What Joey has provided is more than you have for you stance. You've just thrown out some names and conveniently disregarded the fact those players a rare, not common.golden wrote:
What Joey has provided is more than you have for you stance. You've just thrown out some names and conveniently disregarded the fact those players a rare, not common.
he stopped eating, 11 years ago
And what a horrible shame it was ... He coulda been huuge! (Size wise not Fame wise. I gave him another 200lbs before he croaked. Who knew.)
Last edited by joey_hesketh; Tue Mar 1st, 2011 at 10:03 AM.
it's safe to say he LOOOOOVED Cinnabon
Actually, it makes perfect sense. All of the undrafted players after the 2011 draft would have been available at 28-29. BC's point was that the talent pool at that level and after would never, could not possibly include someone at Johnson's talent level. Theoretically, you could also answer Colangelo's position with the question, "what about asset value? Did the pick have more value than Johnson in a trade, etc.?" and expand the list of possibilities by a large factor.
Whether Colangelo is right or wrong won't be know for a couple of years but I think the larger point is that Colangelo is prone to making very broad, definitive declarations that often turn out to be wrong (comparing Derozan to VC, the 50-win team decree), so, people should at least raise an eyebrow.
Even Joey H admits it was just a quick basic breakdown (read: serious omission), so to try to include % probability to add statistical credibility was redikulass. He doesn't have the time, and neither do I.
There are also lots of re-tread first-rounders who are just bench filler or less. James Johnson was a 16th overall pick. So what? Acie Law was #11. Corey Brewer was #7 and he was just waived this week. Juju was #13 and he's no saviour. Joe Alexander was #8 and is a free agent - why don't we go after him?
Weak. You realized you couldn't keep arguing your other point, so now you just try to point out other Mid-1st's that have failed? Lame.
And Golden, that quick, basic break down is better than anything you've provided. And if you actually look at it, for what it argues, it is accurate and conveys my point, regardless of how quick I did. I'm still waiting for ANYTHING that conveys yours.
Well if you don't then how can you cast aside Joey's analysis while adding lots of criticism in the process? If you're not able to debate the topic then you guys probably shouldn't take pot shots during your get away. The numbers tell a lot more than throwing out these names. I could say that lots of people win the lottery, it's a common thing and then give you names. I could go on to say as such, everybody should always buy $1000 worth a lottery tickets per lottery because you're just throwing your money away otherwise. Would it make sense to then go and do that? No, if you were wise about your money the first question you would ask after "are you for real?" is "what is the probability of winning this lottery?"
Okay.... uncle. You won the debate because you said so. And you provided sufficient statistical evidence because you said so. Never mind the flaws in your statistical data that I pointed out and put the onus on you to correct. You don't have the time to correct them, so you deflect it back to me. Nice. You've also proved that you're just as lazy as I am.
Excuse me?! Ok I'm done with you Golden.
When you're willing to put some actual effort into an intelligent debate, please let me know. Otherwise, please leave us grown-ups with real stuff to talk about, alone.
If you're going to continue being childish and critical, without actually presenting any sort of real argument, then I have no time for you.
You never respond to specifics that I mention or inquire about. You dance around the topic like a Court Jester until no one can bother even talking to you about it anymore.
James Johnson is a boss!
There ain't nothin this guy can't do. Hit 3's, defend, pass, score, block shots, and grab boards. Did i miss anything? well u get what i mean. I think BC will keep him around for a long time.
He doesn't have a very consistent mid range jumper let alone 3s.
atleast he can defend and make plays unlike your boyfriend sonny weems. And he made a 3 this game and scored more than weems.
Why are you talking it so personally? I never even said anything about Weems. JJ hitting a 3 today doesn't suddenly make him a good 3 point shooter or a good shooter. Most his points came from shots at the rim.
cause all i see you do is whine about weems on the bench and rip on James Johnson who just came like barley a week ago. I never said he's a good 3 point shooter, but he is a good shooter. Watch him back in wakeforest he is an exellent mid range shooter and 3 pointers aint bad either. Anyways sorry for getting angry
JJ is showing that given minutes and the confidence of his team he COULD turn into a player with a long career. We saw Weems do this last year when given the chance to play. BC may have found a top 9 player.
Maybe in college but from what I've seen so far it isn't great. Hopefully he works with English and gets better.
Jimmy John is certainly a jack of all trades sort of player. I like what he brings. A great pick up by BC thus far. I'm getting over losing the MIA pick, too.
i'm not 100% sure yet, but riding that JJ bandwagon is starting to look mighty interesting
Please don't call him Jimmy John...it' sounds weird. It makes me think of Jim Crow laws for some reason...can we just stick to calling him JJ?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote