Thoughts on Dante Exum

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
BlazerDuckSeahawkFan94 said:
Isn't that more like an all-star game though? No one is really trying THAT hard.
Click to expand...

Not really for a lot of these guys the summit is their first chance to show scouts truly what they can do so may put it a lot more effort than some of the players who come in pre hyped.
 
cmeese47 said:
Yet he shot a higher percentage than LA who can shoot?
Click to expand...

I said he can't shoot, not that he can't get lay-ups as a garbage man, let alone as the primary option on a 54-win team.

Shaq shot a high percentage, too. Did that make him a great shooter in your expert opinion?
 
PapaG said:
I said he can't shoot, not that he can't get lay-ups as a garbage man, let alone as the primary option on a 54-win team.

Shaq shot a high percentage, too. Did that make him a great shooter in your expert opinion?
Click to expand...

No it made him a efficient basketball player, someone who got himself in good position and took quality shots. LA at times seemed to force the issue several times last season. He is more talented than Thompson he should be shooting a higher percentage than him.
 
cmeese47 said:
No it made him a efficient basketball player, someone who got himself in good position and took quality shots. LA at times seemed to force the issue several times last season. He is more talented than Thompson he should be shooting a higher percentage than him.
Click to expand...

LA also stretches the floor by shooting 18f shots. Not a great shot but he takes them and it seems to be the teams "oh god we can't find a shot and there are 3s left on the clock" shot. Thompson can only shoot basically layups, he is shockingly similar to T-Rob in that category and if your only shooting layups you better shoot a decent percentage. That actually hurts your Offense when you have a player who is only good at hitting a shot near the hoop, Ilbaka used to bog down OKC's O until he started hitting that jump shot consistently about 2 years ago.

Screw what I said, look at both of there shot charts.
http://stats.nba.com/playerShotchart.html?PlayerID=202684
http://stats.nba.com/playerShotchart.html?PlayerID=200746

LA shoots better from almost everywhere then Thompson and 7% better in the paint. Thompson only shoots 47% because almost all his shots come from the paint and he has few shots anywhere else. Give the ball to LA ANYWHERE and he is going to shoot a better % then Thompson.
 
Last edited:
cmeese47 said:
No it made him a efficient basketball player, someone who got himself in good position and took quality shots. LA at times seemed to force the issue several times last season. He is more talented than Thompson he should be shooting a higher percentage than him.
Click to expand...

Joel Przybilla shot 69% one season, and 55% for his career. Tristan Thompson should be shooting a higher percentage than a guy with limited talented like Przy.
 
cmeese47 said:
No it made him a efficient basketball player, someone who got himself in good position and took quality shots. LA at times seemed to force the issue several times last season. He is more talented than Thompson he should be shooting a higher percentage than him.
Click to expand...

greg oden shot 56% 60% and 55% in his career with Portland. efficient but not versatile offensively. I can still dunk. Bet i could make more than 50% of them against defense... does that make me a good shooter?
 
honkicracker said:
greg oden shot 56% 60% and 55% in his career with Portland. efficient but not versatile offensively. I can still dunk. Bet i could make more than 50% of them against defense... does that make me a good shooter?
Click to expand...

The better the shooting %, the better the shooter.

Duh!
 
Rhal said:
LA also stretches the floor by shooting 18f shots. Not a great shot but he takes them and it seems to be the teams "oh god we can't find a shot and there are 3s left on the clock" shot. Thompson can only shoot basically layups, he is shockingly similar to T-Rob in that category and if your only shooting layups you better shoot a decent percentage. That actually hurts your Offense when you have a player who is only good at hitting a shot near the hoop, Ilbaka used to bog down OKC's O until he started hitting that jump shot consistently about 2 years ago.

Screw what I said, look at both of there shot charts.
http://stats.nba.com/playerShotchart.html?PlayerID=202684
http://stats.nba.com/playerShotchart.html?PlayerID=200746

LA shoots better from almost everywhere then Thompson and 7% better in the paint. Thompson only shoots 47% because almost all his shots come from the paint and he has few shots anywhere else. Give the ball to LA ANYWHERE and he is going to shoot a better % then Thompson.
Click to expand...

You will get no argument from me that LA is the better offensive player. The thing is he has the ability to be more efficient and has been more efficient than he was last year throughout his career.

Like I have said in the past LA needs to develop a three point shot and work the paint more. Leaving his lower percentage mid range game to win he is shooting well or to nights when other teams have taken away these two more efficient ways of scoring.
 
cmeese47 said:
The thing is he has the ability to be more efficient and has been more efficient than he was last year throughout his career.
Click to expand...

I know, right? If he dunked every time he received the ball on offense and made it, he'd be unstoppable. Why doesn't he do that? It's sooooooo frustrating.
 
PapaG said:
I know, right? If he dunked every time he received the ball on offense and made it, he'd be unstoppable. Why doesn't he do that? It's sooooooo frustrating.
Click to expand...

He isn't talented enough to do that.
 
cmeese47 said:
You will get no argument from me that LA is the better offensive player. The thing is he has the ability to be more efficient and has been more efficient than he was last year throughout his career.

Like I have said in the past LA needs to develop a three point shot and work the paint more. Leaving his lower percentage mid range game to win he is shooting well or to nights when other teams have taken away these two more efficient ways of scoring.
Click to expand...
I really want to see this. If he turns 3 or 4 of those 8 18f jumpers into 3 pointers I'd like them a lot more. I just have flashbacks of Wallace falling in love with the three and doing nothing but chuck them up regardless if it was a good shot or not.
 
Rhal said:
I really want to see this. If he turns 3 or 4 of those 8 18f jumpers into 3 pointers I'd like them a lot more. I just have flashbacks of Wallace falling in love with the three and doing nothing but chuck them up regardless if it was a good shot or not.
Click to expand...

Wallace never made an All-NBA team in his career. LMA has done it 2x already, as well as being voted by coaches as an All-Star 3x in a row.

Whatever he's doing, it seems to be working better than whatever it was Sheed started doing after his collapse in Game 7 of the 2000 WCF.

The most insane Sheed stat to me is that he only one time had a PER of over 20 for a season, and also only one time in 14 playoff seasons.

Yet Sheed was paid a max contract by the Blazers, and nobody blinked nor cared. I know, because I was on the ESPN Blazer community when he signed his max deal.
 
Last edited:
Rhal said:
LA also stretches the floor by shooting 18f shots. Not a great shot but he takes them and it seems to be the teams "oh god we can't find a shot and there are 3s left on the clock" shot. Thompson can only shoot basically layups, he is shockingly similar to T-Rob in that category and if your only shooting layups you better shoot a decent percentage. That actually hurts your Offense when you have a player who is only good at hitting a shot near the hoop, Ilbaka used to bog down OKC's O until he started hitting that jump shot consistently about 2 years ago.

Screw what I said, look at both of there shot charts.
http://stats.nba.com/playerShotchart.html?PlayerID=202684
http://stats.nba.com/playerShotchart.html?PlayerID=200746

LA shoots better from almost everywhere then Thompson and 7% better in the paint. Thompson only shoots 47% because almost all his shots come from the paint and he has few shots anywhere else. Give the ball to LA ANYWHERE and he is going to shoot a better % then Thompson.
Click to expand...
I like Tristan Thompson By no way shape or form is he as good as Aldridge but he's a nice PF.
 
BlazerDuckSeahawkFan94 said:
This. Tristan Thompson is in that Brandon Pass/Carl Landry tier. Would be a great big off the bench though.
Click to expand...

The depressing part is that Thompson was a #4 pick in the 2011 NBA draft, while Bass and Landry were both 2nd round picks in the 2005 and 2007 drafts, respectively.
 
PapaG said:
The depressing part is that Thompson was a #4 pick in the 2011 NBA draft, while Bass and Landry were both 2nd round picks in the 2005 and 2007 drafts, respectively.
Click to expand...

Difference is Bass and Landry are like 30 while Thompson is only 23 and he is a better rebounder than both. His future is going to be decent, He will be a steady 15/10 guy.
 
BlazerDuckSeahawkFan94 said:
Difference is Bass and Landry are like 30 while Thompson is only 23 and he is a better rebounder than both. His future is going to be decent, He will be a steady 15/10 guy.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's not at all what I meant.

Thompson is still an undersized PF who can't defend his own shadow. That won't change, even if he puts up 20/10 someday.
 
He's not all that undersized when you consider his 9'1" reach. I agree, he has a long way to go defensively. He's more Hickson than he is Landry right now.

Though I don't get this TT talk, there is no way they give up the #1 pick and Thompson for Aldridge.
 
Hold on a second.

Tristan Thompson has a career FG % of 47% (48% this season as a garbage scorer, too) and 63% on FTs.

Aldridge has a career FG % of 49% (46% this season as the primary option on offense) and 79% of FTs.

Please remind me to just disregard any post cmeese47 makes w/out first fact-checking the stats he offers. I assumed that Tristan Thompson must have been a high-50% FG guy this year. Then I could see trying to make an argument about FG shooting. I was wrong to trust that cmeese47 had any idea what he was posting about in terms of actually making a serious argument.
 
Fez Hammersticks said:
He's not all that undersized when you consider his 9'1" reach. I agree, he has a long way to go defensively. He's more Hickson than he is Landry right now.

Though I don't get this TT talk, there is no way they give up the #1 pick and Thompson for Aldridge.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's been what I've been saying since last summer. Cleveland would be stupid to risk losing LMA, the #1 pick of the 2014, and an average player in Tristan Thompson for the 2015 season. That's how GMs get fired.

I'm guessing that's not why you think it's a bad idea, though. Look at all the success the Cavs have had with Kyrie Irving and Anthony (or is it Andrew?) Bennett as #1 overall picks. Irving is so jazzed about it, he seems to have his agent leak that he'd rather sign the Q.O. and jet as a UFA rather than spend the next 5 years in Cleveland. The Cavs are even leaking that they may not offer Irving the max. That's a franchise LMA definitely want to play for, right?
 
Exum's going to be really good. But, he's out of realistic reach. I say we make a play for Payton, Garry Harris or go for a big late in the 1st like McGary or Payne.
 
MickZagger said:
Exum's going to be really good.
Click to expand...

That depends on the scouts and executives within every NBA franchise.

What if Olshey thinks Exum is the next Michael Jordan, while Cleveland thinks Exum isn't worth the #1 pick, and don't like his ceiling as they have scouted it? Does Olshey offer All-NBA player Lillard for a draft pick who he and his staff think is the next Michael Jordan? That way, Cleveland could trade Kyrie Irving, and get something in return for him in case he accepts their Q.O. next summer.

Those hypothetical trades are interesting to me, as well as how organizations rate the players in a draft. Memphis thought at one point that Thabeet was worth the #2 pick in the draft, for example. Why?
 
PapaG said:
That depends on the scouts and executives within every NBA franchise.

What if Olshey thinks Exum is the next Michael Jordan, while Cleveland thinks Exum isn't worth the #1 pick, and don't like his ceiling as they have scouted it? Does Olshey offer All-NBA player Lillard for a draft pick who he and his staff think is the next Michael Jordan? That way, Cleveland could trade Kyrie Irving, and get something in return for him in case he accepts their Q.O. next summer.

Those hypothetical trades are interesting to me, as well as how organizations rate the players in a draft. Memphis thought at one point that Thabeet was worth the #2 pick in the draft, for example. Why?
Click to expand...

I don't know, you're talking to the wrong person as I've never promoted trading Lillard or Aldridge for a lottery pick.

We have the key pieces, we just need another really solid player and a supporting cast.
 
MickZagger said:
I don't know, you're talking to the wrong person as I've never promoted trading Lillard or Aldridge for a lottery pick.

We have the key pieces, we just need another really solid player and a supporting cast.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying you've promoted it at all, but you do know hoops to a level I respect. If the Blazers think Exum is going to be better than Lillard as a lead guard, yet the Cavs scouts don't see it and are afraid of losing Irving, Lillard would be the player most attractive to Cleveland, based on his contract status. It would be a major move, sure, and won't happen, but these are the bold moves that can be the difference between keeping a GM job or losing it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top