The NBA rookies Thread

[Shaqdaddy11]

@Shaqdaddy11 posting homerific stuff and you defending it.

And BS on Kobe not showing anything electric. His body wasn't NBA ready as an 18 year old, but he absolutely had some serious highlights flashing supreme atheltic ability. I followed him pretty closely because he and I are 1 month apart in age. He and Jermaine O'Neal were the first 2 players in the league I was actually older than.

Yeah Kobe had a lot of hype, and rightly so. In his case it was about a lot more than just the stats, but he did average 17.6 points per 36 minutes, so he showed the ability to score even then when he was clearly not physically ready.

He's not defending anything. He's agreeing with me. Is that the same thing?

 

[tlance]

I didn't defend anything. I just said I'm not ready to determine how a first or 2nd year players entire career will pan out. There have been several superstar level players over the years who didn't start their careers looking like they'd amount to much.

Not my fault you're foolish enough to think that determining how a first or 2nd year players entire career will pan out.

Your issue with Shaqdaddy is just that, your issue. You automatically discount anything she posts because you don't like her. The fact that you think I defended anything shows that.



I watched every single game his first season. He didn't look like he would become anything close to what he did.



Exactly. Just like Ingram and Lonzo.

My issue with shaqdaddy is that she is one of the most biased posters here.

And I never said Ball and Ingram won't be superstars. I said it is unlikely. Truthfully, it is unlikely for any rookie not named Simmons and maybe Tatum.

 

[Shaqdaddy11]

My issue with shaqdaddy is that she is one of the most biased posters here.

And I never said Ball and Ingram won't be superstars. I said it is unlikely. Truthfully, it is unlikely for any rookie not named Simmons and maybe Tatum.

Lol, Tatum. Now who's full of shit.

 

[trojanfan12]

My issue with shaqdaddy is that she is one of the most biased posters here.

And? I mean, if homerism is that big a deal to you. Maybe sports message boards aren't your thing?

And I never said Ball and Ingram won't be superstars. I said it is unlikely. Truthfully, it is unlikely for any rookie not named Simmons and maybe Tatum.

Like I said, if you want to think you can determine how players career will pan out in their first or 2nd year...you do you.

I think I'll let them play a few years before I do.

 

[bksballer89]

Lol, Tatum. Now who's full of shit.

Tatum is bad?

 

[Shaqdaddy11]

Tatum is bad?

Is he going to be a SUPERSTAR?

 

[tlance]

Is he going to be a SUPERSTAR?

Probably not.

Far more likely than Ball or Ingram though.

Facts.

 

[bksballer89]

Is he going to be a SUPERSTAR?

He has the tools and is off to a hell of a start and is doing it on a good team where he isn't getting the volume shots as other rookies get on a bad team.

For example, Tatum is 6th on Boston in shot attempts at 9.3 or something like that. You look at Mitchell in Utah and he is avg 16 shots per game. Even Kuzma and Ball here in LA get more shots per night than he does.

Tatum efficiency is amazing for a rookie SF. 50% from the field and 51% from 3 is sick.

 

[Shaqdaddy11]

Probably not.

Far more likely than Ball or Ingram though.

Facts.

Now you're arguing just for the hell of it.

Congratulations, you've reached the Wiggy and Hurricane plateau

 

[trojanfan12]

He has the tools and is off to a hell of a start and is doing it on a good team where he isn't getting the volume shots as other rookies get on a bad team.

Nor is he getting the attention of the other teams defense.

For example, Tatum is 6th on Boston in shot attempts at 9.3 or something like that. You look at Mitchell in Utah and he is avg 16 shots per game. Even Kuzma and Ball here in LA get more shots per night than he does.

So, 2 of the main young players on a team without much in the way of veteran talent are getting more shots than a young guy on a team where he isn't necessarily a main player and that has some very good veteran talent around him?

No way to see that coming. lol

 

[Shaqdaddy11]

He has the tools and is off to a hell of a start and is doing it on a good team where he isn't getting the volume shots as other rookies get on a bad team.

For example, Tatum is 6th on Boston in shot attempts at 9.3 or something like that. You look at Mitchell in Utah and he is avg 16 shots per game. Even Kuzma and Ball here in LA get more shots per night than he does.

Tatum efficiency is amazing for a rookie SF. 50% from the field and 51% from 3 is sick.

So Tatum is going to be a superstar because he's on a better team, gotcha.

Let's just ignore the fact Kuzma leads the Lakers in scoring...

 

[bksballer89]

Nor is he getting the attention of the other teams defense.



So, 2 of the main players on a team without much in the way of veteran talent are getting more shots than a guy on a team where he isn't necessarily a main player and that has some very good veteran talent around him?

No way to see that coming. lol

50% from the field and from 3 is still impressive

 

[bksballer89]

So Tatum is going to be a superstar because he's on a better team, gotcha.

Let's just ignore the fact Kuzma leads the Lakers in scoring...

Never said that. Just said he has all the tools. He is a pure scorer. Been watching him since he was at duke

 

[tlance]

Now you're arguing just for the hell of it.

Congratulations, you've reached the Wiggy and Hurricane plateau

LOL.

Ok.

I will post a poll. Let's find out what other side think on this. Pretty sure I know how the voting will go.

 

[trojanfan12]

50% from the field and from 3 is still impressive

No doubt. And if he can sustain it, that will be even more impressive. Although it's likely unsustainable. Especially when defenses start paying attention to him.

Which is why, imo, stating how a first or 2nd year players career will pan out is pretty silly.

 

[Shaqdaddy11]

Never said that. Just said he has all the tools. He is a pure scorer. Been watching him since he was at duke

I'm guessing you haven't seen a single Lakers game yet then.

 

[Shaqdaddy11]

LOL.

Ok.

I will post a poll. Let's find out what other side think on this. Pretty sure I know how the voting will go.

If that's what you need to sleep better at night, go for it.

Again you're arguing matters that haven't happened yet.

 

[bksballer89]

I'm guessing you haven't seen a single Lakers game yet then.

Kuzma is a nice player but he isn't a better pure scorer than Tatum

 

[trojanfan12]

LOL.

Ok.

I will post a poll. Let's find out what other side think on this. Pretty sure I know how the voting will go.

Pretty sure that poll will have a shelf life of about 5 seconds once I see it.

We don't need threads for peoples bullshit, petty issues.

 

[Shaqdaddy11]

Kuzma is a nice player but he isn't a better pure scorer than Tatum

They both have completely different roles on the team. You can't judge players after less than 30 games