Reviewing Bagley v Luka
- Thread starter Kangztillidie
- Start date
How many people on this forum did that? One or two at best? Where are the posts calling Vlade stupid for the Bagley pick? Shouldn't be too hard for you to find them if so many of them actually exist.
You can't get along because you spend a significant portion of your posts trashing the other posters here because they are not a Kings fan exactly the same way you are. You know it's possible to be a Kings fan and to also admire players on other teams, discuss past drafts, etc.
You can't get along because you spend a significant portion of your posts trashing the other posters here because they are not a Kings fan exactly the same way you are. You know it's possible to be a Kings fan and to also admire players on other teams, discuss past drafts, etc.
Tyreke is the go to argument for people to put down rookies that they don't like. He and Michael Carter Williams are the only two examples I can think of in that category with a couple dozen other examples that show how much of an outlier those two are.
I agree with Jamal that Trae isn't having a historic rookie season but since Jan 21st he's averaging 24pts, 9ast on 45% shooting and 40% from 3. The kid is going to be really good. If he keeps trending in this direction he will be much more valuable than Bagley or any other big man in the game simply due to the position he plays. Even without being able to play good defense.
I agree with Jamal that Trae isn't having a historic rookie season but since Jan 21st he's averaging 24pts, 9ast on 45% shooting and 40% from 3. The kid is going to be really good. If he keeps trending in this direction he will be much more valuable than Bagley or any other big man in the game simply due to the position he plays. Even without being able to play good defense.
Eh no. He basically has to have Steph Curry level impact on offense to be a star without playing defense. And Steph eventually became a net neutral defender a bit later on his career. Think there's a case Trae is the worst defender in the NBA right now and it's not particularly close. Last in DRPM in the entire NBA, the ATL defense is 8.6 points better defensively with him off the floor, -2.9 DBPM. And then pair that with the eye test with his lack of size, average lateral quickness and lack of defensive awareness, dude has a LONG way to go before he even sniffs competent on that side of the floor.
Offensively, he can be special, but there's literally one blueprint (Steph Curry), to be a star PG that's horrible on the defensive end. And Steph Curry is one of the greatest offensive players ever. If I had to guess, I'd put his ceiling closer to IT in Boston (special offensive player, sieve on defense) than him being a generational talent.
Offensively, he can be special, but there's literally one blueprint (Steph Curry), to be a star PG that's horrible on the defensive end. And Steph Curry is one of the greatest offensive players ever. If I had to guess, I'd put his ceiling closer to IT in Boston (special offensive player, sieve on defense) than him being a generational talent.
And that's a problem how? Would it be better if he missed more shots and didn't pass? You seem to be making the argument that none of his offensive contributions matter because of how poor he is defensively. They're two separate things. He does suck defensively and needs to improve to at least a passable below-average defender. Obviously the overall team would be better for it.
However you can't just dismiss his outstanding offensive skills and statistics because of it. Those do contribute to winning. Atlanta has played better of late with Trae Young playing better. They also have two Top-10 picks coming which will give Trae some help in the coming seasons.
Why the constant harping on the USG statistic? Do you really believe that a players "counting stats" are based solely on high USG? Have you ever considered that the players with high USG generally have a high USG for a reason? In general they're better offensive players, better ball handlers, better shot creators, etc. So of course their teams are going to entrust them with much more responsibility within the offense. Case in point James Harden the ultimate high usage guy.
If you give Ben McLemore the same USG rate as James Harden the results will not even be remotely similar. So for you to claim a players "counting stats" are only a product of their USG rate is flat out wrong.
However you can't just dismiss his outstanding offensive skills and statistics because of it. Those do contribute to winning. Atlanta has played better of late with Trae Young playing better. They also have two Top-10 picks coming which will give Trae some help in the coming seasons.
Why the constant harping on the USG statistic? Do you really believe that a players "counting stats" are based solely on high USG? Have you ever considered that the players with high USG generally have a high USG for a reason? In general they're better offensive players, better ball handlers, better shot creators, etc. So of course their teams are going to entrust them with much more responsibility within the offense. Case in point James Harden the ultimate high usage guy.
If you give Ben McLemore the same USG rate as James Harden the results will not even be remotely similar. So for you to claim a players "counting stats" are only a product of their USG rate is flat out wrong.
Which offensively gifted, non elite passing big men are leading their teams to the playoffs? Embiid is one with Vucevic, Griffin and Aldridge just barely getting in at the 7th and 8th seeds unless the Heat and Hornets knock Vucevic and Griffin out. The blueprint is about as small for Bagley as it is for Trae.
Trae doesn't have to be Steph Curry. He can lead his team to the playoffs every year by just being some hybrid form of Curry/IT. His defense will always be bad but you can get away with bad defense if you score a ton of points efficiently and set your teammates up. He's averaging 8 assists a game without much talent around him and it's not like his defense is always going to stay at what it is right now. It's obviously not going to be great or anything but he will improve defensively as his career goes....just as most players do.
To me it's less an argument about Bagley vs. Young as it is non elite passing big men vs. scoring facilitators that don't play good defense. I think Bagley is great but the rules of the NBA will more than likely make him less of a player than Trae Young if both players continue to improve the way they have. That's just my opinion and it'll stay my opinion until some sort of proof starts happening in the league.
Trae doesn't have to be Steph Curry. He can lead his team to the playoffs every year by just being some hybrid form of Curry/IT. His defense will always be bad but you can get away with bad defense if you score a ton of points efficiently and set your teammates up. He's averaging 8 assists a game without much talent around him and it's not like his defense is always going to stay at what it is right now. It's obviously not going to be great or anything but he will improve defensively as his career goes....just as most players do.
To me it's less an argument about Bagley vs. Young as it is non elite passing big men vs. scoring facilitators that don't play good defense. I think Bagley is great but the rules of the NBA will more than likely make him less of a player than Trae Young if both players continue to improve the way they have. That's just my opinion and it'll stay my opinion until some sort of proof starts happening in the league.
Doncic and Young much more closely fit the current template for #1's on elite teams than either Fox or Bagley. The Kings are collecting great young talent, but going against the grain in roster construction and focus of resources. I guess they believe the guys will become great enough to supersede conventional wisdom. The mold always does eventually get broken by somebody.
I’ll take the wing who doesn’t play defense over the big unless said big is Embiid.
24-9 for a rookie is elite Trae will be a star in no time and since January 21 that’s enough games to say it isn’t some hot streak. He’s easily more valuable than Bagley in this era I don’t know how that could be argued. Wings/PGs that control the offense are the way it’s built fortunately for us we have Fox.
24-9 for a rookie is elite Trae will be a star in no time and since January 21 that’s enough games to say it isn’t some hot streak. He’s easily more valuable than Bagley in this era I don’t know how that could be argued. Wings/PGs that control the offense are the way it’s built fortunately for us we have Fox.
Duh. It's implied a guy has to prove he can handle the elite rates. That's the first step when figuring out if a guy can be an elite offensive player. If I raise Player X's USG from 20% to 25% and make him a focal point of my offense, what happens to his efficiency numbers?
And nothing I said was wrong. You're USG rate and team role (You conveniently left out team role from my statement) dictate your counting stats. If I gave James Harden, Justin Jackson's role and USG rate, would he still be putting up the same counting numbers? See why that doesn't work?
Yeah... And Trae's rates aren't good at all for the season. He's picked it up the last 2 months, but if we care about samples at all here, he's been an inefficient high USG offensive player that turns the ball over an incredible amount while being a complete sieve on defense. I'm definitely encouraged by the last 2 months of his play and if that's who he's going to be going forward, then he'll be a special offensive player. I do think his passing and court vision can be top-tier. It's a very similar situation to Bagley where the Bagley we've seen the last 2 months can be a very special player if that's who he's going to be moving forward.
I don't take issue that Trae can be good. I take issue with Joshua's ludicrous claim that Trae is putting up some historic rookie season. His rookie arc is very similar to many good talents: Struggle in the beginning and start to figure it out later in the year.
And nothing I said was wrong. You're USG rate and team role (You conveniently left out team role from my statement) dictate your counting stats. If I gave James Harden, Justin Jackson's role and USG rate, would he still be putting up the same counting numbers? See why that doesn't work?
Yeah... And Trae's rates aren't good at all for the season. He's picked it up the last 2 months, but if we care about samples at all here, he's been an inefficient high USG offensive player that turns the ball over an incredible amount while being a complete sieve on defense. I'm definitely encouraged by the last 2 months of his play and if that's who he's going to be going forward, then he'll be a special offensive player. I do think his passing and court vision can be top-tier. It's a very similar situation to Bagley where the Bagley we've seen the last 2 months can be a very special player if that's who he's going to be moving forward.
I don't take issue that Trae can be good. I take issue with Joshua's ludicrous claim that Trae is putting up some historic rookie season. His rookie arc is very similar to many good talents: Struggle in the beginning and start to figure it out later in the year.
We can more or less follow the Pistons blueprint of not having a clear #1.
Fox and Bagley will both be better than any of those Pistons though offensively.
Fox took over yesterdays game down the stretch on both sides and Bagley has flashed his potential. Luka and Trae both have the offense running through them and the green light. Fox and Bagley play in much more of a balanced system.
Fox and Bagley will both be better than any of those Pistons though offensively.
Fox took over yesterdays game down the stretch on both sides and Bagley has flashed his potential. Luka and Trae both have the offense running through them and the green light. Fox and Bagley play in much more of a balanced system.
First of all why didn't you bring up half this stuff to begin with? Now you start to compliment Trae Young but only after you completely trashed him in your last post. Of course he's inefficient and has areas to work on, he's a rookie. Stands to reason he will tighten up multiple areas of his game, just like Doncic and Bagley will. If they don't tighten those areas then they will never thrive long term.
A player of James Harden's calibur in his prime would very rarely get stuck in Justin Jackson's role and USG rate. Even when Harden played for OKC before he reached his prime, he still had a solid role within the team. It was a unique situation with Westbrook and Durant on the same team. Everyone knew he had a lot more to offer (nobody knew he'd be quite this good though). Hence why OKC had to let him go and the rest is history. Bottom line is most of the time special offensive talents end up with high USG rates because of their talent. Some too much but it's just part of being an elite offensive player or perceived elite offensive player.
You focus way too much on the USG stat. It's just one stat and not unlike so many other stats there is also context attached to it. If Bagley averages 20/10 next year and the Kings are winning more than 50% of their games.......I'm going to go out on a limb and say he's a good player and having a good year.
A player of James Harden's calibur in his prime would very rarely get stuck in Justin Jackson's role and USG rate. Even when Harden played for OKC before he reached his prime, he still had a solid role within the team. It was a unique situation with Westbrook and Durant on the same team. Everyone knew he had a lot more to offer (nobody knew he'd be quite this good though). Hence why OKC had to let him go and the rest is history. Bottom line is most of the time special offensive talents end up with high USG rates because of their talent. Some too much but it's just part of being an elite offensive player or perceived elite offensive player.
You focus way too much on the USG stat. It's just one stat and not unlike so many other stats there is also context attached to it. If Bagley averages 20/10 next year and the Kings are winning more than 50% of their games.......I'm going to go out on a limb and say he's a good player and having a good year.
Also, many fans get caught in the moment and don’t want to recognize that rules have changed to a point where it’s far easier to achieve feats that haven’t happened in quite a long time.
Over the past 40 years they’ve implemented a 3 point line, relaxed rules on dribbling and traveling, eliminated hand-checking and instituted a ‘freedom of movement’ rule.
If players from the 60’s and 70’s played under today’s rules they’d have set more lofty records that not near as many current players would have matched or surpassed.
If today’s players played under the rules of the 60’s through the 90’s they’d not be producing the same level of stats and would instead fit in with the rest of the field.
Comparing players from drastically different eras is apples and oranges. It’s just not the same game. Same goes for the NFL and MLB.
Evolution is a great thing. But it’s important to have proper context too.
Over the past 40 years they’ve implemented a 3 point line, relaxed rules on dribbling and traveling, eliminated hand-checking and instituted a ‘freedom of movement’ rule.
If players from the 60’s and 70’s played under today’s rules they’d have set more lofty records that not near as many current players would have matched or surpassed.
If today’s players played under the rules of the 60’s through the 90’s they’d not be producing the same level of stats and would instead fit in with the rest of the field.
Comparing players from drastically different eras is apples and oranges. It’s just not the same game. Same goes for the NFL and MLB.
Evolution is a great thing. But it’s important to have proper context too.
Serious question:
What have Donnie Nelson and Rick Carlisle done lately to inspire any confidence that they can get a rebuild done?
Sure they won a championship but that was 8 seasons ago. Since then, they've lost in the first round of the playoffs four times and missed the playoffs another three times (four if you count this season).
On paper Zinger and Luka looks like it could be a really darn good duo but the Mavs also had to trade almost every single asset they had to get them together with absolutely no guarantee Kristaps stays healthy.
Dallas could, as you say, "pick up a nice FA" but their recent track record involves two ill-fated attempts at DeAndre Jordan (one successful), Deron Williams, Wes Matthews almost immediately after the dude suffered a serious leg injury, and Harrison Barnes, who was the best signing of the bunch but a horrible fit for Carlisle's system and reviled by the Mavs fanbase. Plus with Hardaway taking up a large amount of cap space and a future Zinger contract probably being in the max range, it's not like they're going to have a large amount of cash to play with for a while anyways. And, if the main pitch for the offseason is "Come to Dallas for a chance to become a spot up shooter for Luka!", I'm not sure how many quality guys are gonna jump at the opportunity. (Seriously, I am 95% sure that Willie winds up on their roster next season)
Meanwhile, Carlisle has had repeated conflicts with the point guards on his team and his attempts to modernize the Mavs offense this season can largely come down to "give the ball to Luka and hope for the best". And let's not pretend Zinger has been an easy guy to work with in his young career.
Are we sure this is an ideal leadership group for a rebuild?
What have Donnie Nelson and Rick Carlisle done lately to inspire any confidence that they can get a rebuild done?
Sure they won a championship but that was 8 seasons ago. Since then, they've lost in the first round of the playoffs four times and missed the playoffs another three times (four if you count this season).
On paper Zinger and Luka looks like it could be a really darn good duo but the Mavs also had to trade almost every single asset they had to get them together with absolutely no guarantee Kristaps stays healthy.
Dallas could, as you say, "pick up a nice FA" but their recent track record involves two ill-fated attempts at DeAndre Jordan (one successful), Deron Williams, Wes Matthews almost immediately after the dude suffered a serious leg injury, and Harrison Barnes, who was the best signing of the bunch but a horrible fit for Carlisle's system and reviled by the Mavs fanbase. Plus with Hardaway taking up a large amount of cap space and a future Zinger contract probably being in the max range, it's not like they're going to have a large amount of cash to play with for a while anyways. And, if the main pitch for the offseason is "Come to Dallas for a chance to become a spot up shooter for Luka!", I'm not sure how many quality guys are gonna jump at the opportunity. (Seriously, I am 95% sure that Willie winds up on their roster next season)
Meanwhile, Carlisle has had repeated conflicts with the point guards on his team and his attempts to modernize the Mavs offense this season can largely come down to "give the ball to Luka and hope for the best". And let's not pretend Zinger has been an easy guy to work with in his young career.
Are we sure this is an ideal leadership group for a rebuild?
I actually hope they are in the mix. I miss the days when the KINGS and Dallas were rivals in the postseason. It would be cool to see that happen again especially with all the disagreement over the draft.
I wonder if they’ll get lucky and get to keep their draft pick this year. If the NBA truly does conspire, I could see Zion ending up in LA or DAL if he doesn’t wind up in NY.
I wonder if they’ll get lucky and get to keep their draft pick this year. If the NBA truly does conspire, I could see Zion ending up in LA or DAL if he doesn’t wind up in NY.
