Q12543 wrote:FNG, the problem is you really can't play Ben with Vando. Neither is willing or able to hit a shot outside of 8 feet and it's very difficult to run an offense these days with two guys that are total non-shooters. That mitigates how much he can add defensively since you essentially can't play two of your best defenders at once. So there is a diminishing return we get on defense from Ben and what do we give up offensively to get him? One of our few reliable outside shooters. I think our defense would get marginally better and our offense would potentially get worse.
Yeah, I agree that Ben and Vando is far from an ideal combo. But I would rank Vando as our 5th best defender after the trade I suggest (I love Vando's energy, and I was almost as early as you on the bandwagon last season, but I prefer Jaden, PatBev, and JO on D). Vando gets all 13 minutes Ben is on the bench, plus another 7 or so together...preferably at the end of the game when we are protecting a lead. We lose DLo's shooting, but let's be realistic about that...his 40% shooting this season and 34% on threes are only 2 percentage points lower than his career averages. And both are far below the league average for guards.
Likely still only a theoretical discussion though...Morey is still unlikely to accept this deal.
I've said this a gazillion times and I'll keep saying it in response to your "DLO doesnt' shoot well" narrative....No defense in their right mind is leaving DLO open for 3's. It's not just the raw percentage of 3s a guy hits, it's the perceived threat of him making them that can help an offense. Spacing is absolutely huge in the NBA and teams generally have to guard DLO out there. So even if he's not making 3's at a 39 or 40% clip, he's helping the offensive spacing by simply being on the floor. Simmons simply does not have to be guarded out there....at all.
Also, in regards to JO being a better defender than Vanderbilt, I'd question that at this point. Plus you have the same problem on offense....JO can't play with Simmons either.
We're fooling ourselves if we think D'Angelo Russell's current shooting numbers are reminiscent of the shooter he is and has been in recent years. It's also unfair to ignore volume and shot type when it comes to the topic of three-point shooting. Russell's not out there simply taking a couple catch-and-shoot threes every game. He's good for 7-10 attempts every night with a lot of them coming off the dribble. Defenses have to respect that shot and account for him on that end of the floor, especially if he's playing off the ball.
I've probably been less inclined to trade for Simmons than anyone else on this message board from the beginning. However, I was among those who would have traded DLO and a future pick for Simmons during the offseason although I knew it was highly unlikely Morey would agree to it. As we sit here today, I wouldn't trade DLO or Beasley in any sort of package for Simmons. Our defense has been excellent and our team chemistry is terrific. And as others have noted, trading for Simmons would at least be a temporary step back as Simmons would need time to get in shape physically and adapt to a new team mentally.
We need scoring and DLO is a big-time scorer and fearless clutch shotmaker. In addition, he facilitates and spreads the floor for others. Beasley appears to have gotten his shooting stroke back as expected. We don't have anyone else on the roster like him - an instant lethal 3-point shooting scorer off the bench. As a bonus, he's also fast, athletic and an excellent rebounder for his position.
Furthermore, let's illustrate the type of shooter D'Angelo Russell is and has been off the catch. Russell's been one of the better shooters in the entire league in this regard over the last handful of years.
Defenses will not willingly leave him alone outside the three-point line because of the above. He's proven that he'll make them and make them in bunches. That in itself has value.
lipoli390 wrote:I've probably been less inclined to trade for Simmons than anyone else on this message board from the beginning. However, I was among those who would have traded DLO and a future pick for Simmons during the offseason although I knew it was highly unlikely Morey would agree to it. As we sit here today, I wouldn't trade DLO or Beasley in any sort of package for Simmons. Our defense has been excellent and our team chemistry is terrific. And as others have noted, trading for Simmons would at least be a temporary step back as Simmons would need time to get in shape physically and adapt to a new team mentally.
We need scoring and DLO is a big-time scorer and fearless clutch shotmaker. In addition, he facilitates and spreads the floor for others. Beasley appears to have gotten his shooting stroke back as expected. We don't have anyone else on the roster like him - an instant lethal 3-point shooting scorer off the bench. As a bonus, he's also fast, athletic and an excellent rebounder for his position.
Lip, I'm also probably not in favor of giving up a 1st round pick in a trade for Simmons. But just to be clear, are you saying you wouldn't offer either DLo or Beasley straight up for Simmons?
(Strictly theoretical question, because there's no way Morey does the Beasley trade, and unlikely he does the DLo trade).
Camden wrote:Furthermore, let's illustrate the type of shooter D'Angelo Russell is and has been off the catch. Russell's been one of the better shooters in the entire league in this regard over the last handful of years.
Defenses will not willingly leave him alone outside the three-point line because of the above. He's proven that he'll make them and make them in bunches. That in itself has value.
I have to admit that on face value I was impressed by DLo's numbers on catch and shoot threes...39.1% seems pretty good to me. But then I took a closer look, and the "one of the better shooters in the league" conclusion is far from reality. It turns out that catch and shoot threes are made throughout the association at a very high rate. In fact, DLo ranked 164th last season in catch and shoot 3-point percentage, and 71st in percentage for those taking more than 3 catch and shoot 3-pointers a game. If those shooters were spread evenly throughout the 30 teams, there would be more than 5 shooters on every team with a better catch and shoot percentage, and over 2 high-volume shooters (3 or more catch and shoot threes) on each team with a higher percentage. And if we make it Wolves-specific (not considered a very good 3-point shooting team by any standard), there are 4 current Wolves who had a higher catch and shoot percentage than DLo last year, and 3 of those 4 had 3 or more attempts per game. I don't think anyone would conclude that those rankings make DLo one of the best shooters in the league...far from it.
A couple other guys here have made the same point to me over and over again...that his shooting percentage is not as important as the perceived threat of DLo making a three. But that just doesn't make sense to me in light of the fact that 70 other high-volume guys had a better catch and shoot percentage than DLo last year (and I think we all know Russell would rank much lower in this current year). Let's try one specific example to see if the logic holds up. Davis Bertans had a better catch and shoot 3-point percentage than DLo last season, on almost twice as many attempts. Is he then also one of the better shooters in the league and a valuable offensive player?
You can quibble over my wording, but once again, you're missing the larger and more important point. D'Angelo Russell is a good shooter. His spacing provides value let alone everything else he's capable of offensively. You shortchanged him in this thread and have done so a number of times on this same topic. No learning has occurred.
Another reason/example of why stats can't be your argument. They always have to be used in proper context. Politicians and their campaigns are masters at this. You can always find a stat that makes your position look better than it really is.
Camden wrote:Furthermore, let's illustrate the type of shooter D'Angelo Russell is and has been off the catch. Russell's been one of the better shooters in the entire league in this regard over the last handful of years.
Defenses will not willingly leave him alone outside the three-point line because of the above. He's proven that he'll make them and make them in bunches. That in itself has value.
I have to admit that on face value I was impressed by DLo's numbers on catch and shoot threes...39.1% seems pretty good to me. But then I took a closer look, and the "one of the better shooters in the league" conclusion is far from reality. It turns out that catch and shoot threes are made throughout the association at a very high rate. In fact, DLo ranked 164th last season in catch and shoot 3-point percentage, and 71st in percentage for those taking more than 3 catch and shoot 3-pointers a game. If those shooters were spread evenly throughout the 30 teams, there would be more than 5 shooters on every team with a better catch and shoot percentage, and over 2 high-volume shooters (3 or more catch and shoot threes) on each team with a higher percentage. And if we make it Wolves-specific (not considered a very good 3-point shooting team by any standard), there are 4 current Wolves who had a higher catch and shoot percentage than DLo last year, and 3 of those 4 had 3 or more attempts per game. I don't think anyone would conclude that those rankings make DLo one of the best shooters in the league...far from it.
A couple other guys here have made the same point to me over and over again...that his shooting percentage is not as important as the perceived threat of DLo making a three. But that just doesn't make sense to me in light of the fact that 70 other high-volume guys had a better catch and shoot percentage than DLo last year (and I think we all know Russell would rank much lower in this current year). Let's try one specific example to see if the logic holds up. Davis Bertans had a better catch and shoot 3-point percentage than DLo last season, on almost twice as many attempts. Is he then also one of the better shooters in the league and a valuable offensive player?
Why does the fact 70 other NBA players had better catch shoot percentage mean that opposing teams won't guard him on the perimeter? He may not be among the elite shooters in the league, but he's good enough that defenders don't sag off him or double off of him, as a 39% catch and shoot percentage is still super efficient. No team wants to give that up regardless if there are 70 or 700 other players better at it. This means he helps create space whether he takes a 3 or not. Combine that with his playmaking ability and you have a dangerous offensive player. Why is this so hard for you to grasp?
DLO can be criticized for his lackadaisical defensive play (although not as much this year), his poor shot selection, or his slow first step. His outside shot is the one thing teams want to take away from him.
Camden wrote:Furthermore, let's illustrate the type of shooter D'Angelo Russell is and has been off the catch. Russell's been one of the better shooters in the entire league in this regard over the last handful of years.
Defenses will not willingly leave him alone outside the three-point line because of the above. He's proven that he'll make them and make them in bunches. That in itself has value.
I have to admit that on face value I was impressed by DLo's numbers on catch and shoot threes...39.1% seems pretty good to me. But then I took a closer look, and the "one of the better shooters in the league" conclusion is far from reality. It turns out that catch and shoot threes are made throughout the association at a very high rate. In fact, DLo ranked 164th last season in catch and shoot 3-point percentage, and 71st in percentage for those taking more than 3 catch and shoot 3-pointers a game. If those shooters were spread evenly throughout the 30 teams, there would be more than 5 shooters on every team with a better catch and shoot percentage, and over 2 high-volume shooters (3 or more catch and shoot threes) on each team with a higher percentage. And if we make it Wolves-specific (not considered a very good 3-point shooting team by any standard), there are 4 current Wolves who had a higher catch and shoot percentage than DLo last year, and 3 of those 4 had 3 or more attempts per game. I don't think anyone would conclude that those rankings make DLo one of the best shooters in the league...far from it.
A couple other guys here have made the same point to me over and over again...that his shooting percentage is not as important as the perceived threat of DLo making a three. But that just doesn't make sense to me in light of the fact that 70 other high-volume guys had a better catch and shoot percentage than DLo last year (and I think we all know Russell would rank much lower in this current year). Let's try one specific example to see if the logic holds up. Davis Bertans had a better catch and shoot 3-point percentage than DLo last season, on almost twice as many attempts. Is he then also one of the better shooters in the league and a valuable offensive player?
Why does the fact 70 other NBA players had better catch shoot percentage mean that opposing teams won't guard him on the perimeter? He may not be among the elite shooters in the league, but he's good enough that defenders don't sag off him or double off of him, as a 39% catch and shoot percentage is still super efficient. No team wants to give that up regardless if there are 70 or 700 other players better at it. This means he helps create space whether he takes a 3 or not. Combine that with his playmaking ability and you have a dangerous offensive player. Why is this so hard for you to grasp?
DLO can be criticized for his lackadaisical defensive play (although not as much this year), his poor shot selection, or his slow first step. His outside shot is the one thing teams want to take away from him.
There are two different conversations going here relating to DLo's shooting, Q, and this specific response was to Cam. (I'll get to yours separately). Cam provided some data to support his assertion that DLo is "one of the better shooters in the league", and I replied with some context. Yes, 39.1% seems like a decent percentage on catch and shoot threes, but his percentage actually puts him quite far down the ladder when it comes to catch and shoot accuracy. If volume and success rate are the two criteria for determining how good a shooter a particular player is (and those were the two criteria Cam provided in his post), he actually ranks in the lower half of the league...just as he ranks in the lower half of the league in TS%. My point was not that DLo is not a floor spacer, but rather that he ranks poorly compared to other volume 3-point shooters. And we need more from our one max salary guard than that if we're going to be a contender.
Your point was different as I interpreted it, because you were saying that unlike Ben Simmons, DLo provides value beyond his shooting percentage since he is a threat to hit a three (as is almost every guard in the association...some more than others) and defenses can't sag off of him. I certainly agree that it seems logical that a non-shooter like Simmons would not be helpful to the offense because of his inability to provide spacing. But is it supported by the data? I realize that we are barely 1/5 of the way into the season, but wouldn't logic say that replacing a non-spacer and poor shooter like Simmons with a 38.5% 3-point shooter like Maxey would improve the team's 3-point shooting? And yet, they have a worse 3-point percentage and overall percentage this year compared to last. My point is that while I agree that Ben is far from being a floor spacer, he is a talented facilitator who runs an offense very well...in addition to being perhaps the best defender in the league. Again, it's a non-starter as a discussion topic because Morey likely wouldn't do the deal, but I think we would be lucky to swap these two max players and instantly be 10 wins better.
