Ron Holland - G League Ignite - 2024 NBA Draft

[JMAC3]

I've watched a lot of Holland and he really struggles to get up without a ton of runway and his horrible shooting percentages agree with that.

Those two plays are also really unimpressive and come off of a huge runway, lol.

Scoot Henderson has no functional explosion and look at his highlights.

Watch on YouTube

Massively more impressive.

So you are sticking to Holland is a bad athlete? Just want to know if that is your final stance on him?

I'm sticking to "Ron Holland is extremely strong and has good lateral quickness, but has awful explosion"

The thing that makes this all so funny is you literally have him #2 on your big board

who by your standards has no explosion, broken jump shot, can't dribble, but hey he is strong lol

Saying he needs a runway as an NBA wing doesn't really say much. 90% of LeBrons career dunks he has a so called runway lol

[HadAnEffectHere]

I hate literally every player in this draft to be clear.

This is the worst class I've ever seen.

[JMAC3]

I really don't know how someone has Matas over Holland at this point.
https://www.tankathon.com/players/compare?players=matas-buzelis--ron-holland

Holland is younger, averaged 6 more ppg, more assists, more steals, more fta, basically the same exact efficiency, better athlete.

[Colbinii]

I really don't know how someone has Matas over Holland at this point.
https://www.tankathon.com/players/compare?players=matas-buzelis--ron-holland

Holland is younger, averaged 6 more ppg, more assists, more steals, more fta, basically the same exact efficiency, better athlete.

Size and Projection are the two main reasons people have Matas over Holland.

Holland has some clear question marks about what his role is in the NBA and if his scoring and rim pressure will transfer if he doesn't develop a better handle.

[JMAC3]

I really don't know how someone has Matas over Holland at this point.
https://www.tankathon.com/players/compare?players=matas-buzelis--ron-holland

Holland is younger, averaged 6 more ppg, more assists, more steals, more fta, basically the same exact efficiency, better athlete.

Size and Projection are the two main reasons people have Matas over Holland.

Holland has some clear question marks about what his role is in the NBA and if his scoring and rim pressure will transfer if he doesn't develop a better handle.

I don't really see the projection with Matas though, his outside shooting numbers are basically the same as Holland. Holland is younger and he was the better player as of today.

[Colbinii]

I really don't know how someone has Matas over Holland at this point.
https://www.tankathon.com/players/compare?players=matas-buzelis--ron-holland

Holland is younger, averaged 6 more ppg, more assists, more steals, more fta, basically the same exact efficiency, better athlete.

Size and Projection are the two main reasons people have Matas over Holland.

Holland has some clear question marks about what his role is in the NBA and if his scoring and rim pressure will transfer if he doesn't develop a better handle.

I don't really see the projection with Matas though, his outside shooting numbers are basically the same as Holland. Holland is younger and he was the better player as of today.

He is bigger, he players better off-ball, his shot blocking and positioning on defense is due to feel and his impact on that end seems more effortless compared to the sheer motor of Holland.

The argument for Matas is very clear if you understand both prospects strengths and weaknesses.

I personally prefer Holland, but I am not dumbfounded as to why people like Matas better

[JMAC3]

Size and Projection are the two main reasons people have Matas over Holland.

Holland has some clear question marks about what his role is in the NBA and if his scoring and rim pressure will transfer if he doesn't develop a better handle.

I don't really see the projection with Matas though, his outside shooting numbers are basically the same as Holland. Holland is younger and he was the better player as of today.

He is bigger, he players better off-ball, his shot blocking and positioning on defense is due to feel and his impact on that end seems more effortless compared to the sheer motor of Holland.

The argument for Matas is very clear if you understand both prospects strengths and weaknesses.

I personally prefer Holland, but I am not dumbfounded as to why people like Matas better

I am not going to say I am an expert on the two, but the fact the Ignite gave Holland the ball more, more shots, more mins, consistently was the more productive player while being 8 months younger seems like a pretty clear nod to Holland.

This isn't some Uconn situation where 1 guy is a senior and the other is freshman. Would be a weird move to me to just think Matas is the better player but feature Holland. Maybe they are playing mind tricks.

[JMAC3]

I think Matas could be the better guy longterm, not ruling that out.... but I guess my main thing is that in Basketball there is a natural selection that takes place from highschool to college to NBA where the vast vast vast majority of the time the BEST PLAYER is going to be the leading guy in usage, shot attempts and scoring.

Probably fits the bill for like 29/30 NBA teams, Just a guess probably 330/362 college teams and probably 99.9% of high school teams.

Again, I am saying the BEST PLAYER, not the best prospect.

So when Holland and Matas step on the floor together and he scores more, shoots more and has a higher usage I feel like there is a pretty high chance that Holland is the BEST PLAYER right now. Again not saying prospect necessarily.

So if we assume that is probably the case. Then we add in the fact that Holland is younger, more athletic I feel like that is enough to give him the edge moving forward.

Again not saying Matas can't become better, but as of right now 3/20/2024 Holland is better straight up.

[Colbinii]

I think Matas could be the better guy longterm, not ruling that out.... but I guess my main thing is that in Basketball there is a natural selection that takes place from highschool to college to NBA where the vast vast vast majority of the time the BEST PLAYER is going to be the leading guy in usage, shot attempts and scoring.

You are implying the best players are the ones who score the most. That isn't always the case.

Draymond Green is significantly better than Klay Thompson, especially during their title stretch.
Shawn Marion is significantly better than Amar'e Stoudemire.
Shane Battier is significantly better than Luther Head and Rafer Alston.

Probably fits the bill for like 29/30 NBA teams, Just a guess probably 330/362 college teams and probably 99.9% of high school teams.

I strongly disagree. I think the best shot creator typically takes the most shots and scores the most points, but even that isn't accurate 99.9% of the time.

Think about this:

Player A: 8/10 On-Ball, 7/10 Off-Ball
Player B: 6/10 On-Ball, 2/10 Off-Ball

How would you want to distribute touches? Clearly you don't want Player A to monopolize possessions because Player B offers little value without the ball. In contrast, Player A is going to be extremely useful as a secondary creator and connector so putting him in that role makes sense.

An example of this is Manu Ginobili and Tony Parker. Nobody in their right mind would argue Tony Parker was better than Manu Ginobili. Manu was one of the craftiest on-ball players we have ever seen, he was a tough shot maker but was best served as a connector/secondary playmaker even though on-ball was much more dynamic and lethal than Tony Parker.

I understand the idea is to simplify things when talking about assessing players, and it makes sense. Occam's Razor is a real thing, but context is also important.

[JMAC3]

I think Matas could be the better guy longterm, not ruling that out.... but I guess my main thing is that in Basketball there is a natural selection that takes place from highschool to college to NBA where the vast vast vast majority of the time the BEST PLAYER is going to be the leading guy in usage, shot attempts and scoring.

You are implying the best players are the ones who score the most. That isn't always the case.

Draymond Green is significantly better than Klay Thompson, especially during their title stretch.
Shawn Marion is significantly better than Amar'e Stoudemire.
Shane Battier is significantly better than Luther Head and Rafer Alston.

Probably fits the bill for like 29/30 NBA teams, Just a guess probably 330/362 college teams and probably 99.9% of high school teams.

I strongly disagree. I think the best shot creator typically takes the most shots and scores the most points, but even that isn't accurate 99.9% of the time.

Think about this:

Player A: 8/10 On-Ball, 7/10 Off-Ball
Player B: 6/10 On-Ball, 2/10 Off-Ball

How would you want to distribute touches? Clearly you don't want Player A to monopolize possessions because Player B offers little value without the ball. In contrast, Player A is going to be extremely useful as a secondary creator and connector so putting him in that role makes sense.

An example of this is Manu Ginobili and Tony Parker. Nobody in their right mind would argue Tony Parker was better than Manu Ginobili. Manu was one of the craftiest on-ball players we have ever seen, he was a tough shot maker but was best served as a connector/secondary playmaker even though on-ball was much more dynamic and lethal than Tony Parker.

I understand the idea is to simplify things when talking about assessing players, and it makes sense. Occam's Razor is a real thing, but context is also important.

I said the best player... not the better player.

So yes, Steph Curry is the best player on the Warriors and he shoots the most, has the highest usage and the most points.

And again this is 90% rule, so yes feel free to look through 100 teams at random. I expect this to ring true for 90%.

If you want to find the 10% of times it isn't and shove it in my face you can, but that's not really the point I am making.

[JMAC3]

Probably fits the bill for like 29/30 NBA teams, Just a guess probably 330/362 college teams and probably 99.9% of high school teams.

I strongly disagree. I think the best shot creator typically takes the most shots and scores the most points, but even that isn't accurate 99.9% of the time.

There are 30 teams, please list out the many many examples to me the 99,9% of the time I am wrong.

List teams who best player isn't leading scorer, leading usage and leading shot taker.

I will guess you will struggle and the few you do find will be like the Rockets where Green shoots 0.2 more times than Sengun, has 0.1 more usage and isn't even the leading scorer.

[JMAC3]

It is isn't even relatively close for Holland and Matas either.
We are talking 6 scoring pts, 7 usage points, 4 more shot attempts.

If Matas was the better player then clearly the coach just hated him and rather give the ball to someone worse than him.

[Colbinii]

It is isn't even relatively close for Holland and Matas either.
We are talking 6 scoring pts, 7 usage points, 4 more shot attempts.

If Matas was the better player then clearly the coach just hated him and rather give the ball to someone worse than him.

The disconnect here is if you are projecting both players as #1 options. I don't see Holland as a #1 or #2 at the NBA level. So, when looking at these players, I try to see how both would project in their optimized role. I thing when you do this, it is easy to see why some prefer Matas.

[HadAnEffectHere]

It is isn't even relatively close for Holland and Matas either.
We are talking 6 scoring pts, 7 usage points, 4 more shot attempts.

If Matas was the better player then clearly the coach just hated him and rather give the ball to someone worse than him.

The disconnect here is if you are projecting both players as #1 options. I don't see Holland as a #1 or #2 at the NBA level. So, when looking at these players, I try to see how both would project in their optimized role. I thing when you do this, it is easy to see why some prefer Matas.

?

Holland fits much more cleanly as a complementary player. Matas is so slow and weak that he'll be burnt toast on defense for every team he plays with. Tatum and Giannis will humiliate him night after night. Matas does nothing at an NBA level other than being OK at dribbling. Both guys are hideous shooters who need to become great shooters, but it's not clear even then that Matas can stay on the court in the NBA.

[Colbinii]

It is isn't even relatively close for Holland and Matas either.
We are talking 6 scoring pts, 7 usage points, 4 more shot attempts.

If Matas was the better player then clearly the coach just hated him and rather give the ball to someone worse than him.

The disconnect here is if you are projecting both players as #1 options. I don't see Holland as a #1 or #2 at the NBA level. So, when looking at these players, I try to see how both would project in their optimized role. I thing when you do this, it is easy to see why some prefer Matas.

?

Holland fits much more cleanly as a complementary player. Matas is so slow and weak that he'll be burnt toast on defense for every team he plays with. Tatum and Giannis will humiliate him night after night. Matas does nothing at an NBA level other than being OK at dribbling. Both guys are hideous shooters who need to become great shooters, but it's not clear even then that Matas can stay on the court in the NBA.

Tatum and Giannis humiliate 99% of NBA players

[JMAC3]

It is isn't even relatively close for Holland and Matas either.
We are talking 6 scoring pts, 7 usage points, 4 more shot attempts.

If Matas was the better player then clearly the coach just hated him and rather give the ball to someone worse than him.

The disconnect here is if you are projecting both players as #1 options. I don't see Holland as a #1 or #2 at the NBA level. So, when looking at these players, I try to see how both would project in their optimized role. I thing when you do this, it is easy to see why some prefer Matas.

I am saying which player is better right now. Do you think Matas is a better basketball player than Holland?

[Colbinii]

It is isn't even relatively close for Holland and Matas either.
We are talking 6 scoring pts, 7 usage points, 4 more shot attempts.

If Matas was the better player then clearly the coach just hated him and rather give the ball to someone worse than him.

The disconnect here is if you are projecting both players as #1 options. I don't see Holland as a #1 or #2 at the NBA level. So, when looking at these players, I try to see how both would project in their optimized role. I thing when you do this, it is easy to see why some prefer Matas.

I am saying which player is better right now. Do you think Matas is a better basketball player than Holland?

No, I already said that. I said I had Holland as a higher rated prospect

I don't think in absolutes. My opinion isn't absolutely right. One prospect isn't absolutely better than another.

I may think one is better than another, but I take pride in being open minded while trying to understand and accept different opinions. It has helped me a lot in life to be this way--whether it is growing my career, developing and being involved in long-term relationships (Friends, Significant other, ect) and in better understanding myself.

[JMAC3]

The disconnect here is if you are projecting both players as #1 options. I don't see Holland as a #1 or #2 at the NBA level. So, when looking at these players, I try to see how both would project in their optimized role. I thing when you do this, it is easy to see why some prefer Matas.

I am saying which player is better right now. Do you think Matas is a better basketball player than Holland?

No, I already said that. I said I had Holland as a higher rated prospect

That is my point. Yet the popular opinion right now is that Matas is higher on majority of draft boards.

[JMAC3]

Yes or No? Holland statistically was better this year than Scoot was in the Gleague?

https://www.tankathon.com/players/compare?players=ron-holland--scoot-henderson

[JMAC3]

Yes or No? Holland statistically was better this year than Scoot was in the Gleague?

https://www.tankathon.com/players/compare?players=ron-holland--scoot-henderson

I just don't really understand how 1 guy is older, playing his 2nd year in the league and less productive was a #1 pick type of talent most years. While the other guy is bigger, younger, 1st year in league and more productive is not even a lock to be a top 10 pick in this draft.

Are we just that done with the Gleague after how much Scoot has disappointed?