick to me is Chandler Hutchison of Boise St.
6'7 with a 7'1 wingspan, and a killer of closeouts.
The kid has quite the skillset for the position he could be drafted at.
He's a 4 year college student, but one of the most important aspects about him is his work ethic, working on his handle and his jumper throughout the course of his college career and becoming a much better player in the last 2 seasons of it than he was in his first 2, almost to a night and day extent.
Putting up
19.6 PPG
7.8 REB
3.5 AST
on 47.9% from the field
and 35% from three
As well as improving his free throw percentage from 66% last season to 73% this season.
The kid looks like this draft's potential gem, he's still slotted to be a very late first to early to mid 2nd round pick so he's definitely in the Lakers range to steal.
The kid definitely has some major potential and could be a Kuzma-level steal if the Lakers are noticing him. He'd definitely be my first pick to get for our wing position next to Lonzo at the draft spot in the 1st round we have.
I'll breakdown the other 3 prospects later. Which are Troy Brown for the shooting guard spot, and Austin Wiley and Yurtseven for the Center position.
But for now, just this breakdown on Hutchison will do To me, he's one of the biggest steals at our position in the draft, if he falls to us. So hopefully he finishes the season healthy, and the Lakers have a chance at drafting him. _________________ How NBA 2K18 failed the All-Time Lakers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxMBYm3wwxk
The funny thing is you say jjj is a modern prospect and bagley isn’t but nearly every advanced stats projection hates jjj and loves bagley
The halfcourt stuff is the only separator. I'm not even looking at advanced.
Also, what advanced stats? I'm guessing it's going to favor Bagley because of the scoring rate/rebounding rate. That doesn't mean that JJJ isn't a better swatter, even if he isn't a better scorer/board man.
I'm curious, as well. BPM is flawed, of course, but JJJ has a 17.2 BPM - putting him in the range of Anthony Davis' insane freshman season - whereas Bagley is posting a very good 10.3 BPM.
What helps a team more, someone that puts up 17/10 at 45% from the field but can shoot 37% from three, or someone that puts up 22/10 at 55% from the field but 25% from three.
Honestly? It's Player A, or the guy that can shoot from three. Player A is essentially Kyle Kuzma in terms of his stat profile per 36, and Player B is essentially Julius Randle this year per 36. NBA GMs will take Kuzma's skillset offensively over Randle's any day. Spacing, and being able to space the floor, is hugely valuable. If you can't shoot threes in today's NBA you better hope you're a center, or else you'll find it difficult to get on the floor. Randle is essentially always the center in LA, as Lopez will stay at three point land and bomb away on a relatively inefficient three-point shot just to create enough space for the Lakers offence to operate. Shooting threes at an efficient clip not only helps your numbers, but it helps the efficiency of the whole team, because defences càn't help off you when another player is driving in the lane. The modern NBA is all about maximizing the volume of layups, dunks, FTs, and three-pointers, especially three-pointers, because those help the other three categories.
What helps a team more, someone that puts up 17/10 at 45% from the field but can shoot 37% from three, or someone that puts up 22/10 at 55% from the field but 25% from three.
Honestly? It's Player A, or the guy that can shoot from three. Player A is essentially Kyle Kuzma in terms of his stat profile per 36, and Player B is essentially Julius Randle this year per 36. NBA GMs will take Kuzma's skillset offensively over Randle's any day. Spacing, and being able to space the floor, is hugely valuable. If you can't shoot threes in today's NBA you better hope you're a center, or else you'll find it difficult to get on the floor. Randle is essentially always the center in LA, as Lopez will stay at three point land and bomb away on a relatively inefficient three-point shot just to create enough space for the Lakers offence to operate. Shooting threes at an efficient clip not only helps your numbers, but it helps the efficiency of the whole team, because defences càn't help off you when another player is driving in the lane. The modern NBA is all about maximizing the volume of layups, dunks, FTs, and three-pointers, especially three-pointers, because those help the other three categories.
See this is the kind of response I wanted.
You seem to ignore the other intangibles because one can shoot threes.
Player A can shoot threes.
But player B scores more points and at a higher efficiency.
So is player A still better strictly because he can shoot threes?
To me, this an incorrect way of looking at things. But as I said, there's other intangibles that you need to measure beyond "Well one shoots threes and the other doesn't."
You say it helps the efficiency of the team because of Player A's ability to shoot threes. But doesn't it also help the efficiency of the team that Player B is a 20 PPG scorer at 55% from the field? Wouldn't that also require defensive attention in another aspect, which would then open up the perimeter for wide open threes?
They both take advantage and can be utilized in an 'inside out' situation, and I think that's what's being overlooked.
There's other stuff such as if Player B is great at defense and player A is below average. But this was more about the intangibles.
But for the record, I also extremely value the person that can drop 20 PPG on 55% scoring as well. Why? Because that kind of interior dominance changes a defense just as much as someone being able to knock down the three.
Having that kind of dominant inside scorer opens up the perimeter, but it doesn't just open up the perimeter, it slows down the pace with which the other team wants to get out on defensively.
Kobe said it best yesterday in the Shaq interview when he talked about people trying to say the Lakers wouldn't be able to play at their pace against the teams of today's era. Kobe said it quite simply "When the ball goes into Shaq, the pace stops." Which is about as true as it gets.
Having a dominant interior presence stops teams from playing at the pace they want, but it also opens up the perimeter for easy three point shots when the defense tries to defend or double on the dominant big.
There are many ways to utilize that 20/10 55% from the field guy, just as efficiently as the 17/10 37% from three guy, albeit in different ways, BOTH can exploit the defenses of the modern era and get themselves or their teammates easy shots.
It's just about understanding how to maximize what both of them bring and exploiting other defenses around that.
just my two cents
For the record, as much as people harp on that centers need to stretch the floor from three now and how the post centers are a thing of the past. I will always and forever believe that it has nothing to do with the post game that is phasing centers out, it's whether or not they have the ability to defend.
If a center can defend, they can have the most one dimensional offensive game in the league but still bring significant value to their team and still be considered a star.
If however you are a center that is terrible at defense, then you'll need the offensive game from mid and beyond to compensate, otherwise you get time on the bench.
Will stand by the statement that if Okafor was even as good a defender as Nurkic, he'd be considered headed to stardom. It's his terrible defense that gets him benched, not his offensive game.
I think that defense is a BIG BIG BIG factor in a center's staying point in the NBA, ESPECIALLY if their offensive game doesn't expand beyond the interior. _________________ How NBA 2K18 failed the All-Time Lakers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxMBYm3wwxk
jackson, bamba, sexton, and mikal bridges grade out pretty poorly by his model. while whoever ends up with wendell carter jr may be getting a steal.
i exaggerated when i said nearly all advanced stats projections love bagley and hate jjj. it's not love/hate, it's love/like. _________________ substance over style
First we'll start at 2 guards, which I think is the Lakers most glaring position of need outside of center. Though I think that Zubac and Bryant should get their chances to develop and shine. Shooting guard however, outside of Hart we can start looking at some pieces to go after.
The first sleeper pick to me is Chandler Hutchison of Boise St.
6'7 with a 7'1 wingspan, and a killer of closeouts.
The kid has quite the skillset for the position he could be drafted at.
He's a 4 year college student, but one of the most important aspects about him is his work ethic, working on his handle and his jumper throughout the course of his college career and becoming a much better player in the last 2 seasons of it than he was in his first 2, almost to a night and day extent.
Putting up
19.6 PPG
7.8 REB
3.5 AST
on 47.9% from the field
and 35% from three
As well as improving his free throw percentage from 66% last season to 73% this season.
The kid looks like this draft's potential gem, he's still slotted to be a very late first to early to mid 2nd round pick so he's definitely in the Lakers range to steal.
The kid definitely has some major potential and could be a Kuzma-level steal if the Lakers are noticing him. He'd definitely be my first pick to get for our wing position next to Lonzo at the draft spot in the 1st round we have.
I'll breakdown the other 3 prospects later. Which are Troy Brown for the shooting guard spot, and Austin Wiley and Yurtseven for the Center position.
But for now, just this breakdown on Hutchison will do To me, he's one of the biggest steals at our position in the draft, if he falls to us. So hopefully he finishes the season healthy, and the Lakers have a chance at drafting him.
I don't think Hutch is a sleeper anymore, TBH, I expect him to sneak into the mid 1st Rd.
Joined: 16 Jun 2005 Posts: 40345 Location: Dirty South
Posted: Sun Feb 18, 2018 6:14 pm Post subject:
Luminous8 wrote:
I don't think Hutch is a sleeper anymore, TBH, I expect him to sneak into the mid 1st Rd.
he has not been a sleeper for a couple months....he was getting moved into the 1st round and being discussed in December. The one hang up I have with Hutchison is there has been little to no progression from the player he was last year.
Joined: 16 Jun 2005 Posts: 40345 Location: Dirty South
Posted: Sun Feb 18, 2018 9:29 pm Post subject:
44TheLogo wrote:
Chandler Hutchison is not going to be there at the lakers pick
I doubt it....always a premium on long wings....but he may be....alot of time between now and the draft....guys rise and fall fast over the next couple months.
Joined: 16 Jun 2005 Posts: 40345 Location: Dirty South
Posted: Sun Feb 18, 2018 9:31 pm Post subject:
I am leaning away from Trae Young having POY wrapped up....he has slipped, and Oklahoma has slipped even more. One usually needs to have their team in the top 10 or 15 for that award, no? Oklahoma will not be ranked tomorrow.
Potential sleeper for our 2nd round pick if he decides to come out this year:
Penn State’s Tony Carr. Good shooter, good size for position. Limited athleticism. One or two dribble pull-ups, spot shooting. Could be a rotation pg and three position defender _________________ substance over style
He and Bagley aren't even in the same ballpark as prospects going forward right? I mean.. even in the most simplistic evaluation ------ one has length that 30% of SFs at the next level have..the other has Center length(and bigger hands). And Jackson's 3ball is legit while Bagley's isn't.....
Add the other important stuff you mentioned..Jackson's smarter, super high defensive ceiling.. Jackson is an elite prospect and I think Bagley is risky.. I think non shooting,skinny bigmen are risky
I've listened to a lot of podcasts/informed opinions about this. This is like an internal debate. If this were the 90s, Bagley would be the #1 guy and it wouldn't be close. He's THAT productive already, entirely done on motor and athleticism, developing 3-ball. Just playing totally instinctual out there (except defensively).
But Jackson is 8.5/10 of Bagley's overall athleticism. Bagley is PG-level twitchy/2nd jump/quickness/lateral. Jackson actually knows what to do with it. Both are what, the same age and 18? Ridiculous draft.
I'm definitely on the JJJ side of things only because I know I can trust halfcourt skill and there's less fit issues next level compared to Bagley. But Bagley has the upside.
Like, a bad Bagley game is offensive boards and finishes. A bad JJJ game is a darn near elite level defender (projected) with ability to finish anyway.
Both guys have foul issues.
I feel u. I have to concede that Bagley's motor will eventually pay big dividends in the NBA --- I've been hung up on his skinniness not alllowing him to be a factor on the boards at the next level.. but he'll be able to put on weight in a few years. Seeing Kuz, Nance get bullied their rookies years is in the back of my head.. Bagley has a few years before he's their weight.
And like I keep repeating, shooting is #1 for me. I compared Bagley's game to Randle, I see a lot of flip shots, but at the same time seeing Randle succeed in P/R this year, Bagley can do that in the future. I think it's within a fan's right to be skeptical of how good a player will be considering he can't shoot. Bagley's shot isn't broke though, but we'll see..
His athleticism is really impressive(although I still see too many no-length flip shots). Maybe he's the best P/R switch PF in the league one day, on D
Potential sleeper for our 2nd round pick if he decides to come out this year:
Penn State’s Tony Carr. Good shooter, good size for position. Limited athleticism. One or two dribble pull-ups, spot shooting. Could be a rotation pg and three position defender
He's a pretty useful prospect. Even if he doesn't hit his potential he has a lot to fall back on so he's likely to go in that early 2nd if not late 1st.
Potential sleeper for our 2nd round pick if he decides to come out this year:
Penn State’s Tony Carr. Good shooter, good size for position. Limited athleticism. One or two dribble pull-ups, spot shooting. Could be a rotation pg and three position defender
He's a pretty useful prospect. Even if he doesn't hit his potential he has a lot to fall back on so he's likely to go in that early 2nd if not late 1st.
only 1 mock i've seen has him in the 1st and that's garbage nbadraft.net
everywhere else i'm seeing him in the 2nd round of 2019, or late 2nd of 2018. but wouldn't be surprised to see his stock rise based on recent play. _________________ substance over style
idk guys I watched a video of Hutchinson highlights and was not overly impressed _________________ one dog goes that way the other dog goes the other way
idk guys I watched a video of Hutchinson highlights and was not overly impressed
really? why not
I mean he is playing against major scrubs so that's part of it
what video would you recommend I check out though?
i'm undecided on him, i haven't watched enough personally either, but there seems to be consensus that he's a lottery-mid 1st guy.. was just curious about why you weren't impressed. _________________ substance over style
Joined: 29 Jan 2016 Posts: 963 Location: The Dark Side of the Moon
Posted: Mon Feb 19, 2018 4:47 pm Post subject:
Like what I’m seeing from Lonnie walker. Too bad looks like he’s projected in the teens from what I’ve seen. _________________ We pour this booze and we drink this booze because we think it's yummy. YUMMY! So over the tounge and down the throat to party in our tummys.
DOWN THE HOLA BITC*OLA!!!
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
To me, he's one of the biggest steals at our position in the draft, if he falls to us. So hopefully he finishes the season healthy, and the Lakers have a chance at drafting him.
