Around the NBA - Continued… again

[Chanel Bomber]

was there anyone who thought he was a future all star when we got him? lol

Read on Twitter

He's obviously referring to himself.

Delusional AF.

Probably Scott Perry since he was part of Orlando's front office when they drafted him.

[Gravy]

was there anyone who thought he was a future all star when we got him? lol

Read on Twitter

Dude thought he was prime Derozan or something. How is he blaming the Knicks for not being in the league the last five years

[jvsimonetti0514]

everybody sh*t on him and the trade but you can easily make the argument that gobert is the player that most impacts winning on the timberwolves. he's been their most consistent player all year. they have the best defense and the 17th best offense in the nba. that's a different argument than you're having though.

Defense is constantly overlooked when it comes to winning. Big Steph, Kobe and Dirk fan but their teams probably don't win championships without their defense. And Kobe was no longer a defensive anchor when he led those Lakers teams vs how good he was defensively in the early 2000s.

Gobert has a considerable impact on winning. At least against conventional lineups.

As much as I dislike Draymond green, those warriors teams don’t work without him. Especially the pre/post KD teams. That line up of death they had was all cuz he could offer rim protections at 6’7” plus all the playmaking. Everyone tried copying it to the point that they thought it was going to kill off centers for good. Instead we’ve got this big man renaissance with guys more skilled than ever.

[K_ick_God]

I wish we could embed tiktok videos

But this has those final possessions vs CLE.

https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZPR3txqLe/

That was insane

Props to Spida and the Cavs for pulling that one out.

Hate to say this but I can't think why Mitchell would leave that team for the Knicks this summer

I still don't think he's all that amazing. He's good but more like extra good rather than foundation good. I don't think he can play with a PG. Garland seems to be a bad fit. If he came for picks yeah I guess. But it will diminish Brunson and be a weird fit.

[Fat Kat]

Read on Twitter

[Wildcat]

Read on Twitter

Still New York. Still the borough of Brooklyn. Still Boston.

[Wildcat]

That was insane

Props to Spida and the Cavs for pulling that one out.

Hate to say this but I can't think why Mitchell would leave that team for the Knicks this summer

I still don't think he's all that amazing. He's good but more like extra good rather than foundation good. I don't think he can play with a PG. Garland seems to be a bad fit. If he came for picks yeah I guess. But it will diminish Brunson and be a weird fit.

Winners make it work, so I think they can make it work. But I like what DD is giving the Knicks, so upgrading the SG has me back on the fence.

[Chanel Bomber]

everybody sh*t on him and the trade but you can easily make the argument that gobert is the player that most impacts winning on the timberwolves. he's been their most consistent player all year. they have the best defense and the 17th best offense in the nba. that's a different argument than you're having though.

Defense is constantly overlooked when it comes to winning. Big Steph, Kobe and Dirk fan but their teams probably don't win championships without their defense. And Kobe was no longer a defensive anchor when he led those Lakers teams vs how good he was defensively in the early 2000s.

Gobert has a considerable impact on winning. At least against conventional lineups.

As much as I dislike Draymond green, those warriors teams don’t work without him. Especially the pre/post KD teams. That line up of death they had was all cuz he could offer rim protections at 6’7” plus all the playmaking. Everyone tried copying it to the point that they thought it was going to kill off centers for good. Instead we’ve got this big man renaissance with guys more skilled than ever.

Draymond's one of the best defenders I've seen since I started following the NBA. He's up there with Ben Wallace, peak Artest, peak Kawhi and Miami Bron. He might even be the best depending on how much you value positional versatility.

Several impact metrics suggest he was one of the 10 most impactful players in the league in 2015 and 2016. I don't think it's an aberration.

[ScienceOfLosing]

Tatum is pretty great but that team is loaded

It’s amazing what can happen when the coach doesn’t play everyone into the ground.

So, are you saying if the minutes distribution was better, they'd be on par with Boston? That's categorically untrue. This meme about Thibs is ridiculous. The running theme with Boston is if someone goes down with a serious injury, Boston is screwed.

Randle dislocating his shoulder isn't a Thibs problem. That's bad luck. The bone spurs in OG's elbow isn't a Thibs problem. Bone spurs don't just materialize because you're suddenly playing 2 extra minutes a game. When everyone is healthy, When healthy, everyone's minutes across the board are going down. There's no way Precious isn't logging at least 12 minutes ago when Randle and Mitch are back.

The only thing I'm worried about is Burks. I know he's an ISO guy, but he's still here to initiate the offense, which has been pissed poor in my books. I'm hoping it'll be different when the bench squad is set with Mitch, Josh, and Precious with Burks the initiator.

Ask and then wait for an answer, don‘t assume.

You think Julius‘ injury had nothing to do with being tired and overplayed constantly? Notecwhen it happened - end of game.
OG was just just acquired, so no complaint.
Mitch was overused in general, even w his injury history playing those minutes? And knowing we had IHart to help w minutes?
And IHart is not used to starter minutes and being overplayed? Seems splitting their minutes and not running each into the ground would be better.
Brunson being run into the ground when Deuce could easily do 5 more minutes to help out?
RJ having knee problems at 23?
Derek Rose?
Thibs history.

We all see it and half the board complains.

I was not happy with getting Burks and even Bogs. Can‘t see either being more than situational come playoffs.
Would rather have Grimes be situational w his defense.
We‘ll see come playoffs.

We have a GREAT team though. I just hope Thibs doesn‘t continue to run them into the ground.

[KnicksGadfly]

Hate to say this but I can't think why Mitchell would leave that team for the Knicks this summer

I still don't think he's all that amazing. He's good but more like extra good rather than foundation good. I don't think he can play with a PG. Garland seems to be a bad fit. If he came for picks yeah I guess. But it will diminish Brunson and be a weird fit.

Winners make it work, so I think they can make it work. But I like what DD is giving the Knicks, so upgrading the SG has me back on the fence.

Feels like that's too easy to say... "winners make it work." Why didn't it work in Cleveland? Or Utah? Is Mitchell even a winner now...what does that even mean?

All of the things we'd ask him to do now is stuff that he should be doing in Cleveland and Utah. That's how I judge whether or not he would work here at SG. PG, maybe another matter, but that position is filled on the Knicks by a better player.

[Capn'O]

Defense is constantly overlooked when it comes to winning. Big Steph, Kobe and Dirk fan but their teams probably don't win championships without their defense. And Kobe was no longer a defensive anchor when he led those Lakers teams vs how good he was defensively in the early 2000s.

Gobert has a considerable impact on winning. At least against conventional lineups.

As much as I dislike Draymond green, those warriors teams don’t work without him. Especially the pre/post KD teams. That line up of death they had was all cuz he could offer rim protections at 6’7” plus all the playmaking. Everyone tried copying it to the point that they thought it was going to kill off centers for good. Instead we’ve got this big man renaissance with guys more skilled than ever.

Draymond's one of the best defenders I've seen since I started following the NBA. He's up there with Ben Wallace, peak Artest, peak Kawhi and Miami Bron. He might even be the best depending on how much you value positional versatility.

Several impact metrics suggest he was one of the 10 most impactful players in the league in 2015 and 2016. I don't think it's an aberration.

It's not an aberration but I don't think that impact is fungible to most teams to the same extent he was valuable to the Warriors. I suppose that applies to fit with any player anywhere but it's glaring to me with Green. He was a perfect fit to Curry/Klay and their style of play.

[jvsimonetti0514]

As much as I dislike Draymond green, those warriors teams don’t work without him. Especially the pre/post KD teams. That line up of death they had was all cuz he could offer rim protections at 6’7” plus all the playmaking. Everyone tried copying it to the point that they thought it was going to kill off centers for good. Instead we’ve got this big man renaissance with guys more skilled than ever.

Draymond's one of the best defenders I've seen since I started following the NBA. He's up there with Ben Wallace, peak Artest, peak Kawhi and Miami Bron. He might even be the best depending on how much you value positional versatility.

Several impact metrics suggest he was one of the 10 most impactful players in the league in 2015 and 2016. I don't think it's an aberration.

It's not an aberration but I don't think that impact is fungible to most teams to the same extent he was valuable to the Warriors. I suppose that applies to fit with any player anywhere but it's glaring to me with Green. He was a perfect fit to Curry/Klay and their style of play.

I was listening to the Lowe post the other day and Zach mentioned how Tim Connelly built a great team to take on the nuggets. Since Connelly came from Denver, he knew that he’d have to compete with Jokic for years to come. That reminded me of someone saying the downfall of the Thunder was them building a team to compete with the Kobe, Pau, and Bynum lakers and ended up with the wrong type of team to take on golden state. Which really shows the genius of Kerr and Bob Myers. They really understood how the nba was changing and how they had the players to make it happen.

I’m not sure if another coach would use Draymond the same way Kerr has. Dray doesn’t exact look like the guys that Phil had in the pinch post in the triangle. Or any of the primary playmakers on dantoni’s suns or pops spurs. Or even a guy that could play center. Outside of Ben Wallace, I don’t think there’s a ton centers under 6’10”

Takes a lot of guts to take the ball out of your budding superstars hands and place it in the hands of a 4, that had just been promoted into the starting line up. Sometimes things line up perfectly and you get to dominate the next 6/7 years of the nba.

[WaltFrazier]

Hate to say this but I can't think why Mitchell would leave that team for the Knicks this summer

I still don't think he's all that amazing. He's good but more like extra good rather than foundation good. I don't think he can play with a PG. Garland seems to be a bad fit. If he came for picks yeah I guess. But it will diminish Brunson and be a weird fit.

Winners make it work, so I think they can make it work. But I like what DD is giving the Knicks, so upgrading the SG has me back on the fence.

Clyde and Earl the Pearl made it work, when there were doubts beforehand about 2 ball dominant guards

[Chanel Bomber]

As much as I dislike Draymond green, those warriors teams don’t work without him. Especially the pre/post KD teams. That line up of death they had was all cuz he could offer rim protections at 6’7” plus all the playmaking. Everyone tried copying it to the point that they thought it was going to kill off centers for good. Instead we’ve got this big man renaissance with guys more skilled than ever.

Draymond's one of the best defenders I've seen since I started following the NBA. He's up there with Ben Wallace, peak Artest, peak Kawhi and Miami Bron. He might even be the best depending on how much you value positional versatility.

Several impact metrics suggest he was one of the 10 most impactful players in the league in 2015 and 2016. I don't think it's an aberration.

It's not an aberration but I don't think that impact is fungible to most teams to the same extent he was valuable to the Warriors. I suppose that applies to fit with any player anywhere but it's glaring to me with Green. He was a perfect fit to Curry/Klay and their style of play.

Fully agree about his impact on offense.

His impact on defense I think would've translated.

But to your point he might not have been able to unlock his potential as a playmaking roll man on another team as he did thanks to playing with a revolutionary player like Steph who commanded traps and double teams. This might have impacted his minutes, and therefore reduced his platform to display his HOF defense.

It was basically a perfect match.

[Chanel Bomber]

Draymond's one of the best defenders I've seen since I started following the NBA. He's up there with Ben Wallace, peak Artest, peak Kawhi and Miami Bron. He might even be the best depending on how much you value positional versatility.

Several impact metrics suggest he was one of the 10 most impactful players in the league in 2015 and 2016. I don't think it's an aberration.

It's not an aberration but I don't think that impact is fungible to most teams to the same extent he was valuable to the Warriors. I suppose that applies to fit with any player anywhere but it's glaring to me with Green. He was a perfect fit to Curry/Klay and their style of play.

I was listening to the Lowe post the other day and Zach mentioned how Tim Connelly built a great team to take on the nuggets. Since Connelly came from Denver, he knew that he’d have to compete with Jokic for years to come. That reminded me of someone saying the downfall of the Thunder was them building a team to compete with the Kobe, Pau, and Bynum lakers and ended up with the wrong type of team to take on golden state. Which really shows the genius of Kerr and Bob Myers. They really understood how the nba was changing and how they had the players to make it happen.

I’m not sure if another coach would use Draymond the same way Kerr has. Dray doesn’t exact look like the guys that Phil had in the pinch post in the triangle. Or any of the primary playmakers on dantoni’s suns or pops spurs. Or even a guy that could play center. Outside of Ben Wallace, I don’t think there’s a ton centers under 6’10”

Takes a lot of guts to take the ball out of your budding superstars hands and place it in the hands of a 4, that had just been promoted into the starting line up. Sometimes things line up perfectly and you get to dominate the next 6/7 years of the nba.

Agreed except for this. I think the "take the ball out of your superstar's hands" was primarily (at least initially) forced by opposing defenses.

I think Kerr would've let Curry run the offense if he didn't get doubled and trapped. He was after all the most dominant scorer in the league at the time (94th percentile in isolation scoring, 98th percentile as the PNR ball-handler, 43.8 from 3P pull-ups over 6.3 attempts in 2015-16).

So I think it was born and applied primarily out of necessity. But Draymond playmaking skills for a 4 were incredible and his basketball intelligence was off the charts.

Kerr has made a number of coaching mistakes over the years but he's a coaching genius and some of the plays that they ran to minimize Draymond's weaknesses and maximize his strengths were pretty incredible.

[nykballa2k4]

I mean I have had a sig for a decade stating my opinion on stats

Stats are often the objective piece, but you have to discuss the subjective.

I had a friend who would debate Kobe and basically due to poor efficiency, categorized him as the #2 to Pau. There are things like gravity etc that star players, superstar players, have that influence the quality of shots for others that simple stats don't account for.

Kobe being #2 to Pau due to efficiency is insane.

By that logic, Ant-Man is #2 to Rudy Gobert because Rudy is highly efficient.

You brought up a great point: GRAVITY. How do you quantify that? It's a real thing in basketball that literally determines the outcomes of possessions. There's no stat or metric for it as far as I know, yet it impacts literally every trip down the floor offensively. Along with gravity from players that can score at a high level, spacing is also impacted by guys that can shoot efficiently.

Gravity is a reason Randle is still here instead of Obi
despite all the clamouring that Obi was better for the team because he ran out for a couple of dunks. It's one of the most important parts of building a team

I mean, I would have loved to have both, but yes -- Randle does things that can make the game easier for other players whereas Obi is very reliant on someone making the game easy for him.

[nykballa2k4]

was there anyone who thought he was a future all star when we got him? lol

Read on Twitter

I mean he played mediocre. IDK what he wanted us to do. Jordan Poole type logic

[Capn'O]

Draymond's one of the best defenders I've seen since I started following the NBA. He's up there with Ben Wallace, peak Artest, peak Kawhi and Miami Bron. He might even be the best depending on how much you value positional versatility.

Several impact metrics suggest he was one of the 10 most impactful players in the league in 2015 and 2016. I don't think it's an aberration.

It's not an aberration but I don't think that impact is fungible to most teams to the same extent he was valuable to the Warriors. I suppose that applies to fit with any player anywhere but it's glaring to me with Green. He was a perfect fit to Curry/Klay and their style of play.

Fully agree about his impact on offense.

His impact on defense I think would've translated.

But to your point he might not have been able to unlock his potential as a playmaking roll man on another team as he did thanks to playing with a revolutionary player like Steph who commanded traps and double teams. This might have impacted his minutes, and therefore reduced his platform to display his HOF defense.

It was basically a perfect match.

Agree with this and I can imagine a coach like Thibs could utilize him masterfully on defense. On offense, on that GS team his limitations as a primary offense creator are minimized by the system and personnel which, as you say, also unlock his ability as a creator in ways that wouldn't have been open to him elsewhere. It never came to forcing Draymond to create for himself.

I'll add that Klay was pretty revolutionary in his own right but also had an impact that was ancillary to Steph.

[nykballa2k4]

Read on Twitter

They can keep him. Maybe he is the curse after all

[K_ick_God]

I am pretty impressed by IQ since the break. His drives are not great but no question he's pretty deadly from 3 and will remain so. His passing is good, no turnovers, getting better at playmaking, using his dribble less (or maybe that's just me). Not sure I can really judge IQ's defense but if the numbers are good, that's what matters. I don't know that he's an All-Star mentality or athlete kind of player, or what he'll do in the clutch clutch, but if he keeps this up through the end of the season - and no reason to think he won't - he'll maybe be getting close to Max territory which will be interesting.

RJ looks real solid. HIs footwork is good. His jumper is not there fully but he's hard to guard inside and has gotten good both about finishing off a pass and being determined to draw contact. Defense is not great but not bad. A bit above average maybe, in stretches.