- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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: NBA Offseason officially kicks off, Ingram’s days in NOLA coming to an end per Stein
Posted on 8/13/24 at 4:22 pm to Dantheman504
Posted on 8/13/24 at 4:22 pm to Dantheman504
quote:
BI "not being the best #2 to win a championship" and BI not being a #2 are completely different
I guess it is kind of fluid, depending on the team. But guys are kind of who they are. You put Zion on the majority of teams in the league, he's still #1.
So if you are saying Ingram is a #2 or he should be a #2 on a team, how good would that team be? I don't think he could be that on a great team, no matter who the star is or how strong the supporting cast. So is he more of a #3 on a good/great team?
0
Posted on 8/13/24 at 4:39 pm to TeddyPadillac
quote:I didn't make the initial argument, not my stance.
Comparing CJ and BI's shot chart is just as stupid as comparing Trey and BI's shot chart.
But I'm sure you agree, if you're comparing CJ and BI, it's pretty absurd to call out CJ's shot selection as some knock considering BI's shot selection last season. I don't see why you'd disagree with that...
quote:Again, just see above. But even with that, CJ was able to adapt his game to fit the role he was asked to play. BI was not able to successfully adapt his game to fit what the team needed.
BI isn't in the same role as CJ.
Posted on 8/13/24 at 4:57 pm to TeddyPadillac
quote:
BI isn't in the same role as CJ. If you believe Murray can take BI's role and do better, then fine.
Do you think CJ is better for this team as the clear #3, as opposed to BI/Murray being 2a/2b?
He thinks going from Zion/ BI/ CJ to Zion/ Murray/ BI/ CJ + CJ fit + BI contract timing = BI bad.
People do the same thing with Trey/ Herb as well.
BI as a bad fit doesn't mean BI is a bad player. Y'all must be forgetting how shite our coaching has been aswell.
Teams not wanting to trade 3-4 1st for BI is not the same as teams not wanting BI. You think that would be common sense.
And for Shel-
If BI is making 30 mil (like CJ) then he would have already been traded for 3-4 1sts.
Might not even get a 1st for CJ at 30mil but would get 3-4 1st for BI at 30.
Your perception of CJ vs BI includes personal feelings for Murphy/ Herb playing time, frustration for BI not shooting 3's, your own love for CJ, and fit of CJ compared to BI with the way our roster is constructed.
I also agree with many of those points but I'm not going to act like an aging CJ or unproven Trey are better players than BI. Especially BI coming off a bad season where no one wants to pay him.
Posted on 8/13/24 at 5:12 pm to Dantheman504
BI is now well aware that he can't be a #1 while playing like a #2 or #3.
No one is considering that he still wants to prove he is the "star" of our team. Instead of thinking about BI in his worst moments try thinking about a BI that actually changes his game to prove he can be a #1.
No one is considering that he still wants to prove he is the "star" of our team. Instead of thinking about BI in his worst moments try thinking about a BI that actually changes his game to prove he can be a #1.
Posted on 8/13/24 at 5:36 pm to Dantheman504
Seems like BI has gone from being over rated by the fan base to underrated. It’s kind of impressive, actually.
Posted on 8/13/24 at 5:39 pm to Dantheman504
quote:
No one is considering that he still wants to prove he is the "star" of our team. Instead of thinking about BI in his worst moments try thinking about a BI that actually changes his game to prove he can be a #1.
Whatever you're smoking, i want some. But BI is gonna be smoking his same old bullshite. Its who he is. Thats why there is no market for that mother fricker. He's Carmelo-lite.
Posted on 8/13/24 at 6:20 pm to shel311
quote:
But I'm sure you agree, if you're comparing CJ and BI, it's pretty absurd to call out CJ's shot selection as some knock considering BI's shot selection last season. I don't see why you'd disagree with that...
I agree, but it’s silly to do so b/c they aren’t asked to do the same thing.
quote:
Again, just see above. But even with that, CJ was able to adapt his game to fit the role he was asked to play. BI was not able to successfully adapt his game to fit what the team needed.
And BI can play a different role now with Murray
CJ didn’t have much of a choice to adapt his role. It happened organically b/c Zion and BI took the ball out of his hands.
No one asked BI to do what CJ was doing. They asked him to be the PG. he’s not a PG.
Posted on 8/13/24 at 6:45 pm to TeddyPadillac
This is the crazy thing. If we keep Ingram, how would the points be distributed?
Just look at last year's points per game..
Zion- 23
McCollum- 20
Ingram- 21
Murray- 23
Jones- 11
Murphy- 15
That's 113 points per game. That's not even including a couple of bigs or the rest of our bench. I just don't think it's likely those 6 would combine for more than 100-105. I believe that Zion will actually be up to about 25ppg this year. I would think that Jones and Murphy would stay about the same (if not tick up a bit).
So, IMO the other 3 guys numbers are going down. 10-12 points points distributed in between the 3 of them. So down 3-4 points a piece. That's just the math of it, barring any major injuries. Honestly, i believe that the only 20+ppg guy we have will be Zion. Unless we become the Pacers and start scoring over 120ppg..
Just look at last year's points per game..
Zion- 23
McCollum- 20
Ingram- 21
Murray- 23
Jones- 11
Murphy- 15
That's 113 points per game. That's not even including a couple of bigs or the rest of our bench. I just don't think it's likely those 6 would combine for more than 100-105. I believe that Zion will actually be up to about 25ppg this year. I would think that Jones and Murphy would stay about the same (if not tick up a bit).
So, IMO the other 3 guys numbers are going down. 10-12 points points distributed in between the 3 of them. So down 3-4 points a piece. That's just the math of it, barring any major injuries. Honestly, i believe that the only 20+ppg guy we have will be Zion. Unless we become the Pacers and start scoring over 120ppg..
Posted on 8/13/24 at 6:53 pm to shel311
quote:
No, BI isn't good enough to be a #2. You don't have to try to read too deep into, it's pretty obvious and clear as day he's just not THAT good.
Again, he's barely better than CJ.
You really believe that bi is barely better than cj at this stage of their careers?
You might be able to make the argument that cj is much better at fitting a role but as a pure basketball player it's not true.
Cj can't take the ball and score 35 or 40 in a game. Bi has done that. When he is on he's on. And when he is off he's off. That has always been the problem with him. Consistency.
I don't know if he loses confidence or what but he just looks like he gets down and doesn't care.
Posted on 8/13/24 at 7:57 pm to brmark70816
quote:
This is the crazy thing. If we keep Ingram, how would the points be distributed?
I’ve been saying this.
It’s not feasible.
Only twice in history have 5 guys averaged 15+ on the same team.
Paying someone $30M+ to not play to the best of his ability isn’t smart. Role players matter.
Between Zion, BI, Murray and CJ, those are all 20ppg or more guys. And Trey is ready to score close to 20.
It’s really not just one of those 5 that needs to go, it’s maybe 2 of them if one of those 5 don’t want to accept the 6th man role.
Posted on 8/13/24 at 9:40 pm to TeddyPadillac
quote:
I’ve been saying this.
It’s not feasible.
Only twice in history have 5 guys averaged 15+ on the same team.
Paying someone $30M+ to not play to the best of his ability isn’t smart. Role players matter.
Between Zion, BI, Murray and CJ, those are all 20ppg or more guys. And Trey is ready to score close to 20.
It’s really not just one of those 5 that needs to go, it’s maybe 2 of them if one of those 5 don’t want to accept the 6th man role.
I was trying to think of the best comp. I thought the Celtics might be a good group to emulate or use as an example. They have a super strong top 6 and they combined for about 107ppg. They did have 3 guys score 20ppg last season. But two were under 15ppg, with one of those under 10 ppg. Also, their top 6 is way more balanced up and down the line-up. We are going to have bigs stealing minutes from better players, dragging the numbers down further. If we don't move some people, the numbers for some guys are going down..
Posted on 8/14/24 at 9:53 am to Dantheman504
quote:What?
He thinks going from Zion/ BI/ CJ to Zion/ Murray/ BI/ CJ + CJ fit + BI contract timing = BI bad.
Why would you start a statement with "He thinks" then say something I've never said or insinuated Seriously, why would you do that? The only thing that ends with is you saying something false, simply you making shite up which you tend to do a lot.
Like me saying BI is a bad fit, and you saying, "Well that must mean you think Karlo is better value than BI." It's just such a bad look to do that over and over.
Evaluate what I said, don't make shite up that I never said and pass that off as my takes. I don't do that with you, no need for you to constantly keep doing that with me.
quote:You're doing it again. Can you show me where I said BI is a bad player? I'll prove you wrong really quickly. You rant all the time about how much I love CJ, just yesterday you and I went back and forth in a debate where I said BI was still better than CJ, so why are you now insinuating that I said BI is a bad player?
BI as a bad fit doesn't mean BI is a bad player. Y'all must be forgetting how shite our coaching has been aswell.
Again, stop doing that.
quote:I'd also think it would be common sense to stop making shite up but you've now done it in back to back to back statements.
Teams not wanting to trade 3-4 1st for BI is not the same as teams not wanting BI. You think that would be common sense.
quote:It's solely based on production and efficiency last season. There isn't much of an argument that BI was decidedly better than CJ last season, so no clue why you'd argue everything else you said. It's based on data, nothing more. The data shows that. The eye test also showed that last season, but ultimately, the data backs up what the eye test told us as well.
Your perception of CJ vs BI
quote:I never said that, you're doing it AGAIN. In fact, I've said BI is better than CJ.
but I'm not going to act like an aging CJ or unproven Trey are better players than BI
That was one of the more painful posts I've had to reply to in quite a while. 95% of it was just made up arguments, you were arguing with no one basically
Posted on 8/14/24 at 9:55 am to shel311
I want to throw a thought out there…….Nic Claxton signed his extension fairly immediate. It appears he would be eligible to be traded by October 4th, which is before the real season even starts. Does anyone know that not to be accurate and how does everyone feel about his fit?
Posted on 8/14/24 at 9:57 am to TeddyPadillac
quote:BI was asked to take more 3s, over and over and over and over. He opted for less 3s and worse shot selection.
I agree, but it’s silly to do so b/c they aren’t asked to do the same thing.
Even if you factor in the roles they were asked to play, add that context, CJ's shot selection was still MUCH better than BI's.
Again, I don't see how you or anyone would disagree with that. I'm pretty sure there are tweets from the end of last season where BI had bottom 5 or bottom 3 shot selection in the entire NBA, I can try to dig it up. BI's role is not to have the worst shot selection in the league or darn close to it. THat's his choice. He's been asked to take better shots, he chose not to.
CJ was asked to change his shot selection, he did. BI was asked to change his shot selection, he did not.
quote:More off ball, where he's not good at all?
And BI can play a different role now with Murray
quote:Willie has talked for multiple seasons about wanting BI to take better shots. BI's shot selection got worse. That's on BI. He's had opportunities to take higher efficiency shots, he continually passes those opportunities up.
No one asked BI to do what CJ was doing.
Posted on 8/14/24 at 10:05 am to Chalkywhite84
quote:Last season, there was nothing BI did or showed that was MUCH better than CJ. He simply wasn't.
You really believe that bi is barely better than cj at this stage of their careers?
The data tells you that. The eye test tells us that. BI was just a bit better than CJ last season.
quote:In the past 3 seasons, BI has scored over 35 8 times, CJ 6. So...a bit better.
Cj can't take the ball and score 35 or 40 in a game
Last season, BI did it twice, CJ once. So...a bit better like I keep saying. So even the data point you mentioned shows that BI is just slightly better than CJ at it.
This post was edited on 8/14/24 at 10:06 am
Posted on 8/14/24 at 10:09 am to PELsu
quote:Claxton is eligible to be traded before the deadline.
I want to throw a thought out there…….Nic Claxton signed his extension fairly immediate. It appears he would be eligible to be traded by October 4th, which is before the real season even starts. Does anyone know that not to be accurate and how does everyone feel about his fit?
Something centered around CJ for Claxton to make the money work, then whatever else we add does not seem like a bad idea at all.
Posted on 8/14/24 at 10:12 am to TeddyPadillac
quote:
Between Zion, BI, Murray and CJ, those are all 20ppg or more guys. And Trey is ready to score close to 20.
It’s really not just one of those 5 that needs to go, it’s maybe 2 of them if one of those 5 don’t want to accept the 6th man role.
It's very clear and obvious that Zion, DJ, and Trey are long term pieces for this team. The other two, not so much (for different reasons age vs fit).
Posted on 8/14/24 at 10:17 am to Epic Cajun
quote:Correct, and we will still prioritize CJ and BI over Trey next season if we go into the season with all 7 top guys. it's just a bad idea IMO. If you just absolutely could not get rid of BI or even CJ this offseason, that's life. But we need to go forward prioritizing our future core, not the guys who we know will not be with us beyond next season, or even make it through the season before being moved.
It's very clear and obvious that Zion, DJ, and Trey are long term pieces for this team. The other two, not so much (for different reasons age vs fit).
I understand there are team dyamics, relationship dynamics that us armchair GMs don't have to navigate, but starting Trey would be top priority and would happen for me, at any costs. Whoever gets the short end and doesn't like it, they can fall in line or stay home if they are a malcontent causing issues. It is what it is.
I'm much more of a proponent of maximizing winning and out future core than trying to eek out 1-2 more wins(in the short term) so we can showcase a guy and maybe trade him or maybe get just a tiny little bit of extra value in a trade for him. Nope, it's time to go win games, it's been time...we're about 4 years behind on that. It needs to be the only and main goal going forward. If we lose BI for nothing, that's just an L we have to take, but there's no sense in compounding the losses because we put ourselves in this siutaiton by not trading him sooner.
This post was edited on 8/14/24 at 10:30 am
Posted on 8/14/24 at 10:24 am to shel311
quote:
Correct, and we will still prioritize CJ and BI over Trey next season if we go into the season with all 7 top guys. it's just a bad idea IMO. If you just absolutely could not get rid of BI or even CJ this offseason, that's life. But we need to go forward prioritizing our future core, not the guys who we know will not be with us beyond next season, or even make it through the season before being moved.
I understand there are team dyamics, relationship dynamics that us armchair GMs don't have to navigate, but starting Trey would be top priority and would happen for me, at any costs. Whoever gets the short end and doesn't like it, they can fall in line or stay home if they are a malcontent causing issues. It is what it is.
I'm much more of a proponent of maximizing winning and out future core than trying to eek out 1-2 more wins so we can showcase a guy and maybe trade him or maybe get just a tiny little bit of extra value in a trade for him. Nope, it's time to go win games, it's been time...we're about 4 years behind on that. It needs to be the only and main goal going forward. If we lose BI for nothing, that's just an L we have to take, but there's no sense in compounding the losses because we put ourselves in this siutaiton by not trading him sooner.
Agree with all of this. It would be very short term thinking to go into the season prioritizing BI or CJ's "feelings".
Posted on 8/14/24 at 10:27 am to Epic Cajun
quote:And I imagine someone is going to reply and say my take isn't realistic and we can't bench a guy like BI or send him home, etc. And that person is correct, sorta. We can do that, but they are correct in that we won't. I know that.
Agree with all of this. It would be very short term thinking to go into the season prioritizing BI or CJ's "feelings".
All I'm saying is, just recognize that by not doing that because "we can't"(even though we really can) we will be doing a disservice to the team and our core group. It will be detrimental to the team to appease guys who aren't part of the future.
True vision and leadership means making those tough decisions. if it's just about doing the easy thing that everyone says you have to do, then anyone could do that job, why pay Griff millions? Griff is paid that much to make these exact type of tough and potentially short term unpopular decisions.
This post was edited on 8/14/24 at 10:32 am
Page 182 of 185
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News