GS vs Suns - 10/10
Curry - 37 min, 6-12 shooting, 4-4 FT, 7 reb, 7 ast, 1 blk, 4 TO - 18 pts
Clark - 25 min, 4-16 shooting, 2-2 FT, 6 reb, 0 ast - 10 pts



Thunder vs Hornets - 10/10
Harden - 30 min, 3-6 shooting, 0-0 FT, 0 reb, 1 ast, 4 TO - 8 pts
Mullens - 23 min, 1-3 shooting, 2-2 FT, 1 reb, 1 blk - 4 pts

Cavs vs 'Cats - 10/10
Henderson - 22 min, 3-8 shooting, 3-4 FT, 5 reb, 1 ast - 10 pts


Bulls vs 'Bucks - 10/10
Johnson - 26 min, 3-6 shooting, 8-10 FT, 7 reb, 3 ast, 6 TO - 13 pts
Meeks - 24 min, 3-8 shooting, 4-4 FT, 0 reb, 0 ast - 10 pts
Jennings - 25 min, 3-12 shooting, 0-0 FT, 3 reb, 5 ast, 2 stl, 3 TO - 6 pts

Anthony Morrow is beasting - seriously great from outside

i'll agree w/u Curry looks seasoned already & ready for the NBA level game... he looks to be ahead of many in his draft class from what little we've seen of him so far, but again, that doesn't mean a guy like J Hill won't turn out to be a better player in the end... we gotta give these kids a chance to grow & prove just how good they're gonna be, & that takes a couple years at the very least... we can't keep jumping on every game & trying to prognosticate where these kids are gonna be in 5 years, & yet people always wanna try & do it.

Posted by Caseloads:

Posted by TMS:

i'll agree w/u Curry looks seasoned already & ready for the NBA level game... he looks to be ahead of many in his draft class from what little we've seen of him so far, but again, that doesn't mean a guy like J Hill won't turn out to be a better player in the end... we gotta give these kids a chance to grow & prove just how good they're gonna be, & that takes a couple years at the very least... we can't keep jumping on every game & trying to prognosticate where these kids are gonna be in 5 years, & yet people always wanna try & do it.

true, but people want guys who can get it from the start. most stars come in as beasts and grow into stardom from there. how many stars were late bloomers? none that I know of.

i can think of several dude... Jermaine O'Neal took a few years to come into his own... & although Zach Randolph isn't a superstar, he has been a very productive player over his career & it took him a few years also... & look at Dwight Howard... for a #1 overall pick u can easily say his first couple years in the NBA were not exactly star calibre seasons... it took him time to get a feel of the NBA game as well... another guy we might be able to point to in a couple years is Greg Oden... up to this point he's looked completely lost but i think he's starting to come around, he's showing some signs in some clips i've seen so far... bigmen tend to take longer to develop in the NBA

Posted by Caseloads:

Posted by TMS:

Posted by Caseloads:

Posted by TMS:

i'll agree w/u Curry looks seasoned already & ready for the NBA level game... he looks to be ahead of many in his draft class from what little we've seen of him so far, but again, that doesn't mean a guy like J Hill won't turn out to be a better player in the end... we gotta give these kids a chance to grow & prove just how good they're gonna be, & that takes a couple years at the very least... we can't keep jumping on every game & trying to prognosticate where these kids are gonna be in 5 years, & yet people always wanna try & do it.

true, but people want guys who can get it from the start. most stars come in as beasts and grow into stardom from there. how many stars were late bloomers? none that I know of.

i can think of several dude... Jermaine O'Neal took a few years to come into his own... & although Zach Randolph isn't a superstar, he has been a very productive player over his career & it took him a few years also... & look at Dwight Howard... for a #1 overall pick u can easily say his first couple years in the NBA were not exactly star calibre seasons... it took him time to get a feel of the NBA game as well... another guy we might be able to point to in a couple years is Greg Oden... up to this point he's looked completely lost but i think he's starting to come around, he's showing some signs in some clips i've seen so far... bigmen tend to take longer to develop in the NBA

ok, so, of note, only Jermaine O'neal could, COULD, count. But Jermaine O'neal was a straight from HS player, much younger AND on a portland team going for the title, AND could play to start - he battled shaq in limited time. Zach randolph was good to start. Dwight howard was good to start - not beasting, but good. and you SUGGEST a greg oden. Greg oden started half his games the only season he played, for a playoff team. That is not stuck on the bench, not in the rotation lotto player Hill.

no, that's just off the top of my head... there's more guys like Ben Wallace, Al Jefferson, Chris Kaman as well... & even tho we no longer consider guys like Jamaal Magloire, Brad Miller, Mehmet Okur & Theo Ratliff as "stars" anymore, they were all very good bigmen in the NBA at 1 point & they all had relatively slow starts to their careers production wise... like i said before, sometimes it takes longer for bigmen to get a feel of the NBA game... & dj's favorite player Bargnani wasn't exciting anyone his first couple seasons either but last year he began to show some signs of being worthy of a high lottery pick... how long do u think it's gonna take Hasheem Thabeet to mature into the player he's projected to be? u think he's gonna be good right from the get go? i highly doubt it.

dude, we haven't even started the season yet & u'r projecting Hill's upside already... can u show just a little patience? i'm not even asking for a lot, just a little.

al jeff and kaman rocked from the start. b wallace was a second rounder, not a lotto pick.

magloire rocked to start, b miller ok - fine. okur could play to start, didnt get much burn in deetroit.

i'll give hill some patience. no prob

Posted by TMS:

& btw, Zach Randolph was not "good from the start"... he could barely break the rotation his rookie season too & i think it's fair to say he was a lot more developed skills wise than Jordan Hill when he was drafted.

[Edited by - TMS on 10-11-2009 2:58 PM]

What chew mean, bro??

You talkin' like Zach Randolph is good RIGHT NOW. He is a scrub, year 1 or year 10, this guy has always sucked. And don't EVEN DARE about bringing up 20/10...20/10 MEANS NOTHING if you're a scrub. Look at Marbury.

Posted by orangeblobman:

Posted by TMS:

& btw, Zach Randolph was not "good from the start"... he could barely break the rotation his rookie season too & i think it's fair to say he was a lot more developed skills wise than Jordan Hill when he was drafted.

[Edited by - TMS on 10-11-2009 2:58 PM]

What chew mean, bro??

You talkin' like Zach Randolph is good RIGHT NOW. He is a scrub, year 1 or year 10, this guy has always sucked. And don't EVEN DARE about bringing up 20/10...20/10 MEANS NOTHING if you're a scrub. Look at Marbury.

stop talking nonsense... i hate the guy as much as the next but he's no scrub.

Posted by TMS:

Posted by orangeblobman:

Posted by TMS:

& btw, Zach Randolph was not "good from the start"... he could barely break the rotation his rookie season too & i think it's fair to say he was a lot more developed skills wise than Jordan Hill when he was drafted.

[Edited by - TMS on 10-11-2009 2:58 PM]

What chew mean, bro??

You talkin' like Zach Randolph is good RIGHT NOW. He is a scrub, year 1 or year 10, this guy has always sucked. And don't EVEN DARE about bringing up 20/10...20/10 MEANS NOTHING if you're a scrub. Look at Marbury.

stop talking nonsense... i hate the guy as much as the next but he's no scrub.

no, he actually IS a scrub. a player is judged by being a winner or loser, you can put up 50/20 and be a loser, bro.