Johnnybravo4 Posted May 14, 2007 Report Share Posted May 14, 2007 Put Shelden on Utah and he probably does the same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Diesel Posted May 14, 2007 Premium Member Report Share Posted May 14, 2007 Quote: The key here is that Milsap is contributing for a playoff team. Sheldon was a non-factor for a bottom feeder. So as of right now I don't see how you can argue that Milsap hasn't made a more valuable contribution to date. That's a terrible conclusion... Was Scott Williams a better contributor than Kevin Willis because Williams played for the Bulls and won 3 championships and Willis played for the Hawks and won none??? OF Course not. Milsap is a BU for Boozer. He plays in a team that has better coaching & A team that has better players at key positions. Again, Utah would be tickled pink if the offered was made Shelden for Milsap... And next year at this time, we'll have the "Diaws" saying " I can't believe we traded that guy... Who knew he was that good!"... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasPete Posted May 14, 2007 Author Report Share Posted May 14, 2007 WRONG!!! Jerry Sloan demands that you actually guard somebody. Shelden would not have been picked by the Jazz. They aren't that stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasPete Posted May 14, 2007 Author Report Share Posted May 14, 2007 Milsap and Boozer can and do play together. It just depends on the situation. Last night Milsap was in for AK 47. Did you watch? Or, just BSing again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnnybravo4 Posted May 14, 2007 Report Share Posted May 14, 2007 Quote: WRONG!!! Jerry Sloan demands that you actually guard somebody. Shelden would not have been picked by the Jazz. They aren't that stupid. Shelden was a two time DPOY in college. Did he forget how to play D or did Woody not put him in position to maximize his potential, ala Boris Diaw? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gutz Posted May 14, 2007 Report Share Posted May 14, 2007 Exactly Bravo!!! They act like Shelden did nothing when given minutes this past year. He was putting up double doubles in the beginning and end of the year when he ACTUALLY got playing time. Are you clowns oblivious to this or what. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CBAreject Posted May 14, 2007 Report Share Posted May 14, 2007 I would paste all the links where I said this before the season and when the season started, but what's the point? My argument was that Millsap in the 2nd would be at least comparable to Shelden, and you get the rookie of the year (Roy) to boot. It was a no-brainer then for me. Now I look like I could make Billy Knight my draft [censored]. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packfill Posted May 14, 2007 Report Share Posted May 14, 2007 Quote: Quote: The key here is that Milsap is contributing for a playoff team. Sheldon was a non-factor for a bottom feeder. So as of right now I don't see how you can argue that Milsap hasn't made a more valuable contribution to date. That's a terrible conclusion... Was Scott Williams a better contributor than Kevin Willis because Williams played for the Bulls and won 3 championships and Willis played for the Hawks and won none??? OF Course not. Milsap is a BU for Boozer. He plays in a team that has better coaching & A team that has better players at key positions. Again, Utah would be tickled pink if the offered was made Shelden for Milsap... And next year at this time, we'll have the "Diaws" saying " I can't believe we traded that guy... Who knew he was that good!"... You didn't even read my post. Milsap has done more this year. You realize he average 6.8 points, 5.2 rebounds and .9 blocks in 18 minutes a game versus Sheldon's 5.5, 5.4 and .48 in 18.7 minutes per game? You also realize that Milsap shot .525 versus .455 for Sheldon? So statistically Milsap did more - and he did this for a better team. You mention Milsap being a back-up for Boozer as a bad thing. Why? Sheldon is a back-up for Josh Smith. Is that bad too? I don't understand why you bring up Scott Williams and Kevin Willis. Willis was a starter most of his career. Scott Williams was a back-up most of his career. How are the two comparable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasPete Posted May 14, 2007 Author Report Share Posted May 14, 2007 Why are you living in the past? JJ Redick was the player of the year! He is the ALL TIME leading scorer in ACC history. How is his career looking? Do I need to give you a list of all the award winners in college who didn't make it in the NBA? Because the list is a LONG one. My question is why would you bring up college awards when college has NOTHING to do with the league? You all aren't that ignorant...I hope. C'mon, some kids skills just don't translate. Shelden was a huge shot blocker in college right? How many shots did he block for the Hawks? Let me help you...he blocks less than a PG!!! Your rickety ass argument ain't holding up bro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasPete Posted May 14, 2007 Author Report Share Posted May 14, 2007 EDS, your killing them with facts. The straight ups on these two guys are there for all to see. And Millsap plays much better defense, he can actually guard somebody. Millsap played the same minutes...did pretty much everything better, except he went in the 2nd round instead of the high lottery. Utah didn't even promise him anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gutz Posted May 14, 2007 Report Share Posted May 14, 2007 Just remember this thread next year when Shelden is putting up better numbers than Millsap. Do you honestly think Millsap would have done anything if he was on the Hawks this past season? He is in a TOTALLY different situation in Utah. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnnybravo4 Posted May 14, 2007 Report Share Posted May 14, 2007 Quote: Quote: Quote: The key here is that Milsap is contributing for a playoff team. Sheldon was a non-factor for a bottom feeder. So as of right now I don't see how you can argue that Milsap hasn't made a more valuable contribution to date. That's a terrible conclusion... Was Scott Williams a better contributor than Kevin Willis because Williams played for the Bulls and won 3 championships and Willis played for the Hawks and won none??? OF Course not. Milsap is a BU for Boozer. He plays in a team that has better coaching & A team that has better players at key positions. Again, Utah would be tickled pink if the offered was made Shelden for Milsap... And next year at this time, we'll have the "Diaws" saying " I can't believe we traded that guy... Who knew he was that good!"... You didn't even read my post. Milsap has done more this year. You realize he average 6.8 points, 5.2 rebounds and .9 blocks in 18 minutes a game versus Sheldon's 5.5, 5.4 and .48 in 18.7 minutes per game? You also realize that Milsap shot .525 versus .455 for Sheldon? So statistically Milsap did more - and he did this for a better team. You mention Milsap being a back-up for Boozer as a bad thing. Why? Sheldon is a back-up for Josh Smith. Is that bad too? I don't understand why you bring up Scott Williams and Kevin Willis. Willis was a starter most of his career. Scott Williams was a back-up most of his career. How are the two comparable? You have to balance it out though between Shelden getting 25+mpg in the beginning to the season, to the measly 10 or so mpg he got in the middle and end of the season. Milsap got more consistent minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtLaS Posted May 14, 2007 Report Share Posted May 14, 2007 Quote: ...against a good team at full strength...consistently. He's better. How hard would it have been to find this out in a head to head tryout!?! W I'm sick of so many people using the "doing it on a good team" argument. It's actually HARDER to score on a bad team, although for some reason most people don't realize this. Milsap is also playing with Deron Williams (who should also be on our team), I guess that's not the main reason Utah are better. A great PG is what turns players into winners, period. Milsap is not better than Shelden IMO. Now, I agree that Shelden was a HORRIBLE HORRIBLE pick, but he's still better than Milsap. Shelden was just a bad selection because he filled no NEED on our team, except backup PF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exodus Posted May 14, 2007 Report Share Posted May 14, 2007 Quote: Now I look like I could make Billy Knight my draft [censored]. That puts you in a secect group of several million. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJlaysitup Posted May 14, 2007 Report Share Posted May 14, 2007 Quote: Milsap and Boozer can and do play together. It just depends on the situation. Last night Milsap was in for AK 47. Did you watch? Or, just BSing again? Yeah I watched the f_ckin game. ....and BJ and I wan't Milsap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Diesel Posted May 14, 2007 Premium Member Report Share Posted May 14, 2007 I think it comes down to one easy question. Is it easier to be productive for a good team with a good coach or for a bad team with a Lousy coach?? When you figure it out, come on back! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasPete Posted May 14, 2007 Author Report Share Posted May 14, 2007 Not true at all. It is harder for a rookie like Millsap to put numbers up on a good squad because he is always the 5th option. He has zero plays called for him and gets his points off hustle and offensive rebounding. When you look at Utah's options ahead of Millsap you don't wonder why they don't call his number. Boozer is a top 3 low post scorer right now in all of the NBA. The point is that Millsap plays Shelden's type of role a helluva lot better than Shelden ever could. What you also miss is the defensive difference between Millsap and SW. Millsap is a tough and gritty defender. SW had trouble guarding any 4 he played all year. Shelden is a 5 playing in a 4's body. In fact, you can't name one thing SW does better. A blanket statement that SW is better followed by...no proof. Millsap is a career role player. Ditto for Shelden. One was the 5th pick, the other went in round 2. But Millsap's defense puts him well over the top. I'll take a role player who plays damn good D. All day. And you can keep Shelden. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member Diesel Posted May 14, 2007 Premium Member Report Share Posted May 14, 2007 Again TP... You're argueing just to be disagreeable. Let's simplify this even farther... 1. Is it easier to be productive when you have a good PG vs. No good PG? 2. Is it easier to be productive when you have other bigs that command respect in the post like Boozer and Okur or AK vs. guys who don't really command respect in the post like Zaza? 3. Is it easier to be productive when your team run plays vs. being on a team that plays sandlot basketball? 4. Is it easier to be productive when you have one guy hogging the ball most of the time (JJ) vs. having a team ball concept that has been in place for 20 years?? Come on TP, this is too easy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnnybravo4 Posted May 14, 2007 Report Share Posted May 14, 2007 Quote: Not true at all. It is harder for a rookie like Millsap to put numbers up on a good squad because he is always the 5th option. He has zero plays called for him and gets his points off hustle and offensive rebounding. When you look at Utah's options ahead of Millsap you don't wonder why they don't call his number. Boozer is a top 3 low post scorer right now in all of the NBA. The point is that Millsap plays Shelden's type of role a helluva lot better than Shelden ever could. What you also miss is the defensive difference between Millsap and SW. Millsap is a tough and gritty defender. SW had trouble guarding any 4 he played all year. Shelden is a 5 playing in a 4's body. In fact, you can't name one thing SW does better. A blanket statement that SW is better followed by...no proof. Millsap is a career role player. Ditto for Shelden. One was the 5th pick, the other went in round 2. But Millsap's defense puts him well over the top. I'll take a role player who plays damn good D. All day. And you can keep Shelden. Shelden is on a bad team and he was the 5th option as well. The difference is that he plays in a bad system being manipulated by a bad coach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasPete Posted May 14, 2007 Author Report Share Posted May 14, 2007 Diesel, you may be the easiest debate in the history of Hawksquawk. Now, here is what I want you to do...very carefully. Take each "point" that you just made and apply all 4 "points" to Marvin Williams. Voila. Your right. It's way too damn easy. Taking candy from an infant. Thanks for playing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now