Honestly, losing organizations are losing organizations because they draft poorly and then fail to develop anyone. There's nothing inherently wrong with drafting for need or BPA.
Well, it depends on the talent disparity on the BPA and other player. If you think the BPA is Durant, you don’t go and draft someone else because you already have a player at SF.
If Tatum ends up to be a multi-time all-star, and Lonzo ends up borderline all-star, then it doesn’t validate not doing BPA
You always do BPA.
Ingram
Tatum
Lebron
Kuzma
mcgee
sick.
Again, I agree but there are exceptions IMO. If you have say Joel Embiid, and the talent disparity between the BPA and next guy up is very small, it can make sense to go with next guy up.
Tatum isn't hype he's the real deal. Him and Mitchell are going to be top 10 players very soon. The way they move on the court makes me believe they will be all time greats. And they were doing in the playoffs on good teams not regular season putting up stats on a bad team.
Honestly, losing organizations are losing organizations because they draft poorly and then fail to develop anyone. There's nothing inherently wrong with drafting for need or BPA.
Well, it depends on the talent disparity on the BPA and other player. If you think the BPA is Durant, you don’t go and draft someone else because you already have a player at SF.
If Tatum ends up to be a multi-time all-star, and Lonzo ends up borderline all-star, then it doesn’t validate not doing BPA
The hype train on Tatum is strong.
Maybe I need to rewatch his playoff games cuz I neither see Kobe or GHill.
I see a solid wing player as a rookie.
And I'm interested to see how he progresses.
He is definitely not the athlete that Kobe and Hill were!!
Honestly, losing organizations are losing organizations because they draft poorly and then fail to develop anyone. There's nothing inherently wrong with drafting for need or BPA.
Well, it depends on the talent disparity on the BPA and other player. If you think the BPA is Durant, you don’t go and draft someone else because you already have a player at SF.
If Tatum ends up to be a multi-time all-star, and Lonzo ends up borderline all-star, then it doesn’t validate not doing BPA
You always do BPA.
Ingram
Tatum
Lebron
Kuzma
mcgee
sick.
That line up doesn't excite me as much as the one with Lonzo. Lonzo can/might become an above average shooter, but Tatum won't get close to Lonzo's court vision no matter what. Once Lebron retires/leaves, you don't even have a top 10 playmaker in the team.
Gary Payton at 3:03 " Lonzo has a great court vision. He got a court vision I've never seen since Magic Johnson"
Gary said he likes three things about Lonzo. He has great court vision, he has a great knack of rebounding the basketball like Kidd and it's not stat padding ones, and he can defend a player 1v1.
What makes his court vision even more great is that he doesn't need to ballhog. Low usage rate. _________________ Showtime 2.0
Joined: 29 Aug 2004 Posts: 11197 Location: The Other Perspective
Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2018 12:09 pm Post subject:
saetarubia wrote:
Gary Payton at 3:03 " Lonzo has a great court vision. He got a court vision I've never seen since Magic Johnson"
Gary said he likes three things about Lonzo. He has great court vision, he has a great knack of rebounding the basketball like Kidd and it's not stat padding ones, and he can defend a player 1v1.
What makes his court vision even more great is that he doesn't need to ballhog. Low usage rate.
Yup, great stuff from The Glove. _________________ "Chick lived and breathed Lakers basketball…but he was also fair and objective and called every game the way it was played."
-from Chick: His Unpublished Memoirs and the Memories of Those Who Knew Him
Honestly, losing organizations are losing organizations because they draft poorly and then fail to develop anyone. There's nothing inherently wrong with drafting for need or BPA.
Well, it depends on the talent disparity on the BPA and other player. If you think the BPA is Durant, you don’t go and draft someone else because you already have a player at SF.
If Tatum ends up to be a multi-time all-star, and Lonzo ends up borderline all-star, then it doesn’t validate not doing BPA
Nobody is saying you take a Mike Conley over KD, but if you feel the players will have similar impact, and you already have a glut at one spot, there is nothing wrong with drafting for best fit. In other words, if two guys are equal in terms of value, why not take the one who fits your future goals and needs better?
Joined: 10 Apr 2001 Posts: 65135 Location: Orange County, CA
Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2018 12:20 pm Post subject:
trablos wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
KungPau wrote:
Honestly, losing organizations are losing organizations because they draft poorly and then fail to develop anyone. There's nothing inherently wrong with drafting for need or BPA.
Well, it depends on the talent disparity on the BPA and other player. If you think the BPA is Durant, you don’t go and draft someone else because you already have a player at SF.
If Tatum ends up to be a multi-time all-star, and Lonzo ends up borderline all-star, then it doesn’t validate not doing BPA
Nobody is saying you take a Mike Conley over KD, but if you feel the players will have similar impact, and you already have a glut at one spot, there is nothing wrong with drafting for best fit. In other words, if two guys are equal in terms of value, why not take the one who fits your future goals and needs better?
This is the Portland paradox.
You already have Clyde Drexler.
Michael Jordan is on the draft board. You DO NOT know that he's a potential GOAT, simply because you've only seen 20ppg (max) out of UNC and his workouts.
You know you already have a future HOFer in Clyde Drexler. You, *think* Sam Bowie provides similar impact, just in different ways, because he rebounds, blocks shots, and there was a glut of talent at 5 during the 80s.
We all know who Portland picked.
Now it relates to the Lakers.
You actually have Eddie Jones, and up and coming All-Star, and good guy. Dude even defends MJ pretty darn well considering. Defensive player, improving 3-ball, dunks on Shawn Bradley, etc.
Then there's a 17 year old kid dominating workouts at the same position.
We know who Jerry West picked.
My point? Better be DARN sure that the projected impact of BPA is the same, because those mistakes are costly. _________________ Resident Car Nut.
Honestly, losing organizations are losing organizations because they draft poorly and then fail to develop anyone. There's nothing inherently wrong with drafting for need or BPA.
Well, it depends on the talent disparity on the BPA and other player. If you think the BPA is Durant, you don’t go and draft someone else because you already have a player at SF.
If Tatum ends up to be a multi-time all-star, and Lonzo ends up borderline all-star, then it doesn’t validate not doing BPA
Honestly, losing organizations are losing organizations because they draft poorly and then fail to develop anyone. There's nothing inherently wrong with drafting for need or BPA.
Well, it depends on the talent disparity on the BPA and other player. If you think the BPA is Durant, you don’t go and draft someone else because you already have a player at SF.
If Tatum ends up to be a multi-time all-star, and Lonzo ends up borderline all-star, then it doesn’t validate not doing BPA
You always do BPA.
Ingram
Tatum
Lebron
Kuzma
mcgee
sick.
Ingram isn’t a PG.
Ingram is pretty good at the point but LeBron usually likes to manage the rock. _________________ Lakers need to build a freaking team !
Honestly, losing organizations are losing organizations because they draft poorly and then fail to develop anyone. There's nothing inherently wrong with drafting for need or BPA.
Well, it depends on the talent disparity on the BPA and other player. If you think the BPA is Durant, you don’t go and draft someone else because you already have a player at SF.
If Tatum ends up to be a multi-time all-star, and Lonzo ends up borderline all-star, then it doesn’t validate not doing BPA
Nobody is saying you take a Mike Conley over KD, but if you feel the players will have similar impact, and you already have a glut at one spot, there is nothing wrong with drafting for best fit. In other words, if two guys are equal in terms of value, why not take the one who fits your future goals and needs better?
This is the Portland paradox.
You already have Clyde Drexler.
Michael Jordan is on the draft board. You DO NOT know that he's a potential GOAT, simply because you've only seen 20ppg (max) out of UNC and his workouts.
You know you already have a future HOFer in Clyde Drexler. You, *think* Sam Bowie provides similar impact, just in different ways, because he rebounds, blocks shots, and there was a glut of talent at 5 during the 80s.
We all know who Portland picked.
Now it relates to the Lakers.
You actually have Eddie Jones, and up and coming All-Star, and good guy. Dude even defends MJ pretty darn well considering. Defensive player, improving 3-ball, dunks on Shawn Bradley, etc.
Then there's a 17 year old kid dominating workouts at the same position.
We know who Jerry West picked.
My point? Better be DARN sure that the projected impact of BPA is the same, because those mistakes are costly.
Not a fan of the Kobe draft in a BPA discussion because he was coming off the bench in limited minutes no matter what anyway. If you’re drafting a prospect, you 100% go BPA.
I think BPA is always the way to go, with occasional exceptions depending on who you have already and the talent disparity between other remaining players
So, what if Tatum is a Laker, not Lonzo, but doesn't help the Lakers to 35 wins, even when healthy?
Do you really think you land LeBron?
I sure as hell don't.
I really believe LeBron appreciates Lonzo's game and thinks he can be a special player. Showing up to watch him in summer league, taking time to pull him aside and talk to him after they played in the regular season, and even at the press conference after they lost in the Finals when he talked about wanting to be around players who see and think the game on a different level, I think Lonzo was at least the type of player he meant. Some said LeBron wouldn't want Lonzo around because of LeVar, but there hasn't been a peep about trading him. LeBron knows basketball, and sees what some people here cannot.
Magic thought Lonzo was BPA. I'd say he thought Lonzo was more than just BPA in that draft and hence the comment about his record not being safe during the introductory press conference. _________________ Showtime 2.0
So, what if Tatum is a Laker, not Lonzo, but doesn't help the Lakers to 35 wins, even when healthy?
Do you really think you land LeBron?
I sure as hell don't.
If Tatum was the Lakers choice on draft night and not Lonzo, then they probably instead do the deal to trade Ingram to the Pacers for Paul George and that's where Mozgov winds up and they probably don't move Russell. So essentially they lose Ingram and Mozgov, they gain Paul George and the 18th pick and they don't get Brook Lopez. The Lakers likely then draft Kuzma at 18 and Josh Hart at 28, they don't get Thomas Bryant.
Do the Lakers then win 35 games then and do they sign LeBron in the off-season and keep George?
So, what if Tatum is a Laker, not Lonzo, but doesn't help the Lakers to 35 wins, even when healthy?
Do you really think you land LeBron?
I sure as hell don't.
If Tatum was the Lakers choice on draft night and not Lonzo, then they probably instead do the deal to trade Ingram to the Pacers for Paul George and that's where Mozgov winds up and they probably don't move Russell. So essentially they lose Ingram and Mozgov, they gain Paul George and the 18th pick and they don't get Brook Lopez. The Lakers likely then draft Kuzma at 18 and Josh Hart at 28, they don't get Thomas Bryant.
Do the Lakers then win 35 games then and do they sign LeBron in the off-season and keep George?
I'm just asking cause I want to know your opinion on that.
The Lakers were confident that PG would be available in free agency and Magic/Pelinka seemingly had issues with Russell, so I don't think this is true.
Also, I doubt the Pacers would both take on Mozgov AND give us a first round pick.
Joined: 10 Apr 2001 Posts: 65135 Location: Orange County, CA
Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2018 3:49 pm Post subject:
ringfinger wrote:
Mike@LG wrote:
So, what if Tatum is a Laker, not Lonzo, but doesn't help the Lakers to 35 wins, even when healthy?
Do you really think you land LeBron?
I sure as hell don't.
Kind of an odd hypothetical. And Lonzo didn’t help the Lakers to 35 wins. More like 25 wins, no?
If 25, imagine if he actually played the rest of the season.
That's kind of my point. It's really odd to say that Lonzo has a higher upside than Tatum because he's a playmaker, but it's not the individual numbers that show he has upside, it's the team's overall numbers that reflect it.
Basically, if LAL drafts Tatum (the guy I had at #3 anyway), I don't think they're a Top 15 defense, I don't think they're Top 3 in overall pace, I don't think they're among the league leaders in rebounding, and I definitely don't think they're among the league leaders in transition opportunities/points.
I do think that Lonzo contributes to each of those categories AND that it helped entice LeBron to become a Laker. _________________ Resident Car Nut.
Joined: 10 Apr 2001 Posts: 65135 Location: Orange County, CA
Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2018 3:51 pm Post subject:
MJST wrote:
Mike@LG wrote:
So, what if Tatum is a Laker, not Lonzo, but doesn't help the Lakers to 35 wins, even when healthy?
Do you really think you land LeBron?
I sure as hell don't.
If Tatum was the Lakers choice on draft night and not Lonzo, then they probably instead do the deal to trade Ingram to the Pacers for Paul George and that's where Mozgov winds up and they probably don't move Russell. So essentially they lose Ingram and Mozgov, they gain Paul George and the 18th pick and they don't get Brook Lopez. The Lakers likely then draft Kuzma at 18 and Josh Hart at 28, they don't get Thomas Bryant.
Do the Lakers then win 35 games then and do they sign LeBron in the off-season and keep George?
I'm just asking cause I want to know your opinion on that.
Short answer, a lot of finishers, nor team-culture changes, no guarantee that LeBron comes over.
Russell had his chance to make an effect on the team. We hoped for better transition play, 3pt shooting, PnR play. It was "alright" but didn't have the overall team effect that Lonzo had on the team last year. _________________ Resident Car Nut.
So, what if Tatum is a Laker, not Lonzo, but doesn't help the Lakers to 35 wins, even when healthy?
Do you really think you land LeBron?
I sure as hell don't.
Kind of an odd hypothetical. And Lonzo didn’t help the Lakers to 35 wins. More like 25 wins, no?
If 25, imagine if he actually played the rest of the season.
That's kind of my point. It's really odd to say that Lonzo has a higher upside than Tatum because he's a playmaker, but it's not the individual numbers that show he has upside, it's the team's overall numbers that reflect it.
Basically, if LAL drafts Tatum (the guy I had at #3 anyway), I don't think they're a Top 15 defense, I don't think they're Top 3 in overall pace, I don't think they're among the league leaders in rebounding, and I definitely don't think they're among the league leaders in transition opportunities/points.
I do think that Lonzo contributes to each of those categories AND that it helped entice LeBron to become a Laker.
You don’t think we would be #3 in pace? We were #6 the previous year without Lonzo
Joined: 10 Apr 2001 Posts: 65135 Location: Orange County, CA
Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2018 4:57 pm Post subject:
watchME wrote:
Mike@LG wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
Mike@LG wrote:
So, what if Tatum is a Laker, not Lonzo, but doesn't help the Lakers to 35 wins, even when healthy?
Do you really think you land LeBron?
I sure as hell don't.
Kind of an odd hypothetical. And Lonzo didn’t help the Lakers to 35 wins. More like 25 wins, no?
If 25, imagine if he actually played the rest of the season.
That's kind of my point. It's really odd to say that Lonzo has a higher upside than Tatum because he's a playmaker, but it's not the individual numbers that show he has upside, it's the team's overall numbers that reflect it.
Basically, if LAL drafts Tatum (the guy I had at #3 anyway), I don't think they're a Top 15 defense, I don't think they're Top 3 in overall pace, I don't think they're among the league leaders in rebounding, and I definitely don't think they're among the league leaders in transition opportunities/points.
I do think that Lonzo contributes to each of those categories AND that it helped entice LeBron to become a Laker.
You don’t think we would be #3 in pace? We were #6 the previous year without Lonzo
Not at all. DAR is a different kind of PG that pushes pace. He likes to run up and dribble after a board.
Lonzo legitimately bypasses all of that ball-handling and makes 3 second possessions, and he does that without all of the ball-handlers + passers GSW has. _________________ Resident Car Nut.
So, what if Tatum is a Laker, not Lonzo, but doesn't help the Lakers to 35 wins, even when healthy?
Do you really think you land LeBron?
I sure as hell don't.
Kind of an odd hypothetical. And Lonzo didn’t help the Lakers to 35 wins. More like 25 wins, no?
If 25, imagine if he actually played the rest of the season.
That's kind of my point. It's really odd to say that Lonzo has a higher upside than Tatum because he's a playmaker, but it's not the individual numbers that show he has upside, it's the team's overall numbers that reflect it.
Basically, if LAL drafts Tatum (the guy I had at #3 anyway), I don't think they're a Top 15 defense, I don't think they're Top 3 in overall pace, I don't think they're among the league leaders in rebounding, and I definitely don't think they're among the league leaders in transition opportunities/points.
I do think that Lonzo contributes to each of those categories AND that it helped entice LeBron to become a Laker.
Didn't the Lakers lead the league in pace before Lonzo got hurt?
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
