Luka Doncic (the 'LET'S RE-LITIGATE THE PICK UNTO PERPETUITY~!' thread)

Status
Not open for further replies.
SacTownKid said:
He is impressive. And for the record he has more professional experience than the PG he faced last night.
Click to expand...

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.
 
SacTownKid said:
He is impressive. And for the record he has more professional experience than the PG he faced last night.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Dime Dropper said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
Warhawk said:
The making a molehill comment is in regards to those thinking the coach is throwing shade at the FO about Bagley, which would be totally out of character for the coach and with no rational basis other than in a few poster's melons. Coach has never said anything about not being happy with the Bagley pick or wanting Luka instead. And now, all of a sudden, he's supposed to be talking smack about the pick? Huh?
Click to expand...

I never said anything about Bagley in my post.
 
Padrino said:
That's a nice straw man you're constructing there. Passing on Luka did not occur in a vacuum. The Kings didn't say no to Doncic only to walk away with nothing. They selected Marvin Bagley in the draft instead. So if the choice you're offering is between James Harden and a comparable big name talent like, say, Anthony Davis, then yes, I absolutely say no to Harden. I take Davis instead, because he fits better with our core pieces.

My problem with the way many talk about Doncic in this thread is the notion that there is somehow a massive gulf between Doncic's talent level and Bagley's talent level. Personally, I just don't see what they're seeing. I don't see a "generational" talent in Luka Doncic. Yet. There are huge gaps in Luka's game currently, just like there are huge gaps in Marvin's game currently. Either of them could be hampered by those gaps. Both of them could be hampered by those gaps. Either of them could be headed for stardom. Both of them could be headed for stardom.
Click to expand...

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.

Padrino said:
Simply put, Doncic is not a sure thing. There is no combination of advanced metrics that we could throw together that illustrate how Doncic is a "generational" talent, a future hall of famer. Yes, the raw stats are impressive, but they come by way of extraordinarily high usage, and more to the point, we should be wary of all raw stats for every player in the 2018-2019 season. The freedom of movement rules and the quickening pace of the game are juicing the counting stats league-wide. It's as if steroids have come to the NBA. Per game numbers are on the rise. Guys are scoring 50 with regularity. It doesn't tell us much about what's happening on the floor.

It's taken me years to get on board with advanced metrics, but I've finally come around in the last few seasons. And there's never been a more important time to rely on advanced metrics to explain what's actually happening on an NBA court because of how deceptive the raw stats are becoming in the modern NBA. The names that get used as comparison points to Doncic are not yet instructive names to be offering. Compare the metrics of Doncic's rookie season so far to Lebron's, to Durant's, to Harden's, hell, compare it to Tyreke's. You'll see a defensively-deficient turnover machine who is shooting very well from outside, but struggles to get to the rim and isn't exactly having a very big impact on winning (especially when you take the time to examine Dallas' bench, from which much of their positive production is coming as a team).
Click to expand...

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.

Padrino said:
All of this is to say, once again, that I think Luka Doncic is already very good today. But will he be great tomorrow? That's a question that is very much up for debate, despite what some of you are choosing to believe. And because it's up for debate, because it's not yet clear that Doncic is some godsend to the league, a generational talent the likes of which the NBA has never seen, I don't see how it's some massive error that the Kings' front office chose to draft Marvin Bagley, a young player who clearly has a lot of upside and an unstoppable motor to match.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Gguod said:
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.
Click to expand...

This is a great post!
 
Padrino said:
The difference is that I don’t think Luka is going to be in the same class as some of those names you mentioned. My opinion may be in the minority, but I think Dallas is headed for a fall in the standings, and I think Luka’s going to be a high usage/big stats/bad team kinda player for several years. I’ve said it before, but many of the advanced metrics suggest a player who’s closer to rookie Tyreke Evans than rookie James Harden.

He’s got an undeniable “it” factor. I understand why so many wish the Kings drafted him. But he’s not likely to be a plus on the defensive end anytime soon. His assist to turnover ratio is unnerving for a primary ballhandler. His first step is slow. He struggles to get by NBA wing defenders. He doesn’t get to the rim/free throw line at anywhere near the rate of a lotta the guys you listed during their respective rookie seasons. I just don’t see the “generational” talent that lots of other people see. Don’t get me wrong; he’s damn good already. He could be special. And I certainly see all-star berths in his future, but Bagley’s likely got that kind of future, as well.
Click to expand...

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.
 
sergmatt said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Dime Dropper said:
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.
Click to expand...

It was a simple comparison between he and Fox. Was it untrue?
 
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."
 
Joshoua said:
Looks like he knows how to draw fouls that’s a good thing.
Click to expand...

actually that is one parallel that can be drawn as Bagley is also very good at drawing fouls. I think he gets even more respect than Fox. we really need to get to thw point where Fox is getting these calls. of course, Buddy, Bogdan, and especially Bjelica arw at the bottom of ref respect pole...
 
VF21 said:
If by drawing fouls you mean is on the receiving end of a lot of love from the officials, then I'll agree.
Click to expand...

I wouldn’t say that rookies don’t get calls Bagley is getting calls should we say the same about him. He’s playing smart he’s not being like harden though
 
Well, first half, he didn’t get calls like int he Kings game. In fact, Rick Carlisle got a tech because he thought Luka wasn’t getting any calls. But at the half, the Mavs shot 14 FT’s to Nuggets 8. Could be a home court thing for the Mavs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Y
BDL's Most Interesting Power Rankings: The Cavs send a new message (Ball Don't Lie)
Replies
0
Views
433
Yahoo! Sports - NBA -
Y
Y
Grading the 2014 NBA draft (Ball Don't Lie)
Replies
0
Views
509
Yahoo! Sports - NBA -
Y
Y
All 29 other NBA owners show support for Adam Silver's ban on Donald Sterling, setting stage...
Replies
0
Views
899
Yahoo! Sports - NBA -
Y
Monty'sBiggestFan
MBF's Guide to Picking the Winning Mascot
2 3 4
Replies
113
Views
15K
VF21
VF21
ReinadelosReys
The Brad Miller show transcript
Replies
7
Views
781
VF21
VF21
Back
Top