Cousins is who he is , he's not going to get better attitude wise ... no way I'm trading DAR for him , maybe a JC+ Randle package but Boogie isn't the right direction to go
I just wanted to say, it wasn't the lack of athleticism that made Kobe average last year, it was his body breaking down and the fact he was old and exhausted. When his body felt good he was destroying people in the mid post, but his legs were off for most of the season and he just started jacking 3's like a mad man. If Kobe was a few years younger, had another season to get his legs back and didn't jack 3's trying to do a Steph curry impression - he would of still been one of the best offensive players in the league. For other examples of players that weren't particularly athletic in the speed and jumping sense, look at Steve Nash, Dirk, Harden, Paul Pierce etc. if you can think the game to a high level it's just as important
i'm on team craft. russell knows how to play, intuitively. his size makes his lack of explosion bearable. and i actually disagree that he can't score in isolation or get by folks on the dribble--he does this, just not lately (in part because he's decided to never shoot again). so, yeah, his maturity is an issue, but i don't think his lack of athleticism (which is overblown, harden can barely dunk) is what will tank him, nor is it what could save randle.
Even when he had his legs Kobe was half the player he was in his prime. You could call it whatever you want. Old, exhausted, or his body breaking down. The end result is the same - lack of athleticism. Compare the players you listed to MJ, Lebron, Wilt, or Shaq. And how many of those players are known as good defenders? Yes, craftiness is important, but physique and athleticism matter more.
Kobe didn't have his legs since his 2014 season where he was playing at maybe 85-90% of his peak without really any of his athleticism compared to the early and mid 2000s... last year he didn't have his legs at all. It takes time, hence why you see players taking a year after injury to really get back to where they need to be. For every athletically gifted defensive player there is one that isn't particularly athletic but a good defender none the less - Paul pierce, Marc gasol, Tim Duncan, Ron artest, Larry bird, Stockton, Ricky Rubio, Chris Paul, Draymond Green, David West, George Hill, Tony Allen, Shane Battier, Andrew Bogut - all good defenders and not particularly athletic. So that arguement doesn't really work, otherwise Julius Randle, Andrew Wiggins and Wesley Johnson would be perennial defensive players of the year...
This turned into a weird debate. I think both things are equally important, but skill becomes increasingly more important as you age. Kobe (and every other great player) dominated games with his athleticism for a good 8-10 years. After that, it was mostly about his skill level. His ability to go to the post became his calling card instead of blowing by defenders for dunks. Julius is probably the most unique athlete on our team and one of the most unique athletes in the game right now. His top speed is legitimately fast, not just for his size, but for the NBA in general. He's got very good foot speed too for a 6'9" power forward. Athletic comparisons to guys like Malone and Johnson aren't all that far off. He's got tremendous gifts physically. However, he has not thus far been able to harness that ability to pick and choose his battles. What makes Westbrook and Wall so difficult to guard isn't their top speed, it's their ability to change speeds which is impossible to defend. To be fair to Julius, it took Wall this long to figure out exactly how to be a great player instead of a great athlete. For a lot of these kids, it takes that long. We're just extraordinarily impatient as fans and expect a kid with less than 2 years of on-the-court experience to be something more than he is. We're spoiled. To be fair to us, Julius has proven to be either intentionally stubborn, unintentionally stupid, or incredibly difficult for some other reason. He's timid when it comes to failure. He doesn't like to do something he knows he won't excel at (shooting). More importantly he has failed to grasp how his efforts affect the team as a whole instead of just himself. I think that's been true of all the kids we've had more than 4 months at some point or another with the possible exception of Larry Nance Jr. What it boils down to is some people like Julius more and some like D'Angelo more. That's why the same faces seem to roll around when one does poorly and vice versa. It's fine. Personally, I don't like D'Angelo. I think his arrogance doesn't match is ability. I think he tends to pout a lot and not take the game seriously. I could see why people don't like Julius because he doesn't take responsibility defensively and either can't or doesn't want to learn how to change to this point. Personally I find D'Angelo's flaws infuriating and Julius's merely irritating. I could understand how those could flip and at this point I'm fine getting rid of both or either.
I think it's part of the growing pains of having to develop young players. I mean, when was the last time we had to really do this? Never! Our actual core of players are all under 25, and most under 22. Players in the 80's were just getting drafted at that age. Most of the guys we've drafted have been on potential. A lot of our guys still have yet to develop into mature players yet, both mentally and skillfully. To do that in a new environment, with a new coach, new teammates, and the rough waters of the NBA can delay that for years. I've been critical of Randle, but I also saw what he can be early in the year when he's focused. I like DAR because he presents us a combo guard we've never really had since Magic, that can distribute the ball AND score the ball. Is he being a brat for playing this way, hell yeah he is. But eventually, he'll learn the balance of both when these guys start to mature and develop chemistry. We have A LOT of ego's to maintain in the locker room, and I think we all just need to step back and let these kids develop, but also, discuss what type of development we need to be seeing before we start jumping ship on these guys. I'm sure the Warriors fans had the same debates and discussions with Curry, Thompson, and Draymond before things started clicking for them. We'll get there...
Good game by Randle tonight. 15,7, 2 and 1 in 26 minutes with 50% shooting. He's looking more like himself after the pneumonia.
I thought that interview was a good listen. I don't think he's as thick headed as some fans are making him out to be, he appears to be a thoughtful and a well spoken dude. The comments about playing off the ball and him always being a "big kid" in HS were a bit revealing about his player development. Julius was likely forced to play as a big throughout his youth - unlike a other players his current size, who probably played guard early and had a growth spurt later on. Considering he's playing a facilitator role more than ever before I think he's doing OKAY... I agree, lots of room to improve but okay... I'm not ready to cut the cord on him yet. A trade would have have to get us something better than Ibaka imo
i think regular intelligence and basketball intelligence aren't the same thing. see jason kidd and magic johnson for examples. randle's sort of the reverse.
I wasn't implying that they were the same thing. And that's a very poor example to make your point. Kidd and Magic are some of the greatest basketball minds ever to play. Rick Carlisle said Kidd is the smartest player he's ever encountered. Carlisle was on that 86 Boston team, which included Bird and is considered one of the greatest squads ever. 95% of players to ever play are "the reverse" of Magic and Kidd. It's not like the guys roll the ball out there and wait for people to cut like its a pick up game. Yes, IQ is important, but that is not the end all be all. It's like saying you can't be a physicist if you're not Albert Einstein or Stephen Hawking. Players get coached. They take instruction. And they also develop. He's not a basketball dummy like you're making him out to be.
Magic may not be eloquent but I don't think he could have his success in business if he was unintelligent. He's come a long way from 1979.
i think his issues go beyond eloquence, and i think there's a lot of rich folks who aren't that sharp and poor folks who are.
"smartest player" "great basketball mind" note the qualifiers. and a lot of evidence points to randle as a basketball dummy. again, just look at zubac in like, 200 minutes of nba experience and half a season of nba coaching. if randle takes instruction, he's not doing it well, or he has poor instructors.
really? the reverse of kidd or magic (smart player, not smart person) would be someone who is a smart person but not a smart basketball player. it's quite clear in my first post that this was my point, as opposed to "randle is as basketball dumb as kidd was smart".
