Saric vs. Porzingis

[Von Bismarck]

Rubio's PR agents did terrific job, that needs to be said. Such a high contract for a guy that shoots 30%, pure class.

[Mirotic12]

Rubio was probably the worst player on his Euroleague team? Oh wow, hyperbole much..?

All I see is Euro fanboy who tries too hard to deceive someone into believing how great and strong Euroleague is. Look, I hear what you are saying, and you are correct on some points on surface, but the agenda is clear.

Mirotic was a role player on Real Madrid, but a role player in a sense like Tony Parker is role player on the Spurs. You make it sound like Mirotic was average, while in reality he was one of the bests. Even the bests in Europe can be called role players, Euroleague lacks individual supertalent and is just far more balanced and team oriented. Mirotic was only 6th in USG% on Real Madrid team, but it speaks volumes about how deep that team was.
And yes, he did chocked in the Final 4, but so as Real Madrid. So I think it shows how important Mirotic was to RM success.

Oh, and yes, I totally agree that US media often talks out of their ass hyping those prospects, doing it at Euroleagues expense most of the time. t grinds my gears also. When NBA media talks about European basketball or it's prospects, you should always take it with a grain of salt, because they get things wrong all the time, and just demeans Euro basketball, intentionally or not, I don't know.

I just posted exact same thing you said. Mirotic was very good role player on Real Madrid. Exact same thing you said.

Again....no agenda. I am saying truth.

Again, US media is full of it about Euro players, as you say. So the other guy is coming from point of distortion. He is one who can't understand the reality. He comes with the distortion from US media that Mirotic was best player in Europe and thinks Mirotic was "first option" of Real Madrid. I simply explained to him that was never true.

I am only in agreement with you. Now, I can say Mirotic was probably about 6th best player in Real Madrid maybe based on how played last year, and I think he varied from 4th to 6th best player in their team while he was there, because last year he was playing particularly bad. But Real Madrid of course is an elite team in Euroleague, so it is true that on some of the worst teams of course he could be the best player. I am in no way disagreeing with that.

It is the same exact principle as in the NBA. I think this is your point. I am not arguing with you here. So there is no reason to say I have an agenda. I am the one explaining to the guy that asked a question in TRUTHFUL manner, then someone else said I was lying about stuff because he only knows what ESPN told him "Mirotic was best player in Europe, first option in Real", etc. which is not true. I explain why it is not true.

As far as Rubio goes.......there is no hyperbole at all. Go ahead and list all the players on the roster of Barca from when he was playing there. Then name a single player from that time that he was better than.

You can make an argument that he was as good as Sada, not better than Sada. Although personally for me, Sada was better (Rubio is better than Sada now). And the coach of the team agreed, because Rubio was barely playing compared to Sada for the last 1/3 of the season.

For every other player, I have a very seriously hard time how anyone could claim Rubio was as good as ANY player on that roster with a straight face. But we can list all those players and debate here if you want to. Remember this is the same Barca team that beat the champion team of the Lakers and Mavs. And it had players like Pete Mickeal, a guy many consider maybe best American that ever played in Spanish League on it, and he was not even the best player of the team.

So again, there is no hyperbole at all. The hyperbole was when US media spent years saying Rubio was the best player in Europe, when he was averaging something like 6 points and 3 assists on 30% shooting, and every guy on his own team was actually a better player than he was. I will say that Rubio was one of the 2 best defenders on his team, along with Fran Vazquez, and he was the best perimeter defender on his team. When he was younger, he was a lot quicker and a lot better at defense than he is now. He has gotten much slower than he used to be. Rubio in Euroleague was like current version of Dontaye Draper, without the ability to shoot, so like a poor man's version of current version of Dontaye Draper. And Draper is not even close to best player on Efes, a team many times worse than that Barca team, which was probably the best team of all history of Barca.

[UcanUwill]

I think you underrating Rubio big time. He was far from the worst player on Barca. Like seriously, worst player on Barca would not have been a very good NBA starter the very next season. That just doesn't add up. And I know NBA and Euro ball are different, but still, such inexactitude just can't happen.

Rubio was easily better than Grimau, Sada, Morris, Perovic, N'Dong. He was their best perimeter defender, best ball handler and best play maker. He also had great intangibles. Barca's gameplan wasn't built around him though, he was often used off ball, therefore his numbers suffered a bit.

US media hyped Rubio like crazy, but a lot of it was justified, and more of it was legacy. Some NBA media outlets distorted the truth and claimed he was Euroleague superstar, but a lot of them just hyped his NBA potential and skill. So.
Rubio built his legend yearly, truly was a 16 year old phenomenon, player with such natural IQ and talent. Made Spanish NT 17 years old, and his fantastic performance against USA in the finals solidified his legend. He looked like a generational talent, you can see why NBA media hyped him so much. They saw a huge NBA potential, and thats the only thing they care about. Euroleague success is usually irrelevant to them.

The problem with Rubio - he peaked when he was 18 and just barely improved since then. His evolution just stopped, hes been a disappointment. Still good player though, much better player than his raw stats would suggest.

Back to Mirotic, I think he was top 3 player on RM. Sergio was easily the best, Rudy and Nikola were second and third in line. Speaking about all that ''the best player in the world not in the NBA'' talk, you have to realize one thing. When US media or NBA GMs say that, they usually look at things purely from NBA perspective. When they said Mirotic was the best non NBA player in the NBA, they meant that Mirotic would make the best NBA player out of all of them. And they were probably right. They don't necessarily mean he is the most successful player in Europe.

[sisibilio]

Rubio was maybe the most important or 2nd most important player after Navarro in Barcelona his first season there. The 2nd one was a different story.

[Mirotic12]

I think you underrating Rubio big time. He was far from the worst player on Barca. Like seriously, worst player on Barca would not have been a very good NBA starter the very next season. That just doesn't add up. And I know NBA and Euro ball are different, but still, such inexactitude just can't happen.

Rubio was easily better than Grimau, Sada, Morris, Perovic, N'Dong. He was their best perimeter defender, best ball handler and best play maker. He also had great intangibles. Barca's gameplan wasn't built around him though, he was often used off ball, therefore his numbers suffered a bit.

US media hyped Rubio like crazy, but a lot of it was justified, and more of it was legacy. Some NBA media outlets distorted the truth and claimed he was Euroleague superstar, but a lot of them just hyped his NBA potential and skill. So.
Rubio built his legend yearly, truly was a 16 year old phenomenon, player with such natural IQ and talent. Made Spanish NT 17 years old, and his fantastic performance against USA in the finals solidified his legend. He looked like a generational talent, you can see why NBA media hyped him so much. They saw a huge NBA potential, and thats the only thing they care about. Euroleague success is usually irrelevant to them.

The problem with Rubio - he peaked when he was 18 and just barely improved since then. His evolution just stopped, hes been a disappointment. Still good player though, much better player than his raw stats would suggest.

Back to Mirotic, I think he was top 3 player on RM. Sergio was easily the best, Rudy and Nikola were second and third in line. Speaking about all that ''the best player in the world not in the NBA'' talk, you have to realize one thing. When US media or NBA GMs say that, they usually look at things purely from NBA perspective. When they said Mirotic was the best non NBA player in the NBA, they meant that Mirotic would make the best NBA player out of all of them. And they were probably right. They don't necessarily mean he is the most successful player in Europe.

How was he better than them? I said you can list it and then debate it. Not just list them. I would like reasons, justifications. Also, Rubio was never the best play maker in that team. Navarro was always the best play maker in that team. He was and still is, even now when he is washed up and a complete has been. I think you are confusing passer with play maker. They are not the same thing.

On the issue of NBA general managers saying nonsense about so and so is "best player in Europe", let us say that is what they mean to say..........but that is not what they say. They don't say, "best player for the NBA, or whatever nonsense whatever. They say "best player in Europe", "best player in Euroleague", etc. They simply say that and that is it. Are we to read their mind?

Besides that, it is totally subjective and their opinion only that so and so X, Y, Z player would be the "best player in the NBA from Europe or Euroleague". How good was Mirotic doing when his coach in the Bulls was benching him before Butler got injured? How good was Mirotic going to look if Butler did not get injured and it stayed that way all season?

This sort of thing is absolute ridiculous talk. Mirotic went from scrub not good enough for the NBA to possible ROY all from one of his teammates getting injured, inside of a month's time. This whole nonsense about what player in Europe is best for NBA is ridiculous. Mirotic was not even good enough to get playing time or to get more than 5-12 minutes a game, until someone got injured, then all of a sudden he was often his team's first option......all because his coach had what, a change of heart suddenly, within a couple week's time?

Petrovic went from a scrub not good enough to regularly play in the NBA, as Rick Adelman said in numerous interviews he truly believed that, and he said that even years later, he was taught to believe that "Euros can't play because they are soft", to starting right after being traded? Petrovic himself even said he was going straight back to Europe one week before he got traded from the Blazers and never would have stayed in the NBA and that people would have said he was a scrub not good enough for the NBA.

I guess then he would be one of those, guys that does not fit NBA then, but someone like Gordon Giricek was perfect for NBA so obviously must have been better then. I mean using that logic, since he started right off, and Petrovic only got saved by that lucky trade at the last minute to the Nets.

Or what about Pekovic that was riding the bench for so long with the Wolves and was having everyone call him a scrub that did not fit to NBA, game did not translate to NBA, he was not right for NBA, etc. The list could go on for name after name. Mirotic was just another useless bench scrub "Euro that can't play" before Butler's injury, and now he is some "Euro legend" all of a sudden. If a player does not get a good chance then how is he going to play. Any very good player from Europe could do well, IF they get a chance to play in the NBA. The fact is that VERY FEW have ever gotten a chance.

Oh come on now. You obviously know some things about international basketball and you should know better than to believe some ridiculous nonsense than this NBA marketing double speak.

[sisibilio]

I think you underrating Rubio big time. He was far from the worst player on Barca. Like seriously, worst player on Barca would not have been a very good NBA starter the very next season. That just doesn't add up. And I know NBA and Euro ball are different, but still, such inexactitude just can't happen.

Rubio was easily better than Grimau, Sada, Morris, Perovic, N'Dong. He was their best perimeter defender, best ball handler and best play maker. He also had great intangibles. Barca's gameplan wasn't built around him though, he was often used off ball, therefore his numbers suffered a bit.

US media hyped Rubio like crazy, but a lot of it was justified, and more of it was legacy. Some NBA media outlets distorted the truth and claimed he was Euroleague superstar, but a lot of them just hyped his NBA potential and skill. So.
Rubio built his legend yearly, truly was a 16 year old phenomenon, player with such natural IQ and talent. Made Spanish NT 17 years old, and his fantastic performance against USA in the finals solidified his legend. He looked like a generational talent, you can see why NBA media hyped him so much. They saw a huge NBA potential, and thats the only thing they care about. Euroleague success is usually irrelevant to them.

The problem with Rubio - he peaked when he was 18 and just barely improved since then. His evolution just stopped, hes been a disappointment. Still good player though, much better player than his raw stats would suggest.

Back to Mirotic, I think he was top 3 player on RM. Sergio was easily the best, Rudy and Nikola were second and third in line. Speaking about all that ''the best player in the world not in the NBA'' talk, you have to realize one thing. When US media or NBA GMs say that, they usually look at things purely from NBA perspective. When they said Mirotic was the best non NBA player in the NBA, they meant that Mirotic would make the best NBA player out of all of them. And they were probably right. They don't necessarily mean he is the most successful player in Europe.

How was he better than them? I said you can list it and then debate it. Not just list them. I would like reasons, justifications. Also, Rubio was never the best play maker in that team. Navarro was always the best play maker in that team. He was and still is, even now when he is washed up and a complete has been. I think you are confusing passer with play maker. They are not the same thing.

On the issue of NBA general managers saying nonsense about so and so is "best player in Europe", let us say that is what they mean to say..........but that is not what they say. They don't say, "best player for the NBA, or whatever nonsense whatever. They say "best player in Europe", "best player in Euroleague", etc. They simply say that and that is it. Are we to read their mind?

Besides that, it is totally subjective and their opinion only that so and so X, Y, Z player would be the "best player in the NBA from Europe or Euroleague". How good was Mirotic doing when his coach in the Bulls was benching him before Butler got injured? How good was Mirotic going to look if Butler did not get injured and it stayed that way all season?

This sort of thing is absolute ridiculous talk. Mirotic went from scrub not good enough for the NBA to possible ROY all from one of his teammates getting injured, inside of a month's time. This whole nonsense about what player in Europe is best for NBA is ridiculous. Mirotic was not even good enough to get playing time or to get more than 5-12 minutes a game, until someone got injured, then all of a sudden he was often his team's first option......all because his coach had what, a change of heart suddenly, within a couple week's time?

Petrovic went from a scrub not good enough to regularly play in the NBA, as Rick Adelman said in numerous interviews he truly believed that, and he said that even years later, he was taught to believe that "Euros can't play because they are soft", to starting right after being traded? Petrovic himself even said he was going straight back to Europe one week before he got traded from the Blazers and never would have stayed in the NBA and that people would have said he was a scrub not good enough for the NBA.

I guess then he would be one of those, guys that does not fit NBA then, but someone like Gordon Giricek was perfect for NBA so obviously must have been better then. I mean using that logic, since he started right off, and Petrovic only got saved by that lucky trade at the last minute to the Nets.

Or what about Pekovic that was riding the bench for so long with the Wolves and was having everyone call him a scrub that did not fit to NBA, game did not translate to NBA, he was not right for NBA, etc. The list could go on for name after name. Mirotic was just another useless bench scrub "Euro that can't play" before Butler's injury, and now he is some "Euro legend" all of a sudden. If a player does not get a good chance then how is he going to play. Any very good player from Europe could do well, IF they get a chance to play in the NBA. The fact is that VERY FEW have ever gotten a chance.

Oh come on now. You obviously know some things about international basketball and you should know better than to believe some ridiculous nonsense than this NBA marketing double speak.

That was a gr8 post. Your IQ must be like 180 or more.

Fo real



nah, really




didn't read, LOL + boobs

[cedric76]

I think you underrating Rubio big time. He was far from the worst player on Barca. Like seriously, worst player on Barca would not have been a very good NBA starter the very next season. That just doesn't add up. And I know NBA and Euro ball are different, but still, such inexactitude just can't happen.

Rubio was easily better than Grimau, Sada, Morris, Perovic, N'Dong. He was their best perimeter defender, best ball handler and best play maker. He also had great intangibles. Barca's gameplan wasn't built around him though, he was often used off ball, therefore his numbers suffered a bit.

US media hyped Rubio like crazy, but a lot of it was justified, and more of it was legacy. Some NBA media outlets distorted the truth and claimed he was Euroleague superstar, but a lot of them just hyped his NBA potential and skill. So.
Rubio built his legend yearly, truly was a 16 year old phenomenon, player with such natural IQ and talent. Made Spanish NT 17 years old, and his fantastic performance against USA in the finals solidified his legend. He looked like a generational talent, you can see why NBA media hyped him so much. They saw a huge NBA potential, and thats the only thing they care about. Euroleague success is usually irrelevant to them.

The problem with Rubio - he peaked when he was 18 and just barely improved since then. His evolution just stopped, hes been a disappointment. Still good player though, much better player than his raw stats would suggest.

Back to Mirotic, I think he was top 3 player on RM. Sergio was easily the best, Rudy and Nikola were second and third in line. Speaking about all that ''the best player in the world not in the NBA'' talk, you have to realize one thing. When US media or NBA GMs say that, they usually look at things purely from NBA perspective. When they said Mirotic was the best non NBA player in the NBA, they meant that Mirotic would make the best NBA player out of all of them. And they were probably right. They don't necessarily mean he is the most successful player in Europe.

How was he better than them? I said you can list it and then debate it. Not just list them. I would like reasons, justifications. Also, Rubio was never the best play maker in that team. Navarro was always the best play maker in that team. He was and still is, even now when he is washed up and a complete has been. I think you are confusing passer with play maker. They are not the same thing.

On the issue of NBA general managers saying nonsense about so and so is "best player in Europe", let us say that is what they mean to say..........but that is not what they say. They don't say, "best player for the NBA, or whatever nonsense whatever. They say "best player in Europe", "best player in Euroleague", etc. They simply say that and that is it. Are we to read their mind?

Besides that, it is totally subjective and their opinion only that so and so X, Y, Z player would be the "best player in the NBA from Europe or Euroleague". How good was Mirotic doing when his coach in the Bulls was benching him before Butler got injured? How good was Mirotic going to look if Butler did not get injured and it stayed that way all season?

This sort of thing is absolute ridiculous talk. Mirotic went from scrub not good enough for the NBA to possible ROY all from one of his teammates getting injured, inside of a month's time. This whole nonsense about what player in Europe is best for NBA is ridiculous. Mirotic was not even good enough to get playing time or to get more than 5-12 minutes a game, until someone got injured, then all of a sudden he was often his team's first option......all because his coach had what, a change of heart suddenly, within a couple week's time?

Petrovic went from a scrub not good enough to regularly play in the NBA, as Rick Adelman said in numerous interviews he truly believed that, and he said that even years later, he was taught to believe that "Euros can't play because they are soft", to starting right after being traded? Petrovic himself even said he was going straight back to Europe one week before he got traded from the Blazers and never would have stayed in the NBA and that people would have said he was a scrub not good enough for the NBA.

I guess then he would be one of those, guys that does not fit NBA then, but someone like Gordon Giricek was perfect for NBA so obviously must have been better then. I mean using that logic, since he started right off, and Petrovic only got saved by that lucky trade at the last minute to the Nets.

Or what about Pekovic that was riding the bench for so long with the Wolves and was having everyone call him a scrub that did not fit to NBA, game did not translate to NBA, he was not right for NBA, etc. The list could go on for name after name. Mirotic was just another useless bench scrub "Euro that can't play" before Butler's injury, and now he is some "Euro legend" all of a sudden. If a player does not get a good chance then how is he going to play. Any very good player from Europe could do well, IF they get a chance to play in the NBA. The fact is that VERY FEW have ever gotten a chance.

Oh come on now. You obviously know some things about international basketball and you should know better than to believe some ridiculous nonsense than this NBA marketing double speak.

That was a gr8 post. Your IQ must be like 180 or more.

Fo real



nah, really




didn't read, LOL + boobs

Useless troll post

[sisibilio]

It was a (rather poor) attempt to make an inside joke since i'm 97.63% sure this mirotic guy is the reknowned spanouliswhatever, whose IQ is legendary.