mreinman wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

mreinman wrote:

crzymdups wrote:Looking it up, I forgot that Phil brought over Ron Harper to be the starting PG for the 2000 and 2001 championship Lakers teams. So he won five rings with a "non-shooter" at starting PG.

black and white a bit?

Different era and way different player. Harper was a smart player and an excellent defender.

Again, if a player has really sh1tty eff%'s then he better damn well be a freak in other areas.

LOL, I was responding to Malcolm who listed every single Bulls and Lakers PG ever EXCEPT Ron Harper, who is a pretty decent comp to Tony Wroten SKILLSET WISE, and when you talk about shooting deficits.

thats the thing. The two are a terrible comparison.

He made a list of every single Bulls and Lakers Point guard and left off the starting point guard for FIVE of Phil's ELEVEN championships.

Why did Malcolm not list him? That's the point of my post. Not to debate analytics with you. Yes, Ron Harper is more accomplished. Wroten is 22 and has played the equivalent of two full seasons in the league so far. I can see the reasoning for Phil's interest. I'm not about proving myself correct via prediction - I'm just looking to see the logic and saying I look at Ron Harper and I can see Phil's logic. I look at Grant and see a similar logic.

Harper and Wroten? They're both 6'6" slashers whose value is more about penetrating, defense, size, rather than shooting. That's the extent of my comparison.

mreinman wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

mreinman wrote:so these 18 pages plus the other 7 in the supplemental thread = um ... uh .... like 28 pages GEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEZZ!

Some posters seemed to have a strong desire to side track the topic to Phil bashing and triangle bashing. Not sure how that has anything to do with signing a guy to be the 15th man on a minimally guaranteed contract but it seems to stir the passions of some that want to find fault with how the 15th spot was used causing a spamming of the threads on Wroten.

some posters who may feel emasculated in life feel like they need to silly-smugly police others. Not a great look coach

CrushAlot wrote:

mreinman wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

mreinman wrote:so these 18 pages plus the other 7 in the supplemental thread = um ... uh .... like 28 pages GEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEZZ!

Some posters seemed to have a strong desire to side track the topic to Phil bashing and triangle bashing. Not sure how that has anything to do with signing a guy to be the 15th man on a minimally guaranteed contract but it seems to stir the passions of some that want to find fault with how the 15th spot was used causing a spamming of the threads on Wroten.

some posters who may feel emasculated in life feel like they need to silly-smugly police others. Not a great look coach

Is this a good look? ^^^^^

this is my look. If you don't want to see him then stop walking the beat. Your policing posts out number your content post by 1000 : 1 at best.

I know you like posting d-league stuff and maybe that works for some people and they care but how about some original insight and opinions on our knicks?

If you ask posters where you stand they probably just assume that its in one big boring bucket.

Post an idea ... put forth an hypothesis, prediction, hate, love, sumpin (seriously mean that). Stop selling yourself short.

CrushAlot wrote:

mreinman wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

mreinman wrote:

CrushAlot wrote:

mreinman wrote:so these 18 pages plus the other 7 in the supplemental thread = um ... uh .... like 28 pages GEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEZZ!

Some posters seemed to have a strong desire to side track the topic to Phil bashing and triangle bashing. Not sure how that has anything to do with signing a guy to be the 15th man on a minimally guaranteed contract but it seems to stir the passions of some that want to find fault with how the 15th spot was used causing a spamming of the threads on Wroten.

some posters who may feel emasculated in life feel like they need to silly-smugly police others. Not a great look coach

Is this a good look? ^^^^^

this is my look. If you don't want to see him then stop walking the beat. Your policing posts out number your content post by 1000 : 1 at best.

I know you like posting d-league stuff and maybe that works for some people and they care but how about some original insight and opinions on our knicks?

If you ask posters where you stand they probably just assume that its in one big boring bucket.

Post an idea ... put forth an hypothesis, prediction, hate, love, sumpin (seriously mean that). Stop selling yourself short.

Post an idea? You keep throwing stuff out there and being critical and it doesn't appear to have a lot of thought behind it. I respond to that and say why I think it is wrong and give reasons. Generally you don't respond and if you respond you post something about odds or gut shots. Not much to go with and generally you don't respond.

those gut shots and odds just maybe over your head. If you want me to explain, just ask. No need to get sad or snippy about it.

meanwhile, my gut shots and or sh1tty analogy have me being a pretty damn good predictor. And guess what? I'm cheating and trying to show people how to cheat but guess what? You can't show people how to cheat if they don't want to listen or just can't get the basics.

It reminds me of the famous shelly long episode on cheers where she was out picking everyone in the football pools and they were just so pissed cause they are the jocks.

I also tried to do a lot of research and find and understand stats that fit my biased pro stats agenda.

crzymdups wrote:

mreinman wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

mreinman wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

mreinman wrote:

crzymdups wrote:Looking it up, I forgot that Phil brought over Ron Harper to be the starting PG for the 2000 and 2001 championship Lakers teams. So he won five rings with a "non-shooter" at starting PG.

black and white a bit?

Different era and way different player. Harper was a smart player and an excellent defender.

Again, if a player has really sh1tty eff%'s then he better damn well be a freak in other areas.

LOL, I was responding to Malcolm who listed every single Bulls and Lakers PG ever EXCEPT Ron Harper, who is a pretty decent comp to Tony Wroten SKILLSET WISE, and when you talk about shooting deficits.

thats the thing. The two are a terrible comparison.

He made a list of every single Bulls and Lakers Point guard and left off the starting point guard for FIVE of Phil's ELEVEN championships.

Why did Malcolm not list him? That's the point of my post. Not to debate analytics with you. Yes, Ron Harper is more accomplished. Wroten is 22 and has played the equivalent of two full seasons in the league so far. I can see the reasoning for Phil's interest. I'm not about proving myself correct via prediction - I'm just looking to see the logic and saying I look at Ron Harper and I can see Phil's logic. I look at Grant and see a similar logic.

Harper and Wroten? They're both 6'6" slashers whose value is more about penetrating, defense, size, rather than shooting. That's the extent of my comparison.

I am all for trying out wroten and any other player as long as we are not locked into him beyond this year.

I'm still waiting for Malcolm to respond. He keeps saying in all his years studying the Triangle, he's never seen a PG shoot less than 80% from the free throw line and I keep bringing up Ron Harper and he's not yet responded.

I'm not sure how Wroten will work out, but there is some pretty strong evidence that you don't need to shoot 80% from the free throw line to be a successful PG in the Triangle, as evidenced by Ron Harper's five rings as starting PG for Phil Jackson.

there is strong evidence that one CAN overcome the odds and be successful while missing a crucial aspect of the game.

Take rondo who you love .... If he was not an all all all world passer then there is no way he overcomes his deficiencies. He has struggled for years even with his all world passing.

I think that Wroten has a 5-10% chance at being successful and that is being extremely generous.

nixluva wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

Malcolm wrote:

nixluva wrote:I use my evaluation of a player's talents and try to predict how those talents will work in a given situation.

Sorry, but the only substantial argument for Wroten that you and I can agree on . . . is that he must have something if Phil Jackson thinks he does.

If it weren't for that . . . I don't see how I'd ever consider Wroten.

For a guard to shoot only a career 65% from the free throw line . . . is about as disqualifying a fact as I can think of for Triangle Culture.

John Paxson (PG) -- 80%
Michael Jordan (SG) -- 84%
BJ Armstrong (PG) -- 86%
Steve Kerr (PG) -- 86%

Derek Fisher (PG) -- 81%
Kobe Bryant (SG) -- 83%
Shannon Brown (SG) -- 81%
Sasha Vujacic (SG) -- 86%

I mean COME ON . . . I myself could shoot better than 65%.

It speaks of lack of discipline and commitment.

(BTW: Rajon Rondo is not an exception. Yes, he's an all-star even though he shoots a career 60% FT rate . . . but I can't see him fitting into Triangle Culture).

You left out Ron Harper, starting PG for the 72 win and 70 win teams.

career ft% .720

bulls starting pg 94-95 ft% .618
bulls starting pg 95-96 ft% .705
bulls starting pg 96-97 ft% .707
bulls starting pg 97-98 ft% .750

I think Wroten and Ron Harper are similar players - big guards, slashers, shooting not their strong point, but they can see the floor, defend either guard position, run, and play heady bball.

I think when Phil looks at Wroten, Ron Harper is probably his model as much as anyone else.

I'll expand further - Harper's fg% and 3pt%

bulls starting pg 94-95 fg% .426 | 3pt% .282
bulls starting pg 95-96 fg% .467 | 3pt% .269
bulls starting pg 96-97 fg% .436 | 3pt% .362
bulls starting pg 97-98 fg% .441 | 3pt% .190

Great Post crzymdups. In addition to Ron Harper people are forgetting Brian Shaw who was another 6-6 guard that wasn't a great jump shooter.

This is pretty much the whole point of taking a look at this kid. He's got the size, athletic ability, passing, driving ability and defensive potential to fit what Phil likes in a guard. He's not a strong shooter so far but he's only 22 and has room to grow. MANY guards have been eventually able to improve their shooting. It's not a guarantee that he will but he's young enough to warrant taking a look.

I love how guys are writing off a kid that is Draft pick age. WHY? Why is he done already at 22? These same people wrote off Shved and DWILL. You have to at least allow the kid a chance to actually be taught and worked with to see if he can grow and improve his skills. His base talent alone would be welcome IMO.

writing off? why is this so hard to get.

people are saying that his chances for success are low but of course, everything is possible.

Shaw sucked and there is zero chance he makes it in todays game (unless he is not that brian shaw).

Hope is fine but why can't you answer what you think his chances of success are? 1-10? 0-100%? Why do you always run from this question? Its a valid question and not a finger pointer.

crzymdups wrote:You left out Ron Harper, starting PG for the 72 win and 70 win teams.

Career ft% .720

Still . . . 72% is a LOT better than 65%.

And Harper had 5 years where he shot 75% or better.

crzymdups wrote:

mreinman wrote:

nixluva wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

Malcolm wrote:

nixluva wrote:I use my evaluation of a player's talents and try to predict how those talents will work in a given situation.

Sorry, but the only substantial argument for Wroten that you and I can agree on . . . is that he must have something if Phil Jackson thinks he does.

If it weren't for that . . . I don't see how I'd ever consider Wroten.

For a guard to shoot only a career 65% from the free throw line . . . is about as disqualifying a fact as I can think of for Triangle Culture.

John Paxson (PG) -- 80%
Michael Jordan (SG) -- 84%
BJ Armstrong (PG) -- 86%
Steve Kerr (PG) -- 86%

Derek Fisher (PG) -- 81%
Kobe Bryant (SG) -- 83%
Shannon Brown (SG) -- 81%
Sasha Vujacic (SG) -- 86%

I mean COME ON . . . I myself could shoot better than 65%.

It speaks of lack of discipline and commitment.

(BTW: Rajon Rondo is not an exception. Yes, he's an all-star even though he shoots a career 60% FT rate . . . but I can't see him fitting into Triangle Culture).

You left out Ron Harper, starting PG for the 72 win and 70 win teams.

career ft% .720

bulls starting pg 94-95 ft% .618
bulls starting pg 95-96 ft% .705
bulls starting pg 96-97 ft% .707
bulls starting pg 97-98 ft% .750

I think Wroten and Ron Harper are similar players - big guards, slashers, shooting not their strong point, but they can see the floor, defend either guard position, run, and play heady bball.

I think when Phil looks at Wroten, Ron Harper is probably his model as much as anyone else.

I'll expand further - Harper's fg% and 3pt%

bulls starting pg 94-95 fg% .426 | 3pt% .282
bulls starting pg 95-96 fg% .467 | 3pt% .269
bulls starting pg 96-97 fg% .436 | 3pt% .362
bulls starting pg 97-98 fg% .441 | 3pt% .190

Great Post crzymdups. In addition to Ron Harper people are forgetting Brian Shaw who was another 6-6 guard that wasn't a great jump shooter.

This is pretty much the whole point of taking a look at this kid. He's got the size, athletic ability, passing, driving ability and defensive potential to fit what Phil likes in a guard. He's not a strong shooter so far but he's only 22 and has room to grow. MANY guards have been eventually able to improve their shooting. It's not a guarantee that he will but he's young enough to warrant taking a look.

I love how guys are writing off a kid that is Draft pick age. WHY? Why is he done already at 22? These same people wrote off Shved and DWILL. You have to at least allow the kid a chance to actually be taught and worked with to see if he can grow and improve his skills. His base talent alone would be welcome IMO.

writing off? why is this so hard to get.

people are saying that his chances for success are low but of course, everything is possible.

Shaw sucked and there is zero chance he makes it in todays game (unless he is not that brian shaw).

Hope is fine but why can't you answer what you think his chances of success are? 1-10? 0-100%? Why do you always run from this question? Its a valid question and not a finger pointer.

How is it a valid question? What the hell is the point if I say 23.6% or 17.4%?

Fine, I think there is a 18.323% chance Tony Wroten is successful here.

Who the hell cares what the percentage is? I want to talk about how it could work, how it might work, why it might not. You want to TALK about why it might not work, give some reasons, some observations.

I could give a crap about the percentage - I'm a fan of the team, not a stock broker.

you want to guarantee a contract to a guy when you have no idea if he has a shot of being successful?

It is a very valid question though you are not taking it seriously since this is just a game for you. THIS IS MY LIFE!!!!!!

nixluva wrote:

mreinman wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

mreinman wrote:

nixluva wrote:

crzymdups wrote:

Malcolm wrote:

nixluva wrote:I use my evaluation of a player's talents and try to predict how those talents will work in a given situation.

Sorry, but the only substantial argument for Wroten that you and I can agree on . . . is that he must have something if Phil Jackson thinks he does.

If it weren't for that . . . I don't see how I'd ever consider Wroten.

For a guard to shoot only a career 65% from the free throw line . . . is about as disqualifying a fact as I can think of for Triangle Culture.

John Paxson (PG) -- 80%
Michael Jordan (SG) -- 84%
BJ Armstrong (PG) -- 86%
Steve Kerr (PG) -- 86%

Derek Fisher (PG) -- 81%
Kobe Bryant (SG) -- 83%
Shannon Brown (SG) -- 81%
Sasha Vujacic (SG) -- 86%

I mean COME ON . . . I myself could shoot better than 65%.

It speaks of lack of discipline and commitment.

(BTW: Rajon Rondo is not an exception. Yes, he's an all-star even though he shoots a career 60% FT rate . . . but I can't see him fitting into Triangle Culture).

You left out Ron Harper, starting PG for the 72 win and 70 win teams.

career ft% .720

bulls starting pg 94-95 ft% .618
bulls starting pg 95-96 ft% .705
bulls starting pg 96-97 ft% .707
bulls starting pg 97-98 ft% .750

I think Wroten and Ron Harper are similar players - big guards, slashers, shooting not their strong point, but they can see the floor, defend either guard position, run, and play heady bball.

I think when Phil looks at Wroten, Ron Harper is probably his model as much as anyone else.

I'll expand further - Harper's fg% and 3pt%

bulls starting pg 94-95 fg% .426 | 3pt% .282
bulls starting pg 95-96 fg% .467 | 3pt% .269
bulls starting pg 96-97 fg% .436 | 3pt% .362
bulls starting pg 97-98 fg% .441 | 3pt% .190

Great Post crzymdups. In addition to Ron Harper people are forgetting Brian Shaw who was another 6-6 guard that wasn't a great jump shooter.

This is pretty much the whole point of taking a look at this kid. He's got the size, athletic ability, passing, driving ability and defensive potential to fit what Phil likes in a guard. He's not a strong shooter so far but he's only 22 and has room to grow. MANY guards have been eventually able to improve their shooting. It's not a guarantee that he will but he's young enough to warrant taking a look.

I love how guys are writing off a kid that is Draft pick age. WHY? Why is he done already at 22? These same people wrote off Shved and DWILL. You have to at least allow the kid a chance to actually be taught and worked with to see if he can grow and improve his skills. His base talent alone would be welcome IMO.

writing off? why is this so hard to get.

people are saying that his chances for success are low but of course, everything is possible.

Shaw sucked and there is zero chance he makes it in todays game (unless he is not that brian shaw).

Hope is fine but why can't you answer what you think his chances of success are? 1-10? 0-100%? Why do you always run from this question? Its a valid question and not a finger pointer.

How is it a valid question? What the hell is the point if I say 23.6% or 17.4%?

Fine, I think there is a 18.323% chance Tony Wroten is successful here.

Who the hell cares what the percentage is? I want to talk about how it could work, how it might work, why it might not. You want to TALK about why it might not work, give some reasons, some observations.

I could give a crap about the percentage - I'm a fan of the team, not a stock broker.

you want to guarantee a contract to a guy when you have no idea if he has a shot of being successful?

It is a very valid question though you are not taking it seriously since this is just a game for you. THIS IS MY LIFE!!!!!!

Who's guaranteeing a contract to Wroten? My take is that Phil is doing this in a smart way. Try the kid out this summer and see how he reponds. Check him out in Training Camp as well and if he looks good enough he makes the roster, but there are no long term commitments unless Phil wants to keep the kid.

I'm okay with that and ok with him doing this with 20 other guys as well.

I actually would love if we gave each guy that phil even thinks about a 20 pager :-)

dacash wrote:WOW
20
pages

Nice try to push it to 20

dacash wrote:
hopefully
it
works
now

crzymdups wrote:

dacash wrote:WOW
20
pages

Nice try to push it to 20