He's way more than a year away. He's not even g league player yet. The ceiling you all are attributing to him is not fact based. It's fantasy. He's tall and theoretically athletic. He can't shoot. He's not elite at anything.
At the 19th pick, the Spurs would've been much better off getting a quality role player like Clark. At the very least he could've been part of some future trade package.
He could eventually be Siakam or Lyles, it will depends on his work ethics and what he is going to do in the summer. I remember everyone bashing Metu last year, and he had shown tremedous growth over the summer. There is only so much growth you can do in season mainly positional sense and BBQ IQ or minor adjustment to shot mechanics.
I swear it gets dumber and dumber in here all the time.
Dude is averaging 14 ppg and 7.3 RPGs as a 19 year old developmental rookie. And you say he isn't even a G league player.
Good just don't ever post again.
This. If Luka shows the same improvement that Metu has from year 1 to year 2 he will be totally dominating GL next year.
Cringey front office. No wonder they suck
Since no one seems to have tackled this part of your post, and you seem dead-set on Luka "can't shoot": Pascal Siakam, the absolute role model for a modern forward that Luka ought to follow, shot 7 3PA his first season. Not even made 7 - SHOT seven. And was over 21 when drafted. Luka is already a better shooter than Siakam was as a rookie, and is younger. Obviously not every player is going to develop at the same rate, but you're seriously pulling at strings for your Luka hate here.
I imagine Pop is just like that when the Spurs are drafting...."We really like this guy Thybu-...."
: "Luka!!!"
Wristcutters everywhere.
Yes the nba is terrible product
Cherry picking box score stats from the g league. Lol. You stans are either the extremely disingenuous or extremely stupid. I can't decide which one.
This is typical of the Spurs' homer logic these days. Because Pascal siakim was capable of going from a bad player to a good player, it is somehow reasonable to conclude Luka will as well. Pascal is an extreme outlier, he's not the standard, and no reasonable person would even consider raising him as an example of what we can expect from Luka given his ty career thus far.
Paskal was always elite, even without a shot. Luka has nothing of note to offer.
All in on Keldon at this point. Maybe we can package Luka with Forbes for a pack of skittles and a 2nd round pick.
His career? You are crazy. He turned 20 six days ago. He's the age of a college sop re. Are you trying to prove to everyone that you're nuts?
No, he was not. He was bad, very bad in his rookie year. And only a little bit better in his second year.
You did it.... you posted again.
And totally proved your stupidity again.
do you even bother to check the you're spewing out? Siakam entered the league at 22, three years older than Luka, and averaged a measly 4.2ppg, 3.4rpg, 0.3apg, on 55 ing games played. Luka could be there already if Pop wasn't so stubborn. Siakam then averaged 7 ing points in 80 games his second season. Since you're obviously going to say that his game went beyond boxscore stats, would you mind pointing out what things about him were "elite" coming into the league? Lol, give me a break...
This is typical of the SpursTalk coach GMs these days. Just because another player made improvements in his game means our rookie cannot do it and is hopeless. First off, Siakam was picked below Luka, at 27th; and he showed nothing at the time that Luka hasn't shown. Luka has a (much) better shot at a younger age, is more coordinated than Siakam was (Pascal has the excuse of being a late learner of the game, but I digress), and he has not had a " ty career" whatsoever no matter how much you want to jerk off to that delusional take.
If you're not high on Luka, or hate him even, that's completely fine and your opinion. Just try and not pose it as a fact next time, you end up coming off as very unknowledgeable or straight up hater/troll. Samanic could very well "bust" (in reality no 19th pick truly busts since more often than not they don't pan out anyways) but the signs so far suggest the opposite. ty career
Thanks for the dose of reality.
If you're not high on Luka, or hate him even, that's completely fine and your opinion. Just try and not pose it as a fact next time, you end up coming off as very unknowledgeable or straight up hater/troll. Samanic could very well "bust" (in reality no 19th pick truly busts since more often than not they don't pan out anyways) but the signs so far suggest the opposite. ty career
In college, at 20 years old, Paskal put up 13-7 on 57% then 20-11.5 on 53% shooting at 21. He had a 27 PER his freshman year, and a 31.1 PER his second year. Coming into the league, his usage was super low like Kawhi his first couple years, but he was efficient with the touches he got, still shooting 50%. He didn't have a 3 point shot right away, but he also didn't take any either, and still excelled.
Luka at 20 is putting up 13-7 on 39% shooting, and turning the ball over 3 times a game. His patented shot is good for 30% on 4 attempts per game as of today. The only bright spot so far is his rebounding.
Comparing him to Siakam makes no sense.
For the sake of our new GM, I hope he turns it around, but there's no use sugar coating the situation. The 2nd best player in the draft was there at 19(Brandon Clarke), among other better options(grant williams, thybull.. ).
Last edited by 313; 01-16-2020 at 11:35 PM.
So the difference between Siakam and Luka is the efficiency with which they're getting their points? That's the entire point of your argument on how Pascal was "elite" from the get go while Luka would be barely worth a second round pick? You do know that you can improve efficiency and shot selection as part of learning the game and improving, right...?
I thought your argument would be more fun to pick apart. Believe what you will, I guess. Luka and Pascal have a lot of similarities which make a comparison sensible, like their mobility, rebounding strength and shooting touch (bad efficiency hardly means bad shooting form; take a look at Forbes for a negative example of this).
Also, I really hope that last sentence was a blunder/typo... Clarke, second best player in the entire draft? Do you happen to watch other teams beside the Spurs at all, my guy?
if you're drafting a player in the first round he should be good enough to play in the first season. And this guy was not the last pick, but 19th. ''But, but, the Spurs always take one year to develop the player in the G league'', yea, thats also re ed. Develop the 2nd round picks, not a ing 19th pick, otherwise why draft him that high. And I hope the Spurs are not surprised that he aint that good, cause every guy that watched him play last year could tell you he is a 2nd round pick. The re ed FO most likely thought that cause his name is Luka he'll be good. Also don't mention that this FO is smart and that they know what they are doing, cause after that contract they gave to Caroll they look like re s. Half season gone and the 19th pick was not even close to play. ing pathetic.
You mix up a lot of points that aren't really related in this comment. First off, the Spurs model of developing players in the GL has worked for many of their players, and it's currently working wonders for the Raptors, who have kind of copied the Spurs blueprint and modernized it. More and more teams will start looking at their GL teams for development and talent as they recognize what a successful model it is. Second, a 19th pick is not "high" at all and most players drafted there peak as role players, save for Kawhi-like exceptions, and it's around the area where teams take gambles on multi-year projects instead of looking for instant production, like lottery picks are expected to provide. I don't think saying the FO drafted Luka for the name is warranted or an ingenious comment especially since we know RC has been following Luka and Olimpija team for some years now.
The Carrol contract was bad, but it has nothing to do with Luka, tbh (and IMO it's on Pop for not even giving DeMarre an opportunity to showcase his talent on the court; no player is going to look their best if you put them in on garbage time every 10 games). I don't really know what you expected since this is the Spurs FO and it has brought them 20 years of success... You'd think being here since '06, you'd have grown accustomed to it, tbh.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
