No wonder there is no hype footage......they didn’t even know he was on the damn team.
Clearly Layman is joking but make no mistake his response done with humor clearly gets his point across. Very well done, I’m sure someone from the front office ended up calling him to reassure him and his agent that he was indeed part of the #family#.
I saw the the mention here by somuch that he may have to play significant minutes if Covington goes out again, which is correct. On the other hand though if the fears of Covington becoming a frequent absence from the lineup are realized, then the Wolves and Rosas should have cashed in on him in this last offseason and gotten Garland, or something else for the future.
I already compared Layman to Chase, I hope he works out better.
GO WOLVES!!
Last edited by jodaman01 on Mon Aug 12, 2019 10:50 am, edited 1 time in total.
Yeah, he hasn't proven he's a good 3 point shooter yet, just that he understands midrange and long 2s are bad. He's one of the few players that's been worse shooting corner 3s than above the break. Little weird. Some of the clips I've seen is of him needlessly putting the ball on the floor, over dribble, then shoot. But he has a solid looking stroke.
So I think he has a bit to work with, but still a ways to go. I'm guessing he ends up being like a 35%+ 3pt shooter. Which should make people happy...er.
If it means anything, aside from the month of March (5/36 ) he shot 37.2% from the 3 over the course of the season.
Move over Chuck Person - the Wolves have a new “Rifleman”.
Yeah, he hasn't proven he's a good 3 point shooter yet, just that he understands midrange and long 2s are bad. He's one of the few players that's been worse shooting corner 3s than above the break. Little weird. Some of the clips I've seen is of him needlessly putting the ball on the floor, over dribble, then shoot. But he has a solid looking stroke.
So I think he has a bit to work with, but still a ways to go. I'm guessing he ends up being like a 35%+ 3pt shooter. Which should make people happy...er.
If it means anything, aside from the month of March (5/36 ) he shot 37.2% from the 3 over the course of the season.
He's not a great shooter but he's good enough. Mostly because he's a great athlete for his size. He can legit play 3 or 4 on offense. No idea how he guards either until we see him in our D. Think we overpaid for who he is now but he has plenty of room to grow. I do hope we play him more as a 3 though. Love to see a 2nd string front line of him, Naz, and Dieng. Don't know we have the backcourt to do it but Naz is a crazy good ball handler and shooter for a big.
I was underwhelmed by Layman's 32.6 percent 3P% upon his signing, but when you dig into his numbers from last year, you see a pattern of streaky three-point shooting and effectiveness based on minutes load. Just look at the difference between his effectiveness when he plays 20-29 MPG versus 10-19 (these account for 85% of his games). He also shot above the league average 3P% (35.5%) in five (highlighted) of the seven months of the season (68% of his games).
memyworld wrote: ↑Fri Aug 23, 2019 2:49 pm
I was underwhelmed by Layman's 32.6 percent 3P% upon his signing, but when you dig into his numbers from last year, you see a pattern of streaky three-point shooting and effectiveness based on minutes load. Just look at the difference between his effectiveness when he plays 20-29 MPG versus 10-19 (these account for 85% of his games). He also shot above the league average 3P% (35.5%) in five (highlighted) of the seven months of the season (68% of his games).
Damn, play him those minutes.
We've been trying to reach you about your car's extended warranty.
memyworld wrote: ↑Fri Aug 23, 2019 2:49 pm
I was underwhelmed by Layman's 32.6 percent 3P% upon his signing, but when you dig into his numbers from last year, you see a pattern of streaky three-point shooting and effectiveness based on minutes load. Just look at the difference between his effectiveness when he plays 20-29 MPG versus 10-19 (these account for 85% of his games). He also shot above the league average 3P% (35.5%) in five (highlighted) of the seven months of the season (68% of his games).
Damn, play him those minutes.
I agree on that, and it makes sense. I remember looking at Bjelica stats a few years ago and demonstrating that relationship between minutes played and effectiveness.
But, at teh same time I also mentioned the fact that there is some bias to this measurement. When a player like Layman, or Bjelica, is playing well, coaches will leave them in the game more. WHen they come into the game and they are "cold", the coaches will pull them out of the game quicker. SInce the results aren't totally independent, the conclusion cannot be tot ally made tha tjust playing Layman more minutes will make him a better shooter and more efficient player.
They all have a case for starting 4. Maybe not KBD, but this spot is wide open. And isn't Bell more of a traditional center? He's short but he fits better there correct?
"Come up off your smooth talk player, this raspy. You stuck on Morse code player, this ASCII."
I can see Bell and Towns as the starting bigs, but I think they would slide Towns down to the 4 if they go that route. At least on D so Bell is positioned more around the rim.
"Come up off your smooth talk player, this raspy. You stuck on Morse code player, this ASCII."
YBBR wrote: ↑Sun Aug 25, 2019 7:07 pm
I can see Bell and Towns as the starting bigs, but I think they would slide Towns down to the 4 if they go that route. At least on D so Bell is positioned more around the rim.
Oh god no. The one thing Towns does well on D is block shots at the rim. Bell is a roving weak side shot blocker. And what is needed more on D is getting Towns out of pick and roll and getting a guy who can move his feet and contest in. But the beauty of Bell is if we get stuck and Towns is the pick and roll defender we have Bell back there to block a shot. We did not have that for 2 years with Taj.
The most interesting thing for me as to lineups right now is how much will we play 2 different 5's?. IMO we should definitely start that way. Other than Dieng and Okogie coming in a little early I really want to see a bench unit get a lot of familiarity with each other. Don't know if Ryan will have the balls to start Naz or to go big but really want to see a big 2nd unit of Dieng/Naz/Layman/Okogie/ Culver eventually. Culver likely gets spoon fed early but not a fan of any backup PG on the roster right now. If Okogie and Culver can just get the ball over half court consistently that's all we need with 2 excellent passing bigs. For years our bench has screwed our starters by not being able to hold leads or provide enough rest so we don't fold down the stretch. That is a lineup that can pound in the half court, shoot a ton of FT's. Play slow. Give that starting lineup some rest. And that lineup is one tough damn team to get a board on.
YBBR wrote: ↑Sun Aug 25, 2019 7:07 pm
I can see Bell and Towns as the starting bigs, but I think they would slide Towns down to the 4 if they go that route. At least on D so Bell is positioned more around the rim.
Oh god no. The one thing Towns does well on D is block shots at the rim. Bell is a roving weak side shot blocker. And what is needed more on D is getting Towns out of pick and roll and getting a guy who can move his feet and contest in. But the beauty of Bell is if we get stuck and Towns is the pick and roll defender we have Bell back there to block a shot. We did not have that for 2 years with Taj.
The most interesting thing for me as to lineups right now is how much will we play 2 different 5's?. IMO we should definitely start that way. Other than Dieng and Okogie coming in a little early I really want to see a bench unit get a lot of familiarity with each other. Don't know if Ryan will have the balls to start Naz or to go big but really want to see a big 2nd unit of Dieng/Naz/Layman/Okogie/ Culver eventually. Culver likely gets spoon fed early but not a fan of any backup PG on the roster right now. If Okogie and Culver can just get the ball over half court consistently that's all we need with 2 excellent passing bigs. For years our bench has screwed our starters by not being able to hold leads or provide enough rest so we don't fold down the stretch. That is a lineup that can pound in the half court, shoot a ton of FT's. Play slow. Give that starting lineup some rest. And that lineup is one tough damn team to get a board on.
That hockey "big unit" is a fucking disaster. Holding leads? No chance.
Those 5 guys I would wager will never see the court together, as in zero minutes total.
YBBR wrote: ↑Sun Aug 25, 2019 7:07 pm
I can see Bell and Towns as the starting bigs, but I think they would slide Towns down to the 4 if they go that route. At least on D so Bell is positioned more around the rim.
Oh god no. The one thing Towns does well on D is block shots at the rim. Bell is a roving weak side shot blocker. And what is needed more on D is getting Towns out of pick and roll and getting a guy who can move his feet and contest in. But the beauty of Bell is if we get stuck and Towns is the pick and roll defender we have Bell back there to block a shot. We did not have that for 2 years with Taj.
The most interesting thing for me as to lineups right now is how much will we play 2 different 5's?. IMO we should definitely start that way. Other than Dieng and Okogie coming in a little early I really want to see a bench unit get a lot of familiarity with each other. Don't know if Ryan will have the balls to start Naz or to go big but really want to see a big 2nd unit of Dieng/Naz/Layman/Okogie/ Culver eventually. Culver likely gets spoon fed early but not a fan of any backup PG on the roster right now. If Okogie and Culver can just get the ball over half court consistently that's all we need with 2 excellent passing bigs. For years our bench has screwed our starters by not being able to hold leads or provide enough rest so we don't fold down the stretch. That is a lineup that can pound in the half court, shoot a ton of FT's. Play slow. Give that starting lineup some rest. And that lineup is one tough damn team to get a board on.
That hockey "big unit" is a fucking disaster. Holding leads? No chance.
Those 5 guys I would wager will never see the court together, as in zero minutes total.
Disaster. That's some solid detailed insight. Gonna need some time to digest it to respond.
Thrillkill wrote: ↑Mon Aug 26, 2019 10:28 am
Oh god no. The one thing Towns does well on D is block shots at the rim. Bell is a roving weak side shot blocker. And what is needed more on D is getting Towns out of pick and roll and getting a guy who can move his feet and contest in. But the beauty of Bell is if we get stuck and Towns is the pick and roll defender we have Bell back there to block a shot. We did not have that for 2 years with Taj.
The most interesting thing for me as to lineups right now is how much will we play 2 different 5's?. IMO we should definitely start that way. Other than Dieng and Okogie coming in a little early I really want to see a bench unit get a lot of familiarity with each other. Don't know if Ryan will have the balls to start Naz or to go big but really want to see a big 2nd unit of Dieng/Naz/Layman/Okogie/ Culver eventually. Culver likely gets spoon fed early but not a fan of any backup PG on the roster right now. If Okogie and Culver can just get the ball over half court consistently that's all we need with 2 excellent passing bigs. For years our bench has screwed our starters by not being able to hold leads or provide enough rest so we don't fold down the stretch. That is a lineup that can pound in the half court, shoot a ton of FT's. Play slow. Give that starting lineup some rest. And that lineup is one tough damn team to get a board on.
That hockey "big unit" is a fucking disaster. Holding leads? No chance.
Those 5 guys I would wager will never see the court together, as in zero minutes total.
Disaster. That's some solid detailed insight. Gonna need some time to digest it to respond.
Clank, clank, clank, clank, 18 footer, 18 footer, 18 footer. That help? I know you love the grit and grind, slow it down shit, but it's tough to play defense when the other team never has to take the ball out of the hoop.
That hockey "big unit" is a fucking disaster. Holding leads? No chance.
Those 5 guys I would wager will never see the court together, as in zero minutes total.
Disaster. That's some solid detailed insight. Gonna need some time to digest it to respond.
Clank, clank, clank, clank, 18 footer, 18 footer, 18 footer. That help? I know you love the grit and grind, slow it down shit, but it's tough to play defense when the other team never has to take the ball out of the hoop.
You have to take it out after a made FT. And you think Dieng Naz and Layman are bad shooters? Have you heard of these things called post play, cutting, and offensive rebounds? They lead to these things called layups and dunks. And the aforementioned FT's. They make you take it out after those.
Thrillkill wrote: ↑Mon Aug 26, 2019 10:58 am
Disaster. That's some solid detailed insight. Gonna need some time to digest it to respond.
Clank, clank, clank, clank, 18 footer, 18 footer, 18 footer. That help? I know you love the grit and grind, slow it down shit, but it's tough to play defense when the other team never has to take the ball out of the hoop.
You have to take it out after a made FT. And you think Dieng Naz and Layman are bad shooters? Have you heard of these things called post play, cutting, and offensive rebounds? They lead to these things called layups and dunks. And the aforementioned FT's. They make you take it out after those.
they're upset JR Smith isn't part of that lineup.
There is little difference between the memory of a real event and the memory of a dream.
Clank, clank, clank, clank, 18 footer, 18 footer, 18 footer. That help? I know you love the grit and grind, slow it down shit, but it's tough to play defense when the other team never has to take the ball out of the hoop.
You have to take it out after a made FT. And you think Dieng Naz and Layman are bad shooters? Have you heard of these things called post play, cutting, and offensive rebounds? They lead to these things called layups and dunks. And the aforementioned FT's. They make you take it out after those.
they're upset JR Smith isn't part of that lineup.
Just get up 10 3's. Doesn't matter if they go in.....................apparently.
NotRasho wrote: ↑Thu Oct 03, 2019 8:39 pm
I think layman is the kind of guy the fans will like. If hes even a serviceable rotation player he will be worth more than his contract. I think in 2 years we will still feel favorably about getting him.
His splits when he gets consistent and substantial minutes leads me to believe he ends up way outplaying his contract. The actions he's really good at are the ones the front office and coaching staff have talked about emphasizing. Excellent cutter.
We've been trying to reach you about your car's extended warranty.
) he shot 37.2% from the 3 over the course of the season.
