Reaves - 6.6 pts 3.8 reb 2.0 ast 29.5 fg% 25.0 3ot% 0 +/-.
There were draft concerns he may be a liability on defense but he held up well, showing the ability to move his feet and play with toughness. He was highly efficient scoring in the paint in college but that failed to translate in the SL. He needs time in the Gleague to figure out how to score against NBA type athletes.
Ayayi - 4.8 pts 3.0 reb 2.4 ast 43.5 fg% 12.5 3pt% -3 +/-
Slow start but played well the last 3 games. Showed his all around skills and much like his play at Gonzaga it should complement the stars well. His 3pt shot looked fine but was coming up short on most of his misses. This should self correct with more repetition.
Yeah, on point, good enough showing to develop but nothing special. Mac athletic but not good. This queen kid got a good motor on him, mold him into the matrix
Probably the 2 best run and jump athletes on the team with similar skill sets. Both have the ability to create their own offense but at times tend to get out of control resulting in forced shots. Good 3pt shooters when they have their feet set (catch and shoot) but have shown they can shoot off movement. Good POA defenders. Active on the glass especially off a teammates missed shot.
Both played better as the SL went along and they became more familiar with the offensive and defensive schemes and familiarity with their teammates.
Both are listed at 6'6" and are good POA defenders. Brown having the stronger body tends to be more physical with his opponent and at times will be over aggressive resulting in fouls. Queen is wiry strong with better agility and very capable in mirroring his opponent. Here is your AC replacement
Joined: 10 Apr 2001 Posts: 65135 Location: Orange County, CA
Posted: Thu Aug 19, 2021 8:41 am Post subject:
Brown is the man-defender, physical, potentially switchable, spot up guy. Attacks closeouts, going one direction, doesn't change directions on the drive, and even forces the contact when he's out of control.
Queen is a spot up player, but a ton better off ball, more upside with the handle, and more adept with creative finishing at the rim.
Defensively, he's more of a 1 position defender, but a ton better at forcing turnovers along the perimeter.
I want Queen to make it, along with Reaves/Ayayi. _________________ Resident Car Nut.
Brown is the man-defender, physical, potentially switchable, spot up guy. Attacks closeouts, going one direction, doesn't change directions on the drive, and even forces the contact when he's out of control.
Queen is a spot up player, but a ton better off ball, more upside with the handle, and more adept with creative finishing at the rim.
Defensively, he's more of a 1 position defender, but a ton better at forcing turnovers along the perimeter.
I want Queen to make it, along with Reaves/Ayayi.
Completely agree with this.
I liked Queen and Brown a lot. Reaves seems like the kind of player that would succeed in a role surrounded by star talent. *looks at current Lakers team* he could work.
I missed these games, and I'm usually excited for the summer league. Guessing one or two of them will get training camp invites for further evaluation, but hard to see any of them sticking (minus the two-way contracts). There are only two roster spots left, and reports indicate Lakers are keen on adding vets like JaKarr Sampson and Tim Fraizer. Rondo might even be in play since he won't be playing in Memphis.
It sucks Sacramento has him, because they have no idea how to develop players. Queta being in the same locker room with Dwight and Gasol would have been extremely beneficial to him. He's also the kind of center Vogel loves working on and with. Oh well. _________________ How NBA 2K18 failed the All-Time Lakers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxMBYm3wwxk
It sucks Sacramento has him, because they have no idea how to develop players. Queta being in the same locker room with Dwight and Gasol would have been extremely beneficial to him. He's also the kind of center Vogel loves working on and with. Oh well.
Have the Lakers done better at developing players? The Kings can point to Fox, Hield, Haliburton and Holmes. At the minimum they did not screw them up. Lakers have done partial development of a number of players but never completed any and left some of them stagnated (Lonzo, Kuzma, Randle, Clarkson).
Joined: 10 Apr 2001 Posts: 65135 Location: Orange County, CA
Posted: Sun Aug 22, 2021 5:27 pm Post subject:
MJST wrote:
Really wish we'd given Neemias Queta a look
It sucks Sacramento has him, because they have no idea how to develop players. Queta being in the same locker room with Dwight and Gasol would have been extremely beneficial to him. He's also the kind of center Vogel loves working on and with. Oh well.
I like him a lot but man that is future knee injury waiting to happen.
He gathers down bow-legged at extreme angles. _________________ Resident Car Nut.
Joined: 10 Apr 2001 Posts: 65135 Location: Orange County, CA
Posted: Sun Aug 22, 2021 5:30 pm Post subject:
PlantedTanks wrote:
MJST wrote:
Really wish we'd given Neemias Queta a look
It sucks Sacramento has him, because they have no idea how to develop players. Queta being in the same locker room with Dwight and Gasol would have been extremely beneficial to him. He's also the kind of center Vogel loves working on and with. Oh well.
Have the Lakers done better at developing players? The Kings can point to Fox, Hield, Haliburton and Holmes. At the minimum they did not screw them up. Lakers have done partial development of a number of players but never completed any and left some of them stagnated (Lonzo, Kuzma, Randle, Clarkson).
Yes, they've done better. Fox was known to have outlier work ethic.
What did Hield change? Not much. Haliburton was this guy for 2 years, small changes. Holmes? Didn't develop him from the jump.
It's not just Lonzo, Kuzma, Randle, Clarkson.
It's also Thomas Bryant, Josh Hart, Larry Nance Jr., Ivica Zubac, Brandon Ingram, and even DLO. None of them stagnated. All of them hit 2nd contracts. That isn't just drafting well. _________________ Resident Car Nut.
It sucks Sacramento has him, because they have no idea how to develop players. Queta being in the same locker room with Dwight and Gasol would have been extremely beneficial to him. He's also the kind of center Vogel loves working on and with. Oh well.
Have the Lakers done better at developing players? The Kings can point to Fox, Hield, Haliburton and Holmes. At the minimum they did not screw them up. Lakers have done partial development of a number of players but never completed any and left some of them stagnated (Lonzo, Kuzma, Randle, Clarkson).
Yes, they've done better. Fox was known to have outlier work ethic.
What did Hield change? Not much. Haliburton was this guy for 2 years, small changes. Holmes? Didn't develop him from the jump.
It's not just Lonzo, Kuzma, Randle, Clarkson.
It's also Thomas Bryant, Josh Hart, Larry Nance Jr., Ivica Zubac, Brandon Ingram, and even DLO. None of them stagnated. All of them hit 2nd contracts. That isn't just drafting well.
Thomas bryant??? only 1 season with Lakers. Barely played. Developed under Wizards.
Josh Hart - like Hield what did he change since college.
Larry Nance Jr. - what has he improved since college. 3pt improvement took place his 2nd year with Cavs. Was always solid defensively out of college. Pretty much same player throughout his career.
Ivica Zubac - credit Lakers as a solid rotation player
Brandon Ingram - < 70% FT shooter and < 2 3pt attempts with Lakers. His shooting took off with Pelicans. Is it a coincidence Lonzo fixed his shot with the Pels working with their assistant coach Fred Vinson?
DLO - same stats and player his 2 years with Lakers. Credit to Kenny Atkinson who is known for being a development coach.
Why discount Fox's development just due to outlier work ethic? That is irrelevant. Credit to the Kings 100%. So Laker players don't work hard thus the reason they stagnate?
Holmes progressed in his 2 years with the Kings over his previous career numbers. Maybe just higher usage but lets give the Kings credit for utilizing him in a manner to take advantage of his talent. Who foresaw him doing what he did these past 2 years before he got to the Kings.
Agree with Hield just like Hart and Nance Jr.
How many players who excelled in college struggle when they get into the league? Lets at least give the Kings credit for helping Haliburton not just adapt but excel in his first year.
Thibs unlocked Randles potential. Completely changed his mind set.
Kuzma - the consistently inconsistent player
Clarkson - Not sure he really improved much in the league. Always showed the same skills and play style.
Lonzo - partly health but still fixed his shot under the Pels tenure which changed the outlook of his game.
Joined: 10 Apr 2001 Posts: 65135 Location: Orange County, CA
Posted: Sun Aug 22, 2021 7:09 pm Post subject:
Thomas Bryant got the shot with the Lakers. South Bay did a hell of a job just keeping him level when there were too many players to develop.
Buddy Hield has been out of college and is at his peak. He improved PnR, but not defense. Josh Hart isn't even on his second contract yet, so I wouldn't have made this comparison at all.
Larry Nance Jr. 3pt shot and passing, by far.
Brandon Ingram, he took his first big leap during his 2nd year. 2 foot jumper to 1 foot leaper. More Iso ball handling, and this was all prior to the Pels.
DLO, more confidence in floater and attacking the paint. His best defense was as a Laker and 1 year with the Nets, and big downturn since.
I just disagree with a lot. You're comparing a lot of players in their relative prime years (Hield, Holmes) as opposed to guys just entering their 2nd contracts and have actually improved quite a bit.
No way in hell I'm giving the Kings that much credit. Do you know how many draft kids bombed?
Jahmius Ramsey (I don't believe in him still, bad pick)
Marvin Bagley, worse than his rookie year, mostly due to injury, but even with ample time, not break even
Frank Mason Jr.
Willie Cauley Stein
Nik Stauskas
Ben McLemore
Those are the guys that should be compared to when it comes to the Laker kids. Same time frame.
How does their player development look now?
I can't even believe how much you're underrating Zo's and Clarkson's progression, even if it was just shooting progression, and really, the difference between Kuzma as a scorer where he didn't have to make a decision, vs actually making decisions and becoming a defender, is GIANT.
Even Randle's first leap was his last year as a Laker. GIANT leap defensively. Much improved passing back then under Walton.
Kuzma "consistently inconsistent player" because he has a "consistently inconsistent" role. You can even see when he gets remotely excited about what shots he's stepping into because it's actually for him and no one else.
But most fans don't see that with Kuzma.
Really, just gotta take a quick peak at the advanced stats on bball reference to see when the real changes happened. _________________ Resident Car Nut.
Sure I recognize there has been some development under the Lakers watch and if you look at my first post I mention that they have done partial development of a number of players. I don't totally discredit them but they haven't proven much thus far.
They have never really completed full development of any player and that may be due to circumstances but that is still a fact.
Also a fact all the Laker prospects blossomed under another organizations watch and the one that stayed with the Lakers the longest has shown very little progress besides some improvement defensively which still is a negative analytically. Don't care about how their roles affect their progress or non-progress as this applies to all players and it was up to the Lakers organization to put them in position to maximized their development. They failed with Kuzma. That's part of the process isn't it.
That's a big stretch with Bryant and development in the gleague.
I believe Jahmius will carve out a role in the league. That is pretty good for a 43rd selection considering the majority of players drafted in the 2nd wash out. I find it hard to criticize mid to late 2nd round draft picks.
Bagley may not have been worth the 2nd pick but he was easily top 5 in his draft and those injuries just derailed his career thus far. Maybe you can extrapolate how his career would be but I can't.
Frank Mason - another 2nd round pick just like failed Anthony Brown
Willie Cauley Stein - yep failure. Should I make the excuse he just does not have it mentally, you know like Kuzma's role, or just admit failure? Failure.
Why go back before 2015 with Stauskas and McLemore. I am sure most of the staff responsible for their development is no longer with the organization. Should we look between 2010 and 2013 and see the abject failure of all the Laker picks?
Lets add the following Lakers to even out the score
Moritz Wagner - failure
Sviatoslav Mykhailiuk - failure
Anthony Brown - failure
So same question you posed, How does the Lakers development look now?
Last edited by PlantedTanks on Sun Aug 22, 2021 8:17 pm; edited 1 time in total
Joined: 10 Apr 2001 Posts: 65135 Location: Orange County, CA
Posted: Sun Aug 22, 2021 8:09 pm Post subject:
"Blossomed under new organizations" because they did the hardest part of the foundational development work as a Laker and the rest was refinement + reps/PT + 2nd contract.
My favorite part about Wagner, Mykhailiuk, and Anthony Brown? Outside of Brown, they weren't good NBA picks. Like, I barely had Wagner ranked 50, and Mykhailiuk, ranked at all. They've had opportunities with other teams. How's the development? Even Bonga, the 1 guy I liked out of 2018, super improved his defense, which is more than what I can say about Svi or Moe.
But man, I went back to 2014 because that's when Julius Randle started.
I just really find the comparison incomparable when you legit picked players to compare that are near/or at/player prime and called that aspect, player development. That's a hard no from me.
Buddy Hield barely learning pick and roll play, and not because he's this tremendous passer, but mostly because he can pull the trigger at will behind the arc and get the PPP, isn't really that much development.
Really, it wasn't just hitting on a long string of picks since 2014. It's not even that easy to get all of the kids to development at some super advanced rate, because there's so many of them that need to make leaps. This isn't a THT situation where it's just him.
People really underrate that DLO/Randle/Nance Jr./Zo were among their best, if not, their best defensive years. Zo especially. _________________ Resident Car Nut.
I did not want to use it as a reason but Frank Mason and Stauskas were overrated prospects that should not have been drafted where they were.
I had hopes for WCS prior to the draft but I did not anticipate his poor work ethic and being weak mentally.
I am well aware of Isaac Bonga in the 2018 draft. I believe I was the first to mention him for the Lakers pick. Took a lot of flak from several posters. Also cited his defensive prowess when he was still in the Gleague. Still believe in his talent but time will tell.
We can disagree how much credit the Lakers or other organizations should be given for development of former Lakers and I am not arguing they are worse than the Kings, I just don't see them being better.
One last point since you mention defensive improvement under the Laker watch, the substantial jump in offensive production primarily happened after leaving the Lakers and in most instances 2=3 years after. Again part of development is putting the players in position to succeed to their potential and from an offensive standpoint that has occurred outside of the Lakers.
Joined: 10 Apr 2001 Posts: 65135 Location: Orange County, CA
Posted: Wed Aug 25, 2021 9:54 am Post subject:
Quote:
We can disagree how much credit the Lakers or other organizations should be given for development of former Lakers and I am not arguing they are worse than the Kings, I just don't see them being better.
So how much of that do you blame on the Kings player development vs the draft since they were the first guys to draft them? The Kings were the first to get them in house and instill the work ethic/culture.
Fox, was a standout. So are guys like Collin Sexton. I wouldn't say the Kings or Cleveland have great player development. I'd say that Sexton and Fox had to weather those cultures and found ways to get better, despite that.
Stauskas actually has good work ethic, except he's been put in the wrong roles for multiple teams.
Quote:
the substantial jump in offensive production primarily happened after leaving the Lakers and in most instances 2=3 years after.
Yeah. Offense pays for bigger contracts. Surprise surprise. Why do you think all of the former Lakers wanted to leave the Pels? Their 1 good shooting coach can't make them better overall players.
I really don't think you see clarity in just how difficult it is to do player development with multiple lottery picks + contributing players all at the same time. Why do you think there's teams with multiple picks, and not all of them can stand on their own?
Emphasis goes to certain players, and the rest get dusted. _________________ Resident Car Nut.
It is very hard to define clarity in the convoluted world of player development. It just comes down to what opinion you have formed based on how you interpret a team has developed their prospects over a period to time.
There are so many unknown factors that we will never be privy to or understand how they affect a players development.
Their work ethic
Who they train with on their teams development staff
Who they train with outside of their teams staff
How much court time they are afforded
What role as you like to emphasize they play within the team
Their capacity to learn or adapt their game to the league.
Obviously there are other factors involved but the best I can do is watch the players on court and judge what progress they have made year to year and review their stats to provide any supporting proof of a players progress.
Just to touch on the issues I noted above.
Work ethic always varies from player to player but I believe most of the past Laker prospects worked on their games during the offseason. The question for me is are they receiving the best training to improve their skills.
Outside training.
I truly believe Kuzma working with Lethal Shooter set him back in regards to his shooting mechanics. He essentially abandoned what he learned and resorted back to his old form. I don't know if his current trainer is any good besides barking at Lebron.
BI made year over year improvement with the Lakers and I give them 75% credit for his development but I still remember comments that made fun of his training video that he posted where he picks up cones/cups while dribbling the ball. I can only conclude it worked. How much credit is actually Lakers vs. private?
Julius Randle. After years attempting to fix his 3pt shot it clicked last year. We will probably never know why. Was this an outlier year? What I do know is Thibs has supposedly respected development coaches and together they were able to change Randle's mindset and curb his wild tendencies. He always showed his talent but needed to turn a 180 on how to play the game.
I did not have much belief in Luke Walton's staff to properly develop players. Too inexperienced and without player development background unless you can enlighten me on this aspect.
Roles which you have emphasized with Kuzma and now Stauskas.
Part of player development does include putting their players in the proper role and to get said players to understand and buy into it. For Kuzma the team failed him. As for Stauskas his redeeming skill coming out of college was as a shooter. He never really progressed much in this area and I know he attempted to add to his game with dribble drives to the rim but I need to point out he only played 1 year with the Kings so I can't fault them for his non-development.
Why did it take so long for Kuzma to change his game to focus on defense? No clear direction from the Lakers staff or just his mindset that he should be a focus as an offensive option? He should have just decided himself to put more emphasis in this area 2 years ago but sometimes it tough to break that self image one has of themselves. Just remembering old comments he repeated about his ability to score, be the third option only changed last year.
Yes having too many prospects hurts them as a whole as court time issues will arise but in the end the better talents will rise to the top in most instances. BI, Lonzo, DLO, Randle over Kuzma, Hart. It just so happens that it necessitated being on another team.
This was quite a long diatribe and at the minimum I wasted 10 minutes of your life that you will never get back . I believe you know how I generally analyze players and likewise I believe I know your tendencies from our exchanges in the draft threads. While we both watch probably too much basketball you break down info more granular than I do which is great for me as I acquire more insight into a player while I judge based on output with emphasis on their efficiency. I assume we both use court play as part of the process.
As this pertains to player development there is too much unknown for me to draw any type of definitive conclusions. However I can at minimum formulate an opinion relying on some basic knowledge out there in social media and on the hard numbers that a player produces.
All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous1, 2, 3 ... 13, 14, 15
Page 15 of 15
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
. I believe you know how I generally analyze players and likewise I believe I know your tendencies from our exchanges in the draft threads. While we both watch probably too much basketball you break down info more granular than I do which is great for me as I acquire more insight into a player while I judge based on output with emphasis on their efficiency. I assume we both use court play as part of the process.
