. |
Lol your ego with take a blow and I can already tell you’re hedging even in your writing formula...cushioning yourself to be wrong and fall on a “we never said he was a bad shooter!”
You using Ben Simmons as this inadequate choice on the Star/Bust see-saw is still absurd because despite his flaws, he’s still an Allstar. You take Ben Simmons in a draft!
Darius Garland IS AN AMAZING SHOOTER. Pure shooter! Griffin should have taken him. ,
You say I'm hedging.
Tell me where I ever, EVER, denied he was a capable shooter?
My ego is totally fine. MSU and Three will probably tell you that it's a little too fine, sometimes. Like I said, my issues with Garland are simple. He doesn't care about passing, he's not that good at it when he tries, and he is an absolute non-factor on defense. That was all true yesterday, it will be true tomorrow, and I think that if it ever changes, it won't be for several years.
And when you wake up and realize the NBA is about talent and you can still be an allstar in the league with flaws because something you may do is above and beyond other players and THEY HAVE THE CONFIDENCE AND KNOW IT, bump this thread.
Some players just got it. Darius is one of them.
Nope. None of those players were made to shoot like Darius. None of them have his pure stroke.
The number of players you post is the number of apologies I’d like in December.
That makes no sense, because I have said, repeatedly, that Darius is a good shooter. The fact that his shooting form and stroke is not perfect does not change the fact that the shot goes in. Shawn Marion's stroke and form was completely mutant but it went in.
You appear to have not only completely misunderstood the content of my critique, but also reversed it, such that you think I'm saying the opposite of what I am. That's actually impressive in a very weird, kind of absurd way.
No, you’re either hedging or you’re really good at purposely avoiding the foundation of an argument...
Griffin should have drafted Darius. You’re critique broken down to its very core is that he shouldn’t have.
So when December comes and you realize Griffin should have drafted him, none of this “I said he was a good shooter” matters. Your argument at its foundation is that passing on him was the smart move.
This is just a weird way to go about it.
We have like 5 years of extra picks and 4 guaranteed better drafts to find a shooter.
The only thing that I'll give is that trading the 4th pick is risky simply because...
1. Great Shooters are top 10 prospects and Don’t usually fall out
2. We have no idea if we are remotely bad enough for the top 10 in the foreseeable future.
Yet, if do need a top 10 shooter in future. We have the assets to get the pick.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)