I'm not arguing anything here .. but I do find it somewhat worth mentioning that that game was likely Kanter's FIRST game ever shooting as many shots as Al averages.
No point, really, just to say he did alright.
"I'm a moron for thinking the Browns could even sniff 10 wins in a division where the other three teams (two of whom almost always make the playoffs) made the post-season last year. Gyp Rosetti's thee God of football knowledge." - Brown Notes
I've got no problem with this. Favors will eventually need to learn to pass, but he needs a post game more. Kanter is getting better, he just needs more of an arsenal. But the irony is once he gets one, he's not going to be passing out much more either. While I love the potential of Favors and Kanter, you can be sure we'll hear about ball sticking if they're the starters next year (and that's not necessarily a bad thing.)
What did people see when they watched the Laker game? What I saw is this: By design, Paul basically replaced Al in the offense due to matchups (score Ty). While he did operate out of the low block a few times (like Al), he mostly operated on that elbow (another score Ty because Sap struggles in the post, but is very good on the elbow.)
Sap was not passing. He was not contributing to ball movement. He was relentlessly attacking a mismatch (first Jameson, then Hill). He basically took Al's role because of the mismatch and Al was all too happy to watch him motor.
We mostly killed the Lakers in transition (which is also not ball movement.) But we did get another solid start from Mo, Tinsley played well, and we had tons of cutters. Again, this has nothing to do with post play.
As to Al, Brown Notes has been dead on. Going into the post is a good thing. It's also a thing Al is really, really good at. I've been killing this offense all year for the lack of cutters and movement once he gets it. He's certainly not missing cutters because, until recently, there haven't been any. The light bulb seems to have gone off on that front because there is much more fluidity in the last few games.
Look dudes, as one of the Trade-Al guys who is sticking to his guns, I RESERVE FULL RIGHT TO COMPLAIN ABOUT BLACK-HOLISMS FROM KANTER AND/OR FAVORS IF/WHEN THEY MATERIALIZE AS THE MAJOR FACET OF THE OFFENSE. Your speculative claims that IF WE TRADE AL, THEN IT'LL BE MORE OF THE SAME WITH DIFFERENT ACTORS are doing nothing to my desire to move Al.
Questions? ****, I wish I could rep this post.
I'll add this as a sidebar: at least there is the merit that I'm willing to admit the speculative nature of my argument. The Al apologists preach their stuff like gospel.
I'll score it as a victory for my side anytime the Factoid Al Crowd realizes they don't control the terms of the debate. This stuff is debatable. It is debatable whether Al is an elite post player (i.e. efficient). If we were to grant the idea that he is elite (just for discussion), then it would be debatable whether or not this is good for the team. Etc.
You were kind to his defense. Especially kind given that two better defenders are waiting behind him.