- 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 BI and CJ can't lead this team to .500 or better post ASB
Posted on 2/24/23 at 1:37 pm to Fun Bunch
Posted on 2/24/23 at 1:37 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:
I haven't seen anything remotely on this.
Starting JRichardson and Herb Jones last night REALLY makes me question him.
I can go down a whole rabbit hole on Herb. Someone on Twitter made the comparison that Herb is essentially a taller Jose. A great backup that can come into the game and change it with his energy and defense, and if he contributes offensively it's just lagniappe. But you don't want that guy consistently starting.
As for the whole Richardson/Trey thing, I just don't need Richardson getting minutes over Trey. The 10 games prior to the AS break Trey was playing 31 minutes a night. He had 23 last night. As someone said earlier in this thread, if you give Willie the opportunity to play a vet over a young guy he's going to do it. But with Trey's future here, and Richardson's lack there of, I just don't need him taking meaningful minutes from Trey.
Or Dyson when he comes back, for that matter.
1
Posted on 2/24/23 at 1:54 pm to CP3forMVP
quote:
As for the whole Richardson/Trey thing, I just don't need Richardson getting minutes over Trey
Coach Green essentially moved the deck chairs on the Titanic. Pels had 62-42 deficit in paint points. Dyson will help penetration into the paint somewhat but can’t fix the huge hole at the 4. Line ups of 4 undersized wings with slow Val or undersized Nance at the 5 are killing this team. Have to hope feasting on the also rans in the upcoming schedule can keep the Pels alive for the playoff push if they continue with these lineups.
Posted on 2/24/23 at 1:59 pm to Mickey Goldmill
Yea I definitely f’d that up. Our team is a mess. You legit can’t make an obvious starting lineup with this squad.
We need a true starting pg bad.
We need a true starting pg bad.
Posted on 2/24/23 at 2:07 pm to TeddyPadillac
CJ is just not that good with the way the roster is utilized. He's an undersized 2 that we play at point way too often and he shoots us out of games. Terrible roster construction having two of the most midrange players in the game, one of which is, by NBA standards, small. Great leader and a good player but not for how the Pels use him in this roster.
Posted on 2/24/23 at 2:24 pm to tiger_nurse
quote:
We need a true starting pg bad
For sure, Dyson is promising at point, but has also caught the injury bug. A quick fix, until Zion returns, may be a fixed rotation of Nance, Hayes/Billy and Val at the 4/5 positions. Coach Green would have to sort out minute distribution between Herb, Richardson, TM3, Dyson, Naji as rotational wings.
Posted on 2/24/23 at 2:44 pm to From Rice to Ingram
quote:CJ has averaged an efficient 24/4/6 over his last 32 games, I'm not sure why folks aren't content with that.
CJ is just not that good with the way the roster is utilized. He's an undersized 2 that we play at point way too often and he shoots us out of games.
46% from the filed, 42% from 3 during that time on 8 attempts per game.
Posted on 2/24/23 at 3:09 pm to shel311
Do you think he is a good PG?
Posted on 2/24/23 at 3:20 pm to shel311
quote:
I'm not sure why folks aren't content with that
He's the highest paid player on the team. If you don't understand that being paid more than Jokic and Tatum brings a higher level of accountability, than I don't know what to tell you. He's a really good one way player being paid like a superstar.
Posted on 2/24/23 at 3:21 pm to From Rice to Ingram
quote:Yes, he is very clearly an above average PG. If you' don't think he's good, i'm not sure what else to tell you.
Do you think he is a good PG?
You can argue his skillset doesn't fit what we need. I'd disagree with that, but I can see where you're going with it.
But there is zero logical argument that CJ McCollum is not a good point guard.
And lost in all of this, remember he's supposed to be our 3rd best player, but he's played just about the entire season as either our 2nd or 1st best player.
This post was edited on 2/24/23 at 3:24 pm
Posted on 2/24/23 at 3:23 pm to mhasen1
quote:If you expect CJ to produce on their level because he makes more them those guys, then you quite simply don't understand how the NBA works.
If you don't understand that being paid more than Jokic and Tatum brings a higher level of accountability, than I don't know what to tell you
If I told you before he came to us, he'd put up the numbers I just mentioned, you would have been elated. Now he's putting up those numbers, and it's not good enough.
quote:Again, that's what you pay players at this age if you want them on your team. Feel free to name all the players who were just as good as CJ but younger and on better contracts that we could have gotten for Josh Hart and a 1st if you think we could have done better.
He's a really good one way player being paid like a superstar.
This post was edited on 2/24/23 at 3:25 pm
Posted on 2/24/23 at 3:32 pm to shel311
quote:
CJ has averaged an efficient 24/4/6 over his last 32 games, I'm not sure why folks aren't content with that.
Agree, that CJ has played well while settling into a more off-ball role, but a true point that distributes the ball well to Zion, BI, and the Pels bigs for even 20% of possessions would be manna.
CJ doesn’t see well over defenses for back door opportunities, pick n roll lobs, or passing players to open space for easier shots, and just don't like seeing BI or Zion fight 2-3 defenders as primary initiators (just to get the ball in their hands and generate offense) constantly running against a set defense due to the position the Pel shite paint defense puts them in.
Posted on 2/24/23 at 3:33 pm to From Rice to Ingram
It doesn't help when 3/4 of the roster are sub 35% shooters from deep. We are downright bad from deep. Believe it or not... But we are attempting less threes than we were last season. That makes me sick to my stomach.
Posted on 2/24/23 at 3:44 pm to shel311
He is very much not an above average PG. He is an above average NBA player but we definitely disagree on him as a PG. Of course there is a logical argument that he is not a good PG, we lose without Zion with him at point. Lol. You disagree but you saying there is zero logical argument is nonsensical.
Posted on 2/24/23 at 4:06 pm to Pistol44
quote:Right, there's a huge difference between a good PG and a true PG. Not being a true PG does not make one not a good PG.
Agree, that CJ has played well while settling into a more off-ball role, but a true point that distributes the ball well to Zion, BI, and the Pels bigs for even 20% of possessions would be manna.
Posted on 2/24/23 at 4:11 pm to From Rice to Ingram
quote:Stop
He is very much not an above average PG.
quote:So losing is the barometer per your logic.
Of course there is a logical argument that he is not a good PG, we lose without Zion with him at point. Lol.
Yes or no, is SGA a good point guard? He's averaging 31ppg, but they are 25-29 when he plays.
Remember, you said it was logical and your ONLY data point to back that up was because we don't win without Zion, so explain how SGA is above average.
quote:In fairness, you have not presented a logical argument, so feel free to do so.
You disagree but you saying there is zero logical argument is nonsensical.
This post was edited on 2/24/23 at 4:13 pm
Posted on 2/24/23 at 4:20 pm to shel311
quote:
Right, there's a huge difference between a good PG and a true PG
Ultimately, I think what fans of the Pels want to see is not having to watch Zion and BI have to work so hard to generate offense. This issue, imo, has also been a factor in their availability for long periods. I believe having to operate against set defenses constantly due to defensive inefficiency is a primary culprit, but having a playmaker that can set them, as well as the bigs, up for easier shots (particularly against the better teams) is sorely needed.
Posted on 2/24/23 at 4:20 pm to shel311
I said you argument is nonsensical, of which you did nothing to make me think otherwise. Does SGA have BI as a teammate? Of course not. Yet that is your counter because you think it supports your argument. You want to defend him, that's fine, but to pretend there is no argument against him being a poor PG is nonsensical, like I said.
Posted on 2/24/23 at 4:30 pm to From Rice to Ingram
quote:That's great, you can choose to be wrong. That doesn't bother me like you think it does.
I said you argument is nonsensical, of which you did nothing to make me think otherwise.
quote:So you're already backtracking from your initial argument on wins/losses, now we're getting somewhere.
Does SGA have BI as a teammate?
So tell me all the parameters and hoops you need to jump through to make your point since you've already backed off of simply wins and losses.
You're already down to CJ isn't above average because we don't do as much without our 2 best players. No shite, huh.
quote:Feel free to logically support your argument, you've yet to do so and you have factually backed off of your initial argument.
Yet that is your counter because you think it supports your argument
quote:You keep saying that and yet you STILL can't present that logical argument. Again, make the logical argument. Go...
but to pretend there is no argument against him being a poor PG is nonsensical, like I said.
This post was edited on 2/24/23 at 4:31 pm
Posted on 2/24/23 at 4:42 pm to shel311
[quote]If you expect CJ to produce on their level because he makes more them those guys, then you quite simply don't understand how the NBA works. If I told you before he came to us, he'd put up the numbers I just mentioned, you would have been elated. Now he's putting up those numbers, and it's not good enough.[quote]
You posted last night about Ingram having a poor game despite 27 points at the time. That post could be made about 3/4ths of CJs games this year. When was the last time he made a game changing defensive play or even dove for a loose ball?
For a team unconcerned about the luxury tax, he's a solid 3rd, 4th, or 5th option in the realm of Jordan Poole, DeAngelo Russel, Norman Powell, Mike Conley, or Tim Hardaway Jr. It would be great if the Pelicans become unconcerned about cost and can pay an above average starter all-NBA money, but I doubt it happens anytime soon.
You posted last night about Ingram having a poor game despite 27 points at the time. That post could be made about 3/4ths of CJs games this year. When was the last time he made a game changing defensive play or even dove for a loose ball?
For a team unconcerned about the luxury tax, he's a solid 3rd, 4th, or 5th option in the realm of Jordan Poole, DeAngelo Russel, Norman Powell, Mike Conley, or Tim Hardaway Jr. It would be great if the Pelicans become unconcerned about cost and can pay an above average starter all-NBA money, but I doubt it happens anytime soon.
Posted on 2/24/23 at 4:57 pm to mhasen1
quote:3/4ths of games CJ plays he is not terribly efficient shooting AND has twice as many turnovers as assists?
You posted last night about Ingram having a poor game despite 27 points at the time. That post could be made about 3/4ths of CJs games this year.
You sure about that?
This is EXACTLY what you folks have done all season about CJ. You're literally seeing things that aren't happening. That's a fact, you just proved it for me with that comment.
quote:None of that relevant to whether CJ is a good point guard. See my point above about good PG vs the right fit. 2 different things.
For a team unconcerned about the luxury tax, he's a solid 3rd, 4th, or 5th option in the realm of Jordan Poole, DeAngelo Russel, Norman Powell, Mike Conley, or Tim Hardaway Jr. It would be great if the Pelicans become unconcerned about cost and can pay an above average starter all-NBA money, but I doubt it happens anytime soon.
There is no logical world where CJ is not a good point guard. There simply isn't, it'll be a losing argument every time it's made.
So far there have been 2 points made about why he's not good. 1 of the points would also mean SGA is not good and Lillard is not good and even Steph is maybe barely above average and the other was factually incorrect and easily refuted. What are we doing here?
This post was edited on 2/24/23 at 4:59 pm
Page 4 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News