People were interested in these podcasts
PG - The bum slayers
Moderators: HomoSapien, AshyLarrysDiaper, coldfish, Payt10, Ice Man, dougthonus, Michael Jackson, Tommy Udo 6 , kulaz3000, fleet, DASMACKDOWN, GimmeDat, RedBulls23
Re: PG - The bum slayers
- kulaz3000
- Forum Mod - Bulls
- Posts: 42,596
- And1: 24,802
- Joined: Oct 25, 2006
Re: PG - The bum slayers
Let's not confuse being a talented player as having basketball IQ. LaVine is surpremely talented, and he consistently makes poor basketball decisions - we have all witnessed this, so it really shouldn't come as a shock that people question his basketball IQ.
There have been plenty of basketball players who were extremely talented, and at times even produced at a high level but weren't the most intelligent basketball players. It's really not a knock, because you can still be an All-Star level player, without being a high basketball IQ player. On the flip side, you can be a high basketball IQ player, but simply don't have the basketball talents to produce.
Players like Iverson, Howard, Melo, Westbrook, and Griffin as an example aren't players who you would think of basketball intelligence when you think of them, but they were all high performing All-Stars, and even MVP calibre players.
There have been plenty of basketball players who were extremely talented, and at times even produced at a high level but weren't the most intelligent basketball players. It's really not a knock, because you can still be an All-Star level player, without being a high basketball IQ player. On the flip side, you can be a high basketball IQ player, but simply don't have the basketball talents to produce.
Players like Iverson, Howard, Melo, Westbrook, and Griffin as an example aren't players who you would think of basketball intelligence when you think of them, but they were all high performing All-Stars, and even MVP calibre players.
Why so serious?
Re: PG - The bum slayers
- Leslie Forman
- RealGM
- Posts: 10,119
- And1: 6,303
- Joined: Apr 21, 2006
- Location: 1700 Center Dr, Ames, IA 50011
-
Re: PG - The bum slayers

Literally his first game ever, and he produces a better pass than I've seen anybody on this entire team ever make. THAT is "basketball IQ."
Re: PG - The bum slayers
- Jcool0
- RealGM
- Posts: 15,165
- And1: 9,228
- Joined: Jul 12, 2014
- Location: Illinois
-
Re: PG - The bum slayers
kulaz3000 wrote:Let's not confuse being a talented player as having basketball IQ. LaVine is surpremely talented, and he consistently makes poor basketball decisions - we have all witnessed this, so it really shouldn't come as a shock that people question his basketball IQ.
There have been plenty of basketball players who were extremely talented, and at times even produced at a high level but weren't the most intelligent basketball players. It's really not a knock, because you can still be an All-Star level player, without being a high basketball IQ player. On the flip side, you can be a high basketball IQ player, but simply don't have the basketball talents to produce.
Players like Iverson, Howard, Melo, Westbrook, and Griffin as an example aren't players who you would think of basketball intelligence when you think of them, but they were all high performing All-Stars, and even MVP calibre players.
1. People are trying to make something that you cant quantify quantifiable with no data to back it up. so its essentially just an opinion.
2. You just named a bunch of random players and gave nothing backing up anything you said. So again its just an opinion. Yet its being treating like its a backable fact.
Re: PG - The bum slayers
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 13,829
- And1: 6,507
- Joined: Nov 02, 2017
-
Re: PG - The bum slayers
Leslie Forman wrote:
Literally his first game ever, and he produces a better pass than I've seen anybody on this entire team ever make. THAT is "basketball IQ."
Oh, BS. I've seen several of our guys throw lobs up for Lavine to dunk that were just as good if not better.
Re: PG - The bum slayers
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 13,829
- And1: 6,507
- Joined: Nov 02, 2017
-
Re: PG - The bum slayers
Dresden wrote:Leslie Forman wrote:
Literally his first game ever, and he produces a better pass than I've seen anybody on this entire team ever make. THAT is "basketball IQ."
Oh, BS. I've seen several of our guys throw lobs up for Lavine to dunk that were just as good if not better.
Not to mention he also had 5 turnovers last night. Throw enough risky passes and once in awhile you'll connect on one of them and it will make you look like Bob Cousy.
Re: PG - The bum slayers
- kulaz3000
- Forum Mod - Bulls
- Posts: 42,596
- And1: 24,802
- Joined: Oct 25, 2006
Re: PG - The bum slayers
Jcool0 wrote:kulaz3000 wrote:Let's not confuse being a talented player as having basketball IQ. LaVine is surpremely talented, and he consistently makes poor basketball decisions - we have all witnessed this, so it really shouldn't come as a shock that people question his basketball IQ.
There have been plenty of basketball players who were extremely talented, and at times even produced at a high level but weren't the most intelligent basketball players. It's really not a knock, because you can still be an All-Star level player, without being a high basketball IQ player. On the flip side, you can be a high basketball IQ player, but simply don't have the basketball talents to produce.
Players like Iverson, Howard, Melo, Westbrook, and Griffin as an example aren't players who you would think of basketball intelligence when you think of them, but they were all high performing All-Stars, and even MVP calibre players.
1. People are trying to make something that you cant quantify quantifiable with no data to back it up. so its essentially just an opinion.
2. You just named a bunch of random players and gave nothing backing up anything you said. So again its just an opinion. Yet its being treating like its a backable fact.
What you're essentially saying is that because there are no actual stats or numbers to back up basketball IQ, it doesn't exist? Which effectively means that basketball players, past and present, and basketball experts use the term basketball IQ as simply an opinion that they can't quanitify just because they can?
I'm honestly surprised that someone who clearly is a basketball fan, and has relatively strong basketball knowledge as yourself is holding this stance. There are things in basketball you can't really quantify, like game momentum, when players get on cold or hot streaks and we can all agree that these things do exist in basketball, correct?
Why so serious?
Re: PG - The bum slayers
- AKfanatic
- RealGM
- Posts: 12,210
- And1: 10,068
- Joined: May 20, 2001
-
Re: PG - The bum slayers
Arguing against “basketball IQ” is a weird take.
If one doesn’t understand the difference between players that possess anticipation and an understanding compared to players that don’t, one really hasn’t been paying attention to basketball.
Hell look at a guy like Rondo. His anticipation of where a defense will move and where to pass a ball to allow a teammate to flourish, is “basketball IQ”.
A player knowing naturally where to move off ball to not only open themselves up, but to create openings for teammates by shifting a D is “basketball IQ”.
You see it in all sports from some players. In the NFL you have receivers that are gifted athletes that get by solely on their ability to run past defenders and run their route...some of those guys don’t seem to give much when the play breaks down. But then their are guys who consistently know where to shift to give openings for plays when a QB is in trouble. Their consistency in knowing where to go on the fly, that anticipation, is the “IQ” fans and opponents speak of.
Rodman’s anticipation of where to be, an understanding of how the ball will likely bounce, to gobble up rebounds is part of that IQ.
There’s been numerous players over the years that have been overmatched physically and athletically that get by solely on their anticipation and “IQ”. Guys that know how to get opponents to shift enough to open things up for themselves and others.
Pay attention to Lauri on offense. There are numerous possessions where he gets himself lost. He seems to struggle figuring if he should dive or slide toward the corner, or come for a screen. He’s not the only one... the Bulls as a team have a lot of guys that seem to really need a second to process instead of just naturally knowing where to be to put everyone in the best positions to succeed.
When a team lacks guys that can rely on “IQ”/anticipation, they can overcome that with above average coaching that drills in where to be like a dance routine. The Bulls don’t overcome, because they don’t have the choreographer to teach them.
Finally, saying a player doesn’t possess a high B-ball IQ isn’t an attack on that players intelligence as a person. It’s pointing to their struggles in having a natural anticipation to the flow of basketball.
If one doesn’t understand the difference between players that possess anticipation and an understanding compared to players that don’t, one really hasn’t been paying attention to basketball.
Hell look at a guy like Rondo. His anticipation of where a defense will move and where to pass a ball to allow a teammate to flourish, is “basketball IQ”.
A player knowing naturally where to move off ball to not only open themselves up, but to create openings for teammates by shifting a D is “basketball IQ”.
You see it in all sports from some players. In the NFL you have receivers that are gifted athletes that get by solely on their ability to run past defenders and run their route...some of those guys don’t seem to give much when the play breaks down. But then their are guys who consistently know where to shift to give openings for plays when a QB is in trouble. Their consistency in knowing where to go on the fly, that anticipation, is the “IQ” fans and opponents speak of.
Rodman’s anticipation of where to be, an understanding of how the ball will likely bounce, to gobble up rebounds is part of that IQ.
There’s been numerous players over the years that have been overmatched physically and athletically that get by solely on their anticipation and “IQ”. Guys that know how to get opponents to shift enough to open things up for themselves and others.
Pay attention to Lauri on offense. There are numerous possessions where he gets himself lost. He seems to struggle figuring if he should dive or slide toward the corner, or come for a screen. He’s not the only one... the Bulls as a team have a lot of guys that seem to really need a second to process instead of just naturally knowing where to be to put everyone in the best positions to succeed.
When a team lacks guys that can rely on “IQ”/anticipation, they can overcome that with above average coaching that drills in where to be like a dance routine. The Bulls don’t overcome, because they don’t have the choreographer to teach them.
Finally, saying a player doesn’t possess a high B-ball IQ isn’t an attack on that players intelligence as a person. It’s pointing to their struggles in having a natural anticipation to the flow of basketball.
Re: PG - The bum slayers
-
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 4,817
- And1: 697
- Joined: Feb 13, 2009
Re: PG - The bum slayers
Zach gets a bad rap because of his shot selection mostly on this board and everyone equates what one may consider a bad shot as haveing bad basketball IQ. In the game there is the correct basketball play and the best basketball play.....often these 2 statements are one in the same but during a game the best play isn’t always the correct play....
Taking the Bulls for example
Dunn is open in the corner and Zach has the ball with the shot clock running down with the Bulls down 2 late in the 4th qtr. Zach has Dunn’s man coming to double
The correct play and one deemed as the higher IQ play is to move the ball to Dunn in the corner but that is not the best play for time and score....Dunn is a horrible 3pt shooter. I would prefer Zach to make the best play which may be him just rising before Dunn’s man gets to him to shoot it
Many on this board who say that was a horrible shot but in reality the best shooter shoots it...was it a bad shot? In my opinion a shot that goes in is never a bad shot!
Taking the Bulls for example
Dunn is open in the corner and Zach has the ball with the shot clock running down with the Bulls down 2 late in the 4th qtr. Zach has Dunn’s man coming to double
The correct play and one deemed as the higher IQ play is to move the ball to Dunn in the corner but that is not the best play for time and score....Dunn is a horrible 3pt shooter. I would prefer Zach to make the best play which may be him just rising before Dunn’s man gets to him to shoot it
Many on this board who say that was a horrible shot but in reality the best shooter shoots it...was it a bad shot? In my opinion a shot that goes in is never a bad shot!
Re: PG - The bum slayers
- kulaz3000
- Forum Mod - Bulls
- Posts: 42,596
- And1: 24,802
- Joined: Oct 25, 2006
Re: PG - The bum slayers
imagge wrote:Zach gets a bad rap because of his shot selection mostly on this board and everyone equates what one may consider a bad shot as haveing bad basketball IQ. In the game there is the correct basketball play and the best basketball play.....often these 2 statements are one in the same but during a game the best play isn’t always the correct play....
Taking the Bulls for example
Dunn is open in the corner and Zach has the ball with the shot clock running down with the Bulls down 2 late in the 4th qtr. Zach has Dunn’s man coming to double
The correct play and one deemed as the higher IQ play is to move the ball to Dunn in the corner but that is not the best play for time and score....Dunn is a horrible 3pt shooter. I would prefer Zach to make the best play which may be him just rising before Dunn’s man gets to him to shoot it
Many on this board who say that was a horrible shot but in reality the best shooter shoots it...was it a bad shot? In my opinion a shot that goes in is never a bad shot!
His poor shot selection isn't the problem. Most high scorers shoot bad shots from time to time, even the greatest of shooters/scorers, it's forgivable.
It's his decision making, as to when he takes particular shots, when he chooses to shoot or not drive and vice versa, not being able to make the correct reads, dribbling into double and triple teams, bouncing the air out of the ball, those types of situations his consistently puts himself in.
Why so serious?
Re: PG - The bum slayers
-
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,151
- And1: 1,949
- Joined: Jul 05, 2013
Re: PG - The bum slayers
imagge wrote:Zach gets a bad rap because of his shot selection mostly on this board and everyone equates what one may consider a bad shot as haveing bad basketball IQ. In the game there is the correct basketball play and the best basketball play.....often these 2 statements are one in the same but during a game the best play isn’t always the correct play....
Taking the Bulls for example
Dunn is open in the corner and Zach has the ball with the shot clock running down with the Bulls down 2 late in the 4th qtr. Zach has Dunn’s man coming to double
The correct play and one deemed as the higher IQ play is to move the ball to Dunn in the corner but that is not the best play for time and score....Dunn is a horrible 3pt shooter. I would prefer Zach to make the best play which may be him just rising before Dunn’s man gets to him to shoot it
Many on this board who say that was a horrible shot but in reality the best shooter shoots it...was it a bad shot? In my opinion a shot that goes in is never a bad shot!
Finally somebody understands.
Re: PG - The bum slayers
-
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,151
- And1: 1,949
- Joined: Jul 05, 2013
Re: PG - The bum slayers
The bulls would be so much better with a attacking point guard that can distribute. A point guard that can attack and penetrate and is a threat would help the offense a lot.
Re: PG - The bum slayers
- FriedRise
- RealGM
- Posts: 14,462
- And1: 13,559
- Joined: Jan 13, 2015
- Location: Chicago
-
Re: PG - The bum slayers
Only 2.5 games behind the 8 seed Brooklyn now. We play the Kings at home tonight and the Cavs tomorrow. The Pistons have the Griz tonight and then the Nets tomorrow.
Re: PG - The bum slayers
- Leslie Forman
- RealGM
- Posts: 10,119
- And1: 6,303
- Joined: Apr 21, 2006
- Location: 1700 Center Dr, Ames, IA 50011
-
Re: PG - The bum slayers
Dresden wrote:Leslie Forman wrote:
Literally his first game ever, and he produces a better pass than I've seen anybody on this entire team ever make. THAT is "basketball IQ."
Oh, BS. I've seen several of our guys throw lobs up for Lavine to dunk that were just as good if not better.
Nope. The quickness of thought and recognition he showed in that pass is something sorely lacking in anybody on this team. If you actually pause the video and see the millisecond where he actually begins the pass, Ingram has barely started moving himself.
Throwing the ball to the rim for Zach freakin LaVine is really nowhere near the same in terms of requirements of quick thinking, accuracy, and recognition. I guarantee nobody on this team would've actually started that pass to Ingram until he was already in the paint.