tkf wrote:so for everyone that felt we didn't need a big and that we should have taken jennings.. Please answer this..

had we lucked out into the first pick in the draft, most of you are saying we should have picked jennings over Griffen.. right?

Just want to be sure here...

u are going to get crickets on that.

martin wrote:

tkf wrote:so for everyone that felt we didn't need a big and that we should have taken jennings.. Please answer this..

had we lucked out into the first pick in the draft, most of you are saying we should have picked jennings over Griffen.. right?

Just want to be sure here...

u are going to get crickets on that.

everywhere I ask that question, I get crickets.. so really, this conversation is done as far as I am concerned... LOL...

tkf wrote:

martin wrote:

tkf wrote:so for everyone that felt we didn't need a big and that we should have taken jennings.. Please answer this..

had we lucked out into the first pick in the draft, most of you are saying we should have picked jennings over Griffen.. right?

Just want to be sure here...

u are going to get crickets on that.

everywhere I ask that question, I get crickets.. so really, this conversation is done as far as I am concerned... LOL...

Except for BRIGGS. he stated his pick.

fishmike wrote:
if he's an elite talent level why did he shoot 38% in Europe?

because he made 3 out of every 8 shots.

fishmike wrote:
Why didnt his team play him more?

because the rotation didn't call for him to play more.

fishmike wrote:
If you watched every minute of Jennings games in Europe and had to make an evaluation what would it be?

he is a student of the game

fishmike wrote:

Interior defense and physical toughness isnt a area of need?

yeah. I don't understand why we aren't playing Darko either

fishmike wrote:
Wasting our time here. You see what you want to see

that was the point of springing for the league pass. So when the lemmings start jumping off the cliff with stereotypes and biased inuendo and silly speculation, I have a live feed to guage whats real and swirlie the bull****.

tkf wrote:

No one was talking that mess... It was pretty much unanimous with knick fans... win the lottery and take stud blake griffin.. NO talk of ever taking jennings #1 and you know it..

Hindsight is the ish tho... I will say that much..

Yes, you're comparing picking Griffin to picking Jordan Hill...you're right, hindsight is the ish, almost as good as horrible ridiculous absurd comparisons.

oohah

djsunyc wrote:it's ok to admit walsh fubared this pick instead of making excuses for him. the guy himself said he was napping instead of scouting. admit it, suck it up, and move on.

No it is not okay. Instead we should engage in the most tortured arguments possible in order to justify taking a 5th power forward as opposed to picking a PG!

oohah

oohah wrote:

martin wrote:

tkf wrote:so for everyone that felt we didn't need a big and that we should have taken jennings.. Please answer this..

had we lucked out into the first pick in the draft, most of you are saying we should have picked jennings over Griffen.. right?

Just want to be sure here...

u are going to get crickets on that.

Who is saying that? That is one of the most absurd "points" yet...that is why TKF will get crickets!

oohah

dude stop hiding.. the only thing absurd around here is how you and other make comments and then sidestep the issue with others illy comments, and emotional post that are baseless...

oohah wrote:TKF I'm sorry but your argument is nothing short of retarded. If Griffin is a bust then you bust on the consensus #1 projected to be a superstar, not picking your 5th power forward on an unskilled project.

So you want an answer, I pick Griffin because the guy looks like a pro-ready star. If Jennings ends up being the best player, I didn't miss out because of making a stupid reach, I missed out because the consensus #1 who is projected to be a star was not as good.

Your argument does not live in reality. You are making excuses. You are hiding. From the fact that Walsh simply blew the pick.

At least Taj Gibson, picked at #9 is a professional player right this very moment, and Chicago already had their star PG in Derrick Rose. I can guarantee you that I would not have picked Hill at #8.

It's not about HINDSIGHT, it's about FORESIGHT. It's not about knowing that Jennings will be a star on draft night, it's about understanding your needs when you were picking on draft night. why is that so confusing to you?

Let me explain to you the rules: When picking in the lottery you pick the best player available if you see star talent like Blake Griffin. If you're picking late, like #8 you pick star talent based on need.Holy smoke I can't even believe you think you've made some kind of point. You haven't. It's like watching Fox news during the Bush administration.

oohah

Well let me explain these rules:
Teams that are bad and have holes like the knicks can't afford to pick based on need oohah.. you pick the BPA.. the knicks felt that hill was BPA, many draft boards had him top 6... So the knicks didn't reach, they didn't take a scrub, or a 24 year old rookie like taj gibson who had limited upside. they took a 21 year old kid who improved like crazy over 2 years with a ton of upside and great athletic ability....

You keep saying pick need. Ok then say the knicks blew it by not taking a PG period, but saying they blew it by not taking jennings after he has a good first 8 games is ridiculous.... The knicks need a lot of things.. At which point you take BPA.. in the mind of the knicks. Hill was that... to call it a mistake after 8 games is ridiculous and borderline idiotic oohah!

You may not have picked hill at 8, and that is fine, but you don't get paid to make those decisions, so does it really matter what you think to NBA GM's? honestly? you have nothing on the line, but to root for a team, you don't have money, your reputation, or your career... GM's do, and that is why some of them passed on Jennings... End of story bro.. move on..

Holy smoke I can't even believe you think you've made some kind of point. You haven't. It's like watching Fox news during the Bush administration.

you think that was funny? kind of like the little fat kid that sits behind his computer eating ding dongs writing silly one liners.. my point is clear.. you have no point..you are a whiner, your act is old and your behavior is punkish... but that is cool.. you just proved what I thought all along... you are basing your arguement on hindsight, you don't like hill and that is fine, just admit it... the sad thing is, like a premature teenager you can't even wait long enough to bust your load.... the season is just 10 games in bro..

get over it and move on...