Mike D'Antoni LOST

Talk about anything general in the NBA here.

Moderators: Mr. Crackerz, JREED, Guybrush, 32

User avatar

All Star
Posts: 1786
» Tue May 20, 2008 10:42 pm
Image

Tough Break D'Antoni! LMAO! Could've had #1 pick and the Bulls roster! Now has Knicks roster with pick #6! LMAO!!!!!!!!
User avatar

Starting Lineup
Posts: 918
» Wed May 21, 2008 4:40 pm
speakonitgod wrote:Image

Tough Break D'Antoni! LMAO! Could've had #1 pick and the Bulls roster! Now has Knicks roster with pick #6! LMAO!!!!!!!!
come on give him a break the number one pick isnt always the best.
User avatar

All Star
Posts: 1335
» Wed May 21, 2008 7:48 pm
oaklandfanatic wrote:
speakonitgod wrote:Image

Tough Break D'Antoni! LMAO! Could've had #1 pick and the Bulls roster! Now has Knicks roster with pick #6! LMAO!!!!!!!!
come on give him a break the number one pick isnt always the best.


Image

dude oakland
User avatar

All Star
Posts: 1099
» Wed May 21, 2008 9:12 pm
oaklandfanatic wrote:
speakonitgod wrote:Image

Tough Break D'Antoni! LMAO! Could've had #1 pick and the Bulls roster! Now has Knicks roster with pick #6! LMAO!!!!!!!!
come on give him a break the number one pick isnt always the best.


i was screaming my head off when this happened cuz im also a knick fan, ugh the bulls r also my least favorite team. Knicks r never gonna be good again :(
User avatar

Starting Lineup
Posts: 918
» Wed May 21, 2008 10:32 pm
webelieve wrote:
oaklandfanatic wrote:
speakonitgod wrote:Image

Tough Break D'Antoni! LMAO! Could've had #1 pick and the Bulls roster! Now has Knicks roster with pick #6! LMAO!!!!!!!!
come on give him a break the number one pick isnt always the best.


Image

dude oakland
having number one pick isnt always the best nice to have but not always the best. take the 2005 draft I would rather monta (2 rounder) then A. bogut he is having a decent career, but take monta any day.
User avatar

Franchise Player
Posts: 9163
» Wed May 21, 2008 11:09 pm
Well when you're projected to get the 3rd pick and have the third best chance at landing the first overall pick, but you end up falling three spots, then you're pretty much a loser of the lottery.
User avatar

Starting Lineup
Posts: 918
» Thu May 22, 2008 12:02 am
xbay wrote:Well when you're projected to get the 3rd pick and have the third best chance at landing the first overall pick, but you end up falling three spots, then you're pretty much a loser of the lottery.
you make a very good point, but you never know this good be the best thing that has ever happened to them
User avatar

Franchise Player
Posts: 7481
» Thu May 22, 2008 2:22 am
oaklandfanatic wrote:
webelieve wrote:
oaklandfanatic wrote:
speakonitgod wrote:Image

Tough Break D'Antoni! LMAO! Could've had #1 pick and the Bulls roster! Now has Knicks roster with pick #6! LMAO!!!!!!!!
come on give him a break the number one pick isnt always the best.


Image

dude oakland
having number one pick isnt always the best nice to have but not always the best. take the 2005 draft I would rather monta (2 rounder) then A. bogut he is having a decent career, but take monta any day.


Yes..............but isnt this for the 2008 draft???.............with Beasley and Rose available at the top 2???.................hmmmm, I think Id prefer a shot at either of them than the 6th pick. :roll:
User avatar

Starting Lineup
Posts: 918
» Thu May 22, 2008 7:59 am
bigstrads wrote:
oaklandfanatic wrote:
webelieve wrote:
oaklandfanatic wrote:
speakonitgod wrote:Image

Tough Break D'Antoni! LMAO! Could've had #1 pick and the Bulls roster! Now has Knicks roster with pick #6! LMAO!!!!!!!!
come on give him a break the number one pick isnt always the best.


Image

dude oakland
having number one pick isnt always the best nice to have but not always the best. take the 2005 draft I would rather monta (2 rounder) then A. bogut he is having a decent career, but take monta any day.


Yes..............but isnt this for the 2008 draft???.............with Beasley and Rose available at the top 2???.................hmmmm, I think Id prefer a shot at either of them than the 6th pick. :roll:
what if those two are bust. then it could of been a blessing. your probably right i would rather want the top pick there could be guy who picks up his game after college and his a flat out monster. rose and beasley are pretty great but it does not translate to having a great career. i would still pick them though.
User avatar

Franchise Player
Posts: 6107
» Thu May 22, 2008 9:57 am
pretty convaluted logic there oakland. Nobody can predict with any great degree of certainly who will be busts or not. That is like saying when we drafted Monte Ellis in the 2nd round that the best spot to be in the draft was pick 40 or wherever we picked him... that is nonsense.

It is ALWAYS best to pick first because then you have COMPLETE control to pick the player you want rather than hoping someone falls to you. There is a greater chance at a bust at pick 6 than pick 1 anyway.

Also, #1 is a valued and desired asset that you could trade away if you wanted.
User avatar

All Star
Posts: 1786
» Thu May 22, 2008 11:30 am
D'Antoni blinks like 7 times in a 2 second span LOL
User avatar

All Star
Posts: 2325
» Thu May 22, 2008 12:22 pm
speakonitgod wrote:D'Antoni blinks like 7 times in a 2 second span LOL


He's trying not to cry.
User avatar

All Star
Posts: 3064
» Thu May 22, 2008 1:00 pm
at #6 you still get the chance to have control over drafting a really good, potentially great player. Oakland has a point in a way. It's not that they should be glad they don't have the 1 or 2 pick, but 6 gives some flexibility. At the same time, if i was slotted at 2 and moved down to 6, i'd be PISSED!
User avatar

Starting Lineup
Posts: 918
» Thu May 22, 2008 3:21 pm
bada wrote:pretty convaluted logic there oakland. Nobody can predict with any great degree of certainly who will be busts or not. That is like saying when we drafted Monte Ellis in the 2nd round that the best spot to be in the draft was pick 40 or wherever we picked him... that is nonsense.

It is ALWAYS best to pick first because then you have COMPLETE control to pick the player you want rather than hoping someone falls to you. There is a greater chance at a bust at pick 6 than pick 1 anyway.

Also, #1 is a valued and desired asset that you could trade away if you wanted.
I still would picl beasley or rose but I'm defending mike cause i like him. number 6 is not to bad so.

All Star
Posts: 1218
» Sat May 24, 2008 1:06 pm
Ever since Todd Fuller I make it a point to not worry about draft position. Now I am only interested in draft results.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] and 1 guest