D'Angelo Russell Discussion: Adopting A Professional Attitude

I think if he was on the Warriors his assists would go up

 

Bet Lonzo don't get no ESPN Sports Science Dude special done on him.

 

They'll do it for his dad and do a psychological study on a crazy sports dad.

 

I agree with therealdeal. The more I see of D'Angelo the more I see a guy who is a score first player. He has playmaking ability, but that doesn't make him a pass first or a true floor general. Doesn't mean he can't be a really good player in this league, but odds are it'll be as a 2 guard or combo guard more so than a PG. He just needs to get that shot fixed I think he can still be a hell of a player in this league.

 

Ball is better than Russell in every aspect except shot "form". Not sure what games you have been watching.

 

Maybe we should wait til Ball is in the NBA first to compare. To be fair.

 

Why? I suppose you're coming with the old level of competition argument?

 

Jimmer Fredette looked great in college, and is tearing it up in China. Couldn't stick in the NBA. He might be a far superior prospect, but I think it's too early to say.

 

Russell Westbrook and James Harden both average 10 assists.

Don't think anyone would call them true PG's.

Russell will be just fine. Just needs to be more efficient.

 

... what's his PER36 though

 

Well I can just categorically list them

- size and speed to Ball
- court vision and passing to Ball
- defense to Ball
- rebounding to Ball
- intangibles (e.g. Making others around them better) to Ball
- attacking the rim to Ball
- shooting and range to DLo

Ball is so reminiscent of JKidd to me even with the ugly jumper. Remember that was the knock on Kidd and look at where he ended up, one of the best 3 pt shooters ever.

That's what I'm saying Ball is one of those players I see every now and then that screams to me game changer. "IT" factor.

 

Randle isn't really much of a pick and roll finisher. He may receive the all after the pick, but he prefers to go one on one.

Nance is a smart player looking for the extra pass, but I trust his jumper more than Randles.

 

yeah, not sure i see a clear definition of point guardery above, at all. just some exemplars who actually had very different playing styles (and happened to be surrounded by elite finishers at all times in their careers). and it's totally weird that paul wouldn't be included on a list of guys who "organize" an offense or put people in position to be sucessful.

russell's as much of a pg as most of the top pgs in the nba. and he puts the offense into the right spots and the ball into the right spots. not his fault nobody does anything with it.

randle and ingram can't shoot. randle won't cut to the basket to save his soul, and if he catches while open, he often dribbles until he's not, like some sort of horrific pick up game. none of the centers is a real lob target. due to all of this, you have help defenders all over the passing lanes against the lakers. no modern nba offense works this way. lonzo ball would look like dog s*** in it.

as for whether this means randle and ingram aren't talented...what does talent mean here? ingram has time to start making elementary jumpshots, and the rest of his game is already quite solid. so i'm not concerned. randle has talents that aren't useful, imo. he can initiate as a pf, but we have a better initiator. so, is he talented? sure. he's big, strong, fast, can (sort of) handle, can pass off the dribble. in a vacuum, this sounds great. on the court, it doesn't lead to much. and you can't build around it--or at least you shouldn't.

the question, though, is whether russell needs to be moved to sg. having never given him a puncher's chance with a lineup that might favor his abilities, nobody should be saying that. it's quite obvious he has the requisite skills to play the position.