-
Re: The Lingend is over
[QUOTE=InfiniteBaskets]I'd swap Lin for Mario Chalmers as a Heat fan, as long as it meant salaries wouldn't be an issue.
You think Lin wouln't be able to adapt to the fact that Dwyane Wade and LeBron James are going to handling the ball and creating? Lin has enough basketball IQ to recognize that they're better at creating a high percentage play than he is.
On the other end Lin actually takes charges a lot better than Chalmers (who takes little to none), and he does a good job playing scrappy, which reminds me of Chalmers as a rookie.[/QUOTE]
I don't thin Lin is a particularly smart pg. He would not thrive playing with LeBron. He would serve no purpose on that team.
he doesn't have the skills to play off those guys.
-
Re: The Lingend is over
[QUOTE=IGOTGAME][B]I would take a pg with lesser numbers that fit a role that could be conducive to winning a championship.[/B] I do think there are over 20 pgs better than Lin. Especially whether you consider there ability to git into team concepts.
I'd take Mario Chalmers and Eric Bledsoe over lin easily.[/QUOTE]
That's where you and me differ. I take the PG who I think is better skilled every single time. The better skilled PG could probably adjust his game to gel into a championship team better than a lesser skilled PG can. There is no evidence that Lin wouldn't be able to adjust his game. He played pretty well with both Amare and Carmelo under Woodson.
The argument you bring is situational, not of one that has bearing on who is the better point guard. Mario Chalmers excelled in a 4th or 5th banana role, and Bledsoe may be a decent energy guy off the bench, but would you take them to run your team? Would you take them over guys like Lowry, Lawson, or Rubio, who understand how to run a team, but probably wouldn't play as well as in a non-starter role, or a non-ball handling role?
Maybe I can understand Chalmers over Lin, especially since he excelled in his (limited) role. But I don't see how anyone can argue for a guy like Bledsoe. To me, that's just being a hater. What has Bledsoe done to show he is "easily" better than Lin?
-
Re: The Lingend is over
Linsanity was over half way into Linsanity.
It only got so stupidly far because of the Asian factor and all the $$$ and rating/magazine purchases, etc. that meant for everyone.
-
Re: The Lingend is over
[QUOTE=plUto or bUst]That's where you and me differ. I take the PG who I think is better skilled every single time. The better skilled PG could probably adjust his game to gel into a championship team better than a lesser skilled PG can. There is no evidence that Lin wouldn't be able to adjust his game. He played pretty well with both Amare and Carmelo under Woodson.
The argument you bring is situational, not of one that has bearing on who is the better point guard. Mario Chalmers excelled in a 4th or 5th banana role, and Bledsoe may be a decent energy guy off the bench, but would you take them to run your team? Would you take them over guys like Lowry, Lawson, or Rubio, who understand how to run a team, but probably wouldn't play as well as in a non-starter role, or a non-ball handling role?
Maybe I can understand Chalmers over Lin, especially since he excelled in his (limited) role. But I don't see how anyone can argue for a guy like Bledsoe. To me, that's just being a hater. What has Bledsoe done to show he is "easily" better than Lin?[/QUOTE]
we are too far apart on thism I don't think Lin is a smart player. He is reckless and only thrives playing one way. He is also a reckless defender and oftentimes lazy. Unlike many I think he is a good athlete but plays mostly off instinct and doesn't understand how to run a t
team. He is out there playing checkers and not managing games.
my pick of Bledsoe is because he plays elite defense and is competant in other areas. It also has to do with the fact that I don't think you can win playing the way Pin has to play. Imo he really is very similar to Ramon Sessions.
-
Re: The Lingend is over
"I don't think you can win playing the way Lin has to play"
:facepalm
All he does is LIN! :dancin
-
Re: The Lingend is over
[QUOTE=IGOTGAME]we are too far apart on thism I don't think Lin is a smart player. He is reckless and only thrives playing one way. He is also a reckless defender and oftentimes lazy. Unlike many I think he is a good athlete but plays mostly off instinct and doesn't understand how to run a t
team. He is out there playing checkers and not managing games.
my pick of Bledsoe is because he plays elite defense and is competant in other areas. It also has to do with the fact that I don't think you can win playing the way Pin has to play. Imo he really is very similar to Ramon Sessions.[/QUOTE]
da faq. lin is already better than sessions ever was . and lin is basicly still a rookie (played fewer than 30 games)
-
Re: The Lingend is over
[QUOTE=IGOTGAME]I don't thin Lin is a particularly smart pg. He would not thrive playing with LeBron. He would serve no purpose on that team.
he doesn't have the skills to play off those guys.[/QUOTE]
It doesn't take a great PG to play off of LeBron and Wade. Chris Quinn could play off of LBJ and Wade.
And I would have to disagree with your assertion of Lin not being a smart PG. How are you defining smart in this case? The ability to make good decisions with the basketball?
I actually think Lin is smarter than most PG's with the basketball with the exception of guys like Nash, Kidd, CP3, Rondo.. the obvious elite guys. But I'd say Lin is a smarter distributor than Westbrook. The difference is Lin doesn't excel athletically, so he can't always get to where he needs to be in order to make a play.
Lin's instinct is usually to beat his man off the pick and roll, or off the dribble and draw in a big defender so that he can dump it off to his own center or power forward. He runs into problems when he plays athletic defenses that are able to shut him down because he's not quick enough and can't jump high enough to force the defense to commit.
-
Re: The Lingend is over
[QUOTE]It doesn't take a great PG to play off of LeBron and Wade. Chris Quinn could play off of LBJ and Wade.[/QUOTE]
I don't watch much of Chris Quinn but I remember him being a shooter. Apples and Oranges. Regardless, I wouldn't want him starting either.
[QUOTE]And I would have to disagree with your assertion of Lin not being a smart PG. How are you defining smart in this case? The ability to make good decisions with the basketball?[/QUOTE]
ability to run a basketball and fit into the teams gameplan to optimize the talent available. Lin can only run one type of offense. When he doesn't he struggles and you hear "they are misusing him etc."
[QUOTE]I actually think Lin is smarter than most PG's with the basketball with the exception of guys like Nash, Kidd, CP3, Rondo.. the obvious elite guys. But I'd say Lin is a smarter distributor than Westbrook. The difference is Lin doesn't excel athletically, so he can't always get to where he needs to be in order to make a play.
[/QUOTE]
Lin's instinct is usually to beat his man off the pick and roll, or off the dribble and draw in a big defender so that he can dump it off to his own center or power forward. He runs into problems when he plays athletic defenses that are able to shut him down because he's not quick enough and can't jump high enough to force the defense to commit.[/QUOTE]
you don't have to be a smart pg to be smarter than Westbrook. However, I can name 40 pgs smarter than Jermey Lin. At best he is average. He doesn't manage games, he doesn't know when to get certain players the ball and how to put them in the best spots to succeed. He simply runs his pick and roll to the best of his ability. Being a point guard is about much more than that. And it isn't just those guys you mentioned. He reminds me of Ramon Sessions because they have the same exact strengths and weaknesses. This can be seen especially here.
[QUOTE]As far as when Lin runs into trouble. It has nothing to do with athletes. It has to do with disciplined defenses that stick to their principals. Lin often jumps into the air pass or recklessly drives into situations hoping for something good to happen. When the defenses are sound these situations produce turnovers for most players.
[/QUOTE]
As far as Lin's athletism. I would actually rank him well above average in the category. He is one of the most athletic pgs in the entire league. This is what bothers me the most. Don't underrate his athleticism and than overrate his intelligence.
It has nothing to do with not being fast enough or jumping high enough in the pick and roll. Andre Miller, Mark Jackson, Rick Rubio, old Nash all run that play against all types of athletes. It has to do with decision making and fundamentally sound play. That is where Lin lacks. He is reckless and a poor game manager. These are not traits you want in a starting pg. If you have to deal with them then he better be at top player in the league.
-
Re: The Lingend is over
LMAO! Here's a neg rep I received. :oldlol:
"cry more gook"
-
Re: The Lingend is over
He'd better be good, I have Lin on my fantasy team.
-
Re: The Lingend is over
[QUOTE=madmax17]He'd better be good, I have Lin on my fantasy team.[/QUOTE]
You'll get assists and steals for sure...
-
Re: The Lingend is over
Jesus he's been stinkin' up the joint :facepalm
1-8 today, 2 points :facepalm
Look it's just preseason but DAMN look at these stats:
20 minutes, 1-3 (0-2 from 3), 3 points, 1 rebound, 6 assists, 3 steals, 3 turnovers
23 minutes, 2-6, 9 pts, 1 reb, 7 assists, 2 steals, 2 TO's
25 minutes, 1-10 (0-3), 4 pts, 1 reb, 1 ast, 1 stl, 2 TO's
31 minutes, 3-9 (0-3), 7 pts, 5 reb, 12 ast, 4 stl, 2 TO's
31 minutes, 1-8 (0-1), 2 pts, 3 reb, 5 ast, 2 stl, 6 TO's
Averages: 26.0 MPG, 5.0 PPG, 2.2 RPG, 6.2 APG, 2.4 SPG, 3.0 TO, .222 FG%, .000 3P% (0-9), .600 FT%
:roll: :facepalm
-
Re: The Lingend is over
-
Re: The Lingend is over
Though I hate is hype, maybe he can still becoming promising starter in this league.
Off course, his preseason stats won't mean much, but he has to bring it in the regular season. He's got his work cut out for him.
-
Re: The Lingend is over
Preseason stats don't mean much, but he's been disconcertingly bad IMO.