- 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
What are you guys actuall expecting from our rookie?
Posted on 5/19/16 at 7:55 am
Posted on 5/19/16 at 7:55 am
Just from reading most posts, I feel like most people are penciling in our rookie to start and contribute in a big way. History says that this won't be the case, especially if you want the team to be a winning team.
How many rookies have had: Moderate to high usage, started, and been on a 45+ win team? I can think of less than 3 in the last ten years.
Heck, when we got Baron, who was more talented than anyone we will get this year, he was a role player year 1. Lillard was good, but they ended up in the lotto. I can go on and on. History says that either your rookie will put up good numbers and your team will be bad, or your team will be good but it is because your rookie is just a role player
So, what are you guys expecting? Would Hield be better than Gordon has been the last two years, in his rookie year? Would Bender even give you a Jason Smith level impact? Would Dunn be much better than Tim Frazier was last year?
Not talking about 2017 and beyond, but next year, what are you guys honestly expecting from the rookie?
How many rookies have had: Moderate to high usage, started, and been on a 45+ win team? I can think of less than 3 in the last ten years.
Heck, when we got Baron, who was more talented than anyone we will get this year, he was a role player year 1. Lillard was good, but they ended up in the lotto. I can go on and on. History says that either your rookie will put up good numbers and your team will be bad, or your team will be good but it is because your rookie is just a role player
So, what are you guys expecting? Would Hield be better than Gordon has been the last two years, in his rookie year? Would Bender even give you a Jason Smith level impact? Would Dunn be much better than Tim Frazier was last year?
Not talking about 2017 and beyond, but next year, what are you guys honestly expecting from the rookie?
14
Posted on 5/19/16 at 8:05 am to Crewz
If we draft Hield I don't see why he can't immediately replace Gordon's production. Whether Monty or Gentry, this team has generated a ton of open shots, even rookies should be able to knock open shots down, and since Hield would be replacing Gordon, my defensive expectations would be low.
I think the biggest effect Dunn would have as a rookie is forcing the team to move Tyreke. I'm not sure he beats out Frazier for minutes, but I think that would be good for getting him to focus on what he needs to improve to be John Wall and not MCW.
I honestly haven't studied Murray much, but from what I've seen I'd have similar expectations as with Hield except he might actually be worse than Gordon on defense.
I see Valentine as a super sub playing 1-3 and I would expect more from him as a rookie than anyone else because he's supposed to be coming in with shooting, passing, and rebounding skills.
I think the biggest effect Dunn would have as a rookie is forcing the team to move Tyreke. I'm not sure he beats out Frazier for minutes, but I think that would be good for getting him to focus on what he needs to improve to be John Wall and not MCW.
I honestly haven't studied Murray much, but from what I've seen I'd have similar expectations as with Hield except he might actually be worse than Gordon on defense.
I see Valentine as a super sub playing 1-3 and I would expect more from him as a rookie than anyone else because he's supposed to be coming in with shooting, passing, and rebounding skills.
Posted on 5/19/16 at 8:41 am to Crewz
quote:
History says that either your rookie will put up good numbers and your team will be bad, or your team will be good but it is because your rookie is just a role player
This is a terrible way to look at it. The good teams 1) aren't drafting in the lottery 2) typically don't have starting spots open and 3) there's little usage available for rookie on a good team.
The bad teams are picking in the lottery, getting the best rookies, and have minutes to give instantly.
Last year : KAT, D'lo, Okafor, Porzingis, WCS, & Mudiay all played key roles on their team. Stanley Johnson, Kaminsky, Winslow, & Myles Tuner all were solid role players on playoff teams.
2015 similar, top 10 littered with rookies who had immediate impacts on their "bad" teams, followed by bunch of role players on playoff teams.
Pels are a bad team with essentially 3 starting spots open. The expectation should be a rookie will start and contribute in a big way.
This post was edited on 5/19/16 at 8:42 am
Posted on 5/19/16 at 8:51 am to Crewz
quote:
Just from reading most posts, I feel like most people are penciling in our rookie to start and contribute in a big way. History says that this won't be the case, especially if you want the team to be a winning team.
It really depends on the player. I don't think any starts, but some of the seniors could certainly contribute on a this team.
quote:
How many rookies have had: Moderate to high usage, started, and been on a 45+ win team? I can think of less than 3 in the last ten years.
Not many, but this probably isn't a 45+ win team unless major changes are made to the roster.
Posted on 5/19/16 at 8:59 am to Toula
quote:
The expectation should be a rookie will start and contribute in a big way.
this. Whoever we draft should play 27-30minutes a night. Unless it ends up being a 19yr old like Murray. Might have a little bit steeper learning curve
Posted on 5/19/16 at 9:00 am to Toula
You basically just pointed out exactly what I said in a concise sentence
The guys who put up big numbers are on bad teams. If you are a good team, you can allow your rookie to play a very niche role a la Justice Winslow. It's very rare that you get both.
Point being, if you are gonna take Buddy and get rid of Reke and Gordon, you better hope we land a big FA so Buddy can be a 4th or 5th option, because if he is a 2nd or 3rd, this team won't be good. Same for Dunn. Same for Murray.
For this team to be good, the Pels better add AT LEAST one FA or trade aquisition that is better than the rookie they take
The guys who put up big numbers are on bad teams. If you are a good team, you can allow your rookie to play a very niche role a la Justice Winslow. It's very rare that you get both.
Point being, if you are gonna take Buddy and get rid of Reke and Gordon, you better hope we land a big FA so Buddy can be a 4th or 5th option, because if he is a 2nd or 3rd, this team won't be good. Same for Dunn. Same for Murray.
For this team to be good, the Pels better add AT LEAST one FA or trade aquisition that is better than the rookie they take
Posted on 5/19/16 at 9:02 am to Lester Earl
27-30 mins a night, where the rookie has low usage = you can win
High usage = very rarely you are a winning team
All I am saying
High usage = very rarely you are a winning team
All I am saying
Posted on 5/19/16 at 9:03 am to Crewz
I would hope most people agree with that, but who knows with Pels Talk
Posted on 5/19/16 at 9:05 am to Lester Earl
I just wanted to put it out there because after reading some of the posts, the expectations seemed to be getting a little out of hand
For instance, I don't think Buddy has even a slight chance to be what Eric Gordon was two years ago after coming back from the shoulder injury. No chance he can be that effective in his rookie year. I bet many would disagree.
For instance, I don't think Buddy has even a slight chance to be what Eric Gordon was two years ago after coming back from the shoulder injury. No chance he can be that effective in his rookie year. I bet many would disagree.
Posted on 5/19/16 at 9:18 am to Crewz
quote:
For instance, I don't think Buddy has even a slight chance to be what Eric Gordon was two years ago after coming back from the shoulder injury. No chance he can be that effective in his rookie year. I bet many would disagree.
Probably correct.
I do hope an rookie we draft can contribute to some extent, though.
But I also agree this team needs to add a FA or obtain a solid player via trade, or this will be another long season indeed.
Posted on 5/19/16 at 9:21 am to Crewz
I'm expecting us to get a role player who over time will develope into a solid starter. This franchise needs some youth and excitement, there is no better place to get that than the draft.
Posted on 5/19/16 at 9:27 am to Crewz
this team is going to be bad next year regardless, I can't imagine how it could be otherwise. They have two NBA players and the rest are throwaways and throwins (assuming ryno and Gordon walk)
Evans is a player obviously but I'm not sure they can run the system they want with him
add a rookie to a bad team and he plays
our rookie will have plenty of reason to play
Evans is a player obviously but I'm not sure they can run the system they want with him
add a rookie to a bad team and he plays
our rookie will have plenty of reason to play
Posted on 5/19/16 at 9:28 am to Crewz
Quite simply' I expect our draft pick to bring us hope.
And that, in return, will add a little bit of excitement.
And that, in return, will add a little bit of excitement.
Posted on 5/19/16 at 9:38 am to Crewz
quote:
I don't think Buddy has even a slight chance to be what Eric Gordon was two years ago after coming back from the shoulder injury. No chance he can be that effective in his rookie year. I
It's not like Gordon was having a bunch of plays run for him. When he wasn't busy dribbling the ball off his leg out of bounds, his role was primarily to wait for the catch and shoot opportunities. 2 years ago Post ASB 46.4% of his shots were catch and shoots, 90% of those C&S were 3 point attempts. He was open or wide open for 63% of his shots. 50% of his shots came after no dribbles, 75% were after 2 or fewer dribbles.
I'm not saying Hield will be equivalent to Eric Gordon in terms of NBA2k skill points, I'm saying he can fill the very limited shooter/spacer role we had Gordon playing, which was largely find an open spot on the 3 point line and wait for the ball.
Why do you think averaging about 13 PPG is expecting too much? Make 2.5/6 3s per game (41%) and then add another 5-6 points off of 2s and FTs. 2.2/5 on 2s, throw in a FT or 2 and he's scoring 12 or 13 a night on 11 shots. BDJ got 8.9 shots per 36. I don't think it'd be unreasonable for Buddy to get about 11 in 30, because with his experience being The Man in college, I'm looking for him to be a Rynoesque black hole on offense.
Posted on 5/19/16 at 9:41 am to Crewz
quote:
What are you guys actuall expecting from our rookie?
Injuries
I don't expect a lot from rookies, especially the one-and-dones. They rarely make huge impacts right out of the gate. I'd hope for a healthy guy who shows they can develop into a high level player.
Posted on 5/19/16 at 9:44 am to Crewz
20 points per game
10 Assists per game
10 Rebound per game
lock down defense on the other teams best player
90% Free Throw shooter
40% on 3s
50% on 2s
and the most unrealistic.......
ability to stay healthy with the Pelican's training staff
10 Assists per game
10 Rebound per game
lock down defense on the other teams best player
90% Free Throw shooter
40% on 3s
50% on 2s
and the most unrealistic.......
ability to stay healthy with the Pelican's training staff
Posted on 5/19/16 at 9:50 am to Crewz
quote:
For instance, I don't think Buddy has even a slight chance to be what Eric Gordon was two years ago after coming back from the shoulder injury. No chance he can be that effective in his rookie year. I bet many would disagree.
Dude, Gordon had a fantastic year shooting the ball. Nobody expects that, but that doesn't mean Hield can't be a positive contributor. There is middle ground between flop and instant all-star.
Posted on 5/19/16 at 9:51 am to Crewz
If they can get a rotation player for next year out of 6, that's a win. This past season's rookies fooled people to some degree with their play. Even a guy like Porzingis, with a very bright future, really tailed off badly down the stretch.
Even the most "pro ready" guy like Hield will struggle some. Dudes are bigger, longer, more athletic, and just better in the NBA. It's hard at this level. There will be a learning curve.
If he can be healthy for 70 games, yes. Gordon would still be the better player, but he's played in ~200 games over the past 4 years. Just from a MP and cap perspective, Hield shooting 40/35/75 and playing rookie level (i.e. bad) defense in 65-70 games, would still be better for the team next year.
Even the most "pro ready" guy like Hield will struggle some. Dudes are bigger, longer, more athletic, and just better in the NBA. It's hard at this level. There will be a learning curve.
quote:
Would Hield be better than Gordon has been the last two years
If he can be healthy for 70 games, yes. Gordon would still be the better player, but he's played in ~200 games over the past 4 years. Just from a MP and cap perspective, Hield shooting 40/35/75 and playing rookie level (i.e. bad) defense in 65-70 games, would still be better for the team next year.
Posted on 5/19/16 at 9:58 am to corndeaux
This is basically just Mikey's veiled argument for Murray thread. Hield won't be first team all-NBA as a rookie, so you should take Murray's potential versus Hield's production.
Page 1 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News