NBA Thread

[BGleas]

1 hour ago, NotIThatLives said:

With Rozier being a restricted free agent,  does that mean he could only be included in sign and trades?

Not sure exactly, but yes the fact that he's a restricted free agent would definitely complicate any multi-player deal where he's essentially a throw-in. 

[KDB]

4 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

Why do you think Kuzman and Ingram is better than Brown and Tatum because nothing I have seen would put them even close to being the same.

Nothing you have seen would put them even close to being the same? Going off numbers alone, here they are from this past season for each individual.

Ingram (33.8 mpg) - 18.3 ppg, 5.1 rpg, 3.0 apg - 49.7 FG% 33.0 3PT% --- Tatum (31.1 mpg) - 15.7 ppg, 6.0 rpg, 2.1 apg - 45.0 FG% 37.3 3PT%

Kuz (33.1 mpg) - 18.7 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 2.5 apg - 45.6 FG% 30.3 3PT% --- Brown (25.9 mpg) - 13.0 ppg, 4.2 rpg, 1.4 apg - 46.5 FG% 34.4 3PT%

Ingram and Kuzma are better 3pt shooters than the percentages indicate, not the best of years for those two from deep.

I do agree with Gleas that the Celtics guys are more proven as team guys that can help you win. They displayed that in the 2017-18 playoffs.

If I were a Celtics fan, there is a high chance that I would feel differently about this. That's just how it works usually.

Either way, both teams are lucky to have these guys - all of them being very promising young talent.

[IU Scott]

4 minutes ago, KDB said:

Nothing you have seen would put them even close to being the same? Going off numbers alone, here they are from this past season for each individual.

Ingram (33.8 mpg) - 18.3 ppg, 5.1 rpg, 3.0 apg - 49.7 FG% 33.0 3PT% --- Tatum (31.1 mpg) - 15.7 ppg, 6.0 rpg, 2.1 apg - 45.0 FG% 37.3 3PT%

Kuz (33.1 mpg) - 18.7 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 2.5 apg - 45.6 FG% 30.3 3PT% --- Brown (25.9 mpg) - 13.0 ppg, 4.2 rpg, 1.4 apg - 46.5 FG% 34.4 3PT%

Ingram and Kuzma are better 3pt shooters than the percentages indicate, not the best of years for those two from deep.

I do agree with Gleas that the Celtics guys are more proven as team guys that can help you win. They displayed that in the 2017-18 playoffs.

If I were a Celtics fan, there is a high chance that I would feel differently about this. That's just how it works usually.

Either way, both teams are lucky to have these guys - all of them being very promising young talent.

I am not stat guy and I go by what I have seen of those players and to me Tatum and Brown are far better players.  Remember in the NBA someone has to score points even on a bad team and beside Labron they had nothing else so they was able to score but it did not help them win games.  I am just going by if I were in charge of New Orleans I would want the players from Boston over the LA guys.

[Hoosierhoopster]

43 minutes ago, KDB said:

Nothing you have seen would put them even close to being the same? Going off numbers alone, here they are from this past season for each individual.

Ingram (33.8 mpg) - 18.3 ppg, 5.1 rpg, 3.0 apg - 49.7 FG% 33.0 3PT% --- Tatum (31.1 mpg) - 15.7 ppg, 6.0 rpg, 2.1 apg - 45.0 FG% 37.3 3PT%

Kuz (33.1 mpg) - 18.7 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 2.5 apg - 45.6 FG% 30.3 3PT% --- Brown (25.9 mpg) - 13.0 ppg, 4.2 rpg, 1.4 apg - 46.5 FG% 34.4 3PT%

Ingram and Kuzma are better 3pt shooters than the percentages indicate, not the best of years for those two from deep.

I do agree with Gleas that the Celtics guys are more proven as team guys that can help you win. They displayed that in the 2017-18 playoffs.

If I were a Celtics fan, there is a high chance that I would feel differently about this. That's just how it works usually.

Either way, both teams are lucky to have these guys - all of them being very promising young talent.

KDB, just looking at stats for Lakers players (a bad team this year) and comparing them only to Tatum and Brown's this season (playing with Kyrie) is at best an indirect comparison. This kind of purely stat-driven, limited view of player comparison just doesn't paint an accurate picture (and I have no 'dog' in the discussion between Lakers and Celtics). There are definitely reasons to see a lot of upside with Ingram., Kuz is a player for sure, just saying this kind of stat comparison just doesn't paint a fair comparison and is certainly not what team GMs would do.

On pure stats, Tatum has a PER of 15.2 and WS of 12.0 in his 2-year "career". Last season he shot 43.4% from deep, and 49.2% from 2, and was a flat out stud. His numbers went down this season, with Kyrie, but he still was a much better shooter than Ingram, who btw has a career PER of 11.7 and WS of a whopping 4.5. Ingram shot 33% from deep both seasons. He's a career 66% FT shooter -- he can't shoot, at least yet. Tatum shoots 84% from the stripe. He also averages better boards. He's a more efficient player and a better scorer. Teams would absolutely take him first, and they should. 

Brown v Kuz is much closer, Kuz is a big time player. Brown's the better shooter from deep, but Kuz has a career PER of 14.1, better than Brown's 12.8. Brown has a WS of 9 to Kuz's 7. Kuz is the better FT shooter at 73%, Brown's just not good at 66%. Their eFG% is essentially identical, 52%. I'd take Kuz over Brown, Kuz is the Lakers best player (excluding LeBron of course)

 

[KDB]

58 minutes ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

KDB, just looking at stats for Lakers players (a bad team this year) and comparing them only to Tatum and Brown's this season (playing with Kyrie) is at best an indirect comparison. This kind of purely stat-driven, limited view of player comparison just doesn't paint an accurate picture (and I have no 'dog' in the discussion between Lakers and Celtics). There are definitely reasons to see a lot of upside with Ingram., Kuz is a player for sure, just saying this kind of stat comparison just doesn't paint a fair comparison and is certainly not what team GMs would do.

On pure stats, Tatum has a PER of 15.2 and WS of 12.0 in his 2-year "career". Last season he shot 43.4% from deep, and 49.2% from 2, and was a flat out stud. His numbers went down this season, with Kyrie, but he still was a much better shooter than Ingram, who btw has a career PER of 11.7 and WS of a whopping 4.5. Ingram shot 33% from deep both seasons. He's a career 66% FT shooter -- he can't shoot, at least yet. Tatum shoots 84% from the stripe. He also averages better boards. He's a more efficient player and a better scorer. Teams would absolutely take him first, and they should. 

Brown v Kuz is much closer, Kuz is a big time player. Brown's the better shooter from deep, but Kuz has a career PER of 14.1, better than Brown's 12.8. Brown has a WS of 9 to Kuz's 7. Kuz is the better FT shooter at 73%, Brown's just not good at 66%. Their eFG% is essentially identical, 52%. I'd take Kuz over Brown, Kuz is the Lakers best player.

 

Definitely not what team GMs would do. I was just putting the numbers there.

Ingram shot 39% from 3 last year on more attempts than this year. He can shoot. Not great this year for sure. 

Tatum and Ingram are without a doubt both special talents. The same goes for Brown and Kuz.

[BADGERVOL]

Ummm...not to change topics, but ah...Bucks played pretty average and Raptors played super well for three quarters and Bucks still won. So I still like my Bucks chances...

🤷🏻‍♂️😎

[Hoosierhoopster]

27 minutes ago, BADGERVOL said:

Ummm...not to change topics, but ah...Bucks played pretty average and Raptors played super well for three quarters and Bucks still won. So I still like my Bucks chances...

🤷🏻‍♂️😎

Ok now that’s a fan/green glasses view for sure. Bucks did not play average, it was a very good game and they fought back when the Raps tool that 10- point lead. Raps then missed a bunch of shots and didn’t score for 3 straight minutes at the end of the game. Game 2 will be a war 

[Hoosierhoopster]

1 hour ago, KDB said:

Definitely not what team GMs would do. I was just putting the numbers there.

Ingram shot 39% from 3 last year on more attempts than this year. He can shoot. Not great this year for sure. 

Tatum and Ingram are without a doubt both special talents. The same goes for Brown and Kuz.

I'm with you that I think Ingram is a potentially special young talent (still) -- he has underwhelmed and his 'stock' has dropped, but, imo, he definitely has the potential.

He shot 29% from deep in 16-17 (2.4 attempts per game), then 39% in 17-18 (less, 1.8 attempts per game), then 33% in 18-19, also on 1.8 attempts. I don't think he's shown he can shoot, and his FT shooting is awful, that's generally reflective of shooting. Again though, I think he's a talent for sure.

[BADGERVOL]

1 hour ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

Ok now that’s a fan/green glasses view for sure. Bucks did not play average, it was a very good game and they fought back when the Raps tool that 10- point lead. Raps then missed a bunch of shots and didn’t score for 3 straight minutes at the end of the game. Game 2 will be a war 

Actually I didn’t get to see the first half. It was Kellerman and Smith that said they didn’t play that well until the fourth quarter.  Didn’t shoot well from outside, Middleton was held to half his average and Bleadsoe absolutely did NOT play well. Thank goodness Lopez got back to form. But I’d hardly say if two of your top three players didn’t produce even close to their averages  that you couldn’t say the Bucks played great. On the flip side Lowery gave more than what you can expect from him for probably the rest of the series and the Raptors controlled the tempo and played great for three quarters. I suppose you ca. Soon it both ways. Idk.

[BGleas]

11 minutes ago, BADGERVOL said:

Actually I didn’t get to see the first half. It was Kellerman and Smith that said they didn’t play that well until the fourth quarter.  Didn’t shoot well from outside, Middleton was held to half his average and Bleadsoe absolutely did NOT play well. Thank goodness Lopez got back to form. But I’d hardly say if two of your top three players didn’t produce even close to their averages  that you couldn’t say the Bucks played great. On the flip side Lowery gave more than what you can expect from him for probably the rest of the series and the Raptors controlled the tempo and played great for three quarters. I suppose you ca. Soon it both ways. Idk.

I think that does cut both ways. You could also say that Lopez is not going for 29 points again, that was definitely an outlier, and that Toronto controlled a game for 3 quarters where 4 of their starters (Leonard, Siakam, Green and Gasol) combined to shoot 19-for-61. How deep of a hole is Milwaukee in if those guys had hit shots? Of course Milwaukee's length defensively caused some of that, but you can also say that Leonard defending Middleton caused some of his struggles. 

Bottom line is that it was a good win for Milwaukee, given that Toronto led most of the way. You kind of feel like that was the road game for Toronto to get and they missed the opportunity. It will be interesting to see who shoots better in Game 2 from the group of guys from both teams that struggled.  

Game 2 will be a really interesting game for sure. 

[Hoosierhoopster]

15 minutes ago, BADGERVOL said:

Actually I didn’t get to see the first half. It was Kellerman and Smith that said they didn’t play that well until the fourth quarter.  Didn’t shoot well from outside, Middleton was held to half his average and Bleadsoe absolutely did NOT play well. Thank goodness Lopez got back to form. But I’d hardly say if two of your top three players didn’t produce even close to their averages  that you couldn’t say the Bucks played great. On the flip side Lowery gave more than what you can expect from him for probably the rest of the series and the Raptors controlled the tempo and played great for three quarters. I suppose you ca. Soon it both ways. Idk.

I watched the whole game. The reason guys didn't shoot great is because the Raptors defended really well, and did a good job on Giannis, who kept trying to bull his way to the rim -- frankly, he gets out of control and often gets the benefit of home calls. You will see different foul calls in Toronto, if he does that stuff, and I think he needs to continue to develop his game attacking the rim, notwithstanding how good he already is, he does get out of control. The Bucks were pushed back on their heels -- the Raptors are good, and Lowry was playing outstanding, at one point he was 6-7 from deep. The Raps missed everything as the 4th quarter wore on. Again, Game 2 will be a war

[BGleas]

4 minutes ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

I watched the whole game. The reason guys didn't shoot great is because the Raptors defended really well, and did a good job on Giannis, who kept trying to bull his way to the rim -- frankly, he gets out of control and often gets the benefit of home calls. You will see different foul calls in Toronto, if he does that stuff, and I think he needs to continue to develop his game attacking the rim, notwithstanding how good he already is, he does get out of control. The Bucks were pushed back on their heels -- the Raptors are good, and Lowry was playing outstanding, at one point he was 6-7 from deep. The Raps missed everything as the 4th quarter wore on. Again, Game 2 will be a war

Really good post. It's very similar to Game 1 against Boston. I realize Toronto is playing at a much higher level than Boston, but in Game 1 the refs let Boston play physical with Giannis and then combine that with Milwaukee's "other's" not hitting shots, and it allowed the Celtics to really collapse on Giannis. The rest of the series Giannis got way more calls which changed how Boston could defend him, allowed the other guys to get more open looks from 3, and then of course the other guys for Milwaukee started hitting more. 

Until he develops a consistent outside game, so much of Giannis' effectiveness and ability to carry Milwaukee will come down to how the refs are calling the game and how aggressive he's being at attacking and forcing the refs hand. 

This is not me blaming the refs for the Celtics losing. The Celtics were thoroughly outplayed and a mess overall. Just saying that how physical Giannis is able to be defended goes a long way to how teams can defend Milwaukee. 

[BADGERVOL]

Wow the way things are shaping up I’m just hopeful the Bucks can keep it competitive. And I’m guessing ALL of the sports pundits isn’t be wearing the same green glasses as me! Lol.

look obviously at this point there’s four really good teams left. I fully expect this series to be a battle. I have yet to hear of a sportswriter picking the Raptors (correct me if I’m wrong), and OBVIOUSLY that means nothing. 

BG I don’t think you’re implying this, but just checking, are you saying if the Refs hadn’t called the series different the Celtics would’ve won? 

And HoosierHoopster are you implying Giannis isn’t the best inside the paint in the NBA right now? And if so who is?

i think it might be a bit unfair to assume I’ve got green glasses on and you’re completely objective. 🧐

Edited May 16, 2019 by BADGERVOL

[BGleas]

2 hours ago, BADGERVOL said:

Wow the way things are shaping up I’m just hopeful the Bucks can keep it competitive. And I’m guessing ALL of the sports pundits isn’t be wearing the same green glasses as me! Lol.

look obviously at this point there’s four really good teams left. I fully expect this series to be a battle. I have yet to hear of a sportswriter picking the Raptors (correct me if I’m wrong), and OBVIOUSLY that means nothing. 

BG I don’t think you’re implying this, but just checking, are you saying if the Refs hadn’t called the series different the Celtics would’ve won? 

And HoosierHoopster are you implying Giannis isn’t the best inside the paint in the NBA right now? And if so who is?

i think it might be a bit unfair to assume I’ve got green glasses on and you’re completely objective. 🧐

I think the Bucks will win the series, just saying Game 1 wasn’t a case of Toronto playing great and Milwaukee playing bad but still winning. I also think that was a bad loss for Toronto as that was a winnable road game. Very good win for Milwaukee to claw back after being down. Those are the type of wins that get you to the Finals. 

But, Toronto also had some key guys that didn’t shoot/play well, same as Milwaukee did. 

On the Celtics/ref thing, I said in my post that the Celtics got outplayed and were clearly a mess. But, the reason they were able to win game one was mainly because of three things, 1) The refs let the Celtics be physical with Giannis, 2) The Celtics moved the ball and shot well from the perimeter and 3) Milwaukee’s others didn’t shoot well. 

The Bucks were clearly the better team, no question. The Bucks would have won the series regardless, but I do think it’s probably not 4-1 if the Celtics could play as pysical with Giannis the rest of the series as they did in Game 1. Giannis is just such a physical and athletic specimen and attacks so aggressively, similar combination to LeBron, that the tone of a lot of games are going to be set by how physical the refs allow or don’t allow the defense to be. 

 

[Hoosierhoopster]

13 hours ago, BADGERVOL said:

Wow the way things are shaping up I’m just hopeful the Bucks can keep it competitive. And I’m guessing ALL of the sports pundits isn’t be wearing the same green glasses as me! Lol.

look obviously at this point there’s four really good teams left. I fully expect this series to be a battle. I have yet to hear of a sportswriter picking the Raptors (correct me if I’m wrong), and OBVIOUSLY that means nothing. 

BG I don’t think you’re implying this, but just checking, are you saying if the Refs hadn’t called the series different the Celtics would’ve won? 

And HoosierHoopster are you implying Giannis isn’t the best inside the paint in the NBA right now? And if so who is?

i think it might be a bit unfair to assume I’ve got green glasses on and you’re completely objective. 🧐

You’re overreacting. Giannis is a top 5 player for sure. He’s not better than LeBron  inside the paint or anywhere else. He may well end up better, and he’s clearly a ridiculously athletic specimen (coining Gleas), but he gets out of control against a good D in the paint — that’s what happened to him in game 1. He also obviously needs to develop a jumpier. Doesn’t change the fact that the Bucks still won and played very well, doesn’t change that he’s still an incredible player, why the angst? Come on now, Bucks May win the series, and it may be because they battled back for game 1, as a Bucks fan, i’d Think you’d be ecstatic 

[BGleas]

Still a long way to go, but not good for the Lakers...

https://nba.nbcsports.com/2019/05/17/report-pelicans-owner-gayle-benson-would-trade-anthony-davis-to-lakers-only-over-my-dead-body/

[NotIThatLives]

Good for them.  

[BGleas]

1 minute ago, NotIThatLives said:

Good for them.  

As a Celtics fan, I love it! Though I wouldn't want my team to operate that way. I'd want my team to get the absolute best return possible (in general, not saying the Lakers have the best deal) regardless of where you send a player. Not apples to apples because Davis is better than Kyrie, but if the Celtics were trading Kyrie I'd want them to trade him to whichever team offered the best deal, regardless of what conference or division. 

[NotIThatLives]

24 minutes ago, BGleas said:

As a Celtics fan, I love it! Though I wouldn't want my team to operate that way. I'd want my team to get the absolute best return possible (in general, not saying the Lakers have the best deal) regardless of where you send a player. Not apples to apples because Davis is better than Kyrie, but if the Celtics were trading Kyrie I'd want them to trade him to whichever team offered the best deal, regardless of what conference or division. 

I think the gm will back off of this because it devalues the trade potential, however, there are really only a handful of legit contenders.  

[NotIThatLives]

Should have dumped Tyreke Evans for a 2nd round draft pick.  

Suspended for 2 years, dope.  

[IU Scott]

1 hour ago, NotIThatLives said:

Should have dumped Tyreke Evans for a 2nd round draft pick.  

Suspended for 2 years, dope.  

He was a free agent so it is no big deal

[FKIM01]

1 hour ago, NotIThatLives said:

Should have dumped Tyreke Evans for a 2nd round draft pick.  

Suspended for 2 years, dope.  

What an idiot.  He'll likely never see an NBA court again.

[NotIThatLives]

36 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

He was a free agent so it is no big deal

Hindsight and foresight said get somethong for nothing and the pacers got nothing.  I'm respectfully no longer going to beat this poor dead horse.  This season, how Pritchard held the deck after Vic went down, may later cost him.  As the local media has been saying,  it's put up or shut up this off season.  

[BADGERVOL]

7 hours ago, BGleas said:

As a Celtics fan, I love it! Though I wouldn't want my team to operate that way. I'd want my team to get the absolute best return possible (in general, not saying the Lakers have the best deal) regardless of where you send a player. Not apples to apples because Davis is better than Kyrie, but if the Celtics were trading Kyrie I'd want them to trade him to whichever team offered the best deal, regardless of what conference or division. 

Absolutely agree.

[NotIThatLives]

Curious if Mike Conley to pacers is realistic.  Just read 4 different articles.  Conley is going to be tough to trade.  

This guy breaks it down to what teams have to offer that would actually work. 

 https://www.theringer.com/nba/2019/5/17/18629224/mike-conley-trade-market-memphis-grizzlies-ja-morant-nba-draft

Another writer mentions Miami as a real player if Goran Dragic doesnt pick up his player option.  

Edited May 18, 2019 by NotIThatLives