LaMelo Ball

[Nazrmohamed]

I like Tyrese a lot. His shot is also unorthodox, but it goes in the basket, so that’s okay. Pesky defender, passes and rebounds well. He’s skinny, but otherwise I don’t see any major weaknesses.

Killian Hayes is also a good prospect. 6’5”, super quick with a nice crossover. Very good ball handler. His only major negative was perimeter shooting, but he’s improved that.

There are many other point guard options, this draft is full of them. But those two are my favorites.

I like every one of the PGs mentioned and agree about just about everything except I just don't see Haliburton being anywhere as prolific as Lillard. I actually don't like the comparison at all. There are things Halliburton can do that Lillard doesn't but from a scoring standpoint I just don't see him as a team's primary or even secondary scorer. I think hes alot more Jason Kidd like or possibly even Rondo like. I see a traditional 12-17pt scorer who fills up other areas of the stat sheet....... once he fills out of course. Keep in mind though that filling out part isnt some minor thing to fix. That's like a 3 season project even with him being skilled.

I hope Haliburton is the universe giving us modern day Shaun Livingston. Modern day being trading the automatic mid-range jumper for a steady 38+% three that he launched on high volume.

I didn't see much of young Livingston, but he was a great role player for the Cavs, Nets and Warriors (The Thunder too?).

I always enjoyed watching him play with GSW.

He was supposed to be so much more. Really robbed of an elite nba career but fought hard, stayed the course and carved out a nice career for himself. You didn't miss much. He got hurt early in his career and came back as what you saw. I'd say modern Livingston is a good call. Livingston with a bit more pep in his step. Haliburton can push the pace a bit.

[UcanUwill]

I like every one of the PGs mentioned and agree about just about everything except I just don't see Haliburton being anywhere as prolific as Lillard. I actually don't like the comparison at all. There are things Halliburton can do that Lillard doesn't but from a scoring standpoint I just don't see him as a team's primary or even secondary scorer. I think hes alot more Jason Kidd like or possibly even Rondo like. I see a traditional 12-17pt scorer who fills up other areas of the stat sheet....... once he fills out of course. Keep in mind though that filling out part isnt some minor thing to fix. That's like a 3 season project even with him being skilled.

I hope Haliburton is the universe giving us modern day Shaun Livingston. Modern day being trading the automatic mid-range jumper for a steady 38+% three that he launched on high volume.

I didn't see much of young Livingston, but he was a great role player for the Cavs, Nets and Warriors (The Thunder too?).

I always enjoyed watching him play with GSW.

He was supposed to be so much more. Really robbed of an elite nba career but fought hard, stayed the course and carved out a nice career for himself. You didn't miss much. He got hurt early in his career and came back as what you saw. I'd say modern Livingston is a good call. Livingston with a bit more pep in his step. Haliburton can push the pace a bit.

I never visioned Livingston as superstar prospect, but seeing his insane workethic after the injury, man, I wonder how good he could have been. The last guy who was often compared to Livingston was Dzanan Musa, talk about junior prodigy who hasnt panned out yet in the league. I think Musa and Ball have a lot in common, but I liked Musa way more honestly. If he busts, that will be a big minus on my part.

[clyde21]

Pepperidge Farm remembers Trae Young before the Draft. The half court jump shots. The no defense. The high turnovers. The recklessness. Short kid. No athleticism. "Bust" they said. Even I was highly pessimistic.

Look at Trae Young now. 29.6 points per game. 9.3 assists. 4.3 rebounds. 23.9 PER.

Yeah, I specifically remember telling my brother that Trae Young was going to suck. I just thought he was too small and his shooting fell off in college which made me very skeptical. I don't think I've ever been so wrong.

okay first of all:

Trae from the field: 42%
Melo from the field: 37%

Trae from line: 86%
Melo from line: 72%

Trae from 3: 36%
Melo from 3: 25%

and Trae did it in 3x as many games as Melo

Trae TS coming out was 59% to Melo's whopping 46%

so it's not even really close in terms of efficiency


second of all:

even with Trae being infinitely more efficient than Melo coming out, he himself is also struggling to be very efficient in the NBA, and really by almost all advanced metrics is considered once of THE worst players on per usage basis in the entire NBA on one of the worst teams in the NBA

so, if your argument is that Melo is an even less efficient version of Trae and even worse passer and ya'll think this makes your case?

if you're interested in fancy passing and raw points/assists stats go for it, but Melo is FAR AWAY from being a substance W/L player just like Trae is still is two years into the league.

[clyde21]

Melo will be a 20/10 guy pretty easily in today's stat based nba if given enough usage but that really has nothing to do with a player being a winning player or not

Trae drops 30/10 regularly and has trouble winning games because he's 1) inefficient on a per minute and per usage standpoint, 2) is a trash defender not only at the POA but help wise and 3) has no semblance of an off-ball game

really all of Trae's weaknesses are also Melo's weaknesses, except Melo is even less proven and even less efficient.

[getrichordie]

Pepperidge Farm remembers Trae Young before the Draft. The half court jump shots. The no defense. The high turnovers. The recklessness. Short kid. No athleticism. "Bust" they said. Even I was highly pessimistic.

Look at Trae Young now. 29.6 points per game. 9.3 assists. 4.3 rebounds. 23.9 PER.

Yeah, I specifically remember telling my brother that Trae Young was going to suck. I just thought he was too small and his shooting fell off in college which made me very skeptical. I don't think I've ever been so wrong.

okay first of all:

Trae from the field: 42%
Melo from the field: 37%

Trae from line: 86%
Melo from line: 72%

Trae from 3: 36%
Melo from 3: 25%

and Trae did it in 3x as many games as Melo

Trae TS coming out was 59% to Melo's whopping 46%

so it's not even really close in terms of efficiency


second of all:

even with Trae being infinitely more efficient than Melo coming out, he himself is also struggling to be very efficient in the NBA, and really by almost all advanced metrics is considered once of THE worst players on per usage basis in the entire NBA on one of the worst teams in the NBA

so, if your argument is that Melo is an even less efficient version of Trae and even worse passer and ya'll think this makes your case?

if you're interested in fancy passing and raw points/assists stats go for it, but Melo is FAR AWAY from being a substance W/L player just like Trae is still is two years into the league.

Damn, bro. Why’d you have to quote me and eviscerate me? I was just telling my Trae story

[clyde21]

i mean it depends on whether people think he can improve in these areas or not but guys like Melo and Trae are just not my type of players at all

like I'd rather have SGA over Trae any day tbh if i want to build a winning team

[TB]

Big difference with the Ball/Trae comps are:

Trae is a MUCH better shooter. He's an elite level 3point gunner.
Ball is a MUCH better passer. He's an elite level passer.

To me, that gives you a 6'6 Jason Williams. One worrisome thing is that J-Will was a 40% college 3point shooter, so if Ball is already a low percentage shooter, its definitely a major question if he can even get to the streaky shooting that Williams had in the NBA.

Should mention that I think a 6'6 Jason Williams is a good point guard worth a lotto pick... I just don't think i'd want my team making that decision in the top 5.

[clyde21]

^ what makes Ball a better passer than Trae exactly, let alone 'MUCH BETTER'?

and Jason Williams wasn't that good of a PG.

don't confuse fancy dribbling and passing with actually being a good playmaker.

[TB]

^ what makes Ball a better passer than Trae exactly, let alone 'MUCH BETTER'?

and Jason Williams wasn't that good of a PG.

don't confuse fancy dribbling and passing with actually being a good playmaker.

"MUCH" might be an overstatement because Trae is actually a good passer, but I still have Ball as the higher upside when it comes to vision. And not just who gets more assists, he just sees the court at a very high level for his age. I have no metrics for this, call it the eye test.

But really this just shows that Ball is even riskier of a pick, because Trae is a better passer than Ball is a shooter. Ball is a legitimately bad shooter.

I could talk myself into Ball if my team picked him, but i'd rather not have to do that.

I agree that Jason Williams wasn't that great, but if he was 6'6 that changes some things. Either way, i'm a sucker for fancy dribbling and passing and don't plan on changing.

[The-Power]

Trae Young is an elite passer already. Generally, Trae is already an elite offensive player in his second year – that's pretty damn impressive. He's also a terrible defender, but there's also no doubt that he's having a positive impact on the Hawks. +7.3 on/off when nobody else is higher than +4.7 is a clear indication, although not the be all and end all either. But Trae does have shown the ability to carry a team on his back offensively and if he can improve on that his team will rightfully build around him and try to cover his weaknesses – his offense is that special for someone his age.

Now, as I'm saying that, Trae obviously leverages his scoring to create plays and has shown the ability to score efficiently at a high volume. The reason for that? He's elite at drawing shooting fouls (.455 FTr), he's elite at making his FTs (86%) and he has acceptable percentages from everywhere, including the ability to hit long 3's at a respectable rate. All of that is something LaMelo has not shown – quite the contrary, actually. I have more hopes for LaMelo defensively simply because he has great size and the potential to be solid is actually there (notwithstanding the possibility that he'll always be a liability). But Ball has a lot to prove to be compared to Young as an offensive player a this point. If he had shown what Trae has shown as a freshman in terms of ability then he'd be #1 on my board – but he hasn't, so he isn't.

Still, there's no denying that LaMelo Ball has significant potential. I'm not buying him as an offensive engine just yet, but I do believe his playmaking skills are extraordinary and more than just flash.

[clyde21]

Trae is 22nd just among PGs in RPM, and that's with him dropping 30/10 virtually every game

it takes A LOT more to be a net positive player in the NBA, and this is a problem because he's that low while being a high usage player...meaning he's not earning the usage rate/minutes at all at this point so the negative impact is compounded

it's just really hard for guys like Trae and LaMelo to be winning players while being nonexistent defensively and having efficiency issues on offense while ALSO offering nothing in terms of off-ball productivity...really tough to build winning teams around these types

[The-Power]

it takes A LOT more to be a net positive player in the NBA, and this is a problem because he's that low while being a high usage player...meaning he's not earning the usage rate/minutes at all at this point so the negative impact is compounded

it's just really hard for guys like Trae and LaMelo to be winning players while being nonexistent defensively and having efficiency issues on offense while ALSO offering nothing in terms of off-ball productivity...really tough to build winning teams around these types

Oh, but Young absolutely earns that usage on offense. He's 4th in the entire league (!) ORPM, 1st among PGs. His on-court numbers are really good, his on/off numbers exceptional – on offense. He's just a terrible, terrible defender. But on offense? Young is elite – and efficient as well.

[clyde21]

eh, not really, he has that insane usage because he's completely useless off-ball, limits the types of players you can put next to him, and the fact that he's a complete disaster defensively compounds that issue..and the fact that his ORPM is so high but his overall RPM is so low just highlights just how terrible he is on the other side of the court.

in general it's just reallyyyyyy hard to build winning teams around guys like Trae and Melo, not very versatile, they need to the ball in their hands always and need to have elite efficiency to justify it, can't play with other handlers, etc.

i see the intrigue, I just want nothing to do with it, again i'd much much much rather have a guy like SGA over Melo or Trae and it's not really that close to me

[clyde21]

when was the last time a dominant on-ball guard as the best player took a team anywhere? Harden is the closest, and that's just a completely different type of player than Trae/LaMelo

if these guys are your best player, you're not going anywhere, and the problem is that they can't be your #2 and #3 best player either because if you take the ball from them they are useless

i just don't see the application and scalability

[The-Power]

eh, not really, he has that insane usage because he's completely useless off-ball, limits the types of players you can put next to him, and the fact that he's a complete disaster defensively compounds that issue..and the fact that his ORPM is so high but his overall RPM is so low just highlights just how terrible he is on the other side of the court.

On that we 100% agree. I'm just saying that purely on offense, Young is not only an incredible talent but also already really good. I think he can be someone who approaches Nash-level on offense, which is to say best-in-the-league level. I think it's absolutely justified to build around Young because of that. Of course that means trying to cover for his terrible defense and it's fair to believe that there is some kind of ceiling with a player like him that doesn't exist for some others.

i see the intrigue, I just want nothing to do with it, again i'd much much much rather have a guy like SGA over Melo or Trae and it's not really that close to me

Eh, I think we shouldn't make the mistake and equate LaMelo with Trae. Trae has already proven that he can be an efficient volume scorer in the NBA and have elite offensive impact on his team. For LaMelo, that's far, far away at this point.

And I do believe Young can lead a really good team. Nash and Paul could, and neither was really known for off-ball play and both had the balls in their hands a lot (of course Paul was a much better defender, that's no question). Heck, Kyrie was part of pretty great teams in Cleveland and I'm confident Young is going to be considerably better than Irving. Not to mention that Young actually has the skills to be a good off-ball player – there's a chance he'll become considerably better in this regard once he has another offensive star next to him; it's too soon to write him off as an off-ball player when he clearly has the skills but simply hasn't been asked to use them much as his teams thus far relied on him as the offensive on-ball engine.

But the reason why Young can be a Lead Guard on a great offense is because he's a scoring threat from anywhere – and that's what separates him from LaMelo. If you are a Lead Guard in the NBA and (need to) have the ball in your hands a lot, you better be able to score from different positions and do it efficiently. Trae can (30 Points per36 on 60% TS), at least in the RS, but LaMelo is nowhere near that ability.

[NO-KG-AI]

I don’t think I’ve ever seen a guy that isn’t all that special as an athlete or a physical specimen get away with so many question marks and red flags.


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM Forums

Lonzo? Bennett?

Did they get away with it? Bennett was an out of nowhere pick that everyone but the Cavs thought was stupid, and Lonzo actually played really well in college and minimized his weaknesses while showcasing his strengths and leading a good team. Lamelo basically did the opposite. He seems like he's exactly where Lonzo was in terms of skillset, but he's a shot jacker and a poor defender, two things that Lonzo never was.

[karkinos]

with lamelo's handles, if he focuses on getting to the basket, he'll have options to pass, layup, or get to the FT line. i think his willingness to attack while having a similar skill set to lonzo is what is intriguing about him.

[gswhoops]

when was the last time a dominant on-ball guard as the best player took a team anywhere? Harden is the closest, and that's just a completely different type of player than Trae/LaMelo

if these guys are your best player, you're not going anywhere, and the problem is that they can't be your #2 and #3 best player either because if you take the ball from them they are useless

i just don't see the application and scalability

I think this nicely encapsulates my biggest issue with LaMelo, especially in the context of the Warriors' pick.

I see the appeal, the size, the flashes, etc. but you have to project a LOT of development onto him before he's a useful NBA player.

[getrichordie]

Read on Twitter

[clyde21]

with lamelo's handles, if he focuses on getting to the basket, he'll have options to pass, layup, or get to the FT line. i think his willingness to attack while having a similar skill set to lonzo is what is intriguing about him.

Lonzo was a premium defender coming out and a much better off-ball player, two huge differences