yeah i'd go with the knicks just cuz of the bigs....now only if they could just play 30 plus minutes per game like the Bull players then we'll see something.

Isles, your way too strutting your stuff in the face of 0-4.

Its like you come out of the closet!

Will you go back in when the team is .500?

Posted by Nalod:

Isles, your way too strutting your stuff in the face of 0-4.

Its like you come out of the closet!

Will you go back in when the team is .500?

Where have I been strutting? People keep bringing up the Bulls from last year and how they started off slowly so I was wondering which set up 1st and 2nd year players people here would rather have. I don't think you're being very fair since I haven't "strutted" at all. In fact I said on Brigg's thread that I wouldn't make a big deal about being 0-4.

crzymdups, sorry but I meant the Bulls players from last year when they went from 0-9 to 47 wins.

Posted by crzymdups:

that's funny, I could have sworn Hinrich was in his third year...

Yep, this is Hinrich's THIRD SEASON IN THE NBA. All the more reason to throw this poll out the window...

Which is a completely biased poll on many levels and not even close to the real question which is at the heart of this attempt to "prove" how dumb it is to compare last years' Bulls to the Knicks. Here are some of the reasons this poll is highly flawed:

A) The Bulls' players have already been on a winning NBA team last year, giving them an advantage automatically over the Knicks players in terms of perception of who is better.

B) 2 of the 3 Knick players WERE NOT EVEN ON THE TEAM NOR IN THE NBA LAST YEAR, and the third (Ariza) did not play nearly as much as the three Bulls 2nd and THIRD YEAR (Hinrich) players. Ariza was on a team of vets last year, and is dealing with a similar situation today, while the Bulls clearly had a youth movement, with a few exceptions, allowing them to get playing time because they played better than the other young players on the team. Unless you have already made up your mind (which sounds like it to me) our young players have played well, and sometimes better than the vets, but because of Brown's loyalty and concern about upsetting the vets, he is giving them the chance.

Essentially, the sample that you want to use to compare the Knicks players to the Bulls is non-existent. Since Ariza, Lee & Frye have barely played any games versus Gordon & Duhon playing much of last season and Hinrich playing his third season now makes these comparisons impossible to determine at this early stage of their carreers.

C) Isn't this question really about comparing the Knicks start to the Bulls start of last year? That's where you first made this comment about the young players, islesfan. Are these young players the make up of the entire team? No, so using this comparison is completely ridiculous. It's almost as if you are saying it's the young players' fault we are losing right now, and you know that is not the truth.

Of course, I go with the idea of being patient, for now, but some of you fickle fans just love to be the first to preach gloom and doom as if you're gonna get some kind of medal for it. I hoped we'd be better to, and maybe Isiah has made some big mistakes, but to make such a determination after 4 games is so ridiculous that I'm beginning to wonder why I bother to respond to such irrational and reactionary thinking.



[Edited by - PresIke on 11-10-2005 12:08 PM]

[Edited by - PresIke on 11-10-2005 12:09 PM]

[Edited by - PresIke on 11-10-2005 12:10 PM]

How about a poll of which roster of young players (maybe 23 or younger) would you rather have? Then Curry, Butler, and Sweetney (for the Bulls) are in the picture.

Poll every NBA coach and GM and everyone would take the Bulls players.

ROFL.

Posted by islesfan:

You know what, on second thought get your own poll.