[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

I Think We Should Take A Chance On Markelle Fultz
Author Thread
Nalod
Posts: 68482
Alba Posts: 154
Joined: 12/24/2003
Member: #508
USA
12/18/2018  6:40 AM
So can we soon have a Campbell chunky soup commercial featuring Ebony Fultz? Maybe she is imploring him to eat all his soup while he watches Markelle eat via video cameras? That is must see TV!!

As for Mudiay, I’m seeing this kid is progressing. Nobody has to make a decision today about what to do with him.
Knicks will pay him or not based on his market value. Perhaps Mills will make a classic knick blunder or some other GM might. OR, this kid at 22 is the real deal now.

AUTOADVERT
Welpee
Posts: 23162
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/22/2016
Member: #6239

12/18/2018  6:50 AM    LAST EDITED: 12/18/2018  6:52 AM
The only thing Mudiay supporters ever said was give the guy a chance. Nobody predicted that he would be all-league, nobody predicted he'd be an all-star, nobody said he'd be a top 15 point guard. The only thing that was said was at 22 years old it was too early to give up on him.

The anti-Mudiay people basically trashed him and called him a bum, said he didn't have NBA ability, accused him of not working hard or being in shape, that the only reason he was in the league was due to his size because he hit the genetic lottery, at 22 years old he can't develop beyond what he is, etc., etc., etc.

Now these people can't even concede that they were wrong about the most obvious facts: 1) the guy DID work hard in the off season and DID get in shape. Evidently it took time for him to recover from his pre-season injury; 2) the guy DOES have NBA talent. Whether he can consistently perform this way over the course of a full season remains to be seen but he is showing that he has NBA ability.

The fact that his detractors can't even concede those two points shows that their rants were more about something agenda driven more than anything else and now it's about ego and not having the capacity to admit they were wrong about anything involving Mudiay. Noah Vonleh had an even sketchier path to the Knicks yet nobody went after him with the same vitriol as Mudiay. How many 600 word essays were posted about how bad Hezonja's career has been thus far? Not having the capacity to admit being wrong...on the internet no less...is pretty pathetic.

Nalod
Posts: 68482
Alba Posts: 154
Joined: 12/24/2003
Member: #508
USA
12/18/2018  8:13 AM
I’m not loving what I’m seeing in Vonleh the last few games. Kid looks tired.
Loses make everyone look bad.
martin
Posts: 67903
Alba Posts: 108
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #2
USA
12/18/2018  2:45 PM
Nalod wrote:I’m not loving what I’m seeing in Vonleh the last few games. Kid looks tired.
Loses make everyone look bad.

Yes, felt the same way.

Official sponsor of the PURE KNICKS LOVE Program
TripleThreat
Posts: 23106
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 2/24/2012
Member: #3997

12/19/2018  12:05 AM
Welpee wrote:The only thing Mudiay supporters ever said was give the guy a chance. Nobody predicted that he would be all-league, nobody predicted he'd be an all-star, nobody said he'd be a top 15 point guard. The only thing that was said was at 22 years old it was too early to give up on him.

The anti-Mudiay people basically trashed him and called him a bum, said he didn't have NBA ability, accused him of not working hard or being in shape, that the only reason he was in the league was due to his size because he hit the genetic lottery, at 22 years old he can't develop beyond what he is, etc., etc., etc.

Now these people can't even concede that they were wrong about the most obvious facts: 1) the guy DID work hard in the off season and DID get in shape. Evidently it took time for him to recover from his pre-season injury; 2) the guy DOES have NBA talent. Whether he can consistently perform this way over the course of a full season remains to be seen but he is showing that he has NBA ability.

The fact that his detractors can't even concede those two points shows that their rants were more about something agenda driven more than anything else and now it's about ego and not having the capacity to admit they were wrong about anything involving Mudiay. Noah Vonleh had an even sketchier path to the Knicks yet nobody went after him with the same vitriol as Mudiay. How many 600 word essays were posted about how bad Hezonja's career has been thus far? Not having the capacity to admit being wrong...on the internet no less...is pretty pathetic.

http://www.ultimateknicks.com/forum/topic.asp?t=58654&page=1

"Young NBA players typically make their largest developmental leaps ( barring massive injury or bizarre restriction of playing time) in the offseason of Year 1 and Year 2, and again in the offseason of Year 2 and Year 3. By the All Star break of Year 3, you tend to see 90 percent of what a player will give you for the rest of his career, without factoring typical age related decline.

The structure of NBA first round picks ( Basically 4 years before the RFA year) is set up around this reality. The previous system was three years guaranteed for rookies when the slotting system was created.

22 is not old or is very old in NBA terms depending on the players tenure. If you spent four years in college ball, you are still in your prime developmental window. But that you stayed so long often is an indicator of your level of talent. If you are 22 but was a one and done and entered the league at 19/20, that's a different story.

Some people will try to cite outliers. Yes, there are outliers, but usually those players showed at least one dominant to very marketable skill from the beginning.

ANYONE in the league could have had Mudiay for pretty much nothing. Was anyone rushing to get him? What does that say?

......

The only reason anyone is having this discussion is the Knicks ****ed up their cap and have ****ty contracts no one wants. This is what happens when you **** up your cap sheet, you end up with journeymen and retreads for cheap because you can't spend on anything else.

That Mudiay doesn't even have an effective league average three point shot, something a player can get with grind/attrition, should tell you something."


"Mudiay is in the conversation because the Knicks totally ****ed up their cap sheet.

Mudiay is in the conversation because the Knicks realized they had no room/future for McBuckets and found a trade that would try to make use of his expiring deal and clean out the logjam then in the front court

Mudiay is in the conversation because the Knicks hired Phil Jackson, who proceeded to entirely **** up the point guard situation ( Rose, Jennings, Calderon ) while also gutting down many of their 2nd round picks while also ****ing up their cap sheet and those legacies are still problems today.

Mudiay is in the conversation because he's better than nothing, but that's sadly not by much.

He's not in elite physical condition and he doesn't have even a true league average three point shot. Things you can simply improve with plain raw hard work/dedication.....

The rest of the league could have gotten Mudiay for pretty free and didn't want him. What does that tell you? That means HUNDREDS of the top and most experienced minds in the sport CORRECTLY assessed that Mudiay was outside his prime developmental window and a waste of resources/roster space/minutes. They didn't have to SETTLE for him because they didn't **** up their cap sheet as bad as the Knicks did"

****

Try again.

Mudiay has had a nice couple of games. He's had them before in his career. Good for him. But he's never shown consistency in his career. He does not have a league average three point shot ( consistent and shown to be sustainable) and he's not even a league average defender. He's putting up counting stats with volume, but if you call your own number enough, that's going to happen sometimes.

A handful of games do not change a career arc. Not like this.

Take a person who is fat as ****. Now have them try hard, change their eating and exercise and all that for a couple of months. Good for them. Guess what? They are still fat as ****. You don't change that overnight. Good for them but you need a pathway of YEARS to undo the damage done by YEARS of abuse. Mudiay has had a few nice games. Good for him. However he's had YEARS of being a liability on the court.

No one said 22 was too old, people did say AGE NEEDS CONTEXT IN THE NBA. A "One And Done" is not the same as a rarer 4 year college player. But typically the 4 year college player doesn't have the talent pedigree of a One And Done. 22 and entering your first year in the league is one thing. 22 and already amassing 3 years in the league, with plenty of minutes, is another.

If you a non pivot, and cannot 3 And D in the NBA, at least one or the other, but ideally both, you are going to have problems.

No one hates Mudiay. But THERE'S A MOTHERFUCKING REASON HE WAS AVAILABLE IN THE FIRST PLACE. THERE'S A MOTHERFUCKING REASON ANY OTHER TEAM COULD HAVE HAD HIM FOR NEARLY FREE AND DID NOT WANT HIM. If you take enough shot and get enough minutes, you'll eventually put up some counting stats.

You could be a 100 yard a game rushing RB in the NFL right now. You could. If you got 65-70 carries a game. Basically if you got the ball and fell down forward over and over again.

The arguments you make is how losing teams think. The **** I say is not always pleasant, but the **** I say is how nearly all functional NBA front offices actually operate. The difference between you and me ( besides my more stunning good looks and huge schlong that is almost tripod like) is that I can separate what works for NBA teams and how I feel about things. You want to believe Mudiay is something he's not because you like how it makes you feel. You defend him because people who tell you that you are wrong ( which is literally every team that could have had him for nearly free and walked past him) puts you in a position where you don't like how it feels. You don't stop being a fat **** after two weeks of salads. You don't change your career narrative after a handful of games.

As a fan of the Knicks, I wish you were right about Mudiay. As someone who actually understands basic resource management in pro sports, no matter what anyone feels, Mudiay is odds on not the answer for this team, not where this team wants to go and where fans want it to go.

jrodmc
Posts: 32927
Alba Posts: 50
Joined: 11/24/2004
Member: #805
USA
12/19/2018  8:11 AM
TripleThreat wrote:
Welpee wrote:The only thing Mudiay supporters ever said was give the guy a chance. Nobody predicted that he would be all-league, nobody predicted he'd be an all-star, nobody said he'd be a top 15 point guard. The only thing that was said was at 22 years old it was too early to give up on him.

The anti-Mudiay people basically trashed him and called him a bum, said he didn't have NBA ability, accused him of not working hard or being in shape, that the only reason he was in the league was due to his size because he hit the genetic lottery, at 22 years old he can't develop beyond what he is, etc., etc., etc.

Now these people can't even concede that they were wrong about the most obvious facts: 1) the guy DID work hard in the off season and DID get in shape. Evidently it took time for him to recover from his pre-season injury; 2) the guy DOES have NBA talent. Whether he can consistently perform this way over the course of a full season remains to be seen but he is showing that he has NBA ability.

The fact that his detractors can't even concede those two points shows that their rants were more about something agenda driven more than anything else and now it's about ego and not having the capacity to admit they were wrong about anything involving Mudiay. Noah Vonleh had an even sketchier path to the Knicks yet nobody went after him with the same vitriol as Mudiay. How many 600 word essays were posted about how bad Hezonja's career has been thus far? Not having the capacity to admit being wrong...on the internet no less...is pretty pathetic.

http://www.ultimateknicks.com/forum/topic.asp?t=58654&page=1

"Young NBA players typically make their largest developmental leaps ( barring massive injury or bizarre restriction of playing time) in the offseason of Year 1 and Year 2, and again in the offseason of Year 2 and Year 3. By the All Star break of Year 3, you tend to see 90 percent of what a player will give you for the rest of his career, without factoring typical age related decline.

The structure of NBA first round picks ( Basically 4 years before the RFA year) is set up around this reality. The previous system was three years guaranteed for rookies when the slotting system was created.

22 is not old or is very old in NBA terms depending on the players tenure. If you spent four years in college ball, you are still in your prime developmental window. But that you stayed so long often is an indicator of your level of talent. If you are 22 but was a one and done and entered the league at 19/20, that's a different story.

Some people will try to cite outliers. Yes, there are outliers, but usually those players showed at least one dominant to very marketable skill from the beginning.

ANYONE in the league could have had Mudiay for pretty much nothing. Was anyone rushing to get him? What does that say?

......

The only reason anyone is having this discussion is the Knicks ****ed up their cap and have ****ty contracts no one wants. This is what happens when you **** up your cap sheet, you end up with journeymen and retreads for cheap because you can't spend on anything else.

That Mudiay doesn't even have an effective league average three point shot, something a player can get with grind/attrition, should tell you something."


"Mudiay is in the conversation because the Knicks totally ****ed up their cap sheet.

Mudiay is in the conversation because the Knicks realized they had no room/future for McBuckets and found a trade that would try to make use of his expiring deal and clean out the logjam then in the front court

Mudiay is in the conversation because the Knicks hired Phil Jackson, who proceeded to entirely **** up the point guard situation ( Rose, Jennings, Calderon ) while also gutting down many of their 2nd round picks while also ****ing up their cap sheet and those legacies are still problems today.

Mudiay is in the conversation because he's better than nothing, but that's sadly not by much.

He's not in elite physical condition and he doesn't have even a true league average three point shot. Things you can simply improve with plain raw hard work/dedication.....

The rest of the league could have gotten Mudiay for pretty free and didn't want him. What does that tell you? That means HUNDREDS of the top and most experienced minds in the sport CORRECTLY assessed that Mudiay was outside his prime developmental window and a waste of resources/roster space/minutes. They didn't have to SETTLE for him because they didn't **** up their cap sheet as bad as the Knicks did"

****

Try again.

Mudiay has had a nice couple of games. He's had them before in his career. Good for him. But he's never shown consistency in his career. He does not have a league average three point shot ( consistent and shown to be sustainable) and he's not even a league average defender. He's putting up counting stats with volume, but if you call your own number enough, that's going to happen sometimes.

A handful of games do not change a career arc. Not like this.

Take a person who is fat as ****. Now have them try hard, change their eating and exercise and all that for a couple of months. Good for them. Guess what? They are still fat as ****. You don't change that overnight. Good for them but you need a pathway of YEARS to undo the damage done by YEARS of abuse. Mudiay has had a few nice games. Good for him. However he's had YEARS of being a liability on the court.

No one said 22 was too old, people did say AGE NEEDS CONTEXT IN THE NBA. A "One And Done" is not the same as a rarer 4 year college player. But typically the 4 year college player doesn't have the talent pedigree of a One And Done. 22 and entering your first year in the league is one thing. 22 and already amassing 3 years in the league, with plenty of minutes, is another.

If you a non pivot, and cannot 3 And D in the NBA, at least one or the other, but ideally both, you are going to have problems.

No one hates Mudiay. But THERE'S A MOTHERFUCKING REASON HE WAS AVAILABLE IN THE FIRST PLACE. THERE'S A MOTHERFUCKING REASON ANY OTHER TEAM COULD HAVE HAD HIM FOR NEARLY FREE AND DID NOT WANT HIM. If you take enough shot and get enough minutes, you'll eventually put up some counting stats.

You could be a 100 yard a game rushing RB in the NFL right now. You could. If you got 65-70 carries a game. Basically if you got the ball and fell down forward over and over again.

The arguments you make is how losing teams think. The **** I say is not always pleasant, but the **** I say is how nearly all functional NBA front offices actually operate. The difference between you and me ( besides my more stunning good looks and huge schlong that is almost tripod like) is that I can separate what works for NBA teams and how I feel about things. You want to believe Mudiay is something he's not because you like how it makes you feel. You defend him because people who tell you that you are wrong ( which is literally every team that could have had him for nearly free and walked past him) puts you in a position where you don't like how it feels. You don't stop being a fat **** after two weeks of salads. You don't change your career narrative after a handful of games.

As a fan of the Knicks, I wish you were right about Mudiay. As someone who actually understands basic resource management in pro sports, no matter what anyone feels, Mudiay is odds on not the answer for this team, not where this team wants to go and where fans want it to go.

One should temper your even huge tongue in your sleekly muscled cheek full of **** hubris after spending post after post being a BakerButtBoy, Oh Mr. League Management Genius.

Tripod-like? Is that what your name is applicable to? And here I thought it was some basketball-related analogy. This Bud's for you!

BigRedDog
Posts: 22118
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 1/23/2004
Member: #569
12/19/2018  8:17 AM
TripleThreat wrote:
Welpee wrote:The only thing Mudiay supporters ever said was give the guy a chance. Nobody predicted that he would be all-league, nobody predicted he'd be an all-star, nobody said he'd be a top 15 point guard. The only thing that was said was at 22 years old it was too early to give up on him.

The anti-Mudiay people basically trashed him and called him a bum, said he didn't have NBA ability, accused him of not working hard or being in shape, that the only reason he was in the league was due to his size because he hit the genetic lottery, at 22 years old he can't develop beyond what he is, etc., etc., etc.

Now these people can't even concede that they were wrong about the most obvious facts: 1) the guy DID work hard in the off season and DID get in shape. Evidently it took time for him to recover from his pre-season injury; 2) the guy DOES have NBA talent. Whether he can consistently perform this way over the course of a full season remains to be seen but he is showing that he has NBA ability.

The fact that his detractors can't even concede those two points shows that their rants were more about something agenda driven more than anything else and now it's about ego and not having the capacity to admit they were wrong about anything involving Mudiay. Noah Vonleh had an even sketchier path to the Knicks yet nobody went after him with the same vitriol as Mudiay. How many 600 word essays were posted about how bad Hezonja's career has been thus far? Not having the capacity to admit being wrong...on the internet no less...is pretty pathetic.

http://www.ultimateknicks.com/forum/topic.asp?t=58654&page=1

"Young NBA players typically make their largest developmental leaps ( barring massive injury or bizarre restriction of playing time) in the offseason of Year 1 and Year 2, and again in the offseason of Year 2 and Year 3. By the All Star break of Year 3, you tend to see 90 percent of what a player will give you for the rest of his career, without factoring typical age related decline.

The structure of NBA first round picks ( Basically 4 years before the RFA year) is set up around this reality. The previous system was three years guaranteed for rookies when the slotting system was created.

22 is not old or is very old in NBA terms depending on the players tenure. If you spent four years in college ball, you are still in your prime developmental window. But that you stayed so long often is an indicator of your level of talent. If you are 22 but was a one and done and entered the league at 19/20, that's a different story.

Some people will try to cite outliers. Yes, there are outliers, but usually those players showed at least one dominant to very marketable skill from the beginning.

ANYONE in the league could have had Mudiay for pretty much nothing. Was anyone rushing to get him? What does that say?

......

The only reason anyone is having this discussion is the Knicks ****ed up their cap and have ****ty contracts no one wants. This is what happens when you **** up your cap sheet, you end up with journeymen and retreads for cheap because you can't spend on anything else.

That Mudiay doesn't even have an effective league average three point shot, something a player can get with grind/attrition, should tell you something."


"Mudiay is in the conversation because the Knicks totally ****ed up their cap sheet.

Mudiay is in the conversation because the Knicks realized they had no room/future for McBuckets and found a trade that would try to make use of his expiring deal and clean out the logjam then in the front court

Mudiay is in the conversation because the Knicks hired Phil Jackson, who proceeded to entirely **** up the point guard situation ( Rose, Jennings, Calderon ) while also gutting down many of their 2nd round picks while also ****ing up their cap sheet and those legacies are still problems today.

Mudiay is in the conversation because he's better than nothing, but that's sadly not by much.

He's not in elite physical condition and he doesn't have even a true league average three point shot. Things you can simply improve with plain raw hard work/dedication.....

The rest of the league could have gotten Mudiay for pretty free and didn't want him. What does that tell you? That means HUNDREDS of the top and most experienced minds in the sport CORRECTLY assessed that Mudiay was outside his prime developmental window and a waste of resources/roster space/minutes. They didn't have to SETTLE for him because they didn't **** up their cap sheet as bad as the Knicks did"

****

Try again.

Mudiay has had a nice couple of games. He's had them before in his career. Good for him. But he's never shown consistency in his career. He does not have a league average three point shot ( consistent and shown to be sustainable) and he's not even a league average defender. He's putting up counting stats with volume, but if you call your own number enough, that's going to happen sometimes.

A handful of games do not change a career arc. Not like this.

Take a person who is fat as ****. Now have them try hard, change their eating and exercise and all that for a couple of months. Good for them. Guess what? They are still fat as ****. You don't change that overnight. Good for them but you need a pathway of YEARS to undo the damage done by YEARS of abuse. Mudiay has had a few nice games. Good for him. However he's had YEARS of being a liability on the court.

No one said 22 was too old, people did say AGE NEEDS CONTEXT IN THE NBA. A "One And Done" is not the same as a rarer 4 year college player. But typically the 4 year college player doesn't have the talent pedigree of a One And Done. 22 and entering your first year in the league is one thing. 22 and already amassing 3 years in the league, with plenty of minutes, is another.

If you a non pivot, and cannot 3 And D in the NBA, at least one or the other, but ideally both, you are going to have problems.

No one hates Mudiay. But THERE'S A MOTHERFUCKING REASON HE WAS AVAILABLE IN THE FIRST PLACE. THERE'S A MOTHERFUCKING REASON ANY OTHER TEAM COULD HAVE HAD HIM FOR NEARLY FREE AND DID NOT WANT HIM. If you take enough shot and get enough minutes, you'll eventually put up some counting stats.

You could be a 100 yard a game rushing RB in the NFL right now. You could. If you got 65-70 carries a game. Basically if you got the ball and fell down forward over and over again.

The arguments you make is how losing teams think. The **** I say is not always pleasant, but the **** I say is how nearly all functional NBA front offices actually operate. The difference between you and me ( besides my more stunning good looks and huge schlong that is almost tripod like) is that I can separate what works for NBA teams and how I feel about things. You want to believe Mudiay is something he's not because you like how it makes you feel. You defend him because people who tell you that you are wrong ( which is literally every team that could have had him for nearly free and walked past him) puts you in a position where you don't like how it feels. You don't stop being a fat **** after two weeks of salads. You don't change your career narrative after a handful of games.

As a fan of the Knicks, I wish you were right about Mudiay. As someone who actually understands basic resource management in pro sports, no matter what anyone feels, Mudiay is odds on not the answer for this team, not where this team wants to go and where fans want it to go.

How does someone write so much , say nothing and knows jack ****? No wonder you got your ass kicked out of the NFL. Let me guess you were the one that recommended leaf over Manning, Obrien over Marino?
#nflfrontofficewannabeknowitallpompousassdoesntknow****

Briggs-- Frank is 2 yrs away from being 2 years away
franco12
Posts: 33150
Alba Posts: 4
Joined: 2/19/2004
Member: #599
USA
12/19/2018  8:28 AM
TripleThreat wrote:
Welpee wrote:The only thing Mudiay supporters ever said was give the guy a chance. Nobody predicted that he would be all-league, nobody predicted he'd be an all-star, nobody said he'd be a top 15 point guard. The only thing that was said was at 22 years old it was too early to give up on him.

The anti-Mudiay people basically trashed him and called him a bum, said he didn't have NBA ability, accused him of not working hard or being in shape, that the only reason he was in the league was due to his size because he hit the genetic lottery, at 22 years old he can't develop beyond what he is, etc., etc., etc.

Now these people can't even concede that they were wrong about the most obvious facts: 1) the guy DID work hard in the off season and DID get in shape. Evidently it took time for him to recover from his pre-season injury; 2) the guy DOES have NBA talent. Whether he can consistently perform this way over the course of a full season remains to be seen but he is showing that he has NBA ability.

The fact that his detractors can't even concede those two points shows that their rants were more about something agenda driven more than anything else and now it's about ego and not having the capacity to admit they were wrong about anything involving Mudiay. Noah Vonleh had an even sketchier path to the Knicks yet nobody went after him with the same vitriol as Mudiay. How many 600 word essays were posted about how bad Hezonja's career has been thus far? Not having the capacity to admit being wrong...on the internet no less...is pretty pathetic.

http://www.ultimateknicks.com/forum/topic.asp?t=58654&page=1

"Young NBA players typically make their largest developmental leaps ( barring massive injury or bizarre restriction of playing time) in the offseason of Year 1 and Year 2, and again in the offseason of Year 2 and Year 3. By the All Star break of Year 3, you tend to see 90 percent of what a player will give you for the rest of his career, without factoring typical age related decline.

The structure of NBA first round picks ( Basically 4 years before the RFA year) is set up around this reality. The previous system was three years guaranteed for rookies when the slotting system was created.

22 is not old or is very old in NBA terms depending on the players tenure. If you spent four years in college ball, you are still in your prime developmental window. But that you stayed so long often is an indicator of your level of talent. If you are 22 but was a one and done and entered the league at 19/20, that's a different story.

Some people will try to cite outliers. Yes, there are outliers, but usually those players showed at least one dominant to very marketable skill from the beginning.

ANYONE in the league could have had Mudiay for pretty much nothing. Was anyone rushing to get him? What does that say?

......

The only reason anyone is having this discussion is the Knicks ****ed up their cap and have ****ty contracts no one wants. This is what happens when you **** up your cap sheet, you end up with journeymen and retreads for cheap because you can't spend on anything else.

That Mudiay doesn't even have an effective league average three point shot, something a player can get with grind/attrition, should tell you something."


"Mudiay is in the conversation because the Knicks totally ****ed up their cap sheet.

Mudiay is in the conversation because the Knicks realized they had no room/future for McBuckets and found a trade that would try to make use of his expiring deal and clean out the logjam then in the front court

Mudiay is in the conversation because the Knicks hired Phil Jackson, who proceeded to entirely **** up the point guard situation ( Rose, Jennings, Calderon ) while also gutting down many of their 2nd round picks while also ****ing up their cap sheet and those legacies are still problems today.

Mudiay is in the conversation because he's better than nothing, but that's sadly not by much.

He's not in elite physical condition and he doesn't have even a true league average three point shot. Things you can simply improve with plain raw hard work/dedication.....

The rest of the league could have gotten Mudiay for pretty free and didn't want him. What does that tell you? That means HUNDREDS of the top and most experienced minds in the sport CORRECTLY assessed that Mudiay was outside his prime developmental window and a waste of resources/roster space/minutes. They didn't have to SETTLE for him because they didn't **** up their cap sheet as bad as the Knicks did"

****

Try again.

Mudiay has had a nice couple of games. He's had them before in his career. Good for him. But he's never shown consistency in his career. He does not have a league average three point shot ( consistent and shown to be sustainable) and he's not even a league average defender. He's putting up counting stats with volume, but if you call your own number enough, that's going to happen sometimes.

A handful of games do not change a career arc. Not like this.

Take a person who is fat as ****. Now have them try hard, change their eating and exercise and all that for a couple of months. Good for them. Guess what? They are still fat as ****. You don't change that overnight. Good for them but you need a pathway of YEARS to undo the damage done by YEARS of abuse. Mudiay has had a few nice games. Good for him. However he's had YEARS of being a liability on the court.

No one said 22 was too old, people did say AGE NEEDS CONTEXT IN THE NBA. A "One And Done" is not the same as a rarer 4 year college player. But typically the 4 year college player doesn't have the talent pedigree of a One And Done. 22 and entering your first year in the league is one thing. 22 and already amassing 3 years in the league, with plenty of minutes, is another.

If you a non pivot, and cannot 3 And D in the NBA, at least one or the other, but ideally both, you are going to have problems.

No one hates Mudiay. But THERE'S A MOTHERFUCKING REASON HE WAS AVAILABLE IN THE FIRST PLACE. THERE'S A MOTHERFUCKING REASON ANY OTHER TEAM COULD HAVE HAD HIM FOR NEARLY FREE AND DID NOT WANT HIM. If you take enough shot and get enough minutes, you'll eventually put up some counting stats.

You could be a 100 yard a game rushing RB in the NFL right now. You could. If you got 65-70 carries a game. Basically if you got the ball and fell down forward over and over again.

The arguments you make is how losing teams think. The **** I say is not always pleasant, but the **** I say is how nearly all functional NBA front offices actually operate. The difference between you and me ( besides my more stunning good looks and huge schlong that is almost tripod like) is that I can separate what works for NBA teams and how I feel about things. You want to believe Mudiay is something he's not because you like how it makes you feel. You defend him because people who tell you that you are wrong ( which is literally every team that could have had him for nearly free and walked past him) puts you in a position where you don't like how it feels. You don't stop being a fat **** after two weeks of salads. You don't change your career narrative after a handful of games.

As a fan of the Knicks, I wish you were right about Mudiay. As someone who actually understands basic resource management in pro sports, no matter what anyone feels, Mudiay is odds on not the answer for this team, not where this team wants to go and where fans want it to go.

What are you going to say at the end of the year if Mudiay continues to play like he has in the month of December?

I mean, according to you, he won't- it's simply not possible.

I'm going to say - wow, the kid figured things out, he's starting to reach his potential. Maybe we should retain him moving forward. The knicks found a nugget in the trash.

But you have already made up your mind. Facts won't get in your way.

No person is the same. You would have given up on Chauncy Billips and Steve Nash and Stephen Curry to name a few. And you would have called us stupid for thinking, hey, maybe these guys might yet develop.

Welpee
Posts: 23162
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/22/2016
Member: #6239

12/19/2018  8:47 AM    LAST EDITED: 12/19/2018  10:55 AM
franco12 wrote:
TripleThreat wrote:
Welpee wrote:The only thing Mudiay supporters ever said was give the guy a chance. Nobody predicted that he would be all-league, nobody predicted he'd be an all-star, nobody said he'd be a top 15 point guard. The only thing that was said was at 22 years old it was too early to give up on him.

The anti-Mudiay people basically trashed him and called him a bum, said he didn't have NBA ability, accused him of not working hard or being in shape, that the only reason he was in the league was due to his size because he hit the genetic lottery, at 22 years old he can't develop beyond what he is, etc., etc., etc.

Now these people can't even concede that they were wrong about the most obvious facts: 1) the guy DID work hard in the off season and DID get in shape. Evidently it took time for him to recover from his pre-season injury; 2) the guy DOES have NBA talent. Whether he can consistently perform this way over the course of a full season remains to be seen but he is showing that he has NBA ability.

The fact that his detractors can't even concede those two points shows that their rants were more about something agenda driven more than anything else and now it's about ego and not having the capacity to admit they were wrong about anything involving Mudiay. Noah Vonleh had an even sketchier path to the Knicks yet nobody went after him with the same vitriol as Mudiay. How many 600 word essays were posted about how bad Hezonja's career has been thus far? Not having the capacity to admit being wrong...on the internet no less...is pretty pathetic.

http://www.ultimateknicks.com/forum/topic.asp?t=58654&page=1

"Young NBA players typically make their largest developmental leaps ( barring massive injury or bizarre restriction of playing time) in the offseason of Year 1 and Year 2, and again in the offseason of Year 2 and Year 3. By the All Star break of Year 3, you tend to see 90 percent of what a player will give you for the rest of his career, without factoring typical age related decline.

The structure of NBA first round picks ( Basically 4 years before the RFA year) is set up around this reality. The previous system was three years guaranteed for rookies when the slotting system was created.

22 is not old or is very old in NBA terms depending on the players tenure. If you spent four years in college ball, you are still in your prime developmental window. But that you stayed so long often is an indicator of your level of talent. If you are 22 but was a one and done and entered the league at 19/20, that's a different story.

Some people will try to cite outliers. Yes, there are outliers, but usually those players showed at least one dominant to very marketable skill from the beginning.

ANYONE in the league could have had Mudiay for pretty much nothing. Was anyone rushing to get him? What does that say?

......

The only reason anyone is having this discussion is the Knicks ****ed up their cap and have ****ty contracts no one wants. This is what happens when you **** up your cap sheet, you end up with journeymen and retreads for cheap because you can't spend on anything else.

That Mudiay doesn't even have an effective league average three point shot, something a player can get with grind/attrition, should tell you something."


"Mudiay is in the conversation because the Knicks totally ****ed up their cap sheet.

Mudiay is in the conversation because the Knicks realized they had no room/future for McBuckets and found a trade that would try to make use of his expiring deal and clean out the logjam then in the front court

Mudiay is in the conversation because the Knicks hired Phil Jackson, who proceeded to entirely **** up the point guard situation ( Rose, Jennings, Calderon ) while also gutting down many of their 2nd round picks while also ****ing up their cap sheet and those legacies are still problems today.

Mudiay is in the conversation because he's better than nothing, but that's sadly not by much.

He's not in elite physical condition and he doesn't have even a true league average three point shot. Things you can simply improve with plain raw hard work/dedication.....

The rest of the league could have gotten Mudiay for pretty free and didn't want him. What does that tell you? That means HUNDREDS of the top and most experienced minds in the sport CORRECTLY assessed that Mudiay was outside his prime developmental window and a waste of resources/roster space/minutes. They didn't have to SETTLE for him because they didn't **** up their cap sheet as bad as the Knicks did"

****

Try again.

Mudiay has had a nice couple of games. He's had them before in his career. Good for him. But he's never shown consistency in his career. He does not have a league average three point shot ( consistent and shown to be sustainable) and he's not even a league average defender. He's putting up counting stats with volume, but if you call your own number enough, that's going to happen sometimes.

A handful of games do not change a career arc. Not like this.

Take a person who is fat as ****. Now have them try hard, change their eating and exercise and all that for a couple of months. Good for them. Guess what? They are still fat as ****. You don't change that overnight. Good for them but you need a pathway of YEARS to undo the damage done by YEARS of abuse. Mudiay has had a few nice games. Good for him. However he's had YEARS of being a liability on the court.

No one said 22 was too old, people did say AGE NEEDS CONTEXT IN THE NBA. A "One And Done" is not the same as a rarer 4 year college player. But typically the 4 year college player doesn't have the talent pedigree of a One And Done. 22 and entering your first year in the league is one thing. 22 and already amassing 3 years in the league, with plenty of minutes, is another.

If you a non pivot, and cannot 3 And D in the NBA, at least one or the other, but ideally both, you are going to have problems.

No one hates Mudiay. But THERE'S A MOTHERFUCKING REASON HE WAS AVAILABLE IN THE FIRST PLACE. THERE'S A MOTHERFUCKING REASON ANY OTHER TEAM COULD HAVE HAD HIM FOR NEARLY FREE AND DID NOT WANT HIM. If you take enough shot and get enough minutes, you'll eventually put up some counting stats.

You could be a 100 yard a game rushing RB in the NFL right now. You could. If you got 65-70 carries a game. Basically if you got the ball and fell down forward over and over again.

The arguments you make is how losing teams think. The **** I say is not always pleasant, but the **** I say is how nearly all functional NBA front offices actually operate. The difference between you and me ( besides my more stunning good looks and huge schlong that is almost tripod like) is that I can separate what works for NBA teams and how I feel about things. You want to believe Mudiay is something he's not because you like how it makes you feel. You defend him because people who tell you that you are wrong ( which is literally every team that could have had him for nearly free and walked past him) puts you in a position where you don't like how it feels. You don't stop being a fat **** after two weeks of salads. You don't change your career narrative after a handful of games.

As a fan of the Knicks, I wish you were right about Mudiay. As someone who actually understands basic resource management in pro sports, no matter what anyone feels, Mudiay is odds on not the answer for this team, not where this team wants to go and where fans want it to go.

What are you going to say at the end of the year if Mudiay continues to play like he has in the month of December?

I mean, according to you, he won't- it's simply not possible.

I'm going to say - wow, the kid figured things out, he's starting to reach his potential. Maybe we should retain him moving forward. The knicks found a nugget in the trash.

But you have already made up your mind. Facts won't get in your way.

No person is the same. You would have given up on Chauncy Billips and Steve Nash and Stephen Curry to name a few. And you would have called us stupid for thinking, hey, maybe these guys might yet develop.

He'll simply continue to move the goal post. If Mudiay plays well the rest of the year the argument will be "lets see him do it for another year." If he's putting up good stats he'll drop some advanced metrics that says he sucks. If he's hitting clutch shots he'll claim if it weren't for Mudiay we'd be up big and wouldn't need clutch shooting. Mudiay could turn into the next Billups and he's still going to find an angle to discredit him. He has zero credibility. The volume of words doesn't make a person's point more valid. Just the internet equivalent of someone who loves to hear himself talk.

Here's the game people play, predicting someone is going to suck is like predicting you're not going to win the lottery. Greatness means you're rare so predicting a player won't be great is so weak. Statistically your pet could randomly pick who will not be great and come away with a decent percentage of accuracy. If someone is framing themselves as an internet expert, predict greatest for a player who other's don't think can play. Predict Ron Baker is going to be a star and gloat when THAT happens. Part of the game is when you're wrong, just pretend you never said it and hope nobody remembers it or ever brings it up.

Victor Oladipo was on his third team in five years when he landed in Indy at age 25 and became all-NBA and first team all-defense. Every player is different, every player's development arc is different, every player's situation is different.

BigRedDog
Posts: 22118
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 1/23/2004
Member: #569
12/19/2018  9:21 AM    LAST EDITED: 12/19/2018  9:22 AM
Welpee wrote:
franco12 wrote:
TripleThreat wrote:
Welpee wrote:The only thing Mudiay supporters ever said was give the guy a chance. Nobody predicted that he would be all-league, nobody predicted he'd be an all-star, nobody said he'd be a top 15 point guard. The only thing that was said was at 22 years old it was too early to give up on him.

The anti-Mudiay people basically trashed him and called him a bum, said he didn't have NBA ability, accused him of not working hard or being in shape, that the only reason he was in the league was due to his size because he hit the genetic lottery, at 22 years old he can't develop beyond what he is, etc., etc., etc.

Now these people can't even concede that they were wrong about the most obvious facts: 1) the guy DID work hard in the off season and DID get in shape. Evidently it took time for him to recover from his pre-season injury; 2) the guy DOES have NBA talent. Whether he can consistently perform this way over the course of a full season remains to be seen but he is showing that he has NBA ability.

The fact that his detractors can't even concede those two points shows that their rants were more about something agenda driven more than anything else and now it's about ego and not having the capacity to admit they were wrong about anything involving Mudiay. Noah Vonleh had an even sketchier path to the Knicks yet nobody went after him with the same vitriol as Mudiay. How many 600 word essays were posted about how bad Hezonja's career has been thus far? Not having the capacity to admit being wrong...on the internet no less...is pretty pathetic.

http://www.ultimateknicks.com/forum/topic.asp?t=58654&page=1

"Young NBA players typically make their largest developmental leaps ( barring massive injury or bizarre restriction of playing time) in the offseason of Year 1 and Year 2, and again in the offseason of Year 2 and Year 3. By the All Star break of Year 3, you tend to see 90 percent of what a player will give you for the rest of his career, without factoring typical age related decline.

The structure of NBA first round picks ( Basically 4 years before the RFA year) is set up around this reality. The previous system was three years guaranteed for rookies when the slotting system was created.

22 is not old or is very old in NBA terms depending on the players tenure. If you spent four years in college ball, you are still in your prime developmental window. But that you stayed so long often is an indicator of your level of talent. If you are 22 but was a one and done and entered the league at 19/20, that's a different story.

Some people will try to cite outliers. Yes, there are outliers, but usually those players showed at least one dominant to very marketable skill from the beginning.

ANYONE in the league could have had Mudiay for pretty much nothing. Was anyone rushing to get him? What does that say?

......

The only reason anyone is having this discussion is the Knicks ****ed up their cap and have ****ty contracts no one wants. This is what happens when you **** up your cap sheet, you end up with journeymen and retreads for cheap because you can't spend on anything else.

That Mudiay doesn't even have an effective league average three point shot, something a player can get with grind/attrition, should tell you something."


"Mudiay is in the conversation because the Knicks totally ****ed up their cap sheet.

Mudiay is in the conversation because the Knicks realized they had no room/future for McBuckets and found a trade that would try to make use of his expiring deal and clean out the logjam then in the front court

Mudiay is in the conversation because the Knicks hired Phil Jackson, who proceeded to entirely **** up the point guard situation ( Rose, Jennings, Calderon ) while also gutting down many of their 2nd round picks while also ****ing up their cap sheet and those legacies are still problems today.

Mudiay is in the conversation because he's better than nothing, but that's sadly not by much.

He's not in elite physical condition and he doesn't have even a true league average three point shot. Things you can simply improve with plain raw hard work/dedication.....

The rest of the league could have gotten Mudiay for pretty free and didn't want him. What does that tell you? That means HUNDREDS of the top and most experienced minds in the sport CORRECTLY assessed that Mudiay was outside his prime developmental window and a waste of resources/roster space/minutes. They didn't have to SETTLE for him because they didn't **** up their cap sheet as bad as the Knicks did"

****

Try again.

Mudiay has had a nice couple of games. He's had them before in his career. Good for him. But he's never shown consistency in his career. He does not have a league average three point shot ( consistent and shown to be sustainable) and he's not even a league average defender. He's putting up counting stats with volume, but if you call your own number enough, that's going to happen sometimes.

A handful of games do not change a career arc. Not like this.

Take a person who is fat as ****. Now have them try hard, change their eating and exercise and all that for a couple of months. Good for them. Guess what? They are still fat as ****. You don't change that overnight. Good for them but you need a pathway of YEARS to undo the damage done by YEARS of abuse. Mudiay has had a few nice games. Good for him. However he's had YEARS of being a liability on the court.

No one said 22 was too old, people did say AGE NEEDS CONTEXT IN THE NBA. A "One And Done" is not the same as a rarer 4 year college player. But typically the 4 year college player doesn't have the talent pedigree of a One And Done. 22 and entering your first year in the league is one thing. 22 and already amassing 3 years in the league, with plenty of minutes, is another.

If you a non pivot, and cannot 3 And D in the NBA, at least one or the other, but ideally both, you are going to have problems.

No one hates Mudiay. But THERE'S A MOTHERFUCKING REASON HE WAS AVAILABLE IN THE FIRST PLACE. THERE'S A MOTHERFUCKING REASON ANY OTHER TEAM COULD HAVE HAD HIM FOR NEARLY FREE AND DID NOT WANT HIM. If you take enough shot and get enough minutes, you'll eventually put up some counting stats.

You could be a 100 yard a game rushing RB in the NFL right now. You could. If you got 65-70 carries a game. Basically if you got the ball and fell down forward over and over again.

The arguments you make is how losing teams think. The **** I say is not always pleasant, but the **** I say is how nearly all functional NBA front offices actually operate. The difference between you and me ( besides my more stunning good looks and huge schlong that is almost tripod like) is that I can separate what works for NBA teams and how I feel about things. You want to believe Mudiay is something he's not because you like how it makes you feel. You defend him because people who tell you that you are wrong ( which is literally every team that could have had him for nearly free and walked past him) puts you in a position where you don't like how it feels. You don't stop being a fat **** after two weeks of salads. You don't change your career narrative after a handful of games.

As a fan of the Knicks, I wish you were right about Mudiay. As someone who actually understands basic resource management in pro sports, no matter what anyone feels, Mudiay is odds on not the answer for this team, not where this team wants to go and where fans want it to go.

What are you going to say at the end of the year if Mudiay continues to play like he has in the month of December?

I mean, according to you, he won't- it's simply not possible.

I'm going to say - wow, the kid figured things out, he's starting to reach his potential. Maybe we should retain him moving forward. The knicks found a nugget in the trash.

But you have already made up your mind. Facts won't get in your way.

No person is the same. You would have given up on Chauncy Billips and Steve Nash and Stephen Curry to name a few. And you would have called us stupid for thinking, hey, maybe these guys might yet develop.

He'll simply continue to move the goal post. If Mudiay plays well the rest of the year the argument will be "lets see him do it for another year." If he's putting up good stats he'll drop some advanced metrics that says he sucks. If he's hitting clutch shots he'll claim if it weren't for Mudiay we'd be up big and wouldn't need clutch shooting. Mudiay could turn into the next Billups and he's still going to find an angle to discredit him. He has zero credibility. The volume of words doesn't make a person's point more valid. Just the internet equivalent of someone who loves to hear himself talk.

Here's the game people play, predicting someone is going to suck is like predicting you're not going to win the lottery. Greatness means you're rare so predicting a player won't be great is so weak. Statically your pet could randomly pick who will not be great and come away with a decent percentage of accuracy. If someone is framing themselves as an internet expert, predict greatest for a player who other's don't think can play. Predict Ron Baker is going to be a star and gloat when THAT happens. Part of the game is when you're wrong, just pretend you never said it and hope nobody remembers it or ever brings it up.

Victor Oladipo was on his third team in five years when he landed in Indy at age 25 and became all-NBA and first team all-defense. Every player is different, every player's development arc is different, every player's situation is different.

This asswipe is too above everyone else to even respond to criticism. He thinks Baker should be a starting PG yet Baker can't even get a job in the NBA. He claims no one wanted Mudiay (how the **** does he know that) yet I guarantee if we cut Mudiay today there would be 10 teams at least clamoring for him. Mudiay had 2 30 pt games in his first 3 yrs in the league. He has 2 30 point games in the last 4 games. He has a coach that believes in him finally. Mudiay said that he watches so much game film with Fiz that he hears Fiz's voice in him during the game. When did he ever have that before? Especially for a guy that never went to college, how important is that? Every situation is different and you can't lump them together. Don't worry tripledud won't respond to this.
#nflfrontofficewannabeknowitallpompousassdoesntknow****

Briggs-- Frank is 2 yrs away from being 2 years away
Nalod
Posts: 68482
Alba Posts: 154
Joined: 12/24/2003
Member: #508
USA
12/19/2018  12:31 PM
I think triple is reposting things he has written before which is why it might read redundant.
As for the part about his manhood? Well it speaks for itself. Given his penchant to live the life of a bachelor as his distain for women is well documented it stands to reason he has to have something to offer women.
Those that used inches to measure ones manhood is obviously looking to close.
BigRedDog
Posts: 22118
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 1/23/2004
Member: #569
12/19/2018  1:29 PM
Nalod wrote:I think triple is reposting things he has written before which is why it might read redundant.
As for the part about his manhood? Well it speaks for itself. Given his penchant to live the life of a bachelor as his distain for women is well documented it stands to reason he has to have something to offer women.
Those that used inches to measure ones manhood is obviously looking to close.

I missed that part about his so called manhood due to falling asleep halfway thru his posts. Wow, tripledud has to be the biggest dick on this forum, and I mean that figuratively, not literally.

Briggs-- Frank is 2 yrs away from being 2 years away
TripleThreat
Posts: 23106
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 2/24/2012
Member: #3997

12/20/2018  3:26 AM
franco12 wrote:What are you going to say at the end of the year if Mudiay continues to play like he has in the month of December?

I mean, according to you, he won't- it's simply not possible.

I'm going to say - wow, the kid figured things out, he's starting to reach his potential. Maybe we should retain him moving forward. The knicks found a nugget in the trash.

But you have already made up your mind. Facts won't get in your way.

No person is the same. You would have given up on Chauncy Billips and Steve Nash and Stephen Curry to name a few. And you would have called us stupid for thinking, hey, maybe these guys might yet develop.


It's a fair question.

IF, Mudiay continues to put up counting stats as such the rest of the season, the question then becomes if he is doing so while providing , at minimum, league average defense and a league average three point shot CONSISTENTLY. The other issue is what can he contribute when he's not calling his own number so much and is forced to play another way.

There is nothing wrong with taking 25 shots a game, if that's in line with the actual game flow and based on what the defense is giving you. However, often the defense is giving your teammates more rope than you, and it's your job to exploit that.

What does he give you if he has to take just 8 shots a game from the field? This is the problem with volume scoring, as it goes down, the rest of a players game outside of scoring becomes more critical.

I did not say it was not possible. I said it was extremely unlikely given his entire career arc. Dropping 30 points a game night after night for the rest of the season is just not sustainable for Mudiay, if he was Michael Jordan, sure, but he's not MJ.

In the modern "space and pace" game, if you are a non pivot and you can't offer 3 And D value, it's going to be a rough road for you.

"Some people will try to cite outliers. Yes, there are outliers, but usually those players showed at least one dominant to very marketable skill from the beginning."

You are citing players who showed some kind of skill set that kept them in the rotation. OK, let's look at Billups, how many players DID NOT pan out against something like Billup's career arc? Do you want to bet on those kind of odds?

Do you know why the Nuggets gave up on him? Because while he "might develop" the statistical odds were so small, it forced a question of the opportunity cost of the roster spot and minutes for another player who might actually help them.

Key to note, many here in this thread said the same thing about Trey Burke last year. He's only 25! He could still develop! Don't be a hater!

You are asking what if Mudiay was able to sustain something for the rest of the year against trends in his entire career arc without any context in how those counting stats would be generated.

Is the 2 percent chance that Mudiay pans out as you hope worth the 98 percent of risk implied for the value of those minutes and that roster spot.

"But he might pan out!" Yes, he might. In theory. Odds are against it heavily. And at what total cost in terms of risk versus reward?

He's not here because the Knicks were magically better at mining his talent than every other team in the league. He's here because the Knicks ****ed up their cap and he was the best out of a series of horrible options.

CrushAlot
Posts: 59764
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/25/2003
Member: #452
USA
12/20/2018  5:48 AM
TripleThreat wrote:
franco12 wrote:What are you going to say at the end of the year if Mudiay continues to play like he has in the month of December?

I mean, according to you, he won't- it's simply not possible.

I'm going to say - wow, the kid figured things out, he's starting to reach his potential. Maybe we should retain him moving forward. The knicks found a nugget in the trash.

But you have already made up your mind. Facts won't get in your way.

No person is the same. You would have given up on Chauncy Billips and Steve Nash and Stephen Curry to name a few. And you would have called us stupid for thinking, hey, maybe these guys might yet develop.


It's a fair question.

IF, Mudiay continues to put up counting stats as such the rest of the season, the question then becomes if he is doing so while providing , at minimum, league average defense and a league average three point shot CONSISTENTLY. The other issue is what can he contribute when he's not calling his own number so much and is forced to play another way.

There is nothing wrong with taking 25 shots a game, if that's in line with the actual game flow and based on what the defense is giving you. However, often the defense is giving your teammates more rope than you, and it's your job to exploit that.

What does he give you if he has to take just 8 shots a game from the field? This is the problem with volume scoring, as it goes down, the rest of a players game outside of scoring becomes more critical.

I did not say it was not possible. I said it was extremely unlikely given his entire career arc. Dropping 30 points a game night after night for the rest of the season is just not sustainable for Mudiay, if he was Michael Jordan, sure, but he's not MJ.

In the modern "space and pace" game, if you are a non pivot and you can't offer 3 And D value, it's going to be a rough road for you.

"Some people will try to cite outliers. Yes, there are outliers, but usually those players showed at least one dominant to very marketable skill from the beginning."

You are citing players who showed some kind of skill set that kept them in the rotation. OK, let's look at Billups, how many players DID NOT pan out against something like Billup's career arc? Do you want to bet on those kind of odds?

Do you know why the Nuggets gave up on him? Because while he "might develop" the statistical odds were so small, it forced a question of the opportunity cost of the roster spot and minutes for another player who might actually help them.

Key to note, many here in this thread said the same thing about Trey Burke last year. He's only 25! He could still develop! Don't be a hater!

You are asking what if Mudiay was able to sustain something for the rest of the year against trends in his entire career arc without any context in how those counting stats would be generated.

Is the 2 percent chance that Mudiay pans out as you hope worth the 98 percent of risk implied for the value of those minutes and that roster spot.

"But he might pan out!" Yes, he might. In theory. Odds are against it heavily. And at what total cost in terms of risk versus reward?

He's not here because the Knicks were magically better at mining his talent than every other team in the league. He's here because the Knicks ****ed up their cap and he was the best out of a series of horrible options.

Mudiay doesn't shoot 25 shots a game. He has taken 21 shots twice in a game and 20 shots once in a game. In two of those games the Knicks didn't have Hardaway or Trier. Mudiay is shooting percentage for those 3 games was 59%. The Knicks also won two of those games. I did not follow Mudiay in Denver much. Was he chucking up 25 shots a night in an inefficient manner? Not sure where your answer is coming from if it is based on Mudiay this season.
I'm tired,I'm tired, I'm so tired right now......Kristaps Porzingis 1/3/18
Welpee
Posts: 23162
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/22/2016
Member: #6239

12/20/2018  8:10 AM    LAST EDITED: 12/20/2018  8:11 AM
CrushAlot wrote:
TripleThreat wrote:
franco12 wrote:What are you going to say at the end of the year if Mudiay continues to play like he has in the month of December?

I mean, according to you, he won't- it's simply not possible.

I'm going to say - wow, the kid figured things out, he's starting to reach his potential. Maybe we should retain him moving forward. The knicks found a nugget in the trash.

But you have already made up your mind. Facts won't get in your way.

No person is the same. You would have given up on Chauncy Billips and Steve Nash and Stephen Curry to name a few. And you would have called us stupid for thinking, hey, maybe these guys might yet develop.


It's a fair question.

IF, Mudiay continues to put up counting stats as such the rest of the season, the question then becomes if he is doing so while providing , at minimum, league average defense and a league average three point shot CONSISTENTLY. The other issue is what can he contribute when he's not calling his own number so much and is forced to play another way.

There is nothing wrong with taking 25 shots a game, if that's in line with the actual game flow and based on what the defense is giving you. However, often the defense is giving your teammates more rope than you, and it's your job to exploit that.

What does he give you if he has to take just 8 shots a game from the field? This is the problem with volume scoring, as it goes down, the rest of a players game outside of scoring becomes more critical.

I did not say it was not possible. I said it was extremely unlikely given his entire career arc. Dropping 30 points a game night after night for the rest of the season is just not sustainable for Mudiay, if he was Michael Jordan, sure, but he's not MJ.

In the modern "space and pace" game, if you are a non pivot and you can't offer 3 And D value, it's going to be a rough road for you.

"Some people will try to cite outliers. Yes, there are outliers, but usually those players showed at least one dominant to very marketable skill from the beginning."

You are citing players who showed some kind of skill set that kept them in the rotation. OK, let's look at Billups, how many players DID NOT pan out against something like Billup's career arc? Do you want to bet on those kind of odds?

Do you know why the Nuggets gave up on him? Because while he "might develop" the statistical odds were so small, it forced a question of the opportunity cost of the roster spot and minutes for another player who might actually help them.

Key to note, many here in this thread said the same thing about Trey Burke last year. He's only 25! He could still develop! Don't be a hater!

You are asking what if Mudiay was able to sustain something for the rest of the year against trends in his entire career arc without any context in how those counting stats would be generated.

Is the 2 percent chance that Mudiay pans out as you hope worth the 98 percent of risk implied for the value of those minutes and that roster spot.

"But he might pan out!" Yes, he might. In theory. Odds are against it heavily. And at what total cost in terms of risk versus reward?

He's not here because the Knicks were magically better at mining his talent than every other team in the league. He's here because the Knicks ****ed up their cap and he was the best out of a series of horrible options.

Mudiay doesn't shoot 25 shots a game. He has taken 21 shots twice in a game and 20 shots once in a game. In two of those games the Knicks didn't have Hardaway or Trier. Mudiay is shooting percentage for those 3 games was 59%. The Knicks also won two of those games. I did not follow Mudiay in Denver much. Was he chucking up 25 shots a night in an inefficient manner? Not sure where your answer is coming from if it is based on Mudiay this season.
Here's the thing, guys like him are like the weather man. They're great at telling you what happened after the fact. Tell me what's going to happen the week before it happens. What I want to hear from the "experts" is give us a list of players you think we should sign as free agents, give us the $ amount we should sign them for and give us trade scenarios that you think we should make. Go on record with names and figures so that we can critique your "expertise."

One thing I will say about Briggs, he got a lot of heat but it was because he was willing to go out there and do what I described above. People who want to tell us why someone will suck after a period of already playing poorly is essentially useless and a fraud.

GMs can't make deals in hindsight. If somebody thinks they're smarter than GMs they should act like it and give us next year's prescription for building the team now. But he'll never go on record because he doesn't want to ruin the persona he's trying to create by exposing how little he actually knows.

BigRedDog
Posts: 22118
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 1/23/2004
Member: #569
12/20/2018  10:07 AM
Welpee wrote:
CrushAlot wrote:
TripleThreat wrote:
franco12 wrote:What are you going to say at the end of the year if Mudiay continues to play like he has in the month of December?

I mean, according to you, he won't- it's simply not possible.

I'm going to say - wow, the kid figured things out, he's starting to reach his potential. Maybe we should retain him moving forward. The knicks found a nugget in the trash.

But you have already made up your mind. Facts won't get in your way.

No person is the same. You would have given up on Chauncy Billips and Steve Nash and Stephen Curry to name a few. And you would have called us stupid for thinking, hey, maybe these guys might yet develop.


It's a fair question.

IF, Mudiay continues to put up counting stats as such the rest of the season, the question then becomes if he is doing so while providing , at minimum, league average defense and a league average three point shot CONSISTENTLY. The other issue is what can he contribute when he's not calling his own number so much and is forced to play another way.

There is nothing wrong with taking 25 shots a game, if that's in line with the actual game flow and based on what the defense is giving you. However, often the defense is giving your teammates more rope than you, and it's your job to exploit that.

What does he give you if he has to take just 8 shots a game from the field? This is the problem with volume scoring, as it goes down, the rest of a players game outside of scoring becomes more critical.

I did not say it was not possible. I said it was extremely unlikely given his entire career arc. Dropping 30 points a game night after night for the rest of the season is just not sustainable for Mudiay, if he was Michael Jordan, sure, but he's not MJ.

In the modern "space and pace" game, if you are a non pivot and you can't offer 3 And D value, it's going to be a rough road for you.

"Some people will try to cite outliers. Yes, there are outliers, but usually those players showed at least one dominant to very marketable skill from the beginning."

You are citing players who showed some kind of skill set that kept them in the rotation. OK, let's look at Billups, how many players DID NOT pan out against something like Billup's career arc? Do you want to bet on those kind of odds?

Do you know why the Nuggets gave up on him? Because while he "might develop" the statistical odds were so small, it forced a question of the opportunity cost of the roster spot and minutes for another player who might actually help them.

Key to note, many here in this thread said the same thing about Trey Burke last year. He's only 25! He could still develop! Don't be a hater!

You are asking what if Mudiay was able to sustain something for the rest of the year against trends in his entire career arc without any context in how those counting stats would be generated.

Is the 2 percent chance that Mudiay pans out as you hope worth the 98 percent of risk implied for the value of those minutes and that roster spot.

"But he might pan out!" Yes, he might. In theory. Odds are against it heavily. And at what total cost in terms of risk versus reward?

He's not here because the Knicks were magically better at mining his talent than every other team in the league. He's here because the Knicks ****ed up their cap and he was the best out of a series of horrible options.

Mudiay doesn't shoot 25 shots a game. He has taken 21 shots twice in a game and 20 shots once in a game. In two of those games the Knicks didn't have Hardaway or Trier. Mudiay is shooting percentage for those 3 games was 59%. The Knicks also won two of those games. I did not follow Mudiay in Denver much. Was he chucking up 25 shots a night in an inefficient manner? Not sure where your answer is coming from if it is based on Mudiay this season.
Here's the thing, guys like him are like the weather man. They're great at telling you what happened after the fact. Tell me what's going to happen the week before it happens. What I want to hear from the "experts" is give us a list of players you think we should sign as free agents, give us the $ amount we should sign them for and give us trade scenarios that you think we should make. Go on record with names and figures so that we can critique your "expertise."

One thing I will say about Briggs, he got a lot of heat but it was because he was willing to go out there and do what I described above. People who want to tell us why someone will suck after a period of already playing poorly is essentially useless and a fraud.

GMs can't make deals in hindsight. If somebody thinks they're smarter than GMs they should act like it and give us next year's prescription for building the team now. But he'll never go on record because he doesn't want to ruin the persona he's trying to create by exposing how little he actually knows.

You will never get a response from tripledud/triplefraud because he doesn't know ****. Welpee, you are correct, he only can tell you last weeks weather.

Briggs-- Frank is 2 yrs away from being 2 years away
Nalod
Posts: 68482
Alba Posts: 154
Joined: 12/24/2003
Member: #508
USA
12/20/2018  1:05 PM
Welpee wrote:
CrushAlot wrote:
TripleThreat wrote:
franco12 wrote:What are you going to say at the end of the year if Mudiay continues to play like he has in the month of December?

I mean, according to you, he won't- it's simply not possible.

I'm going to say - wow, the kid figured things out, he's starting to reach his potential. Maybe we should retain him moving forward. The knicks found a nugget in the trash.

But you have already made up your mind. Facts won't get in your way.

No person is the same. You would have given up on Chauncy Billips and Steve Nash and Stephen Curry to name a few. And you would have called us stupid for thinking, hey, maybe these guys might yet develop.


It's a fair question.

IF, Mudiay continues to put up counting stats as such the rest of the season, the question then becomes if he is doing so while providing , at minimum, league average defense and a league average three point shot CONSISTENTLY. The other issue is what can he contribute when he's not calling his own number so much and is forced to play another way.

There is nothing wrong with taking 25 shots a game, if that's in line with the actual game flow and based on what the defense is giving you. However, often the defense is giving your teammates more rope than you, and it's your job to exploit that.

What does he give you if he has to take just 8 shots a game from the field? This is the problem with volume scoring, as it goes down, the rest of a players game outside of scoring becomes more critical.

I did not say it was not possible. I said it was extremely unlikely given his entire career arc. Dropping 30 points a game night after night for the rest of the season is just not sustainable for Mudiay, if he was Michael Jordan, sure, but he's not MJ.

In the modern "space and pace" game, if you are a non pivot and you can't offer 3 And D value, it's going to be a rough road for you.

"Some people will try to cite outliers. Yes, there are outliers, but usually those players showed at least one dominant to very marketable skill from the beginning."

You are citing players who showed some kind of skill set that kept them in the rotation. OK, let's look at Billups, how many players DID NOT pan out against something like Billup's career arc? Do you want to bet on those kind of odds?

Do you know why the Nuggets gave up on him? Because while he "might develop" the statistical odds were so small, it forced a question of the opportunity cost of the roster spot and minutes for another player who might actually help them.

Key to note, many here in this thread said the same thing about Trey Burke last year. He's only 25! He could still develop! Don't be a hater!

You are asking what if Mudiay was able to sustain something for the rest of the year against trends in his entire career arc without any context in how those counting stats would be generated.

Is the 2 percent chance that Mudiay pans out as you hope worth the 98 percent of risk implied for the value of those minutes and that roster spot.

"But he might pan out!" Yes, he might. In theory. Odds are against it heavily. And at what total cost in terms of risk versus reward?

He's not here because the Knicks were magically better at mining his talent than every other team in the league. He's here because the Knicks ****ed up their cap and he was the best out of a series of horrible options.

Mudiay doesn't shoot 25 shots a game. He has taken 21 shots twice in a game and 20 shots once in a game. In two of those games the Knicks didn't have Hardaway or Trier. Mudiay is shooting percentage for those 3 games was 59%. The Knicks also won two of those games. I did not follow Mudiay in Denver much. Was he chucking up 25 shots a night in an inefficient manner? Not sure where your answer is coming from if it is based on Mudiay this season.
Here's the thing, guys like him are like the weather man. They're great at telling you what happened after the fact. Tell me what's going to happen the week before it happens. What I want to hear from the "experts" is give us a list of players you think we should sign as free agents, give us the $ amount we should sign them for and give us trade scenarios that you think we should make. Go on record with names and figures so that we can critique your "expertise."

One thing I will say about Briggs, he got a lot of heat but it was because he was willing to go out there and do what I described above. People who want to tell us why someone will suck after a period of already playing poorly is essentially useless and a fraud.

GMs can't make deals in hindsight. If somebody thinks they're smarter than GMs they should act like it and give us next year's prescription for building the team now. But he'll never go on record because he doesn't want to ruin the persona he's trying to create by exposing how little he actually knows.

Briggs did put it out there but his ideas works if you have a 25 man roster. at the end of the day you have to make a draft pick at the spot you have, and but so much money to sign a guy. There are narrow windows of time to make all these decisions as there is for Trades. Throwing out multitudes of ideas without respect to time is also very vague. Blend in rumors vs facts and its nearly impossible to be "that guy" that really knows it vs. "That guy" who has all the answers in hindsight.

TripleThreat
Posts: 23106
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 2/24/2012
Member: #3997

12/20/2018  4:00 PM    LAST EDITED: 12/20/2018  4:02 PM
CrushAlot wrote:Mudiay doesn't shoot 25 shots a game. He has taken 21 shots twice in a game and 20 shots once in a game. In two of those games the Knicks didn't have Hardaway or Trier. Mudiay is shooting percentage for those 3 games was 59%. The Knicks also won two of those games. I did not follow Mudiay in Denver much. Was he chucking up 25 shots a night in an inefficient manner? Not sure where your answer is coming from if it is based on Mudiay this season.


The point of discussing "25 shots" is not specifically a hardline of 25 shots. It's a discussion of VOLUME vs EFFICIENCY.

Will Mudiay average 30 points a game the rest of the season? No. He will not. Will he average 25 or 20 or 18? Odds on, he will not. Nothing in his career arc suggests this is likely. It is NOT IMPOSSIBLE, but it is IMPROBABLE TO A LARGE DEGREE. That's the polite way to say it. If you went to an actual NBA analyst and tried to push that, they'd look at you like you were ****ing insane.

Is he offering league average defense? No

Is he offering league average three point shooting? In a short stretch, yes, but over the long haul of his career, no. Has he shown he can hit the three ball at an average rate CONSISTENTLY OVER TIME? No

What does he give you when his shot is not falling? Not defense. He's not a good passer. He's not a high IQ player. What does he give you when he has to take a more limited role? Not defense. Not three point shooting. Not passing. Not high IQ play.

His skill set now does not translate well to the modern "Space And Pace" game, he's a non pivot who offers zero 3 And D skills.

What's more likely? He's having a volume stretch ( Good for him ) with his career running the red line otherwise and will regress to what he's shown over his career in the NBA thus far?

Or he will DEFY the base assessment of hundreds of NBA front office personnel ( none of whom wanted this guy for nearly free) and go radically against his long term career arc?

BigRedDog
Posts: 22118
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 1/23/2004
Member: #569
12/20/2018  4:59 PM
TripleThreat wrote:
CrushAlot wrote:Mudiay doesn't shoot 25 shots a game. He has taken 21 shots twice in a game and 20 shots once in a game. In two of those games the Knicks didn't have Hardaway or Trier. Mudiay is shooting percentage for those 3 games was 59%. The Knicks also won two of those games. I did not follow Mudiay in Denver much. Was he chucking up 25 shots a night in an inefficient manner? Not sure where your answer is coming from if it is based on Mudiay this season.


The point of discussing "25 shots" is not specifically a hardline of 25 shots. It's a discussion of VOLUME vs EFFICIENCY.

Will Mudiay average 30 points a game the rest of the season? No. He will not. Will he average 25 or 20 or 18? Odds on, he will not. Nothing in his career arc suggests this is likely. It is NOT IMPOSSIBLE, but it is IMPROBABLE TO A LARGE DEGREE. That's the polite way to say it. If you went to an actual NBA analyst and tried to push that, they'd look at you like you were ****ing insane.

Is he offering league average defense? No

Is he offering league average three point shooting? In a short stretch, yes, but over the long haul of his career, no. Has he shown he can hit the three ball at an average rate CONSISTENTLY OVER TIME? No

What does he give you when his shot is not falling? Not defense. He's not a good passer. He's not a high IQ player. What does he give you when he has to take a more limited role? Not defense. Not three point shooting. Not passing. Not high IQ play.

His skill set now does not translate well to the modern "Space And Pace" game, he's a non pivot who offers zero 3 And D skills.

What's more likely? He's having a volume stretch ( Good for him ) with his career running the red line otherwise and will regress to what he's shown over his career in the NBA thus far?

Or he will DEFY the base assessment of hundreds of NBA front office personnel ( none of whom wanted this guy for nearly free) and go radically against his long term career arc?

yada yada yada . This guy sucks, I know everything, yada yada yada
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Briggs-- Frank is 2 yrs away from being 2 years away
Welpee
Posts: 23162
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/22/2016
Member: #6239

12/20/2018  7:54 PM
BigRedDog wrote:
TripleThreat wrote:
CrushAlot wrote:Mudiay doesn't shoot 25 shots a game. He has taken 21 shots twice in a game and 20 shots once in a game. In two of those games the Knicks didn't have Hardaway or Trier. Mudiay is shooting percentage for those 3 games was 59%. The Knicks also won two of those games. I did not follow Mudiay in Denver much. Was he chucking up 25 shots a night in an inefficient manner? Not sure where your answer is coming from if it is based on Mudiay this season.


The point of discussing "25 shots" is not specifically a hardline of 25 shots. It's a discussion of VOLUME vs EFFICIENCY.

Will Mudiay average 30 points a game the rest of the season? No. He will not. Will he average 25 or 20 or 18? Odds on, he will not. Nothing in his career arc suggests this is likely. It is NOT IMPOSSIBLE, but it is IMPROBABLE TO A LARGE DEGREE. That's the polite way to say it. If you went to an actual NBA analyst and tried to push that, they'd look at you like you were ****ing insane.

Is he offering league average defense? No

Is he offering league average three point shooting? In a short stretch, yes, but over the long haul of his career, no. Has he shown he can hit the three ball at an average rate CONSISTENTLY OVER TIME? No

What does he give you when his shot is not falling? Not defense. He's not a good passer. He's not a high IQ player. What does he give you when he has to take a more limited role? Not defense. Not three point shooting. Not passing. Not high IQ play.

His skill set now does not translate well to the modern "Space And Pace" game, he's a non pivot who offers zero 3 And D skills.

What's more likely? He's having a volume stretch ( Good for him ) with his career running the red line otherwise and will regress to what he's shown over his career in the NBA thus far?

Or he will DEFY the base assessment of hundreds of NBA front office personnel ( none of whom wanted this guy for nearly free) and go radically against his long term career arc?

yada yada yada . This guy sucks, I know everything, yada yada yada
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Exactly. I want him to tell us about the guy who hasn't blown up but will because he's got "special expertise" to see what the rest of us can't see. I want to hear from a guy who told us in 2013 Giannis would be a beast by 2017. I don't need for anyone to tell me in 2018 why he's a beast.
I Think We Should Take A Chance On Markelle Fultz

©2001-2012 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy