Jump to content


Photo

2017 NBA Lottery / Draft


  • Please log in to reply
4943 replies to this topic

#1741 UKUGA

UKUGA

    Superstar

  • Member
  • 7,368 posts
  • Location:22033
  • Name:UKUGA
  • Fan Since:1981
  • Fav. Laker:Kareem Abdul-Jabbar

Posted May 19, 2017 - 04:44 PM

GCMD - Your post, while accurate, highlights what I'm talking about.

You don't discuss defense at all. And that is an area where Fox is consistently viewed as being superior to Ball. In fact, some view this as being a major weakness for Ball. Especially if you put him in a backcourt beside Russell.

Edited by UKUGA, May 19, 2017 - 04:44 PM.

Don't feed the trolls. 


#1742 Japago

Japago

    Starter

  • Member
  • 4,208 posts
  • Name:Pat
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe

Posted May 19, 2017 - 05:37 PM

Weighing strengths and weaknesses from what I'm reading, I still want Lonzo. His play-making seems to be the best skill out of any of the prospects in discussion at number 2. That gives him the highest upside. Not only that, it's something the Lakers really need. I don't think D'Angelo is a primary play-maker. I think he can really benefit from somebody else making plays and him spending most of games in "attack" mode looking for his own offense.

 

His defense and lack of ability to get his own shot are major concerns, but the other guys aren't without their faults too. I think the Lakers can cover Lonzo and D'Angelo with better defenders at the other 3 spots and good team defense. Ingram has potential on defense. PF and C probably aren't set anyway, IMO.

 

* "Set" as in a guy the team should be looking to be a core player going forward. As much as I like Zubac, it's hard to put him in that discussion right now as a 2nd round draft pick with limited on-the-court experience. I'm not sure about Randle's fit going forward, even though he has a nice skill-set.


Edited by Japago, May 19, 2017 - 05:46 PM.

  • UKUGA likes this

#1743 Jody Smokes

Jody Smokes

    Legend

  • Member
  • 11,994 posts
  • Fan Since:2003
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe

Posted May 19, 2017 - 05:46 PM

Fox is a nice talent but no way they can succeed with him and not get some shooting.  The spacing is already bad, you can't another guy to the lineup that can't shoot from 3 and expect this to get better.  


  • LakeShow1o1 likes this

"Blake and Parker are good at canceling each other out till our bench point guard comes in"  - Majesty aka Bird Ish (12/4/13)


#1744 Tensai

Tensai

    █▄█▄█ █ █▀█

  • Member
  • 8,165 posts

Posted May 19, 2017 - 05:56 PM

Lonzo Ball is a passive "guard" - not Draymond Green. People are treating him like he is Ben Simmons with a 3 point shot. Luke's system needs an enforcer, not a follower. If D'Angelo is pushed to play 2, why is Ball the answer at 1? They are essentially same player minus the athleticism (D'Angelo is better at half court).

People are looking at our problem in a romantic way. Forget about names, if we are keeping the pick it should address our problems otherwise it is easy to find suitors.

Sent from my LG-F600S using Tapatalk
  • lakersince75 likes this

fXlFKv8.gif

 


#1745 LakeShow1o1

LakeShow1o1

    Superstar

  • Member
  • 7,079 posts
  • Name:The Black Mamba Will Rise
  • Fan Since:1996
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe Bean Bryant

Posted May 19, 2017 - 05:59 PM

Weighing strengths and weaknesses from what I'm reading, I still want Lonzo. His play-making seems to be the best skill out of any of the prospects in discussion at number 2. That gives him the highest upside. Not only that, it's something the Lakers really need. I don't think D'Angelo is a primary play-maker. I think he can really benefit from somebody else making plays and him spending most of games in "attack" mode looking for his own offense.

 

His defense and lack of ability to get his own shot are major concerns, but the other guys aren't without their faults too. I think the Lakers can cover Lonzo and D'Angelo with better defenders at the other 3 spots and good team defense. Ingram has potential on defense. PF and C probably aren't set anyway, IMO.

 

* "Set" as in a guy the team should be looking to be a core player going forward. As much as I like Zubac, it's hard to put him in that discussion right now as a 2nd round draft pick with limited on-the-court experience. I'm not sure about Randle's fit going forward, even though he has a nice skill-set.

 

 

The thing is, the Lakers don't necessarily need a player that can get his own shot.  Russell and Ingram have proven that both are capable of doing so.  Lonzo is an ideal fit because despite not having all the moves in his toolbox to create his own shot in the mid-range, he seems to be a dependable 3-Point shooter that can help us spread the floor.

 

There's no doubt there are some glaring concerns in Lonzo's game.  The shot creating ability is always going to be brought up.  However, the idea that he is a poor defender and subpar athlete makes no sense to me whatsoever as I have not seen a single scouting report that states his defense and athleticism are a weak-point.  He averaged more steals and blocks in comparison to Fox as well.

 

Advocates for Fox never seem to bring up some of the glaring concerns in his game which go far beyond just his poor shooting ability.  At 6'3 he weighs just 170 pounds.  He's going to have a tough time finishing with contact at the rim which is where a majority of his points are scored.

 

I like Fox, I think he's a solid prospect.  However, I feel most people are judging his play and edging him over Lonzo simply due to his 39 point outbreak during March Madness.  Fultz and Ball are the top two prospects in this draft and it isn't even close.  Jackson and Fox round out the next tier with their elite athleticism and speed but there nowhere near the top 2.

 

Also...

 

Why do people act as if D'Angelo is an extremely poor defender?  It is evident that he has learned how to utilize his length.  If placed at the 2 guard, he'll no longer have to stay in front of smaller and much quicker point guards.  In the Western Conference, saturated with elite guards and the modern era being primarily run through high screen and rolls, individual defense is minor.  What's important is team defense.


Edited by LakeShow1o1, May 19, 2017 - 06:02 PM.


#1746 GCMD

GCMD

    Legend

  • Member
  • 12,726 posts
  • Fav. Laker:Magic Johnson

Posted May 19, 2017 - 06:10 PM

He was the best player in college basketball this year and is the second best prospect. Picking him is a no brainer unless Fultz is somehow on the board. I'm fully expecting us to draft him but I seriously doubt he'll have the impact that you suggest.

I'm not sure how ts% is calculated. I ask you this, do you agree that the vast majority of his shots were uncontested layups and dunks? That makes a difference!

I seriously doubt he's going to be able to dominate in transition the way he did in college or get so many alley oops. There are a ton of red flags on this guy that shouldn't be ignored.

 

 

So because he didn't force shots up, he isn't as good of a scorer?

 

Wasn't UCLA one of the most efficient and highest scoring teams in the NCAA BECAUSE of Ball?

 

What red flags does Ball have that Fox doesn't?


tenor.gif


#1747 GCMD

GCMD

    Legend

  • Member
  • 12,726 posts
  • Fav. Laker:Magic Johnson

Posted May 19, 2017 - 06:19 PM

GCMD - Your post, while accurate, highlights what I'm talking about.

You don't discuss defense at all. And that is an area where Fox is consistently viewed as being superior to Ball. In fact, some view this as being a major weakness for Ball. Especially if you put him in a backcourt beside Russell.

 

 

Ball averaged 1.8spg...Fox averaged 1.5...

 

Fox has POTENTIAL to be a great defender...but he has mental lapses on D.

 

Ball has the length and size and speed and athleticism to be a great defender...his UCLA team played at a breakneck speed increasing the number of possessions.  We don't know if UCLA had a defensive system in place and how it affected Ball's performance on that end.

 

He also played on a high school team that played NO defense.

 

So you claim Fox is a better defender...ok...Ball averaged more steals (1.8 to 1.5) and more blocks (0.8 to 0.2) than Fox while averaging more assist/game (7.6-4.6) while around the same turnovers (2.5 to 2.4)...

 

Like I've been saying, Fox has potential but Ball is better right now.


Edited by GCMD, May 19, 2017 - 06:19 PM.

tenor.gif


#1748 GCMD

GCMD

    Legend

  • Member
  • 12,726 posts
  • Fav. Laker:Magic Johnson

Posted May 19, 2017 - 06:36 PM

If the Lakers move Russell, it will be because most of these things haven't really improved that much.  He finishes better with his off hand and he's worked to get better in the post but his ability to score out front, outside of his 3, has not gotten up to an elite level.

 


tenor.gif


#1749 LakeShow1o1

LakeShow1o1

    Superstar

  • Member
  • 7,079 posts
  • Name:The Black Mamba Will Rise
  • Fan Since:1996
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe Bean Bryant

Posted May 19, 2017 - 06:37 PM

Russell is the best player on our team.

 

There's no reason to deal him unless we are receiving an All-Star caliber player in return not named Paul George.


  • Jody Smokes likes this

#1750 GCMD

GCMD

    Legend

  • Member
  • 12,726 posts
  • Fav. Laker:Magic Johnson

Posted May 19, 2017 - 06:50 PM

IF they trade Russell, here is a look at Ball's potential teammates:

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think Ball/Clarkson could be an interesting backcourt...


Edited by GCMD, May 19, 2017 - 06:51 PM.

tenor.gif


#1751 fido

fido

    Analyst, Moderator, Insomniac

  • Moderator
  • 15,001 posts
  • Location:Costa Mesa, CA
  • Name:Andy
  • Fan Since:1982
  • Fav. Laker:Magic Johnson

Posted May 19, 2017 - 07:15 PM

Ball / Clarkson makes much more sense to me than Ball / Russell.  Russell's off ball movement is awful, Clarkson moves well off the ball and though he's not great at it, can create his shot a bit better for himself. 

 

Defensively, I don't know where Russell's head is at at any given point.  Clarkson is a decent team defender and at least gives 100% effort on that end every time.  Russell, mmmm, not so much.

 

It's really about either convincing a team to take Russell and a terrible contract or get a third team involved.  i can't get away from George at the 4 spot with Ingram at the 3.  Clarkson works at the 2 well.

 

PG: Ball
SG: Clarkson
SF: Ingram
PF: George
C: Randle

 

It just feels right.


  • GCMD likes this

#1752 Ventiquattro

Ventiquattro

    All-Star

  • Member
  • 6,556 posts
  • Location:Unknown

Posted May 19, 2017 - 07:40 PM

Ball / Clarkson makes much more sense to me than Ball / Russell. Russell's off ball movement is awful, Clarkson moves well off the ball and though he's not great at it, can create his shot a bit better for himself.

Defensively, I don't know where Russell's head is at at any given point. Clarkson is a decent team defender and at least gives 100% effort on that end every time. Russell, mmmm, not so much.

It's really about either convincing a team to take Russell and a terrible contract or get a third team involved. i can't get away from George at the 4 spot with Ingram at the 3. Clarkson works at the 2 well.

PG: Ball
SG: Clarkson
SF: Ingram
PF: George
C: Randle

It just feels right.


Ummm. Russell is awful off ball? Nah man. You can't be more wrong.

Byron, Kobe, and Luke all commented on how good Russell Moves off ball.
  • Jody Smokes and kidpolean like this

#1753 Jody Smokes

Jody Smokes

    Legend

  • Member
  • 11,994 posts
  • Fan Since:2003
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe

Posted May 19, 2017 - 08:00 PM

No one said he was Draymond Green lol.  An enforcer?  WTF is that in terms of actual basketball?  A hatchet man that can put people on their ass? You can get them all over the league.  Russell and Ball don't play the same and literally watching 1 game of both you can easily see the difference.  

 

Luke is trying to install a system that requires skill versatility, good bball IQ and unselfishness.  Russell and Ball both fit this mold as guards and both are crazy good in spot ups.  Russell is a more natural scoring guard and Ball is probably a better playmaker.  Russell is a playmaker from the attack, Ball isn't good at scoring off the attack but will make the right passes to guys cutting and getting open.  

 

Try not to overthink it.  Ball is good, Russell is good and what they do as players can mesh.  Be more concerned about what's NOT working on the team which is defense and shooting.  Ball, Ingram and Russell are all high bball IQ players.  

 

Lonzo Ball is a passive "guard" - not Draymond Green. People are treating him like he is Ben Simmons with a 3 point shot. Luke's system needs an enforcer, not a follower. If D'Angelo is pushed to play 2, why is Ball the answer at 1? They are essentially same player minus the athleticism (D'Angelo is better at half court).

People are looking at our problem in a romantic way. Forget about names, if we are keeping the pick it should address our problems otherwise it is easy to find suitors.

Sent from my LG-F600S using Tapatalk


  • GCMD and kidpolean like this

"Blake and Parker are good at canceling each other out till our bench point guard comes in"  - Majesty aka Bird Ish (12/4/13)


#1754 Jody Smokes

Jody Smokes

    Legend

  • Member
  • 11,994 posts
  • Fan Since:2003
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe

Posted May 19, 2017 - 08:02 PM

Clarkson doesnt make any sense whatsoever outside of being a 6 man or a trade piece. 70 percent of the year he was awful on both ends and being the oldest young guy and going into year 4 we should have seen a lot more good if he was on his way. 

 

Ball / Clarkson makes much more sense to me than Ball / Russell.  Russell's off ball movement is awful, Clarkson moves well off the ball and though he's not great at it, can create his shot a bit better for himself. 

 

Defensively, I don't know where Russell's head is at at any given point.  Clarkson is a decent team defender and at least gives 100% effort on that end every time.  Russell, mmmm, not so much.

 

It's really about either convincing a team to take Russell and a terrible contract or get a third team involved.  i can't get away from George at the 4 spot with Ingram at the 3.  Clarkson works at the 2 well.

 

PG: Ball
SG: Clarkson
SF: Ingram
PF: George
C: Randle

 

It just feels right.


  • DanishLakerFan likes this

"Blake and Parker are good at canceling each other out till our bench point guard comes in"  - Majesty aka Bird Ish (12/4/13)


#1755 FranklinPeanuts

FranklinPeanuts

    Legend

  • Member
  • 10,763 posts
  • Location:Los Angeles
  • Fan Since:Since 1989
  • Fav. Laker:Magic Johnson

Posted May 19, 2017 - 08:29 PM

I'm still just happy they kept the pick. I trust their decision. Ball, Fox, Jackson or Fultz, if Ainge pulls a dipsy doodle on the Lakers. I will be cool with whimever they pick. The draft and summer league cannot get here fast ENOUGH
  • GCMD likes this

#1756 DanishLakerFan

DanishLakerFan

    Hall Of Fame

  • Member
  • 8,417 posts
  • Fan Since:1998
  • Fav. Laker:Kobe

Posted May 19, 2017 - 08:35 PM

I'm still just happy they kept the pick. I trust their decision. Ball, Fox, Jackson or Fultz, if Ainge pulls a dipsy doodle on the Lakers. I will be cool with whimever they pick. The draft and summer league cannot get here fast ENOUGH

They have to keep the pick. I'm not sure i trust them to make the right move though. Magic is susceptible to going with his heart over his mind, i think. Ditto for Jeanie. Good thing they have Pelinka. Not sure if he has a heart.

 

To me its not a difficult situation since Ball so obviously is the superior talent between him and Fox.



#1757 dazz

dazz

    Rookie

  • Member
  • 1,122 posts
  • Fan Since:Mid 80's

Posted May 20, 2017 - 02:59 AM

IF they trade Russell, here is a look at Ball's potential teammates:

 

*JC, BI, Jr, & Zu highlights*

 

I think Ball/Clarkson could be an interesting backcourt...

 

Where's Randle?  :ph34r:  :D


Edited by dazz, May 20, 2017 - 03:00 AM.

  • GCMD likes this

3520itw.jpg


#1758 lakersince75

lakersince75

    Sixth Man

  • Member
  • 3,101 posts
  • Fan Since:1975
  • Fav. Laker:Kareem Abdul Jabbar

Posted May 20, 2017 - 03:25 AM

Jamaal Wilkes and Bob McAdoo seemed to do ok with funky shot mechanics. You younger peeps will have to YouTube them to know what I talking about :)


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I hear you but both of them shot the ball way above their heads and the defense back then didn't close out as fast. I'm not saying Ball can't, I just don't know if a shot that looks like a chest ear pass will be effective in high pressure situations. I just wish something about him made me say Holy Crap!! Unless we can get a lopsided trade for him or Russell, I think we roll with it and have a some fun next summer 



#1759 lakersince75

lakersince75

    Sixth Man

  • Member
  • 3,101 posts
  • Fan Since:1975
  • Fav. Laker:Kareem Abdul Jabbar

Posted May 20, 2017 - 03:29 AM

Ball / Clarkson makes much more sense to me than Ball / Russell.  Russell's off ball movement is awful, Clarkson moves well off the ball and though he's not great at it, can create his shot a bit better for himself. 

 

Defensively, I don't know where Russell's head is at at any given point.  Clarkson is a decent team defender and at least gives 100% effort on that end every time.  Russell, mmmm, not so much.

 

It's really about either convincing a team to take Russell and a terrible contract or get a third team involved.  i can't get away from George at the 4 spot with Ingram at the 3.  Clarkson works at the 2 well.

 

PG: Ball
SG: Clarkson
SF: Ingram
PF: George
C: Randle

 

It just feels right.

I was with you until the center position.

I like this

Hill

Butler

Ingram

George

Zu     LMAO!!


  • GCMD likes this

#1760 lakersince75

lakersince75

    Sixth Man

  • Member
  • 3,101 posts
  • Fan Since:1975
  • Fav. Laker:Kareem Abdul Jabbar

Posted May 20, 2017 - 03:39 AM

If we keep everything in tact; can we afford to have both starting guards be defensive liabilities???






3 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users


    Bing (2)