Yup, I had a lot of impressions of Luka prior, but that video crystallizes his issues.
2023-2024 General NBA Season Thread
- Thread starter BigSoxFan
- Start date
I'm surprised to hear you guys say this. My impression of Durant is that he:
- Screens and cuts a bunch on offense
- Positions himself to show for the ball even when he's not initiating, which forces the defense to stay honest on him (really, he's one of the deadliest shooters ever, so they're not leaving him alone much even if he's being a bit lazy)
- Will run hard on defense, even if he's not really big/strong enough to handle post play against guys his height
- Has good rebounding instincts
- Is a good not great passer, but pretty willing if he sees a teammate has a better shot
Like, I'd much rather have Durant on my team than Luka, and it's not close. Even today, with them being 35 and 25 respectively.
Ah, my bad, should have scrolled all the way up.
Still haven’t seen the whole thing, but Steph on the five-year plus-minus chart at 2:30 … my word. That guy was pretty good in his youth.
Hah, I was gonna say that it was a Steph post disguised as a Luka post.
(But seriously, Ben Taylor's stuff is always worth posting twice)
Maybe he doesn't do it as much now, as he's aged? I haven't done any deep dives on him, but he's felt less threatening off the ball this year than in the past. Maybe this even goes back to the 2022 Brooklyn series against Boston, where he felt a lot more containable?
Fwiw, I also expect the "new NBA" to suck for Durant in the playoffs, since you're allowed to beat the shit out of guys now. That was a big part of the Celtics' 2022 blueprint: they physically and mentally broke him.
Watching Luka makes me wonder about LeBron. It's easy to watch Luka and say you can't win with that much heliocentric offense. But it's interesting to think about where the tipping point for an offense is along the heliocentric continuum of James Harden to LeBron. I think Luka falls somewhere along it.
Obviously, prime LeBron being a defensive wrecking ball has a lot to do with the playoff success of those teams versus the Harden Rocket and the Luka Mavericks, but there's a big difference offensively as well. Every LeBron team, regardless of the coach or the players around him, has essentially defaulted to LeBron holding the ball and making a play. Depending on the cast around him, there might be more or fewer one-on-one opportunities for other guys like Wade or Kyrie, but everything has always revolved around LeBron, and it still does, even in his age-39 season. Historically, those have been very good offenses, until the last few years. Part of it is I think what you point out about Luka - he doesn't move without the ball, he doesn't screen, etc. LeBron has settled into that as well, and I think the offense as a whole has suffered as a result.
Point being, you can be a functional offense, in both the regular season and the playoffs, by running everything through a guy who is an offensive ecosystem unto himself. But that guy has to do more than just score and set other guys up. He has to screen, has to move without the ball, etc. I'm not sure we're ever going to see Luka do more of that than he's already doing, and it's possible that team can't win a championship this way, regardless of who they surround him with.
Denver singlehandedly putting the old guard to sleep is kind of nice. That team absolutely needs Murray to make any noise though - he's one of the best postseason overachievers of the current era, and without him Denver could easily lose in the first round.
It was mentioned upthread, but (like most teams in the NBA) Denver has a significant home vs. road split (31-8 vs. 22-16). They are currently tied with OKC at 24 losses; the Wolves have 23. If they slip to the 3 seed, it means they only have HCA in 1 round out of 4 (assuming favorites hold serve). That could be a huge factor in their ability to survive the West.
Edit: they are a little better on the road this year than last year though - only 19-22 last year.
Edit: they are a little better on the road this year than last year though - only 19-22 last year.
I didn't think of the question as Luka vs Durant - I thought of it rather as "how great are Luka and Durant relative to other top 10ish guys" and for me the answer to that is "less than people seem to think"
In terms of the head to head question, if I had no one else good on my team, I'd prefer Luka....he is a pretty real one-man offense, and has shown ability to do it at very high usage. If I had other impact guys, I'd prefer Durant who has shown he can adapt to having other stars around him and whose game (outside shooting, some drives, and off-ball motion and screens) is a lot easier to mesh with other talent than Luka's "Harden-ball" game.
Sixers fined $100K for Embiid-gate. They are repeat offenders. Biting my tongue to not compare it to the NFL and the Pats.
https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/39881637/76ers-fined-100k-violating-injury-reporting-rules-joel-embiid
https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/39881637/76ers-fined-100k-violating-injury-reporting-rules-joel-embiid
Sign off on all of this 100%.
Probably it's because I'm a Celtics homer, but the lack of credit that Tatum is getting for being a scaleable star, driving an historically great (regular season) team is astounding.
Steph Curry had similar counting stats (better TS, bit more assists, worse defense) on the peak Warriors, and no one questioned his value to a team with great players.
As an elite player, meshing well with other top talent is probably the most important thing there is in the NBA.
On a similar note, if you replaced Tatum with Jokic, would the Celtics get better, worse, or stay the same? To be clear, I have zero problem calling Jokic the best player in the world. But in terms of fit on this year's C's, given the presence of Al and KP, I'm not sure what the answer is.
Steph's off-ball movement has always had the entire defense on edge with 5 defenders' heads on swivels, while
a disengaged Luka hangs at half-court or jogs through some ghost screens.
Luka also will need to show up in better shape to get to superstar On/Off production
I mean, the real answer is that the Celtics wouldn't have KP, and would instead be paying a good wing, on the lines of Gordon or KCP, to fill Tatum's current spot. They'd be better, because Jokic surrounded by Jaylen, Jrue, DWhite and shooters would be ridiculous.
The one I have an issue with is that people around the league seem to think it's obvious that replacing Tatum with Kawhi or Durant would upgrade the Celtics. It's not a crazy opinion, but the fact that it's seen as obvious imo shows a lack of understanding of the dynamics of on-court basketball, as opposed to just browsing TS%+usage+assist numbers (which is what a shockingly high % of the "sophisticated" commentariat does).
Yeah fair point on KP.
On the Kawhi / Durant comment, is that really the case? Man I wouldn't trade Tatum for either of those guys even for just the next 2 months.
Same. It's been 5 years since either guy was relevant in terms of title contention. If either one gets 1st team all-NBA over Tatum, it'll be a joke.
I'm with ya, "The Celtics would be better with Jokic / Giannis instead of Tatum" is an interesting thought experiment to argue about, but the Port Cellar was negative on trading Tatum for Durant even like 5 years ago before he became the present all-NBA level player he is. Doing so now? Absolutely unthinkable. Though in Kawhi's case, a large part of why it's unthinkable revolves around his health, rather than his skills when healthy. If you could promise me he would be healthy, I'd downgrade it to "I disagree, but it's a reasonable opinion to have".
Also, especially with Kawhi but true for both of them: you can't impact a game in street clothes
Yeah, if Sabonis is a primary option on your team, you’re toast in the playoffs. All those DHO’s become a non factor against the best teams, in the postseason.
Unfortunately for him, he isn’t especially useful as an off ball threat, and he certainly can’t defend.
Unfortunately for him, he isn’t especially useful as an off ball threat, and he certainly can’t defend.
You relish the schadenfreude of the Bucks but damn what a bummer for their fans as they watch this team age out so rapidly, particularly with Giannis in his prime
This Mavs team is going to be a handful in the postseason. Here’s hoping they match up with the Nuggets in Rd 1
What a gauntlet to end the season for the Suns. But just like the Mavs they are ending strong and will be a bear to face in round 1
Losing to the Wizards, Grizzlies and Raptors in a season is pretty bad let alone all in a row...
Offensively, he's a bigger version of Draymond. Excellent passer for his size, very smart and unselfish....and a total non-factor outside the paint and can't finish at the rim against opposing bigs unless it's really an open layup. That's ok when you've got Curry/Klay/Durant around you, not so much it's Fox/Murray/Barnes. If he's your 2nd best offensive player, it's a major problem.
Defensively, it's kind to just say that he's not Draymond and leave it at that. This seems like the epitome of an 82 game team.
They were really challenged for offense against the Celtics, and that was with basically everybody playing. You just switch a lot, bother Sabonis with length near the rim, and the Kings can maybe score 100 if Fox goes off.
Losing Monk & Huerter was the final nail in the King's coffin.
They will be the worst first round team (if they make it out of the Play In)
On the bright side, SAC will hit their OVER on wins (44.5) for the season
Good news for Milwaukee: They got those (kind of) teams out of the way now and playing their remaining 5 games:
Knicks
Celtics
Magic
@OKC
@Magic
Those are all Playoff teams that still have very much something to play for (with the one obvious exception).
Currently the Bucks are 1 game up on the Cavs and two on the Magic and Knicks.
Their number 2 seat is very shaky - I just hope they don't fall back into the 4-5 matchup!
The Eastern Conference is a tire fire that is trending into historically horrific with the injuries piling up.
I gave the EC way too much credit when I called it utter crap months ago.
The Lakers may just be better than the Bucks
Calls for 1-16 NBA playoff seeding (never happening) will get louder.
The pendulum swings every 7-8 years but this WC is as tough a conference as I’ve seen top through play-in in a long long time. Lakers, Pelicans and Warriors are 3 of the 4 playin teams right now that isn’t even fair.The Eastern Conference is a tire fire that is trending into historically horrific with the injuries piling up.
I gave the EC way too much credit when I called it utter crap months ago.
The Lakers may just be better than the Bucks
Calls for 1-16 NBA playoff seeding (never happening) will get louder.
Well.. where were those calls when the EC was brutal even just last year? Injuries happen every year. Most of LeBron’s titles involve a significant injury to one or several of the teams he had to go through… the Celts had horrible injury luck for instance in the 2000s-2010s.The Eastern Conference is a tire fire that is trending into historically horrific with the injuries piling up.
I gave the EC way too much credit when I called it utter crap months ago.
The Lakers may just be better than the Bucks
Calls for 1-16 NBA playoff seeding (never happening) will get louder.
Conference unevenness has been discussed forever.
The Celtics in the 80s had to survive the Sixers, Pistons, Bulls, etc numerous times while the Showtime Lakers faced a bunch of cupcakes
No complaints here. It's setting up very nicely for the Celtics that's for sure.
Denver certainly was the major beneficiary of their path last season
Hollinger's argument, for those who don't want to read it, is that the lack of transparency in HOF voting (forget knowing who voted - we don't even know who has a vote!) is leading to all this clubbiness, where marginal players who happened to be on dynastic teams are getting in without a second thought. And meanwhile, pretty great players whose merits you can have a debate about, who just didn't happen to play for the Lakers, Celtics or Knicks, are almost entirely overlooked. Cooper is just a jumping-off point, though he makes a pretty good argument about him too.
It's a very good, very fair article. Sort of like when Jay Jaffe writes about baseball HOF stuff. Perhaps Hollinger is a better writer than statistician.
