Goran Dragic Trade Watch

[pickle]

if you thought bledsoe had turnover problems, my oh my

MCW isn't in his 5th season, and he isn't making $14 million a year.

you are right, there's definitely hope for him yet. but his turnover problems are well documented... we'll have to wait and see whether he can bring that down within a more disciplined system and with a better group of players around him in milwaukee. all i'm saying is, i am not a fan of his game, and i'm more than okay that we didn't get him.

all i know about brandon knight are from statistics, so i won't comment on what type of player he is. i love the potential and the intrigue with a draft pick, but at some point those picks need to be turned into players, and our draft history haven't yielded many home runs in the past few years, more like singles and doubles, which suggests that the laker pick might turn into a knight level player after all. again, it sucks to lose a high draft pick, but getting knight back isn't the worst thing in the world.

[pickle]

if you thought bledsoe had turnover problems, my oh my

MCW isn't in his 5th season, and he isn't making $14 million a year.

and while we are on the topic, the 14 million a year thing, i get. but the 5th year comparison, that's just a number to throw out into a debate, but if we are to really look at the chances either player has had to run a team as the sole decision maker, i wonder if they are about at the same level. there's hope yet for bledsoe too.

i get the sentiment that bledsoe isn't loved here. i myself, as a suns fan, haven't warmed up to him completely yet either. but he is on the team, and he's not going anywhere, so i'm gonna be a good fan and root for him to improve. at least that'll help me sleep better at night, vs. focusing on his negatives and having no way to change the situation whatsoever.

[INFORMER]

but the 5th year comparison, that's just a number to throw out into a debate

No, it's a number I value. I value NBA experience, and I think players generally get better the more minutes and years they play in the league. It's a crazy concept, I know, but I think it just might be true.

[Indy]

but the 5th year comparison, that's just a number to throw out into a debate

No, it's a number I value. I value NBA experience, and I think players generally get better the more minutes and years they play in the league. It's a crazy concept, I know, but I think it just might be true.

Fair, but it isn't about the number of years they have been getting paid. It is the number of minutes they have seen on the floor. And I would argue starters minutes are much more valuable than back up. The two guys have about the same amount of experience when you look at it that way.

[pickle]

but the 5th year comparison, that's just a number to throw out into a debate

No, it's a number I value. I value NBA experience, and I think players generally get better the more minutes and years they play in the league. It's a crazy concept, I know, but I think it just might be true.

Fair, but it isn't about the number of years they have been getting paid. It is the number of minutes they have seen on the floor. And I would argue starters minutes are much more valuable than back up. The two guys have about the same amount of experience when you look at it that way.

my point exactly. bledsoe had been backing up chris paul for a few years and his only real experience running a team on his own were half a season last year and the full year this year. let's say we roll up the backup games/minutes into about a full season's worth of starter experience, that's still just about a half year up on MCW, who had been given the reins and racking up high usage rate in philly for the last two years.

i'm not a bledsoe apologist, but i do think that comparison needs to be a fair one. if we only measure # of years in the league, well, archie has had the same amount of experience as mcw... but at this point i would still give archie the benefit of the doubt, whereas mcw, i'm starting to question his abilities somewhat (still a little premature, i'd give him another year in milwaukee, but that's another discussion).

[INFORMER]

if we only measure # of years in the league

Why would we only do that when I specifically mentioned years AND minutes played?

[pickle]

if we only measure # of years in the league

Why would we only do that when I specifically mentioned years AND minutes played?

yeah we shouldn't only do that, but then it seems you are the one that singled it out... coz in my original post i said "but the 5th year comparison, that's just a number to throw out into a debate, but if we are to really look at the chances either player has had to run a team as the sole decision maker, i wonder if they are about at the same level." which seems to suggest minutes and years, but you only quoted the part about years.

we are getting bogged down a bit too much into semantics here. i take back the "only a number" thing. let's just compare the two players based on experience. i am frustrated by bledsoe's high turnover numbers, and i wish he could keep it down. my original point was that i am not impressed by mcw, and contrary to some of the other posters here who prefer having him over knight, i don't. and part of that stems from his high turnover rate, which is worse than bledsoe's, the other part being that he can't shoot. again, i qualify this by saying, not only can't he shoot a jumper, he seems to have regressed with free throw shooting, which is puzzling.