Good debate question: whos better? Shumpert vs lance stephenson? Who has improved the most?
I prefer Shump - as I think he has more offensive potential... but Stephenson is slightly ahead of Shump in my opinion.
I'm pretty disappointed with Shumpert this season and frankly, worried at this point. Mentally he seems out of it.
Stephenson, right now at least, is the better player as much as it pains me to say that.
Stephenson is better, short and long term. I'd still pick Shumpert though because I'm a homer and because Stephenson looks like a Ninja Turtle.
Lance is averaging 14-6-6
callmened wrote:Lance is averaging 14-6-6
He's a big boy though and does everything Shumpert can, while also running the point. The scary thing is that Stephenson has room to get better while I think Shumpert has peaked.
This is not a fair question. One plays for a team that doesn't care if talent is maximized and look at drafted players a mere trade fodder. The other plays for a team that prizes draft picks and develops them to their potential.
NardDogNation wrote:callmened wrote:Lance is averaging 14-6-6
He's a big boy though and does everything Shumpert can, while also running the point. The scary thing is that Stephenson has room to get better while I think Shumpert has peaked.
Peaked at 23?
Both talented but I give Stephenson the edge in head scratching plays.
Vmart wrote:This is not a fair question. One plays for a team that doesn't care if talent is maximized and look at drafted players a mere trade fodder. The other plays for a team that prizes draft picks and develops them to their potential.
Fair pt...indy develops talent
gunsnewing wrote:NardDogNation wrote:callmened wrote:Lance is averaging 14-6-6
He's a big boy though and does everything Shumpert can, while also running the point. The scary thing is that Stephenson has room to get better while I think Shumpert has peaked.
Peaked at 23?
Most guys aren't destined to be stars. Yeah, Shumpert will add things to his game but that's the case for most players that stick around in the league, most of whom are middling players that don't get appreciably better from what they came in as (see Shane Battier). I still think his career trajectory is Toney Allen with a jump shot, which is pretty good but not much better than what he's been.
NardDogNation wrote:gunsnewing wrote:NardDogNation wrote:callmened wrote:Lance is averaging 14-6-6
He's a big boy though and does everything Shumpert can, while also running the point. The scary thing is that Stephenson has room to get better while I think Shumpert has peaked.
Peaked at 23?
Most guys aren't destined to be stars. Yeah, Shumpert will add things to his game but that's the case for most players that stick around in the league, most of whom are middling players that don't get appreciably better from what they came in as (see Shane Battier). I still think his career trajectory is Toney Allen with a jump shot, which is pretty good but not much better than what he's been.
I agree
callmened wrote:Lance is averaging 14-6-6
Love Shump, but simply put I think the Knicks would be a better team with Lance because of how he facilitates, bounds and drives the ball.
Shump has the upside, but right now I think LS has the edge for sure. Maybe if Shump stopped getting beat back door, it'd be closer.
sealy wrote:callmened wrote:Lance is averaging 14-6-6
Love Shump, but simply put I think the Knicks would be a better team with Lance because of how he facilitates, bounds and drives the ball.
Shump has the upside, but right now I think LS has the edge for sure. Maybe if Shump stopped getting beat back door, it'd be closer.
That's assuming the Knicks don't go out of their way to mess with Lance's head. Threaten to start an immature eractic knucklehead over him and include him in trade talks etc. does lance even get playing time having been selected late in the 2nd rd? Or does he go to the dleague?
gunsnewing wrote:sealy wrote:callmened wrote:Lance is averaging 14-6-6
Love Shump, but simply put I think the Knicks would be a better team with Lance because of how he facilitates, bounds and drives the ball.
Shump has the upside, but right now I think LS has the edge for sure. Maybe if Shump stopped getting beat back door, it'd be closer.
That's assuming the Knicks don't go out of their way to mess with Lance's head. Threaten to start an immature eractic knucklehead over him and include him in trade talks etc. does lance even get playing time having been selected late in the 2nd rd? Or does he go to the dleague?
Fields started his first year. If you have the talent, you play. I agree that the Knicks need to take a keener interest in drafting and developing players but we also have to do a better job in making them count. Of all the drafts we've had in recent memory, I can only think of one instance where we may have drafted the best player available (Iman Shumpert in 2011). In every other draft, we've let stars/quasi-stars slip through our fingers and that has to change more than anything else.
gunsnewing wrote:sealy wrote:callmened wrote:Lance is averaging 14-6-6
Love Shump, but simply put I think the Knicks would be a better team with Lance because of how he facilitates, bounds and drives the ball.
Shump has the upside, but right now I think LS has the edge for sure. Maybe if Shump stopped getting beat back door, it'd be closer.
That's assuming the Knicks don't go out of their way to mess with Lance's head. Threaten to start an immature eractic knucklehead over him and include him in trade talks etc. does lance even get playing time having been selected late in the 2nd rd? Or does he go to the dleague?
haha it's funny bc it's true. JR Smith has quickly become my lest favorite Knick.
It's well documented that Indiana does a better job of developing talent. Fields(not a fan) Lin fell in their lap. If anything it was Dantoni(not a fan) who got the most out of those two
I'd even argue that Shumpert was better under Dantoni as a rookie
Look at what Indy did with Paul George
gunsnewing wrote:It's well documented that Indiana does a better job of developing talent. Fields(not a fan) Lin fell in their lap. If anything it was Dantoni(not a fan) who got the most out of those twoI'd even argue that Shumpert was better under Dantoni as a rookie
Look at what Indy did with Paul George
It's an "egg before the chicken" argument. You could just as easily say that Paul George, Danny Granger, and Roy Hibbert were destined to be the stars they became. Whatever the case, better players have consistently been missed by the Knicks in the draft, which leads me to believe it is a drafting problem. We may have a problem developing our draft picks but on the other hand, their play has not changed since they were traded to new teams that also featured them e.g. Gallo, Wilson Chandler, Fields, Jordan Hill, Toney Douglas, etc.
gunsnewing wrote:It's well documented that Indiana does a better job of developing talent. Fields(not a fan) Lin fell in their lap. If anything it was Dantoni(not a fan) who got the most out of those twoI'd even argue that Shumpert was better under Dantoni as a rookie
Look at what Indy did with Paul George
+1
I would have to say Lance. All of the weaknesses discussed when Shump was in the draft are still present. He has been very frustrating this year.
i think lance is a good player but i think he fits the pacers MO much better than he would here. the pacers are a tough, gritty bunch and lance is as well.. not sure how he'd play here with this group. i think shump has more upside, but so far, lance is the better player.
