Game three Summer league game thread

[PtldPlatypus]

Wow

Yeah, it was a pretty candid moment. He tried to recover, but it was obvious he was pretty pissed.

 

[PDXFonz]

What did he actually say?

Rick Kamla: "Shabazz Napier with the shoulder injury, started the game but not the second half. What can you tell us about that? Was it the bang ups at the end of the half?"

Olshey: "That's what happens when you run out at a guy running full speed with .3 on the clock, you get what you deserve. *Sarcastically* I guess he was afraid he was going to hit a half court runner?!"

Kamla: "Now Neil, hold on a second. Isaiah (Thomas) was saying that it was get back for the hard foul that Craft gave Napier before that."

Olshey: "I would have picked a better spot than when he was running full speed, I can tell you that. He's out for the rest of the game, shoulder sprain. But we will see how he's doing after the game, hopefully he's alright."

 

[PDXFonz]

Looks like we play the Jazz again tomorrow. Elimination round, gotta come out hungry if they really want to set an impression for their commitment to success.

 

[Boob-No-More]

He is Claver

He's better. He has Claver's intangibles, with one very tangible benefit - he can shoot. Yes, he is struggling to adjust to the NBA 3-point distance, but that will come. At least he's knocking down his 2-point field goal attempts (shooting .667 from 2-point range). Layman has shown in three summer league games he is capable of doing something Claver was never able to do in three seasons in the NBA - consistently knock down an open shot.

BNM

 

[Sarni]

I like what I've seen from Layman. Probably not ready to contribute much in the upcoming season, especially with the competition in his position, but he could make a good player in the league and looks a good pick at #47. I wonder though whether he'll be used as #3 or a stretch #4.

 

[Mediocre Man]

He's better. He has Claver's intangibles, with one very tangible benefit - he can shoot. Yes, he is struggling to adjust to the NBA 3-point distance, but that will come. At least he's knocking down his 2-point field goal attempts (shooting .778 from 2-point range). Layman has shown in three summer league games he is capable of doing something Claver was never able to do in three seasons in the NBA - consistently knock down an open shot.

BNM

Has he? His shot looks good...like Claver, but hasn't really gone in very much....like Claver.

He's only 2-13 from 3pt. So not sure what you are referring to?

So far anyway

 

[Blazer4ever]

Claver should have been used as a PF. The same way we often use Aminu and Harkless. Layman I think is a more natural SF, a bit weaker inside player but better shooter. Either way Claver was/is a very good player that I think we could have made better use of.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Claver should have been used as a PF. The same way we often use Aminu and Harkless. Layman I think is a more natural SF, a bit weaker inside player but better shooter. Either way Claver was/is a very good player that I think we could have made better use of.

He is shooting .364. What are you guys looking at?

This isn't meant to be a knock on Layman, I like him, but he hasn't shot the ball well AT ALL so far. Luis freaking Montero is shooting a better %

 

[illmatic99]

Remember Nic early in his rookie year and especially during Summer League?

The raw stats were shit and he looked like he couldn't hang at all, but he always knew where to be and what to do. And he was pretty mobile defensively.

That's kinda similar to what I see in Layman right now. The fundamentals and the tools are there, it just hasn't resulted in anything worthwhile. A lot of the summer league stats have to do with teammates. Nic struggled with a guy like Bayless on his team hogging the ball. Layman is working in a similar environment with Pat and Russ etc dribbling the ball for 15 seconds of every possession. (Still, no excuse for him missing so much from three).

Let's see this guy with the regular team in training camp-- I feel like he can play. Call it intuition. He runs and moves with purpose, and I love how quick his first step and jumps are. And that shooting stroke looks too good for him to be missing this poorly.

 

[HailBlazers]

Let's see this guy with the regular team in training camp-- I feel like he can play. Call it intuition. He runs and moves with purpose, and I love how quick his first step and jumps are. And that shooting stroke looks too good for him to be missing this poorly.

Not to mention Neil drafted him. Seemingly out of nowhere. Usually a good sign he's on to something.

 

[Natebishop3]

He is shooting .364. What are you guys looking at?

This isn't meant to be a knock on Layman, I like him, but he hasn't shot the ball well AT ALL so far. Luis freaking Montero is shooting a better %

He shot 50% yesterday from the field.

 

[Orion Bailey]

CONNAUGHTON FOR THE WIIIIINNNNNNN!!!!!!!



GOOOOOOOOOOOOAAAAAALLLLLLLLLLLL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Man what a game!

 

[Mediocre Man]

He shot 50% yesterday from the field.

Yes, he did. Not sure what that has to do with my statement though?

 

[Natebishop3]

Yes, he did. Not sure what that has to do with my statement though?

You said he's shooting 36.4% so I'm assuming you're talking about his overall shooting percentage, no?

 

[Mediocre Man]

You said he's shooting 36.4% so I'm assuming you're talking about his overall shooting percentage, no?

Ya, for sure.

I was just responding to the people saying he can shoot better than Claver. He hasn't shown he can, so I was wondering what I may have been missing. Yes, outside of his 3 point shot, he shot well yesterday. This isn't to condemn him. I think he'll be good. Just hasn't really been the shooter a couple of posters said he has been....IMO anyway

 

[Natebishop3]

Ya, for sure.

I was just responding to the people saying he can shoot better than Claver. He hasn't shown he can, so I was wondering what I may have been missing. Yes, outside of his 3 point shot, he shot well yesterday. This isn't to condemn him. I think he'll be good. Just hasn't really been the shooter a couple of posters said he has been....IMO anyway

I'm not saying this is only you MM, but why does "shooting" specifically mean three pointers in today's NBA?

 

[BBert]

Not sure of the exact words.......but basically said he deserved getting hurt for being stupid and jumping in front of someone sprinting down the court with less than a second left.....then said he hopes he all right.

LOL

 

[Pinwheel1]

Ya, for sure.

I was just responding to the people saying he can shoot better than Claver. He hasn't shown he can, so I was wondering what I may have been missing. Yes, outside of his 3 point shot, he shot well yesterday. This isn't to condemn him. I think he'll be good. Just hasn't really been the shooter a couple of posters said he has been....IMO anyway

Yeah but I think you are comparing Claver after 3 years in the NBA and Layman after 3 games. I liked Claver quite a bit and don't really think he got enough consistent minutes with the Blazers to get his confidence shooting the ball. But just from the eye ball test, Layman's outside shot seems a lot more effortless. Once he gets used to the extra 2 feet behind the 3 point point line, his box score will look better too.

But only time will tell for sure.

 

[Boob-No-More]

Has he? His shot looks good...like Claver, but hasn't really gone in very much....like Claver.

He's only 2-13 from 3pt. So not sure what you are referring to?

So far anyway

Read what I wrote. I said he's struggling with the longer NBA 3-point distance (2-13), but is making his 2-point FGs (6-9).

BNM

 

[Mediocre Man]

I'm not saying this is only you MM, but why does "shooting" specifically mean three pointers in today's NBA?

Maybe because that's the way the game is moving?
Statistics are too hard to break down by spot on the floor? Is there a site for that?
Honestly though, at this point I see no difference in them. Layman has played a total of three summer league games, so I am not saying Claver is his NBA spirit animal, just that he reminds me of him at this point. Smart, always in the right place, form on his shot looks great, ball doesn't seem to go in from distance

 

[Mediocre Man]

Read what I wrote. I said he's struggling with the longer NBA 3-point distance (2-13), but is making his 2-point FGs (6-9).

BNM

Watching the games, it seemed like most of his two point shots are at the rim though. He's had at least two dunks, and two 1 foot lay ins. That is 4 of his 6 shots. Not seeing how that equates to the Liam Neeson (certain skill set) You said he has Claver's intangables, with one very important one, he can shoot. I don't really see how 2 shots outside of 1 foot can show you he is a better shooter than Claver. That's all.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Yeah but I think you are comparing Claver after 3 years in the NBA and Layman after 3 games. I liked Claver quite a bit and don't really think he got enough consistent minutes with the Blazers to get his confidence shooting the ball. But just from the eye ball test, Layman's outside shot seems a lot more effortless. Once he gets used to the extra 2 feet behind the 3 point point line, his box score will look better too.

But only time will tell for sure.

I am. I have been saying that as well.

 

[Boob-No-More]

Watching the games, it seemed like most of his two point shots are at the rim though. He's had at least two dunks, and two 1 foot lay ins. That is 4 of his 6 shots. Not seeing how that equates to the Liam Neeson (certain skill set) You said he has Claver's intangables, with one very important one, he can shoot. I don't really see how 2 shots outside of 1 foot can show you he is a better shooter than Claver. That's all.

In terms of the eye test, Claver had the yips, Layman doesn't. Layman shoots with confidence and without hesitation, whether he makes the shot, or not. He'll be fine once he adjusts to the longer 3-point distance. Claver never shot with confidence. He hesitated and avoided shooting even when wide open.

Layman's 3-point shooting improved every year he was in college. That, along with his confidence and shooting form are good indications that his 3-point shooting will be fine once he has had time to adjust to the longer 3-point distance.

Claver played professionally in Europe, where the 3-point line is closer to the NBA distance. His poor shooting had less to do with distance. Hell, Claver is a shitty FT shooter (never shot above 70% in the 7 seasons he played in Europe prior to the NBA and a career .585 FT shooter in the NBA). Good shooters make their FTs. As with his 3-point shooting, Layman improved his FT shooting every year he was in college to the point where he shot .832 as a senior. He wasn't quite a 50/40/90 guy as a senior, but he was fairly close (.500/.396/.832). FT shooting has nothing to do with distance. Claver was just a poor shooter. Layman is not.

BNM

 

[OSUBlazerfan]

In terms of the eye test, Claver had the yips, Layman doesn't. Layman shoots with confidence and without hesitation, whether he makes the shot, or not. He'll be fine once he adjusts to the longer 3-point distance. Claver never shot with confidence. He hesitated and avoided shooting even when wide open.

Layman's 3-point shooting improved every year he was in college. That, along with his confidence and shooting form are good indications that his 3-point shooting will be fine once he has had time to adjust to the longer 3-point distance.

Claver played professionally in Europe, where the 3-point line is closer to the NBA distance. His poor shooting had less to do with distance. Hell, Claver is a shitty FT shooter (never shot above 70% in the 7 seasons he played in Europe prior to the NBA and a career .533 FT shooter in the NBA). Good shooters make their FTs. As with his 3-point shooting, Layman improved his FT shooting every year he was in college to the point where he shot .832 as a senior. He wasn't quite a 50/40/90 guy as a senior, but he was fairly close (.500/.396/.832). FT shooting has nothing to do with distance. Claver was just a poor shooter. Layman is not.

BNM

You make good points, but in your opinion, why was he selected 47th, and not even on some mock drafts?

 

[Boob-No-More]

You make good points, but in your opinion, why was he selected 47th, and not even on some mock drafts?

Guys drop for all kinds of reasons, especially 4-year players. The draft is all about potential. Guys with 4-years of college are seen with having less upside than the latest 19-year old wunderkind. It's why Draymond Green was a second rounder and Wesley Matthews went undrafted.

BNM

 

[Pinwheel1]

You make good points, but in your opinion, why was he selected 47th, and not even on some mock drafts?

My guess is the mocks left him off because he was not the top scorer on his team (4th) and since he would be playing a position in the NBA where shooting is essential, he was over looked. I bet other NBA scouts were high on....just not internet website scouts.

Plus he could be considered a tweener by some. Which often hurts the perception of the player.

Edit: Maryland had 5 guys who averaged between 11 and 15 pts per game. Layman averaged 11.6

 

[OSUBlazerfan]

Guys drop for all kinds of reasons, especially 4-year players. The draft is all about potential. Guys with 4-years of college are seen with having less upside than the latest 19-year old wunderkind. It's why Draymind Green was a second rounder and Wesley Matthews went undrafted.

BNM

You think they would eventually learn, right? (The GM's)

Also, given the new money in the NBA, a player that takes 3-4 years to develop, is only going to start producing at the end of his rookie deal, which then cascades in a huge second contract as opposed to the 4-year starter which can contribute by possibly 2nd year on his rookie contract.

 

[Natebishop3]

You think they would eventually learn, right? (The GM's)

They never will, because each GM is hoping to roll the dice and draft a super star. They aren't hoping to draft a role player.

 

[Mediocre Man]

In terms of the eye test, Claver had the yips, Layman doesn't. Layman shoots with confidence and without hesitation, whether he makes the shot, or not. He'll be fine once he adjusts to the longer 3-point distance. Claver never shot with confidence. He hesitated and avoided shooting even when wide open.

Layman's 3-point shooting improved every year he was in college. That, along with his confidence and shooting form are good indications that his 3-point shooting will be fine once he has had time to adjust to the longer 3-point distance.

Claver played professionally in Europe, where the 3-point line is closer to the NBA distance. His poor shooting had less to do with distance. Hell, Claver is a shitty FT shooter (never shot above 70% in the 7 seasons he played in Europe prior to the NBA and a career .585 FT shooter in the NBA). Good shooters make their FTs. As with his 3-point shooting, Layman improved his FT shooting every year he was in college to the point where he shot .832 as a senior. He wasn't quite a 50/40/90 guy as a senior, but he was fairly close (.500/.396/.832). FT shooting has nothing to do with distance. Claver was just a poor shooter. Layman is not.

BNM

Claver shot .362 from 3pt. and .533 from the field in Euro league

So again, saying Layman has something Claver doesn't in shooting is complete nonsense.

 

[Boob-No-More]

You think they would eventually learn, right? (The GM's)

He also played on a team with very balanced scoring (all five starters averaged between 11.3 and 14.8 ppg). A 4th year senior who averages 11.6 ppg isn't going to turn a lot of heads. Layman was the 5th option (in terms of FGA), but the most efficient scorer (highest TS%) of the five.

BNM