Byron Mullens: What Bargnani was supposed to be

Moderators: Morten Jensen, Flash3, magnumt, Blame Rasho, tsherkin, Yuri Vaultin, NO-KG-AI

User avatar
Frank Mulely
Head Coach
Posts: 6,847
And1: 635
Joined: Sep 04, 2009
Location: gone phishing

Re: Byron Mullens: What Bargnani was supposed to be 

Post#76 » by Frank Mulely » Wed Feb 20, 2013 7:36 pm

mysticbb wrote:
boogie-reke wrote:What's his + - ?


Bobcats with Mullens on the court are at -14.7 per 100 possessions. The 2nd worst value league-wide for any player playing 400 or more minutes in this season behind his teammate Ben Gordon, who has -15.5 per 100 possession.

There are things like bad and there are things like extremely bad, Mullens is the latter.


LOLCats
Shv3d wrote:
Frank Mulely wrote:Honestly if this was the 80s

The official motto of RealGM.
User avatar
LamarMatic7
General Manager
Posts: 7,792
And1: 1,417
Joined: Jan 02, 2011
Location: Latvia
Contact:
   

Re: Byron Mullens: What Bargnani was supposed to be 

Post#77 » by LamarMatic7 » Wed Feb 20, 2013 7:37 pm

He might be worth more than a 2nd-round pick but it's not like OKC needs a power forward who chucks up shots and plays average defense. Considering the two superstars they have, they need guys who hustle, block shots and play great D at that position. Obviously they have them...
Image
BubbaTee
Head Coach
Posts: 6,394
And1: 536
Joined: Mar 10, 2008

Re: Byron Mullens: What Bargnani was supposed to be 

Post#78 » by BubbaTee » Thu Feb 21, 2013 1:01 am

Leolovinliberal wrote:
BubbaTee wrote:
cs hauser wrote:Presti's greatest mistake... :lol: :lol: :lol:


The mistake was that OKC could've had Taj Gibson instead, who is much, much better than Mullens. Gibson would've been a great fit on OKC too.


How is he "much, much" better than Mullens? Mulley just turned 24 the other day and Taj will be 28 in July. Taj has a per of 14.85 ans Mullens is 13.5. Let's see what Mully's per is in 3.5 years to compare apples to apples development and age wise.


Taj plays this newfangled thing called defense, which is always suspiciously absent from PER calculations.

Also, I like how you want to compare "apples to apples" in terms of age, but not in terms of role. Mullens starts and has a green light to jack up a ton of shots. When Taj starts, he puts up 16 pts and 12 reb on 60% FG - all much better than Mullens' production as a starter.
justinian
Rookie
Posts: 1,139
And1: 81
Joined: Nov 05, 2012

Re: Byron Mullens: What Bargnani was supposed to be 

Post#79 » by justinian » Sat Feb 23, 2013 2:13 am

Mullens is Bargs-like tonight, 1-for-12 with 2pts
thruthefire
Head Coach
Posts: 6,632
And1: 481
Joined: Nov 29, 2008

Re: Byron Mullens: What Bargnani was supposed to be 

Post#80 » by thruthefire » Sat Feb 23, 2013 2:28 am

LOL. Good ole BJ...
Humble yourself.
User avatar
sanity
RealGM
Posts: 17,551
And1: 1,804
Joined: Jul 08, 2009

Re: Byron Mullens: What Bargnani was supposed to be 

Post#81 » by sanity » Sat Feb 23, 2013 2:33 am

justinian wrote:Mullens is Bargs-like tonight, 1-for-12 with 2pts


Arguably still having a better night than Andrea.
User avatar
spearsy23
General Manager
Posts: 7,838
And1: 1,077
Joined: Jan 27, 2012
   

Re: Byron Mullens: What Bargnani was supposed to be 

Post#82 » by spearsy23 » Sat Feb 23, 2013 3:16 am

Mullens is bargs?
bertrob wrote:You can't drive past Fisher when his shorts are pulled up
impossible, not even Michael Jordan can do it
LHead2
Junior
Posts: 488
And1: 3
Joined: Feb 18, 2009

Re: Byron Mullens: What Bargnani was supposed to be 

Post#83 » by LHead2 » Sat Feb 23, 2013 4:01 am

Look, Bargnani's bad, but Mullens isn't exactly a star either. I mean, the dude's shooting below 40% on the season.

They both are awful, though...
User avatar
BizGilwalker
RealGM
Posts: 27,658
And1: 3,456
Joined: Feb 05, 2012
Location: #biznation
     

Re: Byron Mullens: What Bargnani was supposed to be 

Post#84 » by BizGilwalker » Sat Feb 23, 2013 4:02 am

Mully couldn't get it going tonight at all. He had a good 3 or 4 shots roll around the inside of the rim and pop out. He was also taking somw bad shots.
fatlever wrote:Lamb Gang logic - Kemba Walker is faking his injury as his way of a silent protest against not trading for Lamb. You guys are officially off the rails.
:lol:
Imagesig creds to amcoolio
User avatar
spearsy23
General Manager
Posts: 7,838
And1: 1,077
Joined: Jan 27, 2012
   

Re: Byron Mullens: What Bargnani was supposed to be 

Post#85 » by spearsy23 » Sat Feb 23, 2013 4:04 am

"He was taking some bad shots"

Well yeah, he's never seen a shot he couldn't take.
bertrob wrote:You can't drive past Fisher when his shorts are pulled up
impossible, not even Michael Jordan can do it
OKC
Ballboy
Posts: 46
And1: 7
Joined: Nov 15, 2012

Re: Byron Mullens: What Bargnani was supposed to be 

Post#86 » by OKC » Sat Feb 23, 2013 4:42 am

It seems like there's always a BJ Mullens thread posted after he has a good game. Then it becomes a ghost town when he plays like tonight.
Johnlac1
Analyst
Posts: 3,069
And1: 519
Joined: Jan 21, 2012
 

Re: Byron Mullens: What Bargnani was supposed to be 

Post#87 » by Johnlac1 » Sat Feb 23, 2013 4:40 pm

OKC wrote:It seems like there's always a BJ Mullens thread posted after he has a good game. Then it becomes a ghost town when he plays like tonight.

Just like those threads for Nash when goes 2-11....like he did last night.
Johnlac1
Analyst
Posts: 3,069
And1: 519
Joined: Jan 21, 2012
 

Re: Byron Mullens: What Bargnani was supposed to be 

Post#88 » by Johnlac1 » Sat Feb 23, 2013 4:44 pm

Biz Gilwalker wrote:Mully couldn't get it going tonight at all. He had a good 3 or 4 shots roll around the inside of the rim and pop out. He was also taking somw bad shots.

Only maybe one or two shots were questionable. Most of his shots were good shots. Wide open. He just couldn't make them. Neither could Sessions who was 0-9. Last night Nash was 2-11 and Greg Monroe was 2-9. But I guess they're lousy players like Mullens too.
Illuminati_
Starter
Posts: 2,020
And1: 325
Joined: Oct 31, 2009

Re: Byron Mullens: What Bargnani was supposed to be 

Post#89 » by Illuminati_ » Sat Feb 23, 2013 4:54 pm

Guess we gotta wait on Barg to switch teams cause really there's no comparison. If they out this mullens kid on some of those horrible rosters the past 4 years and made him the number one option drawing all the attention it would be ugly/
Krodis
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,155
And1: 210
Joined: Nov 28, 2009

Re: Byron Mullens: What Bargnani was supposed to be 

Post#90 » by Krodis » Sat Feb 23, 2013 5:06 pm

Johnlac1 wrote:
OKC wrote:It seems like there's always a BJ Mullens thread posted after he has a good game. Then it becomes a ghost town when he plays like tonight.

Just like those threads for Nash when goes 2-11....like he did last night.

Did you just compare Byron Mullens to Steve Nash?
Blame Rasho
Global Mod
Global Mod
Posts: 36,400
And1: 3,310
Joined: Apr 25, 2002

Re: Byron Mullens: What Bargnani was supposed to be 

Post#91 » by Blame Rasho » Sat Feb 23, 2013 5:50 pm

Johnlac1 wrote:
Biz Gilwalker wrote:Mully couldn't get it going tonight at all. He had a good 3 or 4 shots roll around the inside of the rim and pop out. He was also taking somw bad shots.

Only maybe one or two shots were questionable. Most of his shots were good shots. Wide open. He just couldn't make them. Neither could Sessions who was 0-9. Last night Nash was 2-11 and Greg Monroe was 2-9. But I guess they're lousy players like Mullens too.


It is really that hard to come to terms that Mullens sucks at shooting? You just compared him to two guys who for their career basically have a 50% percentage. Mullens is a 40% shooter, and 30% from three... there are only so many ways you can sugarcoat crap.

The idea of this thread is that Mullens is supposed to be what Bargnani is suppose to be? Well Mullens is a worse player... You don't win with players like Mullens or Bargnani... you lose because of them. They are only good for is getting lotto picks.
It is illogical to use logic on an illogical person.
Solution...use even more illogical logic to trump their logic.
Things I have learned on the general board this week
The Spurs are semi tanking and aren't interesting in repeating.

Return to The General Board