Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

GotSwag?

Antawn Jamison to visit

96 posts in this topic

Kiss my @ss Cho.

wtf ru talking about? you want him to just magically sign durant rondo and wade overnight and become a powerhouse?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wtf ru talking about? you want him to just magically sign durant rondo and wade overnight and become a powerhouse?

I honestly couldn't care any less about what he does since draft night.

If the Cleveland Cavaliers had a clue, they would've drafted Harrison Barnes at #4 and then went after Eric Gordon, instead of drafting Waiters at #4 and then CLUMSILY trying to get Golden State to trade them Barnes and now trying to talk to Brandon Roy.

They're just as stupid as Cho is, apparently.

Irving

Gordon

Barnes

Thompson

Zeller

That would've been some nucleus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Find me a 7 footer who's better than Hickson and is available. (other than Hibbert)

Chris Kaman (stands 7'0 flat)

Spencer Hawes (stand 7'1 flat) (By the way, don't laugh at Hawes, he had two 20 point games in the Chicago-Philly series)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chris Kaman (stands 7'0 flat)

Spencer Hawes (stand 7'1 flat) (By the way, don't laugh at Hawes, he had two 20 point games in the Chicago-Philly series)

Hawes is a pretty good player, but I'd still take Hickson over Hawes all day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that true shooting percentage is bad for a player of any position. if you actually knew what it meant you would understand this. it takes into consideration that many of his shots are 3s.

you clearly dont understand efficiency, but are beyond me trying to help explain these things. i get it dude, he is a forward that shoots 3s. the problem is he isnt great at it and thus its not a very good shot for anyone to take

Using efficiency statistics to grade out a player that played on a bad Cleveland Cavaliers team (when they didn't have Irving they were garbage) is a very piss poor argument.

If you want to look at efficiency, look at it from the point of view of how efficient/valuable he was to the Cavs. Jamison was responsible for 18.5% of the Cavs total points.

How can you say a guy that scores nearly a fifth of a teams total points is inefficient?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hawes is a pretty good player, but I'd still take Hickson over Hawes all day.

The fact of having a seven footer on the Bobcats roster that doesn't suck really intrigues me though lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

jamison ranked 284 in the in nba in true shooting percentage last year. 1 spot ahead of biyombo

http://insider.espn....otingPct/page/6

That stat is a garbage argument for a player like Jamison because all the true shooting percentage takes in account is free throws, three-point goals, and two-point field goals.

Jamison rarely shot the ball in the paint, most of his two-point field goal attempts came from just inside the three point area around the 18 to 20 foot range as where most of Biyombo's shots were two to five foot shots in the paint.

True shooting percentage doesn't take into the account of how difficult the shot is, which is why your argument is flawed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hawes is a pretty good player, but I'd still take Hickson over Hawes all day.

I rather have Hawes and let Bismack develop into 1 of the better PF in the league.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well shots just inside the 3 point range are the worst in the league, so it does take the value into perspective. Are you his brothger or something?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites