Posted by PresIke:
Why is any defense of an Isiah move have to be so oversimplified into broad sweeping mis-generalizations of what was stated? To defend Collins' upside mean he's "gold" or that he's going to be a top 5 pg? Please point to the part where that was stated. I did mention Ron Harper and Derek Harper, but I didn't imply that he would be as good as them at the top of their game. All I did was ask if that's what someone meant. He played well at the end of the season, so why is it wrong to think that he could be good. He was pretty close to averaging a triple double, so that means he's a certified backup guard and to think he couldn't be a pretty darn good NBA player is dumb?
Not that I agree that Collins, Frye, Lee, Nate or Balkman will be superstars, but how come Tyrus Thomas gets a pass as a potential superstar, but they don't when he has shown even less reason, IMHO, to be so? What because of so-called potential when he was drafted?
Gilbert Areans was a second round pick, Spree, Parker & Lee (I believe both were near the last 2 picks) were late first rounders and Kwame Brown and Kandiman were the #1 pick at one point. Which players would you rather have now?
You then claim that there is a "0.00001%" chance of them being a star. Would you care to share what what kind of statistical analysis this is based on? Please share that with us if you would because I'd like to see it...
Ok, I'm being a smart alec....the reality is that there is no statistical analysis to support this claim, it's a bunch of rhetoric from fans who apparently hate Isiah, and refuse to even consider the prospect that some guys they thought were gonna suck might be good.
Think about that, what is the benefit of not having any hope for Collins? It even goes against what he did on the court last year. So Frank Williams didn't live up to the hype...so what. Just because one player we had hopes for didn't doesn't mean every player we draft is going to be the same. Doesn't the self-deprecating Knick fan stuff ever get old to some here? So what Collins doesn't become a star, I can live with it, but why not have some hope that he could be pretty good? Please provide a good reason why as a fan one should decide to ignore hope altogether, after seeing positive signs in a player, and live in misery thinking about the team?
I challenge all of the "My life revolves around posting on UK and RealGM as an anti-Isiah Knick fan" to ask yourself why you go so far out of your way to undervalue every player on the Knicks? It's like we are self-hating fans so used to crappy draft picks and feeling like we get shafted and made fun of by everyone else in the sports world that we refuse to see the potential upside in our own youth, and to do so is somehow an implication of claiming they are the next superstar when that was never stated.
It isn't so black and white man. I can see some players not panning out, but I hope they do. Collins has some potential, and I like him. Postell was NOTHING compared to Collins, based on what I saw. Postell's hype was when he was drafted, fans felt we got a god player but he never showed us jack on the court when he got his chances, so guess what he was not that good to begin with.
But when Mardy got PT he showed things on the court that went against a lot of what was said about him. Some criticisms were accurate, he can't shoot consistently (although I think his stroke looks fine), but he is more athletic and physical than the scouting report said. Go check the NBA draft report on him and see how wrong it is about that part of his game. This is one tough dude who's not afraid. Lee and Balkman are also similar in mentality which is a major reason why they have done well, IMHO. They all play with a lot of confidence and toughness which is not common in young plaeyrs today. So now he's anthony Johnson? That dude was slow, and not much of a creator? Collins is more athletic and more interesting to me than the prodding Johnson ever looked like on the court.
Don't you think he deserves a chance before assuming he's a mediocre backup PG after what he showed late last year?
[Edited by - PresIke on 05-29-2007 5:35 PM]
Pres, wow, how did you get all of that from my post? First of all, my response wasn't directed at you. Second of all, there were posts like this:
Worst Case Lakers/Bulls Ron Harper
I mean Ron Harper as a worst case? That's pretty freakin' good, don't you think!?
I agree with you that you're being a smart alec. Outside of that, all I said was that he can flop, just like any draft player can flop, so if we're talking about worst case, it's a flop... it's not Ron Harper. Worst case is also lower than Charlie Ward or Greg Anthony. Those were both good NBA players. Great, no.
Plain and simple, until he gets enough chance to prove himself over a full season, he can flop, just like Frye did. Is his upside high? His upside is reasonable. I think he could certainly be a good player for this team. That's not an insult to him. It's just holding realistic expectations, vs. expecting everyone to be a star.
As I've said many times before (and been many time ignored), the general consensus among the lovers on the board:
Curry is a star
Lee is a star
Balkman is a star
Crawford is possibly a star
Marbury is a star
There's only so much room; not every player can be a star. If you guys think Collins is also a star, then knock someone else off your star list. That simple.
Why is it taken as such an offense that I think Collins could simply help the team (and has the potential to flop, as any drafted player does) but isn't a star? Explain that.
And if you think that I think Collins has no hope, you just haven't been listening. Sorry.
[Edited by - Solace on May 29 2007 5:55 PM]Wishing everyone well. I enjoyed posting here for a while, but as I matured I realized this forum isn't for me. We all evolve. Thanks for the memories everyone.
I just said we need to give him time and he doesn't need to be a star and not everyone can be a star. Where's the disagreement? No wonder you drive Bippity nuts.
5/29/2007 10:57 PM