PDA

View Full Version : Is damian lillard a franchise player?



ewing
12-19-2014, 11:31 PM
he is at least the 4th best point guard in the league.

IndyRealist
12-19-2014, 11:49 PM
If you put Curry/Paul/Westy 1-3 in whatever order, you might list Lillard at #4. But the difference between 3 and 4 is HUGE, while the difference between 4-6 isn't very large at all and mostly a matter of system and preference. And everyone else had been doing it for years, Lillard has only been good for a little over a year (yeah I know he's still on his rookie deal), and only been great for two months.

Having said that, I'd build around Lillard before I'd build around Aldridge.

ewing
12-20-2014, 12:00 AM
If you put Curry/Paul/Westy 1-3 in whatever order, you might list Lillard at #4. But the difference between 3 and 4 is HUGE, while the difference between 4-6 isn't very large at all and mostly a matter of system and preference. And everyone else had been doing it for years, Lillard has only been good for a little over a year (yeah I know he's still on his rookie deal), and only been great for two months.

Having said that, I'd build around Lillard before I'd build around Aldridge.


He was good on day one. He been in the league for 2 years and 2 months. he has never missed a game and he has been an elite PG from the jump. Last year was better then year one and fantastic both in regular season and playoffs- i don't know where you get this 2 months stuff. I do not see a case for any other PG other then big 3 being put in front of Lillard in any system. The Blazers already are building around him. He is the leader and best player on that team

Crackadalic
12-20-2014, 12:09 AM
Dude has 40 tonight.

Idk about building around him but he's a damn good player

ewing
12-20-2014, 12:18 AM
Dude has 40 tonight.

Idk about building around him but he's a damn good player

He plays both ways, he shoots it at an elite level, is consistent, under control, gets to the hoop, can play at any tempo, knows how to control tempo, and is the only guy that creates off the dribble on a very successful team. He is the best player on very good team and don't see any case for him just being a system guy. someone did build a team around this guy

Raps18-19 Champ
12-20-2014, 12:20 AM
I think he'll always be in that 15-25 player range. Whether you call that franchise player is a different story.

MonroeFAN
12-20-2014, 12:21 AM
Let's start by saying that he is not in any way shape or form a better player than LMA.

PurpleLynch
12-20-2014, 08:07 AM
I like Lillard. A lot. I'd probably risk it and try to build around him.

Bruno
12-20-2014, 08:44 AM
yea, I'd say so.

we won't get any hard evidence of this until LA drops off and we see what he does with the keys. but I think he passes the eye test, and the advanced line this year supports it. he's in the third year, he's made another jump.

IndyRealist
12-20-2014, 09:24 AM
He was good on day one. He been in the league for 2 years and 2 months. he has never missed a game and he has been an elite PG from the jump. Last year was better then year one and fantastic both in regular season and playoffs- i don't know where you get this 2 months stuff. I do not see a case for any other PG other then big 3 being put in front of Lillard in any system. The Blazers already are building around him. He is the leader and best player on that team

He was ok as a rookie, not good and certainly not great. Go back and look at the numbers. Last year he was better but still not great. This year he is unreal, and only a step below Curry/Paul/Westy.

But if you think he was this good last year, you're delusional. He's a full 6% better on 2pt FG alone.

blahblahyoutoo
12-20-2014, 10:42 AM
he is very good, and i'd take him over chris paul at this point, but as CP3 has shown, you don't build around a PG. PG's as centerpieces don't win it all, unless he is a volume scorer which means he's more of a hybrid 1/2.

ewing
12-20-2014, 12:56 PM
He was ok as a rookie, not good and certainly not great. Go back and look at the numbers. Last year he was better but still not great. This year he is unreal, and only a step below Curry/Paul/Westy.

But if you think he was this good last year, you're delusional. He's a full 6% better on 2pt FG alone.


Looked them up. they were about what i thought they were. 19 and 7 on 43% 36 from 3. 82 games, 38 mins a night. Definitely, better then the majority of starting point guards in the NBA. Since you are so insightful and see a clearly improved player can you enlighten us as to what he is doing to account for this lastest jump. What has he changed? What is he better at?

D-Leethal
12-20-2014, 01:07 PM
Looked them up. they were about what i thought they were. 19 and 7 on 43% 36 from 3. 82 games, 38 mins a night. Definitely, better then the majority of starting point guards in the NBA. Since you are so insightful and see a clearly improved player can you enlighten us as to what he is doing to account for this lastest jump. What has he changed? What is he better at?

I'd call it expected increase in efficiency you pretty much always see from years 2-3 in budding superstars. He was a stud from day 1, in developing young stars sometimes the stats just need to catch up to the talent.

tredigs
12-20-2014, 01:17 PM
I thought Voulgaris' take on it a week or so back was pretty interesting. He's a big Wall guy, but I thought this one might take a second for pause. Apparently not.

542157300647985152

IndyRealist
12-20-2014, 04:28 PM
Looked them up. they were about what i thought they were. 19 and 7 on 43% 36 from 3. 82 games, 38 mins a night. Definitely, better then the majority of starting point guards in the NBA. Since you are so insightful and see a clearly improved player can you enlighten us as to what he is doing to account for this lastest jump. What has he changed? What is he better at?

If I had to single out any one thing, it'd be strength and conditioning. His first year he played no defense, choosing to rest on that end. His second year he played better D but took plays off on offense. This year he seems to have virtually unlimited energy and is going 100% every play. His bursts of speed are simply unreal, especially in the Indiana and San Antonio games. He went from 18ft to the rim and defenders didn't even move.

If I were to pick any other factor, he has better all around court awareness now. In his rookie year the game moved too fast for him at times, and he struggled with knowing what he was supposed to do in split second situations. There's a reason he was referred to as Amian Lillar.

I never said he wasn't talented as a rookie, or that he wasn't good FOR a rookie. But to think he's always been at this level is silly. He's gotten markedly better. His rookie year he averaged 1.21 points per shot, last year 1.30 PPS, and this year 1.35 PPS. He's getting 50% more rebounds, 100% more steals, his assists are up and his fouls are down.

YAALREADYKNO
12-20-2014, 04:32 PM
He plays both ways, he shoots it at an elite level, is consistent, under control, gets to the hoop, can play at any tempo, knows how to control tempo, and is the only guy that creates off the dribble on a very successful team. He is the best player on very good team and don't see any case for him just being a system guy. someone did build a team around this guy


He doesn't play both ways but He's a good point guard and he isn't scared of clutch moments tho

Shammyguy3
12-20-2014, 04:47 PM
First off, how many franchise players are there in the league? if you think there's as many as 30, then yes. If there's as many as 10, then no. If as many as 20? Debatable. I'd take him in the 20-25 range. However, building towards the future you obviously take him ahead of a number of players based on his age and potential moving forward.

Gun to head, yes.

Trueblue2
12-20-2014, 06:02 PM
For comparisons sake he's miles ahead of where Curry was at this point in his career.

abe_froman
12-20-2014, 06:07 PM
i've heard 2 definitions of franchise player

1. franchise player is just whoever the best on the team is. i guess depends on who you think is better between him and aldridge, which he could be.

2.a guy you can build a team around.i think he is.

so ,in short.yes,he is.

tredigs
12-20-2014, 06:43 PM
For comparisons sake he's miles ahead of where Curry was at this point in his career.

lol -- you think?

Curry was averaging 23/4/7 2 years ago on 45/45/90 and broke the NBA record for 3's made in a season. Then put up 24/4/9 on a 62% TS in a 1st round upset of the Nuggets. Lillard's "miles ahead of that"? This Dame hyperbole on PSD is an epidemic.

valade16
12-22-2014, 11:21 AM
lol -- you think?

Curry was averaging 23/4/7 2 years ago on 45/45/90 and broke the NBA record for 3's made in a season. Then put up 24/4/9 on a 62% TS in a 1st round upset of the Nuggets. Lillard's "miles ahead of that"? This Dame hyperbole on PSD is an epidemic.

Curry's 3rd season in the league he averaged 14.7 PPG, 5.3 APG 21.2 PER.

If you want to use his 4th season his PER was 21.3, his WS/48 was .180, his TS% was .589. Lillard's are 23.0 PER, .235 WS/48, and .597 TS%.

Oh and he also led a 1st round upset of the Rockets last season making a series winning 3 that you might have heard about. Miles ahead? Certainly not. But at this poi t in their careers one could say Lillard has been better.

Of course what makes Curry so good is he just kept on getting better. Lillard still has to improve a lot to get to where Curry is now, but at this point their careers Curry wasn't the same Curry of today...

RLundi
12-22-2014, 12:48 PM
Absolutely.

Tony_Starks
12-22-2014, 02:27 PM
Hell yeah! You saw the playoffs. You see what he does on a regular. What is there to debate?

tredigs
12-23-2014, 05:54 PM
Curry's 3rd season in the league he averaged 14.7 PPG, 5.3 APG 21.2 PER.

If you want to use his 4th season his PER was 21.3, his WS/48 was .180, his TS% was .589. Lillard's are 23.0 PER, .235 WS/48, and .597 TS%.

Oh and he also led a 1st round upset of the Rockets last season making a series winning 3 that you might have heard about. Miles ahead? Certainly not. But at this poi t in their careers one could say Lillard has been better.

Of course what makes Curry so good is he just kept on getting better. Lillard still has to improve a lot to get to where Curry is now, but at this point their careers Curry wasn't the same Curry of today...

Oh don't fudge the #'s here. That wasn't Curry's true 3rd season. He hobbled around for like 20 games on a busted ankle and then got shut down for the year. And in his actual 3rd year (coming off surgery), he was the same age as Lillard - already a far better shooter and a more dynamic passer (despite still taking too many chances at that point). 23/4/7 with a 61% TS. That as a #1 in a very weakly run offense. LMA's the #1 in Portland's high octane offense. Regardless, overall essentially equal footing with what we're seeing from Dame, but yeah, he has continued to improve.

ewing
12-23-2014, 11:38 PM
safe to say

valade16
12-24-2014, 12:13 AM
Oh don't fudge the #'s here. That wasn't Curry's true 3rd season. He hobbled around for like 20 games on a busted ankle and then got shut down for the year. And in his actual 3rd year (coming off surgery), he was the same age as Lillard - already a far better shooter and a more dynamic passer (despite still taking too many chances at that point). 23/4/7 with a 61% TS. That as a #1 in a very weakly run offense. LMA's the #1 in Portland's high octane offense. Regardless, overall essentially equal footing with what we're seeing from Dame, but yeah, he has continued to improve.

I did compare his "real" 3rd season when they were the same age.

Lillard had a higher PER, TS% and WS/48.

Statistically, he was a better player.

SeoulBeatz
12-24-2014, 12:36 AM
Yes.

Tony_Starks
12-24-2014, 01:32 AM
We need to start putting him in that Westbrook conversation as far as most explosive pg's in the game. Portland is going to be a problem yet again come playoff time...

nastynice
12-24-2014, 01:32 AM
Can't wait to see him keep progressing. This guy makes BIG shots on a regular

BoSox47
12-24-2014, 01:45 AM
I dont want to say he could never be a number 1 option on a team cause he certainly shows flashes of being a top 25 player in the league, but if he is your number 2 and god forbid number 3 option then your team is in good shape depending on the number 1.

Tough to put in perspective cause the west is so good right now that he almost has to be the number 2 with a Really good number 3 to win it all.

DreamShaker
12-24-2014, 01:59 AM
He is. You know what's cool? The Blazers recovered so quickly from Roy and Oden. As a Rockets fan, I want to strangle the guy, but he's a stud.

nastynice
12-24-2014, 04:13 AM
He is. You know what's cool? The Blazers recovered so quickly from Roy and Oden. As a Rockets fan, I want to strangle the guy, but he's a stud.

Yup, Blazers FO has really been top notch for over a decade now, starting from the early 2000's. They always knew how to put together strong teams even tho they never had that AD, Rose, LBJ type (almost) bust proof draft pick. I remember always being impressed with them, and they just started another cycle of solid team building we saw them compete last year

Sean Moore
12-24-2014, 07:02 AM
Of course he is. How is this even in question. Dude is easily a top ten player in this league and only in his third NBA season. What more can you expect from a franchise player really.

Sean Moore
12-24-2014, 07:03 AM
he is at least the 4th best point guard in the league.

Not his fault the point guard position is stacked.

Sean Moore
12-24-2014, 07:04 AM
I would take him over Kyrie Irving and people would mostly consider him to be a franchise player without hesitation.

FYL_McVeezy
12-24-2014, 10:38 AM
Yea why not?

You don't have to be a top 5 elite player to be a franchise player.....

AllDay28
12-24-2014, 11:46 AM
Dude is really coming into his own ...

Seizabmc
12-24-2014, 08:36 PM
As of right now I wouldn't call him a franchise player.
But mate in A few years he will be.

As of today he is definitely someone you could build your team around.

Or he could be that guy that takes a team to the next level.

He certainly on his way to becoming a top 3 pg in the league
Along with John wall and ?

Out with the old
Cp3
D will
Rondo
D rose

In with the new
John wall
Lillard
Lowery
Irving

I still think tony Parker is number one

RLundi
12-24-2014, 08:39 PM
Of course he is. How is this even in question. Dude is easily a top ten player in this league and only in his third NBA season. What more can you expect from a franchise player really.

EASILY a top 10 player?

I'd like to see your list in that case.

RLundi
12-24-2014, 08:50 PM
Better players than Lillard:

LBJ
Durant
Curry
CP3
Westbrook
Harden
Aldridge
Anthony Davis
Blake
Cousins
Lowry
Marc Gasol

A case could perhaps be made that they are perhaps better than Lillard:

Dwight
Wade
Jimmy Butler
Duncan
Bosh

Lillard could very well be a top 10 player, fringely though. Easily? I disagree.

ewing
12-25-2014, 12:34 AM
Better players than Lillard:

LBJ
Durant
Curry
CP3
Westbrook
Harden
Aldridge
Anthony Davis
Blake
Cousins
Lowry
Marc Gasol

A case could perhaps be made that they are perhaps better than Lillard:

Dwight
Wade
Jimmy Butler
Duncan
Bosh

Lillard could very well be a top 10 player, fringely though. Easily? I disagree.

you are reaching

Jeffy25
12-25-2014, 12:43 AM
Playing like one at this moment.

Does he keep this year up?

BALLER R
12-25-2014, 05:14 AM
Better players than Lillard:

LBJ
Durant
Curry
CP3
Westbrook
Harden
Aldridge
Anthony Davis
Blake
Cousins
Lowry
Marc Gasol

A case could perhaps be made that they are perhaps better than Lillard:

Dwight
Wade
Jimmy Butler
Duncan
Bosh

Lillard could very well be a top 10 player, fringely though. Easily? I disagree.

As much as I love my raptors, Lowry is not better than Lillard. Give me Lillard over Blake as well (This one is just personal preference tho)

basketfan4life
12-25-2014, 05:41 AM
he is very good, and i'd take him over chris paul at this point, but as CP3 has shown, you don't build around a PG. PG's as centerpieces don't win it all.

I might agree with that, but dame to me is the type of PG who can win it all. Because he doesn't dominate the ball, every player around him can play to their strenghts. This is the key point. Ball dominant players with high assist numbers don't give you that on a regular basis. You can have a better player than dame on the same team and that player can still play better than dame because he doesn't dominate the ball and can play off the ball damn well. And he is really clutch.

I don't know, i'm really high on Lillard.

Sean Moore
12-25-2014, 06:01 AM
Better players than Lillard:

LBJ
Durant
Curry
CP3
Westbrook
Harden
Aldridge
Anthony Davis
Blake
Cousins
Lowry
Marc Gasol

A case could perhaps be made that they are perhaps better than Lillard:

Dwight
Wade
Jimmy Butler
Duncan
Bosh

Lillard could very well be a top 10 player, fringely though. Easily? I disagree.

I could argue Lowry and Griffin pretty easily. If not top ten, then pretty damn close. Still a franchise player and not bad for only being in his third year and only one player above him on your list is a third year player as well in Anthony Davis.

RLundi
12-25-2014, 07:04 AM
you are reaching

On?

The point is, idk if Lillard is easily a top 10 player.

ewing
12-25-2014, 10:00 AM
What flaws do people see in his game? Where should he get better? I can see him getting a little shot happy and i can see people thinking his D could improve, not sure what else.

ewing
12-25-2014, 10:11 AM
On?

The point is, idk if Lillard is easily a top 10 player.

I get the point. I do think he is top 10 player. I think an argument could be made for 10 other guys. I don't think you should use Lowery, Wade, LMA, or Jimmy Bulter in that agruement

RLundi
12-25-2014, 10:21 AM
I get the point. I do think he is top 10 player. I think an argument could be made for 10 other guys. I don't think you should use Lowery, Wade, LMA, or Jimmy Bulter in that agruement

You don't respect advanced statistics so my basis for including those players will mean nothing to you. Which begs the question, how do you determine your top 10? Seeing-eye test? Because the 5 players are very close in PER, which I consider one way to compare players. Lillard has them beat in VORP and WS/48 though, which is why I said A CASE can be made.

Either way, let's see your top 10 and a basis for why.

ewing
12-25-2014, 10:28 AM
You don't respect advanced statistics so my basis for including those players will mean nothing to you. Which begs the question, how do you determine your top 10? Seeing-eye test? Because the 5 players are very close in PER, which I consider one way to compare players. Lillard has them beat in VORP and WS/48 though, which is why I said A CASE can be made.

Either way, let's see your top 10 and a basis for why.

no. D wade is on the downside of his career and averaging around 55 games played a year at this point. If you see a case for him or Jimmy Bulter who has been more then a good role player for two months and want to back it up with I told you so links, i don't want to have this conversation. Make a top ten thread.

RLundi
12-25-2014, 10:34 AM
no. D wade is on the downside of his career and averaging around 55 games played a year at this point. If you see a case for him or Jimmy Bulter who has been more then a good role player for two months and want to back it up with I told you so links, i don't want to have this conversation. Make i top ten thread.

So as usual, your opinions are unsubstantiated and invalid. Thanks for playing.

mightybosstone
12-25-2014, 10:37 AM
I think it sort of depends on your definition of "franchise player." If you're asking if he's capable of being a No. 1 on a contender, then the answer is absolutely yes. There are very few players in the league capable of posting a hyper efficient 22/6/5/2. And his 23.3 PER and .235 WS/48 this season are both numbers indicative of a very solid No. 1 in this league.

Right now, I'd feel more comfortable with a great No. 2 next to him like Aldridge to take some of the scoring load off his shoulders. But it's quite possible he would put up even better numbers with more of the scoring burden.

ewing
12-25-2014, 10:45 AM
So as usual, your opinions are unsubstantiated and invalid. Thanks for playing.


sorry i'll post a link that shows wade has been in the league a decade has played 49, 69, and 54 games the last 3 seasons. I'll also post one that shows Lillard has been in the league 3 years and never missed a game. Now that this is substantiated can you help me validate how having your guys healthy and having an expectation of there health is valuable? What are the rules?

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/w/wadedw01.html

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/lillada01.html

ewing
12-25-2014, 11:05 AM
I think it sort of depends on your definition of "franchise player." If you're asking if he's capable of being a No. 1 on a contender, then the answer is absolutely yes. There are very few players in the league capable of posting a hyper efficient 22/6/5/2. And his 23.3 PER and .235 WS/48 this season are both numbers indicative of a very solid No. 1 in this league.

Right now, I'd feel more comfortable with a great No. 2 next to him like Aldridge to take some of the scoring load off his shoulders. But it's quite possible he would put up even better numbers with more of the scoring burden.


you probably see him more then me. What weaknesses do you see?

RLundi
12-25-2014, 11:49 AM
sorry i'll post a link that shows wade has been in the league a decade has played 49, 69, and 54 games the last 3 seasons. I'll also post one that shows Lillard has been in the league 3 years and never missed a game. Now that this is substantiated can you help me validate how having your guys healthy and having an expectation of there health is valuable? What are the rules?

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/w/wadedw01.html

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/l/lillada01.html

Really, so when a player is on the decline it automatically means he can't be better than a player on the upswing? Wow, sound argument. Good to know that Jared Sulinger is the better player than Tim Duncan on the SOLE basis that he's younger while Timmy is regressing. Like I can't overstate enough, I very clearly said a case CAN perhaps be made for Wade. If you don't agree, fine, but don't bring in terrible faulty logic as your "substantiation."

Also, health is a factor to an extent. Durant has missed more games than Wade- you're going to tell me Lillard is better as a result of games played? More faulty logic. It's all relative, when are you going to understand that?

If you want to make a case, how about providing tangible evidence? You've already said you refuse to explain why Player A is better than Player B, so why on earth should your viewpoint be taken with more than a grain of salt? Your subjectivity is underwhelming and dismissible, sorry.

ewing
12-25-2014, 12:06 PM
Really, so when a player is on the decline it automatically means he can't be better than a player on the upswing? Wow, sound argument. Good to know that Jared Sulinger is the better player than Tim Duncan on the SOLE basis that he's younger while Timmy is regressing. Like I can't overstate enough, I very clearly said a case CAN perhaps be made for Wade. If you don't agree, fine, but don't bring in terrible faulty logic as your "substantiation."

Also, health is a factor to an extent. Durant has missed more games than Wade- you're going to tell me Lillard is better as a result of games played? More faulty logic. It's all relative, when are you going to understand that?

If you want to make a case, how about providing tangible evidence? You've already said you refuse to explain why Player A is better than Player B, so why on earth should your viewpoint be taken with more than a grain of salt? Your subjectivity is underwhelming and dismissible, sorry.

Sorry thought it was obvious that comparing Wade to Lillard wasn't like comparing Sulinger to Timmy and that I was talking about expectation of health based on age and history. tell me the rules?

RLundi
12-25-2014, 12:22 PM
Sorry thought it was obvious that comparing Wade to Lillard wasn't like comparing Sulinger to Timmy and that I was talking about expectation of health based on age and history. tell me the rules?

I'll provide with the rules as soon as you provide me with answers to the questions posed to you in the last paragraph of my post just prior to this one. Otherwise, your dodging of the question just gets old and looks like you have absolutely no justification.

Tg11
12-25-2014, 01:25 PM
Lillard is for sure a franchise player and if Portland were smart they would lock him up long-term

valade16
12-25-2014, 09:47 PM
I'll provide with the rules as soon as you provide me with answers to the questions posed to you in the last paragraph of my post just prior to this one. Otherwise, your dodging of the question just gets old and looks like you have absolutely no justification.

Lillard crushes Wade in nearly every advanced metric.

WS/48
Lillard .235
Wade .097

TS%
Lillard .601
Wade .562

VORP
Lillard 6.7
Wade 2.0

BPM
Lillard 7.1
Wade 2.1

Ortg
Lillard 119
Wade 106

And as Ewing pointed out, Wade misses a lot of games, Lillard hardly misses any. Trying to act like that was his only criterion for judgment is silly because it's just one of the many reasons Wade is not as good as Lillard.

There might have been an argument if Wade were playing drastically better on defense than Lillard but he's not. Lillard is far from a great defender but at least he's not a liability, somwthing Wade is more often than not.

RLundi
12-25-2014, 11:18 PM
Lillard crushes Wade in nearly every advanced metric.

WS/48
Lillard .235
Wade .097

TS%
Lillard .601
Wade .562

VORP
Lillard 6.7
Wade 2.0

BPM
Lillard 7.1
Wade 2.1

Ortg
Lillard 119
Wade 106

And as Ewing pointed out, Wade misses a lot of games, Lillard hardly misses any. Trying to act like that was his only criterion for judgment is silly because it's just one of the many reasons Wade is not as good as Lillard.

There might have been an argument if Wade were playing drastically better on defense than Lillard but he's not. Lillard is far from a great defender but at least he's not a liability, somwthing Wade is more often than not.

Feel free to thumb through my earlier posts on this page about Wade vs. Lillard. I literally said the exact same thing that you posted: Lillard has Wade and the other 4 players beat handedly in those statistical categories. I only said they are fairly close in PER.

There's nothing silly about anything. Why did you feel the need to post all of those statistics? Because ewing didn't post ****. He failed to provide a single criterion or justification besides injury. I don't give a **** what anyone thinks common knowledge is. If you are going to dispute something with me, I am ALL ears, just give me something to go off of. "It's one of the many reasons Wade is not as good as Lillard," well I don't disagree but post something to substantiate claims and not just "Lillard doesn't miss any games!"

ewing
12-26-2014, 02:00 AM
i'm an idiot

ewing
05-08-2016, 08:03 AM
yep he's a franchise player.

Shammyguy3
05-08-2016, 12:17 PM
don't bump old threads