Luol Deng

[Nathan S]

As bad as he looked, we were +1 in the 35 minutes he played and -22 in the 13 minutes he sat. His D at least kept the 3-point barrage at bay for long stretches, which was the key to the game.

 

[Los216]

As bad as he looked, we were +1 in the 35 minutes he played and -22 in the 13 minutes he sat. His D at least kept the 3-point barrage at bay for long stretches, which was the key to the game.

His turnovers and blown layups balance that out though

 

[ajz20]

Sorry, but I do not want any part of a long term contract for big money with Deng. This is a preview of what he will look like 2-3 years from now when fully healthy. Rather spend money somewhere else. He has played a lot of minutes, and is already starting to show major red flags that we wont be able to play at a high level for much longer.

 

[Nathan S]

His turnovers and blown layups balance that out though

Huh? I mean yeah, we would have been even better with him on the court if he had played well on offense. Just saying that he managed to be a net positive tonight because he was the only guy on the team who knew where to be on D.

 

[ajz20]

Huh? I mean yeah, we would have been even better with him on the court if he had played well on offense. Just saying that he managed to be a net positive tonight because he was the only guy on the team who knew where to be on D.

Does not change the fact that it is painful to watch him play on the offensive end 75 percent of the time. He has really let this team down with his play. I know he is hurt, but he is hurting the team on many nights on the offensive end. Not as much as Jack, but that is almost impossible to match.

 

[redscoon]

He doesn't want to be here, so what we would be willing to offer is moot. Even if he wanted to stay, I would be afraid to give anything more than maybe 3 years 30 million. He has zero lift and can't dribble. It's a league that is moving more and more towards punishing teams with the 3 pointer and Deng can't shoot. He needs to be on a team that is well coached and operates an efficient system that emphasizes moving off the ball and quick passes. Put him on a one and one team that doesn't run anything and he is just another guy.

 

[RedBlackAttack]

It is honestly painful watching Luol play at this point. I mean, literally painful... as in it looks like he is trying to hide the tremendous amount of pain he is in, but failing miserably.

I agree with the above posters, though... As much as I believe injuries have to do with his looking horrible lately, recovery may not be something that happens easily. He wouldn't be the first guy who spent his late-20s and early-30s limping around on the court.

He turned down three years, $10 million to stay with the Bulls. I'd be very hesitant to even give him that much based on what I've seen. Oh well... it was worth a try.

 

[Nathan S]

Does not change the fact that it is painful to watch him play on the offensive end 75 percent of the time. He has really let this team down with his play. I know he is hurt, but he is hurting the team on many nights on the offensive end. Not as much as Jack, but that is almost impossible to match.

Ok? Sure it's painful to watch him play, but I'm more worried about wins at this point in the season. We were doing just fine with him on the court tonight from that perspective.

 

[Pioneer10]

Plus minus in a single game setting can fool you. I thought when we cut the lead down in the third, Deng got caught looking and SA exploited him to get some easy 3s. The plus minus shows a net neutral despite him being a reason our last big run was repelled

 

[Nathan S]

Plus minus in a single game setting can fool you. I thought when we cut the lead down in the third, Deng got caught looking and SA exploited him to get some easy 3s. The plus minus shows a net neutral despite him being a reason our last big run was repelled

Still, think about our other options at SF. What the plus minus shows is the massive dropoff between having Deng on the court and having Gee or a 3-guard lineup on the court. No Deng and we wouldn't have even been in striking distance in the 3rd.

 

[oasis05]

I find it hard to believe deng would tank his free agent year. He's so badly hurt chicago dumped him, and the results have been if you extended his time for a full season with the cavs it would go down amongst his worst seasons ever.

 

[MD13]

Still, think about our other options at SF. What the plus minus shows is the massive dropoff between having Deng on the court and having Gee or a 3-guard lineup on the court. No Deng and we wouldn't have even been in striking distance in the 3rd.

Yeah, but just because he's miles ahead of our other SF's doesn't mean he's worth $10 mill a year to us. Definitely pass on giving him a big extension, he's shown me nothing to say that he's worth it.

 

[Pioneer10]

Still, think about our other options at SF. What the plus minus shows is the massive dropoff between having Deng on the court and having Gee or a 3-guard lineup on the court. No Deng and we wouldn't have even been in striking distance in the 3rd.

Correlation does not equal causation. Other players may have been responsible for the swing up and Deng just happened to be on the court at the same time. I really like +/- as a stat but using it in one game to defend a a player who didn't look good does not indicate people's criticisms are not invalid. Particularly when you look at the opposing SF who puts up 18 points on a very good TS% and massive +18 in +/-

 

[Nathan S]

Yeah, but just because he's miles ahead of our other SF's doesn't mean he's worth $10 mill a year to us. Definitely pass on giving him a big extension, he's shown me nothing to say that he's worth it.

I'm not making any claims about how much he's worth this summer, just saying his defense is a big part of why the Spurs didn't dominate from the opening tip.

Correlation does not equal causation. Other players may have been responsible for the swing up and Deng just happened to be on the court at the same time. I really like +/- as a stat but using it in one game to defend a a player who didn't look good does not indicate people's criticisms are not invalid. Particularly when you look at the opposing SF who puts up 18 points on a very good TS% and massive +18 in +/-

When people say he didn't look good they're talking about his offense...where we all agree, he did not look good. Where he did look good was on defense, and Leonard's +18 is actually great evidence for this. How is it possible that Deng was +1 and his counterpart was +18? It means that Leonard did a lot of damage when Deng was on the bench.

 

[RonG]

duplicate