foosballnick wrote:

ramtour420 wrote:

martin wrote:

ramtour420 wrote:

VDesai wrote:Shamet isn't better. However if the Mikal role was to guard ballhandlers, shoot threes and provide some secondary shot creation off the bounce- than Deuce does all of those things better than Mikal.

There's been this debate over whether Deuce should start over Hart. Deuce doesn't do the Hart things as well (Rebound, playmaking).

So there's absolutely an argument for Deuce to start over Mikal and not Hart.

Ok, let's take this thought and run with it. Agree that maybe moving Bridges to the bench for a few games might light a fire. Either that or cause discontent. Either would be better than coasting, which I feel he is doing now. If he gets upset with benching then there is going to be a reaction. Bridges being a grownup I expect an adult reaction. We need that for the second half of the season playoff push.

Benching a player for a month of bad games would be disastrous for a team. It’s why coaches don’t do it to guys at that level.

It’s a sure fire way for a coach to get fired or lose his whole team and then get fired. This is like coaching 202.

Good thing I am not a coach then. Screw that. Let's just have Bridges coast off of his amazing accolades. Like he is a superstar that's living out his legacy towards retirement. His achievements include:

1) 5 first round picks
2) The Streak
3) Two way player
4) ....drawing blanks here,those two plays in the Celtics series maybe?

Forgot one
5)the Villanova connection. Of course

Btw ,I didn't want this to become a "$hit on Bridges"thread. I actually like him because of point number 3 on my list. I just feel like Shamet might be a better player, that's all

Sure you did. You created a thread basically saying that a Vet Minimum player who has been injured and missed significant time while here is better than Bridges and also pointed out how much thr Knicks gave up for him in a trade. That's ****ting on a player 101.

Shamet is good as a role player against mostly 2nd units for 3 & D. When you put him against starters for significant time, his value diminishes and becomes exposed.

Also the picks are still years out and this is a win now team. It won last year.
ITs like Money. Spend it on a vacation and pehraps enjoy the moment and the memories. You don't have the money but did you get something in return?

Mikal is a really good role player starter on pretty much any team.

martin wrote:Shamet is a really good bench player in a well defined role.

Mikal is a really good role player starter on pretty much any team.

Exactly

foosballnick wrote:

ramtour420 wrote:

martin wrote:

ramtour420 wrote:

VDesai wrote:Shamet isn't better. However if the Mikal role was to guard ballhandlers, shoot threes and provide some secondary shot creation off the bounce- than Deuce does all of those things better than Mikal.

There's been this debate over whether Deuce should start over Hart. Deuce doesn't do the Hart things as well (Rebound, playmaking).

So there's absolutely an argument for Deuce to start over Mikal and not Hart.

Ok, let's take this thought and run with it. Agree that maybe moving Bridges to the bench for a few games might light a fire. Either that or cause discontent. Either would be better than coasting, which I feel he is doing now. If he gets upset with benching then there is going to be a reaction. Bridges being a grownup I expect an adult reaction. We need that for the second half of the season playoff push.

Benching a player for a month of bad games would be disastrous for a team. It’s why coaches don’t do it to guys at that level.

It’s a sure fire way for a coach to get fired or lose his whole team and then get fired. This is like coaching 202.

Good thing I am not a coach then. Screw that. Let's just have Bridges coast off of his amazing accolades. Like he is a superstar that's living out his legacy towards retirement. His achievements include:

1) 5 first round picks
2) The Streak
3) Two way player
4) ....drawing blanks here,those two plays in the Celtics series maybe?

Forgot one
5)the Villanova connection. Of course

Btw ,I didn't want this to become a "$hit on Bridges"thread. I actually like him because of point number 3 on my list. I just feel like Shamet might be a better player, that's all

Sure you did. You created a thread basically saying that a Vet Minimum player who has been injured and missed significant time while here is better than Bridges and also pointed out how much thr Knicks gave up for him in a trade. That's ****ting on a player 101.

Shamet is good as a role player against mostly 2nd units for 3 & D. When you put him against starters for significant time, his value diminishes and becomes exposed.

Starter vs bench is not how you judge a player. It's not objective. What is objective is that Bridges is shooting 39.8% from 3 this season. That's elite. Shamet is shooting 43.5% nothing to argue there.

Now , one thing we could argue and it's subjective is their d. Bridges gets lost fighting over screens every time. Shamet fights over and stays with his man.

ramtour420 wrote:Some numbers from NBA.com for 25-26 season

Shamet OFFRTG 112.3 DEFRTG 109.9
Bridges. OFFRTG.118.1. DEFRTG 112.9

So Shamet is a better defender, but Bridges is better offensively even tho he doesn't shoot the 3 as well as Shamet does

That defensive rating is a little skewed though. Bridges is always guarding the top guard and/or wing offensive player along with OG.

fitzfarm wrote:I think bridges should come off the bench, McBride deserves the starter minutes over bridges . McBride is statistically better than bridges in all aspects.

But doing so would make management look really bad we gave up a ton to get bridges. But maybe coming off the bench would be a wake up call and light a fire under bridges, coming off the bench would give him more of a green light .

I love Deuce and I'm one of his biggest supporters since draft day. But even I can't say Deuce is better than Mikal. And I've never been a true Mikal fan, but I always have a soft spot for 2 way players. I just think his 2-way abilities are slightly overrated (just slightly).

The fact are: Mikal can guard 3-4 positions....Sometimes 5 against a small ball center. Deuce doesn't have that kind of physical range being undersized. Mikals mid-range jumper / fadeaway is unguardable. All you can do is hope he miss.

Deuce is simply a different player. We don't have this type on the team. And he can only guard 2 positions. He can't break his man off the dribble and get to the rim like he should at his height.

If we are comparing who's a tougher or NY type of player, it's Deuce hands down. Better? Thats subjective and it's only looking at his recent slump. When Mikal was on fire, the entire forum was quiet. Some said you can have the picks. Now some are saying, we want the picks back. These guys are not robots and Mikal is not a superstar. And he's not worth 5 picks, but that was the asking price from the Nets.

Yes I believe he should come off the bench. But I'm not sure how fragile Mikal is with that decision. Does it make him worse? Deuce is a pro, off the bench or starting. so I rather utilize and keep the pampers on Mikal, unless a trade comes up. Doesn't matter who starts for me, as long as Brown utilize Deuce in crutch time.

blkexec wrote:

Philc1 wrote:Shamet is DDV lite. Energy wing off the bench who can sometimes hit a 3. Nice player he’s not as good as Bridges.

Yes, Shamet gives us what we lost in DDV and Randle......Toughness....iHart was another one. Losing all 3 was a tough pill to swallow, cause we all knew Mikal and Towns did not have that same toughness, but hoped for Towns sake, his offense would shine. But just like pickup ball or rec ball, when you have an offensive player that's not producing on offense, they are a liability.

We were so tough we couldn’t get past the second round.

Also, when is the last time Bridges missed a game? To me that is real toughness.