Kanter is ripped

[Deleted member 848]

Personally, Im looking forward to yet another season of seeing your predictions backfiring completely. Us Jazz fans should try and come up with a way to get you to dislike most of our players, since the reverse of what you predict seems to always occur.

But seriously, when are you gonna follow your husband on over to the Pups forum?

 

[MVP]

A The rest of us completely understand that this is what you meant with your above posts, as well as understanding how utterly full-of-**** your ball-analytical skills are, if you think??? that Gordon at 9th overall was a terrible pick.

You doing it again kid. None of my quotes you pulled had me saying that Hayward at 9th was terrible pick. Plus that was before last season, so you should use past not present tense English guru.

 

[Deleted member 848]

You doing it again kid. None of my quotes you pulled had me saying that Hayward at 9th was terrible pick. Plus that was before last season, so you should use past not present tense English guru.

When you say that a GM has never made a good lottery pick, and you do not exclaim that Gordon Hayward is an exception, then by default you say that Gordon Hayward was not a good lottery pick. Tell me, does it hurt being out-logic'd by an 18 year old on a monthly basis? It must.

 

[MVP]

My derivation from this statement comes from the fact that you YOURSELF stated that Gordon Hayward was a terrible pick at 9th overall..

So you pulling stuff from your *** based on stuff you pulled from your ***. Nice. Double fail.
See my quotes again. Where did I say that he was terrible pick??? Do you need glasses?

 

[Deleted member 848]

So you pulling stuff from your *** based on stuff you pulled from your ***. Nice. Double fail.
See my quotes again. Where did I say that he was terrible pick??? Do you need glasses?

Use those wonderfully-functioning eyes of yours, and reply to my most recent post. In proper-English this time, for the love of Gordon

 

[MVP]

When you say that a GM has never made a good lottery pick, and you do not exclaim that Gordon Hayward is an exception, then by default you say that Gordon Hayward was not a good lottery pick..

Thanks again for proving me right... it is not even funny, you fail so bad it is ridiculous. By default not a good pick? where is word terrible??? right... I never said it - you pulled it out of you *** again!

 

[Deleted member 848]

thanks again for proving me right... It is not even funny, you fail so bad it is ridiculous. By default not a good pick? Where is word terrible??? Right... I never said it - you pulled it out of you *** again!

lol

yep, o'connor is genius at trading and drafting in second round but it is mystery why he is so horrible when it comes to drafting in first round ( especially in lottery)

You're right, I guess horrible is a much nicer word than terrible eh?

 

[Deleted member 848]

PS, for readers who are interested in what condo we are talking about


https://jazzfanz.com/showthread.php?7467-What-if-we-would-have-not-made-the-D-Will-trade/

 

[MVP]

lol
You're right, I guess horrible is a much nicer word than terrible eh?

Seriously? kid, I was talking about O'Connors drafting in first round. Not about Hayward being terrible pick. See the difference? Do not make wrong conclusions and start embarrassing yourself. You failed again.

 

[Deleted member 848]

lol







You're right, I guess horrible is a much nicer word than terrible eh?

Man, you're gonna have the taste of DalaBalls in your mouth for weeks after this thread dies out

Seriously? kid, I was talking about O'Connors drafting in first round. Not about Hayward being terrible pick. See the difference? Do not make wrong conclusions and start embarrassing yourself. You failed again.

- You said he has been HORRIBLE in the first round, ESPECIALLY in the lottery. WHEN YOU SAY THIS, it applies to EVERY SINGLE PLAYER he has ever drafted.


THUS, you are BY DEFAULT concluding that Hayward was a horrible pick, especially seeing as he was picked in the lottery. How can I make this any more clear to you? You made ZERO EXCEPTION to saying that Hayward perhaps went against this reputation of KOC that you had concluded

 

[MVP]

When you say that a GM has never made a good lottery pick, and you do not exclaim that Gordon Hayward is an exception, then by default you say that Gordon Hayward was not a good lottery pick. Tell me, does it hurt being out-logic'd by an 18 year old on a monthly basis? It must.

Read my quote one more time!
AK was drafted by Layden not O'Connor. Dwill over C.Paul to me was and is bad mistake. Hayward has shown nothing yet to say he was worth 9th pick.

I said numerous times before last season that jury is still out on Hayward and that IMHO there were better players available, based on rookie player stats. Stop pulling **** out of your ***, it starts to stink here.

 

[Deleted member 848]

Read my quote one more time!
AK was drafted by Layden not O'Connor. Dwill over C.Paul to me was and is bad mistake. Hayward has shown nothing yet to say he was worth 9th pick.

I said numerous times before last season that jury is still out on Hayward and that IMHO there were better players available, based on rookie player stats. Stop pulling **** out of your ***, it starts to stink here.

Wait.....what???

that IMHO there were better players available,

Lemme get this straight

that IMHO there were better players available,

So there were better players available at the 9th pick, that you decided based on rookie stats.



My original post in this thread:

Classic AKMVP. Remember when he was trying to convince everyone that Hayward shouldn't have even gone top 15?? Saying that Players like PPatt would've been better selections at #9?

Keep making assumptions after a player plays for a single season, it seems to be going super well for ya.

You just confirmed my initial post in this thread. Good discussion AKMVP, but it looks like you lose again.

 

[MVP]

- You said he has been HORRIBLE in the first round, ESPECIALLY in the lottery. WHEN YOU SAY THIS, it applies to EVERY SINGLE PLAYER he has ever drafted.

THUS, you are BY DEFAULT concluding that Hayward was a horrible pick, especially seeing as he was picked in the lottery. How can I make this any more clear to you? You made ZERO EXCEPTION to saying that Hayward perhaps went against this reputation of KOC that you had concluded

You doing it again and again. Who cares what you think is by default or what you want to see to make yourself feel better. You would lose any argument in courts as judges would not care about your default conclusions. I said jury is still out on Hayward - thus by default ( lol ) excluding him from failed picks by O'Connor so far. In 3-4 years I may state very confidently that it was failure but last year, before last season I said JURY IS STILL OUT!!!

This is what was said

And I am not saying he is a bust, I said jury is still out on Hayward as his first season was not impressive at all and there were numerous rookies drafted after him who had better stats. Argue all you want about it but it is simple fact.

 

[MVP]

You just confirmed my initial post in this thread. Good discussion AKMVP, but it looks like you lose again.

Lol, I never lose to you kid. You do not have enough basketball experience or knowledge. Again why did you pulled PPatt as example? Did I ever said we should have drafted him??? hm... let me look back..sure.. I never said that. I said he had better rookie stats. I talked about drafting Ed Davis but never about PPatt. So you got busted again. I told you to stop pulling stuff out of your (you know )...you will develop hemorrhoids lol.

 

[Stifle Tower]

Game. Set. Match. Dalamon!

Even if you argue CP3>Deron, Deron was not a HORRIBLE pick. In that draft, Marvin Williams at #2 was a disappointing pick. Villanueva and Diogu were bad picks. Korolev and Vazquez were HORRIBLE picks. Portland trading out of #3 and taking Webster was one of the WORST picks in NBA history.

Hayward at #9 was not a horrible pick, even if you say the "jury's still out." For his career, he's shooting a very respectable 47%/39%. OK, Paul George, at this point, MAY have the edge. He had a better sophomore season, but combine the two years and his shooting averages are lower than Gordon's. The rest of the lottery...Aldrich, Henry, Davis, Patterson. You could call those HORRIBLE picks, but really, there wasn't too much below that (Sanders, Babbitt, Seraphin). Only Bledsoe at #18 sticks out. He had a promising rookie season, then couldn't hit a shot last year. I'd even call the Hayward pick GREAT. No one but KOC and honz had him on their radar as a top-10 pick. Looks like there were only 2 decent players available at #9 and KOC got one of them. And the same was true with Deron/CP3. KOC called that one too, pulling a fast one on Portland to move back up after Utah fell to #6 after the lottery. He could have stayed pat and hoped for the 3rd best PG (Felton) or gone big with Villanueva or Frye. Bynum would have been a good pick talent-wise, except for the fact he took 3 years to develop into a regular WHEN he wasn't hurt. Bynum makes Boozer look like an iron man.

So yes, I agree with you, AKMVP, Jazz have been HORRIBLE at drafting in the lottery. PERHAPS you can say that about Kanter...FOR NOW. He had an underwhelming rookie season. But the Jazz drafted Enes for his potential, just like the Lakers did with Bynum. Let's check back in 2 more years before making a final declaration that Kanter was a terrible choice. And let's also compare him to the bigs taken after him: Vesely, Biyombo, the Morris', Vucevic. None of those guys lit the league on fire. Perhaps Valanciunas does, but until he plays a season, no comparison can be made.

 

[addictionary]

I think 5% is close to where he's at. Regardless, he's in a far better shape than he was last season. I'm really looking forward to seeing whether it pays off!

He was 5.9% at the beginning of his rookie season. I'm sure he's lost some more fat with that shape.

I highly doubt it. So far he is not even top 10 player from last year draft.

This is true, expectations from Kanter were raised by his sole Nike Hoop Summit performance and his Prep School League games which were no competition for him I fear (But they were good example for his outside shooting-mid range in game-pace). He has the desire to be an NBA star. But he needs to set the first things first list and focus on exploding on the court.

This.

He has always been in a good shape, he has it naturally. Maybe he added extra muscle definition which I don't care much about, unless he has also worked out for his lower body and his explosiveness.

And the attitude of his tweets, oh I hated it. He's more immature than I thought he might be. No Enes, you have to prove yourself on the court, I'm not buying a few ripped body photos as proofs of your hardworking, effective summer. We'll see it during the season.

As for the photos, they're taken during the exercises/or right after the exercises while his muscles were pumped up with blood. And the photos are apparently professionally taken. Haven't you noticed the great lighting of them? I've been myself working out for a few months right now and I've seen my abs defined first time in my life just a month or so ago, and now they are almost as good as Enes' abs are on a good light condition, even though I still have 10+% body fat. So it's not a big deal.

Anyway, every new photo of his ripped body just annoys me, nothing more. Oh, and that interjection, "baby", he says after his every sentence, WTF? It's annoying even more than the "I mean" and "Gerçekten" patterns. In Turkish or English, he talks like an adolescent idiot which really what he is. But the problem is, he thinks he's a god or something like that.

I hear you man. He sounds like a wannabe =))) The last sentence is a consequence of anger my bro but I fear it might actually happen!

To sum up, I'm not getting excited over a few overrated photos of him like most of you guys(?) are.

(And all the things I wrote in this post have nothing to do with him ditching the national team or sucking performance of the Turkish NT with already three defeats in a crappy qualifying group.) Or, maybe they have...

Those are dark times indeed, but things will be better when the newbies of our NT grow up. They're really talented and may achieve great things.


Edit: About the adolescent thing, now that I think of it...

https://twitter.com/Enes_Kanter/status/244246376962211840

https://twitter.com/Enes_Kanter/status/244247343283707905

Jesus Christ!

 

[Deleted member 848]

Lol, I never lose to you kid. You do not have enough basketball experience or knowledge. Again why did you pulled PPatt as example? Did I ever said we should have drafted him??? hm... let me look back..sure.. I never said that. I said he had better rookie stats. I talked about drafting Ed Davis but never about PPatt. So you got busted again. I told you to stop pulling stuff out of your (you know )...you will develop hemorrhoids lol.

Lets see.....

IMHO there were better players available, based on rookie player stats.

List of players that you mentioned that had better rookie stats:

Why sudden love for Hayward? What has he done so far? Few good games at the end of the season when nothing mattered?? His rookie season stats are way worse then some other players drafted behind him like Ed Davis, L.Fields or P.Patterson for example...

If you say that you felt that KOC missed out on players who had better rookie stats, and then name PPatt as a player that Gordon was WAY WORSE in comparison to statistically, then.....well. 1 + 1 = 2. Seriously, my hands are tired from delivering this ***-whoopin'

Its obvious that you thought either of these three would have been much better picks at #9; you're only lying to yourself, really.


Also, another thing. You never talked about drafting Ed Davis either, Mr Omniscient memory. I simply picked out one of those three players, and said that Ed would have never gotten playing time (same would apply to PPatt) had he been drafted. If I had chosen to PPatt instead of Ed Davis as my example, I would bet my life that your answer would have been the same. Its so blatantly obvious that you thought these three were much better picks at 9, that I do not know if you realize how silly your blanket scheme of "oh well I never said it explicitly" really is. Im just sticking to these three; you then listen a bunch of others, including (LOL) Jordan Crawford.

 

[Deleted member 848]

Game. Set. Match. Dalamon!

GAY-K, I got some kleenex for ya

Don't be sad, you hung in there valiantly.

 

[BYE]

Those are dark times indeed, but things will be better when the newbies of our NT grow up. They're really talented and may achieve great things.


Edit: About the adolescent thing, now that I think of it...

https://twitter.com/Enes_Kanter/status/244246376962211840

https://twitter.com/Enes_Kanter/status/244247343283707905

Jesus Christ!

Kanter is a 20 year old millionaire, who is single, famous, and virile (or our expression: young, dumb, and full of ***). What the hell is he supposed to be doing? We know he is working on his conditioning and body; he's in LA right now working on his game. Should he post pictures of himself visiting orphans. If he did this, it would be bragging, I guess. He's a young guy and has more or less been exemplary in his conduct, which means taking his training seriously and not breaking the law or doing anything drastic like becoming a pornstar. If Kanter lays off the training, then we will have a problem, but until then let's cut the guy some slack.

 

[MVP]

If you say that you felt that KOC missed out on players who had better rookie stats, and then name PPatt as a player that Gordon was WAY WORSE in comparison to statistically, then.....well. 1 + 1 = 2. Its obvious that you thought either of these three would have been much better picks at #9; you're only lying to yourself, really.
.

You again making conclusions which fits your false accusations completely misinterpreting and misunderstanding what I was saying. How you can tell" it is obvious that you though" - this is you making wrong conclusion, not what I thought. Go back and read all that conversation from last year again, and stop playing Sherlock Holmes - you suck at it.
I gave players who had better stats then Gordon in rookie season. Does not mean by default that all of them would be great fit for the Jazz or should have been drafted instead of Hayward. As I said in the same old thread " jury is still out" on Hayward - which means ( don't try to twist anything else here) he may turn out decent pick after all or may end up nothing special and not worth being drafted at 9.
After rookie season situation looked one way, after two seasons it looks different and after this upcoming season it may look completely different again. True judgement of draft pick comes when it is time for extension or they become free agents - then you know what they are worth for sure and how franchise who drafted player values him. How many first round O'Connor's picks got extended? - D.Williams and...? We will see what happens with Hayward.