PG: Costly turnovers

[djsunyc]

will lou and blake today talked about how iq had a rough game yesterday - which he did - and talked a bit about him as a player here. but not once did they mention how not having a screen setter like yak would effect him more than other players on the team.

sherm hamilton in the post game said our point of attack defense was the reason we lost. he's not wrong but again, not mentioning how we don't have a center and not bringing up that if we hit average % from 3, we win.

it just seems there's alot of "analysis" that goes on w/o getting down to the bottom of it all...we were undermanned and still played well enough to win but we missed critical open 3's down the stretch. there's going to be ebbs and flows to each game and each game is going to be different. but if you're in it, then it simply comes down to makes and misses.

[Mikistan]

will lou and blake today talked about how iq had a rough game yesterday - which he did - and talked a bit about him as a player here. but not once did they mention how not having a screen setter like yak would effect him more than other players on the team.

sherm hamilton in the post game said our point of attack defense was the reason we lost. he's not wrong but again, not mentioning how we don't have a center and not bringing up that if we hit average % from 3, we win.

it just seems there's alot of "analysis" that goes on w/o getting down to the bottom of it all...we were undermanned and still played well enough to win but we missed critical open 3's down the stretch. there's going to be ebbs and flows to each game and each game is going to be different. but if you're in it, then it simply comes down to makes and misses.

Yup, you can't be a serious team playing Thad Young.

[MadDesperado]

So why do you always focus on Siakam and Scottie? You really think those two cannot co-exist with 3 shooters around them?

Come on man. It is absolutely illogical to suggest Siakam/OG are a good fit but Siakam/Scottie are not when Scottie does everything offensively better than OG.

I am not manufacturing rage - rather I enjoy showcasing how every post of yours is full of exaggerations, fallacies, and often straight lies.

Because they play the same position? Do I seriously need to spell this out for you?

Scottie does everything Siakam does, except he also has an outside shot. Why is it so hard for you to grasp, that maybe having another player not occupy the same space is beneficial?

Scottie can play outside and inside, Siakam can play only inside. There is more space outside than inside, therefore two 3pt shooters can co-exist, two paint players cannot. Scottie is a better player than Siakam, you don't sacrifice the better player, to kow tow to the more limited one. Do you want me to start breaking down more basic aspects of basketball? Shall I next explain what a travel is?

I think this is the last post I'm gonna bother with, I've reached my limit with your posts here. Have a good one.

The NBA is positionkess, and Scottie and Siakam literally couldn’t play any differently offensively.

Just a bad take. Scottie can sometimes play inside, but to suggest he’s anywhere near Siakam there is horrible

Both having the most efficient seasons of their careers as the 1/2 focus of an offense… but yeah they don’t fit

They are both on ball players. To maximize one's skillset, the other has to be a catch and shoot player. Having Siakam spot up is bad offense, having Barnes spot up is a waste of an elite playmaker. Barnes plays on ball better than Siakam. His passes are faster, on target, have better timing, etc. He's also stronger, doesn't shy away from bigger players and doesn't sound like a dying gazelle when he goes through contact.

The main difference is that one of them started playing way too late to see the game instinctually at a high level and the other one has been playing like a giant point guard his whole life. Why would you want the latter to play off the former? He has elite instincts that that can't be taught or picked up in your late 20s, you gotta go all in on that.

[ATLTimekeeper]

Because they play the same position? Do I seriously need to spell this out for you?

Scottie does everything Siakam does, except he also has an outside shot. Why is it so hard for you to grasp, that maybe having another player not occupy the same space is beneficial?

Scottie can play outside and inside, Siakam can play only inside. There is more space outside than inside, therefore two 3pt shooters can co-exist, two paint players cannot. Scottie is a better player than Siakam, you don't sacrifice the better player, to kow tow to the more limited one. Do you want me to start breaking down more basic aspects of basketball? Shall I next explain what a travel is?

I think this is the last post I'm gonna bother with, I've reached my limit with your posts here. Have a good one.

The NBA is positionkess, and Scottie and Siakam literally couldn’t play any differently offensively.

Just a bad take. Scottie can sometimes play inside, but to suggest he’s anywhere near Siakam there is horrible

Both having the most efficient seasons of their careers as the 1/2 focus of an offense… but yeah they don’t fit

They are both on ball players. To maximize one's skillset, the other has to be a catch and shoot player. Having Siakam spot up is bad offense, having Barnes spot up is a waste of an elite playmaker. Barnes plays on ball better than Siakam. His passes are faster, on target, have better timing, etc. He's also stronger, doesn't shy away from bigger players and doesn't sound like a dying gazelle when he goes through contact.

The main difference is that one of them started playing way too late to see the game instinctually at a high level and the other one has been playing like a giant point guard his whole life. Why would you want the latter to play off the former? He has elite instincts that that can't be taught or picked up in your late 20s, you gotta go all in on that.

Most teams have multiple "on ball players." You can't put the ball in Scottie's hands all the time because guys like Duncan Robinson can make him turn twice before he reaches the paint. Once his ballhandling gets to where it needs to be that won't be the case, but right now Scottie is best suited using his playmaking talents in transition or running sets from the top of the 3PT line where he can use his vision and size to find guys close to the basket, rather than just these awkward bully ball battering ram drives to create separation.

The issue with Scottie is he has no bread and butter game as a scorer. We see a little bit of everything, but nothing looks mastered or comfortable. So the ball had to largely go through Siakam, who had that post game coming into the league. Even in the bubble, Pascal's post-game held up. Where he laboured was as a consistent jump shooter off the dribble. This is something that only IQ has on this team right now, and it looks like Scottie will get there eventually. There's going to be a lot of debating here about who should get the final looks in the clutch, because IQ isn't insanely talented as a scorer, but he has more of a bag in terms of pull-up shooting at the moment. I would say this is going to result in a lot of close losses the rest of the year. We've seen a few already.

[YogurtProducer]

The NBA is positionkess, and Scottie and Siakam literally couldn’t play any differently offensively.

Just a bad take. Scottie can sometimes play inside, but to suggest he’s anywhere near Siakam there is horrible

Both having the most efficient seasons of their careers as the 1/2 focus of an offense… but yeah they don’t fit

They are both on ball players. To maximize one's skillset, the other has to be a catch and shoot player. Having Siakam spot up is bad offense, having Barnes spot up is a waste of an elite playmaker. Barnes plays on ball better than Siakam. His passes are faster, on target, have better timing, etc. He's also stronger, doesn't shy away from bigger players and doesn't sound like a dying gazelle when he goes through contact.

The main difference is that one of them started playing way too late to see the game instinctually at a high level and the other one has been playing like a giant point guard his whole life. Why would you want the latter to play off the former? He has elite instincts that that can't be taught or picked up in your late 20s, you gotta go all in on that.

Most teams have multiple "on ball players." You can't put the ball in Scottie's hands all the time because guys like Duncan Robinson can make him turn twice before he reaches the paint. Once his ballhandling gets to where it needs to be that won't be the case, but right now Scottie is best suited using his playmaking talents in transition or running sets from the top of the 3PT line where he can use his vision and size to find guys close to the basket, rather than just these awkward bully ball battering ram drives to create separation.

The issue with Scottie is he has no bread and butter game as a scorer. We see a little bit of everything, but nothing looks mastered or comfortable. So the ball had to largely go through Siakam, who had that post game coming into the league. Even in the bubble, Pascal's post-game held up. Where he laboured was as a consistent jump shooter off the dribble. This is something that only IQ has on this team right now, and it looks like Scottie will get there eventually. There's going to be a lot of debating here about who should get the final looks in the clutch, because IQ isn't insanely talented as a scorer, but he has more of a bag in terms of pull-up shooting at the moment. I would say this is going to result in a lot of close losses the rest of the year. We've seen a few already.

Yeah this weird narrative that Scottie needs 4 off-ball players around him is just crazy. Even guys like LBJ (and now Doncic) had a Kyrie with them at their best. It just is not good team building to only have 1 guy on the team who you can trust to give the ball to and make a pass / take a shot when you need one.