# OT: Derrick Rose...



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

Since we been winning and preoccupied about the offseason of 2010, none of us have seemed to really lament about the injustice of the Bulls getting Derrick Rose. In the spirit of crying over spilled milk, how the hell did this team get a chance at drafting this guy? He's been absolutely balling and may very well be good enough in the next few years to be mentioned with the creame de la crop of players that we are in awe of during 2010. In fact, if we had him, I doubt 2010 would be nearly as big as it is for us. And to think, he's leaving this sort of impression with an otherwise bum coach (Vinny Del *****) whose shown no sort of offensive schemes or ingenuity besides setting picks and taking jumpers.


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

I would have jumped for joy if we would have got Rose. In our present situation he would have been able to contribute NOW, more than later. Now we are stuck with a draft pick who is injured, and it would have been a great time for him to be on the floor since we are so short handed, since we basically threw away the season for the next 2 years. It's disappointing that the system didn't work out for us in the draft this year, but I would have loved Rose. That's just the way the ball drops I guess.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

USSKittyHawk said:


> I would have jumped for joy if we would have got Rose. In our present situation he would have been able to contribute NOW, more than later. Now we are stuck with a draft pick who is injured, and it would have been a great time for him to be on the floor since we are so short handed, since we basically threw away the season for the next 2 years. It's disappointing that the system didn't work out for us in the draft this year, but I would have loved Rose. That's just the way the ball drops I guess.


You and I both would have jumped for joy if we drafted Rose. Guys like him come along every so often; a player capable of showing character, leadership and poise on the basketball court while playing on a top tier level. I liked the one game I saw Gallinari and felt that he was the best player available where we drafted but it would be no contest between Rose and him. If Stern really wanted to help the Knicks out, fixing the draft for us to get Rose would have been it; wouldn't be like we didn't deserve it. I do believe the system needs to be improved to avoid having teams tank the season but I would not know any other method that would be better. Hopefully the lottery won't be a concern for us in the near future.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

I know I'm incredibly biased being a Bulls fan, but I can certainly say that things were anything but rosy (no pun intended) last year, and the Bulls would be absolutely horrible without Derrick Rose. So, this isn't like the Spurs winning Tim Duncan back in 1997 where it's a great player going to a good team. The Bulls have just overachieved the past few years until the wheels finally came off. 

So the point being, there were alot of bad teams last year and Rose could've gone to any one of them. Bulls certainly could've used a break with some of the bad karma they encountered in the past 7-8 years: losing the #2 pick in a motorcycle accident (Jay Williams) who was supposed to be everything Rose is. Eddy Curry having that weird heart abnormality. Chandler regressing under Skiles.

I don't expect you to agree it's fair of course!


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

You guys get a top draft pick every year because you stink. I dont think you can really complain. You guys dont draft well, thats your own fault.


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

Walsh probably would have drafted Danilo first if he got that #1 pick over Rose. :rofl:


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

R-Star said:


> You guys get a top draft pick every year because you stink. I dont think you can really complain. You guys dont draft well, thats your own fault.


Dude, read a book about the history of recent lottery selections and then get back to me. You clearly have no idea of what we been doing in terms of drafting the past couple of years.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

yodurk said:


> I know I'm incredibly biased being a Bulls fan, but I can certainly say that things were anything but rosy (no pun intended) last year, and the Bulls would be absolutely horrible without Derrick Rose. So, this isn't like the Spurs winning Tim Duncan back in 1997 where it's a great player going to a good team. The Bulls have just overachieved the past few years until the wheels finally came off.
> 
> So the point being, there were alot of bad teams last year and Rose could've gone to any one of them. Bulls certainly could've used a break with some of the bad karma they encountered in the past 7-8 years: losing the #2 pick in a motorcycle accident (Jay Williams) who was supposed to be everything Rose is. Eddy Curry having that weird heart abnormality. Chandler regressing under Skiles.
> 
> I don't expect you to agree it's fair of course!


LOL, you guys may have been horrible but never Knick horrible. I always thought the Bulls were overrated but they didn't deserve Derrick Rose because of one bad season. Hell, they made it to the second round just the year before as one of the youngest teams in the league. You even made a great trade following that for Hughes and Gooden. You would have had an even better squad than last year if you never had Rose. The only problem with you guys is Vinny Del ***** who is a below mediocre coach. Can you name me an actual play that you guys run that doesn't involve someone coming off a pick and taking a jump shot? It gets me so pissed off to see this when you have such a talented roster and when we clearly could have utilized it better with D'Antoni. 

I also respect the fact you guys have had a tinge of bad luck but, again, it has not been Knick bad luck. How about Antonio McDyess. How about us losing the 2nd pick in the draft in a trade that was suppose to propel us into the playoffs? How about us STILL having Eddy Curry? How about having Channing Frye have what looked to be a career altering injury. How about two 23 win seasons within the course of 4 years? How about having Larry Brown as coach? How about MISSING DERRICK ROSE?!?!??!?! LOL, again, not the same.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*Come on, Kitty*

Your despise for Danilo and his drafting is WAY over the top. Knowing what you knew at the time, who should they have drafted? Beasley and Rose were obviously gone. They loved OJ but couldn't move up to get him. Westbook? Gone. Bayless? Yeah, he looks outstanding.....Kevin Love? Good player but I still prefer Gallinari's skill set for this style. Love isn't wowing anyone, anyway. So you hated the choice of D'Antoni....hated the pick of Walsh..hated the pick of Danilo. SOOOOOO.......D'Antoni looks like coach of the year, so far. Walsh has the lead as GM of the year for how he has cleared space and kept us exciting and competitive to date. One to go, Kitty. Why don't you grab your big spoon and start shovelling crow into your pie hole? After all, you said you would.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

TwinkieFoot said:


> LOL, again, not the same.


Yeah, Bulls were not "Knick bad" as you say.

All I'm saying is, the Bulls were heading downhill fast. I can't imagine where we'd be without Rose this year; probably 2, maybe 3 wins at best. And them winning the lotto is a much lesser crime (for lack of a better word) than the Blazers winning Greg Oden, or the Spurs winning Duncan back in '97. I say the Blazers because they already were racking up good talent fast, so it did seem a little unfair to see them get Oden. Credit goes to their management of course, but the goal of the NBA is to achieve equilibrium where the bad teams become good, and the good teams become "less good". If the good teams are landing higher draft picks, that throws off the whole balance.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

TwinkieFoot said:


> Dude, read a book about the history of recent lottery selections and then get back to me. You clearly have no idea of what we been doing in terms of drafting the past couple of years.


Drafting badly?


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

You had the chance of drafting Eric Gordon, who might have softened the blow of the Rose loss, but instead GM Walsh and his buddy D'Antoni decided to pick an unknown in Gallinari. Fantastic!

They also had a chance to draft Brook Lopez, but anyways this is all past tense now. Maybe 2010 will change all this.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

HB said:


> You had the chance of drafting Eric Gordon, who might have softened the blow of the Rose loss, but instead GM Walsh and his buddy D'Antoni decided to pick an unknown in Gallinari. Fantastic!
> 
> They also had a chance to draft Brook Lopez, but anyways this is all past tense now. Maybe 2010 will change all this.


Eric Gordon is barely starting to prove he was worth a first round selection and Brook Lopez has shown to be nothing better than a role player.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

:laugh: @ Brook showing to be nothing than a role player, when pretty much every pundit has raved about the pick. He is averaging 14, 9rpg, 2.3bpg. Are those role player stats?


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

HB said:


> :laugh: @ Brook showing to be nothing than a role player, when pretty much every pundit has raved about the pick. He is averaging 14, 9rpg, 2.3bpg. Are those role player stats?


Uh,he's not taking over any games is he?


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

TwinkieFoot said:


> Uh,he's not taking over any games is he?


As compared to most rookies who come into the league and start taking games over?


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

TwinkieFoot said:


> Uh,he's not taking over any games is he?


As R-star said how many rookies come in right off the bat and start taking over games.

Also when you have a Vince Carter and Devin Harris on the team, why does he need to take over games?

Besides this game is an example of when he did in fact take over.


----------



## alphaorange (Jul 2, 2006)

*Lopez is a great pick...*

However, nobody had him remotely this high. Hindsight is a beautiful thing. Danilo's injury aside. There are only 2 rookies really tearing it up...Rose and OJ. Most of the other guys drafted haven't proven a thing. The key is the 2nd half of the season after teams adjust to the rooks. Frye was awesome as a 1st half player, but faded the last 3 months. Some of these guys will as well.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Is that your justification for sticking with Danillo? Its a pretty weak one. Yes, not all of the rookies have been tearing it up like Mayo and Rose, but to say guys like Lopez, Gordon, Beasley, Jason Thompson, DJ Augustin and co. haven't shown flashes and had solid impressions on their teams is not giving these rooks due respect.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

HB said:


> :laugh: @ Brook showing to be nothing than a role player, when pretty much every pundit has raved about the pick. He is averaging 14, 9rpg, 2.3bpg. Are those role player stats?


Also, I took a little trip to NBA.com and noticed your stats are way off. The guy is averaging 9.5ppg, 7.1rpg and 1.7bpg. It's actually better than what I thought he was doing but still not close to what you had stated earlier. The guy is a good player but it's not like it's talent that could not be found elsewhere in the league that is readily available.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

I meant to add *as a starter*. You can go to Yahoo sports to clarify that. He has started 9 games for the Nets now. Since Boone went down with injury, he has really been a low post presence for the Nets.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

R-Star said:


> As compared to most rookies who come into the league and start taking games over?


The rookies that will really make he difference in this league show flashes at some point of above average play. Lopez has shown none of that thus far and most good statistical nights have come off of above average minutes from a player of his caliber. I think he'll make a positive impact on the game in the future but as far as being anything more than a Tony Battie/Rasho Nesterovic/Jamal Magloire I'm not sure. Why else would a big man go as low as 10th in a draft that was top heavy in the first 3 picks?


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

TwinkieFoot said:


> The rookies that will really make he difference in this league show flashes at some point of above average play. Lopez has shown none of that thus far and most good statistical nights have come off of above average minutes from a player of his caliber. I think he'll make a positive impact on the game in the future but as far as being anything more than a Tony Battie/Rasho Nesterovic, I'm not sure. Why else would a big man go as low as 10th in a draft that was top heavy in the first 3 picks?


So you've seen most of the Nets games this year then I take it?


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

> The rookies that will really make he difference in this league show flashes at some point of above average play. Lopez has shown none of that thus far and most good statistical nights have come off of above average minutes from a player of his caliber. I think he'll make a positive impact on the game in the future but as far as being anything more than a Tony Battie/Rasho Nesterovic, I'm not sure. Why else would a big man go as low as 10th in a draft that was top heavy in the first 3 picks?


Come on man, you aren't even watching Nets games, to be making such ridiculous assertions. I mean you just admitted in the previous post that his numbers surprised you. Browse through rookie rankings and see what they are saying about him. You act like its his fault that he fell to 10. Blame the stupid GMs that picked guys like Gallinari and Westbrook above him. The guy is a legit center, I mean if he pans out to be a Kaman type player, thats a very good draft for the Nets.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

HB said:


> I meant to add *as a starter*. You can go to Yahoo sports to clarify that. He has started 9 games for the Nets now. Since Boone went down with injury, he has really been a low post presence for the Nets.


The thing is that he hasn't played every game as a starter and you have to look at the whole picture. The guy was coming off the bench for a reason and it was to start a guy that hasn't shown himself to be very much more than a role player either (Josh Boone). Again, Lopez has Jamal Magloire written all over him as far as career's go; I personally think Robin is going to have a better career. I also hardly call 9ppg or 14ppg (whatever you like to use) as being a "low post presence" when he's playing close to 40mpg recently. Your bound to get a few baskets by accident by just standing around especially when you get 3 offensive rebounds per game as a 7ft.


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

Adding salt to the wound


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

R-Star said:


> So you've seen most of the Nets games this year then I take it?


I've seen almost every game in the league besides the ones on NBA TV and games with the Wizards (since they are blacked out on my Broadband); so yeah, I caught Net games.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Points by accident? You make it very obvious that you havent seen much of him as a player.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Almost every game in the league? I find that very, very hard to believe.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

HB said:


> Come on man, you aren't even watching Nets games, to be making such ridiculous assertions. I mean you just admitted in the previous post that his numbers surprised you. Browse through rookie rankings and see what they are saying about him. You act like its his fault that he fell to 10. Blame the stupid GMs that picked guys like Gallinari and Westbrook above him. The guy is a legit center, I mean if he pans out to be a Kaman type player, thats a very good draft for the Nets.


His numbers surprised me because I have been catching your games. When he's in there, he's not exactly lighting it up and appears to be particularly quite on the floor. I also don't need help analysing the game from guys who appear not to know what they are talking about most of the time; if it's not actual facts they are reporting I geniunely tune themselves out. Wasn't Darko Milicic suppose to be a superstar by now? I also should discontinue reading whatever you have to say by referring to "stupid GMs" and have the audacity to imply Donnie Walsh is one of them. Apparently, you should be the one adding more NBA games to your daily diet and listening to commentators. Last time I checked, he's actually one of the best and has us in contention despite not playing our best player all season and trading the remaing top two. 

P.S., I've been much more impressed by Westbrook than Lopez and I feel your we will never be able to mention Lopez in the same caliber of player that Kaman is. Time will tell who is right but thats how I feel.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

R-Star said:


> Almost every game in the league? I find that very, very hard to believe.


Then don't. I have a pile of work and plenty of lost sleep to prove it. You do realize that they archive these games, right?


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

TwinkieFoot said:


> Then don't. I have a pile of work and plenty of lost sleep to prove it. You do realize that they archive these games, right?


I realize that to watch almost every game in one whole season is next to impossible time wise. 

So no, I dont believe you, and you arent the first know it all to spring the "I watch almost every game" card.

Not as though it matters. You cant prove you do, I cant prove you dont, so I doesnt matter.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

R-Star said:


> I realize that to watch almost every game in one whole season is next to impossible time wise.
> 
> So no, I dont believe you, and you arent the first know it all to spring the "I watch almost every game" card.
> 
> Not as though it matters. You cant prove you do, I cant prove you dont, so I doesnt matter.


Most NBA games come on between 8pm and end at 1am and league pass allows you to watch 3 games at one time pretty easily. That's a 5 hour time frame during the weekdays where your not doing anything mandatory. For the games you do miss, you can watch them on archive pretty easily. If I didn't make it clear earlier though, you don't have to believe me. As far as Lopez goes, I feel you guys suffer from fan bias and clearly are overrating him; it's much more likely he becomes Jamal Magloire than Chris Kaman given what he's shown on the floor. Time will only tell who is right so you can reserve your opinions to yourself and me my own.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

TwinkieFoot said:


> If I didn't make it clear earlier, you don't have to believe me. As far as Lopez goes, I feel you guys suffer from fan bias and clearly are overrating him; it's much more likely he becomes Jamal Magloire than Chris Kaman given what he's shown on the floor. Time will only tell who is right so you can reserve your opinions to yourself and me my own.


Dont post to me like a smug *******.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

R-Star said:


> Dont post to me like a smug *******.


Just thought you had a difficult time reading what I had to say. I thought repeating myself might have helped.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

The Krakken said:


> Adding salt to the wound


LOL. "He just broke his ankles. He got CROSSED over!" Owww!!!I hurt my ankles. Is there a medic in the house? I've fallen down and can't get up" Funniest **** ever and yes it makes me even more pissed we don't have Rose.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

TwinkieFoot said:


> The thing is that he hasn't played every game as a starter and you have to look at the whole picture. The guy was coming off the bench for a reason and it was to start a guy that hasn't shown himself to be very much more than a role player either (Josh Boone). Again, Lopez has Jamal Magloire written all over him as far as career's go; I personally think Robin is going to have a better career. I also hardly call 9ppg or 14ppg (whatever you like to use) as being a "low post presence" when he's playing close to 40mpg recently. Your bound to get a few baskets by accident by just standing around especially when you get 3 offensive rebounds per game as a 7ft.


He was coming off the bench because Frank doesn't just reward rookies from the get go without them proving themselves. Boone's a 3 year vet. Once Boone went down, Lopez has exceeded all expectations. Boone will not be starting again, Lopez has taken over the spot. You are entitled to your opinion, but there's nothing about Magloire and Brook's game that are similar. Its funny how you are trying to educate me on a team that I actually root for, whilst you by your own admittance haven't really been following the team that much. I told you, as a starter he is averaging 14ppg, 9rpg, 2.3bpg. Should I add the fact that Brook is just 20, and this is his rookie year. Whats not to like?


----------



## The Krakken (Jul 17, 2002)

TwinkieFoot said:


> LOL. "He just broke his ankles. He got CROSSED over!" Owww!!!I hurt my ankles. Is there a medic in the house? I've fallen down and can't get up" Funniest **** ever *and yes it makes me even more pissed we don't have Rose.*


Mission accomnplished.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

HB said:


> He was coming off the bench because Frank doesn't just reward rookies from the get go without them proving themselves. Boone's a 3 year vet. Once Boone went down, Lopez has exceeded all expectations. Boone will not be starting again, Lopez has taken over the spot. *You are entitled to your opinion, but there's nothing about Magloire and Brook's game that are similar. Its funny how you are trying to educate me on a team that I actually root for, whilst you by your own admittance haven't really been following the team that much.* I told you, as a starter he is averaging 14ppg, 9rpg, 2.3bpg. Should I add the fact that Brook is just 20, and this is his rookie year. Whats not to like?


I know how old Brook is and I know what I've seen from the guy. I've been watching their game against the Suns today and still am not optimistic about his ceiling. *For the sake of truth, where did I say that I haven't really been following the team that much because I don't ever call saying that.* Time will tell how good he becomes though but I doubt he'll be much better than he already is, 20 years old or not. I recall Antonio Wright, Marcus Williams and Sean Williams coming off the bench as well for Frank despite solid play at times....and where are they now?


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

You said when you saw his stats it exceeded your expectations, I would think someone who follows the team would know how well he was doing.

As for Wright, Marcus and Sean, Frank wasn't keen on two of them. The third (Wright) that is, though I am not a fan of the pick, is actually getting decent minutes in Dallas


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

HB said:


> *You said when you saw his stats it exceeded your expectations, I would think someone who follows the team would know how well he was doing.*
> As for Wright, Marcus and Sean, Frank wasn't keen on two of them. The third (Wright) that is, though I am not a fan of the pick, is actually getting decent minutes in Dallas


You know why it exceeded my expectation? Because I was looking at a body of work that spanned 15 games. You on the other hand was looking at roughly half of those games (8). It speaks much more poorly of you for ditching half of the games he's played in to suit your own agenda. Maybe I should look at every game David Lee has played 40 minutes and use that as his real stat per game outputs. 

Frank was so disenchanted with Sean Williams, he started him 29 times last season. I also recall Wright getting decent minutes with the team, although limited. As much as he may have not liked them as players, they still got minutes on the team because they fulfilled a need just like Lopez. You don't see either M. Williams or Wright tearing it up on their new teams and neither will Sean Williams. I think Lopez is in very much the same boat.


----------



## Blue (Jun 21, 2007)

HB said:


> Come on man, you aren't even watching Nets games, to be making such ridiculous assertions. I mean you just admitted in the previous post that his numbers surprised you. Browse through rookie rankings and see what they are saying about him. You act like its his fault that he fell to 10. *Blame the stupid GMs that picked guys like Gallinari and Westbrook above him.* The guy is a legit center, I mean if he pans out to be a Kaman type player, thats a very good draft for the Nets.


Lol @ you grouping Westbrook and Gallinari together...... Westbrook is actually ****ing good man & not too far behind the Knicks starting PG who has been in the L for 4 years and running + 4 years of college, as opposed to just two years of college. I expect good things from him, dont understand the hate on here....


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

TwinkieFoot said:


> You know why it exceeded my expectation? Because I was looking at a body of work that spanned 15 games. You on the other hand was looking at roughly half of those games (8). It speaks much more poorly of you for ditching half of the games he's played in to suit your own agenda. Maybe I should look at every game David Lee has played 40 minutes and use that as his real stat per game outputs.
> 
> Frank was so disenchanted with Sean Williams, he started him 29 times last season. I also recall Wright getting decent minutes with the team, although limited. As much as he may have not liked them as players, they still got minutes on the team because they fulfilled a need just like Lopez. You don't see either M. Williams or Wright tearing it up on their new teams and neither will Sean Williams. I think Lopez is in very much the same boat.


Notice Sean Williams has basically dropped off the radar once Kidd got traded. He is the prime example of a guy whose game was tailor made for Kidd. He's just another spectacular athlete without actual basketball skills e.g. Tyrus Thomas. The difference between him and Lopez is numerous. Lopez isn't a tweener, he actually has a position on the court. Lopez is a legit 7 foot, 260lb Center, Sean is barely 6'8 and skinny as heck. Lopez actually has basketball skills, drop hooks, jab steps, a mid range J etc. Sean makes his living off put backs and dunks. I am no Miss Cleo, who knows what will happen down the line, but as of now, Lopez looks legit.



> Lol @ you grouping Westbrook and Gallinari together...... Westbrook is actually ****ing good man & not too far behind the Knicks starting PG who has been in the L for 4 years and running + 4 years of college, as opposed to just two years of college. I expect good things from him, dont understand the hate on here....


I didnt like how high he was picked. He's had some good games , but it doesnt warrant him being picked so high.


----------



## Blue (Jun 21, 2007)

HB said:


> I didnt like how high he was picked. He's had some good games , but it doesnt warrant him being picked so high.


Seattle needed a PG and he was the best defensive PG on the board. 13ppg/4ast/3rpg is not bad for a rookie PG at all. Actually, it's pretty damn good. I definitely wouldn't call a GM 'stupid' for picking him up where they did.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

Blue Magic said:


> Lol @ you grouping Westbrook and Gallinari together...... Westbrook is actually ****ing good man & not too far behind the Knicks starting PG who has been in the L for 4 years and running + 4 years of college, as opposed to just two years of college. I expect good things from him, dont understand the hate on here....


And Danilo isn't "****ing good." Don't you think it's a little unfair to criticize our pick because he's injuried? That's like picking a fight with Greg Oden (who is sucking terrifically on his own right now) last year for being injuried despite obviously having primer talent (and I'm not say Danilo will be as good as what Oden was projected to be when drafted).


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

TwinkieFoot said:


> Just thought you had a difficult time reading what I had to say. I thought repeating myself might have helped.


No, what you thought is that you could post like a smug ******* and not have anyone call you on it. Mission failed. If theres one thing I hate its people who get on their high horse and talk _facts_, and then when the majority doesnt agree, talk like a smug piece of **** and do the usual "I've seen every NBA game ever made". Sorry jerk, but its obvious you have no idea what you're talking about.

Play nice R-Star
-Kitty


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

TwinkieFoot said:


> I know how old Brook is and I know what I've seen from the guy. I've been watching their game against the Suns today and still am not optimistic about his ceiling. *For the sake of truth, where did I say that I haven't really been following the team that much because I don't ever call saying that.* Time will tell how good he becomes though but I doubt he'll be much better than he already is, 20 years old or not. I recall Antonio Wright, Marcus Williams and Sean Williams coming off the bench as well for Frank despite solid play at times....and where are they now?


This brings up the Knicks rookies, like I had already done and then you threw a fit and told me to get a book. Dont bring up both of the Williams and Wright while your team has been terrible at drafting.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

HB said:


> Notice Sean Williams has basically dropped off the radar once Kidd got traded. He is the prime example of a guy whose game was tailor made for Kidd. He's just another spectacular athlete without actual basketball skills e.g. Tyrus Thomas. The difference between him and Lopez is numerous. Lopez isn't a tweener, he actually has a position on the court. Lopez is a legit 7 foot, 260lb Center, *Sean is barely 6'8 *and skinny as heck. Lopez actually has basketball skills, drop hooks, jab steps, a mid range J etc. Sean makes his living off put backs and dunks. I am no Miss Cleo, who knows what will happen down the line, but as of now, Lopez looks legit.
> 
> 
> 
> I didnt like how high he was picked. He's had some good games , but it doesnt warrant him being picked so high.


Williams looks every bit the 6'10 figure he's listed at on NBA.com. 

I certainly never doubted the position Lopez played or his physique nor ever recalled (because I didn't)doubting that he has the moves you mentioned in his offensive repetoire. But do you know who else has all those moves? Rasho Nesterovic, who happens to be very much a role player and an after thought in this league. In fact, most NBA players are highly skilled but it really comes down to utilizing those moves on a full-time basis which Lopez has not shown to be able to do and likely will not in the future. Your no miss Cleo, so clearly your not factoring the future or potential into Lopez's value. Do you mean to tell me that as of right now you think he's more than a role player?


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

HB said:


> You said when you saw his stats it exceeded your expectations, I would think someone who follows the team would know how well he was doing.
> 
> As for Wright, Marcus and Sean, Frank wasn't keen on two of them. The third (Wright) that is, though I am not a fan of the pick, is actually getting decent minutes in Dallas


Well its hard for him HB. Hes watching pretty much every game over every team (other than the Wiz). He cant remember the stats of every player, now can he?


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

R-Star said:


> No, what you thought is that you could post like a smug ******* and not have anyone call you on it. Mission failed. If theres one thing I hate its people who get on their high horse and talk _facts_, and then when the majority doesnt agree, talk like a smug piece of **** and do the usual "I've seen every NBA game ever made". Sorry jerk, but its obvious you have no idea what you're talking about.


I guess your a clever one; can't fool you. You can call me out...not sure what more that is going to do for you other than feel like an armchair gangster. If that floats your boat, be my guest but behave the way you want to be treated and maybe you might get the respect/courtesy on my part to do the same. When you come at a guy with opinions, attempt to disguise them as fact and then attempt to insult them by asking if they know what they are talking about, you get the response you get.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

R-Star said:


> Well its hard for him HB. Hes watching pretty much every game over every team (other than the Wiz). He cant remember the stats of every player, now can he?


I'm sorry but I have to finish watching the Laker game....do you mind hoping off of my nuts for a second, so I could do so?


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

TwinkieFoot said:


> I'm sorry but I have to finish watching the Laker game....do you mind hoping off of my nuts for a second, so I could do so?


Maybe you need to understand what being on someones nuts means before using it in a sentance. It may help you not look like a fool in the future.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

R-Star said:


> This brings up the Knicks rookies, like I had already done and then you threw a fit and told me to get a book. Dont bring up both of the Williams and Wright while your team has been terrible at drafting.


Again, do you know what your talking about? If you haven't noticed, Nate Robinson, David Lee and Wilson Chandler have all played an integral role for us this season. In season's past, so have Channing Frye and Trevor Ariza who actually will have a job in the NBA for the foreseeable future. The jury is still out on Balkman and Collins but other than those two, our players (especially for where they were drafted) have shown to be legit NBA players. How about your own?


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

Must have been a busy day with you watching the:
Portland Detroit game, 
Chicago Philly game,
Houston Denver game and
Jersey Pheonix game already.

Busy Sunday for ol' Twinkie Foot.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

TwinkieFoot said:


> Again, do you know what your talking about? If you haven't noticed, Nate Robinson, David Lee and Wilson Chandler have all played an integral role for us this season. In season's past, so have Channing Frye and Trevor Ariza who actually will have a job in the NBA for the foreseeable future. The jury is still out on Balkman and Collins but other than those two, our players (especially for where they were drafted) have shown to be legit NBA players. How about your own?


My own? I cheer for the Pacers, not sure why you think Im a Nets fan. And also, no, your draft pics arent impressive from where you've picked them like you're making them out to be. You guys are consistant lotto drafters, and wheres your franchise player? You draft in the top 10 pretty much every year, and have accomplished what other than role players? You're right, great job drafting solid role players.


----------



## ATLien (Jun 18, 2002)

Ohhh cat fight

Wait a sec.. R-Star is a Pacers fan?

:dead:

Letdown


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

ATLien said:


> Ohhh cat fight
> 
> Wait a sec.. R-Star is a Pacers fan?
> 
> ...


My life has been over since Reggie Miller retired...


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

R-Star said:


> My own? I cheer for the Pacers, not sure why you think Im a Nets fan. And also, no, your draft pics arent impressive from where you've picked them like you're making them out to be. You guys are consistant lotto drafters, and wheres your franchise player? You draft in the top 10 pretty much every year, and have accomplished what other than role players? You're right, great job drafting solid role players.


We had one lottery pick in 4 years (before this past draft)...Channing Frye in 2005 with the 8th pick. Nate Robinson went 21st and David Lee went 30th in that same draft. In 2006, we drafted Ronaldo Balkman with the 20th pick and Mardy Collins with the 29th pick. In 2007, we drafted Wilson Chandler with the 21st pick. Allow me to repeat for emphasis, since you seem to have a hard time following things the first time around....*WE HAD ONE LOTTERY PICK BEFORE THIS DRAFT.* Again, go read a book about the NBA and then get back to me.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

R-Star said:


> Must have been a busy day with you watching the:
> Portland Detroit game,
> Chicago Philly game,
> Houston Denver game and
> ...


I guess you really can't seem to shake yourself free from off my nuts. And I didn't happen to catch the Portland-Detriot game or Chicago-Philly game (blackout) today, lol. I imagine that must make you giddy.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

TwinkieFoot said:


> I guess you really can't seem to shake yourself free from off my nuts. And I didn't happen to catch the Portland-Detriot game or Chicago-Philly game (blackout) today, lol. I imagine that must make you giddy.


Again, I guess you dont understand the term "on my nuts". Im sorry you didnt catch 10 hours of basketball games tonight. I shudder to think what someone like you did to fill the void.


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

R-Star said:


> My own? I cheer for the Pacers, not sure why you think Im a Nets fan. *And also, no, your draft pics arent impressive from where you've picked them like you're making them out to be*. You guys are consistant lotto drafters, and wheres your franchise player? You draft in the top 10 pretty much every year, and have accomplished what other than role players? You're right, great job drafting solid role players.


This is coming from the same guy who didn't even know where we've been drafting the past couple of years. Here's a little homework for you, come back and tell me which players that went after the players we drafted, are appreciably better. I'll give you a head start....Andrew Bynum and Danny Granger (by your very own Pacers) ahead of Channing Frye at no.8 in the 2005 NBA draft. I doubt you could name anyone else of consequence after that, in any draft.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

TwinkieFoot said:


> We had one lottery pick in 4 years (before this past draft)...Channing Frye in 2005 with the 8th pick. Nate Robinson went 21st and David Lee went 30th in that same draft. In 2006, we drafted Ronaldo Balkman with the 20th pick and Mardy Collins with the 29th pick. In 2007, we drafted Wilson Chandler with the 21st pick. Allow me to repeat for emphasis, since you seem to have a hard time following things the first time around....*WE HAD ONE LOTTERY PICK BEFORE THIS DRAFT.* Again, go read a book about the NBA and then get back to me.


Im confused with you saying "before this years draft" over and over again. Why does this year not count? And if you guys want to trade your lotto picks for over paid bums, how is that my fault?


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

TwinkieFoot said:


> This is coming from the same guy who didn't even know where we've been drafting the past couple of years. Here's a little homework for you, come back and tell me which players that went after the players we drafted, are appreciably better. I'll give you a head start....Andrew Bynum and Danny Granger (by your very own Pacers) ahead of Channing Frye at no.8 in the 2005 NBA draft. I doubt you could name anyone else of consequence after that, in any draft.


You do understand that the internet in itself makes that not only a moot point, but a very dumb statement on your part correct?


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

R-Star said:


> You do understand that the internet in itself makes that not only a moot point, but a very dumb statement on your part correct?


Stop avoiding the question at hand and tell me which players in there respective drafts are better than who we drafted *AHEAD* of them. I don't think that is a difficult question to answer since you appear to be so conscientious about the draft. I already gave you Danny Granger (18) and Andrew Bynum (10)ahead of Channing Frye (8).


----------



## TwinkieFoot (Jul 8, 2006)

R-Star said:


> *Im confused with you saying "before this years draft" over and over again. Why does this year not count?* And if you guys want to trade your lotto picks for over paid bums, how is that my fault?


....It's because you mentioned on several occassions that the Knicks have been drafting lottery picks for the past several years evident from your statements: "you guys are consistant lotto drafters" and "you draft in the top 10 pretty much every year, and have accomplished what other than role players?" You could count this years draft if you'd like and still be completely off base. 

In case you didn't notice, I think this is the part where you mysteriously disappear and don't come back to this board for a few weeks to save face...


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

TwinkieFoot said:


> Stop avoiding the question at hand and tell me which players in there respective drafts are better than who we drafted *AHEAD* of them. I don't think that is a difficult question to answer since you appear to be so conscientious about the draft. I already gave you Danny Granger (18) and Andrew Bynum (10)ahead of Channing Frye (8).


How is Frye even relevant? Lee is playing much better and was drafted much later in the draft.


----------



## R-Star (Jun 13, 2002)

TwinkieFoot said:


> ....It's because you mentioned on several occassions that the Knicks have been drafting lottery picks for the past several years evident from your statements: "you guys are consistant lotto drafters" and "you draft in the top 10 pretty much every year, and have accomplished what other than role players?" You could count this years draft if you'd like and still be completely off base.
> 
> In case you didn't notice, I think this is the part where you mysteriously disappear and don't come back to this board for a few weeks to save face...


Ha, thanks for trying to tell me how to post, Twinkiefoot. Ill keep that in mind.
Again, just because you trade away your lotto picks for overpaid hacks doesnt mean you arent in the lotto every year. You trade the pick. You guys still have a pathetic selection of young players for a team whos sucked for so long.


----------



## USSKittyHawk (Jul 22, 2005)

Just a friendly reminder attack the post and not the poster, carry on. :rules:


----------

