- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: If Ben, Ingram, Bender, Hield, and Murray are off....
Posted on 4/7/16 at 4:12 pm to 504ByrdGang
Posted on 4/7/16 at 4:12 pm to 504ByrdGang
quote:
Booker is the second best rookie behind KAT.
Disagreed on that, Porzingis and Okafor are having better seasons. The 3 bigs look extremely solid.
Bookers numbers are what I imagine Hield is going to put up next year though.
2
Posted on 4/7/16 at 4:20 pm to htran90
But its more impressive he's doing it at 19 rather than 23.
Posted on 4/7/16 at 4:33 pm to 504ByrdGang
quote:
But its more impressive he's doing it at 19 rather than 23.
And CJ McCollum became someone people knew at the age of 24 (year 3).
Wesley Matthews became solid defender and solid 3pt shooter at the age of 24 (year 2 in portland).
Your point? keep hating, we know you want to. fact is there are plenty of SGs who have been productive in their career even if they started the NBA at 22-23. I could give you a damn good list of SG flakes in the top 10 who were "19 year old rookies"
Posted on 4/7/16 at 4:42 pm to htran90
Same 2 examples out of a million
Posted on 4/7/16 at 5:24 pm to 504ByrdGang
quote:
Same 2 examples out of a million
and your same two examples out of a million.
For every 4th year "bust", there's many 1&done bust.
The transition from NCAA->NBA is rough, but nobody is expecting hield to come in and bust on the scene with 18/4/3. But if he starts at 13/2/2 and by 2nd year becomes a 18/4/3, isn't that good enough? regardless of age, 19 and 22 doesn't matter much. It would be NICE to have the younger guy, but would it be a disappointment if by year 3 he's averaging 20/3/3 at the age of 25?
Consider this, Klay Thompson was 22 when he was drafted.
Puts up 13/2/2. By year 5 at the age of 26, he's putting up 23/4/2
I'd take that any day of the week.
Posted on 4/7/16 at 10:40 pm to 504ByrdGang
Skal
Ship Asik off
Skal and AD in 5 years will be tGoat combo
Ship Asik off
Skal and AD in 5 years will be tGoat combo
Posted on 4/8/16 at 6:55 am to htran90
quote:
Porzingis and Okafor are having better seasons.
I'd take Booker over Okafor right now. No questions asked.
quote:
Bookers numbers are what I imagine Hield is going to put up next year though.
Check his Pre and Post ASB splits- he wasn't playing much until Bledsoe/Knight went down. Then he suddenly became the number 1 option and primary creator of a team starting Tucker, Chandler, Price (Phoenix's Gee, Asik, Cole). If Hield shows even half the ball handling chops that Booker has, then he will be a much better pro than people think. Booker is on pace to be a star.
When we look back on it, the worst part of the Asik trade may not be the resigning, but tossing away at chance at picking Booker, Winslow, or Myles Turner. I'd gladly trade a season with sub replacement 5s and playoff run last year for any of those guys at this point.
Posted on 4/8/16 at 7:56 am to corndeaux
quote:
tossing away at chance at picking Booker, Winslow, or Myles Turner.
Winslow went 10th, but it's definitely one of the downsides of the Win Now strategy. You can even look at it as a cost issue. If you had 2-3 years to wait on a big then practically anyone you draft before 20 should be able to give you what we wanted from Asik if you have the patience to wait for it. I'm not saying there are no mid 1st center busts, but if your expectations are "starter", not Starter, it's a pretty good bet. So even if you didn't get a Booker you'd have better production at center than we're getting now at about 1/10th the cost.
This post was edited on 4/8/16 at 7:57 am
Posted on 4/8/16 at 8:59 am to corndeaux
I did check them and they're solid if you look at numbers, but the percentages and attempts just make him an inefficient chucker like Crawford.
post-ASB
25 games (all starts), 36.1 MPG
39.9/29.2/84.4 on 17.2/5.5/4.9 attempts
19.5 PPG, 2.9 RPG, 4.2 APG, 3.0 TOV, 0.6 SPG, 0.4 BPG
100 ortg, 114 drtg
post-ASB
25 games (all starts), 36.1 MPG
39.9/29.2/84.4 on 17.2/5.5/4.9 attempts
19.5 PPG, 2.9 RPG, 4.2 APG, 3.0 TOV, 0.6 SPG, 0.4 BPG
100 ortg, 114 drtg
Posted on 4/8/16 at 9:25 am to htran90
So you need to bring more than just numbers. Watch him play. Look at his teammates right now. Look at what they are asking him to do with those teammates. Remember he is a 19 year old rookie who didn't play a ton as a creator in his one year in college. Context matters.
Buddy Hield on the Pels should have much better efficiency- he's playing off ball with Davis and Holiday and Evans. And that would be great. Yet, he will be lucky to have as promising a rookie year as Booker.
Buddy Hield on the Pels should have much better efficiency- he's playing off ball with Davis and Holiday and Evans. And that would be great. Yet, he will be lucky to have as promising a rookie year as Booker.
Posted on 4/8/16 at 9:39 am to corndeaux
I am watching him play and he's done very well, but at this point he is an inefficient chucker because he's their best option. You can't argue that he isn't a low% player postASB because that is the fact.
That isn't to say he's going to be that way, but his % will trend upward as his team gets healthier and matures.
But lets not say he has no teammates, Len and Chandler have been 8/8 players the whole season, Teletovic, Goodwin, and Tucker are pretty average but they're not horrid like you want them to be.
That isn't to say he's going to be that way, but his % will trend upward as his team gets healthier and matures.
But lets not say he has no teammates, Len and Chandler have been 8/8 players the whole season, Teletovic, Goodwin, and Tucker are pretty average but they're not horrid like you want them to be.
Posted on 4/8/16 at 9:46 am to htran90
quote:
htran90
Why bother? This conversation was over the second 504 said Booker is having a better rookie campaign than Porzingis.
Posted on 4/8/16 at 10:05 am to corndeaux
Yes, you cannot just look at numbers with guys like Lavine and Booker. I actually think their numbers paint a better picture than their actual play on the floor. You look at Tim Frazier's numbers and you'd think he's an all star. Empty stats on garbage teams, so I'm taking the numbers w a grain of salt.
Granted they are young players on bad teams, so they will likely get better. If they stay with their current teams and are going to adapt to playing with the cornerstone players, their games will have to adapt a bit. Meaning if Lavine doesn't realize he's 3rd fiddle on that team and Booker can't play together with those other guards, you're looking at tyreke evans type players who put up numbers but aren't conducive to winning bc they won't change
And fwiw (not addressed to you specifically) Booker was 2nd on his team at UK in FGA. Everyone acts like he was this rarely used guy coming off the bench. He's got pedigree
Granted they are young players on bad teams, so they will likely get better. If they stay with their current teams and are going to adapt to playing with the cornerstone players, their games will have to adapt a bit. Meaning if Lavine doesn't realize he's 3rd fiddle on that team and Booker can't play together with those other guards, you're looking at tyreke evans type players who put up numbers but aren't conducive to winning bc they won't change
And fwiw (not addressed to you specifically) Booker was 2nd on his team at UK in FGA. Everyone acts like he was this rarely used guy coming off the bench. He's got pedigree
Posted on 4/8/16 at 12:17 pm to GynoSandberg
Certainly. NBA in the spring can be a mirage. I agree on Lavine more than Booker though. No one thought Booker would be able to create like he has. He was a shooter. Adding the ability to create is a huge boost to what he can be. And maybe he stagnates. But the promise is there to be a special player. Lavine is just a gunner, at this point. There's your Crawford comp. And there's nothing wrong with that.
I have no idea what team you're watching if you think a unit of Len/Chandler/Tucker/Price/Booker (the most used in PHX since Bledsoe went down) is not Pels level bad in terms of spacing on offense. 2 guys with no range beyond 6 feet, two poor 3PT shooters, and only one guy with any discernible NBA perimeter skills on offense. Yes, they have Teletovic. The Pels have Anderson. How much of a difference does that make when the other 3 guys are garbage?
Like Gyno says, we all knew Booker could shoot. He shot well when he had NBA level offensive talent on the floor with him. He's shot worse when that talent disappeared AND he was asked to do something out of his assumed wheelhouse. The fact that he's looked competent while assuming more responsibility speaks more to me than the (completely expected) drop in efficiency for any rookie as the season continues and he becomes the primary creator and scorer of a team. It took an offensive genius like Kevin freaking Durant a year to figure out how to get good shots in the NBA. Booker is no Durant, but 19 year olds get better.
This incessant Hield nonsense has made everyone dumber. He can be a good player and pick and I can still like Booker more. I also can change my mind based on what Hield does in the NBA and how/if Booker progresses.
quote:
htran
I have no idea what team you're watching if you think a unit of Len/Chandler/Tucker/Price/Booker (the most used in PHX since Bledsoe went down) is not Pels level bad in terms of spacing on offense. 2 guys with no range beyond 6 feet, two poor 3PT shooters, and only one guy with any discernible NBA perimeter skills on offense. Yes, they have Teletovic. The Pels have Anderson. How much of a difference does that make when the other 3 guys are garbage?
Like Gyno says, we all knew Booker could shoot. He shot well when he had NBA level offensive talent on the floor with him. He's shot worse when that talent disappeared AND he was asked to do something out of his assumed wheelhouse. The fact that he's looked competent while assuming more responsibility speaks more to me than the (completely expected) drop in efficiency for any rookie as the season continues and he becomes the primary creator and scorer of a team. It took an offensive genius like Kevin freaking Durant a year to figure out how to get good shots in the NBA. Booker is no Durant, but 19 year olds get better.
This incessant Hield nonsense has made everyone dumber. He can be a good player and pick and I can still like Booker more. I also can change my mind based on what Hield does in the NBA and how/if Booker progresses.
Posted on 4/8/16 at 12:52 pm to corndeaux
quote:
This incessant Hield nonsense has made everyone dumber.
Sometimes you just have to agree to disagree and move on. Otherwise things can get personal and even offhanded comments will attract unwarranted attention and derail threads a la Boom. Having the last word is not the same as winning an argument, and in an argument without enough facts, like most of the stuff we talk about here, sometimes there aren't any clear winners, just reasons for picking a side.
This post was edited on 4/8/16 at 12:53 pm
Posted on 4/8/16 at 1:19 pm to corndeaux
I'm not saying he's BAD, but the point is he's putting up good numbers on a bad team so the hard numbers get inflated (ala Tyreke). Without spacing, but its still inefficient at this time in his career. Nobody said he couldn't improve, but its an inefficient regardless if you want to go back and forth about it or not.
he's finishing at the rim REALLY efficiently, issue is only 20% of his shots come from there, he's still taking over half his shots from at least 16ft out all while only making 35% of them, that is why his % are so low. Which is the same issue with Crawford, 60% of his shots come from 16ft and out and he only makes 40% or so.
He has A LOT of room to improve and as long as he continues to, which he will, he's going to be very solid for years. My personal opinion is that Okafor, although has many issues, has had a very solid season prior to injury.
he's finishing at the rim REALLY efficiently, issue is only 20% of his shots come from there, he's still taking over half his shots from at least 16ft out all while only making 35% of them, that is why his % are so low. Which is the same issue with Crawford, 60% of his shots come from 16ft and out and he only makes 40% or so.
He has A LOT of room to improve and as long as he continues to, which he will, he's going to be very solid for years. My personal opinion is that Okafor, although has many issues, has had a very solid season prior to injury.
Posted on 4/8/16 at 1:42 pm to htran90
Okafor is having a good season. And he will be a good player for a long time. Just harder for me to be enamored with a post scorer who isn't a good passer (that can change and may be, in part, a function of Sixers being the Sixers) and doesn't defend well. That's the big knock for me. KAT is a unicorn. Zinger looks like on too. I'd take Turner over Okafor for that very reason.
You can live with mediocre/poor defense from a perimeter player. That type of stuff from a 5 is much harder to hide in pace/space era
Booker, because of the PnR skills he's been flashing, is a better long term prospect for me. But, things change.
You can live with mediocre/poor defense from a perimeter player. That type of stuff from a 5 is much harder to hide in pace/space era
Booker, because of the PnR skills he's been flashing, is a better long term prospect for me. But, things change.
Posted on 4/8/16 at 1:49 pm to corndeaux
I'll take thon
Posted on 4/8/16 at 1:51 pm to TigerinATL
Certainly. Co-sign all of that.
Not trying to "win" an argument. It is all shades of gray and saying stuff without context or an awareness that none of us (myself included) here really know what's going on just bugs me. It's the equivalent of RINGZZ!11! argument, to me. I could easily be way way way off on Booker or whatever other opinion. That's fine and I will own it when that day comes
Not trying to "win" an argument. It is all shades of gray and saying stuff without context or an awareness that none of us (myself included) here really know what's going on just bugs me. It's the equivalent of RINGZZ!11! argument, to me. I could easily be way way way off on Booker or whatever other opinion. That's fine and I will own it when that day comes
Posted on 4/8/16 at 1:53 pm to corndeaux
quote:
Not trying to "win" an argument.
That wasn't aimed at you, 504 has gone miniBoom with Hield.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News