My man..
Lauri with Cleveland last season: usage percentage of 19.5%, 11.5 field goal attempts per game, 4th to 6th offensive option on the team. The guys who were ahead of him [and would've still been ahead of him this season] were DG, LeVert, and Mobley. Rubio was ahead of him before he got hurt.
Lauri with Utah this season: usage percentage of 26.6%, 17.3 field goal attempts per game, 1st offensive option on the team.
I'm trying to figure a way that Lauri does what he did in Utah on this Cleveland team and it's just not there. Utah basically gave him the ball and said we will turn you into our #1. He would've likely been more efficient with the shots that he got here [or maybe not, Lauri's a rhythm player], but he wasn't getting that role here on the Cavs.
I wouldn't even want him as the #1 option or even the #2 option like that on a contending/playoff team. Too easy to exploit and not the weapon Mitchell is. Lauri was assisted on 65% [3% less than last season with the Cavs] of his two pointers and 93% [6% less than last season with the Cavs] on his three pointers. Roughly a 79% average. For comparison, Mitchell was assisted on 26% of his two pointers and 48% of his three pointers. Roughly a 37% average.
It's easier to shut down a guy that only creates 21% of his own shots than it is the guy that creates 63% of his own shots. On this Cavs team, if you shut down DG, then you eventually shut down Lauri. And that's another reason Lauri likely wouldn't have been doing this on the Cavs. I'm happy for him. He's a great player. But he wasn't going to be that guy here imo.
He has a lot more spacing in Utah, and that benefits his game a lot more than it did here. Sure, his usage is higher, but his efficiency is much higher.
The bold is all true, but he still provides all the skillsets we are missing on this team. I don't really care if he's not a 1, or 2, or just a 3 option.
We all know he would never average 26 a game here. Nor would we really want him to do that. What I do care is that he provides exactly what we are missing, and badly.
Him playing next to Allen and Mobley made no sense for Lauri's game to really take off.
I think Mitchell is better, no debate.
I do think the front office undervalued his importance though. If there was a way to pull off the Mitchell trade, without including him, that should have been a priority.
Because if you had a unit of Mobley, Lauri, Mitchell, AND Garland. This would be a completely more efficient team.
But there are two problems. I don't think that roster really meshes with JBB's coaching. And I think JBB himself would prefer Allen. JBB is defensive minded, grind it out coach. Slow paced.
A roster I mention, you'd have to change the pace and tempo. And that doesn't fit with how JBB coaches.
So if they were hellbent on keeping JBB, maybe it made no sense to keep Lauri.
JBB is just the gift that keeps on giving.