I posted a video that shows exactly flashes of defense. I said when I posted it that he needs to find a way to channel that energy every play. Here it is again: Ever since the end of the season the narrative on Julius has been oddly negative. He improved in almost every way last season. He shot better, assisted more, doubled his win shares, improved his BPM, improved his VORP, improved his TS%, improved his FG% by distance in almost every way except the three point line which was less than a percent worse. I understand his limitations, but there's some selective memory at play when it comes to Julius. Among his contemporaries last year (22 or younger), he was 4th in rebounding behind Towns, Jokic, and Giannis. He was 7th in assists behind Jokic and a bunch of guards (including Russell). I'm okay with trading him for George still. I think that's the right move. I just don't understand the growing wave of "he's stupid" post that don't actually take into account the things he does well.
He's still my 3rd keeper after Ingram and Zu. I believe he will turn into a really solid all around starter in this league.
His low bb iq is a limiting factor on him. There are lots of terrific athletes in the NBA who aren't worth $15m. And that's probably the starting point for someone his size, as I've now said for I think the third time. If you have to choose today, you trade him. If you keep him, I think you start becoming very concerned about what he is and what he'll be unless he improves significantly.
Fortunately basketball IQ can be improved, more so than athleticism. It's only natural for players like Zubac or Russell with subpar athleticism to have better basketball IQ and good fundamentals because they had to rely on it heavily throughout their youth. Besides, I don't necessarily consider athleticism to be Julius' biggest strength. I think it's the combination of play-making, ball-handling (for his size), hustle, and physicality that sets him apart.
we've been through this before, but i think hoop iq has become more and more valuable, particularly given the sophistication with which team defensive schemes have to operate to be successful in the modern nba. and i don't think it really improves dramatically over time. most players who lack that intuition and focus tend to continue on that path. in terms of athleticism, i really think the limiting factor for most young players is strength, and it's the most improvable aspect of athleticism. but randle's already got that in spades. i like him, but i'd be looking to move him before i had to make a decision on paying him. if he ends up staying, i'm fine with that, too, though. i like his attitude and will a lot more than russell's.
Well the secondary factor is among the kids Julius is about as smart or stupid as any other kid. I think Russell is a more natural player, but I'm not convinced he's a lot smarter than Julius. If intelligence is what we're looking for, I'm not really sure we've got a team full of Chauncey Billupses out there. Again, he's worth trading because I think he's got value. If we end up keeping him at 15 million, that's a solid deal. That's less than 15% of the cap and it's significantly less than the max. Hell it's cheaper than both Mozgov and Deng. That number sounds fine to me.
I honestly think both are smart enough. With Russell the problem is focus and immaturity whereas Randle lacks discipline and repetition. The inconsistency for both will improve as they mature as adults and professional athletes. It's all in their head.
i see absolutely zero risk in $15M for Julius. Given the state of the salary cap, I have a hard time buying guys like Bazemore, Mahinmi, Biyombo, etc are worth more than JR.
i'm defining "smart" here as intuition. russell just has it. he knows where the ball is going. he's sort of lazy and disengaged, but when he wants to be, he's there, on offense and defense. think harden. randle just honestly doesn't know where to be if he doesn't have the ball or is defending the ball. although in each of those cases, give me randle all day. he's just not talented enough to warrant building a system around those obvious strengths. i still have some hope for ingram, as he a) cares and b) has some feel for the game, on and off ball. at 15, sure. but look at the market--he's getting a max offer. that's closer to 20. what if you could convert that to a player paid 15 who's proven to be worth 15?
I mostly agree but a couple notes: - Randle is surprisingly adequate on the ball defensively. When he's engaged he's actually a versatile defender but only on the ball. He absolutely has no idea what to do off the ball. None whatsoever either near the rim or on the perimeter. - Some hope for Ingram? The sky is the limit on that kid. So far I've seen no obvious weaknesses in his game. Nothing that can't be fixed as of right now. - I don't think he gets a max deal, but I think 15 is a steal. If that's the number thrown around, I take that gladly. I think Randle will have trouble negotiating a lot more than Clarkson. A little more. Probably in the 17 range should honestly get it done. If he wants more, I gladly trade him and go in A different direction.
yeah I referenced 15 because i was stuck in the last CBA and thought that was the max. I still think i'd give him his max as I fully expect Randle to get better and if he doesn't fit here, there will be a team out there that believes he's a key piece to push over the top. Randle has holes in his game, but I think a lot of lakers fans are seriously undervaluing him. I think he has the drive to add a lot to his game. I understand what people see when speaking of his lack of instincts, but i do believe he'll at least improve his focus by his mid-late 20s and will be a borderline all-star caliber in this league. Could have an Odom-like career.
i don't agree. i think people had different expectations. Some thought it would come quicker, others thought it would take longer. Most, if not all of his issues look fixable or mental (i.e. shooting until the last 20-30 games).
I didn't forget anything, I went IN not expecting a whole lot from a rail thin 19 year old rookie and I saw major growth as the season went on. From consistently making the right plays on offense and making some beautiful passes, to taking on the challenge of guarding some of the leagues best players, to straight up dunking on people. I did not expect this kid to be doing that in year 1.
Nor his handles and being able to play the point at times if needed. Who here even went there with expectations for him based on his one college year. Handles just kept getting better. The dude is 6'9". From the start of the season he never shied away from taking it inside and making the aggressive "get contact in the air going to the basket" attempts. Even though he was getting his a** kicked. That's what carried my satisfaction through the months of not hitting his shots. What else was it really that was so "negative" aside from shots not dropping or FTs being a poor %? 6'9" no padding on his bones playing fearlessly with a real feel for the game and the right pass or play to be made.
