GT: Wizards (24-41) vs Nets (30-35) - Sunday, 08/02/20, 2:30 PM EST | YES

[ecuhus1981]

rch, why are we resting guys? It's not like the team has played well enough to warrant giving guys breaks.

MDB, you know I respect your POV above most. It doesn't matter if guys have 2 years off beforehand, 3 professional NBA games in 4 days is incredibly tough on the body. Deep stats indicate fewer dunks, lower %'s across the board (even FT%), more fouls and a generally uglier brand of the sport under these conditions. 3-in-4 also generates a higher rate of repetitive-stress injuries. Whether you believe we should keep or trade these guys, for the moment, it's imperative we put their health at the forefront.

IIRC, you were saying the same thing, the first time Irving faced a 3-games-in-4-days scenario? He had just tweaked his shoulder, and I was banging the drum of resting him against Houston, so that he could hopefully recover against the next opponent (Detroit or some average squad). When you're talking rest versus re-aggravation of a nagging ailment, 24 hours can make a huge difference.

Well, we won against Houston with Kyrie leading the charge. It was exhilarating. Then, we lost against Detroit with Ky looking horrible, and he was out not long afterward. We'll never know whether one game of rest could have prevented him from sitting for 15 games due to injury, but sports science says that we made the fool's bet.

We can't repeat that mistake here.

[DarkXaero]

We really turning the game thread into 2 pages of LeVert bashing after he drops 34 on 25 shots

All of these guys in the bubble probably aren't on the team next year anyway. Coaching staff included. Joe Harris can get more money elsewhere and had to go through this trainwreck year. JA has so little respect on the team that him starting caused problems.

Because there's one guy who has unreasonable views on Levert, and downplays every other player to prop up Levert.

[DarkXaero]

Career stats for a young and improving player?

Right now hes shooting it at 37%.

Lavine is a better shooter than LeVert. Hes also one of the worst defensive players in the NBA, a stat padder and loses everywhere he goes. And will cost us additional pieces like Allen and draft picks.

I never said LeVert was a better player than Lavine straight up. But LeVert is clearly a better fit and the upgrade is not worth giving up assets and paying Lavine 30 mill+. Its a marginal upgrade for too high of a cost.

I'm not trading our assets for a guy who can't even make an All Star team in the East.

Young and improving player? He's about to be 26, and in his 4th year as an NBA player, after 4 years in college. As for Lavine's defense, he is a negative defender, but has actually improved defensively this year, and is no longer one of the worst in the league. He can actually play good on ball defense, but a poor team defender. Stat padder? He's by far Chicago's best option, and frequently gets swarmed by defenses that force him into difficult shots. Still manages to have above average efficiency despite that. "Loses everywhere"- Tell me when he was expected to win

Levert cannot be the better fit, when evidence is strongly in Lavine's favor of being the far superior off ball player. Lavine shoots more than 10% better than Levert on catch & shoot 3s, while also being one of the high tier pull up shooters in the league (along Dame & Kyrie).Lavine is also statistically a superior finisher. Lavine also makes around the same money as Levert for the next two seasons, so $30+ mill/yr claim is false. I'm not sure what it would take to get Lavine, but if the cost is reasonable, Nets have to consider it.

Who would you say is the better playmaker?

Levert is the better playmaker, but not by a lot.

[DarkXaero]

What are you talking about?

LeVert got hurt and then Kyrie was in and out of the lineup all season. He only ended up playing 20 games out of 60+.

You're basing this off of what? Like a 5 game simple size?

LeVert improved the last two seasons dramatically and got injured in both which ruined his stats. And hes a good 3 point shooter which is the most important thing in the league today. 37% this season.

How is he not going to work with Kyrie if he can shoot well?

You can call me a "homer" all you want but you are a LeVert hater and what to ship him out for perennial loser like LaVine.

Again looking at his "averages" based on seasons where he is hurt is stupid. When he is healthy and playing, hes is not inefficient.

LeVert was also good as a 2nd banana to D-Lo so wrong again. He was actually our best player in the playoffs last season in case you forgot.

First of all, I'm not a "Levert hater" at all, that's **** stupid

I would love nothing more than to see Levert become that 3rd star. However, I don't let sentimentality and homer bias cloud my judgment, and I can see things for what they are. I'll once again lay it out clearly. Levert has been abnormally good from pull up 3s this season, which has boosted his 3pt %. However, he still remains a poor catch & shoot player (31.9%), and has been mediocre in the past as well. Levert's TS% this season is a mediocre 50.7%. He's a career 52.2% TS% player, well short of league average 56% TS%. "When he is health and playing, he is not inefficient"-Well I guess he hasn't been healthy his entire career, because his entire career is being inefficient.

Levert hardly played a part in our regular season success last year. He had a decent stretch to begin the season, but calling him a "good second banana" to D Lo is being very generous. Yes, he was comfortably our best player in the playoffs, which gave me hope leading into this season, but Levert still remained his old inconsistent, injury prone self (50.7% TS%). He's in his 4th season now, and no longer "young" so that excuse has ran out. Like I've said, he still has a good ceiling, and the talent is there, but the consistency is not. In normal circumstances, I'd keep him on the team, but our championship window demands urgency. It's not a hard concept to understand. If Lavine is a "perennial loser", then so is Levert, because D Lo, Dinwiddie, Harris played a bigger role in our reg season last year. It's a laughable statement because Lavine has yet to be on a remotely decent team in his career.

Again you're obsessed with career stats for a player in his 4th year, who was injured his 3rd and 4th year. When healthy these past 2 years he has played at near an All Star level.

The first two years are irrelevant because no player is very inefficient their first two couple years of the league. The past two years when he was healthy he was efficient enough.

So looking at the averages is stupid.

Also acting like his shooting this year as "abnormal" when he is in his 4th year doesn't really make sense. Players normally makes huge jumps their 3rd and 4th year. LeVert's unfortunately has been stymied by injuries.

Can you make the argument that LeVert is a very injury prone player and these injuries could ruin his career? Yes, thats a fair thing to say. But both his injuries were freak accidents and not long standing issues.

Also being in your "4th season" again doesn't really apply when you were hurt and had to work your way back from injury. Look at Steph Curry's stats this year. He wasn't very efficient either. Once he got back in his groove, he was not inefficient.

LeVert was clearly the best player on our team this year and was leading us to the playoffs. In fact, our record likely would have improved in the last 20 games as his play was improving. He was just coming off putting up 50 in Boston.

Lavine on the other hand was leading a team so bad that they couldn't even make the bubble from the East.

I don't care what you say, our Nets team sans Kyrie/KD is not really any better than that Bulls roster. And hes been losing like this for three years now.

Dude, I'm not just using career stats, you can go season by season or even cherry pick his best stretch this season (he still only hits 56% TS% during his hot stretch this season). It's not stupidity, it's a consistent trend in his NBA career so far. Everyone keeps saying the same thing, that he needs to become more consistent to take the next step. Problem is that he's injury prone on top of that, and its hard to become consistent when you keep getting hurt every season, unless you're an elite tier talent.

Bringing up Steph Curry is ridiculous, who is a multiple time MVP, and one of the greatest players of all time

"LeVert was clearly the best player on our team this year and was leading us to the playoffs."-This is certainly news to me

Our team minus KD/Kyrie is still easily superior to this Bulls team. Bulls have really no one outside of Lavine. Their second best player would be Otto Porter, except he's always hurt and rarely plays. Then there's Lauri Markkanen who has regressed, and hates their coach Boylen (a seemingly common feeling throughout that team). Then there's former lotto pick Wendell Carter Jr., who hasn't really improved from rookie year. Rookie Coby White has shown some promise, but too early to rely on him. Kris Dunn, who was the only high level defender on the team, got injured for the season. Most of their rotation guys have missed time with injuries. So please be realistic, because no one had that Bulls team making playoffs this year or last couple years.

[DarkXaero]

Career stats for a young and improving player?

Right now hes shooting it at 37%.

Lavine is a better shooter than LeVert. Hes also one of the worst defensive players in the NBA, a stat padder and loses everywhere he goes. And will cost us additional pieces like Allen and draft picks.

I never said LeVert was a better player than Lavine straight up. But LeVert is clearly a better fit and the upgrade is not worth giving up assets and paying Lavine 30 mill+. Its a marginal upgrade for too high of a cost.

I'm not trading our assets for a guy who can't even make an All Star team in the East.

Young and improving player? He's about to be 26, and in his 4th year as an NBA player, after 4 years in college. As for Lavine's defense, he is a negative defender, but has actually improved defensively this year, and is no longer one of the worst in the league. He can actually play good on ball defense, but a poor team defender. Stat padder? He's by far Chicago's best option, and frequently gets swarmed by defenses that force him into difficult shots. Still manages to have above average efficiency despite that. "Loses everywhere"- Tell me when he was expected to win

Levert cannot be the better fit, when evidence is strongly in Lavine's favor of being the far superior off ball player. Lavine shoots more than 10% better than Levert on catch & shoot 3s, while also being one of the high tier pull up shooters in the league (along Dame & Kyrie).Lavine is also statistically a superior finisher. Lavine also makes around the same money as Levert for the next two seasons, so $30+ mill/yr claim is false. I'm not sure what it would take to get Lavine, but if the cost is reasonable, Nets have to consider it.

Hes in his 4th year so yes and hes still young and improving. Lots of players get a lot better their 3rd and 4th year. Its not that "crazy." Especially when LeVert has had both years stymied by injury.

I don't know what you've been watching but Lavine is an AWFUL defender.

I already told you I think Lavine is the better shooter and overall player, but hes a terrible defender and would require too many assets to justify a marginal upgrade. I also think he cares more about his stats than winning and will not do well as a "third star." LeVert is perfect for that role.

And you do know the cost will be steep in acquiring him. Why would Chicago just trade him away for LeVert who is older and very injury prone. It would make no sense. They would likely demand a ton of assets back.

Makes much more sense to keep drafting and trying to rebuild around Lavine.

Lavine will likely demand an extension soon of over 30 mill, so thats where I got that from.

You keep saying he's young, but he's about to be 26 this month. Again, I won't be surprised if Levert dramatically improves going forward, the talent is there, like I've said many times before. But this is about thinking of his chances of improving to that level or how soon it can happen.

Lavine can play solid man defense, like I said, but struggles in team defense, which is actually not all that different from Levert's defense description. If you don't believe me, then you can check the numbers or watch some clips. Lavine improved defensively this season. Levert is the better defender, yes, but they're both ultimately below average, and both have all the tools to become plus defenders.

"I also think he cares more about his stats than winning"-This is straight up false.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/shlomosprung/2019/09/20/chicago-bulls-guard-zach-lavine-is-tired-of-losing/#8b6ca7169de8

https://www.vavel.com/en-us/nba/2020/02/03/1012195-zach-lavine-its-just-frustrating.html

''I'm just upset. It gets frustrating when you lose games specially the way we have been doing it the whole season long. Just like anybody else in our position, we are humans and it's okay to feel this way'',

https://chicago.suntimes.com/sports-saturday/2020/8/1/21350682/guard-zach-lavine-isnt-only-bull-looked-at-by-other-teams

Then there’s LaVine, who’s tired of missing out on the playoffs and being overlooked for All-Star recognition.

Will Bulls trade Lavine? Who knows. But so far, there has nothing to refute the speculation around Lavine. It's also looking more and more likely that Lavine will want out of Chicago, because of the losing situation, and they might also retain Jim Boylen, who is hated by the Bulls players.

[MrDollarBills]

We really turning the game thread into 2 pages of LeVert bashing after he drops 34 on 25 shots

All of these guys in the bubble probably aren't on the team next year anyway. Coaching staff included. Joe Harris can get more money elsewhere and had to go through this trainwreck year. JA has so little respect on the team that him starting caused problems.

Yeah, all of this has become a huge joke. Look at every other team in the bubble. Look at us. Christ this is horrible.

[MrDollarBills]

rch, why are we resting guys? It's not like the team has played well enough to warrant giving guys breaks.

MDB, you know I respect your POV above most. It doesn't matter if guys have 2 years off beforehand, 3 professional NBA games in 4 days is incredibly tough on the body. Deep stats indicate fewer dunks, lower %'s across the board (even FT%), more fouls and a generally uglier brand of the sport under these conditions. 3-in-4 also generates a higher rate of repetitive-stress injuries. Whether you believe we should keep or trade these guys, for the moment, it's imperative we put their health at the forefront.

IIRC, you were saying the same thing, the first time Irving faced a 3-games-in-4-days scenario? He had just tweaked his shoulder, and I was banging the drum of resting him against Houston, so that he could hopefully recover against the next opponent (Detroit or some average squad). When you're talking rest versus re-aggravation of a nagging ailment, 24 hours can make a huge difference.

Well, we won against Houston with Kyrie leading the charge. It was exhilarating. Then, we lost against Detroit with Ky looking horrible, and he was out not long afterward. We'll never know whether one game of rest could have prevented him from sitting for 15 games due to injury, but sports science says that we made the fool's bet.

We can't repeat that mistake here.

I see your point...but I don't see any other teams resting their guys though during these seeding games. Also, the fact that there is zero travel involved should be factored in. I dunno. This is just really weak to me. I feel like we're all wasting our time watching the Nets right now.