Funny things you read while on other team boards

[magpies]

Every once and a while, I read other teams boards to see what is happening in their neck of the woods.
And some times you read funny things either about how good players are etc.

Today I was on the Bulls board and the this topic got my attention Where does Noah rank among Centers?
viewtopic.php?f=10&t=1031098&start=15#p24182656


Looking through it most were fair comments of where Bogut sits and Noah, but some on there had Noah above Bogut,

Now when I troll I dont try not to write comment but I am so tempted, but then decided the bulls fans must be hurting so I left it alone

[totcd]

Well i read most of that thread and most had bogut 3rd best or at least in the top 5. that's about whets most of us would rate him. Of course there is a couple of homers there. Don't see what the problem is in all honesty

[WiscoKing13]

Well i read most of that thread and most had bogut 3rd best or at least in the top 5. that's about whets most of us would rate him. Of course there is a couple of homers there. Don't see what the problem is in all honesty

this

[Rerisen]

but some on there had Noah above Bogut,

Dumb, but no worse than a Bucks fan putting Salmons over Noah.

viewtopic.php?f=21&t=1033257&start=45

[The Wet Whistle]

Yeah, I really don't see a problem with the thread you linked to.

[Stopshere2]

hey magpies, I don't want to bend you over any more than has already occurred but I thought Bogut got plenty of respect in that thread. He and Milwaukee are really being noticed these days.

[jamaica3]

When I first read the title of this thread and the comments previous to the link I thought, "Oh god we are going to have a bunch of Chicago fans putting Noah above Bogut." People rarely said that (and those that did clearly weren't thinking straight and most Bulls fans would agree).

I thought their assessments on Centers in the league were quite accurate actually.

I saw someone even put Bogut as the number 2 Center in the league. That's some respect the Bucks and Bogut are getting, especially coming from a Central rival.

I saw no problem with what people were saying in this thread.

[BrewCityBBQ]

Its obvious Jennings is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rose.

[Profound23]

Its obvious Jennings is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rose.

After his 55 point game that was all I heard.

[Legendary 33]

Its obvious Jennings is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rose.

I hope this is a joke. lol

[WRau1]

Dumb, but no worse than a Bucks fan putting Salmons over Noah.

viewtopic.php?f=21&t=1033257&start=45

I'd take Salmons 10 out of 10 times on this team. Noah offers us nothing that we don't have in Bogut, Salmons has been a huge part of our turnaround.

[jamaica3]

Dumb, but no worse than a Bucks fan putting Salmons over Noah.

viewtopic.php?f=21&t=1033257&start=45

I'd take Salmons 10 out of 10 times on this team. Noah offers us nothing that we don't have in Bogut, Salmons has been a huge part of our turnaround.

I agree with this. We're looking at Salmons on the Bucks, not Salmons on the Bulls. It's too hard to compare players that aren't superstars because they bring different qualities to teams at different needs. Neither Salmons nor Noah are superstars, and their abilities fit differently with their respective teams.

[Rerisen]

Dumb, but no worse than a Bucks fan putting Salmons over Noah.

viewtopic.php?f=21&t=1033257&start=45

I'd take Salmons 10 out of 10 times on this team. Noah offers us nothing that we don't have in Bogut, Salmons has been a huge part of our turnaround.

That's fine, but that's not what the poster was saying in that thread. He was rating the players on value or best players in order among the two teams. Bulls fans would take Deng over BJ but does that automatically make Deng the better player? I doubt many teams in the league would take Salmons over Noah. Naturally because Noah is a top 10 center. Salmons is older, isn't as good on defense, and had a worse PER last year, even counting only Salmons Milwaukee Splits.

The Bulls have seen the good and the bad of Salmons, in 09 he played as well for us as he did for you guys. But even then he didn't make the impact of Joakim. We lost 10 straight games when he went down last year.

The Bucks are lucky to be set at Center but most teams aren't.

Anyway, like others have said, most Bulls fans rated Bogut very highly in the thread. There are a few homers for every team, if you are hunting to be offended.

[THE DINJ]

Still don't get all the love for Noah. He's a good scrapper and rebounder. Not a game changer though. Salmons (on the Bucks) is clearly more of a difference maker. See Bucks record before and after the trade.

[InsideInfo]

Dumb, but no worse than a Bucks fan putting Salmons over Noah.

viewtopic.php?f=21&t=1033257&start=45

I'd take Salmons 10 out of 10 times on this team. Noah offers us nothing that we don't have in Bogut, Salmons has been a huge part of our turnaround.

He may be a better fit for your team, but I think most people would agree that Noah is a better player when ranking out rosters.

Another poster in the same thread:

They are terribly overrated by the media (because of the Lebron hype). They are about a 40 win team - ceiling being 45. Floor about 34.

Bucks on the other hand are a 50 win team. Ceiling 58 - Floor 41.

I think even the biggest homer can agree that there is no chance in hell the Bucks win 58 games. I also highly doubt the Bulls win less games then they did last year.

[Diggr14]

The knicks board already has a thread titled "Jerome Jordan Sucks" after 1 Summer league game.

[Diggr14]

I wrote the Bucks could have a ceiling of 58 games - this is why.


With a lesser team and without Bogut for a stretch of games we finished the season 28-11.

Easy math, a really bad central division, and and improved team says that - yes, it is possible. You do realize we are most likely better than last season, no?

So, while you might think it is improbable because our franchise has been pretty bad outside of last year since the big 3.. the talent here, and the probable improvement of that talent is likely. Will it translate into more wins or a better record than the 28-11 "half season" stretch we had? Hard to say one way or another right now. Thus the ceiling and the floor.

[InsideInfo]

I wrote the Bucks could have a ceiling of 58 games - this is why.


With a lesser team and without Bogut for a stretch of games we finished the season 28-11.

Easy math, a really bad central division, and and improved team says that - yes, it is possible. You do realize we are most likely better than last season, no?

So, while you might think it is improbable because our franchise has been pretty bad outside of last year since the big 3.. the talent here, and the probable improvement of that talent is likely. Will it translate into more wins or a better record than the 28-11 "half season" stretch we had? Hard to say one way or another right now. Thus the ceiling and the floor.

A couple of things...

1. I dont remember of the top of my head, but after the bulls trade for miller and salmons 2 years ago we also finished the season with a very impressive post trade record.

2. I do think you will have a better team then last season, but 58 wins just isnt realistic. Hell Boston only won only 50 games last season, the Hawks won 53. I think everyone can agree that the east has got better since last season.

3. If youre so optimistic about the Bucks, why are you so pesimistic about the Bulls? They won 41 games last season dispite a 10 game losing streak when the team was without Deng, Noah, Rose, and Hinrich for much of that streach. With the additon of Boozer and shooters (somthing chicago needed badly) I dont see how you think they could be worse?

[lawrybeard]

The knicks board already has a thread titled "Jerome Jordan Sucks" after 1 Summer league game.

This quote in that thread made me laugh:

He moves really awkward for a guy that looks like he should be able to run the floor...i thought he was injured....He moves like he has one long leg and one short leg

[old skool]

I think the Bulls will be better and their record will be better, because they are likely to lose fewer games to injury, because Boozer is a near All-Star addition, and because their young players are likely to improve - Rose, Gibson, Noah.

I think the Bucks will be better but their record might not improve. Jennings should be improved, but Salmons and Delfino might start to decline. The PF corps of Gooden, Ilyasova, Mbah a Moute and Sanders might create tension, even if Hammond moves one of them. Stackhouse will not be around to provide veteran leadership. Thomas will not be around to provide stability with the second unit and against veteran centers. Bogut will have to answer the bell and play without injury. sKiles will have to mold the old and new players into a team, and once again the Bucks have a lot of new faces. Only 6 contract players on the current roster were there when the season began a year ago (five if you discount injured Micheal Redd). That means six to nine new faces. Obviously that is not insurmountable, but it does pose a challenge.

The Bulls will also have a lot of new faces, but they are at a different point of development. The Bucks are coming off of a major improvement in 2009-10. The Bucks feel as if they have turned a corner. Last year they played free and loose, with nothing to lose. This year the shots will be a little tougher, as they try to stay in that tier of teams markedly over .500.

The Bulls will be able to play a bit looser. Almost anything will be an improvement over last season. And they won't find themselves playing with a ridiculously short roster to save cap space. They won't trade a starter away for nothing at the deadline.

oLd sKool