Dougie Buckets vs. Julian?

[midnightpulp]

I thought Buckets would likely wind up as a poor man's Kyle Korver, but he's showing some scary, Wardell-like range, and he also seems to have improved the time on his release. He's been on fire since Feb 1., where his PPG shot up from 6ppg to about 14ppg in limited minutes, with a fantastic 30 point on 13-17 shooting performance against the Raptors, and then another 29 point on 9-11 night against the same team. He's also shooting well over 50% from the field, 40% from 3, and around .870 from the line during this time.

He's limited athletically, so therefore his peak is naturally limited (he'll never become an elite defender or all around scorer), but his shooting is so deadly, I think he's going to turn into a viable weapon. Maybe the SF version of Klay Thompson but not as good defensively (although Klay's defense is massively overrated).

I bring up Julian because the Lakers were looking at Buckets, and I was ready to laugh something fierce if "Mitch did it," but now I'm glad they chose to draft DeJuan Blair 2.0. Randle hasn't improved his core game at all, and is pretty much just an energy guy who scores through bullrushing and hustles for rebounds.

Imagine the spacing in a line up with Buckets, D'Bust, and Clarkson (who would also feast off penetration as a result of that spacing). It would be the perfect lineup for a potential Ben Simmons. Simmons can't shoot, but it wouldn't matter. Simmons would just play point PF and work off the wide open court he would have as defenses scramble to stay home on all that shooting firepower. Anchor this defensively compromised unit by signing someone like Whiteside, and you have a fun team. Not title contenders, but still a team with much more bright of a future than now (I really think Randle's game, size, and playing style is all wrong for the modern NBA. Randle-type players are better as bench "energy" guys today).

So in hindsight, do you draft Buckets higher?

[midnightpulp]

Also, Buckets has been showing more of a complete game these past few weeks. That turn around J from the post was pretty damn smooth.

https://pippenainteasy.com/2016/03/16/doug-mcdermott-is-looking-more-and-more-like-an-nba-player/

[140]

:lol lakers

[spursistan]

haven't been watching Randle since early in the season..has he made any improvements in his game? seems like he is putting an even worse version of D'Bust empty stats ..

[Killakobe81]

I thought Buckets would likely wind up as a poor man's Kyle Korver, but he's showing some scary, Wardell-like range, and he also seems to have improved the time on his release. He's been on fire since Feb 1., where his PPG shot up from 6ppg to about 14ppg in limited minutes, with a fantastic 30 point on 13-17 shooting performance against the Raptors, and then another 29 point on 9-11 night against the same team. He's also shooting well over 50% from the field, 40% from 3, and around .870 from the line during this time.

He's limited athletically, so therefore his peak is naturally limited (he'll never become an elite defender or all around scorer), but his shooting is so deadly, I think he's going to turn into a viable weapon. Maybe the SF version of Klay Thompson but not as good defensively (although Klay's defense is massively overrated).

I bring up Julian because the Lakers were looking at Buckets, and I was ready to laugh something fierce if "Mitch did it," but now I'm glad they chose to draft DeJuan Blair 2.0. Randle hasn't improved his core game at all, and is pretty much just an energy guy who scores through bullrushing and hustles for rebounds.

Imagine the spacing in a line up with Buckets, D'Bust, and Clarkson (who would also feast off penetration as a result of that spacing). It would be the perfect lineup for a potential Ben Simmons. Simmons can't shoot, but it wouldn't matter. Simmons would just play point PF and work off the wide open court he would have as defenses scramble to stay home on all that shooting firepower. Anchor this defensively compromised unit by signing someone like Whiteside, and you have a fun team. Not title contenders, but still a team with much more bright of a future than now (I really think Randle's game, size, and playing style is all wrong for the modern NBA. Randle-type players are better as bench "energy" guys today).

So in hindsight, do you draft Buckets higher?

Like you said Mitch loved McDermott. But again with your quick to judge analysis you fail to compare apples to oranges. McDermott is not only older but also played at least two more years of college ...maybe 3 if I am not mistaken. Let's revisit this when Randle is the same age as Buckets is now or has played the same number of NBA games, at least Despite the holes in Randle's game not ready to make a definitive decision on who we should have drafted. Also Lakers did not know they would draft Russell or have a shot at Simmons when they drafted Julius.

[midnightpulp]

Like you said Mitch loved McDermott. But again with your quick to judge analysis you fail to compare apples to oranges. McDermott is not only older but also played at least two more years of college ...maybe 3 if I am not mistaken. Let's revisit this when Randle is the same age as Buckets is now or has played the same number of NBA games, at least Despite the holes in Randle's game not ready to make a definitive decision on who we should have drafted. Also Lakers did not know they would draft Russell or have a shot at Simmons when they drafted Julius.

The problem with Randle is that he's a PF with SF size and length, but at the same time, a bit too big to play SF. He also obviously lacks the outside shooting an NBA SF needs to have today. I just see Randle as an Ed Davis type of player. Capable of big rebounding nights and scoring anywhere from 10-20 points (on putbacks, hustle playes, etc), but nothing that really challenges opposing defenses to scheme against him. Not to say he can't be valuable, but he's value will likely come in the "blue collar" variety.

[Killakobe81]

The problem with Randle is that he's a PF with SF size and length, but at the same time, a bit too big to play SF. He also obviously lacks the outside shooting an NBA SF needs to have today. I just see Randle as an Ed Davis type of player. Capable of big rebounding nights and scoring anywhere from 10-20 points (on putbacks, hustle playes, etc), but nothing that really challenges opposing defenses to scheme against him. Not to say he can't be valuable, but he's value will likely come in the "blue collar" variety.

Dont disagree with most of this. But he is actually taller than Dryamond. Green has a longer reach (i think) andI am not saying he will ever be as good as Green ...but just saying that it's too early to tell. no one not even the Dubs FO thought Dryamond would be an all-star after the first 82 games played. I think best case for Randle is as #3 My guess is he probably be a solid 4th starter most likely if he improves his range.

I get that you enjoy calling bust on Lakers players and you may be right on this one ...I dont feel as confident as I do about him as I do Russ or even Clarkson ... but I am willing to give him more time. he at least derserves the same amount as McDermott if not more.

[midnightpulp]

Dont disagree with most of this. But he is actually taller than Dryamond. Green has a longer reach (i think) andI am not saying he will ever be as good as Green ...but just saying that it's too early to tell. no one not even the Dubs FO thought Dryamond would be an all-star after the first 82 games played. I think best case for Randle is as #3 My guess is he probably be a solid 4th starter most likely if he improves his range.

I get that you enjoy calling bust on Lakers players and you may be right on this one ...I dont feel as confident as I do about him as I do Russ or even Clarkson ... but I am willing to give him more time. he at least derserves the same amount as McDermott if not more.

Draymond is a unique player. Tough to compare anyone to him.

Randle won't be a "bust," but undersized PFs who can't shoot are known to be liabilities as starters. Randle has a nice first step and some athleticism, but his offensive game is pretty one dimensional. He's a good rebounder and has a good motor, so I think his best place might be coming off the bench.

Russell will be a solid player. His lack of athleticism is a worry (I know he's shown some get up, but he's still relatively slow at the position). He can get on the offense end using his size and length, but in the many games I've watched, he struggles to stay in front of his matchup.

[Killakobe81]

Draymond is a unique player. Tough to compare anyone to him.

Randle won't be a "bust," but undersized PFs who can't shoot are known to be liabilities as starters. Randle has a nice first step and some athleticism, but his offensive game is pretty one dimensional. He's a good rebounder and has a good motor, so I think his best place might be coming off the bench.

Russell will be a solid player. His lack of athleticism is a worry (I know he's shown some get up, but he's still relatively slow at the position). He can get on the offense end using his size and length, but in the many games I've watched, he struggles to stay in front of his matchup.

On this we agree (so far)

For randle maybe a bench role would be better since he would face David west and Speights instead of Aldridge and Draymond ...
Russ does struggle to stay in front of quick PG's (who doesn't) but he has great length and good anticipation and gets a lot of steals and rebounds by reading plays. I think he will be at least decent on that end and I expect his offensive game to flourish as he gets stronger.