Merged: blazers linked to serge ibaka

[BonesJones]

Yeah, my point is not whether Connaughton is as good as Layman. It's that any scrub you want to make your pet cause, you can easily claim that they're actually great talents because they've shown "flashes" (definition of which is up to the person saying it), they don't get enough burn to get into the flow of the game and the stats mean nothing. There's no further point to discussion at that point because, like religion, it's not something that can be argued. You either believe it or you don't.

Connaughton has shown flashes, but I don't believe he has the tools, and those flashes aren't representative of what he can do.

Layman's shown flashes, and I think those flashes ARE representative of what he can do, because he has the tools.

That's the difference.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Am I crazy, or is this deal actually somewhat reasonable?

http://www.espn.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=jg58tfr

 

[TBpup]

Boob-No-More makes some of the best (if not the best) posts on this site (and with stats to back up his argument) -
But on this one stats be damned, I'm going to have to disagree about Jake Layman.

Jake has flashed talent in all areas on the court.
Has full range out to three, can move laterally (quickly) to defend (and looks eager to put the work in) along with excellent athleticism (swooping in baseline for one-hand reverse slam was beautiful)

Teen Wolf just needs some more court time and I believe he'd be a very serviceable NBA player. In fact I wish we'd have not signed Crabbe and given all of his minutes to Layman. IMO he'd soon be outproducing what we've seen from Crabbe. (especially defensively).

Stotts wouldn't play CJ till he almost had no other choice.

Sounds a lot like Klay this year.

Is Klay not elite?

You're an elite shooter if you shoot over 40% from 3pt on a big enough sample size. No matter how you get it.

I also believe elite shooters can be streaky shooters too.

I would like my elite shooter to be a little more consistent. Only 4 games all season between 33-50%. That is a roller coaster.

 

[riverman]

if Layman was ripping it up in practice

I don't think they've had much practice until recently but the D league is going to help him out

 

[Wizard Mentor]

Am I crazy, or is this deal actually somewhat reasonable?

http://www.espn.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=jg58tfr

I don't know if you're crazy, but being chased by a human sized pitcher of kool-aid probably hasn't helped. It is extremely unlikely, but not unreasonable.

That being said, the wag in me chides you for not including Plumlee, and somehow ending up with Jimmy Butler

 

[Reep]

Am I crazy, or is this deal actually somewhat reasonable?

http://www.espn.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=jg58tfr

It certainly favors Portland, but it also seems to help the other teams out somewhat. Not sure about Orlando. It feels like they are getting the short end, but then again--Orlando.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

It certainly favors Portland, but it also seems to help the other teams out somewhat. Not sure about Orlando. It feels like they are getting the short end, but then again--Orlando.

I'm sure Portland would have to send a couple picks in this deal--which is allegedly what they're looking for--but the main thing for Orlando is that they could convert the expendable portion of their glut of bigs--including an expiring--into two capable wings that would complement Payton and Gordon. Crabbe/Fournier/Gay is not a bad 2/3 rotation.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

I don't know if you're crazy, but being chased by a human sized pitcher of kool-aid probably hasn't helped. It is extremely unlikely, but not unreasonable.

That being said, the wag in me chides you for not including Plumlee, and somehow ending up with Jimmy Butler

All deal proposals posted in here are unlikely. I'm just wondering if this is one of those rare blockbuster deal suggestions that actually make sense for everyone.

 

[RR7]

Yes....and in the example I showed, he was shooting 42% overall so very close to his season mark. What it also showed (as much of the season has) is that he is either on fire or pretty darned cold. There are a lot of 50% and over from '3' games and a lot of games in the 20% range. There are a few also in between but his 44% average comes more from a combo of really hot and really cold games instead of being around 40% every game.

50% or greater = 20 games
33-50% = 4 games
21-33% = 8 games
20% or under = 18 games

That is the definition of a streaky shooter and not an elite one. That's the point I was trying to make. Only 12 times all season has Crabbe shot between even a poor 20% and a warm 50%. The other 76% of the time he is either on fire at over 50% from '3' or bricking it up at 20% or under.

JJ Redick is someone I would consider an elite shooter. This season:

20% or under: 5
21-33:17
33-50:8
50+:15

Crabbe has played in 5 more games. But he has had 24 games greater than 33%, JJ has 23. Crabbe has had more stinkers for sure, but also in a smaller role than Reddick has for the Clippers.

On top of that, 4 of the games Crabbe shot under 20%, he had just 1 3 point attempt. In those 4 games, he shot 4 /7, 6/9, 4/7, and 1/2. In every single game, which you used to show that he was cold, he shot 50% or above. Another one of the games, he didn't attempt a 3.

I also don't get looking at 20-50 as a "sweet spot" as if a 21% game isn't a clunker. I'd think above and below say 33% makes more sense. Removing the 4 0-1 games, and the one without a shot, Crabbe has 24 games above 33%, 21 below. Redick 22 below, 23 above.

 

[BonesJones]

Stotts wouldn't play CJ till he almost had no other choice.

I would like my elite shooter to be a little more consistent. Only 4 games all season between 33-50%. That is a roller coaster.

So you want more 2-5 games from 3 instead of many 1-5 and 3-5 games?

 

[blue9]

You can say "he's shown flashes of being able to do lots of things" and "he'd be way better if he just got more time" about every low-minutes scrub in the league. Literally every single one of them. Especially if you just toss out the stats. At that point, you're basically just in the province of, "Hey, who knows, right? Prove me wrong, just don't use any objective evidence."

It's great to be a fan of the team, but pretending that every player on the roster is either the best in the league or hidden gold and "the stats just don't tell the story" is a little silly. That said, it's par for the course on every large team forum.

Agree to a point. But you have to admit there's a world of difference between watching Jake Layman vs someone like Nolan Smith. Regardless of what the stats say, it's obvious Jake knows how to play. That bodes well for him becoming a decent rotation player if given steady minutes. The same can't be said for Nolan Smith. I guess the flip side to that coin is that it didn't look like Jerm even knew what shape a basketball was before we traded him to IND and he eventually became a pretty good player.

 

[TBpup]

@RR7 ...I'm just suggesting an elite shooter wouldn't have over half his games under 33%.

 

[blue9]

Yeah, my point is not whether Connaughton is as good as Layman. It's that any scrub you want to make your pet cause, you can easily claim that they're actually great talents because they've shown "flashes" (definition of which is up to the person saying it), they don't get enough burn to get into the flow of the game and the stats mean nothing. There's no further point to discussion at that point because, like religion, it's not something that can be argued. You either believe it or you don't.

I would say the only thing Jake has "flashed" was his shooting. Everything else he's actually been fairly consistent with - or at least as consistent as one could hope for given his inconsistent minutes. He may not do things that show up in the box score, but he's always making the right pass, moving to the right spot on the floor, etc. You can't say that about most scrubs - or even starters!

 

[illmatic99]

JJ Redick is someone I would consider an elite shooter. This season:

20% or under: 5
21-33:17
33-50:8
50+:15

Crabbe has played in 5 more games. But he has had 24 games greater than 33%, JJ has 23. Crabbe has had more stinkers for sure, but also in a smaller role than Reddick has for the Clippers.

On top of that, 4 of the games Crabbe shot under 20%, he had just 1 3 point attempt. In those 4 games, he shot 4 /7, 6/9, 4/7, and 1/2. In every single game, which you used to show that he was cold, he shot 50% or above. Another one of the games, he didn't attempt a 3.

I also don't get looking at 20-50 as a "sweet spot" as if a 21% game isn't a clunker. I'd think above and below say 33% makes more sense. Removing the 4 0-1 games, and the one without a shot, Crabbe has 24 games above 33%, 21 below. Redick 22 below, 23 above.

Exactly what I'm trying to get at. Every shooter has these stretches.

 

[RR7]

@RR7 ...I'm just suggesting an elite shooter wouldn't have over half his games under 33%.

So Redick isn't elite either?

 

[illmatic99]

Sidebar on shooters and Magic.

Why does Mario Herzonja keep on getting DNP-CDs? Is he that bad? I mean, a lotto bound team is playing Jeff Green ahead of him. Seems like a perfect NO trade candidate.

 

[Sarni]

It's worth mentioning that although we have been linked with Ibaka, so have been other 8 teams and a lot of them have better assets to offer.

 

[Blazinaway]

Connaughton has shown flashes, but I don't believe he has the tools, and those flashes aren't representative of what he can do.

Layman's shown flashes, and I think those flashes ARE representative of what he can do, because he has the tools.

That's the difference.

seriously? Layman had ONE brief span of minutes when he played/shot well, I agree Layman probably has more potential than Pat C but he has not shown me anything where I can "seriously" believe he might be at least a good rotation player - and I hope he will

 

[Wizard Mentor]

It's worth mentioning that although we have been linked with Ibaka, so have been other 8 teams and a lot of them have better assets to offer.

HATER!!!!

 

[PtldPlatypus]

I still think my 3-way deal involving Orlando and Sacramento is awesome and would be beneficial for all three teams involved. I wish there were a way to find out which GM would be the one to decline a deal like that.

 

[Denny Crane]

I still think my 3-way deal involving Orlando and Sacramento is awesome and would be beneficial for all three teams involved. I wish there were a way to find out which GM would be the one to decline a deal like that.

Seems to me Orlando is getting a poor deal, even with a couple of picks.

 

[BonesJones]

seriously? Layman had ONE brief span of minutes when he played/shot well, I agree Layman probably has more potential than Pat C but he has not shown me anything where I can "seriously" believe he might be at least a good rotation player - and I hope he will

I watched Maryland a lot when he played there.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Seems to me Orlando is getting a poor deal, even with a couple of picks.

Is it that you don't think they'd value Rudy Gay, or that they'd just generally expect more in return for Ibaka/Vucevic? If the latter, how much more do you think?

 

[oldfisherman]

The Magic are not going to trade both Ibaka and Vucevic, unless they get a starting caliber center or a very high lottery draft pick back.

Trading both bigs would mean starting Biyombo, who has had 3 good games in his entire career. They are not happy with Biyombo.

 

[blue9]

They are not happy with Biyombo.

Shocked. Absolutely shocked. Oh wait, no I'm not!

 

[PtldPlatypus]

The Magic are not going to trade both Ibaka and Vucevic, unless they get a starting caliber center or a very high lottery draft pick back.

Trading both bigs would mean starting Biyombo, who has had 3 good games in his entire career. They are not happy with Biyombo.

Been looking at the Magic forum--their fans are pretty well resigned to dealing both Ibaka and Vucevic and going full rebuild. However, they don't really want anything that we would offer, so I'll drop my pipe dream trade proposal.

 

[Denny Crane]

Is it that you don't think they'd value Rudy Gay, or that they'd just generally expect more in return for Ibaka/Vucevic? If the latter, how much more do you think?

Don't want Gay, and want way more for Vucevic. I think they're mostly interested in getting value for Ibaka, not gutting their team to do so.

 

[oldfisherman]

Been looking at the Magic forum--their fans are pretty well resigned to dealing both Ibaka and Vucevic and going full rebuild. However, they don't really want anything that we would offer, so I'll drop my pipe dream trade proposal.

Don't drop your trade idea, I just believe it needs some tweaking. Just my opinion, a senile old guy.

There appears to be a huge disconnect between what the Magic fans want and expect, and what their GM does. He is probably following the orders of the owner, another senile old guy. No telling what he might do.

Plus dreaming up and debating trade ideas is fun.

 

[Boob-No-More]

Is it that you don't think they'd value Rudy Gay, or that they'd just generally expect more in return for Ibaka/Vucevic? If the latter, how much more do you think?

Gay makes no sense for a team looking to rebuild. He'll be 31 by the time he next sets foot on a basketball court. They're try to trade Ibaca, because at 27 he's too old to fit in with their future plans.

BNM

 

[HailBlazers]

Gay makes no sense for a team looking to rebuild. He'll be 31 by the time he next sets foot on a basketball court. They're try to trade Ibaca, because at 27 he's too old to fit in with their future plans.

BNM

Don't know why the hell they traded Dipo and Sabonis for him in the first place.