Sixers' players parents heckling/criticizing organization

[SHAQATTACK]

Don t really blame them.

[Ilikesports17]

Can't believe anyone's trying to defend Stauskas or Bennett at this point.

Just as hard to believe that many here are defending Young (a clear low IQ player that will NEVER be great) and the drafting of Rozier at #16!!!

Smitty77

No. No its not.

Dont mean to be short, but I simply disagree with that statement.

[BballTim]

Nik is just playing in his second year, being the 8th pick in last years draft. As of right now he has his ups and downs, as is to be expected of any young player, but the potential is still there to be an effective scorer in this league. Just look at the type of production he had during the clippers game: http://espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?id=400828392
Its clearly evident that Nik has a great future in the NBA, and Kendall at best is a second or third option the arguably worst team in NBA history.

I don't think it's clearly evident that a guy whose calling card is shooting but has career percentages of .359/.311/.796 has any kind of future in the NBA.

Did you intentionally add the "calling card is shooting" bit to shelter you from the rebuttal that Marcus Smart is shooting 34%/22%/70%?

This is kind of pathetic. Stauskas averages 1.2 turnovers and 1.7 assists. His defense has repeatedly been blasted by Brown

http://articles.philly.com/2015-12-16/sports/69065473_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-nerlens-noel
http://articles.philly.com/2015-11-18/sports/68356892_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-raft

He is possibly the worst rotation player in the NBA this season. He is supposed to decent at one thing and he hasn't been able to do that. You use that as a segway to bring in Marcus Smart's shooting percentages? Again, absolutely pathetic.

He is 302nd out of 324 qualified players for PER rating at 7.68

And he's coming off a game with 18 points, 4 rebounds and 3 assists with 6-8 shooting from three.

So it will be interesting to see if he finds a rhythm.

You have to know more about basketball based on how much you post here than you have exhibited in your last couple of posts...

What do you know about basketball? 

Not a question that should ever be asked by someone who wrote an enthusiastic post about the amazing potential of Anthony Bennett.

Mike

I liked Bennett's potential more than what was available at #16.   I'm still not sure Rozier has more potential than Anthony Bennett.  At best, it's a toss-up. 

I'd still probably trade Rozier for Stauskas.   Maybe that comment ends up looking stupid... i dunno...  Stauskas is coming off a game with 18 points, 4 rebounds, 3 assists with 6-8 shooting from three.   Rozier is coming off a game with 0 points, 0 rebounds, 1 assist with 0-1 shooting.   At gunpoint, I'm takin Sauce Castillo.  Sue me.

  He's probably referring to something like:

  http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=72982.msg1718477#msg1718477

  "Shame about Wiggins and Bennett... both of them have really bright futures, imo.  I could see them both ending up stars.  Yes, even Bennett. "

If you think that's funny that I thought Bennett could still end up a star back in June 2014, you should see what Cleveland thought of him in June 2013...  They literally took him 1st in the NBA draft.   Funny how opinions change. 

 So Cleveland screwing up a pick in a terrible draft is the reason it took you more than a season of nba play to figure out that Bennett wasn't going to be a star?

He's referring to this post where I admit it was a completely preposterous idea, but questioned if anyone would move the #16 pick for Anthony Bennett:  http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=78383.0

  Not sure what about his comment led you to believe that he was referring to your more lukewarm posts about Bennett and not your more enthusiastic hyping of him, but whatever.

[LarBrd33]

Nik is just playing in his second year, being the 8th pick in last years draft. As of right now he has his ups and downs, as is to be expected of any young player, but the potential is still there to be an effective scorer in this league. Just look at the type of production he had during the clippers game: http://espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?id=400828392
Its clearly evident that Nik has a great future in the NBA, and Kendall at best is a second or third option the arguably worst team in NBA history.

I don't think it's clearly evident that a guy whose calling card is shooting but has career percentages of .359/.311/.796 has any kind of future in the NBA.

Did you intentionally add the "calling card is shooting" bit to shelter you from the rebuttal that Marcus Smart is shooting 34%/22%/70%?

This is kind of pathetic. Stauskas averages 1.2 turnovers and 1.7 assists. His defense has repeatedly been blasted by Brown

http://articles.philly.com/2015-12-16/sports/69065473_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-nerlens-noel
http://articles.philly.com/2015-11-18/sports/68356892_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-raft

He is possibly the worst rotation player in the NBA this season. He is supposed to decent at one thing and he hasn't been able to do that. You use that as a segway to bring in Marcus Smart's shooting percentages? Again, absolutely pathetic.

He is 302nd out of 324 qualified players for PER rating at 7.68

And he's coming off a game with 18 points, 4 rebounds and 3 assists with 6-8 shooting from three.

So it will be interesting to see if he finds a rhythm.

You have to know more about basketball based on how much you post here than you have exhibited in your last couple of posts...

What do you know about basketball? 

Not a question that should ever be asked by someone who wrote an enthusiastic post about the amazing potential of Anthony Bennett.

Mike

I liked Bennett's potential more than what was available at #16.   I'm still not sure Rozier has more potential than Anthony Bennett.  At best, it's a toss-up. 

I'd still probably trade Rozier for Stauskas.   Maybe that comment ends up looking stupid... i dunno...  Stauskas is coming off a game with 18 points, 4 rebounds, 3 assists with 6-8 shooting from three.   Rozier is coming off a game with 0 points, 0 rebounds, 1 assist with 0-1 shooting.   At gunpoint, I'm takin Sauce Castillo.  Sue me.

  He's probably referring to something like:

  http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=72982.msg1718477#msg1718477

  "Shame about Wiggins and Bennett... both of them have really bright futures, imo.  I could see them both ending up stars.  Yes, even Bennett. "

Wow. I don't think someone could be more wrong about so many things if they tried. Player evaluations and team record predictions are clearly not his forte. To his credit, he continues offering misguided, yet highly confident opinions, despite his track record.

Perhaps LrdBrd would have been close to correct IF the guard with the best defensive RPM and 10th best overall real plus minus for guards had not gotten injured.  His name is Rondae Hollis-Jefferson.  And to think he was taken at #23 and we could have had him instead of Terry Rozier at #16!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Smitty77

There's a transparent little clique of rabblerousers who LooOoOoooove taking what I say out of context.   Most just have an ax to grind, because I made their stances on guys like Rondo look silly over the past 10 years in countless of other debates and they are looking for something to cling to that makes me look equally as silly.  Trust me, I'll make myself look silly plenty of times without the out-of-context rabblerousing. No need to grasp at straws.  I stand by everything I say on these forums.  I'm not always right, but I'm right far more often than I'm wrong. I shall not be making any apologies for thinkin it was potentially worthwhile to dump the #16 pick for a buy-low candidate like Bennett or Stauskas... certainly not while Rozier is spending all of his time in the children's league, because he's not ready to sniff an NBA court.

OP asked why Philly still plays Stauskas.   I answered.   Kid still has potential.  Gotta give him a shot to see if he can live up to it.  He probably won't, but you still gotta see if he does.  I liked Stauksas potential more than the potential of what was available at #16... I like Stauskas potential more than Rozier's potential.  Is what it is.

[Eddie20]

Nik is just playing in his second year, being the 8th pick in last years draft. As of right now he has his ups and downs, as is to be expected of any young player, but the potential is still there to be an effective scorer in this league. Just look at the type of production he had during the clippers game: http://espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?id=400828392
Its clearly evident that Nik has a great future in the NBA, and Kendall at best is a second or third option the arguably worst team in NBA history.

I don't think it's clearly evident that a guy whose calling card is shooting but has career percentages of .359/.311/.796 has any kind of future in the NBA.

Did you intentionally add the "calling card is shooting" bit to shelter you from the rebuttal that Marcus Smart is shooting 34%/22%/70%?

This is kind of pathetic. Stauskas averages 1.2 turnovers and 1.7 assists. His defense has repeatedly been blasted by Brown

http://articles.philly.com/2015-12-16/sports/69065473_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-nerlens-noel
http://articles.philly.com/2015-11-18/sports/68356892_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-raft

He is possibly the worst rotation player in the NBA this season. He is supposed to decent at one thing and he hasn't been able to do that. You use that as a segway to bring in Marcus Smart's shooting percentages? Again, absolutely pathetic.

He is 302nd out of 324 qualified players for PER rating at 7.68

And he's coming off a game with 18 points, 4 rebounds and 3 assists with 6-8 shooting from three.

So it will be interesting to see if he finds a rhythm.

You have to know more about basketball based on how much you post here than you have exhibited in your last couple of posts...

What do you know about basketball? 

Not a question that should ever be asked by someone who wrote an enthusiastic post about the amazing potential of Anthony Bennett.

Mike

I liked Bennett's potential more than what was available at #16.   I'm still not sure Rozier has more potential than Anthony Bennett.  At best, it's a toss-up. 

I'd still probably trade Rozier for Stauskas.   Maybe that comment ends up looking stupid... i dunno...  Stauskas is coming off a game with 18 points, 4 rebounds, 3 assists with 6-8 shooting from three.   Rozier is coming off a game with 0 points, 0 rebounds, 1 assist with 0-1 shooting.   At gunpoint, I'm takin Sauce Castillo.  Sue me.

  He's probably referring to something like:

  http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=72982.msg1718477#msg1718477

  "Shame about Wiggins and Bennett... both of them have really bright futures, imo.  I could see them both ending up stars.  Yes, even Bennett. "

Wow. I don't think someone could be more wrong about so many things if they tried. Player evaluations and team record predictions are clearly not his forte. To his credit, he continues offering misguided, yet highly confident opinions, despite his track record.

Perhaps LrdBrd would have been close to correct IF the guard with the best defensive RPM and 10th best overall real plus minus for guards had not gotten injured.  His name is Rondae Hollis-Jefferson.  And to think he was taken at #23 and we could have had him instead of Terry Rozier at #16!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Smitty77

There's a transparent little clique of rabblerousers who LooOoOoooove taking what I say out of context.   Most just have an ax to grind, because I made their stances on guys like Rondo look silly over the past 10 years in countless of other debates and they are looking for something to cling to that makes me look equally as silly.  Trust me, I'll make myself look silly plenty of times. No need to grasp at straws.  I stand by everything I say on these forums.  I'm not always right, but I'm right far more often than I'm wrong. I shall not be making any apologies for thinkin it was potentially worthwhile to dump the #16 pick for a buy-low candidate like Bennett or Stauskas... certainly not while Rozier is spending all of his time in the children's league, because he's not ready to sniff an NBA court.

OP asked why Philly still plays Stauskas.   I answered.   Kid still has potential.  Gotta give him a shot to see if he can live up to it.  He probably won't, but you still gotta see if he does.  I liked Stauksas potential more than the potential of what was available at #16... I like Stauskas potential more than Rozier's potential.  Is what it is.

Ha! That's funny.

A legend in your own mind, man.

[Denis998]

This should quite those doubters of the Sauce, clearly no one wanted any.
https://vine.co/v/ib0adZVHVUu

[LarBrd33]

Nik is just playing in his second year, being the 8th pick in last years draft. As of right now he has his ups and downs, as is to be expected of any young player, but the potential is still there to be an effective scorer in this league. Just look at the type of production he had during the clippers game: http://espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?id=400828392
Its clearly evident that Nik has a great future in the NBA, and Kendall at best is a second or third option the arguably worst team in NBA history.

I don't think it's clearly evident that a guy whose calling card is shooting but has career percentages of .359/.311/.796 has any kind of future in the NBA.

Did you intentionally add the "calling card is shooting" bit to shelter you from the rebuttal that Marcus Smart is shooting 34%/22%/70%?

This is kind of pathetic. Stauskas averages 1.2 turnovers and 1.7 assists. His defense has repeatedly been blasted by Brown

http://articles.philly.com/2015-12-16/sports/69065473_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-nerlens-noel
http://articles.philly.com/2015-11-18/sports/68356892_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-raft

He is possibly the worst rotation player in the NBA this season. He is supposed to decent at one thing and he hasn't been able to do that. You use that as a segway to bring in Marcus Smart's shooting percentages? Again, absolutely pathetic.

He is 302nd out of 324 qualified players for PER rating at 7.68

And he's coming off a game with 18 points, 4 rebounds and 3 assists with 6-8 shooting from three.

So it will be interesting to see if he finds a rhythm.

You have to know more about basketball based on how much you post here than you have exhibited in your last couple of posts...

What do you know about basketball? 

Not a question that should ever be asked by someone who wrote an enthusiastic post about the amazing potential of Anthony Bennett.

Mike

I liked Bennett's potential more than what was available at #16.   I'm still not sure Rozier has more potential than Anthony Bennett.  At best, it's a toss-up. 

I'd still probably trade Rozier for Stauskas.   Maybe that comment ends up looking stupid... i dunno...  Stauskas is coming off a game with 18 points, 4 rebounds, 3 assists with 6-8 shooting from three.   Rozier is coming off a game with 0 points, 0 rebounds, 1 assist with 0-1 shooting.   At gunpoint, I'm takin Sauce Castillo.  Sue me.

  He's probably referring to something like:

  http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=72982.msg1718477#msg1718477

  "Shame about Wiggins and Bennett... both of them have really bright futures, imo.  I could see them both ending up stars.  Yes, even Bennett. "

Wow. I don't think someone could be more wrong about so many things if they tried.

You referring to my out-of-context comment in which I said the Cavs should have just kept Wiggins and Bennett instead of trading them for Love?   Funny that you choose to highlight this example when not even two years later there seems to be a widespread consensus agreement that the Cavs messed up and should have just kept Wiggins and Bennett.    Once again, I was ahead of the curve.  Thanks for pointing it out.

The Full quote was in reference to Cleveland giving up the young guys:

Shame about Wiggins and Bennett... both of them have really bright futures, imo.  I could see them both ending up stars.  Yes, even Bennett. It would have been a lot more fun watching them grow under LeBron's leadership.

Kyrie/LeBron/Love should dominant the east for the foreseeable future, though.  It would be interesting if Love got injured and Wiggins/Bennett reached their full potential in Minny.  It will be one of those ultimate "what-ifs"

I don't think you and I are on the same page with our concept of "potential".   Two years ago at the time of that post, I had plenty of reason to believe that Bennett had untapped potential.  It would have been very interesting to see what he could have done with LeBron's guidance.  If you want to know my opinion of Bennett a year later, read this thread:  http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=78383.0

I made that longer post in May of 2015... and they more or less still reflect my thoughts on him.  He's likely not going to amount to anything in this league... but I could see the rationalization in gambling for him... as long as the cost was very low.  And the #16 wasn't really worth anything at that point.  Go ahead and read that entire thread and tell me if I ever actually personally said I'd move #16 for Bennett.  I mostly wanted to know if anyone thought it made sense.   I also acknowledged that it wasn't feasible given the salary Bennett was owed and said I  "more just wanted to explore whether people felt Bennett was a better gamble than whatever we're getting with the #16 pick."

[BballTim]

Nik is just playing in his second year, being the 8th pick in last years draft. As of right now he has his ups and downs, as is to be expected of any young player, but the potential is still there to be an effective scorer in this league. Just look at the type of production he had during the clippers game: http://espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?id=400828392
Its clearly evident that Nik has a great future in the NBA, and Kendall at best is a second or third option the arguably worst team in NBA history.

I don't think it's clearly evident that a guy whose calling card is shooting but has career percentages of .359/.311/.796 has any kind of future in the NBA.

Did you intentionally add the "calling card is shooting" bit to shelter you from the rebuttal that Marcus Smart is shooting 34%/22%/70%?

This is kind of pathetic. Stauskas averages 1.2 turnovers and 1.7 assists. His defense has repeatedly been blasted by Brown

http://articles.philly.com/2015-12-16/sports/69065473_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-nerlens-noel
http://articles.philly.com/2015-11-18/sports/68356892_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-raft

He is possibly the worst rotation player in the NBA this season. He is supposed to decent at one thing and he hasn't been able to do that. You use that as a segway to bring in Marcus Smart's shooting percentages? Again, absolutely pathetic.

He is 302nd out of 324 qualified players for PER rating at 7.68

And he's coming off a game with 18 points, 4 rebounds and 3 assists with 6-8 shooting from three.

So it will be interesting to see if he finds a rhythm.

You have to know more about basketball based on how much you post here than you have exhibited in your last couple of posts...

What do you know about basketball? 

Not a question that should ever be asked by someone who wrote an enthusiastic post about the amazing potential of Anthony Bennett.

Mike

I liked Bennett's potential more than what was available at #16.   I'm still not sure Rozier has more potential than Anthony Bennett.  At best, it's a toss-up. 

I'd still probably trade Rozier for Stauskas.   Maybe that comment ends up looking stupid... i dunno...  Stauskas is coming off a game with 18 points, 4 rebounds, 3 assists with 6-8 shooting from three.   Rozier is coming off a game with 0 points, 0 rebounds, 1 assist with 0-1 shooting.   At gunpoint, I'm takin Sauce Castillo.  Sue me.

  He's probably referring to something like:

  http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=72982.msg1718477#msg1718477

  "Shame about Wiggins and Bennett... both of them have really bright futures, imo.  I could see them both ending up stars.  Yes, even Bennett. "

Wow. I don't think someone could be more wrong about so many things if they tried.

You referring to my out-of-context comment in which I said the Cavs should have just kept Wiggins and Bennett instead of trading them for Love?   Funny that you choose to highlight this example when not even two years later there seems to be a widespread consensus agreement that the Cavs messed up and should have just kept Wiggins and Bennett.    Once again, I was ahead of the curve.  Thanks for pointing it out.

The Full quote was in reference to Cleveland giving up the young guys:

Shame about Wiggins and Bennett... both of them have really bright futures, imo.  I could see them both ending up stars.  Yes, even Bennett. It would have been a lot more fun watching them grow under LeBron's leadership.

Kyrie/LeBron/Love should dominant the east for the foreseeable future, though.  It would be interesting if Love got injured and Wiggins/Bennett reached their full potential in Minny.  It will be one of those ultimate "what-ifs"

  Just out of curiosity, are you really familiar with the phrase "out of context"? If so, how does the rest of that post change the meaning of what I quoted? Do you think the bolded "It would have been a lot more fun watching them grow under LeBron's leadership." somehow keeps "I could see them both ending up stars.  Yes, even Bennett." from meaning you could see Bennett ending up a star? If so, why?

[Sixth Man]

Nik is just playing in his second year, being the 8th pick in last years draft. As of right now he has his ups and downs, as is to be expected of any young player, but the potential is still there to be an effective scorer in this league. Just look at the type of production he had during the clippers game: http://espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?id=400828392
Its clearly evident that Nik has a great future in the NBA, and Kendall at best is a second or third option the arguably worst team in NBA history.

I don't think it's clearly evident that a guy whose calling card is shooting but has career percentages of .359/.311/.796 has any kind of future in the NBA.

Did you intentionally add the "calling card is shooting" bit to shelter you from the rebuttal that Marcus Smart is shooting 34%/22%/70%?

This is kind of pathetic. Stauskas averages 1.2 turnovers and 1.7 assists. His defense has repeatedly been blasted by Brown

http://articles.philly.com/2015-12-16/sports/69065473_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-nerlens-noel
http://articles.philly.com/2015-11-18/sports/68356892_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-raft

He is possibly the worst rotation player in the NBA this season. He is supposed to decent at one thing and he hasn't been able to do that. You use that as a segway to bring in Marcus Smart's shooting percentages? Again, absolutely pathetic.

He is 302nd out of 324 qualified players for PER rating at 7.68

And he's coming off a game with 18 points, 4 rebounds and 3 assists with 6-8 shooting from three.

So it will be interesting to see if he finds a rhythm.

He's spent his entire NBA career thus far in a 'rhythm' of Shoot-and-Miss.  Terrible, terrible player.  Folks like me who reside in Sacto area already have seen more than enough of Stauskas.  He is simply terrible! 

[Sixth Man]

Nik is just playing in his second year, being the 8th pick in last years draft. As of right now he has his ups and downs, as is to be expected of any young player, but the potential is still there to be an effective scorer in this league. Just look at the type of production he had during the clippers game: http://espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?id=400828392
Its clearly evident that Nik has a great future in the NBA, and Kendall at best is a second or third option the arguably worst team in NBA history.

I don't think it's clearly evident that a guy whose calling card is shooting but has career percentages of .359/.311/.796 has any kind of future in the NBA.

Did you intentionally add the "calling card is shooting" bit to shelter you from the rebuttal that Marcus Smart is shooting 34%/22%/70%?

This is kind of pathetic. Stauskas averages 1.2 turnovers and 1.7 assists. His defense has repeatedly been blasted by Brown

http://articles.philly.com/2015-12-16/sports/69065473_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-nerlens-noel
http://articles.philly.com/2015-11-18/sports/68356892_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-raft

He is possibly the worst rotation player in the NBA this season. He is supposed to decent at one thing and he hasn't been able to do that. You use that as a segway to bring in Marcus Smart's shooting percentages? Again, absolutely pathetic.

He is 302nd out of 324 qualified players for PER rating at 7.68

And he's coming off a game with 18 points, 4 rebounds and 3 assists with 6-8 shooting from three.

So it will be interesting to see if he finds a rhythm.

You have to know more about basketball based on how much you post here than you have exhibited in your last couple of posts...

What do you know about basketball? 

Not a question that should ever be asked by someone who wrote an enthusiastic post about the amazing potential of Anthony Bennett.

Mike

I liked Bennett's potential more than what was available at #16.   I'm still not sure Rozier has more potential than Anthony Bennett.  At best, it's a toss-up. 

Here's who you actually compared Bennett to...

"I mean, who are we taking at #16?... Frank Kaminsky or something? (12th in Draftexpress's mock draft).   Frank Kaminsky and Anthony Bennett are a month apart in age.  Are you seriously more confident in the ceiling of someone like Kaminsky over Anthony Bennett?"

I'm not a big Kaminsky fan but, yes, I'd have a lot more confidence in the ceiling of the national player of the year in college vs. a guy who has actually played in the NBA and been a complete bust.

And right now, I'd say Rozier also has a higher ceiling than Bennett because multiple teams haven't already looked at him and decided he sucks.

Mike

Agree 100%, Mike.  TP for you...

[Sixth Man]

Nik is just playing in his second year, being the 8th pick in last years draft. As of right now he has his ups and downs, as is to be expected of any young player, but the potential is still there to be an effective scorer in this league. Just look at the type of production he had during the clippers game: http://espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?id=400828392
Its clearly evident that Nik has a great future in the NBA, and Kendall at best is a second or third option the arguably worst team in NBA history.

I don't think it's clearly evident that a guy whose calling card is shooting but has career percentages of .359/.311/.796 has any kind of future in the NBA.

Did you intentionally add the "calling card is shooting" bit to shelter you from the rebuttal that Marcus Smart is shooting 34%/22%/70%?

This is kind of pathetic. Stauskas averages 1.2 turnovers and 1.7 assists. His defense has repeatedly been blasted by Brown

http://articles.philly.com/2015-12-16/sports/69065473_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-nerlens-noel
http://articles.philly.com/2015-11-18/sports/68356892_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-raft

He is possibly the worst rotation player in the NBA this season. He is supposed to decent at one thing and he hasn't been able to do that. You use that as a segway to bring in Marcus Smart's shooting percentages? Again, absolutely pathetic.

He is 302nd out of 324 qualified players for PER rating at 7.68

And he's coming off a game with 18 points, 4 rebounds and 3 assists with 6-8 shooting from three.

So it will be interesting to see if he finds a rhythm.

You have to know more about basketball based on how much you post here than you have exhibited in your last couple of posts...

What do you know about basketball? 

Not a question that should ever be asked by someone who wrote an enthusiastic post about the amazing potential of Anthony Bennett.

Mike

I liked Bennett's potential more than what was available at #16.   I'm still not sure Rozier has more potential than Anthony Bennett.  At best, it's a toss-up. 

I'd still probably trade Rozier for Stauskas.   Maybe that comment ends up looking stupid... i dunno...  Stauskas is coming off a game with 18 points, 4 rebounds, 3 assists with 6-8 shooting from three.   Rozier is coming off a game with 0 points, 0 rebounds, 1 assist with 0-1 shooting.   At gunpoint, I'm takin Sauce Castillo.  Sue me.

  He's probably referring to something like:

  http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=72982.msg1718477#msg1718477

  "Shame about Wiggins and Bennett... both of them have really bright futures, imo.  I could see them both ending up stars.  Yes, even Bennett. "

Wow. I don't think someone could be more wrong about so many things if they tried. Player evaluations and team record predictions are clearly not his forte. To his credit, he continues offering misguided, yet highly confident opinions, despite his track record.

I'm willing to drive him to a casino if you guys can set up a cash game.

[wiley]

Nik is just playing in his second year, being the 8th pick in last years draft. As of right now he has his ups and downs, as is to be expected of any young player, but the potential is still there to be an effective scorer in this league. Just look at the type of production he had during the clippers game: http://espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?id=400828392
Its clearly evident that Nik has a great future in the NBA, and Kendall at best is a second or third option the arguably worst team in NBA history.

I don't think it's clearly evident that a guy whose calling card is shooting but has career percentages of .359/.311/.796 has any kind of future in the NBA.

Did you intentionally add the "calling card is shooting" bit to shelter you from the rebuttal that Marcus Smart is shooting 34%/22%/70%?

This is kind of pathetic. Stauskas averages 1.2 turnovers and 1.7 assists. His defense has repeatedly been blasted by Brown

http://articles.philly.com/2015-12-16/sports/69065473_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-nerlens-noel
http://articles.philly.com/2015-11-18/sports/68356892_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-raft

He is possibly the worst rotation player in the NBA this season. He is supposed to decent at one thing and he hasn't been able to do that. You use that as a segway to bring in Marcus Smart's shooting percentages? Again, absolutely pathetic.

He is 302nd out of 324 qualified players for PER rating at 7.68

And he's coming off a game with 18 points, 4 rebounds and 3 assists with 6-8 shooting from three.

So it will be interesting to see if he finds a rhythm.

You have to know more about basketball based on how much you post here than you have exhibited in your last couple of posts...

What do you know about basketball? 

Not a question that should ever be asked by someone who wrote an enthusiastic post about the amazing potential of Anthony Bennett.

Mike

I liked Bennett's potential more than what was available at #16.   I'm still not sure Rozier has more potential than Anthony Bennett.  At best, it's a toss-up. 

I'd still probably trade Rozier for Stauskas.   Maybe that comment ends up looking stupid... i dunno...  Stauskas is coming off a game with 18 points, 4 rebounds, 3 assists with 6-8 shooting from three.   Rozier is coming off a game with 0 points, 0 rebounds, 1 assist with 0-1 shooting.   At gunpoint, I'm takin Sauce Castillo.  Sue me.

  He's probably referring to something like:

  http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=72982.msg1718477#msg1718477

  "Shame about Wiggins and Bennett... both of them have really bright futures, imo.  I could see them both ending up stars.  Yes, even Bennett. "

Wow. I don't think someone could be more wrong about so many things if they tried. Player evaluations and team record predictions are clearly not his forte. To his credit, he continues offering misguided, yet highly confident opinions, despite his track record.

Perhaps LrdBrd would have been close to correct IF the guard with the best defensive RPM and 10th best overall real plus minus for guards had not gotten injured.  His name is Rondae Hollis-Jefferson.  And to think he was taken at #23 and we could have had him instead of Terry Rozier at #16!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Smitty77

There's a transparent little clique of rabblerousers who LooOoOoooove taking what I say out of context.   Most just have an ax to grind, because I made their stances on guys like Rondo look silly over the past 10 years in countless of other debates and they are looking for something to cling to that makes me look equally as silly.  Trust me, I'll make myself look silly plenty of times without the out-of-context rabblerousing. No need to grasp at straws.  I stand by everything I say on these forums.  I'm not always right, but I'm right far more often than I'm wrong. I shall not be making any apologies for thinkin it was potentially worthwhile to dump the #16 pick for a buy-low candidate like Bennett or Stauskas... certainly not while Rozier is spending all of his time in the children's league, because he's not ready to sniff an NBA court.

OP asked why Philly still plays Stauskas.   I answered.   Kid still has potential.  Gotta give him a shot to see if he can live up to it.  He probably won't, but you still gotta see if he does.  I liked Stauksas potential more than the potential of what was available at #16... I like Stauskas potential more than Rozier's potential.  Is what it is.

One comment and a few questions for you LB.

Comment: There was zero reason to bring up Smart in this thread.  Stop fighting against your imaginary enemy (people who like what Smart brings to a basketball court).

Questions:  What is about Stauskas that encourages you to say: Kid Still has potential, and then not be able to utter the same about Terry Rozier?  I agree with you that Stauskas still has potential.  Why don't you agree with me that Rozier does?  My opinion on the matter is that Rozier has much more longterm potential than Stauskas because he can bring it on defense.  For example, I'll bet he could shut Stauskas down pretty well and I'll bet Stauskas couldn't shut Rozier down.  Of course there's more to it...the guys have to play in a system and to me the jury's out on who does that better...

And lastly, you were very high on Ben MacLemore during a time when you were calling AB "our trash". It's pretty clear that AB is and never was trash.  He was young and inexperienced and had a lot of injuries.  But AB aside, who would you take today, MacLemore or Stauskas? 

[Moranis]

The problem you run into with the team being terrible argument for Stauskas is that Hollis Thompson has been on the Sixers for 3seasons and has a career 3PT% of 39.6.  Thompson, like Stauskas, doesn't do much aside from shoot, yet Thompson is actually a good outside shooter. 

[LarBrd33]

Nik is just playing in his second year, being the 8th pick in last years draft. As of right now he has his ups and downs, as is to be expected of any young player, but the potential is still there to be an effective scorer in this league. Just look at the type of production he had during the clippers game: http://espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?id=400828392
Its clearly evident that Nik has a great future in the NBA, and Kendall at best is a second or third option the arguably worst team in NBA history.

I don't think it's clearly evident that a guy whose calling card is shooting but has career percentages of .359/.311/.796 has any kind of future in the NBA.

Did you intentionally add the "calling card is shooting" bit to shelter you from the rebuttal that Marcus Smart is shooting 34%/22%/70%?

This is kind of pathetic. Stauskas averages 1.2 turnovers and 1.7 assists. His defense has repeatedly been blasted by Brown

http://articles.philly.com/2015-12-16/sports/69065473_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-nerlens-noel
http://articles.philly.com/2015-11-18/sports/68356892_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-raft

He is possibly the worst rotation player in the NBA this season. He is supposed to decent at one thing and he hasn't been able to do that. You use that as a segway to bring in Marcus Smart's shooting percentages? Again, absolutely pathetic.

He is 302nd out of 324 qualified players for PER rating at 7.68

And he's coming off a game with 18 points, 4 rebounds and 3 assists with 6-8 shooting from three.

So it will be interesting to see if he finds a rhythm.

You have to know more about basketball based on how much you post here than you have exhibited in your last couple of posts...

What do you know about basketball? 

Not a question that should ever be asked by someone who wrote an enthusiastic post about the amazing potential of Anthony Bennett.

Mike

I liked Bennett's potential more than what was available at #16.   I'm still not sure Rozier has more potential than Anthony Bennett.  At best, it's a toss-up. 

I'd still probably trade Rozier for Stauskas.   Maybe that comment ends up looking stupid... i dunno...  Stauskas is coming off a game with 18 points, 4 rebounds, 3 assists with 6-8 shooting from three.   Rozier is coming off a game with 0 points, 0 rebounds, 1 assist with 0-1 shooting.   At gunpoint, I'm takin Sauce Castillo.  Sue me.

  He's probably referring to something like:

  http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=72982.msg1718477#msg1718477

  "Shame about Wiggins and Bennett... both of them have really bright futures, imo.  I could see them both ending up stars.  Yes, even Bennett. "

Wow. I don't think someone could be more wrong about so many things if they tried.

You referring to my out-of-context comment in which I said the Cavs should have just kept Wiggins and Bennett instead of trading them for Love?   Funny that you choose to highlight this example when not even two years later there seems to be a widespread consensus agreement that the Cavs messed up and should have just kept Wiggins and Bennett.    Once again, I was ahead of the curve.  Thanks for pointing it out.

The Full quote was in reference to Cleveland giving up the young guys:

Shame about Wiggins and Bennett... both of them have really bright futures, imo.  I could see them both ending up stars.  Yes, even Bennett. It would have been a lot more fun watching them grow under LeBron's leadership.

Kyrie/LeBron/Love should dominant the east for the foreseeable future, though.  It would be interesting if Love got injured and Wiggins/Bennett reached their full potential in Minny.  It will be one of those ultimate "what-ifs"

  Just out of curiosity, are you really familiar with the phrase "out of context"? If so, how does the rest of that post change the meaning of what I quoted? Do you think the bolded "It would have been a lot more fun watching them grow under LeBron's leadership." somehow keeps "I could see them both ending up stars.  Yes, even Bennett." from meaning you could see Bennett ending up a star? If so, why?

One will never know what kind of future Bennett would have had with LeBron's mentorship.  Real shame.   

[LarBrd33]

Nik is just playing in his second year, being the 8th pick in last years draft. As of right now he has his ups and downs, as is to be expected of any young player, but the potential is still there to be an effective scorer in this league. Just look at the type of production he had during the clippers game: http://espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?id=400828392
Its clearly evident that Nik has a great future in the NBA, and Kendall at best is a second or third option the arguably worst team in NBA history.

I don't think it's clearly evident that a guy whose calling card is shooting but has career percentages of .359/.311/.796 has any kind of future in the NBA.

Did you intentionally add the "calling card is shooting" bit to shelter you from the rebuttal that Marcus Smart is shooting 34%/22%/70%?

This is kind of pathetic. Stauskas averages 1.2 turnovers and 1.7 assists. His defense has repeatedly been blasted by Brown

http://articles.philly.com/2015-12-16/sports/69065473_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-nerlens-noel
http://articles.philly.com/2015-11-18/sports/68356892_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-raft

He is possibly the worst rotation player in the NBA this season. He is supposed to decent at one thing and he hasn't been able to do that. You use that as a segway to bring in Marcus Smart's shooting percentages? Again, absolutely pathetic.

He is 302nd out of 324 qualified players for PER rating at 7.68

And he's coming off a game with 18 points, 4 rebounds and 3 assists with 6-8 shooting from three.

So it will be interesting to see if he finds a rhythm.

You have to know more about basketball based on how much you post here than you have exhibited in your last couple of posts...

What do you know about basketball? 

Not a question that should ever be asked by someone who wrote an enthusiastic post about the amazing potential of Anthony Bennett.

Mike

I liked Bennett's potential more than what was available at #16.   I'm still not sure Rozier has more potential than Anthony Bennett.  At best, it's a toss-up. 

I'd still probably trade Rozier for Stauskas.   Maybe that comment ends up looking stupid... i dunno...  Stauskas is coming off a game with 18 points, 4 rebounds, 3 assists with 6-8 shooting from three.   Rozier is coming off a game with 0 points, 0 rebounds, 1 assist with 0-1 shooting.   At gunpoint, I'm takin Sauce Castillo.  Sue me.

  He's probably referring to something like:

  http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=72982.msg1718477#msg1718477

  "Shame about Wiggins and Bennett... both of them have really bright futures, imo.  I could see them both ending up stars.  Yes, even Bennett. "

Wow. I don't think someone could be more wrong about so many things if they tried. Player evaluations and team record predictions are clearly not his forte. To his credit, he continues offering misguided, yet highly confident opinions, despite his track record.

Perhaps LrdBrd would have been close to correct IF the guard with the best defensive RPM and 10th best overall real plus minus for guards had not gotten injured.  His name is Rondae Hollis-Jefferson.  And to think he was taken at #23 and we could have had him instead of Terry Rozier at #16!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Smitty77

There's a transparent little clique of rabblerousers who LooOoOoooove taking what I say out of context.   Most just have an ax to grind, because I made their stances on guys like Rondo look silly over the past 10 years in countless of other debates and they are looking for something to cling to that makes me look equally as silly.  Trust me, I'll make myself look silly plenty of times without the out-of-context rabblerousing. No need to grasp at straws.  I stand by everything I say on these forums.  I'm not always right, but I'm right far more often than I'm wrong. I shall not be making any apologies for thinkin it was potentially worthwhile to dump the #16 pick for a buy-low candidate like Bennett or Stauskas... certainly not while Rozier is spending all of his time in the children's league, because he's not ready to sniff an NBA court.

OP asked why Philly still plays Stauskas.   I answered.   Kid still has potential.  Gotta give him a shot to see if he can live up to it.  He probably won't, but you still gotta see if he does.  I liked Stauksas potential more than the potential of what was available at #16... I like Stauskas potential more than Rozier's potential.  Is what it is.

One comment and a few questions for you LB.

Comment: There was zero reason to bring up Smart in this thread.  Stop fighting against your imaginary enemy (people who like what Smart brings to a basketball court).

Questions:  What is about Stauskas that encourages you to say: Kid Still has potential, and then not be able to utter the same about Terry Rozier?  I agree with you that Stauskas still has potential.  Why don't you agree with me that Rozier does?  My opinion on the matter is that Rozier has much more longterm potential than Stauskas because he can bring it on defense.  For example, I'll bet he could shut Stauskas down pretty well and I'll bet Stauskas couldn't shut Rozier down.  Of course there's more to it...the guys have to play in a system and to me the jury's out on who does that better...

And lastly, you were very high on Ben MacLemore during a time when you were calling AB "our trash". It's pretty clear that AB is and never was trash.  He was young and inexperienced and had a lot of injuries.  But AB aside, who would you take today, MacLemore or Stauskas?

First a comment on your comment.   Bringing up Smart's dismal offensive performance is less about dumping on him as a player (I'm a fan... he's still our most valuable trade asset) and more about pointing out the hypocrisy of Celtic fans claiming guys like Nik Stauskas will never be better than they currently are.   The point whooshes over most heads, because it's a combative bunch of fans who get their feathers ruffled anytime anyone says anything realistic about whoever happens to be wearing a Celtic jersey this year.  OP said he didn't understand why Stauskas was still playing minutes.   It's because Stauskas still conceivably will improve... just like Smart conceivably will improve. 

Did I call Avery Bradley trash?  I've never been big on AB, but I don't recall calling him trash.   He's been impressive this year, though... put up some really impressive numbers and has developed into a really solid two-way guy.  There was a stretch this year where he played like a borderline all-star.

I'd take McLemore over Stauskas.  McLemore is shooting really well this year.  I liked McLemore way more than Stauskas last year as well even in the face of the majority of this board claiming Stauskas was going to be vastly superior.  I didn't buy it.   I had Stauskas 10th on my draft board.  I was never a big fan.   But the kid obviously had some potential.  He still obviously has some potential.  I like his potential more than Rozier's potential.