Bobcats/Bucks/Kings 1st deal of the day

[e_blazer]

Cho just guaranteed the Bobcats become contenders with this deal.

Can't you see it, eblazer?

Guess I missed that.

I swear some of these guys must get up in the morning an hammer their dicks just to get in the mood for posting here.

 

[PapaG]

Top 4? Or top 5?

Maybe top 5, but definitely not top 9?

When you make shit up, you should at least not act precise about it.

Ed O.

Way to lower the debate, Ed. I posted some specific facts, make a few observations, and now you get all pedantic about it by making it about me.

Talk about a waste of time...

 

[Ed O]

Way to lower the debate, Ed. I posted some specific facts, make a few observations, and now you get all pedantic about it by making it about me.

Talk about a waste of time...

I told you why your specific facts are irrelevant. You then claimed that someone was "celebrating" the trade or that the Bobcats were now "contenders" according to some who liked the trade. You also seemed to indicate that me saying something was a waste of time was un-adminlike.

I'm not making it about you. I'm making it about your weak assertion that there's not much difference between the 19th and 7th picks... but that there IS a big difference between the 5th pick and the 7th pick. That's silly to me.

Ed O.

 

[Minstrel]

Not really. You can find the same results as you move down the lists. Outside of the Top 5 or so, most picks seem to be hit or miss all the way into the mid-to-late 20s.

Any single pick is hit-or-miss. The benefit of picking 7 instead of 19 is that you have a larger pool of players to pick from. That's why looking at specific slots isn't really the way to do this. Maybe the #13 pick was a great player...and if you picked 7, you could have taken him (if you're a good drafter), whereas you couldn't at 19.

Looking at who actually was taken at 7-picks and 19-picks only tells us what specific teams did with those picks...not what the differing potential of each of those picks was.

 

[PapaG]

I told you why your specific facts are irrelevant. You then claimed that someone was "celebrating" the trade or that the Bobcats were now "contenders" according to some who liked the trade. You also seemed to indicate that me saying something was a waste of time was un-adminlike.

I'm not making it about you. I'm making it about your weak assertion that there's not much difference between the 19th and 7th picks... but that there IS a big difference between the 5th pick and the 7th pick. That's silly to me.

Ed O.

It's silly to me for you to call someone out about being vague when your own post uses the qualifier "potentially". Gee Ed, that's an astute observation. "Potentially" Minstrel will enter this thread as your sidekick. "Potentially" the Bobcats just wasted Stephen Jackson's trade value on a pick that hasn't historically made much of a difference. "Potentially" adds so much to the debate, and is such a strong statement.

Thanks for sharing it! It's "potentially" not a waste of time to discuss "potential" value, although I doubt it.

 

[PapaG]

Any single pick is hit-or-miss. The benefit of picking 7 instead of 19 is that you have a larger pool of players to pick from. That's why looking at specific slots isn't really the way to do this. Maybe the #13 pick was a great player...and if you picked 7, you could have taken him (if you're a good drafter), whereas you couldn't at 19.

Looking at who actually was taken at 7-picks and 19-picks only tells us what specific teams did with those picks...not what the differing potential of each of those picks was.

And there he is!!! LMAO!!!

Anyhow, I hope you realize that I do know there are less players to choose from from pick #7 to #19. I'm dumb, but not that dumb. I was just pointing out that the difference between the value received by those picks seems to be minimal.

 

[tlongII]

Hey PapaG! Haven't seen you in the Duck Forum lately... Where ya been?

 

[Ed O]

It's silly to me for you to call someone out about being vague when your own post uses the qualifier "potentially". Gee Ed, that's an astute observation. "Potentially" Minstrel will enter this thread as your sidekick. "Potentially" the Bobcats just wasted Stephen Jackson's trade value on a pick that hasn't historically made much of a difference. "Potentially" adds so much to the debate, and is such a strong statement.

I'm calling you out for being PRECISE... not for being vague.

You want to put a fine point on exactly where a "big difference" resides. You say it's the 4th or 5th pick. But not the 7th pick. You back it up by showing draft picks for two first round spots.

It's silly.

Ed O.

 

[PapaG]

Hey PapaG! Haven't seen you in the Duck Forum lately... Where ya been?

What I like best about the Lyles thing is that Lyles said Texas wouldn't work with him because he wouldn't steer them players. Basically, UT asked him to steer players, and Lyles doesn't steer players.

I expect the NCAA to start investigating UT pronto.

 

[tlongII]

 

[Natebishop3]

Hey! Another PapaG thread!

 

[Boob-No-More]

Hey! Another PapaG thread!

Surprise, surprise. Can we just give him his own sub-forum where he can get the attention he desparately craves so he'll stop polluting every thread in this one?

Another decent, on-topic thread derailed by the insecure attention whore.

BNM