1. Not all rookies get better with time and patience.
2. I can see using the rookie wall excuse at game 60, but not at game 30. He isn't even through a full NCAA season yet.
3. I think that Culver's reputation as a "glue guy" defensively are way overstated. He played on one of the best defensive teams in the history of NCAA basketball, but he was probably their weakest defender.
1- He doesn't need to "get better" He needs to be allowed to use the attributes he has.
2- It's not a rookie wall, it's a lack of confidence brought on by telling him to go out and do the one thing he can't do.
3- Glue guy is not just D. But he is a good defender. Give him playing time to get used to playing NBA D.
We have already completely destroyed his trade value. Our only option is to rehab some value to us. But as is with 80% of Wolves picks we will do the exact opposite of developing him. Because the idiot thinks the way out of the hole is to keep digging.
1. We basically agree he is not a PG. His shooting does need to get better. So does his handle, reading other teams offensive schemes (I.e the game slowing down for him,) free throw shooting, and rebounding. Plenty of room for improvement. Not everyone who is good or great starts that way. The pressure is just higher because of his #6 selection. Give him time to show his true value.
2. Confidence comes from success. He should be a bench player once he gets back from the G league.
3. I agree in principle, but as a bench player (6th man off the bench.) He needs to succeed and build confidence before he plays too many minutes as a starter and gets even more in his head than he already is.
His trade value is no where near shot. He is on a bad team with a moron for a coach playing out of position. Other GMs and POBOs likely could see his potential. The issue is they don’t usually bite mid season on a project guy. We must not sell low.
But other teams know we are run by morons and they will eat us alive in trade talks. I fear that Rosas will sell low just to get his failure far away to sooth his ego.
And I just don't see sending him down doing anything but killing his confidence more. He goes down and plays the same style? Baskets are the same there too. What he needs is a role he can excel in. As I said from minute 1. Let him do what he does well. Why is that so hard for the idiots?
1. We basically agree he is not a PG. His shooting does need to get better. So does his handle, reading other teams offensive schemes (I.e the game slowing down for him,) free throw shooting, and rebounding. Plenty of room for improvement. Not everyone who is good or great starts that way. The pressure is just higher because of his #6 selection. Give him time to show his true value.
2. Confidence comes from success. He should be a bench player once he gets back from the G league.
3. I agree in principle, but as a bench player (6th man off the bench.) He needs to succeed and build confidence before he plays too many minutes as a starter and gets even more in his head than he already is.
His trade value is no where near shot. He is on a bad team with a moron for a coach playing out of position. Other GMs and POBOs likely could see his potential. The issue is they don’t usually bite mid season on a project guy. We must not sell low.
My shooting and handle needs to get better, but that doesn't mean it will get better.
I am going to make a point again, the shooting percentages he is shooting now are about what he did against better NCAA competition, including his shooting percentage in the NCAA tournament. In the NCAA tourney he was 7 out of 31, 22.5% from 3. 31 out of 75 from 2 point range (take away a gimme game againt "Norther Kentucky" in opening game those percentages go down significantly).
HE was the volume scorer on a great NCAA Final team that made their game centered around their defense.
You and I are near polar opposites when it comes to team building. You are full modern NBA and I am all about coach and build to your current talent. And that was when I knew just how bad a pick it was. I was more than pissed about the botched trade knowing that's the moron who is running the team. But there was literally no fit with the roster and he was an overrated prospect in my opinion. Then you chimed in with the stat breakdown against good teams and it was even worse for me. You seriously have to go a long way to make the both of us just pissed at a pick. But the moron pulled it off. Funny you don't see all the trust the pRosas shit that the lovers barraged us with.
Thrillkill wrote: ↑Thu Dec 26, 2019 4:19 pm
1- He doesn't need to "get better" He needs to be allowed to use the attributes he has.
2- It's not a rookie wall, it's a lack of confidence brought on by telling him to go out and do the one thing he can't do.
3- Glue guy is not just D. But he is a good defender. Give him playing time to get used to playing NBA D.
We have already completely destroyed his trade value. Our only option is to rehab some value to us. But as is with 80% of Wolves picks we will do the exact opposite of developing him. Because the idiot thinks the way out of the hole is to keep digging.
1. We basically agree he is not a PG. His shooting does need to get better. So does his handle, reading other teams offensive schemes (I.e the game slowing down for him,) free throw shooting, and rebounding. Plenty of room for improvement. Not everyone who is good or great starts that way. The pressure is just higher because of his #6 selection. Give him time to show his true value.
2. Confidence comes from success. He should be a bench player once he gets back from the G league.
3. I agree in principle, but as a bench player (6th man off the bench.) He needs to succeed and build confidence before he plays too many minutes as a starter and gets even more in his head than he already is.
His trade value is no where near shot. He is on a bad team with a moron for a coach playing out of position. Other GMs and POBOs likely could see his potential. The issue is they don’t usually bite mid season on a project guy. We must not sell low.
But other teams know we are run by morons and they will eat us alive in trade talks. I fear that Rosas will sell low just to get his failure far away to sooth his ego.
And I just don't see sending him down doing anything but killing his confidence more. He goes down and plays the same style? Baskets are the same there too. What he needs is a role he can excel in. As I said from minute 1. Let him do what he does well. Why is that so hard for the idiots?
@mlhouse as well. We al agree the pick was bad. I don’t watch college basketball, so I cannot claim any outrage at the time we picked him, but having seen him play it was a bad choice. I said last year the pick was going to be worthless and I was right. Ironically the guy we traded to the suns alongside Dario was a guy who seems to be a much better player and fit. We need a PG and we traded a starting PF to get a SG. This is a huge blunder. I do not dispute this, nor will I dispute this. However, once you realize your stuck with Culver you have to ask the question, what now? I agree thrill, he should not play the PG. I agree Ml that he might not improve, but in both cases I say it’s too early to give up. Culver’s confidence will come from success. He has succeeded in a few games this season. Thrill you and I disagree about the G league. I think he would dominate there, you clearly don’t. In any event, he is a second unit player. Minutes for the sake of minutes is not the answer with every rookie. Culver needs to play against weaker bench opponents until his game improves.
1. We basically agree he is not a PG. His shooting does need to get better. So does his handle, reading other teams offensive schemes (I.e the game slowing down for him,) free throw shooting, and rebounding. Plenty of room for improvement. Not everyone who is good or great starts that way. The pressure is just higher because of his #6 selection. Give him time to show his true value.
2. Confidence comes from success. He should be a bench player once he gets back from the G league.
3. I agree in principle, but as a bench player (6th man off the bench.) He needs to succeed and build confidence before he plays too many minutes as a starter and gets even more in his head than he already is.
His trade value is no where near shot. He is on a bad team with a moron for a coach playing out of position. Other GMs and POBOs likely could see his potential. The issue is they don’t usually bite mid season on a project guy. We must not sell low.
But other teams know we are run by morons and they will eat us alive in trade talks. I fear that Rosas will sell low just to get his failure far away to sooth his ego.
And I just don't see sending him down doing anything but killing his confidence more. He goes down and plays the same style? Baskets are the same there too. What he needs is a role he can excel in. As I said from minute 1. Let him do what he does well. Why is that so hard for the idiots?
@mlhouse as well. We al agree the pick was bad. I don’t watch college basketball, so I cannot claim any outrage at the time we picked him, but having seen him play it was a bad choice. I said last year the pick was going to be worthless and I was right. Ironically the guy we traded to the suns alongside Dario was a guy who seems to be a much better player and fit. We need a PG and we traded a starting PF to get a SG. This is a huge blunder. I do not dispute this, nor will I dispute this. However, once you realize your stuck with Culver you have to ask the question, what now? I agree thrill, he should not play the PG. I agree Ml that he might not improve, but in both cases I say it’s too early to give up. Culver’s confidence will come from success. He has succeeded in a few games this season. Thrill you and I disagree about the G league. I think he would dominate there, you clearly don’t. In any event, he is a second unit player. Minutes for the sake of minutes is not the answer with every rookie. Culver needs to play against weaker bench opponents until his game improves.
He is a glue guy, a little things guy. An opportunity scorer. He plays better with better players around him. Trying to force him to be a six 3 attempts a game player is beyond stupid. And not only is that our philosophy in the G, all the teams down there play way too fast and chuck too much. All i see that doing is crushing him further when he shoots just as bad against worse competition.
And while I don't think he's a PG I think the best role for him is starting there and letting Wigs handle a lot. Teague gives us the rhythm where he can come in early and play big minutes if Culver is bad or we can give him run if he's playing good. But they need to stop asking him to do things he sucks at and then demoting him because he can't do them. That is asinine.
Thrillkill wrote: ↑Thu Dec 26, 2019 8:18 pm
polar opposites when it comes to team building. You are full modern NBA and I am all about coach and build to your current talent. And that was when I knew just how bad a pick it was. I was more than pissed about the botched trade knowing that's the moron who is running the team. But there was literally no fit with the roster and he was an overrated prospect in my opinion. Then you chimed in with the stat breakdown against good teams and it was even worse for me. You seriously have to go a long way to make the both of us just pissed at a pick. But the moron pulled it off. Funny you don't see all the trust the pRosas shit that the lovers barraged us with.
I think the guy can be a rotational player in the NBA because he is athletic enough to compete as a marginal player on offense. Maybe he is one of those guys that shoots 24% from 3 and the next year he is at 35%, and improves his shooting from all range. Sometimes that happens and he takes a step abouve the marginal player.
The real problem I had was if you are going to trade up to take a flyer on a guy, select Coby White. That risk at least covers trading away Saric.
I would have preferred to stay at #11 and see which player dropped. And, I would have taken Doumbouya if the draft went the way it went. Right now, that is a huge incomplete but the people in Detroit are very high on him despite his limited play this season.
One note I want to make on Jarrett Culver and a lot of other rookies is that how you "model" him makes a huge difference in whether they make it, or fail.
I remember when the Wolves drafted Wes Johnson. Kahn and others were talking about how he was like Scottie Pippen. Well, guess what, he wasn't no Scottie Pippen. I personally commented that he was more of a Rip Hamilton-lite player. Make him a reduced offensive player, let him take some shots off screens, set up a couple of goto the corner-3 plays for him, he was reasonably athletic so let him get a few points running the court, expect 10-12 points a night and let him develop into a good NBA defender. If you have that as your model, Wes Johnson might have been a "success" although that is limited expectations for a 4th overall pick.
With Culver, the expectation that he was some sort of offensive table setter was absurd from the beginning. He might have been that at Tech, but that was because the Red Raiders were a limited offensive team and he was by far their best option. Put him in against higher level competition, like the last several games of the NCAA tourney, and he was a high volume chucker. I am not sure if this was the Wolves management's real expectations, and frankly I never was on the Wolves band wagon so I have observed, in full just one game. But, he is not a primary offensive weapon that is for sure.
Again, it is limited expectations but modeling Culver as Michael Kidd-Gilchrist with a bit more range and handle and a bit less defensive athleticism might be more of a proper way of viewing his development.
Thrillkill wrote: ↑Thu Dec 26, 2019 8:18 pm
polar opposites when it comes to team building. You are full modern NBA and I am all about coach and build to your current talent. And that was when I knew just how bad a pick it was. I was more than pissed about the botched trade knowing that's the moron who is running the team. But there was literally no fit with the roster and he was an overrated prospect in my opinion. Then you chimed in with the stat breakdown against good teams and it was even worse for me. You seriously have to go a long way to make the both of us just pissed at a pick. But the moron pulled it off. Funny you don't see all the trust the pRosas shit that the lovers barraged us with.
I think the guy can be a rotational player in the NBA because he is athletic enough to compete as a marginal player on offense. Maybe he is one of those guys that shoots 24% from 3 and the next year he is at 35%, and improves his shooting from all range. Sometimes that happens and he takes a step abouve the marginal player.
The real problem I had was if you are going to trade up to take a flyer on a guy, select Coby White. That risk at least covers trading away Saric.
I would have preferred to stay at #11 and see which player dropped. And, I would have taken Doumbouya if the draft went the way it went. Right now, that is a huge incomplete but the people in Detroit are very high on him despite his limited play this season.
The most ludicrous part was we had Saric under contract for the year to see if he fits and to play in front of a young guy like Doumboya. But the idiot just thought he was smarter than every legit GM. Trading up for a player at 3 in the afternoon? Who the fuck does that? Taking a guy who doesn't fit and you don't want because you saw some mock and heard some trade smoke? Who has ever done that? Ever? I asked that for weeks after the draft and no one came up with one.
Personally my move would have been take Clarke at 11 and move Saric for a low 1st. But I would have also played defense and not had a 25% 3 shooting team take 40+ a game so what do I know? Oh right, basketball. I know a shit lot more about basketball than the guy running the team. That bodes well.
Thrillkill wrote: ↑Thu Dec 26, 2019 9:20 pm
The most ludicrous part was we had Saric under contract for the year to see if he fits and to play in front of a young guy like Doumboya. But the idiot just thought he was smarter than every legit GM. Trading up for a player at 3 in the afternoon? Who the fuck does that? Taking a guy who doesn't fit and you don't want because you saw some mock and heard some trade smoke? Who has ever done that? Ever? I asked that for weeks after the draft and no one came up with one.
Personally my move would have been take Clarke at 11 and move Saric for a low 1st. But I would have also played defense and not had a 25% 3 shooting team take 40+ a game so what do I know? Oh right, basketball. I know a shit lot more about basketball than the guy running the team. That bodes well.
AS good as Brandon Clarke has been, the problem with his selection is what I have always brought up. He doesn't move the needle one bit. We already had a fully developed player similar to Brandon Clarke in Taj Gibson. If you look take a random Gibson year and compare it to Clarke's rookie season so far there isn't much statistical difference.
Of course, if Clarke continues to shoot the almost unsustainable numbers he has put up to date I might change my mind. Right now, if you look at shooting from distances, Clarke is shooting 73.8 at the rim, 60.5% from 3-10 feet, 61.1% from 10-16 feet, and 50$ from deep 2's, along with 43% from 3.
Memphis could really develop into a team with Jalen Jackson and Ja Morant with Clarke as a support player.
Memphis could actually play Andre Iguodala, along with their current roster, and be a much different, better team. Melton is coming on strong. They've already wised up on how much Tyus sucks. Dumb contract for them now. They'll make a nice jump next season, especially if they get decent returns for Iggy and Crowder at the deadline.
Sorry a bit off topic but some point I can only suffocate on numbers and stats so much.
My take on Culver is that he should be playing at least 25 minutes every single game regardless of what the hell is going on with this trash franchise. If Cleveland is playing Garland that much so he gets his lumps and gets better quicker why the hell wouldn't we do that with Culver?
Thrillkill wrote: ↑Thu Dec 26, 2019 9:20 pm
The most ludicrous part was we had Saric under contract for the year to see if he fits and to play in front of a young guy like Doumboya. But the idiot just thought he was smarter than every legit GM. Trading up for a player at 3 in the afternoon? Who the fuck does that? Taking a guy who doesn't fit and you don't want because you saw some mock and heard some trade smoke? Who has ever done that? Ever? I asked that for weeks after the draft and no one came up with one.
Personally my move would have been take Clarke at 11 and move Saric for a low 1st. But I would have also played defense and not had a 25% 3 shooting team take 40+ a game so what do I know? Oh right, basketball. I know a shit lot more about basketball than the guy running the team. That bodes well.
AS good as Brandon Clarke has been, the problem with his selection is what I have always brought up. He doesn't move the needle one bit. We already had a fully developed player similar to Brandon Clarke in Taj Gibson. If you look take a random Gibson year and compare it to Clarke's rookie season so far there isn't much statistical difference.
Of course, if Clarke continues to shoot the almost unsustainable numbers he has put up to date I might change my mind. Right now, if you look at shooting from distances, Clarke is shooting 73.8 at the rim, 60.5% from 3-10 feet, 61.1% from 10-16 feet, and 50$ from deep 2's, along with 43% from 3.
Memphis could really develop into a team with Jalen Jackson and Ja Morant with Clarke as a support player.
Dude you really have to stop saying that Clarke is similar to Taj. Nothing could be further from the truth.
irishman89 wrote: ↑Thu Dec 26, 2019 11:38 pm
Memphis could actually play Andre Iguodala, along with their current roster, and be a much different, better team. Melton is coming on strong. They've already wised up on how much Tyus sucks. Dumb contract for them now. They'll make a nice jump next season, especially if they get decent returns for Iggy and Crowder at the deadline.
Sorry a bit off topic but some point I can only suffocate on numbers and stats so much.
My take on Culver is that he should be playing at least 25 minutes every single game regardless of what the hell is going on with this trash franchise. If Cleveland is playing Garland that much so he gets his lumps and gets better quicker why the hell wouldn't we do that with Culver?
Ummm......because we are run by an idiot and his pussy flunkie?
irishman89 wrote: ↑Thu Dec 26, 2019 11:38 pm
Memphis could actually play Andre Iguodala, along with their current roster, and be a much different, better team. Melton is coming on strong. They've already wised up on how much Tyus sucks. Dumb contract for them now. They'll make a nice jump next season, especially if they get decent returns for Iggy and Crowder at the deadline.
Sorry a bit off topic but some point I can only suffocate on numbers and stats so much.
My take on Culver is that he should be playing at least 25 minutes every single game regardless of what the hell is going on with this trash franchise. If Cleveland is playing Garland that much so he gets his lumps and gets better quicker why the hell wouldn't we do that with Culver?
Makes absolutely no sense. You are one of the worst teams in the league and you can't get minutes for the guy you picked #6.
Like that tweet said the other night that someone posted.. The Wolves are not winning or developing players. Truly brilliant.
“We are nonviolent with people who are nonviolent with us.”
— Malcolm X
irishman89 wrote: ↑Thu Dec 26, 2019 11:38 pm
Memphis could actually play Andre Iguodala, along with their current roster, and be a much different, better team. Melton is coming on strong. They've already wised up on how much Tyus sucks. Dumb contract for them now. They'll make a nice jump next season, especially if they get decent returns for Iggy and Crowder at the deadline.
Sorry a bit off topic but some point I can only suffocate on numbers and stats so much.
My take on Culver is that he should be playing at least 25 minutes every single game regardless of what the hell is going on with this trash franchise. If Cleveland is playing Garland that much so he gets his lumps and gets better quicker why the hell wouldn't we do that with Culver?
Makes absolutely no sense. You are one of the worst teams in the league and you can't get minutes for the guy you picked #6.
Like that tweet said the other night that someone posted.. The Wolves are not winning or developing players. Truly brilliant.
Totally agree. We're a dumpster fire and basically sitting the 6th pick on the bench. How is that even a thing?
Thrillkill wrote: ↑Thu Dec 26, 2019 9:20 pm
The most ludicrous part was we had Saric under contract for the year to see if he fits and to play in front of a young guy like Doumboya. But the idiot just thought he was smarter than every legit GM. Trading up for a player at 3 in the afternoon? Who the fuck does that? Taking a guy who doesn't fit and you don't want because you saw some mock and heard some trade smoke? Who has ever done that? Ever? I asked that for weeks after the draft and no one came up with one.
Personally my move would have been take Clarke at 11 and move Saric for a low 1st. But I would have also played defense and not had a 25% 3 shooting team take 40+ a game so what do I know? Oh right, basketball. I know a shit lot more about basketball than the guy running the team. That bodes well.
AS good as Brandon Clarke has been, the problem with his selection is what I have always brought up. He doesn't move the needle one bit. We already had a fully developed player similar to Brandon Clarke in Taj Gibson. If you look take a random Gibson year and compare it to Clarke's rookie season so far there isn't much statistical difference.
Of course, if Clarke continues to shoot the almost unsustainable numbers he has put up to date I might change my mind. Right now, if you look at shooting from distances, Clarke is shooting 73.8 at the rim, 60.5% from 3-10 feet, 61.1% from 10-16 feet, and 50$ from deep 2's, along with 43% from 3.
Memphis could really develop into a team with Jalen Jackson and Ja Morant with Clarke as a support player.
Dude you really have to stop saying that Clarke is similar to Taj. Nothing could be further from the truth.
It isn't "far from the truth". While there are some differences in their athletic styles, in the end both were stay at home, traditional power forwards with limited shooting range that were decent defenders who also brought intangibles to the team. And, as I stated, if you take a random Taj Gibson season and compare it to Clarke's you cannot find much statistical difference.
AS good as Brandon Clarke has been, the problem with his selection is what I have always brought up. He doesn't move the needle one bit. We already had a fully developed player similar to Brandon Clarke in Taj Gibson. If you look take a random Gibson year and compare it to Clarke's rookie season so far there isn't much statistical difference.
Of course, if Clarke continues to shoot the almost unsustainable numbers he has put up to date I might change my mind. Right now, if you look at shooting from distances, Clarke is shooting 73.8 at the rim, 60.5% from 3-10 feet, 61.1% from 10-16 feet, and 50$ from deep 2's, along with 43% from 3.
Memphis could really develop into a team with Jalen Jackson and Ja Morant with Clarke as a support player.
Dude you really have to stop saying that Clarke is similar to Taj. Nothing could be further from the truth.
It isn't "far from the truth". While there are some differences in their athletic styles, in the end both were stay at home, traditional power forwards with limited shooting range that were decent defenders who also brought intangibles to the team. And, as I stated, if you take a random Taj Gibson season and compare it to Clarke's you cannot find much statistical difference.
Stay at home? Bell flies all over the floor and is a great shot blocker. He can guard any position on the floor and is a switching defenses dream. He flies down the floor in both directions.
i think thrill had a blip there and wrote bell instead of clarke. but i think he was talking about clarke. correcto?
clarke's mobility and taj's mobility are in entirely separate universes. and as for his lack of range, what else do you need to see? it's early in the year and as a rookie, he's now 15 of 32 (47%). the best taj EVER shot from 3 was 32% - and the most threes he's ever made in an entire season are 11. i'd say clarke's trajectory as a deep threat big looks pretty damn good - and certainly nothing like taj's.
biggest thing though is clarke - or a player like clarke - could strengthen your club in many tangible ways. is he a guy who will lead you to a title? no. that would still need to be found. but having a solid PF doing all the stuff he does makes the road a lot easier once - or if - you find that other guy to lead your club. chicago was a better club with horace grant at the starting PF rather than, say, stacy king. grant didn't need to be karl malone to be important to that club. is horace grant going to lead any team to a championship, no. but as an important piece of a championship team, absolutely.
There is little difference between the memory of a real event and the memory of a dream.
somuchyummy wrote: ↑Fri Dec 27, 2019 12:09 pm
i think thrill had a blip there and wrote bell instead of clarke. but i think he was talking about clarke. correcto?
clarke's mobility and taj's mobility are in entirely separate universes. and as for his lack of range, what else do you need to see? it's early in the year and as a rookie, he's now 15 of 32 (47%). the best taj EVER shot from 3 was 32% - and the most threes he's ever made in an entire season are 11. i'd say clarke's trajectory as a deep threat big looks pretty damn good - and certainly nothing like taj's.
biggest thing though is clarke - or a player like clarke - could strengthen your club in many tangible ways. is he a guy who will lead you to a title? no. that would still need to be found. but having a solid PF doing all the stuff he does makes the road a lot easier once - or if - you find that other guy to lead your club. chicago was a better club with horace grant at the starting PF rather than, say, stacy king. is horace grant going to lead any team to a championship, no. but as an important piece of a championship team, absolutely.
Oh, well same exact thing except Clarke can score outside the paint. And the lack of understanding of intangibles is frustrating. How can people buy into the culture and liking each other crap as intangibles and not see how guys like Clarke and Bell get tips that lead not only to another guys getting a steal but offense resets. How do they not see the tip rebounds that lead to another guy getting it. The switches that stop a drive. The flying back on D and stopping a break. The fear of a block stopping a shot attempt. The tough D that leads to a travel or losing it out of bounds. None of that hits the stat book but all of it leads to wins.
Thrillkill wrote: ↑Fri Dec 27, 2019 12:43 am
Dude you really have to stop saying that Clarke is similar to Taj. Nothing could be further from the truth.
It isn't "far from the truth". While there are some differences in their athletic styles, in the end both were stay at home, traditional power forwards with limited shooting range that were decent defenders who also brought intangibles to the team. And, as I stated, if you take a random Taj Gibson season and compare it to Clarke's you cannot find much statistical difference.
Stay at home? Bell flies all over the floor and is a great shot blocker. He can guard any position on the floor and is a switching defenses dream. He flies down the floor in both directions.
Thrillkill wrote: ↑Fri Dec 27, 2019 12:43 am
Dude you really have to stop saying that Clarke is similar to Taj. Nothing could be further from the truth.
It isn't "far from the truth". While there are some differences in their athletic styles, in the end both were stay at home, traditional power forwards with limited shooting range that were decent defenders who also brought intangibles to the team. And, as I stated, if you take a random Taj Gibson season and compare it to Clarke's you cannot find much statistical difference.
Stay at home? Bell flies all over the floor and is a great shot blocker. He can guard any position on the floor and is a switching defenses dream. He flies down the floor in both directions.
Good lord.
“We are nonviolent with people who are nonviolent with us.”
— Malcolm X
T_J wrote: ↑Tue Dec 24, 2019 4:36 am
Nothing smarter than buying high, selling low.
Agree.
Most here would be complaining 3 years from now because we gave up on Culver too soon.
I don't think trading anyone their rookie season is "selling low." There is still the element of 'hope' that can be sold. He's had a few nice games as of late as well.
"Butler gone and Wiggins with a chip on his shoulder: All Star this season potential." -Unfadeable21
"It's would you rather have Wiggins or Kyrie? I'm taking Wiggins." - Sergeant Rubetube
T_J wrote: ↑Wed Jan 08, 2020 1:54 pm
There are some stupid fucking posts in this thread.
Especially the original one.
Decker, FTW!!!
thinktank wrote: ↑Tue Feb 05, 2019 10:15 am
I’m a successful consultant for some of the biggest and best companies in the world. I tell you about systems architecture, not the other way around.
Still has a chance to be positive, but certainly dont see high end upside. While not a player to bring us over the top he will keep improving and gives us some energy and defense.
Just a bummer I like so many guys after we drafted him that seem like better fits for us.. Hayes, Clark Rui,Washington, White, Herro...
mglviks wrote: ↑Wed Jan 08, 2020 3:58 pm
Still has a chance to be positive, but certainly dont see high end upside. While not a player to bring us over the top he will keep improving and gives us some energy and defense.
Just a bummer I like so many guys after we drafted him that seem like better fits for us.. Hayes, Clark Rui,Washington, White, Herro...
Not sold on Coby White. Maybe I went to the wrong Bulls game (Utah).
