What's new
By:
Filters

Trade for Lou Williams?

fishonjazz said:
You forgot how to read I guess.
I said offensively right in the post silly goose.
Click to expand...
No, you said he had played better than any Jazz player, including Hayward. You then included "at least offensively". That means you called Lou the better player then prefaced with "at least" meaning you think he is better than Hayward but may be willing to concede only offensively.

Either way you are entirely wrong and its laughable. Let's call a dude putting up worse stats than Hayward on a ****ty high tempo team a better offensive player, lmao.

Sent from my A0001 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
Thee jazz fan said:
I respect you as a poster, but WTF!!!
Click to expand...
Offensively Statistically it's true. Dude is Ballin out. Compare his per 36 with any of our starters. Points per shot. Efficiency. Per. I think you will be surprised.
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
No, you said he had played better than any Jazz player, including Hayward. You then included "at least offensively". That means you called Lou the better player then prefaced with "at least" meaning you think he is better than Hayward but may be willing to concede only offensively.

Either way you are entirely wrong and its laughable. Let's call a dude putting up worse stats than Hayward on a ****ty high tempo team a better offensive player, lmao.

Sent from my A0001 using JazzFanz mobile app
Click to expand...
Nope the at least offensively meant at least offensively silly
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
No, you said he had played better than any Jazz player, including Hayward. You then included "at least offensively". That means you called Lou the better player then prefaced with "at least" meaning you think he is better than Hayward but may be willing to concede only offensively.

Either way you are entirely wrong and its laughable. Let's call a dude putting up worse stats than Hayward on a ****ty high tempo team a better offensive player, lmao.

Sent from my A0001 using JazzFanz mobile app
Click to expand...
Compare their offensive stats for me. Maybe in wrong.
When I compared them lou stats looked better.
 
I think hayward is better than lou williams.
If you look at their offensive stats they are very comparable when extrapolated for the same minutes. Hayward is better % from the field. Lou is better from 3. Lou is better from the line gets there more often. Hayward has a better efg%. Lou averages quite a bit more points. lou averages more assists. Hayward more rebounds. Lou more steals. hayward less turnovers.
Pace comes into play into all of this. As does other factors like actual minutes and who opponents are. Im not trying to say lou is better than hayward and i guess my original post that started the commotion came off wrong.
I was trying to make a point that whether a guy is currently a starter or not should not be the sole indicator of value. If lou were starting on the jazz and playing like he has this season then he would be a welcome addition to the team. Hood has not exactly been lighting it up this year. (im quite certain that hoods numbers dont come close to lou's.)
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
Trust that is not how the Lakers feel. How you feel about their chances are irrelevant and what they should do. I'm basing my theory on what they have said and how they usually operate. I could be wrong, but I dont see it happening for a mere late 1st.

And they certainly could take a major leap next year, it's not out of the question. It happens nearly every year. Last year it was Blazers, the year before it was Phoenix, this year it's us (even though ours was much more expected than the previous two). They have young improving talent, vets, incoming high draft pick in major draft, and potential FAs. Who they could get I have no clue, but I doubt LA is walking into next year with a stand pat and tank mentality.
Click to expand...

Their draft pick is probably going to the Sixers.
 
Wes Mantooth said:
Their draft pick is probably going to the Sixers.
Click to expand...

Laker's get it if it lands in the top 3. If the lottery happened today it would have 46.9% of staying in the top 3. If the Lakers fall below Phoenix then those odds jump to 55%. The Laker's have been the 2nd worst team in the NBA since that lucky start they had, so I dont think they are in any trouble of getting wins anytime soon, they suck.

I think they probably end up 2nd worst record, regardless of trading or not trading Lou Will, the guy who Fish thinks is a better offensive player than Hayward.
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
Laker's get it if it lands in the top 3. If the lottery happened today it would have 46.9% of staying in the top 3. If the Lakers fall below Phoenix then those odds jump to 55%. The Laker's have been the 2nd worst team in the NBA since that lucky start they had, so I dont think they are in any trouble of getting wins anytime soon, they suck.

I think they probably end up 2nd worst record, regardless of trading or not trading Lou Will, the guy who stats show is a comparable offensive player to Hayward but stats are often wrong and misleading.
Click to expand...



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G870A using JazzFanz mobile app
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xn599R0ZBwg
 
@everyone. Sorry I was being dumb last night.
 
I'd love to have Lou Williams and I'd go so far as giving up Trey Lyles and a Pick and Burks. Lakers would have to give up another player to make it work though and I'm not sure who.
 
Saint Cy of JFC said:
And they certainly could take a major leap next year, it's not out of the question. It happens nearly every year. Last year it was Blazers, the year before it was Phoenix, this year it's us (even though ours was much more expected than the previous two).
Click to expand...

Blazers didn't take a major leap though. They were just better than what people thought they would be after losing LMA and trading away Batum and Lopez.

And both PDX and Phoenix were overachievers who turned out to be fools Gold. Utah is really the only one of the 3 that took a legitimate leap, and that really kind of happened the year we traded Kanter, and then fell back a little because of injuries.

I don't disagree that the Lakers believe they could turn it all around in one year, though. That's always a possibility with a franchise that so many players grow up dreaming of playing for, regardless of having no success in FA recently.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top