Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 22 of 22
  1. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    13,431
    Quote Originally Posted by ecart View Post
    It's not about him being a clone. He's just not in that mould period. He's a modern 4 like Randle, Sabonis, Green etc. He's not a guard-forward hybrid. His handles are slightly above average for a big, but they're trash compared to any modern wing. He's explosive enough to beat traditional bigs and some of the slower modern 4s, but he's not beating any modern wing (i.e Jaylen Brown) or the up and coming batch of modern bigs (i.e Issac).

    Siakam is part of the new NBA where bigs are expected to do more and be more well-rounded but his guard skills and athleticism aren't good enough where you can reasonably play him out of position like a Tatum or a Giannis.
    Randle, sabonis, and green all play vastly different styles and would have different comparables than siakam. I donít understand the comp there.

    The reason you could theoretically slot siakam at the 2 is because he can spread the floor, and he can defend the position.

    TMac wasnít all handles. He used a lot of strength on his drives.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    2,199
    Quote Originally Posted by ChongInc. View Post
    Randle, sabonis, and green all play vastly different styles and would have different comparables than siakam. I donít understand the comp there.

    The reason you could theoretically slot siakam at the 2 is because he can spread the floor, and he can defend the position.

    TMac wasnít all handles. He used a lot of strength on his drives.
    They're not comparisons. They're examples of the modern NBA 4 that are expected to do a little of everything, beyond what bigs were expected to do in the 90s/0000s.

    If the logic that Siakam is similar to Tmac because he's a 6'9 dude that can handle some, pass some and score some, then it is misplaced since the vast majority of modern bigs can do that to varying degrees.

    Nobody said that TMac is all handles. But guard forward hybrids in that mould all have exponentially better handles. It is just one of the many skills they have in their package that separates them from bigs with similar physical attributes.
    Last edited by ecart; 05-08-2021 at 10:43 PM.

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    13,431
    Quote Originally Posted by ecart View Post
    They're not comparisons. They're examples of the modern NBA 4 that are expected to do a little of everything, beyond what bigs were expected to do in the 90s/0000s.

    If the logic that Siakam is similar to Tmac because he's a 6'9 dude that can handle some, pass some and score some, then it is misplaced since the vast majority of modern bigs can do that to varying degrees.

    Nobody said that TMac is all handles. But guard forward hybrids in that mould all have exponentially better handles. It is just one of the many skills they have in their package that separates them from bigs with similar physical attributes.
    I hear you. I do think we could find comps for some of these players though. I donít think Pf-TMac is a terrible comp. not the best, but I can see how he got there with the eye test.

    Green for example - there must have been a good defensive forward - a little under sized without very much scoring but good assist numbers.

    Sabonis and randles games donít seem overly modern either. Iím sure someone has done similar things.

    Itís early, I canít think lol.

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    2,199
    Quote Originally Posted by ChongInc. View Post
    I hear you. I do think we could find comps for some of these players though. I donít think Pf-TMac is a terrible comp. not the best, but I can see how he got there with the eye test.
    How would you even get there with the eye test lol? They don't do anything similar, from the way they operate in the triple threat, post, how they finish, shoot etc.

    Quote Originally Posted by ChongInc. View Post
    Green for example - there must have been a good defensive forward - a little under sized without very much scoring but good assist numbers.
    Not at all. Every modern 4 is basically modelled after Green. Green started the whole switching thing and leading the break.


    Quote Originally Posted by ChongInc. View Post
    Sabonis and randles games donít seem overly modern either. Iím sure someone has done similar things.

    Itís early, I canít think lol.
    Sabonis and Randle are modern af. 90s and 00s bigs can't do any of that ****.
    Last edited by ecart; 05-09-2021 at 02:05 PM.

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    7,571
    Sabonis is basically a 5 actually but Randle and Green are more 4s so if you wanna compare Siakam to anyone, it would be Randle.

    Siakam if anythin for his size, 6'9 he could easily play the 4 but could also play the 3 at small forward even. He could basically play both positions similarly to Giannis like how he does in Milwaukee.

    Siakam can play the 3 (SF), OG can play the 4 at PF and Boucher, Birch or Gillespie can play the 5

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    2,199
    it doesn't matter, NBA is pretty much position-less. it comes down to matchups. you just want siakam at the 4/5 because you want siakam to be the help, if they try to force the switch. you don't want him at the 2 or 3 cause the opposing wings aren't going to be setting picks, so you lose out on his switch-ability. main action in the NBA is still pick and roll.

    that's why curry is so dangerous. if he's setting a pick, he's usually getting Draymond's guy on an island. so you want a guy like siakam to contain that.

    You want OG on stars who are generally less involved on the off ball action because he is your best 1v1 defender so you want him on his main assignment as much as possible. So those are generally the 2s and 3s. But on occasion you have guys like Jokic where the action is run through them, so thats why Nurse is fine with OG on 5s.
    Last edited by ecart; 05-09-2021 at 10:50 PM.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    The 6
    Posts
    28,614
    Tmac was a sg I dunno where that comparison is coming from honestly. I know he was a tall lanky guy but he was most def a sg, at best he played some sf later in his career but never pf. He was a 2 through his entire prime

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •