# Training camp for Kirk



## Bullhawk (Sep 8, 2003)

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune...ct02,1,4885272.story?coll=cs-basketball-print 



"A lot of guys go through the process of learning how to play in the league. They have to learn how to be aggressive and not be intimidated by the guys who you've watched on TV.

"Kirk has all those qualities already. He is aggressive defensively. He does push the ball up. He is an assist guy. He can penetrate. He's good at screen-and-roll. It's almost something you don't really want to talk about, but I think he has a chance to be really good."


Hinrich struggled with his shot during summer-league play but showed flashes of dominant defensive ability. After just two days of training camp, coaches already are talking about his fearlessness and aggressive play.

Jamal Crawford is clearly the starter. But that doesn't stop Hinrich from challenging him, something Cartwright embraces and Crawford has noticed.

"He plays hard," Crawford said. "He's smart and scrappy. And he's going to compete."




I am telling everybody that you will be shocked by how well Kirk plays and by how much the coaching staff will like having him out there. He plays the way a PG is supposed to play. They want an assist guy at the PG and Kirk is exactly that.


----------



## Kismet (Mar 1, 2003)

"It's almost something you don't really want to talk about, but I think he has a chance to be really good."

Now that's something worth taking note of. Cartwright's not one to market his players to the media unless the praise is well deserved. It remains to be seen whether he maintains this tone once the season begins. Most of us will recall how blunt BC was with his remarks about Curry's and Chandler's development over the past two seasons. BTW, the word I heard is that everyone at camp looked good. Crawford it seems, dominated everyone who attempted to guard him, including our first round pick. I guess there were a lot of sore ankles in the locker room when JC got through schooling each of his competitors.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

if you noticed during the summer league, the team as a whole played very good defense until they got tired at the end. How much of that was hinrich? Looks like we will soon know. 

I like the idea of Hinrich playing against Crawford during practice. That thought never crossed my mind until this article


----------



## Kismet (Mar 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>truebluefan</b>!
> if you noticed during the summer league, the team as a whole played very good defense until they got tired at the end. How much of that was hinrich? Looks like we will soon know.
> 
> I like the idea of Hinrich playing against Crawford during practice. That thought never crossed my mind until this article


From what I saw at the RMR, Cartwright's praise of Hinrich's defensive abilities is well deserved. While his shot may not have been falling, he performed well as a help defender and in one on one situations. He also did something Cartwright was unable to get either Crawford or Williams to do consistently last season: he fought *over* screens instead of sliding under them. Having said that, he's going to be embarrassed defensively a lot his first year going up against the best ballhandlers in the world. But once he gets a good read on each of them, I expect he'll more than hold his own against them his sophomore season.


----------



## Bullhawk (Sep 8, 2003)

> "It's almost something you don't really want to talk about, but I think he has a chance to be really good."






> I shouldn’t say this right now, but I will: I feel he’s going to be a very, very good basketball player. He has all the skills that are necessary to be a very good point guard in this league. He can penetrate and he’s an unselfish player—he’s always thinking pass first.”





Now see this is strange isn't it? Two different quotes from two different sources with BC saying exactly the same thing. Not a Crawford hater here but it certainly makes you wonder.


----------



## TRUTHHURTS (Mar 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>KirkHinrich</b>!
> 
> Now see this is strange isn't it? Two different quotes from two different sources with BC saying exactly the same thing. Not a Crawford hater here but it certainly makes you wonder.


Makes you wonder what ?Is it not possible for both Hinrich and Crawford to have good training camps ?Does one of them HAVE to be better than the other at all times ?

Do we even need to pull up old quotes of what BC said about jay last October ? Heaven forbid that Bc like Crawford and Hinrich


----------



## Bullhawk (Sep 8, 2003)

I was not referring to BC saying he likes Kirk as a player but that both times he said I shouldn't say this but I think Kirk is a very good player. Why shouldn't he say it? If he is good then just say it. No, see he is afraid of bruising ole JC's ego like he did at beginning of last year with the Jay situation. He realizes you have to pamper JC or he might get upset:verysad:


----------



## TRUTHHURTS (Mar 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>KirkHinrich</b>!
> I was not referring to BC saying he likes Kirk as a player but that both times he said I shouldn't say this but I think Kirk is a very good player. Why shouldn't he say it? If he is good then just say it. No, see he is afraid of bruising ole JC's ego like he did at beginning of last year with the Jay situation. He realizes you have to pamper JC or he might get upset:verysad:



Maybe he didnt want to say it because he knows last year he said similar things about Jay, IT WENT TO HIS HEAD ,he didnt play well,and it caused all kinds of problems with team chemistry and such.

Bc knows he shouldnt place that type of pressure on Kirk right away and his words speak more of he wont place supertstar type pressure on the rookie like Lebron but he does expect him to compete.

Truly I think this whole mess is really fan based as Crawfords confidence is soo high right now that it wouldnt matter to him who he faced in practice.Lat year he tried to base things on what he was told would happen .BIG MISTAKE . This year hes looking to make those things happen for himself.

Youre looking at a player who is discovering "Hey Im better than those guys "and the only competition he truly faces is within himself.


----------



## Dan Rosenbaum (Jun 3, 2002)

I was going through articles last year at about this time, and it is very difficult coming up with quotes about Jay Williams that are equally as positive from Cartwright as the ones about Hinrich. Here is the best that I could find from a KC Johnson Chicago Tribune article.

"Jay is going to be fine wherever he is," the coach said. "He's adaptable. He's a smart basketball player. 

"His greatest ability is his ability to push the ball and penetrate, and I feel that he'll have plenty of opportunities to do that and learn when the best opportunities are." 

Williams, whom Cartwright called "a quick learner," knows that he will hit some potholes along the way of his rookie season. But that won't affect his confidence or his approach.

These really strike me as quotes trying very hard to dampen the high expectations many had for Williams.

Last year Jay had lots of quotes about how this was no longer MJ's team and Sam Smith was very high on Jay with an article with quotes from Team USA players, but it is really hard to find gushing quotes from the coaching staff about Williams.

Almost everything we hear about Hinrich from public quotes from the coaching staff, reports from insiders, quotes from other players seems to be extremely positive, even in the face of some poor shooting in summer league play.

It is hard to compare William's and Hinrich's position, since the coaching staff may have not wanted to fan the flames with the high expectations about Williams last year. This year with Hinrich's relatively low public expecations, the coaching staff may feel more free to say good things about Hinrich.

I also get the sense that Hinrich is going to more be well-liked and more respected by his teammates than Williams was. 

I am very excited about what we are hearing about Hinrich _and Crawford_. It will be nice not being hurt by our point guard play as has usually been the case for quite awhile now.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>KirkHinrich</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You shouldn't have to wonder.

I've been saying it all along.

A really good PG in this league---has he ever said that about Crawford?


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>GB</b>!
> 
> 
> You shouldn't have to wonder.
> ...


And now that I think about it---the only other two players he's been as out going about have been Curry and Chandler.


----------



## Tom (Jul 15, 2002)

"He plays hard," Crawford said. "He's smart and scrappy. And he's going to compete."


I heard he was a good athlete too


----------



## Bullhawk (Sep 8, 2003)

Figures that the words smart and scrappy are associated with a white boy like Hinrich. He gets judged like that all the time. He is probably an even better athlete than Crawford and certainly a better PG.




> From Andy Katz on Kirk Hinrich: "He always seems to know what to do and where to be on the floor. Believe it or not, this aw-shucks player from Iowa with the cereal-bowl haircut and the low-socks look with baggy shorts is considered to be the second-best guard for the NBA next to Jason Williams, although Hinrich isn't expected to bolt after this season. No lie. One NBA scout courtside said Hinrich has a sensational feel for the game, is very cerebral, a long and great defender


----------



## TRUTHHURTS (Mar 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>KirkHinrich</b>!
> Figures that the words smart and scrappy are associated with a white boy like Hinrich. He gets judged like that all the time. He is probably an even better athlete than Crawford and certainly a better PG.


Sure ........  So much swagger before he has yet to even PLAY one game.


----------



## Bullhawk (Sep 8, 2003)

You guys are going to be really shocked at the play of Hinrich. I can promise you that. He is an outstanding athlete. If someone still has the pre draft workouts numbers please post them they will prove what a great athlete he is. As for who is better PG I will take Hinrich every day over a street baller like JC.


----------



## TRUTHHURTS (Mar 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>KirkHinrich</b>!
> You guys are going to be really shocked at the play of Hinrich. I can promise you that. He is an outstanding athlete. If someone still has the pre draft workouts numbers please post them they will prove what a great athlete he is. As for who is better PG I will take Hinrich every day over a street baller like JC.


If you still are using how fast a person runs or high he jumps as a indication of how good a basketball player they will be then Erob must be the best player in the world to you.

"Hinrich a better pg" and this is based on what ?His days at Kansas,because they sure cant be based in reality since he hasnt played a game in the nba yet .

This is the same type of nonsense posters were spewing last year this time and part of the reason so many others came down on Jay so rough when he didnt perform up to expectations .

Im starting my countdown to the first game thread when you say 

*Hes only a rookie give him time*  

The countdown is on :laugh: :no:


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TRUTHHURTS</b>!
> 
> 
> If you still are using how fats a peron runs or high he jumps as a indication of how good a basketball player they will be then Erob must be the best player in the world to you.
> ...



the best rookie according to the pre draft tests last year was an undrafted guy named j.r. bremer 

and this year it was troy bell

if we were going to base whom to draft off of a test chart bell would have been chosen instead of kirk


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>KirkHinrich</b>!
> You guys are going to be really shocked at the play of Hinrich. I can promise you that. He is an outstanding athlete. If someone still has the pre draft workouts numbers please post them they will prove what a great athlete he is. As for who is better PG I will take Hinrich every day over a street baller like JC.


Just based on your id & on some of the the things you have posted you strike me as a Hinrich fan that is following him to the Bulls rather than a Bulls fan that happens to also like Hinrich. If I am out of line I apologize in advance. But what I was curious to know is how much of JC have you really seen?

Incidentally, I do think Hinrich has the tools to be a very good pg in the NBA. Whether he will or not is anyones guess. I watched him during thr RMR and I thought he was very good at beating pressure, a solid defender and a scrapy help defender and he did a solid job distributing the ball. His shot simply was not dropping in any of the games except one. 

I still don't think that Hinrich will be able to give JC any real competetion this season. Maybe in a couple of years when Hinrich adjusts to the style of the NBA. I certainly don't think that he is the best pg inthe league behind Jason Kidd. Although, now that I think about it I heard the same thing said about Jay Will.


----------



## Bullhawk (Sep 8, 2003)

Ok to explain myself a little I am a Kirk fan who will be a bulls fan now. I have seen a lot of the Bulls prior to this season though and I am very high on Chandler and Curry but not very high on JC. I think he has talent just is not a good PG. He has the handles and passing ability but not the mentality. His defense is also very weak(potential is there to be better but now is time to show it) along with his shot selection. When I referenced Kirk and his pre draft workout stuff that was to prove his athleticism something he never has gotten enough credit for IMO. I in no way expected that to prove that he will be a great PG. I admit though Kirk has to prove his worth at this level. I feel however that he has all necessary tools and the mentality to be a great PG. Now whether or not that happens in Chicago remains to be seen. I for one hope he does. He can make Chandler and Curry even better than they already are.


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>GB</b>!
> 
> 
> And now that I think about it---the only other two players he's been as out going about have been Curry and Chandler.


Don't forget BC's comments from last season that Cory Blount may have to start because he's always in the right place at the right time...

Doesn't really apply because Cory was a vet, but if Hinrich doesn't surpass Blounts mark on the league there be grim years ahead.


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

Perhaps the expectations were higher for Jay than Hinrich.

Regardless of what Andy Katz says, Kirk's stock rose dramatically in the last month or so before the draft, going from the edge of the lottery to near the top 6 or so. 

I am not a Kirk hater. I guess for me, I am REALLY encouraged by seeing Crawford's coming of age and it's been SUCH a long time since we've had a decent player at that position.

I also put some weight into Bulls loyalty, something that Crawford has shown over the years, yet never been rewarded. Jay Williams drafted and handed the starting job? We all know that their play was fairly equal, and that starting Jay was an experiment of style that went about 30 games too long. Jamal whined a little bit then, but I don't know if I can blame him.

He persevered through TWO major injuries, practically no collegiate experience, and yet is widely viewed as a top prospect among PG's around the league. He bought a house in Chicago, made a family for himself, grew close to his young teammates, and has stated several times that he WANTS to stay in Chicago.

If Kirk is better, then loyalty and all that can go out the window... you play your best players. But I think Kirk is going to have to be REALLY good to really be better.

From the recent quotes by Bill, I think either a) political conspiracy (not likely since JC also showed some respect for Hinrich), or b) Kirk is showing up in practice with some real basketball talent that can make an impact today.

This would drastically change my view of Hinrich, who I really thought should have been a non-lottery 1st rounder. I wasn't a fan of the way he played at Kansas (actually I like him a lot as a shooting guard and a defender, but the team wasn't particularly more impressive when Aaron Miles wasn't in the game, and I think Kirk was most effective at the 2, or 1.5 spot  ). 

I didn't think his game would be NBA ready. The scouts have said different and now the coaches are saying different, so I guess I am waiting to be impressed.

I really thought that Kirk would be a lot of what Jamal is except with more fundamentals, more strength, less height, and less pure athleticism. He's really a scoring-mentality guard as well, and I am interested to see how he is an "assist-man" to a better degree than Jamal, if it's a matter of mentality or a matter of skill.

Anyway. I am surprised, to say the least, but we'll see what happens when the season starts. I really really hope this doesn't develop into a PG controversy, because frankly, that's like knocking 5 wins off of our potential win total right off the bat.


----------



## Bullhawk (Sep 8, 2003)

I can almost guarantee there will not be a PG controversy. Because Kirk is the kind of guy that will take whatever role he is given and do what is best for the team and not whine for a second. If that means being backup for 12-16 minutes a game then so be it. If JC gets injured or something and he is needed for a lot more minutes he will do that and return to bench role when time comes. The guy is a team player bottomline.


----------



## FJ_of _Rockaway (May 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kismet</b>!
> "It's almost something you don't really want to talk about, but I think he has a chance to be really good."
> 
> Now that's something worth taking note of. Cartwright's not one to market his players to the media unless the praise is well deserved.


Glad to hear that Kirk is not a F'n disgrace


----------



## Bullhawk (Sep 8, 2003)

> This would drastically change my view of Hinrich, who I really thought should have been a non-lottery 1st rounder



I almost fell out of my chair when I read that. You did not think Kirk should have been in lottery. Why in the heck not? That is sad that someone spent 4 years at a great school like Kansas, had the career he had there, and some still doubt him as a lottery pick? Check this out:


So if seniors are out and young kids with 40-inch verticals are in, how does a skinny white kid from Iowa sneak into the lottery?


Poise. Savvy. A killer jumper. Surprising athleticism. You guessed it. Hinrich is a point guard. Maybe the best one in this year's draft.

"I love him," one NBA personnel director said. "He's one of the smartest players in college basketball. The point guard position is the hardest position to learn in the pros. He has the capability to come right in and help a team."

Hinrich has the size (6-foot-3), athleticism, floor vision, ball handling, unselfishness and a dead-on jumper. While a few scouts think his move to the wing to make way for prized sophomore Aaron Miles may hurt his stock a bit, others feel it will help him.

"I think it's made him a little more complete," a scout said. "I think the big question about him early in his career was whether he can score. He showed that last year. Everyone believes he's going to be real good."


----------



## jimmy (Aug 20, 2002)

Jamal is a PG, not a SG. Just because he shoots a lot and scores a lot doesn't mean he isn't a playmaker or point guard. At his best at the end of last season, not only was he putting up huge offensive numbers but he was also dishing out 6-8 assists a game and his Ast/TO ratio was very good.

From watching him play, I'd say Jamal ran the offense very well.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>JAF311</b>!
> Jamal is a PG, not a SG. Just because he shoots a lot and scores a lot doesn't mean he isn't a playmaker or point guard. At his best at the end of last season, not only was he putting up huge offensive numbers but he was also dishing out 6-8 assists a game and his Ast/TO ratio was very good.
> 
> From watching him play, I'd say Jamal ran the offense very well.


Thank you! I agree 100%. That being said...I do believe that Jamal could eventually play the SG spot if needed to.


----------



## Kneepad (Jun 24, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>JAF311</b>!
> Jamal is a PG, not a SG. Just because he shoots a lot and scores a lot doesn't mean he isn't a playmaker or point guard. At his best at the end of last season, not only was he putting up huge offensive numbers but he was also dishing out 6-8 assists a game and his Ast/TO ratio was very good.


And at his worst, he was shooting 22% (as he did for the month of February) and averaging fewer than 3 apg (as he did for the months of November and December).

And, for the season, despite being 3rd on the team in FGA per minute played (behind only Rose and Fizer), he was 11th on the team in points per FGA (which is a very effective measure of scoring efficiency)-- ahead of only JWill, Mason, Hassell, and Bags.

So despite JC's impressive scoring totals the last two months of the season, JC was not an efficient scorer. Consider that for the season Jamal took more shots per minute played than did Eddy Curry, the league leader in FG%. I think it's this that the Bulls coaches want to change.


----------



## TRUTHHURTS (Mar 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Kneepad</b>!
> 
> And at his worst, he was shooting 22% (as he did for the month of February) and averaging fewer than 3 apg (as he did for the months of November and December).
> 
> ...


Actually he shot 33% for February and had stretch of 5 games during which he shot 4-39 but the 4 games before 42% and the 5 games after 50%.

As for the assists in November and Decemeber in Nov. He averaged 6pts 2.9 assists in 18 mpg .In December he averaged 7pts 2.6 assists in 17mpg thats not great but thats definitely not bad for someone playing _under 18mpg _ .


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

I also didn't peg Hinrich as a lottery pick. I hated how he played at kansas. I saw a guy who was at a top program for 4 years and yet never managed to get that program to where it should have been. The way they choked year in and year out tainted Hinrich as a loser in my view. And get dominated by Syracuses guards(who were freshmen and sophmores) in the biggest game of his life didn't earn him any extra points in my book.

Perhaps the most irritating thing I would see him do, was taking 3's from the NBA line, when he was wide open and could have been shooting the 3 from the college line...seemed like he was more out to impress the scouts at times than he was about winning the basketball games.

I personally distrust Cartwrights judgment of players...or at least am very skeptical. As I remember he was a role player on those bulls teams and he chafed at times under MJ's stardom. I got the feeling that BC did not like Jordan. And I wonder if his view of star players has been colored slightly by that. He doesn't want to let any of his young players develop into egomaniac superstars and would be content with a team of John Paxsons, Horace Grants, and Bill Cartwrights.

I mean we talk about how he mishandled Crawford last year, he badly mishandled JWill too. If JWill had gone to any other team he probably would have been a ROY candidate, but he ended up here with his parents demanding he get traded...in his ROOKIE YEAR!! And he was talking about how he felt like he could never talk to cartwright...I don't know if BC is the best player's coach in the world.

Really the games couldn't start any sooner this year. All this breaking down of obscure quotes about the PG situation is driving me nuts.


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> I also didn't peg Hinrich as a lottery pick. I hated how he played at kansas. I saw a guy who was at a top program for 4 years and yet never managed to get that program to where it should have been. The way they choked year in and year out tainted Hinrich as a loser in my view. And get dominated by Syracuses guards(who were freshmen and sophmores) in the biggest game of his life didn't earn him any extra points in my book.
> 
> Perhaps the most irritating thing I would see him do, was taking 3's from the NBA line, when he was wide open and could have been shooting the 3 from the college line...seemed like he was more out to impress the scouts at times than he was about winning the basketball games.
> ...


I'm seriously in line with every word of this post. Right on, yo.


----------



## Kneepad (Jun 24, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>TRUTHHURTS</b>!
> Actually he shot 33% for February


You're correct, my mistake. I looked at his 3P% for that month instead of his overall FG%.

Still, it's not like 33% is anything to be proud of. I think his numbers still clearly indicate that he needs to improve the efficiency of his scoring for the Bulls to get to the next level. I think all he needs to do is be more discerning in his shot selection.



> As for the assists in November and Decemeber in Nov. He averaged 6pts 2.9 assists in 18 mpg .In December he averaged 7pts 2.6 assists in 17mpg thats not great but thats definitely not bad for someone playing _under 18mpg _ .


Noted. Assists are not always a very accurate indicator of how well a PG is playing anyways.

But unless Crawford can dramatically improve his scoring efficiency, I don't think it changes the fact that the Bulls have a much greater chance for success with Eddy Curry shooting the ball more frequently than Jamal Crawford. Would you agree with this?


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Kneepad</b>!
> 
> You're correct, my mistake. I looked at his 3P% for that month instead of his overall FG%.
> 
> ...


I think there are two important things to think about concerning your post. First, Jamal is a young player and, as such, his game is changing and growing..evolving. It's not surprising that Jamal wouldn't play nearly as well being given only 18mpg or whatever. Heck, it takes probably 10 minutes per game to get into the flow. Besides, Jamal has improved since then as young players often do. I mean, we could look back at Jermaine O'neals stats with Portland and conclude that he will never amount to anything and obviously we would be wrong.

Second, about who shoots the ball, I don't think your gonna get any argument that Eddy should be taking the MAJORITY of the shots in the post. Still, he has to be complimented with some perimeter shooting! If we simply let Eddy take every shot from the low post he will get double and triple teamed...at that point Eddy should be kicking the ball out to guys like Crawford and Rose for the wide open looks. THEN it will be their turn to shine. Besides, Eddy can't take ALL of the shots. If the Bulls are gonna be effective Jamal is gonna have to probably take around 15 shots a game which is pretty close to what he averaged last year. Still, there is a big difference between a player scoring from the post and a player scoring from the perimeter and the Bulls will need both!


----------



## Zeos (Jun 4, 2003)

> I also didn't peg Hinrich as a lottery pick. I hated how he played at kansas. I saw a guy who was at a top program for 4 years and yet never managed to get that program to where it should have been. The way they choked year in and year out tainted Hinrich as a loser in my view. And get dominated by Syracuses guards(who were freshmen and sophmores) in the biggest game of his life didn't earn him any extra points in my book.


That's incredible! Carrying a team to the Final 4 one year, then to a championship game the next, doesn't qualify?

Consider, the team already with a shallow bench loses its starting center (and 3rd best player) and has to start a foul prone overweight guy who couldn't run a wind sprint in October. The team was written off by most people (including me) as destined for an early exit from the tournament (if they won enough games to get in).

Consider, Kirk was playing on a badly sprained ankle.

Consider the teams Kansas wipped soundly in the process of getting to the championship game. Dwane Wade didn't give much resistance to the Kansas onslaught; what does that tell you about him?

Consider, Syracuse played their best first half of basketball, hitting 3s from 30 feet, and ended the half up by a handful of points.

Everyone has their own opinions, but man, I just don't see it. I see a guy who put the team on his back and carried it to the championship game, and lost by 3 points to a bigger, stronger, faster, deeper, and more talented team.

As far as athleticism, I really think Kirk is _more_ athletic than Jamal. Yes, quicker, faster, stronger, higher leaper, the works. What makes Jamal unique is that he's 6-5 with a super 6-10 wingspan. When Jamal gives a crossover, raises for a fadeaway, what PG is going to stop that shot?

Which one will be a better PG? My money is on Jamal, but I still think Kirk's going to be darn good.


----------



## DaFuture (Nov 5, 2002)

kirk is more athletic than Jamal????


I wont berate you for your opinion afterall you are entitled to it but that is the funniest thing I have heard on this board.


----------



## Zeos (Jun 4, 2003)

> kirk is more athletic than Jamal????


Uh, yes, that's what I said. I'm not sure why that's so funny....


----------



## SirHinn (Feb 9, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> I also didn't peg Hinrich as a lottery pick. I hated how he played at kansas. I saw a guy who was at a top program for 4 years and yet never managed to get that program to where it should have been. The way they choked year in and year out tainted Hinrich as a loser in my view. And get dominated by Syracuses guards(who were freshmen and sophmores) in the biggest game of his life didn't earn him any extra points in my book.


Where should Kansas basketball be at?? I guess being one of the premiere college programs in the country isn't good enough. Kirk Hinrich, Nick Collison and Drew Gooden were the group that brought Kansas basketball back to where it was at before Pierce, Lafrentz, and Vaughn left.. You my friend sound like a person who actually never watched a game besides the highlights on ESPN and during the NCAA tournament. All Kirk Hinrich did was win at the college level and yet you still aren't happy with that. I guess making the Final Four 2 years in a row means nothing these days. 



> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> Perhaps the most irritating thing I would see him do, was taking 3's from the NBA line, when he was wide open and could have been shooting the 3 from the college line...seemed like he was more out to impress the scouts at times than he was about winning the basketball games.


So what do you expect him to do?? Sit at the college line and be guarded all of the time. The only way he was going to get open shots was if he was 25 feet out in the first place. C'mon man everyone knows that no team in college basketball would give Hinrich an open J from the college 3 point line. Another good question for ya is how man 3's did Kirk Hinrich make through out his college career? I bet you never said a thing when Lebron was busting 3's from NBA 3 point range in high school games. 

And if he was out there to impress scouts, why would he continue to play when he had serious ankle injuries. The man put his body on the line and his future on the line to help his team. Did you not see how bad he tweeked his ankle in the NCAA tournament?? Did you not see him continously try and play on a bum ankle?? The guy put his heart and soul into Kansas basketball and you say he played just for the scouts...... what a joke.


----------



## Showtyme (Jun 24, 2002)

I don't think he just played for the scouts... but he did take some long distance 3's when they weren't totally necessary.

I think he was a top-notch shooting guard in college. I just don't see why people insist that he was a point guard. He did handle the ball, and he had some sweet passes, but how come he attains that delegation of point guard when guys like Reece Gaines are considered "combo guards"? Gaines had a lot more sweet plays and played a lot more like a point, even when there was another point on the floor. Aaron Miles really did a fantastic job with the KU offense and the credit shouldn't be taken from him.

Hinrich has the ball-handling skills and the passing vision to be a good NBA PG, but I think he'd make a really good David Wesley kind of combo guard... athletic, strong, and quick with killer range.

David Wesley isn't a bad player, by the way. People knock him cuz he's short, but he takes time at PG as well, and he's a durable player. A guy that's 6-1 and shoots for a career 43.3% and 37.6% from distance while averaging 13 ppg (and much higher than that in the past five seasons), 1.48 spg, and 5.0 apg... that's the kind of play I'd expect from Hinrich, except with more athleticism. That's really good basketball play, and a true combo-guard type feel.

Someone please explain, other than the glowing scouting reports, why Hinrich should be MORE of a PG than a SG, especially when guys like Terry, Iverson, Wesley, and others are successful with even more diminutive stature.


----------



## Kismet (Mar 1, 2003)

Kirk Hinrich missed his sister's wedding because of double sessions.  

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune...sscamp,1,3425417.story?coll=cs-home-headlines

All I know is, this boy appears to be serious about his job.


----------



## Kneepad (Jun 24, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>DaFuture</b>!
> kirk is more athletic than Jamal????
> 
> I wont berate you for your opinion afterall you are entitled to it but that is the funniest thing I have heard on this board.


I don't think the idea that Hinrich is more athletic than Crawford is all that funny at all. I think at the very least they're pretty equal.


----------



## Pistolballer (May 9, 2003)

this reminds me off one particular member's sig(though i cannot recall who)

"Do I have to be anti-Kirk to be pro-Jamal?"


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

That's Electric Slim's sig.


----------



## hoops (Jan 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> Perhaps the most irritating thing I would see him do, was taking 3's from the NBA line, when he was wide open and could have been shooting the 3 from the college line...seemed like he was more out to impress the scouts at times than he was about winning the basketball games.


how many times have u seen him play? well, i've been following hinrich's career since his days at kansas. he certainly has range out to 25-28 feet. were u able to watch the kansas-missou game last march? his 28 foot buzzer-beater sealed the win for the visiting jayhawks. what about the ucla-kansas game or the texas-kansas game? were u able to watch it? want more? i can go on and on.


----------



## hoops (Jan 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>DaFuture</b>!
> kirk is more athletic than Jamal????
> 
> 
> I wont berate you for your opinion afterall you are entitled to it but that is the funniest thing I have heard on this board.


well, he may not be as quick as jc but he certainly has better straight line speed n he can push the ball down the court faster than jc.


----------

