RealGM

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

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...

Leolovinliberal wrote:

BubbaTee wrote:

cs hauser wrote:Presti's greatest mistake...

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.

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

LOL. Good ole BJ...

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

Arguably still having a better night than Andrea.

Mullens is bargs?

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...

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.

"He was taking some bad shots"

Well yeah, he's never seen a shot he couldn't take.

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.

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.

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.

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/

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?

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.