James Johnson Discussion

[Krix]

Size doesn't matter, it's how you use it. Oh wait, wrong thread.

It's not the size of the boat, it's the motion in the ocean.

Here's a new one for ya :P

[golden]

How do I like them apples? You're trying to tell me that Smush Parker and Tyrone Nesby and Quinton Ross are good NBA players. That's not even worth my time to tell you how ridiculous that is. This whole debate started over whether or not JJ will be better than what can be netted at 28ish. And you sorta helped, because I'd MUCH rather have JJ than most of the guys on that list.

I applaud the effort but I still disagree with your argument. Which is fine. I'm allowed.

Nice grown up response, there, pot. So you completely ignored the other 167 players (actually closer to 190 if you add the last 3 seasons) and choose to focus on Smush Parker, Tyrone Nesby and Quinton Ross? Did I really need to cut and paste the bigger list from the basketball-reference, or did you simply choose not to read it?

Cut my list in half and you are still off by an order of magnitude. You just got owned big time, Joey. Your so-called statistical proof just got blown out of the water. Just man up and take it.

[Matt52]

Cut my list in half and you are still off by an order of magnitude. You just got owned big time, Joey. Your so-called statistical proof just got blown out of the water. Just man up and take it.

Based on your supplied information, there is a 76% chance the pick never makes it to 3 NBA seasons. Also of the list that did make it to 3 NBA seasons, many have played at the end of the bench or put up a good season or two and disappeared.

The simple math is if you want to include undrafted players then, yes, you are going to have more NBA players available. However, the odds or percentages of success decrease.

169/600 = 28%

169/60,0000 = 0.0028%

[Rubbishstyle]

Sensai

[Katman]

Based on logic alone, you shouldn't include undrafted plrayers. The orginal premis was whether you could get a better player than JJ with the Miami pick. You can't use undrafted players in your argument precisely because they were undrafted...you didn't need a pick to get them. You are not really comparing apples to apples.

The real question is are there any pearls in THIS year's draft, apparently Colangelo and his scouting department doesn't think so. Or maybe Colangelo plans to buy a pick off someone on draft day, which would make all this arguing pointless.

[joey_hesketh]

("I just got owned"?, "How do I like them Apples"? , "Man up"??
How the [censored] can I have a real conversation with this person?!?)

At this point Golden, it's not really whether I specifically am wrong on the matter. I disagree with the argument. And alot of others here do as well.You are arguing that getting a guy like Smush Parker is a good thing. Or any other scrub thats managed to play 3 measily seasons in the league. I am arguing that a player of James Johnsons caliber will be playing in the league for 10 years+. That is the difference.

So you keep thinking that Tyrone Nesby is going to be our starting SF. And how bout Kevin Ollie to the rescue at PG??
And I will continue to think otherwise.
Done with this.

[heinz57]

tyrone nesby threw me for a loop... had to google him to find his highly inconsequential NBA career.

i google alot of things..

for instance... joey hesketh is either an old school baseball player, or a gay hooker from Tacoma, WA.

i prefer to believe the name came from the second one.

[joey_hesketh]

hahaha Joe Hesketh was a pitcher for the Red Sox and the Expos. As well as a gay hooker from Tacoma. They are one and the same.

[joey_hesketh]

Based on logic alone, you shouldn't include undrafted plrayers. The orginal premis was whether you could get a better player than JJ with the Miami pick. You can't use undrafted players in your argument precisely because they were undrafted...you didn't need a pick to get them. You are not really comparing apples to apples.

I already tried to argue this. Logically, you'd think this is the case. But Golden disagrees apparently.

[heinz57]

there is no logical argument against stupid.

[joey_hesketh]

there is no logical argument against stupid.

Boom.

[e2thed]

The Beast is the best one in my opinion.

[j bean]

What, no "Karate Kid"?

MMA is his thing and I believe he's undefeated with a very impressive record. Very different than a karate match.

"Prince James"

[Raptorsss]

His mixed-martial arts background, is karate. Some fighters start with Ji-Jitsu or more commonly wrestling, JJ was a national champion in karate.

So my vote is for the 'karate kid'.

[joey_hesketh]

How about we just call him 'James'... ? Too boring? Jim maybe?

[heinz57]

i got my childhood nickname tattooed on my shoulder.... and you know what... after years of having it, and growing up, maturing, and becoming an adult...

STUPID NICKNAMES ARE EMBARASSING

If i came into work every day and people were like "Hey what's up, Mad Dog McCallister!" (not my nickname, just the first thing that popped in my head).. i would HATE my life.

[joey_hesketh]

i got my childhood nickname tattooed on my shoulder.... and you know what... after years of having it, and growing up, maturing, and becoming an adult...

STUPID NICKNAMES ARE EMBARASSING

If i came into work every day and people were like "Hey what's up, Mad Dog McCallister!" (not my nickname, just the first thing that popped in my head).. i would HATE my life.

Hahaha Nicknames just remind me of the Seinfeld episode where George wants to be called T-Bone, but instead gets called Cocoa.
I guarentee you James Johnson isn't yearning for a nickname like 'Boobie' Gibson, or 'Poo' Jeter.

[j bean]

His mixed-martial arts background, is karate. Some fighters start with Ji-Jitsu or more commonly wrestling, JJ was a national champion in karate.

So my vote is for the 'karate kid'.

Just read about his karate record and his parents kick boxing background. Awesome.
Still karate kid reminds me of the little kid in the movies.

[heinz57]

Hahaha Nicknames just remind me of the Seinfeld episode where George wants to be called T-Bone, but instead gets called Cocoa.
I guarentee you James Johnson isn't yearning for a nickname like 'Boobie' Gibson, or 'Poo' Jeter.

a friend of mine and me were once introduced to some dude who was a wannabe rapper... can't remember the name, but it was a mythical god.. so lets go with "Poseidon"... he introduced himself as "Poseidon"... i never saw my friend lose all the color in his face, visibly lose all of his energy, and get the "oh my god, i'm dealing with a simpleton" expression on his face all at once.. and then ask "no, what does your mother call you"

[golden]

Based on logic alone, you shouldn't include undrafted plrayers. The orginal premis was whether you could get a better player than JJ with the Miami pick. You can't use undrafted players in your argument precisely because they were undrafted...you didn't need a pick to get them. You are not really comparing apples to apples.

The real question is are there any pearls in THIS year's draft, apparently Colangelo and his scouting department doesn't think so. Or maybe Colangelo plans to buy a pick off someone on draft day, which would make all this arguing pointless.

Your logic assumes in advance that the draft goes exactly as Draft Express or some rankings predict. Guys who should have been drafted always fall (e.g. Ed Davis, DuJuan Blair, Manu,...) and some guys fall right out of the draft. But they were available and should have been drafted. That's the original argument, that a guy of JJ's quality would not even be available. Undrafted is simply a way to quantify those guys. Undrafted = available.