Felix

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Jun 27, 2011 -> 09:44 PM) I didnt consider that a personal attack or I'd have not posted it. I hope Felix knows I value his NBA mind. Honestly, I could not care less what you think of my opinion, especially when it's so incredibly obvious you don't even read my posts.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Jun 27, 2011 -> 09:29 PM) Actually, dude who likes to quote and bold things, my point was that JR Smith is incredibly ineffective at putting the ball in the hoop. As nowhere near the focal point of an offense... ever... JR Smith has taken about as many shots as points scored over his career. Scoring 12 points on 10 shots isn't some sort of amazing lights out shooter just creating like Magic Johnson, that's just an inefficient ball player doing what I said he does, inefficiently chucking. I'm honestly speechless right now, given some of the arguments about efficiency in this thread in the past. How can you be this blatantly hypocritical without realizing it? Am I missing something? You're just trolling me right now, right? There's a camera in here to grab my reaction and everything. SMILE! YOU'RE ON CANDID CAMERA!?!

QUOTE (Felix @ Jun 27, 2011 -> 08:43 PM) His point was that JR Smith isn't an effective three point shooter and only makes them because he shoots a lot, which simply isn't true at all. Yes, he shoots a lot of threes, but yes, he also converts on a high percentage of them. QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Jun 27, 2011 -> 09:02 PM) Nope. My point was comparing JR Smith and his role in an offense to anything Derrick Rose does is simply idiotic. QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Jun 27, 2011 -> 10:33 AM) For someone who "puts the ball in the hoop", JR Smith is incredibly ineffective of doing that at a high percentage. Sure, you are going to make a lot of threes when you shoot 4 per game like he did last year. That's down from the 6.2 (SIX POINT TWO) that he attempted per game the year prior. Are you being intentionally dense now?

QUOTE (farmteam @ Jun 27, 2011 -> 08:40 PM) But I think his point was that, as the focal point of his team's offense, he's going to be forced to take more shots? Whereas, Smith has the luxury of being able to get a better shot, since he isn't the one his team is counting on. His point was that JR Smith isn't an effective three point shooter and only makes them because he shoots a lot, which simply isn't true at all. Yes, he shoots a lot of threes, but yes, he also converts on a high percentage of them.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Jun 27, 2011 -> 08:13 PM) Derrick Rose does a f***load more than JR Smith. You bringing this up is just baiting and silly. Derrick Rose carried the team on his back like that injured guy (EDIT: Greg Jennings) from Madden that made for a funny YouTube clip. JR Smith was at best his team's 3rd, but more likely 4th option. Wait, Derrick Rose is better at basketball than JR Smith? Really? Thank you for clearing that up, I'm sure that s*** is crystal clear for everyone now. I just find it funny how when player A shoots 4.0 3P a game and makes 1.6 of them, and then player B shoots 4.8 3P a game and makes 1.6 of them, player A is "incredibly ineffective of doing that at a high percentage" and player B is the best player in the world and immune from ever being criticized because you watched the Bulls when they're bad. If you're going to give credence to efficiency and statistics, then be consistent about it. That's all I'm asking for. And before you go on detailing about how Rose is a far better player than JR Smith: Yes, yes he is. It's not even close. Rose is 20x the player that JR Smith, and has 1/10th of the off-court baggage that Smith brings. This is completely irrelevant to the point I'm making, but completely true.

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Jun 27, 2011 -> 10:33 AM) For someone who "puts the ball in the hoop", JR Smith is incredibly ineffective of doing that at a high percentage. Sure, you are going to make a lot of threes when you shoot 4 per game like he did last year. Haven't you made the argument in the past that Derrick Rose should continue to shoot the three? And let me just say that it is absolutely hilarious to read this thread's opinions on Kahn on this page. Carry on.

Scotch is delicious

QUOTE (knightni @ Jun 24, 2011 -> 10:12 PM) He was a very good shooter in Europe and had at least 5 good seasons shooting the ball with FG and 3 pt %. How many 7 foot tall guys could say that pre-Dirk? Muggsy Bogues played a lot of seasons and was 5'3". How many 5'3" players could say that before him? Does that make him a very good player? (Note: this is a very stupid argument, but really, yours wasn't anything to write home about either) Tony Kukoc was a below average NBA shooter. Who gives a f*** if he's tall or shot well in Europe? You didn't say "Kukoc was a good shooter given his height" or "Prior to Dirk, Kukoc was as good as they come for shooting big men" (which I don't know if I'd agree with either, but I'm not putting the time into looking that up now). You said that Kukoc was a very good outside shooter, and that simply isn't true. He was below average for most of his career. If you want to be generous, you could say he was average (at best) for his career, but even that isn't true looking at the numbers posted above.

QUOTE (Felix @ Jun 24, 2011 -> 09:12 PM) I'd love to believe you, but you're simply wrong. Even ignoring his first two years -- where he shot 27.1% and 31.3% from beyond the arc -- he was a 34.1% three-point shooter. In fact, why leave it at that? 1993-94 -- LEAGUE AVG: .333; KUKOC: .271 1994-95 -- LEAGUE AVG: .359; KUKOC: .313 1995-96 -- LEAGUE AVG: .367; KUKOC: .403 1996-97 -- LEAGUE AVG: .360; KUKOC: .331 1997-98 -- LEAGUE AVG: .346; KUKOC: .362 1998-99 -- LEAGUE AVG: .339; KUKOC: .285 1999-00 -- LEAGUE AVG: .353; KUKOC: .262 2000-01 -- LEAGUE AVG: .354; KUKOC: .446 2001-02 -- LEAGUE AVG: .354; KUKOC: .310 2002-03 -- LEAGUE AVG: .349; KUKOC: .361 2003-04 -- LEAGUE AVG: .347; KUKOC: .292 2004-05 -- LEAGUE AVG: .356; KUKOC: .362 2005-06 -- LEAGUE AVG: .358; KUKOC: .306 He was, by definition, an above-average three-point shooter in five seasons during his career, while below average in eight. And one of those seasons (2004-05), you could make a pretty good argument that he was really average instead of above-average. Of course, none of this even considers how much extra space he had during his Chicago years, given the amount of attention Jordan got on the offensive end. In his career, Kukoc averaged 10 shots a game for 11.6 points per game. That's not particularly good for a guy that's supposed to be a "very good" shooter.

I'd love to believe you, but you're simply wrong. Even ignoring his first two years -- where he shot 27.1% and 31.3% from beyond the arc -- he was a 34.1% three-point shooter.

QUOTE (knightni @ Jun 24, 2011 -> 08:20 PM) I asked if he was similar to Kukoc. No one answered. I was not trying to compare him to Kukoc; but, they do have similar body size and outside games. Kukoc had a very good outside jumper. QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 24, 2011 -> 08:47 PM) I had a feeling based on the first post that someone is going to come back with a modern stat showing his outside shot was actually ineffective. Is 3P% a modern stat? Kukoc was a career 33.5% three-point shooter.

I thoroughly enjoyed the pilot of Wilfred. Wasn't really sure what to expect, but it's pretty funny and odd, which is up my alley.

I have no idea what happened in the last 20+ pages, and I'm certainly not going to waste my time and read it, but the Wolves had a great draft. Didn't f*** up the Williams pick and were able to use their 20th pick to move into the second and add future picks, cash and Lee. I'll take that everyday of the week.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Jun 22, 2011 -> 10:27 PM) He did get him for nothing. Maybe that's his prized acquisition that he really wants to pan out. That's basically how I think he's looking at it. It's a shame though, because even if he flipped Beasley for a role player or two, it'd be a net gain for the team and still a very good move. Oh well.. Really, I think Beasley could be a fine scoring option coming off the bench with a second unit, but I don't think he'd ever accept that role.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Jun 22, 2011 -> 10:17 PM) I agree. Beasley's an inefficient chucker though. I'm all for ditching Beasley. Between an offensive game that isn't all that good, a defense that is abysmal and a flaky personality, I'd love to trade him and move on. Not sure that Kahn sees it the same way, however.

One way or another, I fully expect the pick to be traded. Probably won't get the type of return Kahn wants either, but I don't think he has the balls to take Williams with Beasley already on the roster.

QUOTE (chw42 @ Jun 22, 2011 -> 09:58 PM) Did Kahn say something about taking Enes Kanter with the #2 pick? Because DraftXpress' latest mock draft has Kanter going 2nd instead of Derrick Williams. http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/22748484/30198774 I'd be surprised if they didn't take Williams (assuming the pick isn't traded and Irving goes #1), but I've been wrong before.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news?slug=aw-w...t_rambis_062211 At least we don't have to worry about Rambis f***ing up Rubio now. EDIT: Probably at least -- http://twitter.com/#!/JerryZgoda/statu...700640307609600

There is an insane amount of wrong in the last two posts.

QUOTE (DBAHO @ Jun 21, 2011 -> 11:40 PM) Do you think any of the deals proposed have legs Felix? The one which to me makes the most sense for Minny is probably Marcin Gortat plus 13 for 2, although Gortat needs a good pick and roll PG to be effective. I'm sure plenty of them have legs in the sense that the Wolves are trying their hardest to get a difference maker for that #2 pick. Mostly, I think they're trying to move the #2 pick for a center and a lower pick that they can use on a shooting guard. I'm not convinced that's going to happen, though. I'd much rather just keep the pick, trade Beasley and move on. As to your comment about Gortat, Rubio is a good pick and roll PG...

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jun 21, 2011 -> 05:37 PM) I don't believe it has legs, feet, arms, elbows or even testicles. Zoom hit it pretty much on the nose a page or two ago.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jun 21, 2011 -> 10:24 AM) Some people around LA are talking about the Lakers and Minny trying to work out a trade involving Gasol. It has to be the most lopsided trade ever but I've heard some good NBA people on the radio commenting on it and they are indicating it has legs. Cowherd has been yapping about it this AM too. Gasol for Love and the #2 pick. That is ridiculous. It has no legs.

5-1 :smugdog:

QUOTE (whitesoxfan101 @ Jun 18, 2011 -> 10:55 PM) I don't think he's awful due to those numbers, I've always thought he was garbage. Those numbers just make me a bit more comfortable with that stance. David Kahn managing to take three point guards in the same first round (incredible on its own merits), have two of them be horse s***, and trade the one that's actually good is among the more incredible draft feats I've ever seen. Except David Kahn didn't take three point guards in the first round. He took two. The third was traded before the pick was made, but because of NBA rules, we had to technically make the pick. If the Wolves had kept the pick, they wouldn't have drafted Lawson. For all intensive purposes, Denver made the pick. And Kahn f***ed up the Flynn pick, but Rubio was the right pick to make. Day of the draft, Rubio was great value at the 5th spot. As for his skill, his shooting percentage is obviously the big concern, but he's still incredibly young and showed signs of improving it before they moved the three point line back last year. It'll probably be ugly for his first couple of seasons, and I'm certainly not drinking the koolaid on him yet, but to write him off already before he's even dribbled a basketball in the NBA is downright ridiculous.

QUOTE (whitesoxfan101 @ Jun 16, 2011 -> 10:57 AM) I'm on pins and needles over whether a guy that averaged 6.5/3.2/3.5 on 31 percent shooting in 20 Spanish League games will come over here. It would make sense for him to consider staying there though simply due to the labor situation. Even if he wasn't hot garbage. He's not staying in Europe. There is a 0% chance of that. And saying a guy sucks based on his Europe numbers when he can't even legally drink yet in this country is really f***ing stupid. I'm not saying he's going to be good, and I don't think he's worth the hype that he's gotten from Kahn over the years, but the "Rubio is awful, look at these numbers that don't translate to the NBA at all" camp really doesn't know what they're talking about either.