Trae Young - The Man, The Viper, and The Prosecution aka The MVP aka Ice Trae

[Spud2nique]

Can’t miss won’t miss!

 

https://www.instagram.com/reel/CTC-srvJg9j/?utm_medium=copy_link

[Spud2nique]

1 hour ago, RandomFan said:

But that being said, we could also make the argument that he's more of a 2-guard than a true point guard,

I think I’m falling for you.. all over again. 

 

THANK YOU! Look, why do people call Luka a point guard when he’s a small forward by nature? Why can’t we call Curry a 2 guard? He’s on the fence at 6’3”, he’s just got that lil bit(boy) face and plays off ball for the last 5 or 6 years now. 

[AHF]

45 minutes ago, macdaddy said:

I much prefer Trae don't get me wrong.   You're probably right but a Boston team determined to put all blame on Kyrie because they are overrated and mentally weak isn't the greatest example.   Plus that Bucks team was actually really good.   

Yeah he's not a #1 option but that doesn't mean he's not a good player.   Maybe Dame has never won a ring because he's not really a good #1 either.   

I think Dame has shown himself to be a good #1.  He has led teams to the playoffs year after year and been huge in a lot of playoff series as the #1 even if they lost the series.

Kyrie has never had a good playoff run (as measured by individual performance not team success) when he was the #1 option.  He has only been the #1 option 3 seasons in Cleveland, 2 in Boston, and 1 in Brooklyn.  The only playoff team among those led by Kyrie was the Boston team noted above.  

In Cleveland, he missed the playoffs 3 times as the #1 option and only made the playoffs when LeBron returned.  With LeBron, defenses no longer focused on him. Defenses keyed on LeBron (Kevin Love drew additional attention but the important point is defenses schemed around LeBron and Kyrie got lots of open jumpers as a result).

In Boston, we just covered his playoff run.  In the second round, he put up 32 assists against 18 turnovers.  35.6% fg%, 21.9% 3pt%.  Ugly.  The prior year, Boston made the ECF without him.

In Brooklyn, the team went 8-12 with Kyrie - a pace that would have had them out of the playoffs.  But they put up a winning record without him and made the playoffs without him.

So the short version for Kyrie is 6 seasons as the #1.  3 teams that missed the playoffs.  2 teams that made the playoffs without him (one of which was a losing team with him and a winning team without him).  1 team that made the playoffs with him and then he crashed and burned.

This isn't just about Boston.  Kyrie has no real resume whatsoever.

 

[Spud2nique]

Trae needs to hit some mid rangers on Insta to this.. @kg01 it’s time.. 

 

 

[Spud2nique]

2 minutes ago, AHF said:

This isn't just about Boston.  Kyrie has no real resume whatsoever.

Kyrie the dude, I’ve heard good things about him putting good money in good places so it makes me feel as though I wouldn’t wanna comment too much on him.

The play Kyrie: Possibly a top 3 dribbler (handler) of all time. I don’t want to get into the Cousy debate but he’s prolly on my top 3 even though Muggsy Bogues would have ripped Bob a ton, that’s neither here nor there, a topic for another day I guess.

All of Kyrie’s talent as a player is overshadowed by his ego in my opinion. Almost too cool for school type of guy. Ya he did it in Cleveland but Bron prolly rode him and broke him down.

Kyrie aint in it for the ring. He could be but he’s not. This season will prove that. Injury counts with him too btw because I personally don’t think he puts the time to rehab that body, maybe he does and I’m wrong but he isn’t Trae, Trae wants the mountain 🏔 top, he’s not afraid to get it.

[macdaddy]

55 minutes ago, AHF said:

Kyrie has no real resume whatsoever

This is my issue though as this is major hyperbole.   I didn't disagree with anything you said until this.  His first 3 years in the league were garbage, tanking teams where the second best offensive player was Tristan Thompson.

50 playoff games with Cleveland averaged 23 points and shot 41% from three and won a championship.   I'd put that on my resume.    I mean you can give all the credit to Lebron if you want but then there are a lot of guys who are #2 on championship teams that would have no real resume whatsoever.  

 

[Spud2nique]

1 minute ago, macdaddy said:

This is my issue though as this is major hyperbole.   I didn't disagree with anything you said until this.  His first 3 years in the league were garbage, tanking teams where the second best offensive player was Tristan Thompson.

50 playoff games with Cleveland averaged 23 points and shot 41% from three and won a championship.   I'd put that on my resume.    I mean you can give all the credit to Lebron if you want but then there are a lot of guys who are #2 on championship teams that would have no real resume whatsoever.  

 

Lebron sparked his hunger and then he transformed back to his unc Drew self. I mean, his original self still haven’t seen the movie.

[RedDawg#8]

Cleveland doesn't get that ring without Kyrie. Lebron may have taken the pressure off of him but Kyrie still made some big plays out of nothing on his own.

If you are talking pure point guards in the league. It's CP3 and Trae at the top of the list. And obviously CP3 is about to age out of the convo.

If you're talking overall playmakers, then you open the conversation to guys like Lebron, Harden, Luka and Jokic.

Their list appears to be overall PG's so I'm not mad at his spot. I think of the players who play PG has to be Curry and Dame at the top, then guys like Kyrie, Trae, CP3, Russ, etc.. all pretty close behind. 

I can live with 4 based on the criteria they seem to be going by. CP3 could be just as mad at 5 as Trae is at 4.

[AHF]

1 hour ago, macdaddy said:

This is my issue though as this is major hyperbole.   I didn't disagree with anything you said until this.  His first 3 years in the league were garbage, tanking teams where the second best offensive player was Tristan Thompson.

50 playoff games with Cleveland averaged 23 points and shot 41% from three and won a championship.   I'd put that on my resume.    I mean you can give all the credit to Lebron if you want but then there are a lot of guys who are #2 on championship teams that would have no real resume whatsoever.  

 

Let me clarify - Kyrie has proven he is standout #2 guy and an elite #3 guy.  He has no resume whatsoever as a playoff #1.

I'm always going to take someone like Trae who is a legit #1 and has shown he can step up in the playoffs when opposing teams are keying on him over someone like Kyrie or Klay Thompson who are great when the defense is focused on someone else.  Kyrie's shot selection is so incredibly much easier playing with LeBron, KD, etc. compared to if he was the #1 and defenses focused on him.  (That doesn't mean he never takes contested or tough shots but that is very different from the defense keying on you as the top priority.)

If we were talking about which player is the better fit as the #3 guy for the Nets next year, I'm on board with you in saying that Kyrie has the stronger case because he has shown he can be elite in that role and Trae hasn't.  While Trae's playmaking skills would be much better regardless of role, Kyrie's ability to knock down open jumpers is much more proven than Trae's and with KD and Harden on the floor that ability is a very high priority.  But there is zero reason to think the Hawks improve by swapping Trae out for Kyrie and letting Kyrie try to lead as the #1 guy.  And in rating the very best players against each other, IMO you should be rating them for their ability to succeed in the most challenging roles and not in roles like Kyrie and Klay have played (although I will say that this doesn't apply so much defensively which gives a better case for Klay since Kyrie isn't a standout defender).

[sturt]

Ohhhhhh maaannnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn.... this is fun. Did you know that Trae Young is no Reggie Miller?.... hehehehe...

 

 

 

[kg01]

No fanbase deserves the butt whuppin we served more than these a**clowns.

I bet if you take their regular season wins over Atlanta to the flea market ... er the bodega, they might trade you 2-for-1 on a playoff win.

[AHF]

Listened to that and it was as quality as you'd expect.  "Our fourth option is Julius..."   Ummm......what???  

Now I do agree that they will be better and more offensively versatile this season but it is going to be interesting to see how Kemba and Randle fit together since Randle blossomed when he assumed the point forward role last season.

[macdaddy]

I just get super irritated with Knicks fans and i know a few.   They constantly say they are the best and most knowledgeable fans in the league then immediately follow up with stupid takes.   

Seriously they said all this same stuff before the playoffs last year.   They said they were the smartest fans in the league, the Knicks were going to sweep the Hawks or maybe win in 5.   Then after the series they all said 'well everyone knew the Hawks had the better team'   Seriously!  They really are absolutely the dumbest fans in the league.   No question.   

And this whole narrative that things are really going to change for Trae because of this new rule?   Just shows they don't watch.    

[RedDawg#8]

They're really selling low on Julius here. Putting Barrett over him? Lol 

Ok. Good luck with that fellas lol

[kg01]

8 minutes ago, macdaddy said:

I just get super irritated with Knicks fans and i know a few.   They constantly say they are the best and most knowledgeable fans in the league then immediately follow up with stupid takes.   

Seriously they said all this same stuff before the playoffs last year.   They said they were the smartest fans in the league, the Knicks were going to sweep the Hawks or maybe win in 5.   Then after the series they all said 'well everyone knew the Hawks had the better team'   Seriously!  They really are absolutely the dumbest fans in the league.   No question.   

And this whole narrative that things are really going to change for Trae because of this new rule?   Just shows they don't watch.    

Preach.

They're just fans just like the rest of us.  Every time they open their mouths they confirm that.

The Hawks "making their names off the Knicks"?  How?  Why?  You don't "make your name" off a middlin', ceiling'd playoff team.  That's why no one batted an eye when the Hawks plowed through the 1st round last year.

[AHF]

7 minutes ago, kg01 said:

Preach.

They're just fans just like the rest of us.  Every time they open their mouths they confirm that.

The Hawks "making their names off the Knicks"?  How?  Why?  You don't "make your name" off a middlin', ceiling'd playoff team.  That's why no one batted an eye when the Hawks plowed through the 1st round last year.

I view it this way.  The media tends to ignore the Hawks except when they are playing a high visibility team.  So the big advantage for playing the Knicks last year is they always get a lot of attention so beating the Knicks did get a lot of eyes on Atlanta in games where Atlanta would historically have been ignored.  That isn't making your name off of the Knicks - it is removing the media bias against giving the Hawks attention.

[bleachkit]

18 hours ago, AHF said:

Let me clarify - Kyrie has proven he is standout #2 guy and an elite #3 guy.  He has no resume whatsoever as a playoff #1.

I'm always going to take someone like Trae who is a legit #1 and has shown he can step up in the playoffs when opposing teams are keying on him over someone like Kyrie or Klay Thompson who are great when the defense is focused on someone else.  Kyrie's shot selection is so incredibly much easier playing with LeBron, KD, etc. compared to if he was the #1 and defenses focused on him.  (That doesn't mean he never takes contested or tough shots but that is very different from the defense keying on you as the top priority.)

If we were talking about which player is the better fit as the #3 guy for the Nets next year, I'm on board with you in saying that Kyrie has the stronger case because he has shown he can be elite in that role and Trae hasn't.  While Trae's playmaking skills would be much better regardless of role, Kyrie's ability to knock down open jumpers is much more proven than Trae's and with KD and Harden on the floor that ability is a very high priority.  But there is zero reason to think the Hawks improve by swapping Trae out for Kyrie and letting Kyrie try to lead as the #1 guy.  And in rating the very best players against each other, IMO you should be rating them for their ability to succeed in the most challenging roles and not in roles like Kyrie and Klay have played (although I will say that this doesn't apply so much defensively which gives a better case for Klay since Kyrie isn't a standout defender).

If you want Kyrie to be your number 1, you have to use the Allen Iverson model. But that model does not usually work, especially in today's game. I have no idea how Larry Brown got a ball hogging AI and some role players to the NBA finals. One of the great coaching performances of all time.

[macdaddy]

The thing is that no one under 40 outside of NY and maybe parts of Asia give a crap about the Knicks.  It's been so long since they were even decent.   The only thing keeping them a 'premier' franchise is that the NY area is huge and the TV money is huge and the league continues to prop them up publicly as some sort of special team.   

The ratings for the Knicks - Hawks wasn't even that high compared to a lot of other games in the playoffs.   

Seriously Nate gets fined for saying the NBA wants the Knicks to win and then the NBA turns around and awards them a Christmas day game.   For winning 1 playoff game in 7 years with no real star player?   Letting them so easily get included with the real top of the league has monetary and team reputation benefits.   It's bs.   

[AHF]

1 hour ago, macdaddy said:

The ratings for the Knicks - Hawks wasn't even that high compared to a lot of other games in the playoffs.   

I was excited about being matched up with the Knicks because I thought getting them would give us more attention than we otherwise would.  To see whether that happened, I would compare our TV ratings from past 1st round playoff series against this and not look at what other high profile teams did in their first round playoff series (later rounds being even more apples to oranges).  I think we got a boost in attention relative to the normal non-coverage we get and Trae and the Hawks made the absolute most of it and carried that positive momentum forward to upset Philly and play neck and neck with the Bucks until Trae went down.

[marco102]

1 hour ago, macdaddy said:

 

The ratings for the Knicks - Hawks wasn't even that high compared to a lot of other games in the playoffs.   

 

Actually they were. The Hawks and Knicks were one of the consistently highest rated first round series. Maybe not always the highest.. Kind of what happens when you a have the #1 and #7 media markets matching up.