BigRedDog wrote:TripleThreat wrote:knicks1248 wrote:Yes i do, because it was the same thing people were saying when he was tearing up the G league, about how in wouldn't cross over to the NBA and look what happen. Making shots is all about confidence and mechanics. In his case, he's the first to tell you that his confidence was at a all time low once the jazz gave up on him. I'm telling you now, you are going to be so surprise, the kid is one the rise, and fiz system is ideal for his skill set
Trey Burke has actual NBA experience. He is older than most G Leaguers by a long shot. Many G Leaguers are not even fully physically developed yet. Most have not had the kind of attrition of being a pro basketball player. Of course he would dominate the G League.
It would be like a Division I college basketball 4th year senior going against high school players.
Burke is a low IQ player. He lacks baseline NBA athleticism. He doesn't currently show elite three point range. He is a complete zero on defense. He has not proven he can functionally run a NBA offense full time and be productive. He hasn't shown he can play more than one style of ball ( Me First gunner all the time)
He produced on a team riddled with injury and lack of talent because he was able to push out volume. If you get enough volume( if you chuck it enough) you will produce counting stats. Antwan Jamison is a classic example of a guy who could keep punching out counting stats just by sheer volume. The G League also does not PEDS test the same way. You got a guy with fresh legs, in a gutted Eastern Conference, against some teams already given up or resting their stars, who did not have to cycle down in his juicing, able to shoot as much as he wants. Nothing bout that sounds sustainable.
Burke was a razor's edge from being out of the league for good. The Knicks took a shot at him because their point guard situation was so gutted.
The argument you are making is that 29 other teams, and even the Knicks for a long time, and their entire scouting/coaching/front office staffs are all WRONG about Trey Burke. In order for what you are saying to add up, you'd need over 450+ front office personnel, coaches, trainers, scouts, analysts, cap guys, stats guys, the whole range of top shelf minds in all of pro sports in the entire Western world, and have them be wrong. This is not some 1st or 2nd year player or a guy who got no opportunity or just a mass of injuries ( This is not a Shaun Livingston/Jeremy Lin type of situation)
They didn't give his a role!
No, he's just not very good.
But he's better than much of what the Knicks have right now. ( Is that saying much?) Which is why he's still on the roster.
You keep saying the same **** over and over again. Clearly you are biased against Burke. When the Knicks signed him you said he sucks and wouldn't do anything. He proved you wrong but you keep making excuses for his success. Like anyone can score 42 pts in an NBA game, easy. Admit you don't know everything and that you are wrong. So ****ing annoying.
I am biased against any player, coach, owner, executive, scout, agent or whomever causes the Knicks to lose instead of win. Most fans are.
You want to focus on a handful of productive games Burke played over the backdrop of his entire mediocre career. That's fine, it's your choice, your right.
I choose to focus on the backdrop of his entire mediocre career over a handful of productive games in context. That's fine too ( well its fine to me, clearly not to you). It's my choice, my right.
He worked hard. He put in effort. He did the work and bled to save his NBA career. Good for him. It doesn't mean what he did in a few games is sustainable. There are real questions in place, based on his ENTIRE CAREER ARC, on whether it is sustainable or not.
Burke shot the ball 31 times against Charlotte in a game the Knicks lost. He matched up with another undersized/smaller player in Kemba Walker. If you shoot 31 times in any NBA game, good chance you'll put up some counting stats. One of the reasons the Knicks lost that game? Being a zero on defense isn't helping matters.
The question just isn't about scoring, but can he score to compensate for the zero he brings on defense? Guys like Rodman and Ben Wallace were "offensively limited" That's being polite. But they brought so much to the table with their other skills, that it could shade those limitations. Burke needs to bomb from plus range with threeballs at an elite rate to compensate for his zero status on defense.
A few years back, Nixluva said Bargs could be a good defender and defend the rim. I said that was pretty much insane because nothing in his career arc then indicated that was likely or possible. If Bargs did become a defensive giant, and it would help the Knicks win, I'd be happy to say I was wrong every day of the week forever.
I want the Knicks to win. Every trade rape that gets posted here, deep down I wish those trades could happen. Every outlandish claim on a player to do X or Y, I wish the player could really do that. Dumb **** like Jackson signing Noah, which looks horrible at every angle, deep down I wished that 2 percent chance it could work out, that it would.
I want the Knicks to win. Because I love this team. No one wants me to be more wrong about the things I say than me.
Trey Burke was available for a reason. Every other team could have had him and did not want him. You aren't just asking for me to be wrong, you are asking for the entire league, every scout, every GM, every analyst to also be wrong. What's more likely? Burke ends up turning into an impact player? Or that the aggregate of the entire NBA coaching/front office talent was right to pass up on him, even for nearly free?
A handful of games don't do it for me. Maybe it does for you. Maybe it's time to ask yourself if you don't like what I have to say or you don't like how what I have to say makes you feel. Being "annoyed" is on you, dude, no one is sticking a gun to your head to read anything I write on this forum.