cant help but notice, but........

[isguros]

its obvious that you didnt read my post correctly because i was comparing mkg to about 10+ players with the same or similar playing styles. what you did was just name a bunch of random big men. you even threw in stretch 4's, and non athletic players. non of the players above were in any comparison to t-rob style or skill set .

#epic fail lol

Actually I did read your post, perhaps you meant it well but you chose those specific players just because they play good defense. Their playing styles aren't that similar to Kidd-Gilchrist.

[QC Thundercats]

yeah?! someone needs to brush up on their basketball .

#epic fail lol

[Plowright]

The thing is, he isn't embarrassed at all as he is for some reason thinking he is ahead of the curve, when in reality he has just turned up and been wrong about... Well pretty much everything.

[G Wuh Wuh Wuh Wallace]

This thread is my favs.

[dav7z]

your analogies are way off. lebron was a phenom , durant a phenom , rose a phenom; these are players that were clearly cant misses . mj was the only exception on that list but lets be serious mkg is not a phenom , he's a specialist . the thunder already had big men before drafting harden also harden was a need .

you must think that im some person who hate wing players and thats not the case. i was pointing out a position of need . you are comparing teams who didnt have any specific needs anywhere so it may be alittle easier(sarcasim) to start a franchise off w
the best player.

im stating an cause and an effect that we drafted a want , when our team suffers from below average big men , not below avg wing players(thus the small ball).

I don;t understand your statement at all we had NO three at all except Maggs be 4 the draft.

[gm in training]

Actually I did read your post, perhaps you meant it well but you chose those specific players just because they play good defense. Their playing styles aren't that similar to Kidd-Gilchrist.

i didnt pick just players who just play good defense? ok, lets break down mkg(6'7 235) style ; he's a wing tweener who cant shoot , transition player ,good defender,strong rebounder,athletic slasher,shoot blocker and good ball handle.


marion (6'7 22- wing tweener who cant shoot ,transition player,great defender,strong rebounder,athletic slasher ,shot blocker and good ball handle(marion been playing alot of poiny forward as of late , check his assist nmbrs)

t.young(6'8 220)- wing tweener who's an ok shooter, transition player, ok defender, ok rebounder,athletic slasher, and suspect handle

wallace(6'7 225)- wing tweener who's an ok shooter ,transition player, good defender,strong rebounder,athletic slasher ,shot blocker and suspect handle.

kwahi leonard (6'7 225)- wing tweener who's a good shooter,transition player, good defender,good rebounder,athletic slasher and ok handle.

wesley johnson (6'7 205)- wing tweener who's a ok shooter, transition player,good defender, good rebounder, athletic slasher ,shot blocker and suspect handle.

iggy(6'6 206)- wing tweener who's a ok shooter, transition player, great defender, good rebounder, athletic slasher,and great handle.

j.smith(6'9 225)- wing tweener who's a streaky shooter,transition player, great defender,good rebounder,shot blocker, athletic slasher,and good handle.

i literary can break all my player comparisons down . so for some that think mkg is a once of a lifetime talent is sadly mistaking . i think everybody feel because he's 19 he's got the potential to be the next lebron ...wrong !!! i guess some of you must of forgot about the high school phase the nba went through where everyone was 18 &19. that phase had the worst draft classes ever . yeah everyone had potential and talent but everyone was raw and never developed. we need to hope that he can be closer to wallace,smith,or marion and be happy with that . mkg is what he is; an raw athletic hustle player but news flash everyone in college is raw and athletic players. the only thing i can say separate mkg from the pack is his handle is above avg and that he's one of the fastest end to end tweeners in the lg.

like i said i like mkg but to glorify him im not . i glorify hendo because i think hendo is very rare. he's a physical speciman at 6'5 215 , great mid-rang, turn into a great 3-pointer ,good court vision( he's avg 3.8 since he's been starting), good rebounder( avg 5.1 rebounds since he's been starting),post moves, plays the passing lanes, great defender ,and weak side blocks .

the players you compared where just random big men , that weren't even in the same skill set as t-rob. like i said if you can find a 6'10,6'9,6'8 pf athletic banger, with good foot work, can run the court, some post moves ,decent mid,and work ethic ,then be my guest . i know there are some players but there isnt many .

[kitch0202]

OK, last attempt at reasoning then I too am done.

First things first ... it is clear you put a lot of time and effort into your posts and for that you should be applauded.

However there are times when every single person gets things wrong or an opposing argument can be so persuasive and well constructed that it changes your original opinion, or at least causes you to question it. It follows that when someone correctly argues against a point you have made then why not hold your hands up and say either 'fair enough you're right' or 'I didn't express myself as I meant to'?

Here's an example ... when talking about MKG you said:

we are losing games because our bigs are horrible not because we dont have an wing player who plays defense and barely on the court.

SWedd rightly called you out on that and your response was:

and yes barley , 27 min is not considered starter mins.

I also called you out on this and pointed out 27 minutes is a little over 56% of the game, so the notion that he's barely on the court is false. You then came back with:

if your a starter avg 27 min then thats bad. there are role player min(15-20) ,6 man min(24-30), and starter min (30-3. mkg fits in the sixth man role so i will stand towards my barely comment because if lebron,or (imma take it down a notch) even gerald wallace(same type player as mkg) avg 27 min a game then their barely on the floor for "starter"

Do you see that you changed your argument?

You started by saying MKG was barely on the court, which is incorrect.

You then ended up saying that 27 minutes was barely on the floor for a starter.

They are two different arguments. If when you were called out on your original, incorrect, statement you simple said that you didn't express yourself as you had meant to and clarified it by saying 27 minutes is a low amount of floor time for a starter then all well and good. A bit of humility shown and the issue explained. Instead you try to belligerently argue your way out of a situation you must have known was of your own making.

Anyone who puts the effort you do into your posts is an asset for any forum.

Anyone who won't admit when they're wrong or when they haven't expressed themselves' correctly is less welcome.

And anyone who insults other member with childish comments (epic fail etc.) is simply a nuisance.

Again, last attempt ... take the advice or leave it but it's well meant.

[gm in training]

OK, last attempt at reasoning then I too am done.

First things first ... it is clear you put a lot of time and effort into your posts and for that you should be applauded.

However there are times when every single person gets things wrong or an opposing argument can be so persuasive and well constructed that it changes your original opinion, or at least causes you to question it. It follows that when someone correctly argues against a point you have made then why not hold your hands up and say either 'fair enough you're right' or 'I didn't express myself as I meant to'?

Here's an example ... when talking about MKG you said:



SWedd rightly called you out on that and your response was:



I also called you out on this and pointed out 27 minutes is a little over 56% of the game, so the notion that he's barely on the court is false. You then came back with:



Do you see that you changed your argument?

You started by saying MKG was barely on the court, which is incorrect.

You then ended up saying that 27 minutes was barely on the floor for a starter.

They are two different arguments. If when you were called out on your original, incorrect, statement you simple said that you didn't express yourself as you had meant to and clarified it by saying 27 minutes is a low amount of floor time for a starter then all well and good. A bit of humility shown and the issue explained. Instead you try to belligerently argue your way out of a situation you must have known was of your own making.

Anyone who puts the effort you do into your posts is an asset for any forum.

Anyone who won't admit when they're wrong or when they haven't expressed themselves' correctly is less welcome.

And anyone who insults other member with childish comments (epic fail etc.) is simply a nuisance.

Again, last attempt ... take the advice or leave it but it's well meant.

im not admitting im wrong when im not .you stated i mentioned 27 min without being specific ,which seemed like i changed my arguement. i never tried to pull a fast one by adding starter; the fact is mkg is a starter , i dint think i had to add starter because i thought it was self explanatory because we where talking about mkg.

there is no percentage that qualifies the word barley . barley is a opinionated word, i could state" i only had 65 dollars , just barely had enough to pay the 70 dollar ticket ,im glade they let me slide", by the way thats alittle over 92% . i was stating that mid 20's are not quality starter mins. if i was so wrong why is it that in every 5 threads there are fellow bobcat fans complaining about the mins and usage of mkg ?


alot of people act like i just cursed at them when i mention mkg in a trade . when in reality we need to hope mkg is being traded because he may have the 2nd most trade value on our team. alot of websites are stating that kemba is the only player who can make the cousins trade possible, and it doesnt even stop there because they're also stating we may need to take a bad sacramento contract and we may need to add a 1st rounder.

[Plowright]

im not admitting im wrong when im not . there is no percentage that qualifies the word barley . barley is a opinionated word i could state" i only had 65 dollars , just barely had enough to pay the 70 dollar ticket ,im glade they let me slide" .

TIT: Stands for Teacher In Training-- Didn't realise you were an English professor as well

[QC Thundercats]

OK, last attempt at reasoning then I too am done.

I just want to say, for all those who want to try to keep reasoning, it doesn't work. The gitter only responds to what he wants to, but when someone takes time to factually break down his arguments, he runs away.

I've attempted plenty of times to engage in a logical, factual back and forth, but whenever he's proven wrong, he moves on to the next item on his agenda.

I'm still waiting on the response to these:

http://www.bobcatsplanet.com/vb/show...612#post226612

http://www.bobcatsplanet.com/vb/show...951#post224951

So, I don't waste my time anymore. Sometimes I wonder if its Ziggy's secret account to try to get more discussion when the board starts to slow down. It seems to work.