2016-2017 College Basketball / '17 NBA Draft Thread

[BigSleep333]

Some of Lonzo Ball's college 3 point shots are midrange/long 2's in the NBA...

yup, but he probably wouldn't take those in the nba, and that would prove he is a bad midrange shooter

[Arsenal]

Ball doesn't shoot from midrange because he is a genius on the court, and therefore he knows that the midrange is the absolute worst shot in the game. How can you argue with a .662 TS%? That's absolutely sick. I do have questions about how effective his shot will be in the NBA, but him not taking midrange shots is a GOOD thing, not a bad thing.

[dkj5061]

i guess CoreyGallagher and i are the only ones on the Frank the Tank bandwagon. Not as quick as DSJ or Fox, but has a build, once filled out will be a tank with elite defensive potential, and looks like he could have an advanced midrange and 3 ball. Could play the 1 or the 2 depending on the rotation

Nah man, I'm 100% with you. Obviously I don't have him above Fultz, but I would definitely consider him over Ball and DSJ. His defense will be elite, I don't even think you need to include the word potential in there. If his shot is real (which is looking increasingly likely), he would be the ideal Patrick Beverly type player next to Simmons with way more upside than Pat Beverly.

[Negrodamus]

im sry you annoyed by logic. you cant agree with that sentence: "the closer you are to the basket, the better are the chances you make a bucket"???

i will take the "more efficient" argument, as the reason why he is taking that few shots in that range, as any rationalist would

What suggests I'm annoyed by logic? The only time I used that word was when I highlighted the unnecessary "lol" at the end of your post which you're using as an all too frequent mechanism on here (much like the emojis) to make other posters be perceived as less informed and is completely disrespectful in civil discourse.

That aside, I'm missing the aforementioned logic. 60% his shots are from 3 and some well beyond. Those aren't "more efficient" but rather shows he's willing to take a harder shot than to pull up or he's wide open. The other 35% are at the rim. If anything, he's going to need to lean heavy on that passing ability in the pros because he's not going to be the finisher he is at the next level and he will not be able to get these 3pters off as easily, especially with that stroke.

3's are more efficient than long 2's. shouldnt be too hard to do the math...to even have to mention that, gave me the suggestion..

i agree with you with the rest of your post. im not even a big lonzo ball fan, im just questioning your conclusions out of a 5,3 % 2p jump attempt stat.

Okay, whatever. I'm not even saying "long 2's". How about a shot from the elbow after beating your man on a "pumpfake", if he even has one of those?

There's no math to do. He's the only one shooting under double digit percentage of 2pts taken of any top ten prospect. And of those shots, he's the only one in single digits. That's, in my opinion, a massive red flag. I think you'll be hard pressed to find a single starting PG in the NBA with those numbers or anything remotely close. Even Elfrid Payton is shooting 33% of his shots from inside the arc but not in the paint. Rubio is 34%.

Maybe all these guards just haven't learned Lonzo's secret that the mid range game is worthless, right?

[dkj5061]

https://theringer.com/the-ringers-2017-nba-draft-lottery-big-board-version-2-0-446c31b6a473#.uw0umx7g2

New Ringer.com big board. Josh Jackson all the way down at #5 has me all sorts of giddy.

[BigSleep333]

What suggests I'm annoyed by logic? The only time I used that word was when I highlighted the unnecessary "lol" at the end of your post which you're using as an all too frequent mechanism on here (much like the emojis) to make other posters be perceived as less informed and is completely disrespectful in civil discourse.

That aside, I'm missing the aforementioned logic. 60% his shots are from 3 and some well beyond. Those aren't "more efficient" but rather shows he's willing to take a harder shot than to pull up or he's wide open. The other 35% are at the rim. If anything, he's going to need to lean heavy on that passing ability in the pros because he's not going to be the finisher he is at the next level and he will not be able to get these 3pters off as easily, especially with that stroke.

3's are more efficient than long 2's. shouldnt be too hard to do the math...to even have to mention that, gave me the suggestion..

i agree with you with the rest of your post. im not even a big lonzo ball fan, im just questioning your conclusions out of a 5,3 % 2p jump attempt stat.

Okay, whatever. I'm not even saying "long 2's". How about a shot from the elbow after beating your man on a "pumpfake", if he even has one of those?

There's no math to do. He's the only one shooting under double digit percentage of 2pts taken of any top ten prospect. And of those shots, he's the only one in single digits. That's, in my opinion, a massive red flag. I think you'll be hard pressed to find a single starting PG in the NBA with those numbers or anything remotely close. Even Elfrid Payton is shooting 33% of his shots from inside the arc but not in the paint. Rubio is 34%.

Maybe all these guards just haven't learned Lonzo's secret that the mid range game is worthless, right?

apparently there is some math to do for you. whats the avg on elbow jumpers in the nba? whats the average 3p % in the nba? do the math

there is really nothing to compare...ah you mean those 9/18/27 (im too lazy to search it up) shots taken huh? cmon...this samplesize is worth absolutely nothing.

[SelfishPlayer]

Perhaps Lonzo Ball can be like Jason Kidd. The Jason Kidd that played for the Mavericks (2nd time around), but with the ability to finish above the rim.

[LloydFree]

Ball doesn't shoot from midrange because he is a genius on the court, and therefore he knows that the midrange is the absolute worst shot in the game. How can you argue with a .662 TS%? That's absolutely sick. I do have questions about how effective his shot will be in the NBA, but him not taking midrange shots is a GOOD thing, not a bad thing.

After watching Ball shoot over the athletes on Kentucky, the only question I have about his shooting is his ability to shoot midrange, off the pick-n-roll. They don't run pick-n-roll much in college, so you're not going to see it. But based on how Ball makes decisions and his ability to finish with both hands, I'd have to think he'd still be a pick-n-roll nightmare for most defenses.

**I'm convinced we're not going to be bad enough to get Ball, so now I'm just hoping Boston doesn't get him.

[Negrodamus]

3's are more efficient than long 2's. shouldnt be too hard to do the math...to even have to mention that, gave me the suggestion..

i agree with you with the rest of your post. im not even a big lonzo ball fan, im just questioning your conclusions out of a 5,3 % 2p jump attempt stat.

Okay, whatever. I'm not even saying "long 2's". How about a shot from the elbow after beating your man on a "pumpfake", if he even has one of those?

There's no math to do. He's the only one shooting under double digit percentage of 2pts taken of any top ten prospect. And of those shots, he's the only one in single digits. That's, in my opinion, a massive red flag. I think you'll be hard pressed to find a single starting PG in the NBA with those numbers or anything remotely close. Even Elfrid Payton is shooting 33% of his shots from inside the arc but not in the paint. Rubio is 34%.

Maybe all these guards just haven't learned Lonzo's secret that the mid range game is worthless, right?

apparently there is some math to do for you. whats the avg on elbow jumpers in the nba? whats the average 3p % in the nba? do the math

there is really nothing to compare...ah you mean those 9/18/27 (im too lazy to search it up) shots taken huh? cmon...this samplesize is worth absolutely nothing.

Somehow you managed to string a bunch of words together into two paragraphs without forming a coherent point, but once again you're incapable of having this discussion without being obnoxious, so I'll just move on. This isn't worth my time.

[Unbreakable99]

Give me Ball or give me death. Ball is life.

[BigSleep333]

Okay, whatever. I'm not even saying "long 2's". How about a shot from the elbow after beating your man on a "pumpfake", if he even has one of those?

There's no math to do. He's the only one shooting under double digit percentage of 2pts taken of any top ten prospect. And of those shots, he's the only one in single digits. That's, in my opinion, a massive red flag. I think you'll be hard pressed to find a single starting PG in the NBA with those numbers or anything remotely close. Even Elfrid Payton is shooting 33% of his shots from inside the arc but not in the paint. Rubio is 34%.

Maybe all these guards just haven't learned Lonzo's secret that the mid range game is worthless, right?

apparently there is some math to do for you. whats the avg on elbow jumpers in the nba? whats the average 3p % in the nba? do the math

there is really nothing to compare...ah you mean those 9/18/27 (im too lazy to search it up) shots taken huh? cmon...this samplesize is worth absolutely nothing.

Somehow you managed to string a bunch of words together into two paragraphs without forming a coherent point, but once again you're incapable of having this discussion without being obnoxious, so I'll just move on. This isn't worth my time.

ok? maybe its because english is not my native language, but what didnt you understand? since you are too ignorant to do it, i did it for you:

avg for elbow jumpers: 45-46 %
avg for 3%: ~35 %

2*0,46= 0,92
3*0,35=1,05

im alright with being obnoxious, if somebody ignores facts in a discussion

[Slizeezyc]

Ball doesn't shoot from midrange because he is a genius on the court, and therefore he knows that the midrange is the absolute worst shot in the game. How can you argue with a .662 TS%? That's absolutely sick. I do have questions about how effective his shot will be in the NBA, but him not taking midrange shots is a GOOD thing, not a bad thing.

After watching Ball shoot over the athletes on Kentucky, the only question I have about his shooting is his ability to shoot midrange, off the pick-n-roll. They don't run pick-n-roll much in college, so you're not going to see it. But based on how Ball makes decisions and his ability to finish with both hands, I'd have to think he'd still be a pick-n-roll nightmare for most defenses.

**I'm convinced we're not going to be bad enough to get Ball, so now I'm just hoping Boston doesn't get him.

I don't follow the logic here? He could only get off 30+ footers against Kentucky, went 2-8 from deep and had 6 turnovers. If anything, that game proved out the fears of Ball not being a lead guard in anything but transition. He had to either throw up hand grenades or dish it off when it wasn't in the open court.

You tend to obsess about how players look against other "good athletes" and that Kentucky game sort of showed where Ball stands as a halfcourt player, and it wasn't great; Fox gave him plenty of trouble on both ends.

[Negrodamus]

Ball doesn't shoot from midrange because he is a genius on the court, and therefore he knows that the midrange is the absolute worst shot in the game. How can you argue with a .662 TS%? That's absolutely sick. I do have questions about how effective his shot will be in the NBA, but him not taking midrange shots is a GOOD thing, not a bad thing.

After watching Ball shoot over the athletes on Kentucky, the only question I have about his shooting is his ability to shoot midrange, off the pick-n-roll. They don't run pick-n-roll much in college, so you're not going to see it. But based on how Ball makes decisions and his ability to finish with both hands, I'd have to think he'd still be a pick-n-roll nightmare for most defenses.

**I'm convinced we're not going to be bad enough to get Ball, so now I'm just hoping Boston doesn't get him.

I don't follow the logic here? He could only get off 30+ footers against Kentucky, went 2-8 from deep and had 6 turnovers. If anything, that game proved out the fears of Ball not being a lead guard in anything but transition. He had to either throw up hand grenades or dish it off when it wasn't in the open court.

You tend to obsess about how players look against other "good athletes" and that Kentucky game sort of showed where Ball stands as a halfcourt player, and it wasn't great; Fox gave him plenty of trouble on both ends.

This is the point that I was making. On a pick and roll, one of the best shots to take is a mid range shot because the defender is either off balanced or the switch man is paying too far off. If the guard doesn't have a natural pull-up shot from mid range, the PnR is infinitely harder to run. I'm not saying Ball literally can't hit a mid range shot, I'm saying in the flow of the game, he's not taking set shots from mid range. He's off balanced and has to have a natural pull up jump shot. Maybe one of these days he'll show off that part of his game.

[LloydFree]

Ball doesn't shoot from midrange because he is a genius on the court, and therefore he knows that the midrange is the absolute worst shot in the game. How can you argue with a .662 TS%? That's absolutely sick. I do have questions about how effective his shot will be in the NBA, but him not taking midrange shots is a GOOD thing, not a bad thing.

After watching Ball shoot over the athletes on Kentucky, the only question I have about his shooting is his ability to shoot midrange, off the pick-n-roll. They don't run pick-n-roll much in college, so you're not going to see it. But based on how Ball makes decisions and his ability to finish with both hands, I'd have to think he'd still be a pick-n-roll nightmare for most defenses.

**I'm convinced we're not going to be bad enough to get Ball, so now I'm just hoping Boston doesn't get him.

I don't follow the logic here? He could only get off 30+ footers against Kentucky, went 2-8 from deep and had 6 turnovers. If anything, that game proved out the fears of Ball not being a lead guard in anything but transition. He had to either throw up hand grenades or dish it off when it wasn't in the open court.

You tend to obsess about how players look against other "good athletes" and that Kentucky game sort of showed where Ball stands as a halfcourt player, and it wasn't great; Fox gave him plenty of trouble on both ends.

I understand your point. If you look at the boxscore, I can see that conclusion. I don't "boxscore scout" college players, so I won't argue against your point of view.

[SelfishPlayer]

I posted the following about Lonzo Ball after viewing the Kentucky vs UCLA game.

Lonzo Ball is the recipient of a great deal of hype. In the Kentucky vs UCLA game where he went up against NBA level athletes, they exposed his weaknesses.

[Unbreakable99]

I think Fox outplayed Ball in the 1st half of the game. Ball played better in the second half imo.

[cksdayoff]

it's not that deep. ball doesn't have a midrange game. Negrodamus may have hit on something, that shooting form he has, where he launches it was tailor made for deep 2s and 3s. That's probably all he ever practiced since he was in middle school, just launching from deep.

a quote from his dad. "why settle for a shot right on the 3point line with a hand in your face when you can shoot a shot a couple of feet behind the 3 point line where there's space between you and the defender and you can go through your shooting form comfortably without a hand in your face."

i'm not quoting exactly word for word but that seems to be something lonzo lives by on the offensive end. i guess you can say he takes what the defense gives him. the guy has a smooth step back to get his shot off from deep to force some space between him and the defender, and he also has a quick release.

[LloydFree]

I think Fox outplayed Ball in the 1st half of the game. Ball played better in the second half imo.

You are correct. And you have to look at the context of what was going on during the game. Kentucky was 3/4 quarter court trapping Ball in order to get the ball out of his hands as much as possible and when UCLA beat the traps to set up offense in the halfcourt, Kentucky put Forwards on Ball, in order to dissuade him from shooting.
If you boxscore scout, you just see the six turnovers, but if you saw the game, at least 4 of them were dumb unforced mistakes in the 1st 5-6 minutes of the game. The other 35 minutes, he handled the ball effortlessly against the Kentucky pressure, and he was able to get up contested jumpers over Bam Adebayo. Before that game, I wasn't sure that ridiculous wind-up was fast enough to get shots up. Afterwards I saw it doesn't matter.

[cksdayoff]

i guess CoreyGallagher and i are the only ones on the Frank the Tank bandwagon. Not as quick as DSJ or Fox, but has a build, once filled out will be a tank with elite defensive potential, and looks like he could have an advanced midrange and 3 ball. Could play the 1 or the 2 depending on the rotation

Nah man, I'm 100% with you. Obviously I don't have him above Fultz, but I would definitely consider him over Ball and DSJ. His defense will be elite, I don't even think you need to include the word potential in there. If his shot is real (which is looking increasingly likely), he would be the ideal Patrick Beverly type player next to Simmons with way more upside than Pat Beverly.

sweet. the only knocks i can see are his quickness and his aggressiveness on the offensive end. i think it's amazing that this guy goes into the game with a mindset of locking down his opponent on defense at such a young age, and his shot looks pure, people say he has a slow release but what helps him, is what looks like to be a high release point. Frank says he has it in him to be aggressive on the offensive end, so we'll see. The guy is ideal as the secondary ball handler with Simmons. TLC, RoCo and this guy causing havoc in the passing lanes would be amazing.

[Marcus]

I posted the following about Lonzo Ball after viewing the Kentucky vs UCLA game.

Lonzo Ball is the recipient of a great deal of hype. In the Kentucky vs UCLA game where he went up against NBA level athletes, they exposed his weaknesses.

which weaknesses?