2024-25 NBA Season Discussion

[tsherkin]

I would be careful with viewing higher efficiency as an indicator of greater ability.

There is a reason I mentioned proportion as well

[RCM88x]

I agree Go Cavs

[itsxtray]

Jesus Cavs. That was insane.

[parsnips33]

Genius move by Kerr to dispel all the horrendous jinxing energy on here after the Celtics game

[KembaWalker]

For a guy that has never had a positive said about him on this website LaMelo Ball sure is a 4th quarter assassin

[tsherkin]

For a guy that has never had a positive said about him on this website LaMelo Ball sure is a 4th quarter assassin

34.5% FG on 29 FGA, 27.8% from 3 on 18 attempts. Not sure if this is really the moment to praise his scoring.

Charlotte crushed the glass and things came together at the end but that was a pretty ugly performance, all told.

[KembaWalker]

For a guy that has never had a positive said about him on this website LaMelo Ball sure is a 4th quarter assassin

34.5% FG on 29 FGA, 27.8% from 3 on 18 attempts. Not sure if this is really the moment to praise his scoring.

Charlotte crushed the glass and things came together at the end but that was a pretty ugly performance, all told.

He played a stellar game, especially in the 4th quarter as stated.

You should try actually watching the game, it might give you a bit of insight into why someone like Iverson was voted an MVP. You have a dude starting with a sophomore, Josh Green, rookie Tidjane Salaun, **** 2024 Taj Gibson. He’s playing against what people thought were a top EC contender. The shots not falling early, he’s taking clock ending heaves, whatever. He could have curled up in a ball and quit at 6 points like RealGM darling Tyrese “the modern Steve Nash” Haliburton. Make Miller and Mann have to score 40 each to win the game. Instead he goes out, keeps playing his game, and the leagues top 4th scoring player goes out during the actual important part of the game and drops 17 in the 4th and puts them away.

Superstar performance, bottom line.

[tsherkin]

He played a stellar game, especially in the 4th quarter as stated.

There is a limit to how stellar a game can be on that level of performance, IMHO.

You should try actually watching the game, it might give you a bit of insight into why someone like Iverson was voted an MVP. You have a dude starting with a sophomore, Josh Green, rookie Tidjane Salaun, **** 2024 Taj Gibson. He’s playing against what people thought were a top EC contender. The shots not falling early, he’s taking clock ending heaves, whatever.

There is a limit to the excuse of teammate quality in terms of bottom-end efficiency for a given player, though. Like, sure, no one expects him to be breaking efficiency records. And indeed, shooting terribly in volume once can be an isolated cold night, especially against a difficult defense. But when a player is persistently inefficient AND now we're speaking of so profoundly inefficient a night, there's something more to it.

Superstar performance, bottom line.

Can't possibly agree with that. He isn't anywhere near that level, and such a performance doesn't merit that description. That game has more in common with Stackhouse's ~ 30 ppg season than superstardom.

[KembaWalker]

He played a stellar game, especially in the 4th quarter as stated.

There is a limit to how stellar a game can be on that level of performance, IMHO.

You should try actually watching the game, it might give you a bit of insight into why someone like Iverson was voted an MVP. You have a dude starting with a sophomore, Josh Green, rookie Tidjane Salaun, **** 2024 Taj Gibson. He’s playing against what people thought were a top EC contender. The shots not falling early, he’s taking clock ending heaves, whatever.

There is a limit to the excuse of teammate quality in terms of bottom-end efficiency for a given player, though. Like, sure, no one expects him to be breaking efficiency records. And indeed, shooting terribly in volume once can be an isolated cold night, especially against a difficult defense. But when a player is persistently inefficient AND now we're speaking of so profoundly inefficient a night, there's something more to it.

Superstar performance, bottom line.

Can't possibly agree with that. He isn't anywhere near that level, and such a performance doesn't merit that description. That game has more in common with Stackhouse's ~ 30 ppg season than superstardom.

You didn’t even watch the game and you’re comparing it to a guy who you also didn’t watch. Not sure what you’re even arguing, you’re literally just looking at a box score and passing it off as basketball insight. Do better. The one note schtick where you look at TS% was shallow and wrong back in 2012 and it still is now, over a decade later. That’s crazy

[tsherkin]

He played a stellar game, especially in the 4th quarter as stated.

There is a limit to how stellar a game can be on that level of performance, IMHO.

You should try actually watching the game, it might give you a bit of insight into why someone like Iverson was voted an MVP. You have a dude starting with a sophomore, Josh Green, rookie Tidjane Salaun, **** 2024 Taj Gibson. He’s playing against what people thought were a top EC contender. The shots not falling early, he’s taking clock ending heaves, whatever.

There is a limit to the excuse of teammate quality in terms of bottom-end efficiency for a given player, though. Like, sure, no one expects him to be breaking efficiency records. And indeed, shooting terribly in volume once can be an isolated cold night, especially against a difficult defense. But when a player is persistently inefficient AND now we're speaking of so profoundly inefficient a night, there's something more to it.

Superstar performance, bottom line.

Can't possibly agree with that. He isn't anywhere near that level, and such a performance doesn't merit that description. That game has more in common with Stackhouse's ~ 30 ppg season than superstardom.

You didn’t even watch the game and you’re comparing it to a guy who you also didn’t watch. Not sure what you’re even arguing, you’re literally just looking at a box score and passing it off as basketball insight. Do better. The one note schtick where you look at TS% was shallow and wrong back in 2012 and it still is now, over a decade later. That’s crazy

So, scoring efficiency is objectively important. A game here or there when a guy shoots poorly and comes through is one thing. Anyone who followed Dirk's 2011 run will recall. He had some very poor shooting performances and was bailed out by his teammates in the Finals for whole halves which allowed him to come back and look like the hero. And winning is the salve for all, sort of like this Charlotte game. Over four seasons to start his career, Ball has been an inefficient scorer. Not a league-average scorer, but below. In some seasons more so than others, particularly as his volume has increased. That separates him from a certain level of player right away. He has other strengths, but decades of NBA history shows us that inefficient scoring really has limited value.

There is floor-raising value on terrible offensive teams, and generally speaking you don't expect a point-of-attack guy to be an ATG in terms of scoring efficiency. Right now, Ball is actually +1.2% rTS at the moment, which is reasonable. It's largely on the back of a single game, but that's early-season samples for you.

But you don't have a 10/29 game and get lots of praise for that. He shot horribly and he was absolutely terrible in the 2nd quarter.

When they had a chance to really push Indy, because the Pacers scored 18, he shot 1/10, 0/5 from 3. Then he was 1/3 in the 3rd, and of course he sat much of the quarter.

Then, he was hot in the 4th. This isn't a performance which deserves serious kudos. This is a performance where Charlotte got lucky and Ball was able to get his 3 falling in the 4th.

It would be MORE appropriate to talk about the Hornets' offensive rebounding, or Tre Mann and Cody Martin off the bench. Without Mann's first-half scoring, this would have been a very different situation. Same same Martin in the 3rd. If those guys don't go off, then this game gets remembered as one where Ball shot them out of the game.

This is a reality of basketball. When you shoot a lot, if you don't score efficiently, then it's a problem. It separates him from a tier of his peers because he's worse at it than others. And yes, the specific details of situation limit his ceiling to some extent. That's a given, so no one is expecting him to be a +6% rTS guy. That's fine. But 10/29 and dreadful second-quarter performances won't get overlooked because he got hot in the 4th and because he plays on a team where he doesn't have a ton of help on a game to game basis.

[KembaWalker]

There is a limit to how stellar a game can be on that level of performance, IMHO.



There is a limit to the excuse of teammate quality in terms of bottom-end efficiency for a given player, though. Like, sure, no one expects him to be breaking efficiency records. And indeed, shooting terribly in volume once can be an isolated cold night, especially against a difficult defense. But when a player is persistently inefficient AND now we're speaking of so profoundly inefficient a night, there's something more to it.



Can't possibly agree with that. He isn't anywhere near that level, and such a performance doesn't merit that description. That game has more in common with Stackhouse's ~ 30 ppg season than superstardom.

You didn’t even watch the game and you’re comparing it to a guy who you also didn’t watch. Not sure what you’re even arguing, you’re literally just looking at a box score and passing it off as basketball insight. Do better. The one note schtick where you look at TS% was shallow and wrong back in 2012 and it still is now, over a decade later. That’s crazy

So, scoring efficiency is objectively important. A game here or there when a guy shoots poorly and comes through is one thing. Anyone who followed Dirk's 2011 run will recall. He had some very poor shooting performances and was bailed out by his teammates in the Finals for whole halves which allowed him to come back and look like the hero. And winning is the salve for all, sort of like this Charlotte game. Over four seasons to start his career, Ball has been an inefficient scorer. Not a league-average scorer, but below. In some seasons more so than others, particularly as his volume has increased. That separates him from a certain level of player right away. He has other strengths, but decades of NBA history shows us that inefficient scoring really has limited value.

There is floor-raising value on terrible offensive teams, and generally speaking you don't expect a point-of-attack guy to be an ATG in terms of scoring efficiency. Right now, Ball is actually +1.2% rTS at the moment, which is reasonable. It's largely on the back of a single game, but that's early-season samples for you.

But you don't have a 10/29 game and get lots of praise for that. He shot horribly and he was absolutely terrible in the 2nd quarter.

When they had a chance to really push Indy, because the Pacers scored 18, he shot 1/10, 0/5 from 3. Then he was 1/3 in the 3rd, and of course he sat much of the quarter.

Then, he was hot in the 4th. This isn't a performance which deserves serious kudos. This is a performance where Charlotte got lucky and Ball was able to get his 3 falling in the 4th.

It would be MORE appropriate to talk about the Hornets' offensive rebounding, or Tre Mann and Cody Martin off the bench. Without Mann's first-half scoring, this would have been a very different situation. Same same Martin in the 3rd. If those guys don't go off, then this game gets remembered as one where Ball shot them out of the game.

This is a reality of basketball. When you shoot a lot, if you don't score efficiently, then it's a problem. It separates him from a tier of his peers because he's worse at it than others. And yes, the specific details of situation limit his ceiling to some extent. That's a given, so no one is expecting him to be a +6% rTS guy. That's fine. But 10/29 and dreadful second-quarter performances won't get overlooked because he got hot in the 4th and because he plays on a team where he doesn't have a ton of help on a game to game basis.

There really isn’t much to say here, you wrote a wall of text that was basically all wrong because you didn’t watch the game. I’m not gonna address a fanfic derived from your imagination after scanning a box score. Type less, watch more basketball

[PaulieWal]

You didn’t even watch the game and you’re comparing it to a guy who you also didn’t watch. Not sure what you’re even arguing, you’re literally just looking at a box score and passing it off as basketball insight. Do better. The one note schtick where you look at TS% was shallow and wrong back in 2012 and it still is now, over a decade later. That’s crazy

So, scoring efficiency is objectively important. A game here or there when a guy shoots poorly and comes through is one thing. Anyone who followed Dirk's 2011 run will recall. He had some very poor shooting performances and was bailed out by his teammates in the Finals for whole halves which allowed him to come back and look like the hero. And winning is the salve for all, sort of like this Charlotte game. Over four seasons to start his career, Ball has been an inefficient scorer. Not a league-average scorer, but below. In some seasons more so than others, particularly as his volume has increased. That separates him from a certain level of player right away. He has other strengths, but decades of NBA history shows us that inefficient scoring really has limited value.

There is floor-raising value on terrible offensive teams, and generally speaking you don't expect a point-of-attack guy to be an ATG in terms of scoring efficiency. Right now, Ball is actually +1.2% rTS at the moment, which is reasonable. It's largely on the back of a single game, but that's early-season samples for you.

But you don't have a 10/29 game and get lots of praise for that. He shot horribly and he was absolutely terrible in the 2nd quarter.

When they had a chance to really push Indy, because the Pacers scored 18, he shot 1/10, 0/5 from 3. Then he was 1/3 in the 3rd, and of course he sat much of the quarter.

Then, he was hot in the 4th. This isn't a performance which deserves serious kudos. This is a performance where Charlotte got lucky and Ball was able to get his 3 falling in the 4th.

It would be MORE appropriate to talk about the Hornets' offensive rebounding, or Tre Mann and Cody Martin off the bench. Without Mann's first-half scoring, this would have been a very different situation. Same same Martin in the 3rd. If those guys don't go off, then this game gets remembered as one where Ball shot them out of the game.

This is a reality of basketball. When you shoot a lot, if you don't score efficiently, then it's a problem. It separates him from a tier of his peers because he's worse at it than others. And yes, the specific details of situation limit his ceiling to some extent. That's a given, so no one is expecting him to be a +6% rTS guy. That's fine. But 10/29 and dreadful second-quarter performances won't get overlooked because he got hot in the 4th and because he plays on a team where he doesn't have a ton of help on a game to game basis.

There really isn’t much to say here, you wrote a wall of text that was basically all wrong because you didn’t watch the game. I’m not gonna address a fanfic derived from your imagination after scanning a box score. Type less, watch more basketball

Address his post content or disengage. Responding with baiting and telling him to watch the game, type less etc. won't fly.

[KembaWalker]

So, scoring efficiency is objectively important. A game here or there when a guy shoots poorly and comes through is one thing. Anyone who followed Dirk's 2011 run will recall. He had some very poor shooting performances and was bailed out by his teammates in the Finals for whole halves which allowed him to come back and look like the hero. And winning is the salve for all, sort of like this Charlotte game. Over four seasons to start his career, Ball has been an inefficient scorer. Not a league-average scorer, but below. In some seasons more so than others, particularly as his volume has increased. That separates him from a certain level of player right away. He has other strengths, but decades of NBA history shows us that inefficient scoring really has limited value.

There is floor-raising value on terrible offensive teams, and generally speaking you don't expect a point-of-attack guy to be an ATG in terms of scoring efficiency. Right now, Ball is actually +1.2% rTS at the moment, which is reasonable. It's largely on the back of a single game, but that's early-season samples for you.

But you don't have a 10/29 game and get lots of praise for that. He shot horribly and he was absolutely terrible in the 2nd quarter.

When they had a chance to really push Indy, because the Pacers scored 18, he shot 1/10, 0/5 from 3. Then he was 1/3 in the 3rd, and of course he sat much of the quarter.

Then, he was hot in the 4th. This isn't a performance which deserves serious kudos. This is a performance where Charlotte got lucky and Ball was able to get his 3 falling in the 4th.

It would be MORE appropriate to talk about the Hornets' offensive rebounding, or Tre Mann and Cody Martin off the bench. Without Mann's first-half scoring, this would have been a very different situation. Same same Martin in the 3rd. If those guys don't go off, then this game gets remembered as one where Ball shot them out of the game.

This is a reality of basketball. When you shoot a lot, if you don't score efficiently, then it's a problem. It separates him from a tier of his peers because he's worse at it than others. And yes, the specific details of situation limit his ceiling to some extent. That's a given, so no one is expecting him to be a +6% rTS guy. That's fine. But 10/29 and dreadful second-quarter performances won't get overlooked because he got hot in the 4th and because he plays on a team where he doesn't have a ton of help on a game to game basis.

There really isn’t much to say here, you wrote a wall of text that was basically all wrong because you didn’t watch the game. I’m not gonna address a fanfic derived from your imagination after scanning a box score. Type less, watch more basketball

Address his post content or disengage. Responding with baiting and telling him to watch the game, type less etc. won't fly.

It was fully addressed, I said he was wrong and that the shooting percentage was not reflective of the impact on the game. I’m not telling him to watch the game as a way to be hostile, that’s literally the only way you can respond to someone who’s wrongly trying to explain how a game went by looking at a box score. If he doesn’t want to then the conversation has naturally ended.

[GSP]

Zion is done as a serious player Imo what a waste of talent his fatass couldnt get on a diet and take his job seriously completely stunted his development as a player. Being on a mins restriction in 1st week of the season as a 24yo freak athlete is one of the most insane things ive ever heard. His career trajectory is starting to look like Larry Johnson but more injuries......early promise. Flashes. 2 all star appearances..................all downhill now

He's had 2 30+-point games in the last 3. He just had a 10-assist game. He's hit double-digit rebounds twice. He's had three poor-shooting games and 2 incendiary performances.

It's a bit early to be writing him off as such, especially while thus far posting the highest FTr of his career and the 2nd-best ORB% of his career. He's had his struggles but he's also still shown flashes and it's only 5 games.

Hes the most blocked player of the season so far. Hasnt developed his game out of the paint and teams are smarter walling off. He couldnt score on the Blazers lmao. His athleticism has been on a decline since Duke and he cant get inside as easy and his vaunted 2nd jump is a shell which is what made him so dominant.

Watch on YouTube

His % of dunks has gone down every season and

% of Fg at rim 0-3ft from rookie season to now

75%
70%
62%
55%
39% so far this season small sample but its obvious whats happening

He may well drop 40 on the Washington Wizards but that doesnt matter. He is finished as a top player. Larry Johnson 2.0

[IlikeSHAIguys]

I really hope Chet is okay.

[Peregrine01]

It’s wild how Murray rewarded the Nuggets for giving him a max by becoming worse than Westbrook.

[KembaWalker]

LaMelo Ball lapping the field in 4th quarter scoring. Absolute superstar

[Lou Fan]

The demise of the Nuggets seems to have been exaggerated

[Texas Chuck]

The demise of the Nuggets seems to have been exaggerated

As was the absurd burying of Jokic for losing a close 7 game series. He's still the best player on the planet and there's not even a competition for that position.



Sent from my SM-A156U using RealGM mobile app

[Peregrine01]

The demise of the Nuggets seems to have been exaggerated

Jokic alone pretty much guarantees a playoff berth. But this team without Jokic...