Reply With QuoteOriginally Posted by DashGlobal
Ceilings/potentials is pseudoscience. Hit me with real facts cuz as far as I can see, both players have very similar numbers and Kemba doesnt even have to hit a tray to be just as effective.
What makes you say that?
Is it because he's taller and shoots better from three?
Is it his 3.3 turnovers a game compared to Kemba's 2.2?
Is it because Lillard gets less steals a game than Kemba?
Like i've shown with stats...they are nearly identical in every category...and they are the same age...Why is Kemba's ceiling lower?
Like I've said in different threads...I really believe Lillard will become a star...so will Kemba
Ceilings/potentials is pseudoscience. Hit me with real facts cuz as far as I can see, both players have very similar numbers and Kemba doesnt even have to hit a tray to be just as effective.
Lillard definitely doesn't have a higher ceiling. Just wait until Walker can develop a consistent shot from 3.
If anything as previously stated they have the same ceiling.
Kemba playing with Batum, Aldridge might allow him to shoot a better % on 3's. Aldridge commands a double team in the post and Batum spreads the floor leaving Lillard more room to shot.
Also, a lot of Kemba's 3's are when the shot clock is winding down, I believe Coach Dunlap has instructed him that if there is time left on the clock, he would prefer him driving vs. Settling for a 3. I think that is part of he reason his 3% is worse this season..
Lastly, I fully expect Kemva to add that missing piece to his game in the offseason, Jason Kidd couldn't throw it in the ocean early in his career and look at him now. Plenty of time for Kemba to become a competent 3 point threat.
Now compare Kemba's rookie numbers to Lillard's.
lol how can you not by this "he's a rookie thing"?I don't buy this he's a rookie thing...In some ways you can say Lillard never had a hard time adjusting to the speed of the NBA...but in the end...[b]They are the same age[b]...Lillard played 4 years in College...Kemba played 3...If they are the same age and stats-wise literally neck and neck...How is one that much better than the other?
MKG is 19 and Harrison Barnes is 20, so according to you, MKG isn't a rookie yet because they aren't the same age? You're using excuses just for the sake of using excuses.
Also, I already answered your question. If you had bothered to read the entire post instead of selectively reading praise for Lillard as admonishment for Kemba then you'd understand the point. I'll repeat and embolden it for you:
But after that I also stated, again emboldened for you:What helps Lillard in any argument against Kemba is that he's doing it as a rookie, while Kemba needed another year to reach that level.
All that really matters is that if Kemba continues to play at this level then we got our hands on a great young PG and it doesn't really matter how well Lillard does.
Last edited by SWedd523; 11-21-2012 at 12:38 AM.
His height is fine, it's his length that can cause troubles.
For a player like Kemba who is less of a shooter and more of a slasher, having long arms would help him finish at the rim more easily because he'd be able to get over defenders. Having remarkably short arms is just another issue that he has to overcome. I haven't gone to all of the trouble of looking up his percentages at the rim, but from the eye test I can say that it hasn't really manifested itself into a problem. But questioning his lack of length is a valid question (just ask Veteran Picksetter)
I'm pretty sure this same argument was made for Tyreke Evans vs Steph Curry or Brandon Jennings about 3 years ago. Size helps, but it doesn't make one player better than another just because he's taller or stronger. Ceilings aren't nothing but standards expected of potential talent anyway and potential is just another word for "ain't did it yet".
What's with all the Lillard/Kemba comparisons anyway? Does it really matter? Lillard is having a great start this year, and Kemba is having a great start this year. Whether its in a rookie year or second year I don't think matters much, at least not to me. Some people start out great out of the gates, and some people have different situations starting out and don't become who they really are until a year or two later.
If you arrive, you arrive - its a question then of how you keep it up and continue your progress. I don't necessarily think because Lillard is doing it now that he has such a head start on greatness. By year six or seven, is proving yourself one year earlier going to really make that much of a difference of how good you can become?
Tyreke Evans, Okafor, Damon Stoudamire, and Steve Francis all were rookies of the year, and showed some promise to be something special. Although Stevie lost his will to play after the breakup with Cuttino, but he had a great start, and fizzled out just as quick. Tyreke had an incredible start of his career, but there has been no progress, and he may very well be the next Ricky Davis or JR Rider - talented, but unhelpful to a team. Stoudamire used to kill with the Raptors, taking down Jordan and the Bulls, but he didn't really get better, and turned out to be just a solid, role playing pg. I thought Okafor at the minimum could be like a Buck Williams or Antonio Davis, but his skill progression occurred more in the yoga circle rather than a basketball court.
The point is is what the player has inside of himself to keep improving over the years, instead of just starting great and settling there. Lillard is taller, longer, and a better long range shooter - great. Hopefully he doesn't go down the Francis/Baron Davis path. I prefer Kemba because, for one, he's our guy, but also I think his intangibles are more important for a winning team. His charisma and leadership will help bring the team closer, he is a fighter and scrapper, and we know he has the clutch gene. And based on a two season sample size, his trajectory is at the least going up.
We don't know if Lillard has that yet, maybe he does, but Kemba is a known quantity to me. You want a bulldog as a leader, especially one who has that much control of the team as a PG. Even if his stats don't end up being as good, he is looking like the kind of leader I want on my team.
Either you don't get my argument or you're purposefully choosing to ignore it...I'M NOT SAYING THEY AREN'T ROOKIES...I'M SAYING THAT AGE IS MORE IMPORTANT WHEN JUDGING A PLAYER'S "CEILING" THAN JUST THE FACT THAT SOMEONE IS A ROOKIE...If MKG came out at 25 or 26 and did what he's doing now...would you be as impressed? But wouldn't he still be a rookie? and averaging 12/7? The fact that he's 19 makes what he does that much more significant...
If Barnes and MKG came out one year apart but had the same stats...I wouldn't say the person who came out the year later has better potential...
Let me put it this way...THIS IS KEMBA AND LILLARD'S 5TH YEAR OF ORGANIZED BASKETBALL OUT OF HIGH SCHOOL...They are putting up similar numbers...I can easily assume they have the same ceiling...I can't make it any clearer than that...
The whole point of bringing up Lillard was to ask all the people who thought Kemba would make a great 6th man but not a starter why they felt Lillard has a higher "ceiling" than Kemba...I pointed out that their stats at the age of 22 are nearly identical...and you rightfully talked about the intangibles that Kemba has that we don't know if Lillard does...It was not to bash either one of them as I feel they have a chance to truly become great...
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks