The NBA rookies Thread

[trojanfan12]

I do agree that Ball's rebound rate is a positive point for him regardless of the style of the team. But you do have to question how many rebounds a league average PG would get if he replaced Ball. Probably not as many as Ball but probably more than the typical PG.

IOW, Ball is doing better than most PGs would do in that position but his numbers should be qualified a little.

Of course their rebounding would go up if their the team was gameplanning for them to get rebounds. But why would we qualify numbers for playing smart basketball? Teams gameplan for bigs to get rebounds and we don't qualify their numbers.

End of the day, it doesn't matter who got the rebound or why. It just matters that they got it.

 

[flyerhawk]

Of course their rebounding would go up if their the team was gameplanning for them to get rebounds. But why would we qualify numbers for playing smart basketball? Teams gameplan for bigs to get rebounds and we don't qualify their numbers.

End of the day, it doesn't matter who got the rebound or why. It just matters that they got it.

You are talking about analyzing the team strategy which, I agree, is more about results. I was talking about Ball's statistical output, and not even his general play.

 

[trojanfan12]

You are talking about analyzing the team strategy which, I agree, is more about results. I was talking about Ball's statistical output, and not even his general play.

I know what you're talking about. The overall team strategy is why he has some of the stats that he does.

You said that his numbers should be qualified a little because the team is game planning for him to get rebounds. So again I ask...Why would we qualify his numbers because the team is planning for him to get rebounds? Because he's a point guard? We don't qualify bigs numbers when teams plan for them to get rebounds.

Most players get what they get stats wise because teams plan for that.

 

[flyerhawk]

I know what you're talking about. The overall team strategy is why he has some of the stats that he does.

You said that his numbers should be qualified a little because the team is game planning for him to get rebounds. So again I ask...Why would we qualify his numbers because the team is planning for him to get rebounds? Because he's a point guard? We don't qualify bigs numbers when teams plan for them to get rebounds.

Most players get what they get stats wise because teams plan for that.

We qualify them for the same reason why we qualify rebounds by point guards and give higher marks for lower rebound numbers compared to a power forward or a center. It's good that he grabs the rebounds. I'm not disparaging him.

 

[trojanfan12]

We qualify them for the same reason why we qualify rebounds by point guards and give higher marks for lower rebound numbers compared to a power forward or a center. It's good that he grabs the rebounds. I'm not disparaging him.

Ok, I get what you're saying because bigs are expected to get rebounds and pgs aren't. So we are as or more impressed with the pg who gets 7 rebounds as we are with the big who gets 10. So, on that level, we qualify all numbers (like a big who gets 5 or 6 assists vs. a pg who gets 8).

I really don't buy into qualifying numbers at all. Imo, if you have a guy who does something that most at his position don't, then it's just smart basketball to plan ways to enhance that.

Shit, I'll bet the Sixers coaches are like mad scientists in their planning session coming up with ways to use all of the stuff Simmons does that most players his size don't. lol

A lot of media types like to use that to try and lessen a players accomplishments just so they can look like they are saying something different.

 

[flyerhawk]

Ok, I get what you're saying because bigs are expected to get rebounds and pgs aren't. So we are as or more impressed with the pg who gets 7 rebounds as we are with the big who gets 10. So, on that level, we qualify all numbers (like a big who gets 5 or 6 assists vs. a pg who gets 8).

I really don't buy into qualifying numbers at all. Imo, if you have a guy who does something that most at his position don't, then it's just smart basketball to plan ways to enhance that.

A lot of media types like to use that to try and lessen a players accomplishments just so they can look like they are saying something different.

I think it is more about understanding the context than trying to diminish it. Kinda like qualifying Westbrook's triple double average last year. It was a highly impressive feat but it should be put into the context of the historic pace of play and the allergic reaction half the teams in the league seem to have to half court basketball.

FTR, I think you can also qualify Simmons rebound numbers because he's playing a hybrid PG/PF role which means he gets more rebound opportunities especially defensive rebounds. He's still 15th in the league in rebounds per game so his rebound rate is really good and it would be really impressive if he were a pure PG but he isn't.

 

[Mecca]

Kuzma continuing to light it up!

Barring an absolute catastrophe, Simmons will win ROY but Kuz is a good second.

He has been fantastic.

But, he's probably 3rd.

If he keeps it up, he has a chance to close the gap with Tatum.

But, Lakers would have to win more, Celtics win less for that to be possible.

Simmons would have to go the Embiid route * 31 games * for anyone to beat him.

But, Kuz's rise has been every bit as extraordinary as Brogodon last year.

 

[tlance]

Ok, I get what you're saying because bigs are expected to get rebounds and pgs aren't. So we are as or more impressed with the pg who gets 7 rebounds as we are with the big who gets 10. So, on that level, we qualify all numbers (like a big who gets 5 or 6 assists vs. a pg who gets 8).

I really don't buy into qualifying numbers at all. Imo, if you have a guy who does something that most at his position don't, then it's just smart basketball to plan ways to enhance that.

Shit, I'll bet the Sixers coaches are like mad scientists in their planning session coming up with ways to use all of the stuff Simmons does that most players his size don't. lol

A lot of media types like to use that to try and lessen a players accomplishments just so they can look like they are saying something different.

I think it is absolutely fair to measure Ball's rebounding against other PGs where he stacks up quite well. I don't think it isn't fair to compare to any player at any other position.

PGs have by far the easiest path to defensive rebounds because their man is back in transition and with more and more teams shooting more and more threes, more boards are coming off long where free PGs are most likely to gobble them up.

That said, the Lakers game plan like they do because Ball is an exceptional rebounder. He deserves credit for being that, just as Westbrook does. That said, people also need to contextualize these numbers and understand that Ball and Westbrook getting double digit rebounds is not the same as a big man getting them. We can't say for example that Ball is a better rebounder than Brook Lopez. Their jobs are very different.

 

[tlance]

He has been fantastic.

But, he's probably 3rd.

If he keeps it up, he has a chance to close the gap with Tatum.

But, Lakers would have to win more, Celtics win less for that to be possible.

Simmons would have to go the Embiid route * 31 games * for anyone to beat him.

But, Kuz's rise has been every bit as extraordinary as Brogodon last year.

The Brogdon comparison is right on.

That is also where @True Lakers Fan and a couple others are being a little too rosy with their Kuzma projections. He is so successful because he was NBA ready (like Brogdon) and he landed in a spot where he fits absolutely perfectly.

The absolute ceiling for Kuzma would be a Draymond Green type complimentary piece (his game is obviously much different). If Kuzma is the Lakers 2nd best player 4 years from now, they will not be serious contenders IMO.

 

[flyerhawk]

I think it is absolutely fair to measure Ball's rebounding against other PGs where he stacks up quite well. I don't think it isn't fair to compare to any player at any other position.

PGs have by far the easiest path to defensive rebounds because their man is back in transition and with more and more teams shooting more and more threes, more boards are coming off long where free PGs are most likely to gobble them up.

That said, the Lakers game plan like they do because Ball is an exceptional rebounder. He deserves credit for being that, just as Westbrook does. That said, people also need to contextualize these numbers and understand that Ball and Westbrook getting double digit rebounds is not the same as a big man getting them. We can't say for example that Ball is a better rebounder than Brook Lopez. Their jobs are very different.

This is about right.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

The Brogdon comparison is right on.

That is also where @True Lakers Fan and a couple others are being a little too rosy with their Kuzma projections. He is so successful because he was NBA ready (like Brogdon) and he landed in a spot where he fits absolutely perfectly.

The absolute ceiling for Kuzma would be a Draymond Green type complimentary piece (his game is obviously much different). If Kuzma is the Lakers 2nd best player 4 years from now, they will not be serious contenders IMO.

Perhaps I am being too Rosy as you say, but I also believe that once Lonzo Ball gets his act together, those two will really be a pretty good duo - then add a legitimate star and the Lakers could go some where. I will have to add, however that as of right now - the Lakers are in the 8th seed for the playoffs and they are in that 8th seed thanks to the excellent play of Kyle Kuzma. The reality is the Kuzma was really overlooked in the draft and should have drafted in the top 5 by according to some persons. But at the end of this season, come back and tell me if I was wrong. Right now he has made a difference for the Lakers.

 

[flyerhawk]

Perhaps I am being too Rosy as you say, but I also believe that once Lonzo Ball gets his act together, those two will really be a pretty good duo - then add a legitimate star and the Lakers could go some where. I will have to add, however that as of right now - the Lakers are in the 8th seed for the playoffs and they are in that 8th seed thanks to the excellent play of Kyle Kuzma. The reality is the Kuzma was really overlooked in the draft and should have drafted in the top 5 by according to some persons. But at the end of this season, come back and tell me if I was wrong. Right now he has made a difference for the Lakers.

They are in the 8th seed with an 8-10 record. Maybe 36 wins will get a playoff spot in the West but I somehow doubt it.

It will be interesting to see where they are in a month after playing the Warriors 3 times, the Rockets twice.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

They are in the 8th seed with an 8-10 record. Maybe 36 wins will get a playoff spot in the West but I somehow doubt it.

It will be interesting to see where they are in a month after playing the Warriors 3 times, the Rockets twice.

I doubt that they can keep it up unless Lonzo Ball gets better, but as of right now, Kyle Kuzma has played like a veteran. He has worked hard at his craft and deserves some credit.

 

[tlance]

Perhaps I am being too Rosy as you say, but I also believe that once Lonzo Ball gets his act together, those two will really be a pretty good duo - then add a legitimate star and the Lakers could go some where. I will have to add, however that as of right now - the Lakers are in the 8th seed for the playoffs and they are in that 8th seed thanks to the excellent play of Kyle Kuzma. The reality is the Kuzma was really overlooked in the draft and should have drafted in the top 5 by according to some persons. But at the end of this season, come back and tell me if I was wrong. Right now he has made a difference for the Lakers.

I can't argue with any of that.

Big difference between being a good duo and the best duo on the league.

The Lakers have some nice pieces, but for them to be a legit threat in the West, they need to add 2 stars or have Ingram emerge as one.

 

[tlance]

I can't argue with any of that.

Big difference between being a good duo and the best duo on the league.

The Lakers have some nice pieces, but for them to be a legit threat in the West, they need to add 2 stars or have Ingram emerge as one.

Sorry, I take that back.

Kuzma should not have been drafted top5. You are comparing a 22 year old to 19 year olds. Kuzma should be better. If teams drafted today, Kuzma would be in the top 15, maybe even top 10.

But, these players would definitely get picked first:

Ball
Tatum
Fox
Maarkanen
Jackson
Fultz
DSJ
Isaac

Possibly these guys too:

Ntilikina
Mitchell
Monk
Adebayo
J. Collins

 

[True Lakers Fan]

I can't argue with any of that.

Big difference between being a good duo and the best duo on the league.

The Lakers have some nice pieces, but for them to be a legit threat in the West, they need to add 2 stars or have Ingram emerge as one.

Well when I said being the best duo, I was thinking in a couple of years from now - I already know that is not happening this year or even next. The model I see Luke building is like the Warriors and I am realistic enough to know that does not happen in one or two years. I was the only one who said Jim Buss was not going to make the Lakers a contender in three years. That was a really bad judgement call on his part that was not realistic. Of course I also was thinking at the time that he did not have the genius or capabilities that Jerry Buss had. Not only that while I liked Mitch Kupchak, I saw a lot of mistakes as well as good ones and simply did not have a lot of confidence in him

That being said - If Kuzma can maintain the level he is playing right now - and Lonzo Ball develops - the Lakers could end up being pretty good this year - No one expected the Lakers to make the playoffs the year they got Gasol and they were in first place before that trade with Bynum as the center - so anything can happen

 

[True Lakers Fan]

Sorry, I take that back.

Kuzma should not have been drafted top5. You are comparing a 22 year old to 19 year olds. Kuzma should be better. If teams drafted today, Kuzma would be in the top 15, maybe even top 10.

But, these players would definitely get picked first:

Ball
Tatum
Fox
Maarkanen
Jackson
Fultz
DSJ
Isaac

Possibly these guys too:

Ntilikina
Mitchell
Monk
Adebayo
J. Collins

I think Ingram has a chance to emerge, but honestly I think the Lakers needs to be patient with Ingram and Randle for one more year. I can almost guarantee you one of them will be traded with Luol Deng if the some one bites though. I think Johnson's priority is to undo the damage done by Kupchak and Jim Buss and then start rebuilding and his name alone will carry more credibility than that of Jim Buss. Every player in the NBA knows and respects Magic Johnson - Dr Jerry Buss would be happy with him at the helm.

 

[tlance]

I think Ingram has a chance to emerge, but honestly I think the Lakers needs to be patient with Ingram and Randle for one more year. I can almost guarantee you one of them will be traded with Luol Deng if the some one bites though. I think Johnson's priority is to undo the damage done by Kupchak and Jim Buss and then start rebuilding and his name alone will carry more credibility than that of Jim Buss. Every player in the NBA knows and respects Magic Johnson - Dr Jerry Buss would be happy with him at the helm.

They can't be patient with Randle. He is a restricted FA this off season, and they can't afford to pay him unless they abandon their hopes of signing big name players.

 

[True Lakers Fan]

They can't be patient with Randle. He is a restricted FA this off season, and they can't afford to pay him unless they abandon their hopes of signing big name players.

The Lakers have a history though of letting them become a free agent and then negotiating a new contract all together that is favorable to the player, so that part doesn't necessarily mean anything. We won't know of course until the time comes, but the one thing I do believe is this

That either Ingram or Randle will be traded with the Luol Deng Contract if some one bites. I believe that's the reason the Lakers are trying to play Hart, Zubac and Bryant - in hopes of kissing Deng bye bye. If(very huge if) the Lakers could find a sucker, uhh I mean team that will take Deng with Randle and Hart or Bryant then that team just started a rebuilding contract. Look how well it was working out for Russell. Brooklyn was happy until he went down for the season.

 

[tlance]

The Lakers have a history though of letting them become a free agent and then negotiating a new contract all together that is favorable to the player, so that part doesn't necessarily mean anything. We won't know of course until the time comes, but the one thing I do believe is this

That either Ingram or Randle will be traded with the Luol Deng Contract if some one bites. I believe that's the reason the Lakers are trying to play Hart, Zubac and Bryant - in hopes of kissing Deng bye bye. If(very huge if) the Lakers could find a sucker, uhh I mean team that will take Deng with Randle and Hart or Bryant then that team just started a rebuilding contract. Look how well it was working out for Russell. Brooklyn was happy until he went down for the season.

Much different with young players on restricted deals.

Lakers are at the mercy of the market. They would have to match another teams' offer, which would likely be near 15-20 million at least. Guys like Randle almost always get overpaid on the open market.