Trade ET Traded

[Scalma]

:35

No ability to pass.

 

[JoshuaHall]

Not sure I follow.

Kyle Guy usage rate is higher than GTJr.

Gary Trent Jr. didn’t dominate the ball at Duke, either. In fact, if you look back at what they said about Trent coming out of Duke, it was the fact he had to limit his game to catch and shoot because they wanted him to camp out at the 3 point line.

Also, on this topic... your comparison makes no sense.

Gary Trent Jr. was in the Allen Crabbe role. Catch and shoot. Yet average more assists, or approximately the same, as the others... who were in the CJ role.

 

[JoshuaHall]

Dont take things so serious my guy. We're talking about Trent's "ability" to pass.

You picked out one guy who isn't even more of a black hole. Guy averaged 2.1apg in college, Trent averaged 1.4. Also, eye test.

You responded to my post which was not about Trent’s ability to pass.

It was about what makes Trent a black hole in comparison to the other guys. So what makes the other guys so different?

So focus on the other guys, not Trent.

And I’m not taking things seriously. It doesn’t matter to me. There is no logic that states than these other dudes are some stellar passers in comparison.

Notice how you can’t refute any of the statistics or statements I’ve provided.

Also Kyle Guy - 1.3 assists per game. 1.5 assists per game. Then as a junior, 2.1. For a stellar average of 1.6 over a 3 year college career.

I’ve read your posts. You’re smarter than this dude.

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

By his coaches admission, he could do a lot more than “jack 3s”.

Once again — at no point have I argued or stated he is a great passer — so maybe lay off the Gary trent Jr focus and start telling me why, if he is a “black hole” those other players are logically not black holes.

Get off Trent’s dick and start picking apart

Kyle Guy
admiral schofield
THJ

Since they aren’t “black holes”

Did I ever argue they weren't black holes? I responded to a post about Gary Trent Jr, not about Guy, Schofield or THJ.

 

[SharpesTriumph]

Simons hype is getting crazy. He's still ultimately a 19 yr old with only 140 mins total experience.

We're gonna be relying on him for 20 mpg off the bench every night? I love the idea of throwing him into the fire, but I'd still like a minimum vet PG as our third string-- someone who won't gripe about mins and help nurture the youngins. We can't go with Dame as our only true PG.

Someone like Jeremy Lin would be perfect.

The problem is Jeremy Lin will not be happy at all as a third string guy who gets DNP. If we want Simons to attempt to take the primary backup PG role we can't bring anyone in who will get upset with a DNP. Then of course there is the salary, I don't want to burn our MLE at our best position when we have the wing and big issues we have.

I'd really look at it as though Dame is our main PG; Simons the backup PG, CJ the third string PG. Maybe there is a two way player we can sign as the 17th man to be the 4th string PG? Or we try to get a veteran on a minimum contract for that 15th roster spot that will accept the role, think of Earl Watson on his final season here. I think I'd rather target that 15th roster spot for a forward (still our area of biggest weakness) or a big since we have the Nurk injury concern.

This is all in motion depending on if we can keep any of Kanter/Hood/Aminu.

Either way I'm fine leaving the 4th string PG spot vacant until we finalize everything else with the roster.

 

[JoshuaHall]

Did I ever argue they weren't black holes? I responded to a post about Gary Trent Jr, not about Guy, Schofield or THJ.

My apologies. I thought you were participating in the conversation I started about how Trent is a black hole and those other players aren’t, which has somehow devolved into a conversation about Gary Trent Jr. and nothing about those other players.

 

[hoopsjock]

By his coaches admission, he could do a lot more than “jack 3s”.

Once again — at no point have I argued or stated he is a great passer — so maybe lay off the Gary trent Jr focus and start telling me why, if he is a “black hole” those other players are logically not black holes.

Get off Trent’s dick and start picking apart

Kyle Guy
admiral schofield
THJ

Since they aren’t “black holes”

You're complaining about not saying something while going off on others about something they didn't say either.

Try actually reading all of the post next time.

 

[Pinwheel1]

Always need shooters. Loved these highlights. Showed a variety of ways he can score. I think he can be better than Crabbe.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Once again, I never said he was a passer, nor was I arguing that he was so I don’t know what the fuck your point is other than making straw man arguments.

I said it was laughable that someone notes Gary Trent Jr. as a black hole then suggested a bunch more players - who are more developed, have higher usage ratings, and had a greater role than “stand at the 3pt line and jack 3s” - as players he would prefer but “I don’t like Trent because he is a black hole.”

Why the fuck else would you like any of those other players more then? They’re arguably just as bad, if not worse - given age, role, etc.

Once again, that post, which appears to have upset you so, was not stating that those players were better than Trent. It was saying that those players were available with one of the two picks that were given up to acquire Trent. The implication is not that they are less of black holes than Trent, but that their overall contributory value to the franchise would be roughly equal to that of Trent, so it was arguably poor resource management to have given up an additional pick on top of that one to acquire Trent.

At least, that's how I read it, and that appears to be what @hoopsjock has said in his subsequent posts in this thread.

 

[JoshuaHall]

You're complaining about not saying something while going off on others about something they didn't say either.

Try actually reading all of the post next time.

I am not going off on them.

I am telling them they aren’t answering the question I posed.

If YOU believe Gary Trent Jr. is a black hole ... why do YOU believe those other players arent?

They have responded as to why Gary Trent Jr is a black hole, which is not the question I posed.

I will ignore your last statement so as to not turn this into a pissing match.

 

[hoopsjock]

Also, on this topic... your comparison makes no sense.

Gary Trent Jr. was in the Allen Crabbe role. Catch and shoot. Yet average more assists, or approximately the same, as the others... who were in the CJ role.

Man, Caleb Swanigan and Nolan Smith would've been so good if their coaches didn't hold them back!

 

[TorturedBlazerFan]

My apologies. I thought you were participating in the conversation I started about how Trent is a black hole and those other players aren’t, which has somehow devolved into a conversation about Gary Trent Jr. and nothing about those other players.

I think Trent does tend to be a bit of a one-track mind when he gets the ball, I have a similar suspicion on Guy and Schofield. They’re all young though things can change, roles can change. At some point a player is kind of “what they are”, but I don't think that point has come for any of them.

 

[JoshuaHall]

Once again, that post, which appears to have upset you so, was not stating that those players were better than Trent. It was saying that those players were available with one of the two picks that were given up to acquire Trent. The implication is not that they are less of black holes than Trent, but that their overall contributory value to the franchise would be roughly equal to that of Trent, so it was arguably poor resource management to have given up an additional pick on top of that one to acquire Trent.

At least, that's how I read it, and that appears to be what @hoopsjock has said in his subsequent posts in this thread.

I am not upset in the slightest.
I am asking this:

If someone doesn’t like a certain player because he is a black hole... and complains about them being on the team...

Then says, but hey we could have gotten these players too... which are also black holes (and possibly worse)

Why wouldn’t you suggest, I don’t know, players that aren’t black holes???

Lmao

 

[PtldPlatypus]

I am not upset in the slightest.
I am asking this:

If someone doesn’t like a certain player because he is a black hole... and complains about them being on the team...

Then says, but hey we could have gotten these players too... which are also black holes (and possibly worse)

Why wouldn’t you suggest, I don’t know, players that aren’t black holes???

Lmao

Because...while he stated that he didn't like that aspect of Trent's game, his actual quibble was the cost of acquisition. Go back and read the post...again.

Sure, he definitely can. I just don't like what I've seen so far in terms of team oriented play. Dude can get shots off though, it's a useful skill.

I wasn't happy at all when we gave up two 2nd rounders to get him though. One of those picks would've been the 40th pick this year. The other was Miami's in 2021 which could end up being pretty good too.

Guys still on the board if we still had that pick:
Bol Bol
Eric Paschall
Admiral Schofield
Jalen McDaniels
Talen Horton Tucker
Kyle Guy

I'm not saying any of those guys are necessarily better though and I'm pulling for Trent to expand his game.

 

[JoshuaHall]

I think Trent does tend to be a bit of a one-track mind when he gets the ball, I have a similar suspicion on Guy and Schofield. They’re all young though things can change, roles can change. At some point a player is kind of “what they are”, but I don't think that point has come for any of them.

Guy and Schofield aren’t young in comparison to Trent Jr.

3 year players in comparison to 1 year.

Guy and Schofield had a much more defined and free role than Trent Jr.

Which is why I said the idea of being upset with Trent Jr,, but wanting to replace him with older, more known commodities makes very little logical sense.

 

[JoshuaHall]

Because...while he stated that he didn't like that aspect of Trent's game, his actual quibble was the cost of acquisition. Go back and read the post...again.

Why.
Suggest.
Those.
Players.

Find players you’d actually want. That is the part of the post I *responded* to.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Why.
Suggest.
Those.
Players.

Find players you’d actually want. That is the part of the post I *responded* to.

Because.
They're.
Comparable.
Value.

That's all he was talking about--asset value.

 

[JoshuaHall]

Because...while he stated that he didn't like that aspect of Trent's game, his actual quibble was the cost of acquisition. Go back and read the post...again.

And my reply was, maybe suggest players you’d actually want before throwing your hands up in the air bitching about acquisition cost.

What does cost of acquisition matter if there aren’t players you want? Lol

 

[JoshuaHall]

Because.
They're.
Comparable.
Value.

That's all he was talking about--asset value.

But they aren’t comparable value if he doesn’t want them.

And they also aren’t comparable value due to...

Age...
Role...
Injury history...

 

[hoopsjock]

I am not going off on them.

I am telling them they aren’t answering the question I posed.

If YOU believe Gary Trent Jr. is a black hole ... why do YOU believe those other players arent?

They have responded as to why Gary Trent Jr is a black hole, which is not the question I posed.

I will ignore your last statement so as to not turn this into a pissing match.

I already answered why even if they were black holes why I'd still prefer them over Trent.

@PtldPlatypus tried to explain it to you nicely and you're still fixated on something that I never said.

 

[Hoopguru]

Im thinking GTjr is being overlooked by all the hoopla around others, which is fine and understandable when it comes to fandom. But this guy has been programed and trained to excel in many different ways which will give him opportunity. He has an i/o game, can post up, nice mid-range game, beautiful fade, decent d and he's tough as nails. We saw how a un-drafted VanVleet was able to engineer shots and hit threes, I expect GTjr to do much the same.

 

[JoshuaHall]

I already answered why even if they were black holes why I'd still prefer them over Trent.

@PtldPlatypus tried to explain it to you nicely and you're still fixated on something that I never said.

Where did you answer why you would prefer them over Trent?

All I saw was you’d prefer them because we would get to keep an extra pick.

That doesn’t address why you like *their game* more than Trent to justify even drafting them.

 

[Pinwheel1]

And my reply was, maybe suggest players you’d actually want before throwing your hands up in the air bitching about acquisition cost.

What does cost of acquisition matter if there aren’t players you want? Lol

I agree with this. Obviously 2nd round picks are good to have, but they are also fairly easy to replace if you need to use an extra one to get a player you really want. And quite frankly having an extra spot on your roster for a rookie free agent is just as valuable. Again I am not down playing the value of having extra 2nd round picks, but I would prefer they go after the one they feel most comfortable with because there are limited number of roster spots available.

 

[hoopsjock]

And my reply was, maybe suggest players you’d actually want before throwing your hands up in the air bitching about acquisition cost.

What does cost of acquisition matter if there aren’t players you want? Lol

Do you really think I just post bitching about acquisition cost and don't back up my posts?

I didn't like what we gave up for Trent at the time. You can go back and read it if you want.

Other than briefly acknowledging Bol Bol you've since dismissed him as the top player on my list. Not only could we have gotten him but we could've also kept Denver from getting him too. Now we have to hope his body is in as bad of shape as people are saying. He's a pretty unique player that I wouldn't have touched in the 1st round but that would've been great value at 40.

 

[Hoopguru]

I remember listening to Calling All Sports - Ted Dawson (the guy that started sports talk radio in PDX) when we drafted a second rounder out of a small school in Cheese Country WI, and I was taken back by all the critical analysis of his game before he even had a chance to compete for a job by getting minutes. Well, he won everyone over eventually and we know the rest of the story.

 

[hoopsjock]

That doesn’t address why you like *their game* more than Trent to justify even drafting them.

I didn't address that because I never fucking said that.

 

[andalusian]

You realize usage rate isnt indicative of how much a player dominates the ball, right?

But I could simply point to AST% as will. Trent is a chucker.

10 shot attempts per assist in NBA
12.3 shot attempts per assist in G-League.

Thats bad.

I understand what you are saying but I am not sure if AST% is based on passes or actually assists that convert into baskets (percentage of assists per possessions used). If it is actually based on actual assists - I would not use it as an indicative statistics (it just makes no sense, mathematically). If it based on passes, I can see what you say.

Maybe a (FGA/ (mp * usg%)) will be a better indicator. (or to make it easier, FGA per 36 / usg%)

Based on this, GTJ has a shot per usg rate of 16.2 / 20.7 (using the per-36) = 0.78

Dame is at 19.4 / 29.3 = 0.66
CJ is at 18.8 / 25.5 = 0.74
ANT is at 16.1 / 24.3 = 0.66

Per this, Ant projects as the same kind of PG that Dame is, he shoots a lot, but he moves the ball. GTJ is a bit more like CJ - shoots more than he creates.

Basketball Reference also has a FGA / 100 possessions - which in theory should be the same results, but there they have the order on Portland as Dame, CJ, GTJ, ANT where the calculation above shows it as GTJ, CJ, Dame/ANT (which really shows you that they are doing estimates for possessions too - and it seems likely that they are estimating it differently.

Either way, the kid is not afraid to shoot.

 

[Hoopguru]

I understand what you are saying but I am not sure if AST% is based on passes or actually assists that convert into baskets (percentage of assists per possessions used). If it is actually based on actual assists - I would not use it as an indicative statistics (it just makes no sense, mathematically). If it based on passes, I can see what you say.

Maybe a (FGA/ (mp * usg%)) will be a better indicator. (or to make it easier, FGA per 36 / usg%)

Based on this, GTJ has a shot per usg rate of 16.2 / 20.7 (using the per-36) = 0.78

Dame is at 19.4 / 29.3 = 0.66
CJ is at 18.8 / 25.5 = 0.74
ANT is at 16.1 / 24.3 = 0.66

Per this, Ant projects as the same kind of PG that Dame is, he shoots a lot, but he moves the ball. GTJ is a bit more like CJ - shoots more than he creates.

Basketball Reference also has a FGA / 100 possessions - which in theory should be the same results, but there they have the order on Portland as Dame, CJ, GTJ, ANT where the calculation above shows it as GTJ, CJ, Dame/ANT (which really shows you that they are doing estimates for possessions too - and it seems likely that they are estimating it differently.

Either way, the kid is not afraid to shoot.

Thats why we acquired him, to be a gun slinger. Maybe he can add to his game over time.

 

[HailBlazers]

Man, Caleb Swanigan and Nolan Smith would've been so good if their coaches didn't hold them back!

Really bro? Can't wait for GTJ to serve you some crow!

 

[Scalma]

Has Trent ever even been asked to facilitate? In college his role was minimized, had the lowest usage among dukes starters. He was relegated to spot up duty. Probably why he didn’t get drafted higher to begin with. In the NBA he’s only been in glorified pickup environments (summer league, g league, mop up duty.)

It’s funny how there’s a microanalysis of a teenagers passing game, but not someone like Rodney Hoods, who has averaged less than 2 assists a game in his career, yet most would love to give him the full MLE (including me.) We need bucket getters on the second unit. Hood is a bucket getter. So is Trent. Time will tell how good, but I wouldn’t dismiss an entire part of his game just because we haven’t seen it yet.