Ingram

[celticsclay]

FWIW,

About even, but Ingram has been slightly better than Jaylen in preseason.  He has the higher EFF rating (8.4 to 7.5).  Comes down to better three point shooting and less turnovers. 

Ingram:  8.1 points, 2.4 rebounds, 1.7 assists, 1.1 blocks, 0.7 steals, 0.3 turnovers with 41%/39%/54% shooting in 24mpg.

Brown:  10.7 points, 2.8 rebounds, 1.4 assists, 0.4 blocks, 1 steal, 1.7 turnovers, 42%/28%/59% in 23.3mpg

Ingram is 11 months younger.  He's widely believed to have a high ceiling.   While Jaylen wasn't widely believed to have a high ceiling, Boston clear thought otherwise.  Hopefully they are right.

This is very untrue.

It's actually very true, though it's up to your interpretation of what we mean when we say "widely believed to have a high ceiling".   Most would agree Jaylen had/has potential.  The consensus was that he was unlikely to develop into a star.  Even now, most of the national articles I read suggest the same thing.   That's why he was projected 8th on most mocks in what was seen as a 2 player draft.   But Boston took him 3rd... so we can assume Boston believes in his ceiling more than the widespread consensus opinion.

On the flip said... consensus was that Ingram had/has star potential.  He's widely believed to have a high ceiling.  The assumption is that Ingram is far more likely to develop into a star than Brown.  That doesn't mean it will pan out that way.

You're not offering any evidence beyond hollow "many people are saying" conjecture.  How are you interpreting "high ceiling"? Quite a bit of pre-draft discussion of Jaylen was that he was a boom or bust prospect.  In other words, low floor, high ceiling.  In other other words if he puts it together he could be awesome. 

From Kevin O'Connor:

Brown has special characteristics that could make him the best player in this draft.

From Sam Vecenie (CBS Sports):

While Brown also has some questions about his game, there's not much use in questioning his upside. At 6-7 with a 7-foot wingspan and tremendous explosiveness, Brown could become an all-star if things broke right for him.

Even if he doesn't hit his ceiling as a dynamic, versatile two-way all-star, it's hard to envision Brown entirely flaming out in the NBA due to his athleticism and defense.

Ben Dowsett's article is literally called "Jaylen Brown Leaping at His Sky-High Ceiling"
http://www.basketballinsiders.com/jaylen-brown-leaping-at-his-sky-high-ceiling/

Now if what you are saying is that Jaylen was much less of a "can't miss" prospect than Ingram, that I'll accept.  The pre-draft consensus was that only Simmons and Ingram were anywhere near locks to be future All-Star level players.

Chad ford had him in the non-star tier, so that kind of outweighs a lot of this stuff by a significant margin. Ingram on the other hand was listed as a tier 2. The thing with LB is that every word he types has been very carefully researched and vetted. If you ever think for a moment that you have caught him in a mistake, double check your posts and his, without a doubt the true misunderstanding will have been typed out from your own fingertips.

Is this supposed to be read ironically?

I am not sure

[LarBrd33]

FWIW,

About even, but Ingram has been slightly better than Jaylen in preseason.  He has the higher EFF rating (8.4 to 7.5).  Comes down to better three point shooting and less turnovers. 

Ingram:  8.1 points, 2.4 rebounds, 1.7 assists, 1.1 blocks, 0.7 steals, 0.3 turnovers with 41%/39%/54% shooting in 24mpg.

Brown:  10.7 points, 2.8 rebounds, 1.4 assists, 0.4 blocks, 1 steal, 1.7 turnovers, 42%/28%/59% in 23.3mpg

Ingram is 11 months younger.  He's widely believed to have a high ceiling.   While Jaylen wasn't widely believed to have a high ceiling, Boston clear thought otherwise.  Hopefully they are right.

This is very untrue.

It's actually very true, though it's up to your interpretation of what we mean when we say "widely believed to have a high ceiling".   Most would agree Jaylen had/has potential.  The consensus was that he was unlikely to develop into a star.  Even now, most of the national articles I read suggest the same thing.   That's why he was projected 8th on most mocks in what was seen as a 2 player draft.   But Boston took him 3rd... so we can assume Boston believes in his ceiling more than the widespread consensus opinion.

On the flip said... consensus was that Ingram had/has star potential.  He's widely believed to have a high ceiling.  The assumption is that Ingram is far more likely to develop into a star than Brown.  That doesn't mean it will pan out that way.

You're not offering any evidence beyond hollow "many people are saying" conjecture.  How are you interpreting "high ceiling"? Quite a bit of pre-draft discussion of Jaylen was that he was a boom or bust prospect.  In other words, low floor, high ceiling.  In other other words if he puts it together he could be awesome. 

From Kevin O'Connor:

Brown has special characteristics that could make him the best player in this draft.

From Sam Vecenie (CBS Sports):

While Brown also has some questions about his game, there's not much use in questioning his upside. At 6-7 with a 7-foot wingspan and tremendous explosiveness, Brown could become an all-star if things broke right for him.

Even if he doesn't hit his ceiling as a dynamic, versatile two-way all-star, it's hard to envision Brown entirely flaming out in the NBA due to his athleticism and defense.

Ben Dowsett's article is literally called "Jaylen Brown Leaping at His Sky-High Ceiling"
http://www.basketballinsiders.com/jaylen-brown-leaping-at-his-sky-high-ceiling/

Now if what you are saying is that Jaylen was much less of a "can't miss" prospect than Ingram, that I'll accept.  The pre-draft consensus was that only Simmons and Ingram were anywhere near locks to be future All-Star level players.

Jaylen was widely seen as a raw prospect that potentially had potential, but few anticipated him developing into a star.  Basically every raw young prospect is believed to have potential, but only a couple guys in this draft got the "future star" and "can't-miss" labels that went to Simmons and Ingram.  Jaylen was seen as a 2nd class prospect.  Even now, he's presented more in articles as a future trade chip than foundation piece.  Just the other day I saw him listed as one of the most likely players to be traded next season.  They went on to talk about how he, along addition pieces like a 1st round pick, crowder and maybe Bradley would make for a decent jimmy butler trade package (we supposedly offered crowder, Jaylen and a future 1st on draft night) and it described Jaylen as someone who even if he reaches his best case scenario will be a lesser player than Jimmy butler right now.  This isn't a player who was or is widely believed to have a high ceiling.   When I mention it comes down to your interpretation of "widely believed to have a high ceiling" I'm talking about whether you think expectations play into that. 

 Yes, technically Perry Jones III was considered a prospect with a lot of potential and by your definition he had the same "high ceiling" as Jaylen brown when he was drafted 28th by the thunder a few years ago.   But it's a mischaracterizarion to suggest that perry jones was seen as having a "high ceiling" like Andrew Wiggins.  Wiggins and Ingram are two first class prospects who were widely believed to have high ceilings (with the assumption being they would actually reach those ceilings).   Perry jones and Jaylen brown weren't.   But Boston reached for Jaylen at 3 so they must believe in his ability to reach that mythical potential a lot more than the general consensus.  Let's hope Boston proves the rest of the world (including their own fans who booed the pick) wrong.  Jaylen undeniably showed signs as he struggled through preseason.  Jaylen potentially has a lot of potential. Hopefully he defies expectations and lives up to his potential potential.   It's good that Gerald green is on the team.  Gerald was another perry jones/Jaylen brown second class prospect that had a lot of potential potential, but never lived up to that potential potential.  Gerald can be a cautionary tale as Jaylen tries to reach his potential potential.

[celticsclay]

FWIW,

About even, but Ingram has been slightly better than Jaylen in preseason.  He has the higher EFF rating (8.4 to 7.5).  Comes down to better three point shooting and less turnovers. 

Ingram:  8.1 points, 2.4 rebounds, 1.7 assists, 1.1 blocks, 0.7 steals, 0.3 turnovers with 41%/39%/54% shooting in 24mpg.

Brown:  10.7 points, 2.8 rebounds, 1.4 assists, 0.4 blocks, 1 steal, 1.7 turnovers, 42%/28%/59% in 23.3mpg

Ingram is 11 months younger.  He's widely believed to have a high ceiling.   While Jaylen wasn't widely believed to have a high ceiling, Boston clear thought otherwise.  Hopefully they are right.

This is very untrue.

It's actually very true, though it's up to your interpretation of what we mean when we say "widely believed to have a high ceiling".   Most would agree Jaylen had/has potential.  The consensus was that he was unlikely to develop into a star.  Even now, most of the national articles I read suggest the same thing.   That's why he was projected 8th on most mocks in what was seen as a 2 player draft.   But Boston took him 3rd... so we can assume Boston believes in his ceiling more than the widespread consensus opinion.

On the flip said... consensus was that Ingram had/has star potential.  He's widely believed to have a high ceiling.  The assumption is that Ingram is far more likely to develop into a star than Brown.  That doesn't mean it will pan out that way.

You're not offering any evidence beyond hollow "many people are saying" conjecture.  How are you interpreting "high ceiling"? Quite a bit of pre-draft discussion of Jaylen was that he was a boom or bust prospect.  In other words, low floor, high ceiling.  In other other words if he puts it together he could be awesome. 

From Kevin O'Connor:

Brown has special characteristics that could make him the best player in this draft.

From Sam Vecenie (CBS Sports):

While Brown also has some questions about his game, there's not much use in questioning his upside. At 6-7 with a 7-foot wingspan and tremendous explosiveness, Brown could become an all-star if things broke right for him.

Even if he doesn't hit his ceiling as a dynamic, versatile two-way all-star, it's hard to envision Brown entirely flaming out in the NBA due to his athleticism and defense.

Ben Dowsett's article is literally called "Jaylen Brown Leaping at His Sky-High Ceiling"
http://www.basketballinsiders.com/jaylen-brown-leaping-at-his-sky-high-ceiling/

Now if what you are saying is that Jaylen was much less of a "can't miss" prospect than Ingram, that I'll accept.  The pre-draft consensus was that only Simmons and Ingram were anywhere near locks to be future All-Star level players.

Jaylen was widely seen as a raw prospect that potentially had potential, but few anticipated him developing into a star.  Basically every raw young prospect is believed to have potential, but only a couple guys in this draft got the "future star" and "can't-miss" labels that went to Simmons and Ingram.  Jaylen was seen as a 2nd class prospect.  Even now, he's presented more in articles as a future trade chip than foundation piece.  Just the other day I saw him listed as one of the most likely players to be traded next season.  They went on to talk about how he, along addition pieces like a 1st round pick, crowder and maybe Bradley would make for a decent jimmy butler trade package (we supposedly offered crowder, Jaylen and a future 1st on draft night) and it described Jaylen as someone who even if he reaches his best case scenario will be a lesser player than Jimmy butler right now.  This isn't a player who was or is widely believed to have a high ceiling.   When I mention it comes down to your interpretation of "widely believed to have a high ceiling" I'm talking about whether you think expectations play into that. 

 Yes, technically Perry Jones III was considered a prospect with a lot of potential and by your definition he had the same "high ceiling" as Jaylen brown when he was drafted 28th by the thunder a few years ago.   But it's a mischaracterizarion to suggest that perry jones was seen as having a "high ceiling" like Andrew Wiggins.  Wiggins and Ingram are two first class prospects who were widely believed to have high ceilings (with the assumption being they would actually reach those ceilings).   Perry jones and Jaylen brown weren't.   But Boston reached for Jaylen at 3 so they must believe in his ability to reach that mythical potential a lot more than the general consensus.  Let's hope Boston proves the rest of the world (including their own fans who booed the pick) wrong.  Jaylen undeniably showed signs as he struggled through preseason.  Jaylen potentially has a lot of potential. Hopefully he defies expectations and lives up to his potential potential.   It's good that Gerald green is on the team.  Gerald was another perry jones/Jaylen brown second class prospect that had a lot of potential potential, but never lived up to that potential potential.  Gerald can be a cautionary tale as Jaylen tries to reach his potential potential.

Yea I think Perry Jones/Jaylen Brown versus Wiggins/Ingram is a great way to think about this. Both Jones and Brown *could be stars but Wiggins and Ingram were/are expected to be stars.

[Ilikesports17]

FWIW,

About even, but Ingram has been slightly better than Jaylen in preseason.  He has the higher EFF rating (8.4 to 7.5).  Comes down to better three point shooting and less turnovers. 

Ingram:  8.1 points, 2.4 rebounds, 1.7 assists, 1.1 blocks, 0.7 steals, 0.3 turnovers with 41%/39%/54% shooting in 24mpg.

Brown:  10.7 points, 2.8 rebounds, 1.4 assists, 0.4 blocks, 1 steal, 1.7 turnovers, 42%/28%/59% in 23.3mpg

Ingram is 11 months younger.  He's widely believed to have a high ceiling.   While Jaylen wasn't widely believed to have a high ceiling, Boston clear thought otherwise.  Hopefully they are right.

This is very untrue.

It's actually very true, though it's up to your interpretation of what we mean when we say "widely believed to have a high ceiling".   Most would agree Jaylen had/has potential.  The consensus was that he was unlikely to develop into a star.  Even now, most of the national articles I read suggest the same thing.   That's why he was projected 8th on most mocks in what was seen as a 2 player draft.   But Boston took him 3rd... so we can assume Boston believes in his ceiling more than the widespread consensus opinion.

On the flip said... consensus was that Ingram had/has star potential.  He's widely believed to have a high ceiling.  The assumption is that Ingram is far more likely to develop into a star than Brown.  That doesn't mean it will pan out that way.

You're not offering any evidence beyond hollow "many people are saying" conjecture.  How are you interpreting "high ceiling"? Quite a bit of pre-draft discussion of Jaylen was that he was a boom or bust prospect.  In other words, low floor, high ceiling.  In other other words if he puts it together he could be awesome. 

From Kevin O'Connor:

Brown has special characteristics that could make him the best player in this draft.

From Sam Vecenie (CBS Sports):

While Brown also has some questions about his game, there's not much use in questioning his upside. At 6-7 with a 7-foot wingspan and tremendous explosiveness, Brown could become an all-star if things broke right for him.

Even if he doesn't hit his ceiling as a dynamic, versatile two-way all-star, it's hard to envision Brown entirely flaming out in the NBA due to his athleticism and defense.

Ben Dowsett's article is literally called "Jaylen Brown Leaping at His Sky-High Ceiling"
http://www.basketballinsiders.com/jaylen-brown-leaping-at-his-sky-high-ceiling/

Now if what you are saying is that Jaylen was much less of a "can't miss" prospect than Ingram, that I'll accept.  The pre-draft consensus was that only Simmons and Ingram were anywhere near locks to be future All-Star level players.

Jaylen was widely seen as a raw prospect that might have potential, but few anticipated him developing into a star.  Basically every raw young prospect is believed to have potential, but only a couple guys in this draft got the "future star" label and that was Simmons and Ingram.  Jaylen was seen as a 2nd class prospect.  Even now, he's presented more in articles as a future trade chip than foundation piece.  Just the other day I saw him listed as one of the most likely players to be traded next season.  They went on to talk about how he, along addition pieces like a 1st round pick, crowder and maybe Bradley would make for a decent jimmy butler trade package (we supposedly offered crowder, Jaylen and a future 1st on draft night) and it described Jaylen as someone who even if he reaches his best case scenario will be a lesser player than Jimmy butler right now.  This isn't a player who was or is widely believed to have a high ceiling.   When I mention it comes down to your interpretation of "widely believed to have a high ceiling" I'm talking about whether you think expectations play into that. 

 Yes, technically Perry Jones III was considered a prospect with a lot of potential and by your definition he had the same "high ceiling" as Jaylen brown when he was drafted 28th by the thunder a few years ago.   But it's a mischaracterizarion to suggest that perry jones was seen as having a "high ceiling" like Andrew Wiggins.  Wiggins and Ingram are two first class prospects who were widely believed to have high ceilings (with the assumption being they would actually reach those ceilings).   Perry jones and Jaylen brown weren't.   But Boston reached for Jaylen at 3 so they must believe in his ability to reach that mythical potential a lot more than the general consensus.  Let's hope Boston proves the rest of the world (including their own fans who booed the pick) wrong.

Boston did not reach for Brown at 3. He was in the third tier of prospects.

Basically indistinguishable from Hield Dunn etc.

Him falling to 8th in mock draft could easily be explained by the myriad of smokescreens thrown up predraft along with team needs. We were rumored to be guaranteed to take Dunn, phoenix was supposedly big Bender/Chriss guys so then you have Dunn bender, Minny the must take hield Murray, New Orleans takes the one they left cus both teams need shooters. Denver then has Harris Gallo Mudiay Jokic Nurkic, they need a 4. They take bender/Chriss Boom! Brown logically falls 8th.

[LarBrd33]

FWIW,

About even, but Ingram has been slightly better than Jaylen in preseason.  He has the higher EFF rating (8.4 to 7.5).  Comes down to better three point shooting and less turnovers. 

Ingram:  8.1 points, 2.4 rebounds, 1.7 assists, 1.1 blocks, 0.7 steals, 0.3 turnovers with 41%/39%/54% shooting in 24mpg.

Brown:  10.7 points, 2.8 rebounds, 1.4 assists, 0.4 blocks, 1 steal, 1.7 turnovers, 42%/28%/59% in 23.3mpg

Ingram is 11 months younger.  He's widely believed to have a high ceiling.   While Jaylen wasn't widely believed to have a high ceiling, Boston clear thought otherwise.  Hopefully they are right.

This is very untrue.

It's actually very true, though it's up to your interpretation of what we mean when we say "widely believed to have a high ceiling".   Most would agree Jaylen had/has potential.  The consensus was that he was unlikely to develop into a star.  Even now, most of the national articles I read suggest the same thing.   That's why he was projected 8th on most mocks in what was seen as a 2 player draft.   But Boston took him 3rd... so we can assume Boston believes in his ceiling more than the widespread consensus opinion.

On the flip said... consensus was that Ingram had/has star potential.  He's widely believed to have a high ceiling.  The assumption is that Ingram is far more likely to develop into a star than Brown.  That doesn't mean it will pan out that way.

You're not offering any evidence beyond hollow "many people are saying" conjecture.  How are you interpreting "high ceiling"? Quite a bit of pre-draft discussion of Jaylen was that he was a boom or bust prospect.  In other words, low floor, high ceiling.  In other other words if he puts it together he could be awesome. 

From Kevin O'Connor:

Brown has special characteristics that could make him the best player in this draft.

From Sam Vecenie (CBS Sports):

While Brown also has some questions about his game, there's not much use in questioning his upside. At 6-7 with a 7-foot wingspan and tremendous explosiveness, Brown could become an all-star if things broke right for him.

Even if he doesn't hit his ceiling as a dynamic, versatile two-way all-star, it's hard to envision Brown entirely flaming out in the NBA due to his athleticism and defense.

Ben Dowsett's article is literally called "Jaylen Brown Leaping at His Sky-High Ceiling"
http://www.basketballinsiders.com/jaylen-brown-leaping-at-his-sky-high-ceiling/

Now if what you are saying is that Jaylen was much less of a "can't miss" prospect than Ingram, that I'll accept.  The pre-draft consensus was that only Simmons and Ingram were anywhere near locks to be future All-Star level players.

Jaylen was widely seen as a raw prospect that potentially had potential, but few anticipated him developing into a star.  Basically every raw young prospect is believed to have potential, but only a couple guys in this draft got the "future star" and "can't-miss" labels that went to Simmons and Ingram.  Jaylen was seen as a 2nd class prospect.  Even now, he's presented more in articles as a future trade chip than foundation piece.  Just the other day I saw him listed as one of the most likely players to be traded next season.  They went on to talk about how he, along addition pieces like a 1st round pick, crowder and maybe Bradley would make for a decent jimmy butler trade package (we supposedly offered crowder, Jaylen and a future 1st on draft night) and it described Jaylen as someone who even if he reaches his best case scenario will be a lesser player than Jimmy butler right now.  This isn't a player who was or is widely believed to have a high ceiling.   When I mention it comes down to your interpretation of "widely believed to have a high ceiling" I'm talking about whether you think expectations play into that. 

 Yes, technically Perry Jones III was considered a prospect with a lot of potential and by your definition he had the same "high ceiling" as Jaylen brown when he was drafted 28th by the thunder a few years ago.   But it's a mischaracterizarion to suggest that perry jones was seen as having a "high ceiling" like Andrew Wiggins.  Wiggins and Ingram are two first class prospects who were widely believed to have high ceilings (with the assumption being they would actually reach those ceilings).   Perry jones and Jaylen brown weren't.   But Boston reached for Jaylen at 3 so they must believe in his ability to reach that mythical potential a lot more than the general consensus.  Let's hope Boston proves the rest of the world (including their own fans who booed the pick) wrong.  Jaylen undeniably showed signs as he struggled through preseason.  Jaylen potentially has a lot of potential. Hopefully he defies expectations and lives up to his potential potential.   It's good that Gerald green is on the team.  Gerald was another perry jones/Jaylen brown second class prospect that had a lot of potential potential, but never lived up to that potential potential.  Gerald can be a cautionary tale as Jaylen tries to reach his potential potential.

Yea I think Perry Jones/Jaylen Brown versus Wiggins/Ingram is a great way to think about this. Both Jones and Brown *could be stars but Wiggins and Ingram were/are expected to be stars.

Exactly.  It's the difference between perceiving a player to have undeniable potential (Ingram/Wiggins) and perceiving a player to have undeniable potential potential (perry/Jaylen).   The good news is, none of that matters.  Boston took Jaylen 3rd at the top of the 3rd tier of prospects.  They clearly believe in his potential to reach his potential.   I hope they are right.  I have faith. And I'm not too disappointed to see Ingram outplay him in preseason despite being a year younger.  That's partially why ingram was believed to be a higher class prospect.

[crimson_stallion]

FWIW,

About even, but Ingram has been slightly better than Jaylen in preseason.  He has the higher EFF rating (8.4 to 7.5).  Comes down to better three point shooting and less turnovers. 

Ingram:  8.1 points, 2.4 rebounds, 1.7 assists, 1.1 blocks, 0.7 steals, 0.3 turnovers with 41%/39%/54% shooting in 24mpg.

Brown:  10.7 points, 2.8 rebounds, 1.4 assists, 0.4 blocks, 1 steal, 1.7 turnovers, 42%/28%/59% in 23.3mpg

Ingram is 11 months younger.  He's widely believed to have a high ceiling.   While Jaylen wasn't widely believed to have a high ceiling, Boston clear thought otherwise.  Hopefully they are right.

I strongly disagree on Ingram having a better preseason...

Ingram basically had 3 or 4 games to start the preseason that were absolutely trash.  Then he has one solid game, followed by one really standout game that brought up the averages.

Brown has been consistently productive, with solid performances in pretty much ever game he's played so far, despite the fact that he's been something like the 7th or 8th man for Boston.

I'll take the guy who has had 5 solid games over the guy who has had 3 trash tames, one solid game and one good game, any day.

[tazzmaniac]

FWIW,

About even, but Ingram has been slightly better than Jaylen in preseason.  He has the higher EFF rating (8.4 to 7.5).  Comes down to better three point shooting and less turnovers. 

Ingram:  8.1 points, 2.4 rebounds, 1.7 assists, 1.1 blocks, 0.7 steals, 0.3 turnovers with 41%/39%/54% shooting in 24mpg.

Brown:  10.7 points, 2.8 rebounds, 1.4 assists, 0.4 blocks, 1 steal, 1.7 turnovers, 42%/28%/59% in 23.3mpg

Ingram is 11 months younger.  He's widely believed to have a high ceiling.   While Jaylen wasn't widely believed to have a high ceiling, Boston clear thought otherwise.  Hopefully they are right.

I strongly disagree on Ingram having a better preseason...

Ingram basically had 3 or 4 games to start the preseason that were absolutely trash.  Then he has one solid game, followed by one really standout game that brought up the averages.

Brown has been consistently productive, with solid performances in pretty much ever game he's played so far, despite the fact that he's been something like the 7th or 8th man for Boston.

I'll take the guy who has had 5 solid games over the guy who has had 3 trash tames, one solid game and one good game, any day.

That's why you shouldn't just go by stats sheets.  The difference in Ingram's first 5 games and last 2 games is that the Lakers finally started to run some offense through Ingram rather than just having him play off the ball.  I will point out a couple items on the stats.  Ingram's 1.1 blocks vs. 0.4 for Brown (thank those long arms) and Ingram's 0.3 turnovers vs. 1.7 turnovers for Brown.  Besides his poor shooting, the biggest knock on Brown was his extremely high turnover rate.  He's going to have to fix both of those issues to have any hope of being a star. 

[mr. dee]

FWIW,

About even, but Ingram has been slightly better than Jaylen in preseason.  He has the higher EFF rating (8.4 to 7.5).  Comes down to better three point shooting and less turnovers. 

Ingram:  8.1 points, 2.4 rebounds, 1.7 assists, 1.1 blocks, 0.7 steals, 0.3 turnovers with 41%/39%/54% shooting in 24mpg.

Brown:  10.7 points, 2.8 rebounds, 1.4 assists, 0.4 blocks, 1 steal, 1.7 turnovers, 42%/28%/59% in 23.3mpg

Ingram is 11 months younger.  He's widely believed to have a high ceiling.   While Jaylen wasn't widely believed to have a high ceiling, Boston clear thought otherwise.  Hopefully they are right.

This is very untrue.

It's actually very true, though it's up to your interpretation of what we mean when we say "widely believed to have a high ceiling".   Most would agree Jaylen had/has potential.  The consensus was that he was unlikely to develop into a star.  Even now, most of the national articles I read suggest the same thing.   That's why he was projected 8th on most mocks in what was seen as a 2 player draft.   But Boston took him 3rd... so we can assume Boston believes in his ceiling more than the widespread consensus opinion.

On the flip said... consensus was that Ingram had/has star potential.  He's widely believed to have a high ceiling.  The assumption is that Ingram is far more likely to develop into a star than Brown.  That doesn't mean it will pan out that way.

Projecting a ceiling is different than projecting whether he will reach it or not. Brown always have a high ceiling, just like many other athletic prospects. The question is will he reach it or not. Jaylen was labeled as a high-risk, high-reward guy. He slipped on the mock draft because people thought he doesn't have any NBA ready game and was kinda subpar in his college stint.

[mr. dee]

FWIW,

About even, but Ingram has been slightly better than Jaylen in preseason.  He has the higher EFF rating (8.4 to 7.5).  Comes down to better three point shooting and less turnovers. 

Ingram:  8.1 points, 2.4 rebounds, 1.7 assists, 1.1 blocks, 0.7 steals, 0.3 turnovers with 41%/39%/54% shooting in 24mpg.

Brown:  10.7 points, 2.8 rebounds, 1.4 assists, 0.4 blocks, 1 steal, 1.7 turnovers, 42%/28%/59% in 23.3mpg

Ingram is 11 months younger.  He's widely believed to have a high ceiling.   While Jaylen wasn't widely believed to have a high ceiling, Boston clear thought otherwise.  Hopefully they are right.

I strongly disagree on Ingram having a better preseason...

Ingram basically had 3 or 4 games to start the preseason that were absolutely trash.  Then he has one solid game, followed by one really standout game that brought up the averages.

Brown has been consistently productive, with solid performances in pretty much ever game he's played so far, despite the fact that he's been something like the 7th or 8th man for Boston.

I'll take the guy who has had 5 solid games over the guy who has had 3 trash tames, one solid game and one good game, any day.

That's why you shouldn't just go by stats sheets.  The difference in Ingram's first 5 games and last 2 games is that the Lakers finally started to run some offense through Ingram rather than just having him play off the ball.  I will point out a couple items on the stats.  Ingram's 1.1 blocks vs. 0.4 for Brown (thank those long arms) and Ingram's 0.3 turnovers vs. 1.7 turnovers for Brown.  Besides his poor shooting, the biggest knock on Brown was his extremely high turnover rate.  He's going to have to fix both of those issues to have any hope of being a star.

Tbf, I don't think CBS ran his offense with Brown as the main option. Brown just seized opportunities with it without forcing much issues.

[crimson_stallion]

Exactly.  It's the difference between perceiving a player to have undeniable potential (Ingram/Wiggins) and perceiving a player to have undeniable potential potential (perry/Jaylen).   The good news is, none of that matters.  Boston took Jaylen 3rd at the top of the 3rd tier of prospects.  They clearly believe in his potential to reach his potential.   I hope they are right.  I have faith. And I'm not too disappointed to see Ingram outplay him in preseason despite being a year younger.  That's partially why ingram was believed to be a higher class prospect.

I'm not getting your point. There is no such thing as "potential potenital". 

Potential refers to a player having the tools to one day be great IF the stars align right...

There are numerous things that could potentially stop those stars from aligning right, such as:

* Injury
* Work ethic / motor
* Playing time opportunities
* Environment (i.e. the type of role models a player is surrounded by)
* Etc

Hence why we use the term "potential". 

Ben Simmons has potential because of his elite combination of size/athleticsm along with his foundation of skills - passing, rebounding, ball handling, etc. He also has limitations that threaten that potential - his lack of a jumper, concerns over his attitude and motor, the lack of quality role models around in in Philly, etc.

Brandon Ingram has potential because of his elite length combined with his outstanding skills as a shooter/scorer, and his solid passing + rebounding ability.  However his star potential is threatened by his disturbingly thin frame, his lack of lateral/explosive quickness, and general question marks about his motor, toughness and leadership ability

Jaylen Brown has star potential because of his combined SSA (size/strength/athleticism) for his position, his elite ability to get to the basket, his underrated passing/rebound instincts, his strong motor/work ethic, and his alpha-dog mentality.  His potential is threatened by his limited finishing ability on offense, and his lack of general polish on both the offensive and defensive end of the floor - i.e. he's still quite raw. He should benefit from being a member of the Celtics, as he'll have a lot of good people around him and should get a taste of winning (playoff) basketball early in his career.

All three have also have high potential because of their age - on draft day Simmons and Brown are both 19, while Ingram was 18. 

Ingram and Brown actually have similar amount of potential, people have just hyped Ingram a lot more because he has freakish length and is a very gifted shooter - two things that people obsessive over in today's NBA.

By comparison Brown has a has a very raw jump shot, which (given today's obsession with three point shooting) is enough to cause his stock to drop significantly.

Simmons lacks a jump shot also (and it hurt him a lot as a prospect), but but he makes up for it by being arguably the most all-round talented prospect the NBA has seen since Lebron James.  His lack of a jumper is really the only thing that has allowed Ingram to even come close to him as a prospect - if Simmons could shoot he would have been an entire tier above Ingram.  Personally, I believe he is a tier above Ingram anyway - jumper or not.

Likewise if Brown had a more consistent jumper in college, then that alone would have likely put him on the same level as Ingram as a prospect.   

[tazzmaniac]

Ingram highlights.  Looking good especially since it was against GSW whose big 4 all played 30+ minutes. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUEQrwMG-QM

Dude has the body of a pencil.  Basically the opposite of Jaylen.  Jaylen has an NBA-ready body already.  When people talk about Ingram's ceiling they must be considering how his body will evolve as he grows up and how it will impact his game (which is already arguably better than Jaylen)

Unless my eyes deceive me, that's KD that Ingram is getting the tip in offense rebound over at 0:40.  Ingram is lanky but he's stronger than he looks.  He was forced to play PF at Duke and generally did a good job even though he routinely was giving up 20+ lbs.  He already uses his length very well. 

[kraidstar]

Exactly.  It's the difference between perceiving a player to have undeniable potential (Ingram/Wiggins) and perceiving a player to have undeniable potential potential (perry/Jaylen).   The good news is, none of that matters.  Boston took Jaylen 3rd at the top of the 3rd tier of prospects.  They clearly believe in his potential to reach his potential.   I hope they are right.  I have faith. And I'm not too disappointed to see Ingram outplay him in preseason despite being a year younger.  That's partially why ingram was believed to be a higher class prospect.

I'm not getting your point. There is no such thing as "potential potenital". 

Potential refers to a player having the tools to one day be great IF the stars align right...

There are numerous things that could potentially stop those stars from aligning right, such as:

* Injury
* Work ethic / motor
* Playing time opportunities
* Environment (i.e. the type of role models a player is surrounded by)
* Etc

Hence why we use the term "potential". 

Ben Simmons has potential because of his elite combination of size/athleticsm along with his foundation of skills - passing, rebounding, ball handling, etc. He also has limitations that threaten that potential - his lack of a jumper, concerns over his attitude and motor, the lack of quality role models around in in Philly, etc.

Brandon Ingram has potential because of his elite length combined with his outstanding skills as a shooter/scorer, and his solid passing + rebounding ability.  However his star potential is threatened by his disturbingly thin frame, his lack of lateral/explosive quickness, and general question marks about his motor, toughness and leadership ability

Jaylen Brown has star potential because of his combined SSA (size/strength/athleticism) for his position, his elite ability to get to the basket, his underrated passing/rebound instincts, his strong motor/work ethic, and his alpha-dog mentality.  His potential is threatened by his limited finishing ability on offense, and his lack of general polish on both the offensive and defensive end of the floor - i.e. he's still quite raw. He should benefit from being a member of the Celtics, as he'll have a lot of good people around him and should get a taste of winning (playoff) basketball early in his career.

All three have also have high potential because of their age - on draft day Simmons and Brown are both 19, while Ingram was 18. 

Ingram and Brown actually have similar amount of potential, people have just hyped Ingram a lot more because he has freakish length and is a very gifted shooter - two things that people obsessive over in today's NBA.

By comparison Brown has a has a very raw jump shot, which (given today's obsession with three point shooting) is enough to cause his stock to drop significantly.

Simmons lacks a jump shot also (and it hurt him a lot as a prospect), but but he makes up for it by being arguably the most all-round talented prospect the NBA has seen since Lebron James.  His lack of a jumper is really the only thing that has allowed Ingram to even come close to him as a prospect - if Simmons could shoot he would have been an entire tier above Ingram.  Personally, I believe he is a tier above Ingram anyway - jumper or not.

Likewise if Brown had a more consistent jumper in college, then that alone would have likely put him on the same level as Ingram as a prospect.

Good points.

I would add that defensive potential is very important too. Most championships are led by 2-way stars.

Ingram just looks slow to me. I like his offensive potential, but I don't know that he'll ever be a great defender. It could really be a problem for the Lakers, who are already chock-full of bad defenders. Their opponents are going to have a field day scoring this year.

I like Brown's defense so far. He has made rookie mistakes, but he shows real promise.

Simmons will be interesting defensively. He seemed disinterested at LSU a lot. If that carries over to this league it could really affect his ceiling as an overall star.

[tankcity!]

Ingram highlights.  Looking good especially since it was against GSW whose big 4 all played 30+ minutes. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fUEQrwMG-QM

Dude has the body of a pencil.  Basically the opposite of Jaylen.  Jaylen has an NBA-ready body already.  When people talk about Ingram's ceiling they must be considering how his body will evolve as he grows up and how it will impact his game (which is already arguably better than Jaylen)

Unless my eyes deceive me, that's KD that Ingram is getting the tip in offense rebound over at 0:40.  Ingram is lanky but he's stronger than he looks.  He was forced to play PF at Duke and generally did a good job even though he routinely was giving up 20+ lbs.  He already uses his length very well.

It's like you're the Tony Mazz as lbbrd is to Felger. But seriously, wasn't lbbrd the one who said he wouldn't be surprised if jaylen started in the d-league. Now he's shooting a better fg% than Ingram, but jaylens preseason performance sucks. Makes sense

[crimson_stallion]

That's why you shouldn't just go by stats sheets.  The difference in Ingram's first 5 games and last 2 games is that the Lakers finally started to run some offense through Ingram rather than just having him play off the ball.  I will point out a couple items on the stats.

Firstly, Ingram is not a point guard and he's not an "alpha dog" type of personality.  He's not going to have the offense running through him, especially not when he's got guys like Russell, Randle Young and Clarkson on the roster.  He's going to have to be able to play off the ball, and his skill set (if legit) should easily allow for that given that his biggest strength is his shooting. 

Secondly, in his five games Ingram shot:

1-2 (4 points), 2 reb, 0 ast in 19 mins
2-6 (5 points), 2 reb, 0 ast in 24 mins
3-7 (7 points), 2 reb, 2 ast in 28 mins
3-6 (12 points) 0 reb, 3 ast in 26 mins
7-10 (21 points), 7 reb, 4 ast in 28 mins

There is only one game in that list that I would call a 'good' game, and that is the 5th one.  That's despite the fact that he played substantial minutes and took a significant number of shots in all of those games. 

One good game among a sea of stinkers does not an "impressive preseason" make.

Ingram's 0.3 turnovers vs. 1.7 turnovers for Brown.  Besides his poor shooting, the biggest knock on Brown was his extremely high turnover rate.  He's going to have to fix both of those issues to have any hope of being a star.

Turnovers Per Game (TOPG) and Turnover Rate (TOR) for the NBA's top 10 scorers from last season:

Steph Curry - 3.3 TOPG, 12.9% TOR
James Harden - 4.6 TOPG, 15.9% TOR
Kevin Durant - 3.5 TOPG, 13.5% TOR
Demarcus Cousins - 3.8 TOPG, 13.3% TOR
Lebron James - 3.3 TOPG, 13.2% TOR
Damian Lillard - 3.2 TOPG, 12.6% TOR
Anthony Davis - 2.0 TOPG, 8.4% TOR
Russell Westbrook - 4.3 TOPG, 16.8% TOR
DeMar Derozan - 2.2 TOPG, 9.5% TOR
Paul George - 3.3 TOPG, 13.6% TOR

There are only two guys on that list who had a turnover rate under 12.5%, so I don't see any evidence to suggest that a high turnover rate is a hindrance to somebody becoming a star.

[tankcity!]

That's why you shouldn't just go by stats sheets.  The difference in Ingram's first 5 games and last 2 games is that the Lakers finally started to run some offense through Ingram rather than just having him play off the ball.  I will point out a couple items on the stats.

Firstly, Ingram is not a point guard and he's not an "alpha dog" type of personality.  He's not going to have the offense running through him, especially not when he's got guys like Russell, Randle Young and Clarkson on the roster.  He's going to have to be able to play off the ball, and his skill set (if legit) should easily allow for that given that his biggest strength is his shooting. 

Secondly, in his five games Ingram shot:

1-2 (4 points), 2 reb, 0 ast in 19 mins
2-6 (5 points), 2 reb, 0 ast in 24 mins
3-7 (7 points), 2 reb, 2 ast in 28 mins
3-6 (12 points) 0 reb, 3 ast in 26 mins
7-10 (21 points), 7 reb, 4 ast in 28 mins

There is only one game in that list that I would call a 'good' game, and that is the 5th one.  That's despite the fact that he played substantial minutes and took a significant number of shots in all of those games. 

One good game among a sea of stinkers does not an "impressive preseason" make.

Ingram's 0.3 turnovers vs. 1.7 turnovers for Brown.  Besides his poor shooting, the biggest knock on Brown was his extremely high turnover rate.  He's going to have to fix both of those issues to have any hope of being a star.

Turnovers Per Game (TOPG) and Turnover Rate (TOR) for the NBA's top 10 scorers from last season:

Steph Curry - 3.3 TOPG, 12.9% TOR
James Harden - 4.6 TOPG, 15.9% TOR
Kevin Durant - 3.5 TOPG, 13.5% TOR
Demarcus Cousins - 3.8 TOPG, 13.3% TOR
Lebron James - 3.3 TOPG, 13.2% TOR
Damian Lillard - 3.2 TOPG, 12.6% TOR
Anthony Davis - 2.0 TOPG, 8.4% TOR
Russell Westbrook - 4.3 TOPG, 16.8% TOR
DeMar Derozan - 2.2 TOPG, 9.5% TOR
Paul George - 3.3 TOPG, 13.6% TOR

There are only two guys on that list who had a turnover rate under 12.5%, so I don't see any evidence to suggest that a high turnover rate is a hindrance to somebody becoming a star.

I love your posts man. Hard to argue with them.