SupremeCommander wrote:

tkf wrote:

cooch2584 wrote:

tkf wrote:

cooch2584 wrote:

tkf wrote:

cooch2584 wrote:

tkf wrote:

cooch2584 wrote:reggie miller took 6486 3s and made 2560 for a 39% average so tkf YOU go do some research.

39% is a lot better than 33, but I was referring to him being an efficient all around shooter, which is why i mentioned bernard king as well.. I wasn't talking about threes and you know it.. if so why not mention how bernard king never took threes... this was just another one of your attempt to try to one up someone in a conversation you are getting pretty much beat up in.. sorry , but that is the truth... it is equivalent to not having an answer and just yelling back... "yo mamma"...

for the record miller was a 47% shooter from the field, but I would not consider him a volume shooter so he most likely doesn't belong in the convo. if anything, THAT should have been your argument...

Nice try tkf/dk7th, but you know this was all about shooting the "heat ck 3" and you or your alter ego brought other players into it and when confronted with the facts you ran away with your tail between your legs.Nice try tho.

lol... jeez man... ok, so tell me, what was the significance of your post with reggie miller.. what are you trying to prove here?

this should be interesting.. can't wait cooch...

If you take 6500 3s theres a good chance your % is gonna be up there.

LOL.. I knew this was above your head.... dude that is not true.... your percentage is what it is.....that is why they have what is called an AVERAGE! that is why you usually need a good enough sample size.... for instance if I take 2 threes and hit 1, then my percentage is 50%.. well that may not be indicative of how good of a shooter I may really be, too small of a sample size.. but after 100 threes you have a good enough sample size where you can trust the percentages... therefore If I shoot 40% after 2,000 threes taken, then it is pretty much assumed that I will be around 40% after I take 4,000 threes.... taking more doesn't increase my percentage if anything it can have an adverse effect..

usually cooch the less you take the higher your % is... for example why do you think they put a minimum number of attempts in order for someone to qualify for a batting title, or shooting percentage leader....

Pretty much assumed?? So your examples,that took 2 and 3x as many 3s as Melo are better shooters because you ASSUME their %?? Nope not flying with me. And if Melo shoots 50% one yr where does your assumption go? Hes shooting at 44.8 right now.

i give up... seriously someone, please help cooch. seriously... someone on here who is a carmelo fan, because he just doesn't get it.. maybe coming from someone he can't call a hater will make much more sense.. again, maybe not and there is just no hope... but I am done..

dk, run... you are not going to get anywhere with this one man.....

cooch, I will say this final thing.... them taking more shots than carmelo from three, doesn't help their percentage!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

lets play this game... cooch takes 100 shots..

tkf takes 80 shots...

cooch makes 40 shots

tkf makes 60

guess what cooch?.................

later cooch....

cooch is saying if you coach actually gave a player the green light to shoot 6500 hundred shots, chances are you are a pretty good three point shooter. and then you turn to the discussion into the definition of percentages and averages... you are such a troll. common bull**** real gm tactic - have nothing worthwhile to say, turn the discussion to semantics about nothing worth discussing. next time just link to actual definitions and save yourself some time

but even if that made sense then you should understand what dk is saying.. no one shooting 33% from three for their career should be taking adrenaline threes!!

Hersports85 wrote:What's the argument now against Melo? Seriously, it's hard to keep up with all the attempts to discredit every single positive stat or improvement.

Adrenaline 3s apparently

Hersports85 wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

Hersports85 wrote:What's the argument now against Melo? Seriously, it's hard to keep up with all the attempts to discredit every single positive stat or improvement.

Adrenaline 3s apparently

LMAOOOOOOOO can't be serious. This is beginning to become borderline pathetic.

Heat Check 3's to be clear

hahahaha

Hersports85 wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

Hersports85 wrote:What's the argument now against Melo? Seriously, it's hard to keep up with all the attempts to discredit every single positive stat or improvement.

Adrenaline 3s apparently

LMAOOOOOOOO can't be serious. This is beginning to become borderline pathetic.

It started as a "heatck" post and tkf and dk7th turned it into a % troll talk.Tkf, wheres your buddy dk7th?? Maybe you should find another butt buddy.

dk7th wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:

tkf wrote:

cooch2584 wrote:

tkf wrote:

cooch2584 wrote:

tkf wrote:

cooch2584 wrote:

tkf wrote:

cooch2584 wrote:reggie miller took 6486 3s and made 2560 for a 39% average so tkf YOU go do some research.

39% is a lot better than 33, but I was referring to him being an efficient all around shooter, which is why i mentioned bernard king as well.. I wasn't talking about threes and you know it.. if so why not mention how bernard king never took threes... this was just another one of your attempt to try to one up someone in a conversation you are getting pretty much beat up in.. sorry , but that is the truth... it is equivalent to not having an answer and just yelling back... "yo mamma"...

for the record miller was a 47% shooter from the field, but I would not consider him a volume shooter so he most likely doesn't belong in the convo. if anything, THAT should have been your argument...

Nice try tkf/dk7th, but you know this was all about shooting the "heat ck 3" and you or your alter ego brought other players into it and when confronted with the facts you ran away with your tail between your legs.Nice try tho.

lol... jeez man... ok, so tell me, what was the significance of your post with reggie miller.. what are you trying to prove here?

this should be interesting.. can't wait cooch...

If you take 6500 3s theres a good chance your % is gonna be up there.

LOL.. I knew this was above your head.... dude that is not true.... your percentage is what it is.....that is why they have what is called an AVERAGE! that is why you usually need a good enough sample size.... for instance if I take 2 threes and hit 1, then my percentage is 50%.. well that may not be indicative of how good of a shooter I may really be, too small of a sample size.. but after 100 threes you have a good enough sample size where you can trust the percentages... therefore If I shoot 40% after 2,000 threes taken, then it is pretty much assumed that I will be around 40% after I take 4,000 threes.... taking more doesn't increase my percentage if anything it can have an adverse effect..

usually cooch the less you take the higher your % is... for example why do you think they put a minimum number of attempts in order for someone to qualify for a batting title, or shooting percentage leader....

Pretty much assumed?? So your examples,that took 2 and 3x as many 3s as Melo are better shooters because you ASSUME their %?? Nope not flying with me. And if Melo shoots 50% one yr where does your assumption go? Hes shooting at 44.8 right now.

i give up... seriously someone, please help cooch. seriously... someone on here who is a carmelo fan, because he just doesn't get it.. maybe coming from someone he can't call a hater will make much more sense.. again, maybe not and there is just no hope... but I am done..

dk, run... you are not going to get anywhere with this one man.....

cooch, I will say this final thing.... them taking more shots than carmelo from three, doesn't help their percentage!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

lets play this game... cooch takes 100 shots..

tkf takes 80 shots...

cooch makes 40 shots

tkf makes 60

guess what cooch?.................

later cooch....

cooch is saying if you coach actually gave a player the green light to shoot 6500 hundred shots, chances are you are a pretty good three point shooter. and then you turn to the discussion into the definition of percentages and averages... you are such a troll. common bull**** real gm tactic - have nothing worthwhile to say, turn the discussion to semantics about nothing worth discussing. next time just link to actual definitions and save yourself some time

your post is piling on with zero evidence you read the back and forth leading up to it.

by the time nash arrived in phoenix he was already a 40%+ 3-point shooter. he subsequently raised his shooting average even higher. of course nash gets the green light and gets to take 3s with impunity. add the fact that he is the highest IQ basketball player of this generation. melo is not a high IQ player at all.

not only that but melo has not had a single season with one team where he has shot 40%. have you ever considered that melo's less-than-mediocre shooting from 3 and his less-than-mediocre defensive effort has been the main source of his denver futility? it's great that he shooting a high percentage from 3 but when it goes down he needs to find other ways to help the knicks win.

here's a part of basketball that most fans don't appreciate: when you miss a 3-point shot it usually ends in a long rebound for the opponent, igniting their own semi-break or fast break. therefore there should be a premium on the number of 3-point shots a player should take based on their shooting percentage from 3. it's a classic risk-reward scenario. a player who shoots from 3 at less than a certain percentage is contributing to what is basically a turnover.

so if you think woodson encourages melo to shoot the heat check adrenaline three you're likely wrong. if you're right then that's just bad coaching and bad strategy that will hurt a team in the playoffs. not for nothing woodson has been murdered in the second round... where the real playoffs begin.

THIS is a funny post.

dk7th wrote:

SupremeCommander wrote:

tkf wrote:

cooch2584 wrote:

tkf wrote:

cooch2584 wrote:

tkf wrote:

cooch2584 wrote:

tkf wrote:

cooch2584 wrote:reggie miller took 6486 3s and made 2560 for a 39% average so tkf YOU go do some research.

39% is a lot better than 33, but I was referring to him being an efficient all around shooter, which is why i mentioned bernard king as well.. I wasn't talking about threes and you know it.. if so why not mention how bernard king never took threes... this was just another one of your attempt to try to one up someone in a conversation you are getting pretty much beat up in.. sorry , but that is the truth... it is equivalent to not having an answer and just yelling back... "yo mamma"...

for the record miller was a 47% shooter from the field, but I would not consider him a volume shooter so he most likely doesn't belong in the convo. if anything, THAT should have been your argument...

Nice try tkf/dk7th, but you know this was all about shooting the "heat ck 3" and you or your alter ego brought other players into it and when confronted with the facts you ran away with your tail between your legs.Nice try tho.

lol... jeez man... ok, so tell me, what was the significance of your post with reggie miller.. what are you trying to prove here?

this should be interesting.. can't wait cooch...

If you take 6500 3s theres a good chance your % is gonna be up there.

LOL.. I knew this was above your head.... dude that is not true.... your percentage is what it is.....that is why they have what is called an AVERAGE! that is why you usually need a good enough sample size.... for instance if I take 2 threes and hit 1, then my percentage is 50%.. well that may not be indicative of how good of a shooter I may really be, too small of a sample size.. but after 100 threes you have a good enough sample size where you can trust the percentages... therefore If I shoot 40% after 2,000 threes taken, then it is pretty much assumed that I will be around 40% after I take 4,000 threes.... taking more doesn't increase my percentage if anything it can have an adverse effect..

usually cooch the less you take the higher your % is... for example why do you think they put a minimum number of attempts in order for someone to qualify for a batting title, or shooting percentage leader....

Pretty much assumed?? So your examples,that took 2 and 3x as many 3s as Melo are better shooters because you ASSUME their %?? Nope not flying with me. And if Melo shoots 50% one yr where does your assumption go? Hes shooting at 44.8 right now.

i give up... seriously someone, please help cooch. seriously... someone on here who is a carmelo fan, because he just doesn't get it.. maybe coming from someone he can't call a hater will make much more sense.. again, maybe not and there is just no hope... but I am done..

dk, run... you are not going to get anywhere with this one man.....

cooch, I will say this final thing.... them taking more shots than carmelo from three, doesn't help their percentage!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

lets play this game... cooch takes 100 shots..

tkf takes 80 shots...

cooch makes 40 shots

tkf makes 60

guess what cooch?.................

later cooch....

cooch is saying if you coach actually gave a player the green light to shoot 6500 hundred shots, chances are you are a pretty good three point shooter. and then you turn to the discussion into the definition of percentages and averages... you are such a troll. common bull**** real gm tactic - have nothing worthwhile to say, turn the discussion to semantics about nothing worth discussing. next time just link to actual definitions and save yourself some time

your post is piling on with zero evidence you read the back and forth leading up to it.

by the time nash arrived in phoenix he was already a 40%+ 3-point shooter. he subsequently raised his shooting average even higher. of course nash gets the green light and gets to take 3s with impunity. add the fact that he is the highest IQ basketball player of this generation. melo is not a high IQ player at all.

not only that but melo has not had a single season with one team where he has shot 40%. have you ever considered that melo's less-than-mediocre shooting from 3 and his less-than-mediocre defensive effort has been the main source of his denver futility? it's great that he shooting a high percentage from 3 but when it goes down he needs to find other ways to help the knicks win.

here's a part of basketball that most fans don't appreciate: when you miss a 3-point shot it usually ends in a long rebound for the opponent, igniting their own semi-break or fast break. therefore there should be a premium on the number of 3-point shots a player should take based on their shooting percentage from 3. it's a classic risk-reward scenario. a player who shoots from 3 at less than a certain percentage is contributing to what is basically a turnover.

so if you think woodson encourages melo to shoot the heat check adrenaline three you're likely wrong. if you're right then that's just bad coaching and bad strategy that will hurt a team in the playoffs. not for nothing woodson has been murdered in the second round... where the real playoffs begin.

Denver was not much of a defensive culture overall.

Denvers primary cause of their futility was a direct result from having a futile team

mrKnickShot wrote:

tkf wrote:

cooch2584 wrote:

Hersports85 wrote:

TeamBall wrote:

Hersports85 wrote:What's the argument now against Melo? Seriously, it's hard to keep up with all the attempts to discredit every single positive stat or improvement.

Adrenaline 3s apparently

LMAOOOOOOOO can't be serious. This is beginning to become borderline pathetic.

It started as a "heatck" post and tkf and dk7th turned it into a % troll talk.Tkf, wheres your buddy dk7th?? Maybe you should find another butt buddy.

this is simple.. dk doesn't believe in heat check 3's.... moreso if you are not good shooting threes for your career... so of course % has to come into play, otherwise how do you show if someone is a good shooter from three? cooch wants to win an argument because he says so..... that just won't fly, and when faced with reason, he resorts to this type of behavior that is not conducive to having a reasonable conversation....

edit: dk also mentioned that although no one should be taking heat check 3's, if you do so, it is somewhat more understandable if you are a good three point shooter for your career.. ie: Nash..

DK is far smarter than you.

I don't believe he needs you to speak on his behalf. Its kind of disrespectful to him to have his well thought out comments to be regurgitated and narrated by ...

well if i am far smarter than tkf, then what does it mean if i sincerely say tkf is far smarter than me?

actually mrknickshot i need all the help i can get regardless. because with cooch it "gets late really early out there" and "if people don't want to come to the ballpark you can't stop them." my apologies to mr. berra. it's so bad with cooch i am wondering if this isn't an act of some sort. kind of like jerry stiller in the festivus episodes. he is into the "listing of grievances" and whatnot. but hey i'm willing to play along for now.