By Kibner Go To Postyeah, this strikes true. need zion to get in the kind of shape that lets him dominate in the regular and post-season and also get him a better running mate than ingram:I'm conflicted because while it's true that you probably don't want your two stars not to complement each other (though it can work in some cases--Tatum-Brown is the fourteenth best two-man for Boston over 1000 minutes, and the second worst both overall and of its starter pairs over that threshold), if you're going by lineup data the story it consistently tells is less about that and more about Zion just not being as impactful as he looks out there. For instance the on/off data just don't really like Zion very much with or without Ingram. A fair amount of this comes from what I would normally ascribe to shooting luck (opponents shooting better from three and teammates worse when he's out there) if it didn't happen almost every single year of his career. And if Zion himself isn't good enough--and "good enough" for contention realistically means playing at an All NBA first team level--you're going to struggle to contend no matter how complementary the costars are.
Yeah, whole lot of teams are gonna be throwing a bag at Donovan Mitchell in the offseason. Orlando, LA, Miami. Both NY teams…
I could see the Spurs doing it too.
Wonder if the Blazers wind up getting a good haul for Brogdon and maybe Simons as well.
I could see the Spurs doing it too.
Wonder if the Blazers wind up getting a good haul for Brogdon and maybe Simons as well.
By pilonv1 Go To PostThere's not many good point guards who can shoot that are available though. Everyone has gone so wing heavy that there's fewer true point guards around.True point guards are just a player archetype that doesn’t need to be guarded. It’s dead and better left forgotten.
By pilonv1 Go To PostThere's not many good point guards who can shoot that are available though. Everyone has gone so wing heavy that there's fewer true point guards around.if they had tj mcconnel, they win in 6
By Kibner Go To PostTrue point guards are just a player archetype that doesn’t need to be guarded. It’s dead and better left forgotten.ehh I kinda disagree? It's just morphed into a player that plays the 1 and actually knows how to run an offense to a respectable level.
The 90's "true point guard" is mostly gone except a handful of guys like Conley and CP3.
A true point guard, as I understand it, doesn’t look to score. A good/great team will let that guy go 1v1 and do nothing with the ball because they won’t pressure a defense that knows what they are about. If you don’t pressure the defense as a threat to score, you won’t bend the defense which extremely limits the kinds of passes you can make. So, imo, they are nigh useless on a team that wants to make a deep run in the playoffs.
Also, a true point guard in this league needs to be able to play off ball at a high level. Because the defense doesn’t see them as a threat to score when they are the primary playmaker, they function best when capitalizing on someone else forcing the defense into rotation. That’s when they can shine. It’s also why they will never have enough possessions to consistently do all the things people think of a true point guard doing when they are on the floor. They simply won’t have the ball in their hands a lot.
By DY_nasty Go To Postchris paul did this to you ;_;I watched that man when he was athletic and aggressive enough to drive and score on prime Dwight. His biggest liability when playing for Nola was not taking open 3s. He looked to score pretty frequently apart from that.
Also, look at him now that he doesn’t scare defenses anymore. Almost ineffective.
Nola cp3 would actually generate and take open shots for himself at the end of close games against defenses keyed in on him. Best player in franchise history and I’m not sure it’s particularly close.
By Kibner Go To PostA true point guard, as I understand it, doesn’t look to score. A good/great team will let that guy go 1v1 and do nothing with the ball because they won’t pressure a defense that knows what they are about. If you don’t pressure the defense as a threat to score, you won’t bend the defense which extremely limits the kinds of passes you can make. So, imo, they are nigh useless on a team that wants to make a deep run in the playoffs.
I mean "true" as in an actual point guard, not a lead guard masquerading as a point. Not the 90s definition of a true point guard.
lol, lmao
i mean doesn't mean much, if they want to get rid of him in the future they will do that anyway.
i mean doesn't mean much, if they want to get rid of him in the future they will do that anyway.
By diehard Go To Postehh I kinda disagree? It's just morphed into a player that plays the 1 and actually knows how to run an offense to a respectable level.
The 90's "true point guard" is mostly gone except a handful of guys like Conley and CP3.
This is what I’m referring to. Modern scoring guard that can run an offense. Not classic PG. When Conley is gone that’ll be an extinct position. These days you need to be able to get buckets first and set everything up second, otherwise they just guard the rest of the team instead.
Teams keep trying to replace guards with wing PGs and that’s near impossible to achieve. That player archetype is almost as rare as Jokic types.
Conley was a 17-20ppg dude in his prime on one of the slowest paced teams of all time. To say he couldn't score is underselling him.
When I think of guards that weren't scorers I think of Fisher and Kidd.
When I think of guards that weren't scorers I think of Fisher and Kidd.
It seems like we are in general agreement. I just want to rant on this a little more, though.
Ballhandlers in the NBA need to be "advantage creators" for their teammates because (good) teams are smart enough to play everyone else straight up with no or little help. Team defense is about denying easy shots generated from those advantages and living with everything else.
If you can dribble and get past your guy but not actually be able to score after that, your handles are almost useless. Like the great Bill Russell said:
Ballhandlers in the NBA need to be "advantage creators" for their teammates because (good) teams are smart enough to play everyone else straight up with no or little help. Team defense is about denying easy shots generated from those advantages and living with everything else.
If you can dribble and get past your guy but not actually be able to score after that, your handles are almost useless. Like the great Bill Russell said:
By reilo Go To PostConley was a 17-20ppg dude in his prime on one of the slowest paced teams of all time. To say he couldn't score is underselling him.i'm thinking of current guys like ish smith. fisher wasn't really a "true" point, either. which plays into what i was saying earlier. "true" points don't really exist on good teams because "true" points have to actually run the team's offense to do their job. and if they aren't an aggressive scorer, then they can't do their job. it's like a chicken and egg thing. you need to be an effective scorer before you should be allowed to handle the ball enough to setup your teammates. otherwise, you are trying to make passes at impossible angles through ridiculous defense because no one is worried about you.
When I think of guards that weren't scorers I think of Fisher and Kidd.
e: i feel like i'm rambling and not being very coherent and saying/explaining everything i want to. oh well.
By Kibner Go To Posti'm thinking of current guys like ish smith. fisher wasn't really a "true" point, either. which plays into what i was saying earlier. "true" points don't really exist on good teams because "true" points have to actually run the team's offense to do their job. and if they aren't an aggressive scorer, then they can't do their job. it's like a chicken and egg thing. you need to be an effective scorer before you should be allowed to handle the ball enough to setup your teammates. otherwise, you are trying to make passes at impossible angles through ridiculous defense because no one is worried about you.IMO this is oversimplifying things a bit because point guards do other things than score and pass. Guys like Tre Jones who is kind of a pure PG tend to grade out well in RAPM based metrics despite not really being scorers because they have such a huge impact on team turnovers, for example. Or other "pure points" will provide a lot of value defensively, or in some cases with unusually good rebounding instincts (though that's rare for the small guard archetype we're talking about). I'm not saying these are guys who are going to lead you to a ring on a contender, but I think there's still a place for them in the modern NBA and they are probably undervalued a bit when you consider the impact they bring (vs. mediocre wings who can often get a contract just for being 6'8" and shooting a lot).
e: i feel like i'm rambling and not being very coherent and saying/explaining everything i want to. oh well.
By Sharp Go To PostIMO this is oversimplifying things a bit because point guards do other things than score and pass. Guys like Tre Jones who is kind of a pure PG tend to grade out well in RAPM based metrics despite not really being scorers because they have such a huge impact on team turnovers, for example. Or other "pure points" will provide a lot of value defensively. I'm not saying these are guys who are going to lead you to a contender, but I think there's still a place for them in the modern NBA.My criticisms of them have been couched in terms of going deep in the playoffs. You can't really do that with a guy whose selling point is being a "pure point". That isn't a winning skillset when trying to go to the conference finals. They need to be much more than that. Like you said, providing value defensively (though this means that they will at least need the size and strength to guard many forwards), providing a release valve for the more effective creators, running around off screens and stuff to put pressure on the defense in a different way.
But that is just moving them further and further away from the archetype of a "pure point".
Their role right now is the equivalent of training wheels for an inexperienced and error-prone roster.
By Kibner Go To PostMy criticisms of them have been couched in terms of going deep in the playoffs. You can't really do that with a guy whose selling point is being a "pure point". That isn't a winning skillset when trying to go to the conference finals. They need to be much more than that. Like you said, providing value defensively (though this means that they will at least need the size and strength to guard many forwards), providing a release valve for the more effective creators, running around off screens and stuff to put pressure on the defense in a different way.Well that's fair but I think pretty much all one dimensional players are a dying breed unless they are extremely elite at that one skill. Like the pure PG, the pure scorer sixth man archetype is falling out of fashion, elite three point shooters who can't do anything else are usually bench players, the rebound only guy is basically dead (shoutout to Tshiebwe!), the defense only guy who's not a 5 is struggling (look at how much trouble Mobley or Suggs have justifying a starting spot), etc. Just too much talent in the league.
But that is just moving them further and further away from the archetype of a "pure point".
Their role right now is the equivalent of training wheels for an inexperienced and error-prone roster.
By Sharp Go To PostWell that's fair but I think pretty much all one dimensional players are a dying breed unless they are extremely elite at that one skill. Like the pure PG, the pure scorer sixth man archetype is falling out of fashion, and so is the rebound only guy (shoutout to Tshiebwe!), the defense only guy who's not a 5 (look at how much trouble Mobley or Suggs have justifying a starting spot), etc.Yup, and I'm glad of it. But until that reaches mainstream consciousness, I still have to see or hear people clamoring for pure points and defense-only bigs as the solution to struggling teams. Makes it hard to discuss the bigger picture of roster construction for certain teams without having to go back and argue against the usefulness of non-elite specialists.
By Kibner Go To PostYup, and I'm glad of it. But until that reaches mainstream consciousness, I still have to see or hear people clamoring for pure points and defense-only bigs as the solution to struggling teams. Makes it hard to discuss the bigger picture of roster construction for certain teams without having to go back and argue against the usefulness of non-elite specialists.I think people would understand better if instead of "pure PG" you said "turnover specialist" because I'm positive people would agree they don't want a guy who provides that and nothing else and add other attributes they want their pure PG to have. Like people who root for bad teams hate watching dumb turnovers over and over again due to players who don't know how to dribble or pass out of a double team having the ball all the time, or no one knowing how to throw an entry pass, but they're obviously not the difference between contention and losing in the first round.
By pilonv1 Go To Postkidd is decent.
lol
K N I C K S
Still don’t see why teams sign/extend players/coaches while the season is still going on
Pelicans out right saying they aren’t giving the max/super max to Ingram will be the norm moving forward
Still don’t see why teams sign/extend players/coaches while the season is still going on
Pelicans out right saying they aren’t giving the max/super max to Ingram will be the norm moving forward
Shams reporting that there's "mutual interest" between Klay Thompson and the Magic. If it's for a vet min *after* you figure out the money for the guys that you actually want, sure, but if that's the offer I think GS would match anyway just for nostalgia.
Jimmy gonna get jersey photoshopped like Wade used to back when he was a free agent.
I agree with Pat, don’t pay your aging stars before their contract is over, look at Ballmer with Kawhi and Brad with Jrue
Also Grayson getting paid early was dumb lol
No reason to pay them now
I agree with Pat, don’t pay your aging stars before their contract is over, look at Ballmer with Kawhi and Brad with Jrue
Also Grayson getting paid early was dumb lol
No reason to pay them now
Gotta love Pat lol. Jimmy's extension is going to begin at age 36 and he's gonna want a max. He'll need to chip to stay in Miami on a max extension. That's the only way I see it happening.
Some teams may trade for him, but it's scary hours dealing with Jimmy with a player option in a new situation.
Some teams may trade for him, but it's scary hours dealing with Jimmy with a player option in a new situation.
By Kabro Go To PostLet LeBron coach the team
Timberwolves got the split so go watch the birth of your first child. Job done in Denver
Finals/Super Bowl it’s 50/50 but second round after a split it’s a no brainer to skip the game
Finals/Super Bowl it’s 50/50 but second round after a split it’s a no brainer to skip the game
By Sho_Nuff82 Go To PostShams reporting that there's "mutual interest" between Klay Thompson and the Magic. If it's for a vet min *after* you figure out the money for the guys that you actually want, sure, but if that's the offer I think GS would match anyway just for nostalgia.
I don't get it for the Magic. Klay is uber washed.
By DiPro Go To PostI don't get it for the Magic. Klay is uber washed.
No one on their roster can shoot at all lol
Saw someone suggest Anfernee Simons solves all their problems
By n8 dogg Go To PostSaw someone suggest Anfernee Simons solves all their problemsHe kinda does but what can the Magic give up in return?
By reilo Go To PostHe kinda does but what can the Magic give up in return?
Klay Thompson
By reilo Go To PostHe kinda does but what can the Magic give up in return?
This was probably me, but yeah, I want at least a good 2025 first and maybe more to make that happen. That's a pretty damn good, young player on a team friendly deal.
Dirk's rep didn't recover until the 2011 Finals. Specifically, I think it was game two of that series when he was super clutch.