The Case for Jake (1 Viewer)

[Scalma]

Zach is a miss. These guys were all picked after him who are unequivocally better.

10. Collins
13. Mitchell
17. John Collins ( I can't get over how perfect he would be as our PF next to Nurk)
22. Jarrett Allen
27. Kuzma (one pick after Caleb, ugh)
42. Thomas Bryant (check the numbers)

Others who are just as good or in the same range: Bam, OG, Hart, Derrick White, Brooks, Monte Morris, Giles.

Unless Collins improves, this was a disastrous draft, especially because he had 3 picks going into it.

Way too early to make that sort of judgement. I mean just look at who this thread is about.

 

[illmatic99]

I disagree. I see a lot of upside with Zach. More upside than any of those guys with the exception of Mitchell.

This bugs me. People keep saying he has upside but..... based on what? What upside are you seeing in Zach that tells you he'll be anything more than an average starter? There aren't even flashes. People keep mentioning his defense but he's averaging nearly as many fouls as rebounds as a 7 footer, while a guy like John Collins is putting up 19/10 on ridiculous efficiency at the same age. Thomas Bryant was a second round big man who just turned 21 also and is putting up double doubles nightly with good defense. Jarrett Allen has become a defensive stalwart and just had a 20/20 game on the road in a massive win in Houston. Kuzma is the Lakers best player after Lebron.

Way too early to make that sort of judgement. I mean just look at who this thread is about.

Fair, but we are in win now mode. And there are about 10 guys who we could have picked that would have us in a better position to take on GS than we do with Zach. Or hell, we could have traded that pick. The fact that Jake is popping now doesn't mean Collins was the right pick. And fwiw, Zach has played nearly twice the minutes in his 1.5 yrs in the NBA than Jake and his 2.5 yrs. He's had the opportunity while Jake never got it til now.

 

[Scalma]

This bugs me. People keep saying he has upside but..... based on what? What upside are you seeing in Zach that tells you he'll be anything more than an average starter? There aren't even flashes. People keep mentioning his defense but he's averaging nearly as many fouls as rebounds as a 7 footer, while a guy like John Collins is putting up 19/10 on ridiculous efficiency at the same age. Thomas Bryant was a second round big man who just turned 21 also and is putting up double doubles nightly with good defense. Jarrett Allen has become a defensive stalwart and just had a 20/20 game on the road in a massive win in Houston. Kuzma is the Lakers best player after Lebron.


Fair, but we are in win now mode. And there are about 10 guys who we could have picked that would have us in a better position to take on GS than we do with Zach. Or hell, we could have traded that pick. The fact that Jake is popping now doesn't mean Collins was the right pick. And fwiw, Zach has played nearly twice the minutes in his 1.5 yrs in the NBA than Jake and his 2.5 yrs. He's had the opportunity while Jake never got it til now.

Jake also went to college for four years, which is part of a player’s development. So comparing their NBA minutes isnt really fair. Zach’s learning on the fly. He doesn’t have the luxury of sitting for two years.

 

[illmatic99]

Jake also went to college for four years, which is part of a player’s development. So comparing their NBA minutes isnt really fair. Zach’s learning on the fly. He doesn’t have the luxury of sitting for two years.

We can all spin this anyway we want to fit the narrative, but I will maintain that Zach is a bust until he shows us something otherwise. Honestly, I think it's generous for us to even peg him as a starter level player in the future and I feel like I'm giving his defense way more credit than it warrants. He offers very little rim protection, even against 2nd unit guards.

 

[Scalma]

We can all spin this anyway we want to fit the narrative, but I will maintain that Zach is a bust until he shows us something otherwise. Honestly, I think it's generous for us to even peg him as a starter level player in the future and I feel like I'm giving his defense way more credit than it warrants. He offers very little rim protection, even against 2nd unit guards.

K

 

[CupWizier]

We can all spin this anyway we want to fit the narrative, but I will maintain that Zach is a bust until he shows us something otherwise. Honestly, I think it's generous for us to even peg him as a starter level player in the future and I feel like I'm giving his defense way more credit than it warrants. He offers very little rim protection, even against 2nd unit guards.

Gotta disagree with that assessment. 2 years into the league and playing in the rotation of a top 4 team in the west as a rookie and second year player is not a bust.

 

[illmatic99]

Gotta disagree with that assessment. 2 years into the league and playing in the rotation of a top 4 team in the west as a rookie and second year player is not a bust.

He hasn't earned his spot in the rotation. Meyers is better than him.

 

[James lamphear]

What do you mean by hit? Even his second rounders are contributing, which is more than you can say about the majority. Crabbe, Connaughton, Barton, Layman. He really only has one obvious miss on his record, and that’s Meyers. But if you look at that draft class, even that isn’t so bad.

You might include Swanigan as a miss.

 

[Scalma]

Zach’s got a better block % than, among others, DeAndre, KAT, Valanciunas, Horford, Ibaka, and Vucevic. And he’s doing that while being dragged away from the basket because of Meyers. Not bad for a guy that offers “very little rim protection”

 

[CupWizier]

He hasn't earned his spot in the rotation. Meyers is better than him.

once again, I will disagree and you are comparing a player that has 5 more years of experience and is 5 years older to a guy who just turned 21 and only in his 2nd year of the NBA after one season of college ball. They are both drafted in close to the same spot as well. Let's see where Collins is at when he has as much experience in the league as Leonard.

 

[Scalma]

Anyways this thread is getting derailed.

At what point is Stotts forced to start Layman? Are we close?

 

[illmatic99]

Anyways this thread is getting derailed.

At what point is Stotts forced to start Layman? Are we close?

Terry seems hellbent on starting Harkless for some reason. Unless there's an injury or trade, I don't think Jake will start anytime soon. At least he's leapfrogged Stauskas in the rotation, which is a start.

 

[Scalma]

Terry seems hellbent on starting Harkless for some reason. Unless there's an injury or trade, I don't think Jake will start anytime soon. At least he's leapfrogged Stauskas in the rotation, which is a start.

I guess the best case scenario is what’s been mentioned by others; he doesn’t start but he’s in the closing lineup in the fourth. The only problem with that for me is if he’s struggling Stotts won’t trust him and will revert back to Moe. It feels like his leash is so short for Layman, and I don’t understand why.

 

[Pinwheel1]

This bugs me. People keep saying he has upside but..... based on what? What upside are you seeing in Zach that tells you he'll be anything more than an average starter? There aren't even flashes. People keep mentioning his defense but he's averaging nearly as many fouls as rebounds as a 7 footer, while a guy like John Collins is putting up 19/10 on ridiculous efficiency at the same age. Thomas Bryant was a second round big man who just turned 21 also and is putting up double doubles nightly with good defense. Jarrett Allen has become a defensive stalwart and just had a 20/20 game on the road in a massive win in Houston. Kuzma is the Lakers best player after Lebron.

You obviously choose to use stats as a the basis of most of your arguments. I think others who believe he has an upside see "flashes" in his actual play. Similar to what some saw in Jake while others saw only the box score. When Zach was drafted many said it would take until his 3rd season before he would contribute to a playoff team. This was based on his age , build, and by watching other big men develop slowly as well.. I think he is on schedule.

His offense at some point will start to click...as soon as he finds a go to shot and starts hitting it on a regular basis. I would be shocked if he doesn't improve his mid range shot by then. He clearly is a hard worker with a high basketball IQ. Right now his shooting is frustrating for sure. But everyone I talk to, whose basketball knowledge I respect, all like his upside.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

I think I prefer for Jake to come off the bench. When he starts, he's marginalized as the fourth option behind Dame/CJ/Nurk. When coming off the bench, he can fire with impunity, get into a rhythm, and be much more effective. I think I like the Moe starting, Jake gunning dynamic better than the alternative.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Will you admit being wrong if they do?

Do what?

 

[Pinwheel1]

I think I prefer for Jake to come off the bench. When he starts, he's marginalized as the fourth option behind Dame/CJ/Nurk. When coming off the bench, he can fire with impunity, get into a rhythm, and be much more effective. I think I like the Moe starting, Jake gunning dynamic better than the alternative.

I am coming around to this as well. Regardless who starts, play the one who is having the best game down the stretch in the 4th. Of course this is dependent on Moe getting healthy and playing consistent minutes.

 

[Orion Bailey]

If Jake Layman is being talked about as a regular rotation guy, your team is basically a .500 team......

Stilk feel this way?

Yes

Well I think they will prove you wrong.

Cool

Will you admit being wrong if they do?

Do what?

Follow along my man!

 

[CupWizier]

Terry seems hellbent on starting Harkless for some reason. Unless there's an injury or trade, I don't think Jake will start anytime soon. At least he's leapfrogged Stauskas in the rotation, which is a start.

questions?

1) which one between Harkless or Layman is the better scorer?

2) does the starting unit need more scoring or does the bench?

The answer to those 2 questions might help you understand why it is what it is right now.

starting has nothing to do with minutes as a player coming off the bench sometimes play more minutes and this way Stotts can evaluate which type of player he needs more under certain situations. It's a nice problem to have.

 

[Mediocre Man]

Follow along my man!

I'll admit now they'll be better than .500

They'll also be an also ran

 

[Orion Bailey]

questions?

1) which one between Harkless or Layman is the better scorer?

2) does the starting unit need more scoring or does the bench?

The answer to those 2 questions might help you understand why it is what it is right now.

starting has nothing to do with minutes as a player coming off the bench sometimes play more minutes and this way Stotts can evaluate which type of player he needs more under certain situations. It's a nice problem to have.

Though i tend to agree with you, playing devils advocate, then we should have Dame coming off the bench.

I do think seniority and salary play a bigger factor into player minutes than it should with this team and i tend to think that comes from olshey.

 

[Orion Bailey]

I'll admit now they'll be better than .500

They'll also be an also ran

Not sure what that last sentance means. Typo?

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Quick note--Amongst the 10 most common 3-man lineups including Layman, pairing him with Meyers and Collins has quietly become the most effective grouping. Small-sample-size, sure, but it's something to watch as he continues in a reserve role.

 

[oldmangrouch]

With this franchise, what draft misses do you see? Leonard, presumably Swanigan, and...?

And there's the trick. Draft "prospects" and if they don't contribute insult the fans for being impatient. It helps when you draft players your coach isn't enthusiastic about, so he can share the blame by not doing everything he can to develop them.

 

[tlongII]

This bugs me. People keep saying he has upside but..... based on what? What upside are you seeing in Zach that tells you he'll be anything more than an average starter? There aren't even flashes. People keep mentioning his defense but he's averaging nearly as many fouls as rebounds as a 7 footer, while a guy like John Collins is putting up 19/10 on ridiculous efficiency at the same age. Thomas Bryant was a second round big man who just turned 21 also and is putting up double doubles nightly with good defense. Jarrett Allen has become a defensive stalwart and just had a 20/20 game on the road in a massive win in Houston. Kuzma is the Lakers best player after Lebron.


Fair, but we are in win now mode. And there are about 10 guys who we could have picked that would have us in a better position to take on GS than we do with Zach. Or hell, we could have traded that pick. The fact that Jake is popping now doesn't mean Collins was the right pick. And fwiw, Zach has played nearly twice the minutes in his 1.5 yrs in the NBA than Jake and his 2.5 yrs. He's had the opportunity while Jake never got it til now.

Based on his size and athleticism for one. Those other guys don't have it like Collins. Is he foul prone? Yes. But that will decrease over time. I expect him to improve significantly between now and the end of the season, and I expect an even bigger jump next year. As long as he stays in the weight room he'll be fine. The only thing he's short on right now is strength. That will change.

 

[oldmangrouch]

questions?

1) which one between Harkless or Layman is the better scorer?

2) does the starting unit need more scoring or does the bench?

The answer to those 2 questions might help you understand why it is what it is right now.

starting has nothing to do with minutes as a player coming off the bench sometimes play more minutes and this way Stotts can evaluate which type of player he needs more under certain situations. It's a nice problem to have.

In a perfect world - I would say start Mo and Layman and move CJ and Aminu to the 2nd unit.

You're right though - fans (and sometimes players) get too hung up on who the starters are. As long as Layman gets enough minutes to help the team win, that's the important thing.

 

[CupWizier]

And there's the trick. Draft "prospects" and if they don't contribute insult the fans for being impatient. It helps when you draft players your coach isn't enthusiastic about, so he can share the blame by not doing everything he can to develop them.

I would venture an educated guess that the coaching staff is doing everything they can to develop these players. It's in their best interest to do so and thinking they don't seems very foolish by anyone thinking that.

 

[CupWizier]

In a perfect world - I would say start Mo and Layman and move CJ and Aminu to the 2nd unit.

You're right though - fans (and sometimes players) get too hung up on who the starters are. As long as Layman gets enough minutes to help the team win, that's the important thing.

Huh? So you want to leave Lillard out on an island as the only real ball handler and only one that can truly break down a defense? If I was an opposing coach, I would jump for joy if I saw that lineup.

 

[oldmangrouch]

I would venture an educated guess that the coaching staff is doing everything they can to develop these players. It's in their best interest to do so and thinking they don't seems very foolish by anyone thinking that.

Stotts *is* pursuing his best interests. A new owner almost always means a new coach. Stotts is choosing to polish his resume by chasing regular season wins, rather than developing players that will only benefit the next Blazer coach.

Very few NBA coaches prioritize player develop over winning now. With the team ownership future in limbo, a coach has even less incentive to focus on the long-term.

 

[CupWizier]

Stotts *is* pursuing his best interests. A new owner almost always means a new coach. Stotts is choosing to polish his resume by chasing regular season wins, rather than developing players that will only benefit the next Blazer coach.

Very few NBA coaches prioritize player develop over winning now. With the team ownership future in limbo, a coach has even less incentive to focus on the long-term.

First, there is no new owner and this is not a developmental league, but every day coaches are working with players and teaching them how to play in the NBA game. Every head coaches job is to get his respective team the most wins that they can (unless they are tanking and Blazers aren't in that predicament) so I have no idea what this "pursuing his best interests" even means. Regular season wins is what get you to the playoffs so I consider this a positive.