Target Valentine

[greenbeerd]

Backup PG is a big need, the team cratered with Blake playing. The team also still needs more shooters. Getting Meeks back could help the latter, but we probably should not rely on him to play the whole season. The longer we see KCP, the more we have to consider that he'll never become a two way player (still a poor shooter and scorer overall) and should consider looking for an upgrade (KCP is still useful, but might be best off the bench). Johnson is young and should improve, but he's also a huge liability right now. His defense is adequate (which is actually high praise for a 19 year old), but his offense is catastrophic (and did not improve throughout the year). Either Johnson improves dramatically, or he will quickly become unplayable on a playoff team.

Valentine really would hit a lot of boxes if he pans out. He can run the point, shoot, and even shift down to the 2 or 3 if we really struck by injuries or development stalls.

KCP is not a poor shooter, he has a higher scoring ceiling than say, Shumpert, a pure bench defender.

Regarding Johnson, how many 19 year old rookies aren't a liability in some way? Let's revisit this at the end of next season, check on his progression. "Catastrophic" isn't fair to define Stanley's offense either, he shot mainly 3s while struggling with a shoulder injury for a month.

Two way stud players at each starting position would be nice, but is it realistic? We'll have Harris, Jackson, and Drummond all under max contracts for next year.

Valentine is still my top target, but I doubt Stan will go for it, his love is athletic stretch shooters. Tolliver leaving creates a void for one. He'll want the Motiejunas type that this 1st round pick was intended for at the trade deadline.

 

[dubbsco]

A 19 year old kid that showed a TON of toughness in the post-season including 8 ppg and 4 rpg. You cannot call his offense catastrophic at this point. I love the way he plays. I really think he's going to be special.

 

[Sbee]

KCP is not a poor shooter, he has a higher scoring ceiling than say, Shumpert, a pure bench defender.

Regarding Johnson, how many 19 year old rookies aren't a liability in some way? Let's revisit this at the end of next season, check on his progression. "Catastrophic" isn't fair to define Stanley's offense either, he shot mainly 3s while struggling with a shoulder injury for a month.

Two way stud players at each starting position would be nice, but is it realistic? We'll have Harris, Jackson, and Drummond all under max contracts for next year.

Valentine is still my top target, but I doubt Stan will go for it, his love is athletic stretch shooters. Tolliver leaving creates a void for one. He'll want the Motiejunas type that this 1st round pick was intended for at the trade deadline.

Valentine may likely be gone by the time the Pistons pick, I think it's 18, right? He's also a guy who can come in and contribute right away to a team on the verge of really breaking out.

 

[everyoneneedsasmil]

KCP is not a poor shooter, he has a higher scoring ceiling than say, Shumpert, a pure bench defender.

Regarding Johnson, how many 19 year old rookies aren't a liability in some way? Let's revisit this at the end of next season, check on his progression. "Catastrophic" isn't fair to define Stanley's offense either, he shot mainly 3s while struggling with a shoulder injury for a month.

Two way stud players at each starting position would be nice, but is it realistic? We'll have Harris, Jackson, and Drummond all under max contracts for next year.

Valentine is still my top target, but I doubt Stan will go for it, his love is athletic stretch shooters. Tolliver leaving creates a void for one. He'll want the Motiejunas type that this 1st round pick was intended for at the trade deadline.

KCP is a poor shooter. This isn't me just trying to be hard on him, it's a fact. He's shot 32%, 34.5%, and 31% from three (career 32.7%). Those are poor numbers for a shooting guard. He's under 41% from the field overall for his career, also a poor number. His defense is valuable, certainly. But it's completely reasonable to say no potential playoff opponent worries about him going off offensively.

Stanley's offense really was catastrophic, also. Again, the numbers simply bear this out. 37% from the field and 30% from three (for a whopping 46 TS%). Those are Josh Smith numbers. Even RPM rated his offense as nearly 2 full points worse than average (this is bottom 20% in the entire league - so including all those players who can't even catch a ball on offense). Consider that 2 points per 100 possessions is the difference between our team offense and Brooklyn (27th). Also the difference between our team offense and Houston (8th). I get that he's young, and I have really high hopes for his defense. I just worry that he's currently on the KCP path offensively (which hasn't turned out well so far).

 

[everyoneneedsasmil]

A 19 year old kid that showed a TON of toughness in the post-season including 8 ppg and 4 rpg. You cannot call his offense catastrophic at this point. I love the way he plays. I really think he's going to be special.

None of the things you just mentioned are particularly impressive. Playing with "toughness" while getting lit up doesn't mean much. He shot a whole lot better from outside in the playoffs, but it was so much better (60% from three) and such a small sample size (4 total games, 10 total threes attempted), that it has no predictive value.

I think he might end up being a really good defender, but the amount of progress he needs to make offensively is daunting. I certainly hope he gets there, but I would have no basis on which to say it's probable.

 

[durtymrclean]

None of the things you just mentioned are particularly impressive. Playing with "toughness" while getting lit up doesn't mean much. He shot a whole lot better from outside in the playoffs, but it was so much better (60% from three) and such a small sample size (4 total games, 10 total threes attempted), that it has no predictive value.

I think he might end up being a really good defender, but the amount of progress he needs to make offensively is daunting. I certainly hope he gets there, but I would have no basis on which to say it's probable.

For context, Jimmy Butler shot .405/.182/.768 his first year... at age 22. Stanley Johnson is lightyears ahead of a 22 year old Jimmy Butler. I like his chances.

 

[tomdalton22]

For context, Jimmy Butler shot .405/.182/.768 his first year... at age 22. Stanley Johnson is lightyears ahead of a 22 year old Jimmy Butler. I like his chances.

Comparing their rookie seasons is absurd. Johnson came onto a team that sucked the prior year and Butler played on a contender. Johnson played over 23 minutes a game and attempted 600 shots (37.5%). Butler didn't play much (8.5 minutes a game) and only took 79 shots.

 

[durtymrclean]

Comparing their rookie seasons is absurd. Johnson came onto a team that sucked the prior year and Butler played on a contender. Johnson played over 23 minutes a game and attempted 600 shots (37.5%). Butler didn't play much (8.5 minutes a game) and only took 79 shots.

Even if you compare Butler's second year to Johnson's 1st year, Johnson still compares favorably. So Johnson is relatively on the same level of a 23 year old Jimmy Butler... at 19. Yeah, I'd say his potential is pretty high.

 

[tomdalton22]

Even if you compare Butler's second year to Johnson's 1st year, Johnson still compares favorably. So Johnson is relatively on the same level of a 23 year old Jimmy Butler... at 19. Yeah, I'd say his potential is pretty high.

Butler shot 47% from the field and 38% from 3. Johnson shot 38% from the field and 31% from 3. Offensively, they do not compare favorably.

That said...due to his age, he does have potential. But I would pump the brakes on comparing him to Butler.

 

[durtymrclean]

Butler shot 47% from the field and 38% from 3. Johnson shot 38% from the field and 31% from 3. Offensively, they do not compare favorably.

That said...due to his age, he does have potential. But I would pump the brakes on comparing him to Butler.

The next year butler shot .397/.283/.769. Butler and Johnson are very comparable, same physical tools and type of game. Johnson looks like he should be Butler 2.0 if everything pans out, especially since he has a coach that usually brings out the best in his players. Next year, dont be surprised when the FG% creeps above .450.

 

[tomdalton22]

could Johnson end up being a good player like Butler...sure...he could. But for every Jimmy Butler there are 10 guys that bust.