New NBA thread

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 5593
Moses
DetrimentalWhat do you guys think about this Kyle Kuzma phenomenon? Think he's the real deal?

I don't believe that we will know for awhile. This seems like a redo of last season when Patrick McCaw lit up preseason for Golden State. Kyle Kuzma still has young, well-regarded talent ahead of him in the Lakers rotation at the forward spot. The Lakers are likely to play both Brandon Ingram and Julius Randle until they prove that they cannot be cornerstones of the franchise, so we'll have to give this some time.

I think he is going to play a lot more than McCaw, and I think Larry Nance Jr should be concerned about how many minutes he is going to be looking at. I've even seen people calling for Kuzma to start because he spaces the floor better, but I expect Randle to start.
I watched some of the Utah Lakers game last night and Ingram looks terrible. Also Booze was crazy for not keeping Gobert.
Oct 11, 2017 9:25 PM
0 0
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 13649
Wreckloose
Moses
DetrimentalWhat do you guys think about this Kyle Kuzma phenomenon? Think he's the real deal?

I don't believe that we will know for awhile. This seems like a redo of last season when Patrick McCaw lit up preseason for Golden State. Kyle Kuzma still has young, well-regarded talent ahead of him in the Lakers rotation at the forward spot. The Lakers are likely to play both Brandon Ingram and Julius Randle until they prove that they cannot be cornerstones of the franchise, so we'll have to give this some time.

I think he is going to play a lot more than McCaw, and I think Larry Nance Jr should be concerned about how many minutes he is going to be looking at. I've even seen people calling for Kuzma to start because he spaces the floor better, but I expect Randle to start.
I watched some of the Utah Lakers game last night and Ingram looks terrible. Also Booze was crazy for not keeping Gobert.

Randle went one pick before me in the fantasy draft to JB3. I instead got Dennis Smith Jr. Tulsa gets both the Thunder and the Mavericks' games on its Fox Sports channels, and Smith Jr. is my only Mavericks/Thunder player that I have. So, I'm glad how it worked out. I do think Randle takes a serious step into becoming a quality asset for LAL.
Oct 11, 2017 9:43 PM
0 0
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 8183
Obviously I'd have loved to have kept him, but I would have to drop Beard or Boogie.

Basically, most years I assemble the best team of chuckers you can find. No one even flirting with .500 FG%, Since I'd have to keep Harden, who was #1 in fantasy if you ignore turnovers (as I do), that means no Boogie. But Cousins is a multi-category, across-the-board influencer, and Rudy basically gives you FG%, rebounds and blocks. With my all-chucker team FG% isn't even a category I'm contesting, I'd be surprised if I win it once (or turnovers for that matter) all year. So there again, Gobert's low turnover rate means nothing, because I'll have James Harden and his 8 turnovers a game. In the end, I try to pick fun players, and the big-man build I'd have to put around Gobert would mean taking the Zach Randolph or Jonas Valanciunas types who are boring as fuck to watch. As of now I'm built to win every week, though with missing out on so many of my desired picks it may be 5-4 instead of 7-2.
Oct 11, 2017 9:49 PM
0 0
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 14839
Moses
Wreckloose
Moses
DetrimentalWhat do you guys think about this Kyle Kuzma phenomenon? Think he's the real deal?

I don't believe that we will know for awhile. This seems like a redo of last season when Patrick McCaw lit up preseason for Golden State. Kyle Kuzma still has young, well-regarded talent ahead of him in the Lakers rotation at the forward spot. The Lakers are likely to play both Brandon Ingram and Julius Randle until they prove that they cannot be cornerstones of the franchise, so we'll have to give this some time.

I think he is going to play a lot more than McCaw, and I think Larry Nance Jr should be concerned about how many minutes he is going to be looking at. I've even seen people calling for Kuzma to start because he spaces the floor better, but I expect Randle to start.
I watched some of the Utah Lakers game last night and Ingram looks terrible. Also Booze was crazy for not keeping Gobert.

Randle went one pick before me in the fantasy draft to JB3. I instead got Dennis Smith Jr. Tulsa gets both the Thunder and the Mavericks' games on its Fox Sports channels, and Smith Jr. is my only Mavericks/Thunder player that I have. So, I'm glad how it worked out. I do think Randle takes a serious step into becoming a quality asset for LAL.


I completely disagree on Randle. They have actively been trying to trade him and he is a RFA at season's end. I think Nance is by far the cleaner player and appears to be starting and if Kuzma continues to do what he has been doing he will earn more and more time. Randle might have gaudier statlines but his inability to defend, his TRex arms, and his inability to either defend the rack or shoot make him an expendable player. Especially since the Lakers have some grander goals next offseason. But in short, I don't think Kuz is for real at this point. Summer League and preseason mean almost nothing in terms of predictive value. Still, given just HOW impressive he has been, its worth the watch.

I really wonder what is going to happen with NO. They have NO WINGS. AT ALL. And you have to have wings in today's game. Their answer was to move their PG to the wing. That doesn't count. I think they have a disappointing season this year and wouldn't be shocked to see Boogie walk. I think it is highly suspicious that he hasn't sign an extension yet.

I get what Booze is thinking, I just think Rudy is about as impactful a player as there is and Boogie is empty stats. Eventually I think you will see Boogie forced to take a smaller role. He had a career high TS% of .562 this year. The league avg was .552. Over the course of his career he has scored at ~league avg efficiency. He does none of the little things and makes enormous mistakes in high leverage situations. I feel for guys in lousy spots. But my affinity for Boogie has long since expired. And Gobert is a far better watch than Boogie for all the reasons I listed.

How about giving a guy with <800 career NBA min 148M? I'm taken aback by the Embiid contract. Why the TWolves (Wiggins) and 76ers gave those two contracts out PREMATURELY is something I just don't understand.
Oct 11, 2017 10:01 PM
0 0
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 13649
Julius Randle finished last season with a 16.3 PER, 3.5 Win Shares, and a 1.1 VORP. That's a good player. He's gotten himself into tremendous shape and has earned great reviews in the offseason. I can easily see him making the jump into a 19.0 or so PER guy.
Oct 11, 2017 10:47 PM
0 0
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 13649
Joel Embiid just had 19 points and 7 rebounds in his first nine minutes of action.
Oct 12, 2017 12:52 AM
0 0
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 14839
MosesJulius Randle finished last season with a 16.3 PER, 3.5 Win Shares, and a 1.1 VORP. That's a good player. He's gotten himself into tremendous shape and has earned great reviews in the offseason. I can easily see him making the jump into a 19.0 or so PER guy.


PER is a bit of a joke. I pointed this out on page 1 of this thread. Any shot you take at >33% benefits PER. So if someone took 80 shots at 39% they would lead the league in PER (depending on other statistical contributions) and have the worst FG% in the league.

Randle has a career (and really we are talking about 2 years) .511TS%. The league avg last year was .552. So we are talking about a WELL BELOW average efficiency quantity scorer. His OBPM (plus minus) was never been above -.8 and over his career is a god-awful -2.3.

Now he may very well be a decent fantasy player. But his actual court impact is simply not there and given the multitude of other options the Lakers have, with a pending decision on him to make soon, I don't think he has a great season. Of course, given the 10s of millions on the line, he might have a decent contract year. I just get wary about guys who put up empty stats because they aren't likely to maintain their role, much less expand it.
Oct 12, 2017 3:26 PM
0 0
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 20824
HurricaneKid
MosesJulius Randle finished last season with a 16.3 PER, 3.5 Win Shares, and a 1.1 VORP. That's a good player. He's gotten himself into tremendous shape and has earned great reviews in the offseason. I can easily see him making the jump into a 19.0 or so PER guy.


PER is a bit of a joke. I pointed this out on page 1 of this thread. Any shot you take at >33% benefits PER. So if someone took 80 shots at 39% they would lead the league in PER (depending on other statistical contributions) and have the worst FG% in the league.

Marcus Smart begs to differ
Oct 12, 2017 3:29 PM
0 0
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 14839
MosesJoel Embiid just had 19 points and 7 rebounds in his first nine minutes of action.


He would be a basketball GOD if he were to find a way to stay healthy. The humiliation he was putting on Booker, a longtime NBA vet, was simply obnoxious. But the way he throws his body around, the lack of grace when falling, coupled with his health history are scary as all hell to me. I doubt he will ever be right for a long period of time.

Jaylen Brown blocked Kemba and Marvin Williams on successive possessions. He is a defensive beast in 1-on-1 situations.
Oct 12, 2017 3:35 PM
0 0
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 13649
HurricaneKid
MosesJulius Randle finished last season with a 16.3 PER, 3.5 Win Shares, and a 1.1 VORP. That's a good player. He's gotten himself into tremendous shape and has earned great reviews in the offseason. I can easily see him making the jump into a 19.0 or so PER guy.


PER is a bit of a joke. I pointed this out on page 1 of this thread. Any shot you take at >33% benefits PER. So if someone took 80 shots at 39% they would lead the league in PER (depending on other statistical contributions) and have the worst FG% in the league.

Randle has a career (and really we are talking about 2 years) .511TS%. The league avg last year was .552. So we are talking about a WELL BELOW average efficiency quantity scorer. His OBPM (plus minus) was never been above -.8 and over his career is a god-awful -2.3.

Now he may very well be a decent fantasy player. But his actual court impact is simply not there and given the multitude of other options the Lakers have, with a pending decision on him to make soon, I don't think he has a great season. Of course, given the 10s of millions on the line, he might have a decent contract year. I just get wary about guys who put up empty stats because they aren't likely to maintain their role, much less expand it.

1. I put up not only Randle's PER, but also his Win Shares, and VORP from last season. He's improved, and his career arc suggests that he will continue to improve.

2. His TS% improved from .482% in his first full season to .543% last season. Convenient of you to omit that. And of course, you're not wanting to point out Randle's other value on offense: he's a fine offensive rebounder and one of the league's best passing big men.

3. I said nothing about Randle's fantasy value in my post. Don't try to attach that strawman to me.

Just admit that you were more familiar with his play in his second season than you were with his improved last season. You're capable of being better in your basketball discussions yet your pride always refuses to let you be.
Oct 12, 2017 4:07 PM
0 0
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 14839
Moses
HurricaneKid
MosesJulius Randle finished last season with a 16.3 PER, 3.5 Win Shares, and a 1.1 VORP. That's a good player. He's gotten himself into tremendous shape and has earned great reviews in the offseason. I can easily see him making the jump into a 19.0 or so PER guy.


PER is a bit of a joke. I pointed this out on page 1 of this thread. Any shot you take at >33% benefits PER. So if someone took 80 shots at 39% they would lead the league in PER (depending on other statistical contributions) and have the worst FG% in the league.

Randle has a career (and really we are talking about 2 years) .511TS%. The league avg last year was .552. So we are talking about a WELL BELOW average efficiency quantity scorer. His OBPM (plus minus) was never been above -.8 and over his career is a god-awful -2.3.

Now he may very well be a decent fantasy player. But his actual court impact is simply not there and given the multitude of other options the Lakers have, with a pending decision on him to make soon, I don't think he has a great season. Of course, given the 10s of millions on the line, he might have a decent contract year. I just get wary about guys who put up empty stats because they aren't likely to maintain their role, much less expand it.

1. I put up not only Randle's PER, but also his Win Shares, and VORP from last season. He's improved, and his career arc suggests that he will continue to improve.

2. His TS% improved from .482% in his first full season to .543% last season. Convenient of you to omit that. And of course, you're not wanting to point out Randle's other value on offense: he's a fine offensive rebounder and one of the league's best passing big men.

3. I said nothing about Randle's fantasy value in my post. Don't try to attach that strawman to me.

Just admit that you were more familiar with his play in his second season than you were with his improved last season. You're capable of being better in your basketball discussions yet your pride always refuses to let you be.


Win Shares and PER are simply box score amalgams. They are designed to reinforce perception that PPGZzzz guys are the best. I've granted his accumulation of box score stats is impressive. VORP is a better indicator of impact. So lets look at his VORP of 1.1. He splits time with Larry Nance Jr. His VORP? 1.4.

So his TS% "jumped" to well below the league average. His calling card is scoring- he can't do much else, and he scores at below the league average efficiency. Furthermore, his actual offensive impact, what he does for the Lakers offensively when he is in the game, is what OBPM and ORPM measure and he, in his "much improved" season was a -.8 and -.79. So he is below league at the one thing he does.

He has shot 81/296 or 27.3% from outside 15 feet the last two seasons, or about 1 make every other game. Yet he has almost no impact inside defensively.

I was giving you the benefit of the doubt, not trying to attach a strawman.

We can agree to disagree on guys. But don't think I don't watch basketball or accuse me of not knowing what I am talking about. I do.
Oct 12, 2017 4:29 PM
0 0
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 13649
HurricaneKid
Moses
HurricaneKid
MosesJulius Randle finished last season with a 16.3 PER, 3.5 Win Shares, and a 1.1 VORP. That's a good player. He's gotten himself into tremendous shape and has earned great reviews in the offseason. I can easily see him making the jump into a 19.0 or so PER guy.


PER is a bit of a joke. I pointed this out on page 1 of this thread. Any shot you take at >33% benefits PER. So if someone took 80 shots at 39% they would lead the league in PER (depending on other statistical contributions) and have the worst FG% in the league.

Randle has a career (and really we are talking about 2 years) .511TS%. The league avg last year was .552. So we are talking about a WELL BELOW average efficiency quantity scorer. His OBPM (plus minus) was never been above -.8 and over his career is a god-awful -2.3.

Now he may very well be a decent fantasy player. But his actual court impact is simply not there and given the multitude of other options the Lakers have, with a pending decision on him to make soon, I don't think he has a great season. Of course, given the 10s of millions on the line, he might have a decent contract year. I just get wary about guys who put up empty stats because they aren't likely to maintain their role, much less expand it.

1. I put up not only Randle's PER, but also his Win Shares, and VORP from last season. He's improved, and his career arc suggests that he will continue to improve.

2. His TS% improved from .482% in his first full season to .543% last season. Convenient of you to omit that. And of course, you're not wanting to point out Randle's other value on offense: he's a fine offensive rebounder and one of the league's best passing big men.

3. I said nothing about Randle's fantasy value in my post. Don't try to attach that strawman to me.

Just admit that you were more familiar with his play in his second season than you were with his improved last season. You're capable of being better in your basketball discussions yet your pride always refuses to let you be.


Win Shares and PER are simply box score amalgams. They are designed to reinforce perception that PPGZzzz guys are the best. I've granted his accumulation of box score stats is impressive. VORP is a better indicator of impact. So lets look at his VORP of 1.1. He splits time with Larry Nance Jr. His VORP? 1.4.

So his TS% "jumped" to well below the league average. His calling card is scoring- he can't do much else, and he scores at below the league average efficiency. Furthermore, his actual offensive impact, what he does for the Lakers offensively when he is in the game, is what OBPM and ORPM measure and he, in his "much improved" season was a -.8 and -.79. So he is below league at the one thing he does.
He has shot 81/296 or 27.3% from outside 15 feet the last two seasons, or about 1 make every other game. Yet he has almost no impact inside defensively.

I was giving you the benefit of the doubt, not trying to attach a strawman.
We can agree to disagree on guys. But don't think I don't watch basketball or accuse me of not knowing what I am talking about.? I do.

Here's the thing -- extremely young guys with a shit-ton of athletic ability often improve in their third full season. If you think that Randle's career production does not improve after his Year 2, then you are in the small minority here.
Oct 12, 2017 4:34 PM
0 0
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 14839
Moses
HurricaneKid
Moses
HurricaneKid
MosesJulius Randle finished last season with a 16.3 PER, 3.5 Win Shares, and a 1.1 VORP. That's a good player. He's gotten himself into tremendous shape and has earned great reviews in the offseason. I can easily see him making the jump into a 19.0 or so PER guy.


PER is a bit of a joke. I pointed this out on page 1 of this thread. Any shot you take at >33% benefits PER. So if someone took 80 shots at 39% they would lead the league in PER (depending on other statistical contributions) and have the worst FG% in the league.

Randle has a career (and really we are talking about 2 years) .511TS%. The league avg last year was .552. So we are talking about a WELL BELOW average efficiency quantity scorer. His OBPM (plus minus) was never been above -.8 and over his career is a god-awful -2.3.

Now he may very well be a decent fantasy player. But his actual court impact is simply not there and given the multitude of other options the Lakers have, with a pending decision on him to make soon, I don't think he has a great season. Of course, given the 10s of millions on the line, he might have a decent contract year. I just get wary about guys who put up empty stats because they aren't likely to maintain their role, much less expand it.

1. I put up not only Randle's PER, but also his Win Shares, and VORP from last season. He's improved, and his career arc suggests that he will continue to improve.

2. His TS% improved from .482% in his first full season to .543% last season. Convenient of you to omit that. And of course, you're not wanting to point out Randle's other value on offense: he's a fine offensive rebounder and one of the league's best passing big men.

3. I said nothing about Randle's fantasy value in my post. Don't try to attach that strawman to me.

Just admit that you were more familiar with his play in his second season than you were with his improved last season. You're capable of being better in your basketball discussions yet your pride always refuses to let you be.


Win Shares and PER are simply box score amalgams. They are designed to reinforce perception that PPGZzzz guys are the best. I've granted his accumulation of box score stats is impressive. VORP is a better indicator of impact. So lets look at his VORP of 1.1. He splits time with Larry Nance Jr. His VORP? 1.4.

So his TS% "jumped" to well below the league average. His calling card is scoring- he can't do much else, and he scores at below the league average efficiency. Furthermore, his actual offensive impact, what he does for the Lakers offensively when he is in the game, is what OBPM and ORPM measure and he, in his "much improved" season was a -.8 and -.79. So he is below league at the one thing he does.
He has shot 81/296 or 27.3% from outside 15 feet the last two seasons, or about 1 make every other game. Yet he has almost no impact inside defensively.

I was giving you the benefit of the doubt, not trying to attach a strawman.
We can agree to disagree on guys. But don't think I don't watch basketball or accuse me of not knowing what I am talking about.? I do.

Here's the thing -- extremely young guys with a shit-ton of athletic ability often improve in their third full season. If you think that Randle's career production does not improve after his Year 2, then you are in the small minority here.

I think our issue is that you are talking about production and I am talking about impact.
Oct 12, 2017 5:55 PM
0 0
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 20824
I'm also low on Randle. PFs who can neither shoot nor defend have a tough time contributing to a winning team.
Oct 12, 2017 6:06 PM
0 0
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 13649
HurricaneKid
Moses
HurricaneKid
Moses
HurricaneKid
MosesJulius Randle finished last season with a 16.3 PER, 3.5 Win Shares, and a 1.1 VORP. That's a good player. He's gotten himself into tremendous shape and has earned great reviews in the offseason. I can easily see him making the jump into a 19.0 or so PER guy.


PER is a bit of a joke. I pointed this out on page 1 of this thread. Any shot you take at >33% benefits PER. So if someone took 80 shots at 39% they would lead the league in PER (depending on other statistical contributions) and have the worst FG% in the league.

Randle has a career (and really we are talking about 2 years) .511TS%. The league avg last year was .552. So we are talking about a WELL BELOW average efficiency quantity scorer. His OBPM (plus minus) was never been above -.8 and over his career is a god-awful -2.3.

Now he may very well be a decent fantasy player. But his actual court impact is simply not there and given the multitude of other options the Lakers have, with a pending decision on him to make soon, I don't think he has a great season. Of course, given the 10s of millions on the line, he might have a decent contract year. I just get wary about guys who put up empty stats because they aren't likely to maintain their role, much less expand it.

1. I put up not only Randle's PER, but also his Win Shares, and VORP from last season. He's improved, and his career arc suggests that he will continue to improve.

2. His TS% improved from .482% in his first full season to .543% last season. Convenient of you to omit that. And of course, you're not wanting to point out Randle's other value on offense: he's a fine offensive rebounder and one of the league's best passing big men.

3. I said nothing about Randle's fantasy value in my post. Don't try to attach that strawman to me.

Just admit that you were more familiar with his play in his second season than you were with his improved last season. You're capable of being better in your basketball discussions yet your pride always refuses to let you be.


Win Shares and PER are simply box score amalgams. They are designed to reinforce perception that PPGZzzz guys are the best. I've granted his accumulation of box score stats is impressive. VORP is a better indicator of impact. So lets look at his VORP of 1.1. He splits time with Larry Nance Jr. His VORP? 1.4.

So his TS% "jumped" to well below the league average. His calling card is scoring- he can't do much else, and he scores at below the league average efficiency. Furthermore, his actual offensive impact, what he does for the Lakers offensively when he is in the game, is what OBPM and ORPM measure and he, in his "much improved" season was a -.8 and -.79. So he is below league at the one thing he does.
He has shot 81/296 or 27.3% from outside 15 feet the last two seasons, or about 1 make every other game. Yet he has almost no impact inside defensively.

I was giving you the benefit of the doubt, not trying to attach a strawman.
We can agree to disagree on guys. But don't think I don't watch basketball or accuse me of not knowing what I am talking about.? I do.

Here's the thing -- extremely young guys with a shit-ton of athletic ability often improve in their third full season. If you think that Randle's career production does not improve after his Year 2, then you are in the small minority here.

I think our issue is that you are talking about production and I am talking about impact.

Efficient production is impact, I would say.

Also, I'm certainly not saying that you don't know about basketball. Far from it. To me, at least, you come across as investing too much of your ego into this. You seem more interested in winning basketball arguments than you do in finding what's out what's true about basketball. It's alright to sometimes just say, "I didn't realize that."
Oct 12, 2017 6:09 PM
0 0
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 1002
Randle is a good player but the problem for the Lakers is that Nance and Kuzma are cheaper and they need to clear some room for LeBron. It also worries me whenever I see a guy in a contract year get into phenomenal shape because to me that just says "I'm going to become a fatty again once you pay me."
Oct 12, 2017 6:19 PM
0 0
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 14839
Moses
HurricaneKid
Moses
HurricaneKid
Moses
HurricaneKid
MosesJulius Randle finished last season with a 16.3 PER, 3.5 Win Shares, and a 1.1 VORP. That's a good player. He's gotten himself into tremendous shape and has earned great reviews in the offseason. I can easily see him making the jump into a 19.0 or so PER guy.


PER is a bit of a joke. I pointed this out on page 1 of this thread. Any shot you take at >33% benefits PER. So if someone took 80 shots at 39% they would lead the league in PER (depending on other statistical contributions) and have the worst FG% in the league.

Randle has a career (and really we are talking about 2 years) .511TS%. The league avg last year was .552. So we are talking about a WELL BELOW average efficiency quantity scorer. His OBPM (plus minus) was never been above -.8 and over his career is a god-awful -2.3.

Now he may very well be a decent fantasy player. But his actual court impact is simply not there and given the multitude of other options the Lakers have, with a pending decision on him to make soon, I don't think he has a great season. Of course, given the 10s of millions on the line, he might have a decent contract year. I just get wary about guys who put up empty stats because they aren't likely to maintain their role, much less expand it.

1. I put up not only Randle's PER, but also his Win Shares, and VORP from last season. He's improved, and his career arc suggests that he will continue to improve.

2. His TS% improved from .482% in his first full season to .543% last season. Convenient of you to omit that. And of course, you're not wanting to point out Randle's other value on offense: he's a fine offensive rebounder and one of the league's best passing big men.

3. I said nothing about Randle's fantasy value in my post. Don't try to attach that strawman to me.

Just admit that you were more familiar with his play in his second season than you were with his improved last season. You're capable of being better in your basketball discussions yet your pride always refuses to let you be.


Win Shares and PER are simply box score amalgams. They are designed to reinforce perception that PPGZzzz guys are the best. I've granted his accumulation of box score stats is impressive. VORP is a better indicator of impact. So lets look at his VORP of 1.1. He splits time with Larry Nance Jr. His VORP? 1.4.

So his TS% "jumped" to well below the league average. His calling card is scoring- he can't do much else, and he scores at below the league average efficiency. Furthermore, his actual offensive impact, what he does for the Lakers offensively when he is in the game, is what OBPM and ORPM measure and he, in his "much improved" season was a -.8 and -.79. So he is below league at the one thing he does.
He has shot 81/296 or 27.3% from outside 15 feet the last two seasons, or about 1 make every other game. Yet he has almost no impact inside defensively.

I was giving you the benefit of the doubt, not trying to attach a strawman.
We can agree to disagree on guys. But don't think I don't watch basketball or accuse me of not knowing what I am talking about.? I do.

Here's the thing -- extremely young guys with a shit-ton of athletic ability often improve in their third full season. If you think that Randle's career production does not improve after his Year 2, then you are in the small minority here.

I think our issue is that you are talking about production and I am talking about impact.

Efficient production is impact, I would say.

Also, I'm certainly not saying that you don't know about basketball. Far from it. To me, at least, you come across as investing too much of your ego into this. You seem more interested in winning basketball arguments than you do in finding what's out what's true about basketball. It's alright to sometimes just say, "I didn't realize that."


But he isn't efficient. I thought that was established.

I would still disagree with this statement. A guy doesn't have to score to impact an offense. When Korver was scoring 12/gm for the Hawks he was still drawing so much attention from multiple defenders miles from the basket that it freed up the entire offense. Providing space is so much more important that scoring at below league avg from a bevy of 15 foot jumpers, even if a guy scores a lot from them.

You would not be the first one to call me stubborn. I don't know what new information you have provided that demanded me to say such a thing in this instance though. I really don't argue to "win" internet arguments. No one wins internet arguments. We simply bounce opinions off one another and the ones that ring true are absorbed.

The Lakers were better offensively with Randle on the bench. He shot at below league avg efficiency. He can't shoot from outside 15 feet and cannot defend the rim. There are a TON of guys like him that can approximate a fair replication of his contributions at a fraction of what will be his salary next year. Which is why I thought the Lakers might be inclined to move on.
Oct 12, 2017 6:36 PM
0 0
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 9479
Apparently, Nikola Mirotic and Bobby Portis got into a fight at practice today and now Mirotic is in the hospital and out indefinitely. I guess that's one way to get more playing time if you're Portis.
Oct 17, 2017 11:03 PM
0 0
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 1002
Yeah, WTF. I checked my yahoo lineup just now and Mirotic had an injury tag on him. I did not expect it to be from Bobby Portis literally beating his ass in practice.
Oct 17, 2017 11:15 PM
0 0
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 1002
jbbb, I expect a formal written apology for this.
Oct 17, 2017 11:17 PM
0 0