Luol Deng vs Lamar Odom, who is better?
Posted: Fri Mar 14, 2008 9:07 pm
Luol Deng vs Lamar Odom, who is better?
RealGM
Sports is our Business
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/
Luol Deng vs Lamar Odom, who is better?
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=771941
Page 1 of 2
Posted: Fri Mar 14, 2008 9:42 pm
Lamar gets under-rated on these boards, but it's still Luol easily.
Posted: Fri Mar 14, 2008 9:44 pm
Lamar Odom is good but Anti-Clutch, Deng is a better shooter, worse on boards, not sure on playmaking.. or D really, but I assume it's about the same.. closer than people realize but I'll take Deng.
Posted: Fri Mar 14, 2008 9:50 pm
Lamar
Posted: Fri Mar 14, 2008 10:00 pm
i'll take lamar he's a new player since the gasol trade
Posted: Fri Mar 14, 2008 10:28 pm
I'll go with Deng,although he has a down year this year due to injuries he is still a player on the rise...Odom is a nice complimentary player like a 3rd option...
Posted: Fri Mar 14, 2008 11:06 pm
deng is a nice complimentary 3rd option too.
Posted: Fri Mar 14, 2008 11:22 pm
lamar. hes way underated.
Posted: Sat Mar 15, 2008 4:34 am
Odom has more talent/skill, but Deng uses what he's got much better (and he's a superior defender). I'll take Luol.
Posted: Sat Mar 15, 2008 4:56 am
miller31time wrote:Odom has more talent/skill, but Deng uses what he's got much better (and he's a superior defender). I'll take Luol.
How is Luol a superior defender?...Lamar defensively at PF is so underrated defensively.
Posted: Sat Mar 15, 2008 5:16 am
CB4MiamiHeat wrote:How is Luol a superior defender?...Lamar defensively at PF is so underrated defensively.
Deng is one of the better defensive small forwards in the association. Odom is average at best.
And just to back up my assertion with some stats from the past couple of seasons...
2007-2008 season
Deng
opp. PER: 16.5
opp. eFG: 48.4% (SF position)
Odom
opp. PER: 17.0
opp. eFG: 49.5% (PF position)
2006-2007 season
Deng
opp. PER: 14.1
opp. eFG: 46.6% (SF position)
Odom
opp. PER: 17.4
opp. eFG: 50.4% (PF position)
*Deng is covering the opposing team's best G/F. This is not to say Odom doesn't have to cover good players (especially in the West), but I doubt he gets the opposing team's #1 assignment on a regular basis.
Posted: Sat Mar 15, 2008 5:43 am
^48.4% is quite high for a guard/forward
Posted: Sat Mar 15, 2008 5:49 am
Gerald3Wallace wrote:^48.4% is quite high for a guard/forward
From looking at knickerblogger.net's eFG%'s for each team's players, it seems around average for guards/forwards. Teams that shoot well, like the Magic and Celtics, don't have one single player (who gets more than 10 minutes per game) that averages 48.4 eFG% or lower, for instance.
EDIT: Shoot, Brian Scalabrine averages 10.4 minutes per game and has an eFG% of 39.6.
Posted: Sat Mar 15, 2008 8:11 am
I'd take Deng, he's still only 22, and I think he's better than Odom is right now, anyway. Defensively, Miller is wrong. He's good, but he almost never handles guards. He guards the SF almost exclusively. But he does it well, and is consistent in that way night in and night out.
Lamar is a fantastic rebounder, and a great passer, yet his talents often don't translate in games. Why that is, I don't know. I just know Deng has been very productive, even when too thin, and lacking a solid perimeter shot, he was pretty damn good. Deng just knows what to do out there.
Lamar is a fantastic rebounder, and a great passer, yet his talents often don't translate in games. Why that is, I don't know. I just know Deng has been very productive, even when too thin, and lacking a solid perimeter shot, he was pretty damn good. Deng just knows what to do out there.
Posted: Sat Mar 15, 2008 3:37 pm
miller31time wrote:-= original quote snipped =-
From looking at knickerblogger.net's eFG%'s for each team's players, it seems around average for guards/forwards. Teams that shoot well, like the Magic and Celtics, don't have one single player (who gets more than 10 minutes per game) that averages 48.4 eFG% or lower, for instance.
oh...but im still trying to figure how is deng a "superior defender" when the players he guards has an average shooting %
Posted: Sat Mar 15, 2008 4:06 pm
Gerald3Wallace wrote:oh...but im still trying to figure how is deng a "superior defender" when the players he guards has an average shooting %
It's very difficult to make a decision based off of opp. eFG% for the simple reason that it's not tracked possession by possession (that would take a lot more time and a lot more people than those who provide these stats have). This stat is extremely general and rarely very accurate but it's supposed to give a general idea of their defensive prowess.
A stat that I just remembered that's found on 82games.com is "defensive rating".
I have developed a stat I call Defensive Composite Score, or DCS (if you
Posted: Sat Mar 15, 2008 4:14 pm
alright..thats all i wanted to know..thanks for the info
Posted: Sat Mar 15, 2008 4:40 pm
hermes wrote:i'll take lamar he's a new player since the gasol trade
Posted: Sat Mar 15, 2008 6:29 pm
Lamar is a great 3rd option on offense, and a poor 2nd option, whereas Luol is a great 2nd option, and poor 1st option. To me, that more than makes up for Luol's inferior rebounding and ball-handling. Also, Lamar is in a great situation with a great player who gets you tons of open looks (Kobe), whereas Luol is in a pretty terrible situation and has to create his own offense much more often. Finally, Luol has been playing through an achilles injury, and was clearly not the same for at least a few weeks when he came back (averaged only 12.4 ppg over his first 7 games back from injury).
Posted: Sat Mar 15, 2008 6:37 pm
well, Lamar as a co-1st option with Wade made it to the 2nd round .. i dont see what makes Deng a better 2nd option. I think Deng, like Odom, is a great 3rd option for a championship team.
If you put Luol with Kobe the past 2 seasons its probably the same result. Actually they would lose some rebounding, which was one of LAs strong points.
If you put Luol with Kobe the past 2 seasons its probably the same result. Actually they would lose some rebounding, which was one of LAs strong points.