I love how confident people are every year about a certain prospect. Usually, around this time, LG turns into the Hive mind about a player.
2015 - okafor > Russell lol nobody who supported Russel could get a word in because the okafor supporters took over.
2016 - Simmons > Ingram. This one had more validity. I won’t go into detail but I still feel Ingram was the correct choice. .
2017 - fultz > Lonzo. I remember a few Fox supporters too, but mostly it was believed that fultz was a prospect in his own tier. That wasn’t the case at all and anyone who watched Lonzo completely outclass him in their matchup would have known that.
2018 - garland > anyone else and we haven’t even really seen the guy play yet lol he’s being compared to players like CP3 and Kyrie. Personally I don’t even see what the fuss is about. He’s not even as good as any of our last few draft picks. Not even Randle and he was picked 7th.
This hive mind ish is crazy.
Imo reddish and Bol Bol are better upside prospects than garland. I honestly don’t think he’s better than the HS prospect last year Anfernee somons. I liked him but he went later in the first.
Yep, every year some guy becomes the "it" pick and turns out to be all bluster. I'm befuddled by the love with Garland. Guys like Dame or Curry dont fall off trees - theyre the exception, not the rule.
I admit its all a bit of a guess game, but I would not waste my pick on Garland. But please do keep up the hype for the Knicks, who have been known to go off the rails sometimes with their picks. Maybe they will draft him and leave us deciding between RJ Barrett, Culver, or Hunter (and, likely, Barrett would be drafted then).
I know player comps aren't great, but how about these?
Garland: Dame, Kemba
Culver: Joe Johnson with a worse 3 point shot.
Hunter: Artest/Stanley Johnson with a better 3 point shot.
Am I off?
I don't see Garland as a Lillard/Kemba level athlete around the rim. He certainly has enough vertical pop and touch to be an effective finisher at the rim, but I don't see Garland putting the same downhill pressure on defenses as those two (and Kemba's only recently got his 3-ball going). Garland tends to go east-west rather than north-south, which could be a comfort thing that could be coached out of him or it might be a sign of a half-step slow first step. I'd actually compare Garland more to a young Steph Curry stylistically, but obviously the comparison ends there.
Culver will likely be a better defender than Johnson. Offensively there's definitely some overlap and remember that Johnson wasn't a knock-down 3pt shooter his first few seasons in the league.
Artest was a wrecking ball team defender along with being an intimidating man defender. Hunter is much more conservative and akin to Klay Thompson as a smart, unambitious team defender who shines defending on-the-ball. Offensively? Stanley Johnson with a reliable 3pt jumper is probably accurate.
Thanks. I'm cramming for this exam basically as I've watched 0 college games.
Still not sure we end up keeping the pick anyways, but always interesting to see the prospects.
How do you feel about the purported group of players in that 3-4 range? Hunter/Reddish/Garland/Culver/Barrett? _________________ From 2-10 to the Western Conference Finals
from my perspective, our biggest needs are SG and C. we have lonzo at PG with kidd to groom him, LBJ at SF obviously and Kuzma as stretch PF.
culver and hunter are the ideal choices since there are no good centers in the top 5 (bol bol is too big a risk and hayes will likely go 10 or later). hunter is more NBA ready but culver has the potential to be a great player. lonzo is NOT a SG and picking another PG to try pairing with him is a big mistake IMO.
Why isn't Lonzo a "SG?" I'm not wedded to traditional positions. Assume we get Garland (or even Kyrie/Kemba via FA), Lonzo would be slotted as a "SG" but defend the other team's best guard threat every night.
I usually define a player (crudely) by the position they mostly defend.
he doesn't "shoot" well? lonzo's biggest asset is his playmaking, and garland's small stature will be a liability given lonzo isn't yet strong enough to handle the larger 2's in the league.
Lonzo is bigger and stronger than most 2s in the league
Lonzo is fine guarding 2s, even most 3s.
lonzo can't stay healthy for a full season, let alone guard 3s. harden, klay, kawhi, butler, etc. all outweigh him by 25-30 lbs. he'll get outmuscled even at the 2, and he can't compensate with crafty handles or knockdown shooting like lou williams or mccollum. _________________ We only celebrate championships.
from my perspective, our biggest needs are SG and C. we have lonzo at PG with kidd to groom him, LBJ at SF obviously and Kuzma as stretch PF.
culver and hunter are the ideal choices since there are no good centers in the top 5 (bol bol is too big a risk and hayes will likely go 10 or later). hunter is more NBA ready but culver has the potential to be a great player. lonzo is NOT a SG and picking another PG to try pairing with him is a big mistake IMO.
Why isn't Lonzo a "SG?" I'm not wedded to traditional positions. Assume we get Garland (or even Kyrie/Kemba via FA), Lonzo would be slotted as a "SG" but defend the other team's best guard threat every night.
I usually define a player (crudely) by the position they mostly defend.
he doesn't "shoot" well? lonzo's biggest asset is his playmaking, and garland's small stature will be a liability given lonzo isn't yet strong enough to handle the larger 2's in the league.
Lonzo is bigger and stronger than most 2s in the league
Lonzo is fine guarding 2s, even most 3s.
lonzo can't stay healthy for a full season, let alone guard 3s. harden, klay, kawhi, butler, etc. all outweigh him by 25-30 lbs. he'll get outmuscled even at the 2, and he can't compensate with crafty handles or knockdown shooting like lou williams or mccollum.
He does fine on 2s and most 3s. His injuries have never been related to guarding bigger players and his ball handing and shooting is irrelevant to the discussion at hand.
from my perspective, our biggest needs are SG and C. we have lonzo at PG with kidd to groom him, LBJ at SF obviously and Kuzma as stretch PF.
culver and hunter are the ideal choices since there are no good centers in the top 5 (bol bol is too big a risk and hayes will likely go 10 or later). hunter is more NBA ready but culver has the potential to be a great player. lonzo is NOT a SG and picking another PG to try pairing with him is a big mistake IMO.
Why isn't Lonzo a "SG?" I'm not wedded to traditional positions. Assume we get Garland (or even Kyrie/Kemba via FA), Lonzo would be slotted as a "SG" but defend the other team's best guard threat every night.
I usually define a player (crudely) by the position they mostly defend.
he doesn't "shoot" well? lonzo's biggest asset is his playmaking, and garland's small stature will be a liability given lonzo isn't yet strong enough to handle the larger 2's in the league.
Lonzo is bigger and stronger than most 2s in the league
Lonzo is fine guarding 2s, even most 3s.
lonzo can't stay healthy for a full season, let alone guard 3s. harden, klay, kawhi, butler, etc. all outweigh him by 25-30 lbs. he'll get outmuscled even at the 2, and he can't compensate with crafty handles or knockdown shooting like lou williams or mccollum.
He does fine on 2s and most 3s. His injuries have never been related to guarding bigger players and his ball handing and shooting is irrelevant to the discussion at hand.
you're talking defensively. he can guard 2s in stretches but 3s? forget about it. his injuries are a result of not being physically ready to handle a full nba season, which goes back to needing to get stronger. his shooting is one of the most relevant weaknesses, especially if you're looking to move him off ball by drafting another point guard. _________________ We only celebrate championships.
from my perspective, our biggest needs are SG and C. we have lonzo at PG with kidd to groom him, LBJ at SF obviously and Kuzma as stretch PF.
culver and hunter are the ideal choices since there are no good centers in the top 5 (bol bol is too big a risk and hayes will likely go 10 or later). hunter is more NBA ready but culver has the potential to be a great player. lonzo is NOT a SG and picking another PG to try pairing with him is a big mistake IMO.
Why isn't Lonzo a "SG?" I'm not wedded to traditional positions. Assume we get Garland (or even Kyrie/Kemba via FA), Lonzo would be slotted as a "SG" but defend the other team's best guard threat every night.
I usually define a player (crudely) by the position they mostly defend.
he doesn't "shoot" well? lonzo's biggest asset is his playmaking, and garland's small stature will be a liability given lonzo isn't yet strong enough to handle the larger 2's in the league.
Lonzo is bigger and stronger than most 2s in the league
Lonzo is fine guarding 2s, even most 3s.
lonzo can't stay healthy for a full season, let alone guard 3s. harden, klay, kawhi, butler, etc. all outweigh him by 25-30 lbs. he'll get outmuscled even at the 2, and he can't compensate with crafty handles or knockdown shooting like lou williams or mccollum.
He does fine on 2s and most 3s. His injuries have never been related to guarding bigger players and his ball handing and shooting is irrelevant to the discussion at hand.
you're talking defensively. he can guard 2s in stretches but 3s? forget about it. his injuries are a result of not being physically ready to handle a full nba season, which goes back to needing to get stronger. his shooting is one of the most relevant weaknesses, especially if you're looking to move him off ball by drafting another point guard.
We’ve seen him guard 3s. Is that his ideal position defensively? Of course not. But can he do it? Yes. I agree he needs to get stronger but I have a hard time attributing a sprained ankle while dribbling to being too weak to handle NBA level physicality. He needs to work on his shooting that’s undeniable(although it’s overstated) but that has nothing to do with who he can guard. And I wouldn’t move him to the two offensively, I’d move Garland there for pretty obvious reasons.
from my perspective, our biggest needs are SG and C. we have lonzo at PG with kidd to groom him, LBJ at SF obviously and Kuzma as stretch PF.
culver and hunter are the ideal choices since there are no good centers in the top 5 (bol bol is too big a risk and hayes will likely go 10 or later). hunter is more NBA ready but culver has the potential to be a great player. lonzo is NOT a SG and picking another PG to try pairing with him is a big mistake IMO.
Why isn't Lonzo a "SG?" I'm not wedded to traditional positions. Assume we get Garland (or even Kyrie/Kemba via FA), Lonzo would be slotted as a "SG" but defend the other team's best guard threat every night.
I usually define a player (crudely) by the position they mostly defend.
he doesn't "shoot" well? lonzo's biggest asset is his playmaking, and garland's small stature will be a liability given lonzo isn't yet strong enough to handle the larger 2's in the league.
Lonzo is bigger and stronger than most 2s in the league
Lonzo is fine guarding 2s, even most 3s.
lonzo can't stay healthy for a full season, let alone guard 3s. harden, klay, kawhi, butler, etc. all outweigh him by 25-30 lbs. he'll get outmuscled even at the 2, and he can't compensate with crafty handles or knockdown shooting like lou williams or mccollum.
Joel Embiid couldn't get on the court for his first two seasons.
Here's Harden outmuscling Lonzo: _________________ Under New Management
I know player comps aren't great, but how about these?
Garland: Dame, Kemba
Culver: Joe Johnson with a worse 3 point shot.
Hunter: Artest/Stanley Johnson with a better 3 point shot.
Am I off?
I don't see Garland as a Lillard/Kemba level athlete around the rim. He certainly has enough vertical pop and touch to be an effective finisher at the rim, but I don't see Garland putting the same downhill pressure on defenses as those two (and Kemba's only recently got his 3-ball going). Garland tends to go east-west rather than north-south, which could be a comfort thing that could be coached out of him or it might be a sign of a half-step slow first step. I'd actually compare Garland more to a young Steph Curry stylistically, but obviously the comparison ends there.
Culver will likely be a better defender than Johnson. Offensively there's definitely some overlap and remember that Johnson wasn't a knock-down 3pt shooter his first few seasons in the league.
Artest was a wrecking ball team defender along with being an intimidating man defender. Hunter is much more conservative and akin to Klay Thompson as a smart, unambitious team defender who shines defending on-the-ball. Offensively? Stanley Johnson with a reliable 3pt jumper is probably accurate.
Thanks. I'm cramming for this exam basically as I've watched 0 college games.
Still not sure we end up keeping the pick anyways, but always interesting to see the prospects.
How do you feel about the purported group of players in that 3-4 range? Hunter/Reddish/Garland/Culver/Barrett?
Not super excited. I'd prefer they trade back or trade out for a future pick, but one of those guys you named probably pops enough to make a GM look silly in the future for not taking him at #4. But which guy will it be? _________________ Under New Management
from my perspective, our biggest needs are SG and C. we have lonzo at PG with kidd to groom him, LBJ at SF obviously and Kuzma as stretch PF.
culver and hunter are the ideal choices since there are no good centers in the top 5 (bol bol is too big a risk and hayes will likely go 10 or later). hunter is more NBA ready but culver has the potential to be a great player. lonzo is NOT a SG and picking another PG to try pairing with him is a big mistake IMO.
Why isn't Lonzo a "SG?" I'm not wedded to traditional positions. Assume we get Garland (or even Kyrie/Kemba via FA), Lonzo would be slotted as a "SG" but defend the other team's best guard threat every night.
I usually define a player (crudely) by the position they mostly defend.
he doesn't "shoot" well? lonzo's biggest asset is his playmaking, and garland's small stature will be a liability given lonzo isn't yet strong enough to handle the larger 2's in the league.
Lonzo is bigger and stronger than most 2s in the league
Lonzo is fine guarding 2s, even most 3s.
lonzo can't stay healthy for a full season, let alone guard 3s. harden, klay, kawhi, butler, etc. all outweigh him by 25-30 lbs. he'll get outmuscled even at the 2, and he can't compensate with crafty handles or knockdown shooting like lou williams or mccollum.
Joel Embiid couldn't get on the court for his first two seasons.
Here's Harden outmuscling Lonzo:
This is delicious, Harden aint no pushover either.
if we actually draft garland, i'll be back here to say told you so when he gets injured again playing the 2. _________________ We only celebrate championships.
Joined: 15 Sep 2012 Posts: 29286 Location: La La Land
Posted: Wed May 22, 2019 9:21 pm Post subject:
Baron Von Humongous wrote:
matrixskillz wrote:
if we actually draft garland, i'll be back here to say told you so when he gets injured again playing the 2.
Take the L.
L is for Lonzo.
Hopefully this upcoming season, Garland and Lonzo play 82 games for us (combined). _________________ "Every hurt is a lesson, and every lesson makes you better”
How about trading Zo to the Bulls or Suns for their pick and selecting Hunter & Garland?
(I know Lebron won't like it, but hopefully we get Kyrie for him to play with) _________________ “Always remember... Rumors are carried by haters, spread by fools, and accepted by idiots.”
How about trading Zo to the Bulls or Suns for their pick and selecting Hunter & Garland?
(I know Lebron won't like it, but hopefully we get Kyrie for him to play with)
I’d do Zo to Atlanta for 8 and 10. I take that back... Trae and Zo along with Huerter... that would be too much regret. _________________ DEAR BASKETBALL
Last edited by €H£M£$TR¥ on Wed May 22, 2019 10:10 pm; edited 1 time in total
I love how confident people are every year about a certain prospect. Usually, around this time, LG turns into the Hive mind about a player.
2015 - okafor > Russell lol nobody who supported Russel could get a word in because the okafor supporters took over.
2016 - Simmons > Ingram. This one had more validity. I won’t go into detail but I still feel Ingram was the correct choice. .
2017 - fultz > Lonzo. I remember a few Fox supporters too, but mostly it was believed that fultz was a prospect in his own tier. That wasn’t the case at all and anyone who watched Lonzo completely outclass him in their matchup would have known that.
2018 - garland > anyone else and we haven’t even really seen the guy play yet lol he’s being compared to players like CP3 and Kyrie. Personally I don’t even see what the fuss is about. He’s not even as good as any of our last few draft picks. Not even Randle and he was picked 7th.
This hive mind ish is crazy.
Imo reddish and Bol Bol are better upside prospects than garland. I honestly don’t think he’s better than the HS prospect last year Anfernee somons. I liked him but he went later in the first.
You posted this like there’s a lot of strong options out here. He doesn’t have to be better than Randle etc.. he’s most likely the best available at 4. Do you believe reddish will be better than Ingram? Do you believe any of the guys who are available at 4 is better than Ingram?
Reddish? Idk. Garland? Def not.
I’m saying he’s not even in the same conversation as our other prospects. I feel like bol bol and reddish are at least the same caliber of talent and potential.
That’s the issue though. Even though we have super talented prospects, they all needed years to develop (they are still developing). That is the only reason I’m not too interested in this class. We need a player that can come in and be a contributor in the rotation from day 1. The only prospect I see with that potential is hunter and I don’t think he has much upside tbh. He’s a 3& D player in this league.
I wouldn’t be surprised if the pick is traded. If not go for the highest potential
Bol bol and reddish at 4 imo
Get the duck outta here. Cam ain’t close to being the prospect Ingram was. What exactly is he good at? Garland is good at scoring and handling the ball. All you can do is talk about Reddish potential.
Idk man, I look at draft prospects a little differently than most people. Ingram has a better wingspan, vert and is younger at the time of draft. Reddish has a better body coming into the nba. Other than that I see them as equal skill wise.
Cam didn’t get a chance to show his all around game but he has it. Point guard skills in a small forward body. If Cam was the top prospect at Duke like Ingram was I bet he puts up similar numbers. Cam was relegated to a catch and shoot guy which really hurt his draft stock. He took a ton of catch and shoot 3’s last season because he was the only one somewhat capable of spacing the floor for Zion and Barrett. He made a sacrifice for the team.
I’d honestly be surprised if the lakers choose to keep the puck and pass him up. _________________ “like I never left”
If You get Kyrie or Kemba via free agency then pick Hunter.
If You can get KD or Kawhi, then pick Garland
....and if You can get AD You trade the pick
it's simple like that for me
Hunter is the safe pick. He'll be a good player that can help a team right at the start. But he hasn't the upside of reddish, garland and maybe even culver or hayes _________________ White guy to white guy alley oop
Saying this generally and unrelated to the draft pick...
I don't want Lonzo guarding 2s, and prefer the advantage he gives us over most teams when he guards their 1s. So, I'd like to see him fix his broke-ass shot... and partnered with a 2 who is equally or better suited to guarding 2s and 3s while also being a better shooter than Lonzo. IMO, Klay/Beal types between 6'4" - 6'8" would be perfect.
Last edited by LAL1947 on Thu May 23, 2019 2:20 am; edited 2 times in total
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
