These are facts that do not matter. though Who cares if MJ or Magic could shoot 3s? It wasn't necessary in their era. Back then nobody could shoot 3s. The current NBA requires shooting from guards, plain and simple. Also Magic had an amazing post game to rely on and was 6 foot taller than any other PG, MJ had an amazing midrange game and could take it to the rim at will and finish with authority, same with James...Lonzo, except for his passing, isn't good at particularly anything on offense. Can't hit midrange shots, can't finish at the rim, has no post up game to talk about, can't blow past defenders, can't draw fouls, can't make FTs, and his shooting motion forces him to go left for his shot...which makes him easy and predictable to defend. Kidd for example was a great player but there is a reason why Steve Nash has 2 MVPs and Kidd has none, even though he was a much better defender and a much better rebounder and an equal passer..the one major difference...shooting.
Skimmed through a bunch of baby s*** in here no offense... Zo is a killa, he just doesn't show it yet.
Steve Nash's rookie numbers: 3.3 points, 1 rebound, 2.1 assists, 0.3 steals, 0 blocks, 1 turnover, 10.5 mpg in 65 games (only started 2 of them) Steve Nash's per36 rookie numbers: 11.2 points, 3.3 rebounds, 7.3 assists, 1.1 steals, 0 blocks, 3.3 turnovers Steve Nash's advanced rookie numbers: 103 ORtg, 112 DRtg, 0.7 WS, -0.5 VORP, AST% 29.5%, TOV% 24.2%, USG% 17.1%, PER 10.8, TS% 53.9% Lonzo's rookie numbers: 10.2 points, 6.9 rebounds, 7.2 assists, 1.7 steals, 0.8 blocks, 2.6 turnovers, 34.2 mpg in 52 games (only came off the bench in 2 of them) Lonzo's advanced rookie numbers: 97 ORtg, 106 DRtg, 2 WS, 1.7 VORP, AST% 29.2%, TOV% 18.6%, USG% 17.4%, PER 12.5, TS% 44.4% Lonzo's only problem this year was efficiency. He's better than Steve in basically every other way. By the way, Steve came into the league at 22 years old after playing 4 years in college. Everyone can keep banging on this kid's shooting all they want, but you're missing the forest for the trees. His efficiency needs to improve and as soon as it does this kid is, without exaggeration, one of the Top 10 PGs in the game right now maybe even higher than that. What other PG is giving you 7+ assists with less than 3 turnovers a game and elite defense and rebounding with low USG%? Lonzo could be the 3rd player in NBA history to average a triple double and he would do it with a USG% under 25% (for reference, Westbrook hasn't been under 30% since his sophomore season and topped 40% in 2017 when he averaged a triple double). Hell he could be the first to average a triple double with 2+ steals and a block a game.
Part of the reason I'm ok passing on Bron is the kids need some time and patience to develop into what they can be. Perhaps Bron ends up being the guy to speed that growth, and is more willing to share the load than Kobe or than himself on past teams where he controlled the ball too much. Lots to be seen, but a few of our kids just need time to grow into their game and their bodies.
maybe there's a reason kidd has a ring and nash doesn't, too? i'm with you on lonzo's faults. and they concern me. but he's already an impactful nba player even with those warts. passing, rebounding, hoop iq, pace control...he matters. i'm not one who says he's untouchable in trade, but those suggesting his rookie year was disappointing weren't paying attention. in fact, my biggest concern was that he wasn't on the floor enough. if anything stops him, that will be it, imo. and that's a big issue.
Anyone know where I can find defensive +/- for PGs ??? I read that Ball was 3rd in the league. Want to confirm.
https://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2018_leaders.html He was third in defensive box plus/minus among guards, but 13th overall. Still pretty remarkable for a rookie.
We might have to agree to disagree. To be honest, I'm not too much into stats, and certainly not into 36mpg stats which is IMO probably the most useless stat of all time. I'm saying this: 1. Comparing stats of players from different teams in different eras is foolish. 2. Shooting efficiency is just "one" stat....but to me the most important one. I would not care about shooting if you are Ben Simmons. But since you are not...shooting matters more than assist to TO ratio, low usage rate, rebounding etc... I look at a floor general and I care about 3 things mostly...shooting, playmaking and leadership. Ball is not communicative and hasn't come across as a leader to me yet. This might be related to his age and status as a rookie but it doesn't seem to be his personality and certainly not an emotional leader by any stretch of imagination. Ball is an amazing passer in transition but an average playmaker in half court sets because he isn't aggressive enough. For the sake of this argument, lets say he is a great playmaker overall. Ball is an absolutely terrible shooter from anywhere. These are my take aways from his rookie season. It doesn't mean it will have to stay that way. Obviously he will get better at everything, he is just 20. But I don't put too much wehight on what PER he has, what rebounding numbers, or whatever else...I know PGs these days tend to be good scorers as well but to me, thats not important. Its important to be aggressive though which he has lacked at times, getting benched in 4th quarters. Shooting is the most important skill on a basketball court these days especially for a guard. If you are a great shooter but can't do anything else, you still easily get an NBA job. If you are a great playmaker that can't shoot, there is a good chance you aren't playing in the NBA for long. Guys like John Wall and Westbrook have proven you can be great without being a great shooter. But they are 20/10 players who aren't without their own doubters either. Alltime great PGs of this era like Chris Paul or Steve Nash checked all boxes...shooting, leadership, playmaking etc...
We can agree to disagree, no problem (although I think we agree more than you think), but there's some inconsistencies in your argument here. How can it be foolish to use Steve Nash as an example when you used him before and then brought him back again? The only reason I posted those numbers was because you brought up Steve Nash as a player that Lonzo should be emulating. As for Per36, the only reason I posted that at all was because comparing Steve Nash's rookie season to Lonzo's is laughable. Steve barely played and when he did he was okay, but only in spurts. Literally the only thing he did better than Lonzo was shoot, but that was in a small sample size in comparison anyway. Steve took a total of 179 shots to Lonzo's 564 shots. Who knows if Steve would be as efficient as Lonzo if he had the opportunity to take 3x as many shots as Lonzo did? If you want to compare the stats straight up, Lonzo crushes Steve. And for the record, Lonzo today is a better defender and rebounder than Steve Nash at any point in Steve's career. Again, in terms of talent the only thing Steve has on Lonzo is shooting efficiency and it's FAR too early to write Lonzo off as a shooter given Lonzo's college efficiency and the fact that shooting efficiency improves over time for good players typically as they adjust to NBA defenses. See that doesn't make sense to me at all. First of all Ben's and Lonzo's numbers are remarkably similar. Ben took and made about two more shots a game and that's the main difference in their numbers. 15.8/8.1/8.2 with 1.7 steals and 0.9 blocks vs. 10.2/6.9/7.2 with 1.7 steals and 0.8 blocks. Ben Simmons literally refuses to take a three pointer because he can't shoot at all, Lonzo just lacks consistency. Oh and Ben is 4" taller and a year older with a far more mature body. If we're comparing the two, they're way closer than people realize which is wild since Ben Simmons is fantastic. And how can usage rate and assist to turnover ratio mean less than shooting for a point guard? The first two numbers define what a point guard does: spread the ball to his teammates. Shooting is important, but it's not as important as those other factors. That also includes defense and rebounding which Lonzo is elite at for his position. I guess this is where we'll have to really disagree. I agree he needs to be more efficient and I agree he needs to be more aggressive. I completely disagree that his shooting defines who he is as a point guard or that his lack of efficiency is some sort of indicator that he's not good enough. If you now want to stop comparing him to Steve Nash, that's fine. Let's talk about Ricky Rubio. Rubio is a starting point guard who can't shoot well, but is a tremendous playmaker. Lonzo is a better defender and rebounder than Rubio right now, but let's call Rubio his floor. Rubio is a solid starter in this league.
Real...i also think we agree on more stuff than not. Lonzos floor is Rubio who is a real impact player in the NBA. I have never doubted that Lonzo will be better than Rubio. That's out of question to me. The question though is who are we comparing him to? What are the expectations? If your expectation is long career, savvy playmaking and a sure fire NBA starter and possibly top 10 PG in the NBA? Great, let me tell you now that Lonzo will meet every of those expectations most likely. My expectations are higher though. If what I described is his actual career, he'd be considered a letdown in my book. Lonzo wasn't advertised as a solid starter. He was advertised as the friggin face of the greatest and most successful franchise in all of sports. His father was talking how he is the goat already, magic was talking about hanging his jersey in the rafters. I'm sorry, he doesn't like such a player even in my wettest dreams. If he isn't an all-star he is a wasted pick imo. I know #2 picks are usually letdowns in the NBA but when you pick 2nd 3 straight years and it doesn't even produce one all-star, that's a fail in my book. But the jury is out, we have 3-4 years to find out what these guys are made of. BTW I did bring up Nash because he is the ideal PG in my book while being a great shooter and garbage on defense (opposite of Lonzo).
My expectations are that he'll continue to improve and will be a Top 10 PG as early as 2020, could be earlier than that. All he has to do is knock down a couple more open shots and he's putting up Ben Simmons numbers. What's not to love? We'll see I guess, but I think it's crazy that fans don't see what I see. This kid is doing things no other kid is doing. This isn't D'Angelo Russell where we have to examine the stats as hard as possible to maybe project Lonzo as a future All-Star possibly one day. Lonzo put up a season that, if Ben Simmons wasn't a "rookie", would be wildly lauded. His impact on the game is tremendous, it pops on film. His defense, his rebounding, his ability to find easy looks constantly and consistently is remarkable. I honestly don't get how anyone could call this kid a bust (not that you're saying that, but it's a narrative for some reason).
