Luka Doncic (the 'LET'S RE-LITIGATE THE PICK UNTO PERPETUITY~!' thread)
- Thread starter Hansel
- Start date
- Status
You mean experience against euro softies in inferior competition (to the NCAA)? That's what most of the Luka detractors tried to say going into the draft.......that his experience and success in Europe was overrated because the league he played in was inferior to the NCAA.
Now that's he's having success in the NBA the #1 explanation given from his detractors is.........well of course he's good he was already playing against grown men in a professional league. Very interesting that the same compliment that was given to him by his supporters going into the draft is now being used against him by the detractors.
In any event it doesn't matter. Luka is very good because he's very good. There doesn't always have to be this ulterior reason behind someone's success or lack thereof.
Now that's he's having success in the NBA the #1 explanation given from his detractors is.........well of course he's good he was already playing against grown men in a professional league. Very interesting that the same compliment that was given to him by his supporters going into the draft is now being used against him by the detractors.
In any event it doesn't matter. Luka is very good because he's very good. There doesn't always have to be this ulterior reason behind someone's success or lack thereof.
Right but I'm not sure why this is now commonly being brought up as a negative for Doncic. The same is true of literally every European prospect that comes over given that they generally turn pro while US kids of the same age are in college. It doesn't mean they're automatically putting up better numbers in the NBA. People are really reaching with this point.
It's not a negative. It's a question of whether you will see exponential leaps vs. linear improvement in his game because he already comes in at a very high level. Think the changes a star player makes from years 3-5 vs those they make during years 1-3. Can still be huge (Willie?) but maybe not something where week to week you go "holy crap, he couldn't do that last month!" (Bagley)
I think the biggest questions with Doncic hinge around whether he can develop an NBA body vs. whether he can develop an NBA mind. Most of the guys coming from college have the opposite issue.
I think the biggest questions with Doncic hinge around whether he can develop an NBA body vs. whether he can develop an NBA mind. Most of the guys coming from college have the opposite issue.
First of all Luka plays much more valuable position and has much more valuable skillset. Disclaimer: the following is purely an example on positional value, not a player comparison. When Steve Nash and Stoudamire played in Phoenix, they were both considered elite, all star and max salary level players. Still, Nash was way more valuable to that team and its not even close. If you disagree we can talk about that more but atm i'm not going to focus on argumenting that point any further. But thats just one example on why ball handling playmakers are so valuable and much more valuable than players who are more finishers than creators.
And I'm not even going to go into the "but we already have Fox" argument. It has been used constantly and every time it gets shot down by simply saying that elite teams almost all have at least couple of elite offensive creators and so on.
But thats already one huge thing that creates cap between Luka and Bagley, positional value and the value of different skillsets. Other thing is that at this moment, Luka is clearly the superior player. Plays a role that is far more challenging and produces lot more value to his team.
Those are couple reasons on why people talk like there is a big gap between these players.
What if you compare Lukas rookie advanced stats to Fox's? What if you compare Fox's to Tyreekes? Does it mean that since rookie Tyreeke dominates rookie Fox in advanced metrics, Fox has a limited ceiling? Does these comparisons mean that Luka is going to be a lot better than Fox since Lukas rookie metrics are better than Fox's and your prediction model seems to suggest that?
When talking about advanced stats for rookie ball handling creators, its usually good to remember that those guys doesnt contribute to winning basketball very often as rookies. Fox had trash advancee metrics in his rookie season, one of the worst RPM's in the whole league if I remember correctly. Also using Tyreekes stats is pretty much pointless since he had quite amazing stats for a rookie. Then injuries happened and lack of developement on crucial aspects like shooting and finishing.
Also I'm pretty sure that more than enough rookies will have worse rookie metrics than the second best player to ever play the game of basketball. No one has predicted that Luka will be in discussion with Jordan and Lebron for the best to ever done it so comparing their metrics seems quite worthless to me.
You are entitled to your opinion. My opinion is that I would take the already very good 19 year old playing the most valuable role rather than the 19 year old who plays less valuable role and "who has a lot of upside" aka he has to improve lot of things in order to become "even" a good player.
No one can ever know for certain what happens in the future but at least we know what has happened to this date and to this date Luka has been a lot better than Marvin. We also know approximetly how valuable different roles, positions and skillsets are in general compared to each other. You cant see how some people think that this was a massive error? Well the reason why I think it was a massive error is that combining thos two things above we can form an opinion that suggests that Doncic wouldve clearly been the better pick. Then we can start trying to predict future and developement of these players. Im just saying that Bagley has a lot to develope to even become as good as Doncic is already (plus then there is that difference in positional value). And for that reason even if I would predict that Bagley will tap more into his potential in the future, I would still pick Doncic 100 times out of 100.
And I'm not even going to go into the "but we already have Fox" argument. It has been used constantly and every time it gets shot down by simply saying that elite teams almost all have at least couple of elite offensive creators and so on.
But thats already one huge thing that creates cap between Luka and Bagley, positional value and the value of different skillsets. Other thing is that at this moment, Luka is clearly the superior player. Plays a role that is far more challenging and produces lot more value to his team.
Those are couple reasons on why people talk like there is a big gap between these players.
What if you compare Lukas rookie advanced stats to Fox's? What if you compare Fox's to Tyreekes? Does it mean that since rookie Tyreeke dominates rookie Fox in advanced metrics, Fox has a limited ceiling? Does these comparisons mean that Luka is going to be a lot better than Fox since Lukas rookie metrics are better than Fox's and your prediction model seems to suggest that?
When talking about advanced stats for rookie ball handling creators, its usually good to remember that those guys doesnt contribute to winning basketball very often as rookies. Fox had trash advancee metrics in his rookie season, one of the worst RPM's in the whole league if I remember correctly. Also using Tyreekes stats is pretty much pointless since he had quite amazing stats for a rookie. Then injuries happened and lack of developement on crucial aspects like shooting and finishing.
Also I'm pretty sure that more than enough rookies will have worse rookie metrics than the second best player to ever play the game of basketball. No one has predicted that Luka will be in discussion with Jordan and Lebron for the best to ever done it so comparing their metrics seems quite worthless to me.
You are entitled to your opinion. My opinion is that I would take the already very good 19 year old playing the most valuable role rather than the 19 year old who plays less valuable role and "who has a lot of upside" aka he has to improve lot of things in order to become "even" a good player.
No one can ever know for certain what happens in the future but at least we know what has happened to this date and to this date Luka has been a lot better than Marvin. We also know approximetly how valuable different roles, positions and skillsets are in general compared to each other. You cant see how some people think that this was a massive error? Well the reason why I think it was a massive error is that combining thos two things above we can form an opinion that suggests that Doncic wouldve clearly been the better pick. Then we can start trying to predict future and developement of these players. Im just saying that Bagley has a lot to develope to even become as good as Doncic is already (plus then there is that difference in positional value). And for that reason even if I would predict that Bagley will tap more into his potential in the future, I would still pick Doncic 100 times out of 100.
I don't know if he will ever reach those levels either but his rookie year is much better than guys like Lowry, Derozan, Harden, Beal, Giannis etc.
I think Carlisle is using Luka nearly perfectly this year. He knows they don't have the talent for an all out playoff run so get the kid going developmentally from the opening bell. What's crazy is that his heavy usage still has them in the playoff hunt and that's not because some other player on the team is picking up the slack. It's because Luka is good already. His assist/TO ratio isn't very good right now but he's a rookie and he's being thrown to the wolves right off the bat. That's a stat that can get much better in time as he adjusts to the league and figures out what works and what doesnt. I believe Harden's ratio was even worse his rookie year. Something close to 1 to 1.
His first step is slow but he's crafty and gets to the line just fine for a 19 year old. He would be 3rd on our team behind only Bagley and Fox as far as his free throw rate goes. He would have led the team last year. I don't think he's a ball hog either. He was being used as the point guard against us last night and I thought he did a terrific job of scoring and passing. The Mavs were very competitive for most of the game so it's not like he was just out there empty statting like Harrison Barnes or Wiggins do.
I don't agree that his advanced metrics are anything close to Tyreke. He's already 102nd in the league in RPM, just behind WCS and Bogie. He's a much better passer and sees the floor way better than Tyreke ever did. He just needs to work on turnovers and defense but the rest of his game has "holy crap this dude is going to be good" written all over it. For the record, I think Bagley is going to be very good as well. I think he will become a formidable scorer in this league very soon but I still think getting Doncic and a defensive/rebounding minded center would have been a better move as far as team success goes.
I think Carlisle is using Luka nearly perfectly this year. He knows they don't have the talent for an all out playoff run so get the kid going developmentally from the opening bell. What's crazy is that his heavy usage still has them in the playoff hunt and that's not because some other player on the team is picking up the slack. It's because Luka is good already. His assist/TO ratio isn't very good right now but he's a rookie and he's being thrown to the wolves right off the bat. That's a stat that can get much better in time as he adjusts to the league and figures out what works and what doesnt. I believe Harden's ratio was even worse his rookie year. Something close to 1 to 1.
His first step is slow but he's crafty and gets to the line just fine for a 19 year old. He would be 3rd on our team behind only Bagley and Fox as far as his free throw rate goes. He would have led the team last year. I don't think he's a ball hog either. He was being used as the point guard against us last night and I thought he did a terrific job of scoring and passing. The Mavs were very competitive for most of the game so it's not like he was just out there empty statting like Harrison Barnes or Wiggins do.
I don't agree that his advanced metrics are anything close to Tyreke. He's already 102nd in the league in RPM, just behind WCS and Bogie. He's a much better passer and sees the floor way better than Tyreke ever did. He just needs to work on turnovers and defense but the rest of his game has "holy crap this dude is going to be good" written all over it. For the record, I think Bagley is going to be very good as well. I think he will become a formidable scorer in this league very soon but I still think getting Doncic and a defensive/rebounding minded center would have been a better move as far as team success goes.
The exact things you bring up is precisely what went on in any discussion revolving around the draft prospect that was Luka Doncic. He was more ready, not a question about it, but because he was more ready it also might be an indicator that he might be closer to what he will become. See, nobody was really wrong about that yet. Luka being very good isn't a question for those in the know and never was. It's how good he'll be.
what, no posts in this mammoth of a thread for more than a day? let me pour some gasoline on the fire before Mavs play one of the best defenses in the NBA. I like this quote from early in the preseason :
"Helllooo, the NBA is filled with freak athletes, especially at the guard and wing positions. He’ll be clamped and abused on a nightly basis. He won’t be playing the Beijing Ducks every night lol."
"Helllooo, the NBA is filled with freak athletes, especially at the guard and wing positions. He’ll be clamped and abused on a nightly basis. He won’t be playing the Beijing Ducks every night lol."
- Status