I don't like the trade for Randle but CJ's "year" is only 12 games long. I'd say, considering his career norms, the odds are pretty high his level of play is not sustainable and he'll regress. I mean his career PER is 17.4 and he's at 26.4; his career TS% is .553 and he's at .620; his career assist rate is 17.2% and he's at 26.3%; his career wjnshare is .107 and he's at .227; his career BPM is 1.1 and he's at 6.9 expecting CJ to sustain those numbers would have been like expecting Dame to sustain the numbers over that 10-12 game stretch hast season when he was averaging something like (IIRC) 44 points and 10 assists with a TS% north of 70%.
Right. That's part o f the reason I always dream up trades for CJ. For one thing; he's just not here. And when he comes back, who knows who he will be?
Thank you!! Lol. While it’s reasonable to expect CJ to regress somewhat. Look at the kind of shots he taking. He has always been a great 3 point shooter but he never took enough of them. This year he taking 4 more attempt than he did last year on even better efficiency. So I will say this CJ will not regress to his normal career norm. But he will still be dangerous if he keep taking more 3s. He always has been capable of this, he just needed to do it
A kicker?!?! https://www.google.com/search?q=Suisham&client=ms-android-verizon&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8
If you think someone scoring 44ppg is the same as someone scoring 28ppg, I don't know what to tell ya.
look...I actually agree with you that what Dame did in that stretch was more unsustainable than what CJ was doing. But based upon their norms, what both were doing was beyond a realistic expectation of sustainability. Hot streaks are common and both were incredibly hot for a dozen games or so. we'll see how CJ does when he comes back but I'd expect his efficiency and production to regress toward his norms. I'm also convinced Portland is best when Dame is aggressive in creating offense for himself and the team. He was deferring to CJ too much in the first part of the season and it made him less of a player with less impact. I believe CJ can be a lot closer to what he can be as a 2nd fiddle then Dame can. To me, it's just another example of the awkward on-court synergy Dame and CJ have
This might be true, but when that happens don't you think Dame will get worn down? What happens when Dame gets hurt and there is no CJ. what happens in the playoffs when they double Dame. I have not read this whole thread but if it is another "duplication" discussion then count me as one who believes that you want both. 1/3 of their minutes should be without the other on the court. I said earlier I would take someone like Siakam in a trade for CJ, but not someone who is not as good as CJ. Too many suggestions out there are for players that will not make us better.
Gotta love the narrative of "CJ playing well is unsustainable, and it was a negative anyway because it took away from Dame." Some people are hellbent on making CJ out to be garbage.
Your hate of CJ knows no bounds. It's OK to admit you were wrong-- you're in an anonymous forum for Godsakes. No one gives a shit if you predicted something correctly or not
The only way you "get better" by trading CJ is by taking a risk--no excellent wing is going to be available for CJ. Unless he proves that his season this year before he got hurt is his new, permanent level, he's not worth a really good wing. So you have to make a bet on a pre-hype (many of whom are ironically post-hype als0) like Brandon Ingram was when he was traded or Andrew Wiggins was when he was traded. Someone who's deemed disappointing, but you think could flourish with the right culture and coaching (or just more development). Otherwise, the team will just tread water with CJ. My issue with CJ is not exactly "duplication." I'd take two Stephen Curries, two Dame Lillards or two Kevin Durants. The problem, to me, is that CJ isn't another Lillard (again, unless his small sample explosion is a genuine evolution, which I'm not betting on right now) and his defense is a problem at a wing position (counting twos and threes as wings). To me, CJ is closer to a Lou Williams type of player than a Damian Lillard--someone who's a potential microwave scorer, but who's not an elite level scorer and brings poor defense.
Right, what you think is a legitimate opinion, what others think is "narrative." Feel free to divide the world into "reasonable people" and "haters," but that's the true intellectual laziness. I don't hate CJ, so I'm not pushing a narrative. But I guess it allows you to avoid using your brain, it's much easier to toss off a dismissive line.
Not calling you a hater, but CJ plays nothing like Lou Williams. Lou is a ball dominant score-first guard who relies heavily on pounding the ball and drawing fouls. CJ is nothing like that. And the idea that he shouldn't be starting is something that people have been harping on for over 5 yrs now, without any merit really. CJ and Dame had been developing great synergy this season with CJ taking more threes and actively passing more. His comments in various media appearances confirm the deliberate change in his game. Just a damn shame he couldn't show how sustainable it was because of his fluke injury
I never said he shouldn't be starting, nor did I say he plays like Lou Williams. My comparison to Lou Williams was that he's a potent, but not elite, offensive player (Williams has, in fact, been a better play-maker, by Assist Rate, then CJ) which means that, combined with his overall poor defense, he's not star-level. I'm certainly not the first to say that, but that's because it's true. It has nothing to do with "narrative."
That he's a potent but not elite offensive player (elite meaning like Lillard, Curry, Durant, Harden, etc) and he's a poor defender.
