3toheadmelo wrote:
Im good with that trade wonder if its 3 unprotected and two of the extra picks
Moderators: Deeeez Knicks, mpharris36, j4remi, NoLayupRule, HerSports85, GONYK, Jeff Van Gully, dakomish23
3toheadmelo wrote:
3toheadmelo wrote:
GONYK wrote:3toheadmelo wrote:
Didn't this herb guarantee the deal was going to happen last Tuesday?
knicksstuff wrote:3toheadmelo wrote:
Im good with that trade wonder if its 3 unprotected and two of the extra picks
Fury wrote:knicksstuff wrote:3toheadmelo wrote:
Im good with that trade wonder if its 3 unprotected and two of the extra picks
That guy is full of ****

god shammgod wrote:3toheadmelo wrote:
that's my prediction on the players too. 2 guys who were barely gonna play anyway.

thebuzzardman wrote:Deeeez Knicks wrote:I am not listening to Utah talk radio. Probably a trap to get us into a cult
I listened for 10 hours yesterday and today I'm sitting in holy underwear and have a request in to change my username to Buzzerdiah

Slicin N Dicin wrote:KnixinSix wrote:DOT wrote:Mate, that's Buddhism.
DOT...Anything apart from Christ can sound similar to the carnal understanding but without Christ you can't have Son-ship.
Essentially, Christ had to take on the nature of man so we could have the nature of God.....it was the purpose of God taking on the nature of the flesh and dying to it and being reserrected. It was so we could share in his death (to the flesh reality) and enter into his nature (God/Kingdom reality)
i'll smoke what you smoking
snadler wrote:3toheadmelo wrote:Yeah it’s not happening. Tony Jones is the guy who broke the initial talks with Shams.
Where do you take anything from this that it’s not happening

Fury wrote:D Rog wrote:Deeeez Knicks wrote:I am not listening to Utah talk radio. Probably a trap to get us into a cult
Utah fan LMFAO... I was reading your board over the last 3 - 4 pages trying to get your read on a trade for Donovan. I thought it was strange that a few Knick fans are discussing "Christianity" on this board (That the hell). Then I read the post above. The Utah radio talk show host Pat Kinahan that has been discussed here in the past few pages is from New Jersey and I am pretty sure he is not Mormon or if he is he is definitely what we call Jack Mormon (not one with a corn cob up his...)
Jack Mormon is like a modern Mormon?


Ghetto Gospel wrote:there's no way all of these nobodies are hearing it before anyone credible
NoDopeOnSundays wrote:Chanel Bomber wrote:NoDopeOnSundays wrote:
The Millsap doctrine will have you looking at player projections differently, especially when they're already efficient like Obi.
The article is interesting but I think it is outdated, and can be refuted on several levels. I don't say this as a criticism of the piece, as it was - remarkably - well ahead of its time when it was published in 2007.
My first comment, before I get to the core of the article, is specific to Obi. The article mentions how the minutes of bench players are often staggered, and frequently overlap with the starters. That is largely true, and it definitely applies to a player like D-Rose, who often closed games for the Knicks, but I don't think it really does for Obi. Thibs doesn't really stagger line-ups, and Obi (being stuck behind Randle, and playing for a coach who doesn't play him at the 5 either) has predominantly played against bench units. So in his case, the separation between starters and bench is particularly relevant.
My second and more important point is that the article uses boxscore numbers (and boxscore-heavy metrics like PER, which is now fairly obsolete) and per-40 minutes, which I think is an inaccurate and outdated way of projecting impact. I agree with the article's premise that production doesn't necessarily suffer, and can in fact improve by going from bench player to starter, especially if they get minutes in bigger chunks. But production doesn't necessarily translate to impact. And I think the more modern metrics like RAPM and RAPTOR, which are primarily plus/minus- and/or on/off-based statistics that aim to extract the noise from raw plus/minus or on/off by adjusting for context, are far more interesting and accurate for player projection.
I never doubted that Obi could be a productive player in the NBA, even a starter. I believe I even said that when I was more vehemently opposed to the pick around draft time. My worry about him is about the impact that he can have as a 4 with little positional versatility who has yet to demonstrate that he can be a reliable 3-point shooter and a plus defender. I actually like him more now than I did before, since he has improved a lot on defense, and his finishing at the basket has been truly impressive, but those questions remain largely unanswered in my opinion.
The piece gives interesting insights about projecting production, but has little value (by today's standards) in terms of projecting impact.
What exactly are we doing here Chanel? If you think he can be a productive starter, then what else is there? How about we find out whether or not he can be an impact player, but if your point is that you think he can already be a productive starter, I don't know what else you're trying to argue.
If you have Donovan Mitchell, why would Obi then need to be an impact player, provided he's still on the team? Considering at his absolute best he would be a 4th option, and 4th best player on the team, why is "Can he be an impact guy" even in your mind?
?
knicksstuff wrote:3toheadmelo wrote:
Im good with that trade wonder if its 3 unprotected and two of the extra picks

B8RcDeMktfxC wrote:Also, in fact, Christianity was, whether by chance or not, the cradle of an insane rate of human technological development over the last ~350 years. That's a pretty interesting thing.
