As our most recent podcast with Julius Randle’s trainer, Amoila Cesar, detailed, the off-season is a time for grinding and improving for the players. Like Randle, Brandon Ingram also attacked his summer training regimen, looking to improve on an up and down rookie campaign while building on the growth he showed to close out the year.
For Ingram, that seeking of improvement took many forms but he’d be the first to admit one major area he needed to tackle was improving his jumper. And in a recent sit-down with Mike Trudell of Lakers.com, Ingram detailed what exact changes he worked on to become a better shooter:
For me it was the mechanics of the shot. Coach Keefe and I did a good job of just trying to come here every day and work. We started out with form shooting. Trying to keep myself from shooting over my head. Trying to find different ways that I feel comfortable shooting the basketball the right way. That was the first thing. The second thing was to get my body right. Of course, repetitions of everything I’d do in the game, but getting my body right in the weight room. Trying to eat a little bit better and eat a little bit more…
…I was shooting over my head. With my long arms, it was like a slingshot. Coming from college to the NBA, I was only about 180 pounds, so I was trying to push the ball to the rim from the 3-point line. I think I’ve gotten strong enough now where I feel comfortable shooting the ball from the 3-point line now. As I keep getting stronger, it’s going to be natural.
And here’s even more context from Lakers’ assistant coach Brian Keefe:
One of the goals going into the offseason with Brandon was to make his shot more efficient. Clean up a couple little things technically with his shot. He has good touch, but it was just making him more consistent and focusing on one or two things. One, his footwork, making sure he was on better balance…
…(We focused on) his hand placement on the ball and where his guide hand was. He has very long arms, so making his shot a little bit tighter and more compact, because when you have long arms more mistakes can be made. Shooting more one-handed and getting his left hand off the ball, specifically.
These technical shifts can mean all the difference for Ingram who doesn’t want to just be a really good player, but a great one. As Trudell points out in their sit down (read the entire thing), Ingram becoming a better shooter has the opportunity to open up his entire game and generate a bevy of opportunities all over the floor.
If defenders need to respect Ingram’s shooting ability and do so deeper out on the floor, there are so many benefits. Driving angles against hard closeouts open up. Passing opportunities materialize. His already deceptive first step becomes even more of a strength, which means more separation and more opportunities to use his long stride and length in creative ways to generate shot opportunities for himself and teammates.
Ultimately, then, I love reading about this type of work Ingram is doing. Not only do these types of technical adjustments have the opportunity to make him a more efficient and better player overall, but they grow his confidence in ways which make these technical improvements grow exponentially. Remember what Ingram looked like early in the year? Remember what he looked like at the end? Most of that was confidence and belief. If this summer’s work can add to that in ways to make another leap at the start of his second year?
Watch out.
Renato Afonso says
So true. Proper strength is key to a smooth jumpshot. This is good stuff from Ingram…
Tom Daniels says
Ingram came into the NBA with a high school body. He had no strength at all. You could see, when he had to take a dribble to get a pull up jumper, that he didn’t have the strength to get around an NBA defender, stop, gather himself, pull up and shoot. He also didn’t have the strength to shoot from deep. He didn’t have the strength to do 90% of what he needed to do.
Adding strength and working on technique could have a HUGE impact on his game.
I am interested to see the new Ingram and the new Randle. The Lakers new forwards for this year. A lot hinges on what they can become.
Out There says
Randle needs to impress so the Lakers can off load him for assets at the trade deadline. If the Lakers plan on adding to the Ingram/Ball core with All Star free agents (PG and Cousins) next summer then Randle and Clarkson’s contracts need to be off the books.
It would be a shame to let Randle go for nothing. However trading him for a future 1st, etc. softens the blow and adds usable future assets to a team that will be capped out for the foreseeable future starting next season.
I’m still hoping that the Cavs back court implodes (IT is injured and Rose is an injury waiting to happen). Lebron demands that management makes a deal to get him help. Coincidently, Randle and Clarkson begin the year playing well. The Cavs owner, not wanting to face the PR nightmare of an angry Lebron decides to get him help by using the unprotected Nets pick to get the Lakers young duo. The Lakers then use the pick and get Michael Porter or Marvin Bagley — both of whom project to be modern day NBA Fours (ball handling + passing + shooting + rebounding + defense).
The Lakers would be set with a staring line up of:
SF: Ingram age 21
PF: Bagely or Porter age 20
C: Cousins age 28
SG: George age 28
Ball: age 20
That is a team that by the 2019/2020 season is challenging the Warriors for the West and would be better than any team in the East. Note: I realize that the Celtics are ascending, however, their weakness is their bigs — the only front court player with any real talent is Horford and he is 31 with an injury history. Add this to the fact that Irving has averaged 16 missed games for the last 5 years and you see that the Celtics are in more of a precarious situation than most realize.
Concerned says
Out There — The only way the Cavs pull the trigger on dealing that Nets draft pick is if the Nets play well above expectations making the likelihood that the pick falls out of the top 3. Additionally, Lebron would have to indicate that he’s staying in Cleveland.
Current thinking is that Lebron is indeed leaving and that pick is a rebuilding chip for the future. If Lebron is intent on staying then that pick is open dealing. Lebron won’t play with a rookie he’d demand a veteran that can help him win now.
That’s the great fear for Lakers’ fans. If he joins the Lakers they immediately become a win now team and any asset not geared to that objective will be fair game to be included in a deal that nets a win now player. Lebron, the GM, has a tendency to make teams older, capped out and with little flexibility to improve. Case history: look at Cleveland Lebron Part 1, Miami and Cleveland Lebron Part 2.
I’d much prefer, like you suggested, pursuing PG and Cousins who would provide the Lakers with a longer window for competing than a 32 year old Lebron.
Alexander says
FB&G is usually the place where I go to escape imaginary fan theories. I myself had a post blocked after 2017 exit interviews, when I hypothesized that Phil Jackson could consider trading Porzingis, the Lakers had the assets to get him (Randle, Russell, 2017 1st), but it would probably get Phil fired first for even trying.
What Laker asset do you think can fetch a top-3 2018 pick to get Bagley or Porter, when neither PG13 nor Butler could fetch a top-5 lottery in 2017? Randle at the end of his rookie contract? Not even close. I would be ecstatic if JR is playing well enough to sweeten a Deng dump with only one more 1st added. If Randle becomes an all star good enough to fetch a top-3 pick of a loaded draft, that’s also the scenario where he *doesn’t* get traded, but retained for his $12m cap hold and then maxed.
And why do we need to get younger while going all out to get stars at their prime? Who do you think Lebron wants to play with? We’ll be lucky if we keep the youngins we have now after next summer.
One more thought on Bagley and Porter – Giles and Randle were once equally vaunted high schoolers at the start of their collegiate careers, such is the nature of forecasting talent.
Lastly, why worry about the Celtics? If we can get past GSW, the Celtics can worry about us.
Rick in Seattle says
Alex, I know you said you don’t like imaginary fan theories, but I’d like to comment on several of your interesting points.
I’m gonna concur with ‘Out There’, that the Lakers don’t need to trade Randle yet. But, before the February trade deadline, the Lakers FO will be in decision-mode, carefully assessing the roster, including Clarkson, Randle, kCP, Lopez, & perhaps Deng.
Their on-court play (particularly for Clarkson, Randle & Deng) will likely be factored into trade discussions. Their on-court improvement may be just the key to their tradeability and desirability by other teams.
Remember, if the front office sticks to its desire to go for two max free agents, a player (or two) is going to be moved. If Randle is playing well and can be attached to Deng to move him to another team, I could see that happening. If Deng is not tradable at the deadline, then I think Randle is probably safe until the end of the season. However, if the front office has its eye on going after Cousins (to replace Randle) then Randle’s departure is a forgone conclusion. But we probably wont know that until it happens.
Clarkson, however, would seem to be the easier asset to trade. If the team could get a low first (similar to the Lou Williams deal) or a high 2nd rd pick for 2018, then I think Clarkson and his remaining 3 yrs are gone. But, the one way Clarkson may remain, is IF the front office backs off on their 2-max-player goal and chooses to resign KCP and/or Lopez (at then brings in only PG).
As far as moving Deng, there is a possibility that a young team, a few years away from contention, could be interested enough in Randle & Clarkson to add Deng’s contract (much as Brooklyn did with Mozgov), but probably with a future 1st rd pick added.
In thinking about who might possibly be interested, here are four expiring contracts:
* Wouldn’t Chicago be better off trading Dwayne Wade than giving him a buyout?
* Wouldn’t Milwaukee be better off trading Greg Monroe than keeping him on the bench?
* Wouldn’t the Spurs be better off trading Tony Parker and getting something in return?
* Wouldn’t Cleveland be better off trading James & similarly getting something in return?
It’s hard to believe that these four teams (and possibly others) will all just sit on their expiring contracts and not try to get something in return.
While the Lakers don’t appear to have the available resources to acquire a top-3, 2018 pick, I agree with you that many of us (including the Lakers FO), would be quite pleased if Clarkson (or Randle) were playing well enough to facilitate a Deng trade.
. .
Alexander says
@Rick in Seattle: I completely concur. I was going for impact, not nuance. 😉 Nor do I think your thoughtful post is at odds with mine.
We don’t have to act before February and possibly June, it behooves us to see what we got after a crucial developmental summer for several of our rookie contract players. I agree that one of the four (Utah with Favors and JJ five?) might step up as a potential partner later in the year. Also, come Feb, it may be that The Pels or OKC may be accepting they won’t retain Boogie/PG and would deal to the Lakers (Lopez, KCP, JC, JR could be in play). The same would be true for the Cavs, but LBJ has already nixed that possibility.
Rick in Seattle says
Unlike Indiana (who refused the Lakers reasonable trade offer for Paul George), the Cavs’ owner seems a bit more pragmatic. If, by the trade deadline, it remains reasonably certain that LBJ intends to opt out, then I could see him trying to trade LBJ for reasonable assets.
My concern would be whether LBJ is the right fit for the Lakers, particularly with the style of unselfish ball movement that Walton currently employs?
That brings up a subject that I would like Darius or his staff to explore more in depth, which is how well certain free agent combinations would work with the existing core and coaching?
* Would a Cousins & LBJ combo complement one another, or does it dilute their skill sets?
* How well would Paul George and LBJ fit together playing side by side. (Remember that would probably push Ingram to SG, and how well would that work)?
* How well would a PG and Cousins combination work?.
* What if PG were added to a resigned KCP and Lopez?
* Finally, how well would a Westbrook-LBJ combination work alongside existing core and coaching?
While the coming season may help determine the KCP and Lopez questions, there are a lot of issues (some negative) relating to any FO attempting to put together a functional all-star team.
Having two 28-yr olds (George & Cousins) combined with the existing core, seems like a good combination for both the present as well as future success.
Or perhaps a threesome of George (28), KCP (24) and Lopez (29) may even be a better long term combination.
My personal opinion is not important, but I would like to see some assessment of these various combInations from someone who has a tactical coaching perspective.
Can someone please enlighten me as to how a Westbrook & LBJ combination would be a good long-term decision?
.
Rick in Seattle says
Correction, George and Cousins are both 27, not 28. I’m just not thinking clearly today.
Must be the excitement of the new season fast approaching.
Can’t wait to see how this team comes together on the court.
dxmanners says
Glad they’re working on this, and glad he’s receptive to some tweaking. Never a fan of guys who put the ball behind their head. Jamaal Wilkes was the only one who ever made it work, if it made you a better shooter everyone would do it. Coach Keefe will be busy, Randle has that funky spin, and Lonzo could obviously use some fixes, if only Dad will stay out of the way. I swear, all his kids shoot funny intentionally, better brand recognition. Ugh.