Main Site | Forum | Rules | Downloads | Wiki | Features | Podcast

NLSC Forum

Like real basketball, as well as basketball video games? Talk about the NBA, NCAA, and other professional and amateur basketball leagues here.
Post a reply

Sun Oct 30, 2005 7:35 pm

"History shows that overall, No. 1 draft picks don't necessarily lead teams to playoffs," Stotts said. "As a matter of fact, it's quite the opposite."


weird, that is so blatantly obvious yet i haven't really thought about it until now. good move though by the bucks, i think it'll be more beneficial to bogut having him watch and learn for now. i can see the dude starting by around january.

Sun Oct 30, 2005 7:49 pm

Jae wrote:
You don't know what you're talking about. Bogut does have a better vertical than Okafor, but Emeka is a much, much quicker jumper, which is what counts in the game of basketball. Plus, he had a terrible result on his lateral quickness test, which tells you that he'll have trouble guarding smaller, quicker players - or quicker players of his size.


Ah you're an idiot, lets continue.

Andrew Bogut Lane Agility: 12.06 seconds
Emeka Okafor Lane Agility: 12.32 seconds

So how much trouble does Okafor have guarding smaller, quicker players :roll:

His lack of athleticism (vertically)


Andrew Bogut Vertical Leap: 33 1/2"
Emeka Okafor Veritcal Leap: 34"

Jonathan Givony: Looking at your combine results…on first glance I actually thought you did fine. Your vertical leap is only a half an inch less than Emeka Okafor’s, and your lane agility time is much better.


Congratulations though on being another mindless drone that refuses to actually research and just pulls something random out of their ass based on a generalisation of someone they read in a Bill Simmons article.

One of my points was (which you ignored), that you can't measure athleticism with numbers. If you could do so, Bogut wouldn't be much worse leaper than guys like J.R. Smith and Iguodala. Run&jump athleticism, quickness and power of your jump is what counts on the court. Now, if you had seen Bogut and Okafor play, you can't really deny that Bogut is inferior athleticism-wise. It's not about him being white, he just can't fucking jump or run, god dammit! No matter what the test tell you, he just isn't good at it.

Sun Oct 30, 2005 9:57 pm

It's not about him being white, he just can't fucking jump or run, god dammit! No matter what the test tell you, he just isn't good at it.


Are you fucking retarded :lol: :lol: do you think if he couldn't "fucking jump or run, god dammit!" he would've been taken #1? Moron.

Sun Oct 30, 2005 10:32 pm

HE ISN'T GOOD AT IT. He was taken #1 because of his skills, not because he would be psychicaly impressive. I'm not saying that he's Divac, but you can't say he's as athletic as Okafor is if you had seen them in real game scenarios. Fuck, I quit. Andrew Bogut is an athletic freak who can masturbate and gather pennies from the top of the board at the same time. He will lead Bucks to the title while playing point guard and average quadrouple double for the whole season. He'll get himself into menage a trois with Jessica Alba and Keira Knightley. FUCK YOU, YOU FUCKIN' SWOOPES. He had a better vertical result than Taft and Villaneua who had been labeled as athletic freaks. Do you really believe people call Bogut averagely athletic, because he's white? So you're taking results from the ESPN Insider. Let's look what Ford (BTW, he's a joke, but he can be usefull to some extent):

LOSERS

Andrew Bogut -- He's been trying to dispel the "great white stiff" myth for the past few weeks. This doesn't help. While his vertical leap is actually above average for a guy his size, his lateral quickness and sprinting speed were just awful. That will hurt him defensively.


He's not a stiff. I don't care what Ford says. But he doesn't have that explosivness to be called athletic. Once again: he is a skilled 7 footer. That's why he was #1 pick.

Sun Oct 30, 2005 10:44 pm

I didn't read your first bit because it's random illiterate rubbish, but as far as your second thing... you don't need to be "explosive" to be called athletic :roll: I don't know of many marathon runners that are "explosive", so I'm guessing they're not athletic either.

Sun Oct 30, 2005 10:52 pm

Jae wrote:I didn't read your first bit because it's random illiterate rubbish, but as far as your second thing... you don't need to be "explosive" to be called athletic :roll: I don't know of many marathon runners that are "explosive", so I'm guessing they're not athletic either.

:shock:. I'm betting GMs around the league are kicking themselves for not drafting Evans Rutto when he was still eligible. I mean, he's THE MF of long distance running - ergo, his athleticism is off the charts. I bet he can outquick Iverson, outjump Amare and outpower Shaq. Gut kombiniert, Sherlock.

Seriously, you can't measure basketball athleticism with some random tests. You can train for these tests (just look at Luke Jackson's results) and win them all, if you have enough will and psychical talent, but that doesn't mean that those results will translate onto the court in the way you think they will.
Last edited by Fenix on Sun Oct 30, 2005 10:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Sun Oct 30, 2005 10:54 pm

He will lead Bucks to the title while playing point guard and average quadrouple double for the whole season


Recognize, that's my prediction

Sun Oct 30, 2005 11:00 pm

I'm betting GMs around the league are kicking themselves for not drafting Evans Rutto when he was still eligible. I mean, he's THE MF of long distance running - ergo, his athleticism is off the charts. I bet he can outquick Iverson, outjump Amare and outpower Shaq. Gut kombiniert, Sherlock.

Seriously, you can't measure basketball athleticism with some random tests. You can train for these tests (just look at Luke Jackson's results) and win them all, if you have enough will and psychical talent, but that doesn't mean that those results will translate onto the court in the way you think they will.


It's like arguing with an ignorant, self obsessed brick wall. Go take some measurements or something, for all our sakes.

Mon Oct 31, 2005 8:11 am

but you can't say he's (Bogut) as athletic as Okafor

I'm not that impressed with Okafor's athleticism either. Okafor does have the moves though.
Maybe seeing Bogut play against Bosh might give me an idea of his athleticism.

Mon Oct 31, 2005 9:29 am

Jae wrote:
I'm betting GMs around the league are kicking themselves for not drafting Evans Rutto when he was still eligible. I mean, he's THE MF of long distance running - ergo, his athleticism is off the charts. I bet he can outquick Iverson, outjump Amare and outpower Shaq. Gut kombiniert, Sherlock.

Seriously, you can't measure basketball athleticism with some random tests. You can train for these tests (just look at Luke Jackson's results) and win them all, if you have enough will and psychical talent, but that doesn't mean that those results will translate onto the court in the way you think they will.


It's like arguing with an ignorant, self obsessed brick wall. Go take some measurements or something, for all our sakes.


owned (Y)

Mon Oct 31, 2005 3:49 pm

shadowgrin wrote:
but you can't say he's (Bogut) as athletic as Okafor

I'm not that impressed with Okafor's athleticism either. Okafor does have the moves though.
Maybe seeing Bogut play against Bosh might give me an idea of his athleticism.

dude i don't know about that. go to charlie villanueva's site and download the season highlights

Tue Nov 01, 2005 8:39 pm

j.23 wrote:
"History shows that overall, No. 1 draft picks don't necessarily lead teams to playoffs," Stotts said. "As a matter of fact, it's quite the opposite."


weird, that is so blatantly obvious yet i haven't really thought about it until now. good move though by the bucks, i think it'll be more beneficial to bogut having him watch and learn for now. i can see the dude starting by around january.


obviously it doesnt mean they get a spot in the playoffs...
they didnt get the #1 pick because they were doing well in the season before...

Wed Nov 02, 2005 5:02 am

Bogut is expected to start in the season opener, but that's not exactly good news:

"We probably will start Andrew," Bucks coach Terry Stotts told the Journal-Sentinel on Monday. "There's a possibility of starting Toni [Kukoc]."

Ouch.

Wed Nov 02, 2005 11:43 am

I think Andrew's starting, he's got 6 points/7 rebounds in 20 minutes so far against Philadelphia. Completely outplaying Jamaal Magloire.

Wed Nov 02, 2005 11:46 am

too bad iggy dunked on him :lol:

Wed Nov 02, 2005 11:56 am

Awell, I guess his career is over now.

Wed Nov 02, 2005 12:09 pm

damn , Bogut's on his way to a double double .

Wed Nov 02, 2005 12:17 pm

I think he'll probably finish with 8/8

Wed Nov 02, 2005 12:38 pm

10/9 (Y) He has 4 offensive rebounds.

Wed Nov 02, 2005 12:42 pm

:lol: thanks for the exclusive update (Y)

Wed Nov 02, 2005 12:45 pm

Bucks won it too . TJ had a monster game!!

Wed Nov 02, 2005 12:48 pm

air gordon wrote::lol: thanks for the exclusive update (Y)


Well, it is called Bogut Watch. :?

Finished with 13/9, got fouled on a layup and made the FT to put the game out of reach for Philadelphia :cool:

Edit: Also 3 blocks.

Wed Nov 02, 2005 12:59 pm

that would be decent season stats for him.

Wed Nov 02, 2005 1:03 pm

did he guard Webber because if so, Webber dropped 32, 14 & 5 on 14/28 shooting from the field....

it's good to see TJ back though....he's the biggest difference in this team, he was only 1 board shy of a triple double :shock: Bobby Simmons was good too :P

Wed Nov 02, 2005 1:05 pm

I'd say Magloire would've had Webber, I haven't seen any mention of Bogut guarding him.
Post a reply