# TJ Ford is..............



## BEEZ

very good. I just wanted to point out his 12 assists and 1 turnover in 26 minutes yesterday. I think its good that his very consistent and strong season is falling under the radar. I think he will get alot better this way


----------



## HKF

Next year when he is playing 36 minutes a game he could lead the league in assists.


----------



## Arclite

TJ has some glaring weaknesses, but outside of Redd and their power forwards by committee (and maybe their bench), he has been the leading catalyst of the Bucks' success this year. Hard to believe that the TJ no one thought had the body nor the durability to compete in the league is _second_ in assists/48. It seems like everyone in the Hinrich camp was claiming that Ford was going to be a major bust, and vice versa, but lo and behold, they're both living up to or exceeding expectations..

Props to Ford, he seems to be getting overlooked this year, but he's proved that he belongs in the NBA..


----------



## BEEZ

> Originally posted by <b>Sovereignz</b>!
> TJ has some glaring weaknesses,


No doubt but those definitley can be worked on. I am surprised that with his handle and quickness he doesnt take it to the rack more often and that Jumpshot while not good is miles ahead of when the season started. Those are the only 2 major weaknesses that I see in him. Also on the defensive end, he hasnt been as big of a defensive liability as many were saying


----------



## Arclite

> Originally posted by <b>BEEZ</b>!
> 
> 
> No doubt but those definitley can be worked on. I am surprised that with his handle and quickness he doesnt take it to the rack more often and that Jumpshot while not good is miles ahead of when the season started. Those are the only 2 major weaknesses that I see in him. Also on the defensive end, he hasnt been as big of a defensive liability as many were saying


Point taken.. I believe as late as Christmas his field goal percentage was hovering around 30%, right now it's at least respectable for a rookie point.. seems like his offense has an effect on the outcome of the games, too.. in losses he is shooting 32%, but in wins he's shooting an astounding 10 percentage points higher.. once (if) he develops an even moderately reliable jumper, coupled with his quickness he will be a nearly impossible player to stay in front of on defense..


----------



## LionOfJudah

What many people don't know is TJ is just a winner. He doesn't have to put up a great stat line to help his team win. He lead his High School team to 3 Texas state championships. Then, with UT he brought Texas farther than they have been in 30 years (roughly). Now, he's in the NBA and definatly a factor in the Bucks suprising winning season.

A little bulk and a consistant jumper is about all he lacks. Those things are about the easiest to improve. Maybe with a little more bulk he'll attack the rim like he did in college.


----------



## SilentOneX

I don't have any concerns regarding to his early years as a NBA player. Time is what he needs to go through right now. Sooner or later, he'll be a much better player that are for everyone to see.


----------



## HKF

> Originally posted by <b>stevemc</b>!
> What many people don't know is TJ is just a winner. He doesn't have to put up a great stat line to help his team win. He lead his High School team to 3 Texas state championships. Then, with UT he brought Texas farther than they have been in 30 years (roughly). Now, he's in the NBA and definatly a factor in the Bucks suprising winning season.


No offense because you are correct about TJ being a winner, but he has played with very good players even in HS. He didn't win those state titles alone.

Teammates: 
Daniel Ewing - Duke
Kenny Taylor - Baylor/Texas
Ivan McFarlin - Oklahoma State
Aaron Coombs - NC Wilmington

Just wanted to let that be known.


----------



## LionOfJudah

> Originally posted by <b>Hong Kong Fooey</b>!
> 
> 
> No offense because you are correct about TJ being a winner, but he has played with very good players even in HS. He didn't win those state titles alone.
> 
> Teammates:
> Daniel Ewing - Duke
> Kenny Taylor - Baylor/Texas
> Ivan McFarlin - Oklahoma State
> Aaron Coombs - NC Wilmington
> 
> Just wanted to let that be known.


This is true. You really can't say they've done any worse or better with out him tho. 

How about UT tho, how many players on last seasons final four roster are going pro?


----------



## HKF

> Originally posted by <b>stevemc</b>!
> 
> 
> This is true. You really can't say they've done any worse or better with out him tho.
> 
> How about UT tho, how many players on last seasons final four roster are going pro?


Well that is true, he made those guys better. But it's not like he was the only one doing that. I just wanted to point out his HS team because he played with some tremendous talent. Also remember in college all you really need is one or two NBA players and you can succeed. Heck, sometimes you don't have any NBA players and you do well in the tournament.


----------



## LionOfJudah

> Originally posted by <b>Hong Kong Fooey</b>!
> 
> 
> Well that is true, he made those guys better. But it's not like he was the only one doing that. I just wanted to point out his HS team because he played with some tremendous talent. Also remember in college all you really need is one or two NBA players and you can succeed. Heck, sometimes you don't have any NBA players and you do well in the tournament.


Comparing this year's Longhorn team to last years is just sad tho. TJ was the glue keeping the team together and controlled the game. Now, he seems to be doing that for the Bucks.


----------



## Rocket23

> Originally posted by <b>stevemc</b>!
> 
> 
> Comparing this year's Longhorn team to last years is just sad tho. TJ was the glue keeping the team together and controlled the game. Now, he seems to be doing that for the Bucks.


I'm not sad at all. I'm ecstatic that my boys were able to bounce back so well from losing the program's best player _ever_. They're #2 in a decent Big 12. Texas is having a good year considering the situation...everyone predicted a down year.


----------



## bigbabyjesus

yeah, i was very high on tj ford before the draft, and still am now.

i said that he will be the best pg to come out of this draft and i stand by that. what he lacks is a jumper which he has vastly improved since his college days. he also should look for his offense more by taking it hard to the rack as he's one of the quicker players in the league and he's got hops.

he's really been under the radar but has been playing stellar for the bucks.


----------



## Gambino

> Originally posted by <b>Hong Kong Fooey</b>!
> 
> 
> No offense because you are correct about TJ being a winner, but he has played with very good players even in HS. He didn't win those state titles alone.
> 
> Teammates:
> Daniel Ewing - Duke
> Kenny Taylor - Baylor/Texas
> Ivan McFarlin - Oklahoma State
> Aaron Coombs - NC Wilmington
> 
> Just wanted to let that be known.


i believe John Lucas was one of his teammates as well
and i am glad that he's proving people wrong everyday....


----------



## VincentVega

Ford will continue to get better and better. He was basically unguardable in college, and he'll learn to use his quickness and playmaking ability with greater effectiveness as he gains experience in the pros. Size is always an issue, but like Iverson, it's greatly overshadowed by natural talent and durability.


----------



## FanOfAll8472

TJ was my 2nd favorite college player for the last two years (behind Wade). Despite his bad jump shot and lack of bulk and height, I've never had doubts that he'll become a good player, if not very good. He's a floor general and a leader as well.



> Originally posted by <b>Sovereignz</b>!
> TJ has some glaring weaknesses, but outside of Redd and their power forwards by committee (and maybe their bench), he has been the leading catalyst of the Bucks' success this year.


BTW, the Bucks don't have a PF by committee? I can't believe how many people overlook Joe Smith. Teammates have cited him as their MVP so far...30 minutes a game...10 pts/ 9 boards, 1 block, but it's been his hustle and defense that have made him so valuable. but just wanted to point out another overlooked Buck .


----------



## jmk

> Originally posted by <b>Hong Kong Fooey</b>!
> Next year when he is playing 36 minutes a game he could lead the league in assists.


I HIGHLY doubt that.


----------



## BEEZ

> Originally posted by <b>jmk</b>!
> 
> 
> I HIGHLY doubt that.


Now considering the amount that he avgs in the time that he plays would most likely corrolate to that. So why do you HIGHLY doubt that he would do that


----------



## #1BucksFan

As one of the lucky few who has seen him play everynight, he has truely suprised me. In the beginning, I thought that he would ride the bench and learn his first year. But he has played very well, and is starting to play during crunch time in the end of games. I think that he could improve his jumpshot, but has shown in recent games that he has range. What I think he could do is use his athleticism more in games. For example, he could beat most players in the NBA down the court, and I'd like him to finish with dunks instead of layups (which he can do). But I am pleased, and the Bucks have a record to reflect his attitude and talent.

Lastly, most Ford fans have nothing against Hinrich. He is a very talented player and I enjoy the fact that he's in the Bucks division. I would have been as happy with Hinrich on the Bucks as I am with Ford.


----------



## The_Franchise

Hmm... Ford's rookie numbers have looked very similar to Tinsley's rookie season numbers. Both shot poorly from the field, but had a high number of assists. Although Tinsley averaged 1.5 more apg per game, Ford averages 1 less turnover.

Biggest difference I've seen between Ford and Tinsley is Ford's athleticism, but I still don't know if that will ever help him become a much better PG than Tinsley (even after his dropoff in production).


----------



## BEEZ

> Originally posted by <b>The Franchise</b>!
> Hmm... Ford's rookie numbers have looked very similar to Tinsley's rookie season numbers. Both shot poorly from the field, but had a high number of assists. Although Tinsley averaged 1.5 more apg per game, Ford averages 1 less turnover.
> 
> Biggest difference I've seen between Ford and Tinsley is Ford's athleticism, but I still don't know if that will ever help him become a much better PG than Tinsley (even after his dropoff in production).



Easy. You cant even compare the 2 on that type of level because Tinsley was/is and will never be the student to the game and as coachable and willingness to put in extra work to get better. That is very evident in TJ ford and the same cant be said for Jamal Tinsley


----------



## merc_cuban

> Originally posted by <b>stevemc</b>!
> What many people don't know is TJ is just a winner. He doesn't have to put up a great stat line to help his team win. He lead his High School team to 3 Texas state championships. Then, with UT he brought Texas farther than they have been in 30 years (roughly). Now, he's in the NBA and definatly a factor in the Bucks suprising winning season.
> 
> A little bulk and a consistant jumper is about all he lacks. Those things are about the easiest to improve. Maybe with a little more bulk he'll attack the rim like he did in college.


yep him and daniel ewing (now at duke) did big things in highschool. Tj reminds me of a more athletic smaller version of jason kidd. i've watched him play for years


----------



## compsciguy78

> Originally posted by <b>BEEZ</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> Easy. You cant even compare the 2 on that type of level because Tinsley was/is and will never be the student to the game and as coachable and willingness to put in extra work to get better. That is very evident in TJ ford and the same cant be said for Jamal Tinsley


Yeah, I agree. I wouldn't compare Ford to Tinsley, because Ford has the chance to be many times the player Tinsley will ever be. Tinsley might be able to shoot the 3 ball, but that is the only thing he has on Ford. IF Ford develops a solid jumper, he will be a top 3 PG in the league in a few years.


----------



## rocketeer

> Originally posted by <b>The Franchise</b>!
> Hmm... Ford's rookie numbers have looked very similar to Tinsley's rookie season numbers. Both shot poorly from the field, but had a high number of assists. Although Tinsley averaged 1.5 more apg per game, Ford averages 1 less turnover.
> 
> Biggest difference I've seen between Ford and Tinsley is Ford's athleticism, but I still don't know if that will ever help him become a much better PG than Tinsley (even after his dropoff in production).


ford is averaging 8th in the league in assists with 6.6 even though he only plays 27 minutes a game. move that up to 36 and he would be averaging 8.8 which would put him only behind jason kidd. even if ford's jumper doesn't improve any more, he will be a top 10 pg in the league and top 5 in assists for a long time.


----------



## LionOfJudah

> Originally posted by <b>rocketeer</b>!
> 
> 
> ford is averaging 8th in the league in assists with 6.6 even though he only plays 27 minutes a game. move that up to 36 and he would be averaging 8.8 which would put him only behind jason kidd. even if ford's jumper doesn't improve any more, he will be a top 10 pg in the league and top 5 in assists for a long time.


Jason Kidd's jumper isn't all that great either, its still rather weak dispite improvement over the years, and he's still considered the best PG in the game. So how can you condem TJ for coming into the leauge with a weak jumper? So next year if he comes back shooting over 40 percent from the field, 15+ ppg, 8+ apg, and 4+ rpg would you say he's the best PG in the leauge? Probably not, but just thinkg about what you guys are saying.


----------



## rocketeer

> Originally posted by <b>stevemc</b>!
> 
> 
> Jason Kidd's jumper isn't all that great either, its still rather weak dispite improvement over the years, and he's still considered the best PG in the game. So how can you condem TJ for coming into the leauge with a weak jumper? So next year if he comes back shooting over 40 percent from the field, 15+ ppg, 8+ apg, and 4+ rpg would you say he's the best PG in the leauge? Probably not, but just thinkg about what you guys are saying.


that's what i am saying. even with his current jumper, ford will be a very good pg once he starts getting the minutes that other good pgs are getting and gets a little more adjusted to the league. his game is just fine how it is, but any improvement shooting can just make him that much better.


----------



## kcchiefs-fan

Kidd's got a reliable jumper. If he's on that night, than he'll knock down any open look out to 3 pt. land that he gets. On top of which, he's one of the best perimeter defenders in the East, which is a gaping hole in Ford's game, and a great rebounder, something Ford's height will most likely always limit him. Ford will most definitely be a quality PG in the NBA, he already is in many ways, but he's not a sure-in for one of the elite by any means.


----------



## LionOfJudah

> Originally posted by <b>kcchiefs-fan</b>!
> .....he already is in many ways, but he's not a sure-in for one of the elite by any means.


No player is. _See: Grant Hill._


----------



## kcchiefs-fan

> Originally posted by <b>stevemc</b>!
> 
> 
> No player is. _See: Grant Hill._


Grant Hill WAS an elite player, and it was pretty obvious he would be from the moment he entered the league. The guy was insane, easily one of the top 5 players in the league. Just because he isn't now due to unfortunate circumstances doesn't negate the fact that at one time he was.


----------



## HKF

> Originally posted by <b>kcchiefs-fan</b>!
> Kidd's got a reliable jumper. If he's on that night, than he'll knock down any open look out to 3 pt. land that he gets. On top of which, he's one of the best perimeter defenders in the East, which is a gaping hole in Ford's game, and a great rebounder, something Ford's height will most likely always limit him. Ford will most definitely be a quality PG in the NBA, he already is in many ways, but he's not a sure-in for one of the elite by any means.


Kidd is not a very good defender anymore. He can barely keep any PG in from of him. Anyone that tells you that he stills plays awesome D must really not watch Nets games.


----------



## LionOfJudah

> Originally posted by <b>kcchiefs-fan</b>!
> Grant Hill WAS an elite player, and it was pretty obvious he would be from the moment he entered the league. The guy was insane, easily one of the top 5 players in the league. Just because he isn't now due to unfortunate circumstances doesn't negate the fact that at one time he was.


True, but he was hyped as to be the next MJ (or superstar to take MJ's place) but it never happened due to injuries. I'm just saying you can't say anyone is a sure in for one of the elite players in the leauge. Knock on wood, if Lebron was to run into drug problems or injury problems he wouldn't be considered one of the elite players would he?


----------



## kcchiefs-fan

> Originally posted by <b>stevemc</b>!
> 
> 
> True, but he was hyped as to be the next MJ (or superstar to take MJ's place) but it never happened due to injuries. I'm just saying you can't say anyone is a sure in for one of the elite players in the leauge. Knock on wood, if Lebron was to run into drug problems or injury problems he wouldn't be considered one of the elite players would he?


You're exaggerating my remark. I was implying that Ford's got a lot of odds against him before he can stake a claim as one of the top PG's in the league, and there may be a couple other PG's in the draft that have a better chance.


----------



## BEEZ

> Originally posted by <b>kcchiefs-fan</b>!
> Kidd's got a reliable jumper. If he's on that night, than he'll knock down any open look out to 3 pt. land that he gets. On top of which, he's one of the best perimeter defenders in the East, which is a gaping hole in Ford's game, and a great rebounder, something Ford's height will most likely always limit him. Ford will most definitely be a quality PG in the NBA, he already is in many ways, but he's not a sure-in for one of the elite by any means.


I can understand what you are saying kc chiefs fan but when you look at it. He hasnt been as big a defensive liabilty as it was thought he was going to be. Hes been better than advertised in that area. He also avg right at 4 rbds per game at 3.77 and thats better than most Pg's in the league so that you cant use. Also none of the PG's coming out in this years draft are the floor generals and or can find the open man on the level that TJ Ford is already at.


----------



## LionOfJudah

> Originally posted by <b>BEEZ</b>!
> 
> 
> I can understand what you are saying kc chiefs fan but when you look at it. He hasnt been as big a defensive liabilty as it was thought he was going to be. Hes been better than advertised in that area. He also avg right at 4 rbds per game at 3.77 and thats better than most Pg's in the league so that you cant use. Also none of the PG's coming out in this years draft are the floor generals and or can find the open man on the level that TJ Ford is already at.


TJ has many intangables that people don't notice from just seeing him once or twice or just seeing his statline. TJ is going to be a star... Porter knows it, some of us know it, and the rest will know it soon enough.


----------



## kcchiefs-fan

> Originally posted by <b>BEEZ</b>!
> 
> 
> I can understand what you are saying kc chiefs fan but when you look at it. He hasnt been as big a defensive liabilty as it was thought he was going to be. Hes been better than advertised in that area. He also avg right at 4 rbds per game at 3.77 and thats better than most Pg's in the league so that you cant use. Also none of the PG's coming out in this years draft are the floor generals and or can find the open man on the level that TJ Ford is already at.


Ford is rebounding very well for his size, BUT, he's only averaging about half of what Kidd does. His size will limit him ever being a serious contributor on the glass. As for his defense, he's still a liability and it's a major area of his game that needs work.

I'm not saying he won't be an all-star someday, just that I'd take a few PG's from this class over him.


----------



## rocketeer

> Originally posted by <b>kcchiefs-fan</b>!
> On top of which, he's one of the best perimeter defenders in the East, which is a gaping hole in Ford's game, and a great rebounder, something Ford's height will most likely always limit him.


ford is not a bad defender. he has never been a bad defender. he has the quickness to stay in front of anyone of his jumping ability allows him to challenge shots(not block much but get a hand in the face). he also is a good rebounder. he is 12th in rebounding by a pg and all of the guys above him(except for bobby jackson) play at least 7 more minutes than he does. of guys that play at least 25 minutes, ford is 5th in rebounding per 48. so obviously his size does not limit his rebounding.

the only two problems you can mention about ford are size and shooting ability. he has proven over and over that his size is not a problem. so that just leaves shooting. and he shoots well enough to be a very good pg as a rookie, so i doubt that will end up holding him back either(even if he doesn't improve his shot at all).


----------



## Mavs Dude

I think next year he will have a jumper and will be a good shooter. When you have Porter,Redd,and all ther other guys around you, you can learn a lot. The only thing that I don't understand is why he can shoot free thows so good but not the J.

2500 posts!!!


----------



## Zalgirinis

Why have Ford loged just 15 minutes yesterday? Injury or what?


----------



## Mavs Dude

> Originally posted by <b>Zalgirinis</b>!
> Why have Ford loged just 15 minutes yesterday? Injury or what?


He averages only like 20 some minutes. Plus Porter plays whoever is hot and Jones was making a good amount of his shots so he stuck with him.


----------



## kcchiefs-fan

> Originally posted by <b>rocketeer</b>!
> 
> 
> ford is not a bad defender. he has never been a bad defender. he has the quickness to stay in front of anyone of his jumping ability allows him to challenge shots(not block much but get a hand in the face). he also is a good rebounder. he is 12th in rebounding by a pg and all of the guys above him(except for bobby jackson) play at least 7 more minutes than he does. of guys that play at least 25 minutes, ford is 5th in rebounding per 48. so obviously his size does not limit his rebounding.
> 
> the only two problems you can mention about ford are size and shooting ability. he has proven over and over that his size is not a problem. so that just leaves shooting. and he shoots well enough to be a very good pg as a rookie, so i doubt that will end up holding him back either(even if he doesn't improve his shot at all).


Ford is not a good defender, simple as that. You may be right in saying he's not a bad defender, but when talking about the elite PG's, they're fantastic defenders. Guys like Stockton, Payton, Kidd....these guys are great defenders. That's something Hinrich and Banks have in spades, they've definitely got the potential to be All-NBA type defenders.......Ford doesn't. As for his rebounding, I already said he's rebounding well for his size. However, I'll be surprised if he ever averages 5 boards a game while having one or two viable low post rebounders on the team. Not a flaw, many great PG's don't average more than 5 boards a game, just an observation.

Size is defintely a problem. Is athletic ability limits it as a problem, but it's obvious he'd be a much better player if he were 3-5 inches taller. As for his shot, you're right, even with that he's still a good rookie PG. But we're talking about potential here. Does he have the potential to be one of the elite PG's in the league someday? I would say that it's a possibility, but as I've already mentioned, he's definitely not the first PG I would take out of this draft class.


----------



## LionOfJudah

> Originally posted by <b>kcchiefs-fan</b>!
> Size is defintely a problem. Is athletic ability limits it as a problem, but it's obvious he'd be a much better player if he were 3-5 inches taller. As for his shot, you're right, even with that he's still a good rookie PG. But we're talking about potential here. Does he have the potential to be one of the elite PG's in the league someday? I would say that it's a possibility, but as I've already mentioned, he's definitely not the first PG I would take out of this draft class.


Which player couldn't use another 3-5 inches?

I think in the next couple years he'll seperate himself from the rest of the PGs in his class. (Since Lebron is a SG now)

Allen Iverson turned out alright and everyone said he could use some more height.


----------



## kcchiefs-fan

> Originally posted by <b>stevemc</b>!
> 
> 
> Which player couldn't use another 3-5 inches?
> 
> I think in the next couple years he'll seperate himself from the rest of the PGs in his class. (Since Lebron is a SG now)
> 
> Allen Iverson turned out alright and everyone said he could use some more height.


Everyone would like an extra few minutes but Ford would be an ideal PG if he was about 6'3''. As it is, he's a PG who has a chance at becoming a very good player.

I doubt he seperates himself from the rest of the class at PG, even if you move Lebron at Wade to the off-guard. I'd easily take Hinrich and possibly Barbosa and Banks ahead of him.

And Iverson's an extremely different player than Ford. Iverson is one of a kind. As a rookie, when he was playing point, he was still putting up insane point totals but was also averaging more assists than Ford is. He's at a disadvantage defensively but is able to conceal it to an extent by playing the passing lanes brilliantly. Citing him as another small player who's had success doesn't really support your claim.


----------



## VincentVega

*February Stats*
Ford: 5.3 ppg, 7.4 apg, 2.3 rpg, 0.4 spg, 36.5% FG, 0.00% 3PT, 77.7% FT.

Hinrich: 14.4 ppg, 8.1 apg, 4.0 rpg, 2.6 spg, 39.2% FG, 40.0% 3PT, 93.8% FT.


----------



## LionOfJudah

> Originally posted by <b>VincentVega</b>!
> *February Stats*
> Ford: 5.3 ppg, 7.4 apg, 2.3 rpg, 0.4 spg, 36.5% FG, 0.00% 3PT, 77.7% FT.
> 
> Hinrich: 14.4 ppg, 8.1 apg, 4.0 rpg, 2.6 spg, 39.2% FG, 40.0% 3PT, 93.8% FT.


And where's minutes per game?


----------



## VincentVega

*2003-04 Highs*
Points: Hinrich 25, Ford 17
Assists: Hinrich 14, Ford 12 
Rebounds: Hinrich 11, Ford 11 
Field Goals Made: Hinrich 9, Ford 7 
3PT Field Goals Made: Hinrich 6, Ford 1 
Free Throws Made: Hinrich 7, Ford 5 
Free Throws Attempted: Hinrich 8, Ford 6 
Steals: Hinrich 4, Ford 4
Blocks: Hinrich 2, Ford 1


----------



## VincentVega

Ford: 25.4 mpg in February, 10.68 EFF rating overall
Hinrich: 38.1 mpg in February, 12.84 EFF rating overall


----------



## LionOfJudah

> Originally posted by <b>VincentVega</b>!
> Ford: 25.4 mpg in February, 10.68 EFF rating overall
> Hinrich: 38.1 mpg in February, 12.84 EFF rating overall


Ford: 5.3 ppg, 7.4 apg, 2.3 rpg, 0.4 spg, 36.5% FG, 0.00% 3PT, 77.7% FT.

Hinrich: 14.4 ppg, 8.1 apg, 4.0 rpg, 2.6 spg, 39.2% FG, 40.0% 3PT, 93.8% FT.

So... with 12 minutes more PT he does get more points but not more than .5 asists and 1.7 rpg? 

I know you're big on Kirk, and I'm big on TJ. We can sit and compare numbers all day but no stat will actually show who will be better in the long run. As for now, Kirk is having a better year thanks to more PT. But that doesn't mean I would take Kirk over TJ. Thats my opinion tho.


----------



## VincentVega

I wonder what Kirk's assist numbers would look like if he had Michael Redd and Desmond Mason to throw the ball to. Anyways........

good argument. I respect your opinion totally.


----------



## LionOfJudah

> Originally posted by <b>VincentVega</b>!
> I wonder what Kirk's assist numbers would look like if he had Michael Redd and Desmond Mason to throw the ball to. Anyways........
> 
> good argument. I respect your opinion totally.


Hopefully next year they both get plenty of PT so we can argue this next season again


----------



## VincentVega

Agreed.


----------



## kcchiefs-fan

> Originally posted by <b>stevemc</b>!
> I know you're big on Kirk, and I'm big on TJ. We can sit and compare numbers all day but no stat will actually show who will be better in the long run. As for now, Kirk is having a better year thanks to more PT. But that doesn't mean I would take Kirk over TJ. Thats my opinion tho.


Kirk's also regarded as one of the better perimeter defenders in the Easter Conference already.......just thought I'd throw that out there


----------



## Jamel Irief

> Originally posted by <b>The Franchise</b>!
> Hmm... Ford's rookie numbers have looked very similar to Tinsley's rookie season numbers. Both shot poorly from the field, but had a high number of assists. Although Tinsley averaged 1.5 more apg per game, Ford averages 1 less turnover.
> 
> Biggest difference I've seen between Ford and Tinsley is Ford's athleticism, but I still don't know if that will ever help him become a much better PG than Tinsley (even after his dropoff in production).


TJ reminds me more of Brevin Knight. If he doesn't develop a jumper he will never be a star.


----------



## bigdbucks

> Originally posted by <b>Jemel Irief</b>!
> 
> 
> TJ reminds me more of Brevin Knight. If he doesn't develop a jumper he will never be a star.



T. Ford G 28 4-5 0-0 1-2 1 2 6 2 0 2 2 9 

That's a pretty good percent shooting today. All I care about is that he keeps this team winning. As long as there winning there are no problems in his game. He's a rookie PG that is leading his team into the playoffs. Hinrich? James? (if you consider him a PG) They prolly won't be in the playoffs eh?


----------



## compsciguy78

> Originally posted by <b>Jemel Irief</b>!
> 
> 
> TJ reminds me more of Brevin Knight. If he doesn't develop a jumper he will never be a star.


I agree that if he doesn't develop a jumper he won't be a star, but I would money on it that his jumper will come around. Why? Because I have read that he is hard worker, and if you look at his FT%, the guy has a capable shot. Developing a jump shot is an easier skill to develop than the other skills he already posseses(ball handling, extreme god given quickness, court vision).


----------



## Jamel Irief

> Originally posted by <b>bigdbucks</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> T. Ford G 28 4-5 0-0 1-2 1 2 6 2 0 2 2 9
> 
> That's a pretty good percent shooting today. All I care about is that he keeps this team winning. As long as there winning there are no problems in his game. He's a rookie PG that is leading his team into the playoffs. Hinrich? James? (if you consider him a PG) They prolly won't be in the playoffs eh?


Brevin Knight lead his team to the playoffs as a rookie as well.

He's a good player, no doubt, but no star. The Lakers will make the playoffs with Rick Fox starting after all.


----------



## KokoTheMonkey

T.J. Ford is..............hurt.


----------

