Jump to content
brownie man

LeBron James to the Lakers 4 Years/$154M

Recommended Posts

Agreed.  LeBron is still going to handle the basketball more than anyone, but he will at least be able to take a break from those duties with Ball, Rondo and Ingram.  With the Cavs last year, he literally had to do it non-stop because there was nobody else on the team who could spell him for even a little bit.  The Cavs last year was the worst team he has been on since like 2007-2009 when he left Cleveland the first time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Bullet Club said:

The only problem is they can't shoot.

Exactly. Which is why I'd expect LeBron to be out on the perimeter. Eric Snow was a great setup PG. But he also couldn't shoot to save his life. It caused massive problems with congested lanes and didn't allow LeBron to attack the way he wanted to. George Hill is a much better fit at PG with LeBron than Lonzo Ball is. That would have been a much fairer way to word that in my last post. I'd take Lonzo over Hill if starting a team from scratch, but Lonzo is a horrible fit with LeBron James methinks.

 

This is all a moot point I think, as I expect both Ball and Ingram to have been traded by mid-season for guys that fit better with LeBron. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, BleedTheClock said:

Exactly. Which is why I'd expect LeBron to be out on the perimeter. Eric Snow was a great setup PG. But he also couldn't shoot to save his life. It caused massive problems with congested lanes and didn't allow LeBron to attack the way he wanted to. George Hill is a much better fit at PG with LeBron than Lonzo Ball is. That would have been a much fairer way to word that in my last post. I'd take Lonzo over Hill if starting a team from scratch, but Lonzo is a horrible fit with LeBron James methinks.

 

This is all a moot point I think, as I expect both Ball and Ingram to have been traded by mid-season for guys that fit better with LeBron. 

The fact that you're trying to make a comparison between Eric Snow and Lonzo Ball is comical at best.  Even in Eric Snow's best season (2002-03) it's comparable to Lonzo Ball's rookie season.  Eric Snow is a career 21% shooter from beyond the arc, and Snow was a 26% shooter in college.  Lonzo Ball in his rookie year shot 31% from beyond the arc, but shot 41% from beyond the arc in college.  He will improve, and he's already a night and day better shooter than Eric Snow.  The fact that you're trying to even make this comparison is mind boggling.

As for the fit next to LeBron, that's debatable depending on what kind of offense you want to run.  If you want run a LeBron-centric offense, yes I'd agree George Hill is a better fit next to him due to him being a consistent better shooter.  If you're wanting to run more off-ball LeBron offense, than Lonzo is a significantly better fit.  I'd take Lonzo every day of the week and twice on Sunday's over George Hill in a vacuum.  Add in age and salary and it's not even remotely close.  I'm still not sure how you can argue that Brandon Ingram is a bad fit for LeBron.  I'd LOVE to hear an explanation for that one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, sdrawkcab321 said:

lmao laker fans 

Those aren't Lakers fans...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, sdrawkcab321 said:

lmao laker fans 

You seem upset.

 

also - 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
41 minutes ago, BleedTheClock said:

Exactly. Which is why I'd expect LeBron to be out on the perimeter. Eric Snow was a great setup PG. But he also couldn't shoot to save his life. It caused massive problems with congested lanes and didn't allow LeBron to attack the way he wanted to. George Hill is a much better fit at PG with LeBron than Lonzo Ball is. That would have been a much fairer way to word that in my last post. I'd take Lonzo over Hill if starting a team from scratch, but Lonzo is a horrible fit with LeBron James methinks.

 

This is all a moot point I think, as I expect both Ball and Ingram to have been traded by mid-season for guys that fit better with LeBron. 

If Lonzo can shoot even close to what he did in college he's a fantastic fit next to LeBron. The problem is who knows how likely that is. He's 6'6, can defend multiple positions well, isn't ball-dominant but can run an offense if needed and he's a fantastic passer. Everything is there...except the most important part.

I really hope they don't deal all their assets. That'd be the same mistake the Heat and Cavs made. I'd rather punt a year knowing LeBron is 34 and swing for Kawhi/Butler/Klay/etc. in Free Agency.

Edited by Bullet Club

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

The fact that you're trying to make a comparison between Eric Snow and Lonzo Ball is comical at best.  Even in Eric Snow's best season (2002-03) it's comparable to Lonzo Ball's rookie season.  Eric Snow is a career 21% shooter from beyond the arc, and Snow was a 26% shooter in college.  Lonzo Ball in his rookie year shot 31% from beyond the arc, but shot 41% from beyond the arc in college.  He will improve, and he's already a night and day better shooter than Eric Snow.  The fact that you're trying to even make this comparison is mind boggling.

Both are effectively worthless as shooters. I don't care if he's 10% better than Snow. Both guys are going to be left open on the perimeter. That's the whole point. If Lonzo can improve his shooting, he'll no doubt be a better fit with LeBron. But he shot the ball like butthole in his rookie year. Teams are going to sag off of Lonzo all day to help defend LeBron James. The same way they did when Eric Snow was on the Cavs. I'm not taking Eric Snow over Lonzo Ball, but they're essentially similar players in that they are good PG's that can't shoot the ball. Just because Lonzo Ball can shoot the ball a little less horribly doesn't make him a good fit with LeBron.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, BleedTheClock said:

Both are effectively worthless as shooters. I don't care if he's 10% better than Snow. Both guys are going to be left open on the perimeter. That's the whole point. If Lonzo can improve his shooting, he'll no doubt be a better fit with LeBron. But he shot the ball like butthole in his rookie year. Teams are going to sag off of Lonzo all day to help defend LeBron James. The same way they did when Eric Snow was on the Cavs. I'm not taking Eric Snow over Lonzo Ball, but they're essentially similar players in that they are good PG's that can't shoot the ball. Just because Lonzo Ball can shoot the ball a little less horribly doesn't make him a good fit with LeBron.

Lulz.  The way you manage to shrug off that 10% difference is astounding.  Paul George shot 41% from beyond the arc compared to 31% for Lonzo Ball.  Would you say that's negligible?  No.  Paul George is a better shooter than LeBron.  But Lonzo Ball will improve his shooting, I can guaranteed that.  Unlike Eric Snow over his entire career shot 21% from beyond the arc, there was no room for improvement.  They're literally nothing alike.  Lonzo Ball is exponentially better than Eric Snow.  Just admit it was a lazy comparison and we can move on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, CWood21 said:

Lulz.  The way you manage to shrug off that 10% difference is astounding.  Paul George shot 41% from beyond the arc compared to 31% for Lonzo Ball.  Would you say that's negligible?  No.  Paul George is a better shooter than LeBron.  But Lonzo Ball will improve his shooting, I can guaranteed that.  Unlike Eric Snow over his entire career shot 21% from beyond the arc, there was no room for improvement.  They're literally nothing alike.  Lonzo Ball is exponentially better than Eric Snow.  Just admit it was a lazy comparison and we can move on.

You're right. Teams will be scrambling to stay in front of a 31% shooter from beyond the arc. LeBron will feast inside the post when 2 guys have to stay hugged up on Lonzo all game long.

Until Lonzo proves that he can shoot the basketball better from 3 point range, he's going to be a "rich man's Eric Snow." Is that a better comparison for you? And I would never take Snow over Lonzo. But for broad strokes purposes, I'm looking back at old PG's that LeBron had that couldn't shoot the ball to save their lives. Snow was the first one that came to mind. He was a good player that couldn't shoot and therefore, was a bad fit next to LeBron, who needed space to drive and operate.

 

When you have a physical marvel like LeBron, you need to surround him with shooters. This is how you clear out space for him. If the Cavs players would have been making 3 point shots last season, they would have had a chance to win a title. But they had exactly 1 guy (Korver) that would actually convert on his wide open 3's. Because our players were always left wide the eff open on the 3 point line after a LeBron drive and kick. If you're comfortable with him kicking the ball out to a 31% shooter, more power to you.

 

I'd be willing to bet both of Ball and Ingram are gone by the trade deadline when they realize that they aren't fits with LeBron. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get what you are trying to interpret with the Eric Snow narrative. Except Ball actually has proven in college he could shoot from 3. Snow has never demonstated that ability. If Lonzo doesn’t improve from 3 which I doubt will happen knowing that he will receive a ton of spot up shots instead of off the dribble ones this year, I still think he will be useful. Ball is 6’6 and has a decent idea on how to attack the rim using his size. Think he won’t be learning more from Bron? Sadly mistaken. Even as a non shooter god for bid he shoots 30% again, he can at least attack the paint with his size.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, BleedTheClock said:

You're right. Teams will be scrambling to stay in front of a 31% shooter from beyond the arc. LeBron will feast inside the post when 2 guys have to stay hugged up on Lonzo all game long.

No.  They don't have to be scrambling to him, but they just have to respect him.  Jason Kidd was a career 35% shooter, and it wasn't like teams completely left him wide open.  This isn't Rajon Rondo during the Celtics' championship run when he was consistently a sub-25% shooter from beyond the arc, where teams were literally not defending him until he attacked the basket.  LIS, if Lonzo can improve to around 35% shooting, that's more than enough.

17 minutes ago, BleedTheClock said:

Until Lonzo proves that he can shoot the basketball better from 3 point range, he's going to be a "rich man's Eric Snow." Is that a better comparison for you? And I would never take Snow over Lonzo. But for broad strokes purposes, I'm looking back at old PG's that LeBron had that couldn't shoot the ball to save their lives. Snow was the first one that came to mind. He was a good player that couldn't shoot and therefore, was a bad fit next to LeBron, who needed space to drive and operate

No.  That's still an awful comparison.  I mean, even if Lonzo Ball suddenly got worse, he's still better than Eric Snow by a pretty significant margin.  We're talking about a guy who actually impacts the game positively, and one who didn't.  I mean, of all the comparisons to make about non-shooters at PG, this might have been the worse.  Hell, I would have gone with Rajon Rondo before I would have used Eric Snow.  It's a downright awful, lazy comparison.  When your career best season is comparable to a rookie season, that's not a good comparison.

19 minutes ago, BleedTheClock said:

When you have a physical marvel like LeBron, you need to surround him with shooters. This is how you clear out space for him. If the Cavs players would have been making 3 point shots last season, they would have had a chance to win a title. But they had exactly 1 guy (Korver) that would actually convert on his wide open 3's. Because our players were always left wide the eff open on the 3 point line after a LeBron drive and kick. If you're comfortable with him kicking the ball out to a 31% shooter, more power to you.

And we saw how well that worked for Cleveland.  In the four Finals against the Warriors, the Cavaliers went 7 of a possible 22 games.  That's a winning percentage of 32%, that's a winning percentage worse than the Sacramento Kings.  Let that sink in.  Let's not try to overthink this.  The Cavaliers were effective for two reasons: they played in a mediocre Eastern Conference and they had LeBron James.  They were a great offensive team, but an absolutely miserable defensive team.  The whole filling 3&D players around LeBron James sounds great in theory, but the reality is those players don't grow on trees and they are usually a high commodity.

Do you have something to convince you that Lonzo Ball will be a career 31% shooter from beyond the arc for his career?  If so, I'd love to hear it because at this point I don't think you can.  I've said that if he becomes a career 35% shooter from beyond the arc, I'm happy.  Especially given the impact he makes elsewhere.  You know who else is a career 35% shooter from beyond the arc?  LeBron James.  You don't hear anyone complaining about his shooting  It's ridiculous.

26 minutes ago, BleedTheClock said:

I'd be willing to bet both of Ball and Ingram are gone by the trade deadline when they realize that they aren't fits with LeBron. 

Still waiting to hear how Brandon Ingram isn't a good fit next to LeBron.  I imagine I'll be waiting for a while because there really isn't a good one.  He shot 39% from beyond the arc this year, but let me guess he's not a good enough shooter?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, indifference said:

Except Ball actually has proven in college he could shoot from 3.

Too bad the NBA is the NBA and the NCAA is the NCAA. It's a different game. And I think he can improve, but people are simply assuming he's going to all of a sudden morph into a great 3-point shooter to where defenders have to respect that part of his game. I don't like to assume that players will iron their flaws out. I've been waiting for LeBron James to improve his free throw shooting every single season and that has yet to happen. Sometimes guys just don't improve on certain aspects. Some people seem to believe it's a foregone conclusion that he'll improve for some reason. Maybe he will, but until he does, it's perfectly fair to call him a poor shooter.

 

@CWood21 0%, 10%, 20%, 30% from 3-point range is not good. Is 30% better than 0%? Sure, but for all intensive purposes, you're still talking about a terrible 3 point shooter. Nobody that shoots 30% is considered a great 3-point shooter. Guys that shoot 40% and over are considered great shooters. You don't close out like a madman on someone that shooters 30. You do on someone that shoots 40. Not sure if you're new to the NBA or what, but this is how it's always been. The 10% gap between 20 & 30 is negligible. The 10% gap between 30 and 40 is a lot more significant and you'd be hard pressed to find anyone that disagrees with me on that point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, CWood21 said:

And we saw how well that worked for Cleveland.  In the four Finals against the Warriors, the Cavaliers went 7 of a possible 22 games.  That's a winning percentage of 32%, that's a winning percentage worse than the Sacramento Kings.  Let that sink in.  Let's not try to overthink this.

lol their guys weren't hitting wide open shots. If we had competent shooters, we would have been a lot better off. Our defense was a bigger problem than the offense, but our "shooters" were left wide open and continued to miss. Don't confuse incompetence with a schematic problem.

If I try to run the spread offense with dudes that can't catch the football, it doesn't mean the spread doesn't work. It means my players just aren't good enough. That's essentially what I'm arguing here. If your PG, SG and PF are getting wide open 3's, the scheme is working.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, BleedTheClock said:

Too bad the NBA is the NBA and the NCAA is the NCAA. It's a different game. And I think he can improve, but people are simply assuming he's going to all of a sudden morph into a great 3-point shooter to where defenders have to respect that part of his game. I don't like to assume that players will iron their flaws out. I've been waiting for LeBron James to improve his free throw shooting every single season and that has yet to happen. Sometimes guys just don't improve on certain aspects. Some people seem to believe it's a foregone conclusion that he'll improve for some reason. Maybe he will, but until he does, it's perfectly fair to call him a poor shooter.

 

@CWood21 0%, 10%, 20%, 30% from 3-point range is not good. Is 30% better than 0%? Sure, but for all intensive purposes, you're still talking about a terrible 3 point shooter. Nobody that shoots 30% is considered a great 3-point shooter. Guys that shoot 40% and over are considered great shooters. You don't close out like a madman on someone that shooters 30. You do on someone that shoots 40. Not sure if you're new to the NBA or what, but this is how it's always been. The 10% gap between 20 & 30 is negligible. The 10% gap between 30 and 40 is a lot more significant and you'd be hard pressed to find anyone that disagrees with me on that point.

He doesn't have to be a great shooter to be a great player, he impacts the game enough in other ways that he doesn't have to be a great shooter to provide value.  Lonzo shot 67% from the FT line and 41% in college, but only shot 45% from the line and 31% from beyond the arc.  So it goes back to one question, why did Lonzo shoot worse from the FT line in the NBA than he did in college?  It's the same shot.  I suppose you could make the argument about sample size, but you could argue that for both sides.  You'd imagine his career FT% will probably be closer to his college average than his rookie season.  That suggests there's either a mechanical issue or a medical flaw that affects the mechanics.  And college FT% is usually a good indicator of 3P% in the NBA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×