Sunsdeuce wrote:Ghost of Kleine wrote:Trae is enticing for sure! With the hopes that he could bring some level of Nash magic to our backcourt.
But if adding/ targeting another star player at the expense of every last ounce of value and young talent we have left, I'd honestly much rather go after Lauri Markkanen as a frontcourt scoring compliment to our defensive wings and centers.
And I think that Ainge might have some level of interest in Allen and O'neale (both who played well for the Jazz in the past).
Bro just compared Trae to Nash.
I’m sorry and I apologize ahead of time but that is single-handedly the worst comparison of all time. Literally nothing a like as players. Nash was head and shoulders above Trae in the IQ category. Trae looks for the points first then forces his assist numbers. There’s a reason Atlanta has never won more than 43 games in a season since Trae was drafted. Trae makes NO ONE better. He just hunts stats. Nash MADE everyone better because stats was the least of his worries, he could not care less if he scored a single point in a game. It was a rarity for Nash to play on a team with less than 50 wins
Don’t ever compare those two again if you want to maintain an ounce of knowledge respectability. And I again I apologize for being harsh but this particular comparison really gets under my skin with how uneducated and weak it is.
Lol!
I like your insights man! but honestly, this is an emotionally based response here and a bit hyperbolic in presentation. The comparison of the two is actually quite simple and accurate in that both are undersized but cerebral playmaking guards that are exceptionally good playmakers man. And for a brief stint (shooting funks being expected at times with players) Young was also a pretty good shooter early on.
Now environmental and situational factors can of course affect a players game on multiple levels. But the point I was making that I had hope wouldn't go overlooked as much as it apparently has, is that both Nash and Young are " natural playmakers" that are exceptional pick and roll facilitators.
Nash was of course the standard and in a tier above most every other guard comparison. But it's important to consider context in that Nash had a much superior roster to play alongside of too. Who exactly did/ does Trae Young have comparable to make his job easier?
You say that Young only looks to score, yet he managed to average around 11.6 assists.
Trae Young is known for his high assist numbers and playmaking ability as a point guard. [/size ][size=150]He has led the league in assists multiple times and is among the all-time leaders in assists per game. In his most recent full NBA season, he averaged 11.6 assists per game, leading the league in total assists.
Young's playmaking skills have made him a vital part of the Atlanta Hawks' offense. His ability to create scoring opportunities for teammates through passes is a key part of his game and has earned him recognition as a top facilitator in the NBA. His assist totals in multiple seasons have placed him among the league's elite in that category.
In summary, Trae Young is an exceptional passer with a knack for creating scoring chances for his teammates. He frequently leads the league in assists and is considered a premier point guard in the NBA.
You point out his predominant proclivities for scoring, yet reference the above for accurate reflection. What other stars (who can actually score)!! Did he have helping him on Atlanta's roster?? What other legit shooters has he played with since Murray got traded??
My point is contextual factors are important here in that perhaps he had to look to score so much because their roster has been so limited offensively and he's not had any other legitimate help on the offensive end? Could that he a possibility to consider man?
So key points here that I made were:
1- " MAYBE" Young could bring some level of Nash magic to our backcourt...............As in being a cerebral pick n roll playmaker with exceptional passing abilities, although undersized. This would be important by the way in getting Booker to actually play at his natural position instead of mitigating his true talents as a scorer.
2- Maybe, just maybe Young looks to score so much because there wasn't any other decent suppoetive offensive options or depth options around him on that roster as was constructed??
3- He still was/ is considered a "premiere" playmaking guard averaging 11.6 assists despite the claim of being a " srat padding scoring guard. How many assists did Nash and Paul average with us comparably with much better rosters man?
You see, perhaps uoon further reflection, my view was misunderstood and not at all that uneducated and weak after all.
