Posted by fishmike:

Posted by holfresh:

Posted by nyk4ever:

Posted by crzymdups:

Frye is going to be an all-star, or near all-star for the rest of his career.

I wouldn't trade Curry for Bynum either and anyone who says they would is pouting.

Why so? Why are you allowed to think that Frye is going to be a near all-star and others aren't allowed to think that Bynum is a near all-star? What makes you so elitist in this fashion?

The guy has all the skills to become a dominant beast in the post. Will he? Who knows but I see no reason why he wouldn't. He has a great work-ethic and that can go a long way.

[Edited by - nyk4ever on 07-18-2006 5:17 PM]

Dominant beast in the post..Dude don't embarrass yourself....He's third string to Kwame Brown...Think about that...If Bynum has near allstar skills, pigs can fly...

So David Lee is garbage because he was 3rd string to Antonio Davis and Mo Taylor? Same logic right?

Posted by holfresh:

Posted by fishmike:

Posted by holfresh:

Posted by nyk4ever:

Posted by crzymdups:

Frye is going to be an all-star, or near all-star for the rest of his career.

I wouldn't trade Curry for Bynum either and anyone who says they would is pouting.

Why so? Why are you allowed to think that Frye is going to be a near all-star and others aren't allowed to think that Bynum is a near all-star? What makes you so elitist in this fashion?

The guy has all the skills to become a dominant beast in the post. Will he? Who knows but I see no reason why he wouldn't. He has a great work-ethic and that can go a long way.

[Edited by - nyk4ever on 07-18-2006 5:17 PM]

Dominant beast in the post..Dude don't embarrass yourself....He's third string to Kwame Brown...Think about that...If Bynum has near allstar skills, pigs can fly...

So David Lee is garbage because he was 3rd string to Antonio Davis and Mo Taylor? Same logic right?

Well David Lee didn't get playing time at the 4...Since you ask...I think you are garbage when your numbers are 1.6 PPG 1.7 RPG 29% FT

Also David Lee is a role player...No defense or offense to speak of....Rebounds well, thats it..

I like him but don't make me bash him....

Posted by crzymdups:

Posted by holfresh:

Well David Lee didn't get playing time at the 4...Since you ask...I think you are garbage when your numbers are 1.6 PPG 1.7 RPG 29% FT

Also David Lee is a role player...No defense or offense to speak of....Rebounds well, thats it..

I like him but don't make me bash him....

Lee was our best rebounder per minute and led all rookies in FG% and is developing more and more of a jumper. He's also a great passer for a guy his size. There is no reason whatsoever to dislike him.

Posted by Solace:

Posted by crzymdups:

Posted by Solace:

Originally posted by crzymdups:

even in limited minutes DLee put up a PER of 15.2. Bynum put up one of 7.2. how's that logic holding up?

To be fair, I don't think Bynum played enough minutes to even get much of a sample. ... and he's 18! I mean, he barely played 300 minutes on the season, and those minutes were mostly a minute here, a minute there, and the occasional garbage time. Geez, if he was on the Knicks, you'd all be touting him as next coming of Wilt, so let's try to be a little objective here. Just a little! Is that asking too much?

[Edited by - Solace on 07-19-2006 11:18 AM]

I am objective. David Lee, Frye and Curry have all shown things on the NBA level to make me think they can succeed. They're all 22-23. Bynum is 18, hasn't shown a thing on the NBA level, hasn't had a good rookie season compared to other 18 yr old rookies who went on to success. I'm sorry, where's the argument again?

The argument is based on the fact that you're making assumptions that have ZERO basis. It's fine if you don't like Bynum, but again, baseless arguments are just foolish and a waste of most of our time. Bynum has upside, and is very young, so we really won't know the answer for, at least, three or four years. Your comparisons have been towards exceptional cases, instead of the general rule. The general rule says that we should wait and see. So, please do that.

Anyway, back to the point of the original topic, most people wouldn't trade Frye for Bynum, so where's the argument? Frye is clearly the better player right now. He's also more experienced and older. Trading Frye for Bynum, at best, is a huge risk. End of story.

Posted by buddapaw:

Posted by Solace:

Posted by crzymdups:

Posted by Solace:

Originally posted by crzymdups:

even in limited minutes DLee put up a PER of 15.2. Bynum put up one of 7.2. how's that logic holding up?

To be fair, I don't think Bynum played enough minutes to even get much of a sample. ... and he's 18! I mean, he barely played 300 minutes on the season, and those minutes were mostly a minute here, a minute there, and the occasional garbage time. Geez, if he was on the Knicks, you'd all be touting him as next coming of Wilt, so let's try to be a little objective here. Just a little! Is that asking too much?

[Edited by - Solace on 07-19-2006 11:18 AM]

I am objective. David Lee, Frye and Curry have all shown things on the NBA level to make me think they can succeed. They're all 22-23. Bynum is 18, hasn't shown a thing on the NBA level, hasn't had a good rookie season compared to other 18 yr old rookies who went on to success. I'm sorry, where's the argument again?

The argument is based on the fact that you're making assumptions that have ZERO basis. It's fine if you don't like Bynum, but again, baseless arguments are just foolish and a waste of most of our time. Bynum has upside, and is very young, so we really won't know the answer for, at least, three or four years. Your comparisons have been towards exceptional cases, instead of the general rule. The general rule says that we should wait and see. So, please do that.

Anyway, back to the point of the original topic, most people wouldn't trade Frye for Bynum, so where's the argument? Frye is clearly the better player right now. He's also more experienced and older. Trading Frye for Bynum, at best, is a huge risk. End of story.

Being 23 years old is not ancient either Fyre still has time to improve, he has a great outside shot , the defence and post moves can be developed. Why trade a known commodity for the unknown. That's just plain ole stupid. Just because you may think that Bynum has the tools to become a superstar someday doesn't make it a fact. They were many before him and there will be many after him.
e.g.
Kwame Brown
Sam Bowie
Stinka Dare
just to name a few big men
J.R. Rider
Billy Owens
Harold Baby Jordan Miner

Posted by Solace:

Posted by buddapaw:

Posted by Solace:

Posted by crzymdups:

Posted by Solace:

Originally posted by crzymdups:

even in limited minutes DLee put up a PER of 15.2. Bynum put up one of 7.2. how's that logic holding up?

To be fair, I don't think Bynum played enough minutes to even get much of a sample. ... and he's 18! I mean, he barely played 300 minutes on the season, and those minutes were mostly a minute here, a minute there, and the occasional garbage time. Geez, if he was on the Knicks, you'd all be touting him as next coming of Wilt, so let's try to be a little objective here. Just a little! Is that asking too much?

[Edited by - Solace on 07-19-2006 11:18 AM]

I am objective. David Lee, Frye and Curry have all shown things on the NBA level to make me think they can succeed. They're all 22-23. Bynum is 18, hasn't shown a thing on the NBA level, hasn't had a good rookie season compared to other 18 yr old rookies who went on to success. I'm sorry, where's the argument again?

The argument is based on the fact that you're making assumptions that have ZERO basis. It's fine if you don't like Bynum, but again, baseless arguments are just foolish and a waste of most of our time. Bynum has upside, and is very young, so we really won't know the answer for, at least, three or four years. Your comparisons have been towards exceptional cases, instead of the general rule. The general rule says that we should wait and see. So, please do that.

Anyway, back to the point of the original topic, most people wouldn't trade Frye for Bynum, so where's the argument? Frye is clearly the better player right now. He's also more experienced and older. Trading Frye for Bynum, at best, is a huge risk. End of story.

Being 23 years old is not ancient either Fyre still has time to improve, he has a great outside shot , the defence and post moves can be developed. Why trade a known commodity for the unknown. That's just plain ole stupid. Just because you may think that Bynum has the tools to become a superstar someday doesn't make it a fact. They were many before him and there will be many after him.
e.g.
Kwame Brown
Sam Bowie
Stinka Dare
just to name a few big men
J.R. Rider
Billy Owens
Harold Baby Jordan Miner

Um dude, I was saying we *shouldn't* trade Frye for Bynum. I also said bashing Bynum at this stage is foolish. How is that hard to comprehend?

Posted by crzymdups:

Posted by BRIGGS:


Channing Frye wasnt even 200 pounds his freshmen year at AZ. You can't realistically compare players who are 23 years old with 4 years of major CBB to an 18 year old. I am not in terms of experience, but I do know that neither CF or DL will be 7-3290-300 athletic multi-skilled players no matter what they do--cant teach size.

yes, but Briggs the whole point is that Frye, Lee and Curry have played a lot of minutes at a high level, whether it's college or the NBA for the last 4 yrs. Bynum risks not getting much PT anywhere for the next few years, and not getting many touches when he's on the court with Supastar Cowboy Kobe running the offense. So, where is he going to develop that size? NBDL? He should've gone to college.

Posted by Bonn1997:

Exactly; no one's given any evidence for why Bynum will turn out better than those players turned out. I could see some people here trading very solid but not flashy players for those guys. I bet Briggs would have traded Allan Houston for any of them early in their careers as soon as they put up good summer league stats.