nate33 wrote:tleikheen wrote:Siakam is better than Kuzma. Yeah, his contract is worse, but teams will pay a premium for a guy who is a legit #2 guy on a contender versus Kuzma who might be conceivably capable of being a #3 on a contender.
You dont avg 22 pts in the NBA and maybe be a #3 on a contender .
You aren't even in the starting lineup of a contender if you post a TS% of .546 (4% below league average). Honestly, Kuzma hasn't actually proven he is anything better than a 5th starter on a good team. In this comparison with Siakam I'm charitably assuming Kuzma can post a significantly improved TS% in the 58%-60% range if his usage rate comes down to 3rd option territory; but that hasn't even been proven yet....
Actually, I think it's fair to say that it's been proven
false. On his career, Kuz has a .545 TS%. He has never posted a TS% as high as .55 in any season. Even in his best year -- his last with LA -- when he was at best the third option (& took the fewest shots per 40 minutes of his career) -- his TS% was well below average.
nate33 wrote:...All Kuzma has proven so far is that he absolutely cannot shoulder the load of a #1 option while maintaining acceptable efficiency....
If by "acceptable" you mean "as good as an average player at his position," then Kuz has proven that he can't be the
#3 option while maintaining acceptable efficiency. Would you not think that at least
average efficiency would be required for the #3 option?