Posted by misterearl:

What, no miracles?

arkrud - Then how do you explain the 1969 Mets?

The US Gold Medal Olympic hockey team?



[Edited by - misterearl on 09-25-2007 09:33 AM]

Posted by misterearl:

"Come on!!!
This is about earl's believes.
And believes are irrational.
Why are you looking for some logic?"

That is an interesting take arkrud. Beliefs can be strange things. To anyone who has lived history it would seem as highly irrational as someone else believing the Holocaust never happened. There are those who believe that. It is their belief. It cannot be changed.

Or believing in one supreme being over another. That too, is the immovable object of too many wars and too much destruction.

Logic... (pause) or belief?

Repeat... Logic ....(pause) or belief?

Or fact?

Very different things.

Please don't be so quick to be offended if I inject the slightest amount of humor in my" belief" that Wilson Chandler will be The Mayor... or that he is already better than Trevor Ariza.

He is "better" because he is ours. He is a Knicks player.

If I show the same unconditional support for a franchise I've supported in the same manner of positive "belief" in better things to come, for decades, why is that a crime all of a sudden?

Why is that a crime?








[Edited by - misterearl on 09-25-2007 07:14 AM]

Posted by nixluva:

Posted by islesfan:

Posted by nixluva:

Posted by TrueBlue:

Posted by nixluva:

Isles, Trueblue, come on guys. Ariza had almost no real NBA skills when he came in the league. He was all energy and athletic ability. Chandler is already a much more polished all around talent. If you're gonna start saying that he has to play a game then you could say the same for every other pick in this draft. Oden and Durant aren't good yet either. I think that's just being silly. If you've got eyes you can see the skills.

Again there are no guarantees, but I think Chan has better tools than Ariza already. I would guess that if he was left open like they did to Ariza, Chan would nail some shots. He's got a better physique than Ariza already too. Almost the same athletic ability, but stronger.

That's an opinion of where Chandler's game is at now compared to where Ariza's was then.

That's not what Earl said, stay on point Nix and stop being irrational. Earl said Chandler is already better than Ariza... meaning Current Knick player is better than Current Orlando player. Not Current Knick player better than the Past Knick player. Ariza is a starter/definite 6th man Chandler might not crack the rotation.

What is it with you and insulting me. Can't you just make your point without saying that i'm irrational or some other characterization If you actually read what I wrote. In addition to going back to the level of ability they both had coming in, I also said:

Posted by nixluva:

Again there are no guarantees, but I think Chan has better tools than Ariza already. I would guess that if he was left open like they did to Ariza, Chan would nail some shots. He's got a better physique than Ariza already too. Almost the same athletic ability, but stronger.

With this statement i'm referring to the player Ariza is now. Of course Ariza has a few years of NBA experience on his side and that along with other vets on the Knicks that are ahead of him, is the reason he's not likely to crack the rotation. It doesn't mean that Chan isn't a better overall player. Ariza isn't exactly lighting up the league off the bench either. The guy only started 7 games, so I wouldn't say he's anywhere near starting material. He's a nice energy guy. Right now Chan would hit more 3's IMO.

With all due respect, what's your point? We're discussing misterearl's ridiculous comment that right now Chandler is a better player than Ariza. You're talking about better physiques and specific skills like shooting 3 pointers.

Again, nobody is saying that Chandler can't become better than Ariza, hell he might even surpass him during his rookie year, but it's asinine to say that Chandler is better RIGHT NOW than a 2 year veteran, who has started a handful of games, all before he starts his first training camp.

You guys aren't saying he's a better player, only that he's currently more effective. LIke Malik's know how and experience tended to make him more effective than more talented young players on the team. He's still a limited player, but he overcame a lot of that with know how. This is about effectiveness vs. overall ability. So if 25 games into the season Chan plays better than Ariza, it's invalid cuz he didn't play better from day one of the season?

It IS ENTIRELY possible that Chan could show more ability than Ariza this year. Of course he's gonna have to learn the plays and adjust to the new surroundings, but that doesn't mean that he doesn't ALREADY possess a better game. Which is more to the point of what is being said. Sure Ariza is at an advantage due to his knowing the plays and the league. That still doesn't mean he's a better player, just that he's more ready to contribute due to familiarity. Since the NBA isn't a one game season, you have to judge this over the course of a season. However right now Chan is a better offensive player and I believe he's not that far behind as a defender. If given equal playing time, I think Chan would put up better numbers.

Ariza - 8.9ppg 4.4rpg 1.1asts in 22.4mpg
The guy took seven 3's and missed them all. He avg'd 3.5 makes a game and you know that included a lot of layups and dunks. 82games says he only avg'd about 31% on his jumpers.

Ariza get lucky to get a lot of playing time.
I hope Chan will get it. I am not sure how he can get it zo with what we have on his position?
If he will get on avarage less than 5 min in junk time - how he can show anything?

Posted by nixluva:

You guys aren't saying he's a better player, only that he's currently more effective. LIke Malik's know how and experience tended to make him more effective than more talented young players on the team. He's still a limited player, but he overcame a lot of that with know how. This is about effectiveness vs. overall ability. So if 25 games into the season Chan plays better than Ariza, it's invalid cuz he didn't play better from day one of the season?

It IS ENTIRELY possible that Chan could show more ability than Ariza this year. Of course he's gonna have to learn the plays and adjust to the new surroundings, but that doesn't mean that he doesn't ALREADY possess a better game. Which is more to the point of what is being said. Sure Ariza is at an advantage due to his knowing the plays and the league. That still doesn't mean he's a better player, just that he's more ready to contribute due to familiarity. Since the NBA isn't a one game season, you have to judge this over the course of a season. However right now Chan is a better offensive player and I believe he's not that far behind as a defender. If given equal playing time, I think Chan would put up better numbers.

Ariza - 8.9ppg 4.4rpg 1.1asts in 22.4mpg
The guy took seven 3's and missed them all. He avg'd 3.5 makes a game and you know that included a lot of layups and dunks. 82games says he only avg'd about 31% on his jumpers.

Posted by Masterplan:

Posted by nixluva:

You guys aren't saying he's a better player, only that he's currently more effective. LIke Malik's know how and experience tended to make him more effective than more talented young players on the team. He's still a limited player, but he overcame a lot of that with know how. This is about effectiveness vs. overall ability. So if 25 games into the season Chan plays better than Ariza, it's invalid cuz he didn't play better from day one of the season?

It IS ENTIRELY possible that Chan could show more ability than Ariza this year. Of course he's gonna have to learn the plays and adjust to the new surroundings, but that doesn't mean that he doesn't ALREADY possess a better game. Which is more to the point of what is being said. Sure Ariza is at an advantage due to his knowing the plays and the league. That still doesn't mean he's a better player, just that he's more ready to contribute due to familiarity. Since the NBA isn't a one game season, you have to judge this over the course of a season. However right now Chan is a better offensive player and I believe he's not that far behind as a defender. If given equal playing time, I think Chan would put up better numbers.

Ariza - 8.9ppg 4.4rpg 1.1asts in 22.4mpg
The guy took seven 3's and missed them all. He avg'd 3.5 makes a game and you know that included a lot of layups and dunks. 82games says he only avg'd about 31% on his jumpers.

nixluva the world is full of guys with talent. chandler's got talent; it is "entirely possible" that chandler proves himself to be better than ariza this year or over the course of his career. but, pointing out his talents only goes so far... there are too many head-scratching cases of players who never put it together to count. remember, there were "lack of effort/motor" criticisms dogging wilson pre-draft - you don't have to put stock in them (i don't), but chandler isn't a lock to translate into an NBA player. you can't just discount the savvy of players like malik - it's not a given that every talented young gun *gets it*.

Posted by nixluva:

Posted by islesfan:

Posted by nixluva:

Posted by TrueBlue:

Posted by nixluva:

Isles, Trueblue, come on guys. Ariza had almost no real NBA skills when he came in the league. He was all energy and athletic ability. Chandler is already a much more polished all around talent. If you're gonna start saying that he has to play a game then you could say the same for every other pick in this draft. Oden and Durant aren't good yet either. I think that's just being silly. If you've got eyes you can see the skills.

Again there are no guarantees, but I think Chan has better tools than Ariza already. I would guess that if he was left open like they did to Ariza, Chan would nail some shots. He's got a better physique than Ariza already too. Almost the same athletic ability, but stronger.

That's an opinion of where Chandler's game is at now compared to where Ariza's was then.

That's not what Earl said, stay on point Nix and stop being irrational. Earl said Chandler is already better than Ariza... meaning Current Knick player is better than Current Orlando player. Not Current Knick player better than the Past Knick player. Ariza is a starter/definite 6th man Chandler might not crack the rotation.

What is it with you and insulting me. Can't you just make your point without saying that i'm irrational or some other characterization If you actually read what I wrote. In addition to going back to the level of ability they both had coming in, I also said:

Posted by nixluva:

Again there are no guarantees, but I think Chan has better tools than Ariza already. I would guess that if he was left open like they did to Ariza, Chan would nail some shots. He's got a better physique than Ariza already too. Almost the same athletic ability, but stronger.

With this statement i'm referring to the player Ariza is now. Of course Ariza has a few years of NBA experience on his side and that along with other vets on the Knicks that are ahead of him, is the reason he's not likely to crack the rotation. It doesn't mean that Chan isn't a better overall player. Ariza isn't exactly lighting up the league off the bench either. The guy only started 7 games, so I wouldn't say he's anywhere near starting material. He's a nice energy guy. Right now Chan would hit more 3's IMO.

With all due respect, what's your point? We're discussing misterearl's ridiculous comment that right now Chandler is a better player than Ariza. You're talking about better physiques and specific skills like shooting 3 pointers.

Again, nobody is saying that Chandler can't become better than Ariza, hell he might even surpass him during his rookie year, but it's asinine to say that Chandler is better RIGHT NOW than a 2 year veteran, who has started a handful of games, all before he starts his first training camp.

You guys aren't saying he's a better player, only that he's currently more effective. LIke Malik's know how and experience tended to make him more effective than more talented young players on the team. He's still a limited player, but he overcame a lot of that with know how. This is about effectiveness vs. overall ability. So if 25 games into the season Chan plays better than Ariza, it's invalid cuz he didn't play better from day one of the season?

It IS ENTIRELY possible that Chan could show more ability than Ariza this year. Of course he's gonna have to learn the plays and adjust to the new surroundings, but that doesn't mean that he doesn't ALREADY possess a better game. Which is more to the point of what is being said. Sure Ariza is at an advantage due to his knowing the plays and the league. That still doesn't mean he's a better player, just that he's more ready to contribute due to familiarity. Since the NBA isn't a one game season, you have to judge this over the course of a season. However right now Chan is a better offensive player and I believe he's not that far behind as a defender. If given equal playing time, I think Chan would put up better numbers.

Ariza - 8.9ppg 4.4rpg 1.1asts in 22.4mpg
The guy took seven 3's and missed them all. He avg'd 3.5 makes a game and you know that included a lot of layups and dunks. 82games says he only avg'd about 31% on his jumpers.

Sorry Nix your reasoning would never fly in court. Until Chandler plays actual NBA games no one can say he's a better player than Ariza. Also what about the other side of the ball? As usual you only see things with a one track-dimensional mind. Basketball is a team sport, which involves more than scoring no matter how many different ways a player can score. That's why I said you're irrational because you nullify extremely important components in a debate and try to flip it as if you're unfairly put under fire when called out.

No one is disputing Chandler may have the tools and demonstrate them in a real NBA game. He actually may be the best Knick on the team, who knows. Isles brought up a valid comparison offensively Chandler blows Balkman out of the water because all Balkman is a high energy, decent defender, that dunks right? You won't touch that though will you? What about Jeffries?

Nix have you seen Ariza play ball at all this summer? No you haven't, so you have no idea if he's improved any parts of his game.

Posted by islesfan:

Using nixluva's definition for being a "better player", the CBA is filled with players who are better than Ariza.

nixluva, is Chandler a better player than Balkman, right now? And please explain why you do or don't believe that to be the case.

Posted by nixluva:

Posted by islesfan:

Using nixluva's definition for being a "better player", the CBA is filled with players who are better than Ariza.

nixluva, is Chandler a better player than Balkman, right now? And please explain why you do or don't believe that to be the case.

Obviously by the very nature of the fact that we're talking about a guy who hasn't played a game yet, we have to talk in terms of what we "believe" the players level of ability is. Just like Oden or Durant or any other player in this draft. Still people make assessments like this all the time.

Maybe the CBA is filled with guys who are better than Ariza, I don't know for sure. I doubt it tho. It's my opinion that Chan is a better overall player.

Balkman is not a better player skills wise, but he's got an unreal energy level and intangible effect on the game. It's impossible to judge intangibles completely without games played. I think Chan would be an effective player in our offense whereas Balk isn't a good enough shooter to fulfill that role. Balk does a lot of the garbage type work and I think Chan would be less impactful in those same areas. Balk tho is IMO better than Ariza. I think Balk is more productive and I think right now he's better at what he does than Chan is at what he does and his impact would be felt more. So i'd put Balk ahead of Chan and Ariza IMO.

Why some NY Knicks fans like Isiah?