[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

OT - Balkman playing well
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 3 of 4 ‹ Previous 1  2  3  4 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
GKFv2
Posts: 26752
Alba Posts: 114
Joined: 1/16/2007
Member: #1259
USA
3/16/2009  3:37 AM
Yeah and some guys never improve after their rookie year. See Frye, Channing. Curry, Eddy. Morrison, Adam.

Rookie doesn't mean shiznit to me. Players need to have basic basketball instincts. Can you develop them? sure. But you have to work your ass off. Lets hope Chandler does that.
Thank you, Rick Brunson.
AUTOADVERT
sebstar
Posts: 25698
Alba Posts: 4
Joined: 6/2/2002
Member: #249
USA
3/16/2009  3:37 AM
Posted by TMS:

Chandler would easily be starting on all these teams right now, either as a SF or a SG:

Atlanta
Charlotte
Cleveland
Dallas
Denver
Golden State
Indiana
Lakers
Miami
Minnesota
New Jersey
New York
Oklahoma City
Philadelphia
Portland
Sacramento
San Antonio
Toronto
Utah
Washington

Absolutely.

Are they saying this kind of stuff because he is an Isiah pick?
My saliva and spit can split thread into fiber and bits/ So trust me I'm as live as it gets. --Royce Da 5'9 + DJ Premier = Hip Hop Utopia
NineMike2Whiskey
Posts: 20381
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 8/10/2004
Member: #732
3/16/2009  3:45 AM
Posted by GKFv2:

Yeah and some guys never improve after their rookie year. See Frye, Channing. Curry, Eddy. Morrison, Adam.

Rookie doesn't mean shiznit to me. Players need to have basic basketball instincts. Can you develop them? sure. But you have to work your ass off. Lets hope Chandler does that.

I dont think Chandler will fall into that category. He has gone from a guy with NO 3 point shot and a dirt ugly jumpshot last year to a respectable streak shooter (ala Antoine Walker, by no means something we can cheer about but still a major improvement). His finishing is so much more polished this year, when he drives strong to the hoop nowadays we can expect something good to happen.
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
3/16/2009  3:45 AM
Posted by sebstar:
Posted by TMS:

Chandler would easily be starting on all these teams right now, either as a SF or a SG:

Atlanta
Charlotte
Cleveland
Dallas
Denver
Golden State
Indiana
Lakers
Miami
Minnesota
New Jersey
New York
Oklahoma City
Philadelphia
Portland
Sacramento
San Antonio
Toronto
Utah
Washington

Absolutely.

Are they saying this kind of stuff because he is an Isiah pick?

i hate Isiah as much as anyone but u can't let personal feelings get in the way of objectivity... IMO Wilson Chandler will grow to be better than either Lee or Nate because he's got all the physical tools, his offensive game is well rounded, he plays defense & he's got a great work ethic & seems to have a great character as well... i think of all the guys on this team right now, he's got the most chance of sticking around for the long haul... he's still very young so obviously his consistency is not quite there yet, but give him a year or two & that will probably come as well... of course it may not, but really i have about zero worries when it comes to Wilson Chandler's development... the only thing i can even imagine that's gonna prevent him from becoming a very good player for this franchise in the coming years is if we somehow land 2 star perimeter players like Lebron & Wade or Joe Johnson in 2010.
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
3/16/2009  7:55 AM
Posted by Solace:
Posted by TMS:

Nate is so much better than KT it's not even funny... come on dude... i'm no Isiah lover but let's be objective here.

How? Nate isn't even starter material. He does one thing well, but he cancels it out with how much of a liability he is on defense with his size disadvantage. I would take KT in his prime over Nate right now any day.

[Edited by - Solace on Mar 16 2009 12:44 AM]

Kurt had a prime?
MS
Posts: 27064
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/28/2004
Member: #724
3/16/2009  9:39 AM
Kurt also has been traded for 4 first round picks and was more than servicable when we moved him.

The point here is that we had low cost effective players that I think could've been used more effectively in a trade. The Kings gave Artest away, I am sure we could've put together a package of balkman, collins, crawford, rose for artest and kenny thomas, and then moved zach for a second round pick and then just started Ron at the two guard position for the season.

I thought balkman was more than useful and should have at least been kept around while jefferies was injured. we didn't need roberson, we could have maybe got a little more for the guy
tkf
Posts: 36487
Alba Posts: 6
Joined: 8/13/2001
Member: #87
3/16/2009  10:36 AM
Posted by GKFv2:

Balkman? I wonder why he gets no threads when his ass is glued to the bench most of the time. H's putting up the same numbers he did last year. Who cares?


I don't get it either... when balkman was here, we were told, that we are overrating him, he is nothing more than a hustle role player, he has limited upside...etc..

now that he is gone, there are balkman shrines, we made a mistake, He is beasting, we could use him.. I mean ,just over the top type ish!
Anyone who sits around and waits for the lottery to better themselves, either in real life or in sports, Is a Loser............... TKF
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
3/16/2009  10:53 AM
Posted by tkf:
Posted by GKFv2:

Balkman? I wonder why he gets no threads when his ass is glued to the bench most of the time. H's putting up the same numbers he did last year. Who cares?


I don't get it either... when balkman was here, we were told, that we are overrating him, he is nothing more than a hustle role player, he has limited upside...etc..

now that he is gone, there are balkman shrines, we made a mistake, He is beasting, we could use him.. I mean ,just over the top type ish!
There's no contradiction there. Balkman is a hustle role player. Thinking of him as more was overrating him. At the same time, giving him up for nothing was a mistake. As a hustle/role player, he may have been over-reated but he was still worth more than zero. And it would have been really nice to have a nice hustle/role player still on his rookie contract in 2010.


[Edited by - bonn1997 on 03-16-2009 10:54 AM]
martin
Posts: 79878
Alba Posts: 108
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #2
USA
3/16/2009  11:00 AM
Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by tkf:
Posted by GKFv2:

Balkman? I wonder why he gets no threads when his ass is glued to the bench most of the time. H's putting up the same numbers he did last year. Who cares?


I don't get it either... when balkman was here, we were told, that we are overrating him, he is nothing more than a hustle role player, he has limited upside...etc..

now that he is gone, there are balkman shrines, we made a mistake, He is beasting, we could use him.. I mean ,just over the top type ish!
There's no contradiction there. Balkman is a hustle role player. Thinking of him as more was overrating him. At the same time, giving him up for nothing was a mistake. As a hustle/role player, he may have been over-reated but he was still worth more than zero. And it would have been really nice to have a nice hustle/role player still on his rookie contract in 2010.


[Edited by - bonn1997 on 03-16-2009 10:54 AM]

we gave him up for a second rounder. Which team is going to trade him for a first rounder?
Official sponsor of the PURE KNICKS LOVE Program
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
3/16/2009  11:20 AM
Posted by martin:
Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by tkf:
Posted by GKFv2:

Balkman? I wonder why he gets no threads when his ass is glued to the bench most of the time. H's putting up the same numbers he did last year. Who cares?


I don't get it either... when balkman was here, we were told, that we are overrating him, he is nothing more than a hustle role player, he has limited upside...etc..

now that he is gone, there are balkman shrines, we made a mistake, He is beasting, we could use him.. I mean ,just over the top type ish!
There's no contradiction there. Balkman is a hustle role player. Thinking of him as more was overrating him. At the same time, giving him up for nothing was a mistake. As a hustle/role player, he may have been over-reated but he was still worth more than zero. And it would have been really nice to have a nice hustle/role player still on his rookie contract in 2010.


[Edited by - bonn1997 on 03-16-2009 10:54 AM]

we gave him up for a second rounder. Which team is going to trade him for a first rounder?
In that case, see bold
martin
Posts: 79878
Alba Posts: 108
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #2
USA
3/16/2009  11:31 AM
Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by martin:
Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by tkf:
Posted by GKFv2:

Balkman? I wonder why he gets no threads when his ass is glued to the bench most of the time. H's putting up the same numbers he did last year. Who cares?


I don't get it either... when balkman was here, we were told, that we are overrating him, he is nothing more than a hustle role player, he has limited upside...etc..

now that he is gone, there are balkman shrines, we made a mistake, He is beasting, we could use him.. I mean ,just over the top type ish!
There's no contradiction there. Balkman is a hustle role player. Thinking of him as more was overrating him. At the same time, giving him up for nothing was a mistake. As a hustle/role player, he may have been over-reated but he was still worth more than zero. And it would have been really nice to have a nice hustle/role player still on his rookie contract in 2010.


[Edited by - bonn1997 on 03-16-2009 10:54 AM]

we gave him up for a second rounder. Which team is going to trade him for a first rounder?
In that case, see bold

he doesn't fit into the MDA system, he has not gotten progressively better after any season, his practice habits were reported bad, and he matched Jefferies in output.

Remind me again why he would be good to have on the bench in 2010? Less $ to go after a better free agent?
Official sponsor of the PURE KNICKS LOVE Program
MS
Posts: 27064
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/28/2004
Member: #724
3/16/2009  11:47 AM
Matched jefferies in output. That's a false statement.

Jefferies wasn't as good a rebounder, scorer, ball handler, and shot blocker. No one is saying the guy was an All Star, but with minutes he can put up numbers especially on the glass.

Last five games with 20 plus minutes

22pts 11rbs 2blks
14pts 14rbs
9pts 10rbs 1blk
9pts 14rbs
4pts 7rbs

Jefferies hasn't had a stretch like that maybe ever, he did have bad habits, partied a lot etc, but again you don't just give players away.
Allanfan20
Posts: 35947
Alba Posts: 50
Joined: 1/16/2004
Member: #542
USA
3/16/2009  11:50 AM
Posted by Solace:
Posted by TMS:

Nate is so much better than KT it's not even funny... come on dude... i'm no Isiah lover but let's be objective here.

How? Nate isn't even starter material. He does one thing well, but he cancels it out with how much of a liability he is on defense with his size disadvantage. I would take KT in his prime over Nate right now any day.

[Edited by - Solace on Mar 16 2009 12:44 AM]

Nate. He can score in any way shape or form. He plays the passing lanes and is a pest on defense. His help defense is where he struggles, as well as charging out to shooters. He can create for his teammates on given moments. He's getting better every day. Hustle player.

KT. I loved the guy and everyone here knows it. But, he was a rebounder, could basically guard power power fowards and centers and that's really it. He could spot up shoot and set picks. Was never a shotblocker.

You HAVE to take Nate and he's clearly the BEST player in that trade. Better than Q, better than Kurt and better than Ron Turiaf.

And for the record, we didn't trade Kurt in his prime. He had his best season before that, but after that, he was basically no where to be seen besides on teams that needed him to bang for a little bit.
“Whenever I’m about to do something, I think ‘Would an idiot do that?’ and if they would, I do NOT do that thing.”- Dwight Schrute
martin
Posts: 79878
Alba Posts: 108
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #2
USA
3/16/2009  11:56 AM
Posted by MS:

Matched jefferies in output. That's a false statement.

Jefferies wasn't as good a rebounder, scorer, ball handler, and shot blocker. No one is saying the guy was an All Star, but with minutes he can put up numbers especially on the glass.

Last five games with 20 plus minutes

22pts 11rbs 2blks
14pts 14rbs
9pts 10rbs 1blk
9pts 14rbs
4pts 7rbs

Jefferies hasn't had a stretch like that maybe ever, he did have bad habits, partied a lot etc, but again you don't just give players away.

you let me know what team was gonna trade Balk for more than a second rounder. And note the fact that his value would have gone down in this team with the players we have. No way he get productive minutes behind Chandler, Q, JJ2, etc.

Also, I want to know who those minutes were against and if they were garage time or real playing minutes. Just cause a guy has a good 5 game run dont mean crap. How has his season been?
Official sponsor of the PURE KNICKS LOVE Program
Solace
Posts: 30002
Alba Posts: 20
Joined: 10/30/2003
Member: #479
USA
3/16/2009  12:00 PM
I think you guys missed my point. My point was had we kept KT, he would've been more of an asset than QRich had been. At the time of the trade, Nate was the worst player. Obviously, right now he's better than a guy with a terrible back and a backup, perhaps I should've phrased better.

I'm not going to be lusting over Earl Boykins part two. I'll be happy when Nate is not resigned in 2010.

[Edited by - Solace on Mar 16 2009 12:01 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.
Marv
Posts: 35540
Alba Posts: 69
Joined: 9/2/2002
Member: #315
3/16/2009  12:06 PM
hey the rumors were thick around the balkster - too much pot, too little working on his game. somehow he managed to wear out his welcome here in a short amount of time.
tkf
Posts: 36487
Alba Posts: 6
Joined: 8/13/2001
Member: #87
3/16/2009  12:31 PM
Posted by Bonn1997:
Posted by tkf:
Posted by GKFv2:

Balkman? I wonder why he gets no threads when his ass is glued to the bench most of the time. H's putting up the same numbers he did last year. Who cares?


I don't get it either... when balkman was here, we were told, that we are overrating him, he is nothing more than a hustle role player, he has limited upside...etc..

now that he is gone, there are balkman shrines, we made a mistake, He is beasting, we could use him.. I mean ,just over the top type ish!
There's no contradiction there. Balkman is a hustle role player. Thinking of him as more was overrating him. At the same time, giving him up for nothing was a mistake. As a hustle/role player, he may have been over-reated but he was still worth more than zero. And it would have been really nice to have a nice hustle/role player still on his rookie contract in 2010.


[Edited by - bonn1997 on 03-16-2009 10:54 AM]

I thought we got a second round pick for him.. and looking at some of the second rounders the past few years, I would hardly call that "nothing" would you not trade balkman for chalmers? I would in an instant!!

Anyone who sits around and waits for the lottery to better themselves, either in real life or in sports, Is a Loser............... TKF
tkf
Posts: 36487
Alba Posts: 6
Joined: 8/13/2001
Member: #87
3/16/2009  12:38 PM
Posted by Solace:

I think you guys missed my point. My point was had we kept KT, he would've been more of an asset than QRich had been. At the time of the trade, Nate was the worst player. Obviously, right now he's better than a guy with a terrible back and a backup, perhaps I should've phrased better.

I'm not going to be lusting over Earl Boykins part two. I'll be happy when Nate is not resigned in 2010.

[Edited by - Solace on Mar 16 2009 12:01 PM]
balkman most likely won't be in the league after his rookie deal is done...

Anyone who sits around and waits for the lottery to better themselves, either in real life or in sports, Is a Loser............... TKF
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
3/16/2009  1:16 PM
Posted by tkf:
Posted by GKFv2:

Balkman? I wonder why he gets no threads when his ass is glued to the bench most of the time. H's putting up the same numbers he did last year. Who cares?


I don't get it either... when balkman was here, we were told, that we are overrating him, he is nothing more than a hustle role player, he has limited upside...etc..

now that he is gone, there are balkman shrines, we made a mistake, He is beasting, we could use him.. I mean ,just over the top type ish!

what are u talking about bro? Balkman was well on his way to being the 18 & 9 player i predicted he would be. *cough*
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
TMS
Posts: 60684
Alba Posts: 617
Joined: 5/11/2004
Member: #674
USA
3/16/2009  1:21 PM
Posted by Solace:

I think you guys missed my point. My point was had we kept KT, he would've been more of an asset than QRich had been. At the time of the trade, Nate was the worst player. Obviously, right now he's better than a guy with a terrible back and a backup, perhaps I should've phrased better.

I'm not going to be lusting over Earl Boykins part two. I'll be happy when Nate is not resigned in 2010.

[Edited by - Solace on Mar 16 2009 12:01 PM]

well of course Nate was the worst player at the time of the trade, he wasn't even playing in the NBA yet... but the fact is that he's become the best player in that trade by a clear margin when u compare Nate now to what KT was at the time we traded him... that makes that trade a good one for the Knicks... Nate is definitely not Earl Boykins part 2... he's overrated by many around here & is definitely no superstar, but ur comparison is definitely going off the other deep end bro.
After 7 years & 40K+ posts, banned by martin for calling Nalod a 'moron'. Awesome.
Page 3 of 4 ‹ Previous 1  2  3  4 Next ›
« Reply To Topic
OT - Balkman playing well
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum

©2001-2025 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy