Chicago Fanatics Message Board :: View topic

long time guy wrote:

IMU wrote:

I was with you until you said Valentine is a player. Dude is garbage. He and Portis are busts.

Valentine makes shots. It is hard to call a guy drafted 22nd a bust.

MCW is garbage.

why does the fact that he was drafted 22nd matter? People that are drafted in the top spot are busts. You can be a bust from any spot in the draft.

I dont think one can tell yet if Valentine is a bust or a player. He needs more time.

RFDC wrote:

long time guy wrote:

IMU wrote:

I was with you until you said Valentine is a player. Dude is garbage. He and Portis are busts.

Valentine makes shots. It is hard to call a guy drafted 22nd a bust.

MCW is garbage.

I don't think you know the definition of "bust"

define draft bust - Google Search
https://www.google.com/search?ei=5lHgWI ... jl7VOZNUyc

long time guy wrote:

RFDC wrote:

long time guy wrote:

IMU wrote:

I was with you until you said Valentine is a player. Dude is garbage. He and Portis are busts.

Valentine makes shots. It is hard to call a guy drafted 22nd a bust.

I'd say typically top 10.

MCW is garbage.

I don't think you know the definition of "bust"

define draft bust - Google Search
https://www.google.com/search?ei=5lHgWI ... jl7VOZNUyc

I would say that anyone taken in the first round would be in consideration for being a bust.

If not where is the cut off for when a player is a bust or not?

long time guy wrote:

RFDC wrote:

long time guy wrote:

IMU wrote:

I was with you until you said Valentine is a player. Dude is garbage. He and Portis are busts.

Valentine makes shots. It is hard to call a guy drafted 22nd a bust.

MCW is garbage.

I don't think you know the definition of "bust"

define draft bust - Google Search
https://www.google.com/search?ei=5lHgWI ... jl7VOZNUyc

I would say that anyone taken in the first round would be in consideration for being a bust.

If not where is the cut off for when a player is a bust or not?

Wow some of you have low standards from your front office.

If your 22 overall pick is out of the league in 5 years, I consider it a bust.

And we're trying to claim that there is an official definition of an NBA draft bust? Bitch pleeeeeaaaasse.

IMU wrote:

There is a definition. I just provided it

So you are telling me that if Jimmy Butler would have been out of the league in a couple years that Bulls fans would not have considered him as a bust?

That type of thought allows for a shitty organization like the Bulls to not be held accountable.

IMU wrote:

That type of thought allows for a shitty organization like the Bulls to not be held accountable.

No, it's really just common sense. A bust is someone who performs significantly below expectations. That is literally not possible when there are no expectations. You're using a definition for bust that seems to be "someone who is not good".

Don't mind them. They've put a lot on Portis and Valentine, between the two, and now need to cover a few angles so it does not reflect poorly upon them.

IMU wrote:

Don't mind them. They've put a lot on Portis and Valentine, between the two, and now need to cover a few angles so it does not reflect poorly upon them.

It has nothing to do with your expectations, or mine, or the Bulls. It's just how it is. This is where not following the nba closely hurts you in these arguments. Let's look at the guys picked 22nd overall since 2006.

2016 - Malachi Richardson
2015 - Bobby Portis
2014 - Jordan Adams
2013 - Mason Plumlee
2012 - Fab Melo
2011 - Kenneth Faried
2010 - Elliot Williams
2009 - Víctor Claver
2008 - Courtney Lee
2007 - Jared Dudley
2006 - Marcus Williams

So Faried is definitely better than Portis, and probably better than Portis ever will be. Plumlee is slightly better than Portis, but I think Portis will be a better player than him in the future. Courtney Lee had an ok career.

Portis is probably the 3rd or 4th best player drafted in that spot over the last 11 years. You need to recalibrate your idea of what a bust is at that spot. It's fair to call Fab Melo a bust I guess.

IMU wrote:

Don't mind them. They've put a lot on Portis and Valentine, between the two, and now need to cover a few angles so it does not reflect poorly upon them.

I would take Fab Melo right now over Portis.

Paxson's strength has always been finding solid talent in the draft. It's when he's reached that it's blown up in his face.

In hindsight though, I wish he would've "reached" for Russell Westbrook.

FavreFan wrote:

IMU wrote:

Don't mind them. They've put a lot on Portis and Valentine, between the two, and now need to cover a few angles so it does not reflect poorly upon them.

I would take Fab Melo right now over Portis.

Matches Malone wrote:

Paxson's strength has always been finding solid talent in the draft. It's when he's reached that it's blown up in his face.

In hindsight though, I wish he would've "reached" for Russell Westbrook.

I remember reading the mock drafts that year and I was shocked when I saw Westbrook slotted top 5. He was considered to be the 4th best player on that team as I remember. Didn't have much of a game and was considered more defender than anything. Rose destroyed him in the tournament also.

NBA guys had him scouted correctly.

long time guy wrote:

Matches Malone wrote:

Paxson's strength has always been finding solid talent in the draft. It's when he's reached that it's blown up in his face.

In hindsight though, I wish he would've "reached" for Russell Westbrook.

Yep. Sam PrestI was doing the drafting and he was money in the bank at that time. Even Harden was sort of a reach at 3 but he had him pegged too. No one really saw Harden coming either. Ibaka was a helluva get too.

I remember reading the mock drafts that year and I was shocked when I saw Westbrook slotted top 5. He was considered to be the 4th best player on that team as I remember. Didn't have much of a game and was considered more defender than anything. Rose destroyed him in the tournament also.

NBA guys had him scouted correctly.

Seattle/OKC hit on what, 4 or 5 straight drafts?

Author:	long time guy [ Sat Apr 01, 2017 8:22 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Bulls Bets
RFDC wrote: long time guy wrote: IMU wrote: I was with you until you said Valentine is a player. Dude is garbage. He and Portis are busts. Valentine makes shots. It is hard to call a guy drafted 22nd a bust. MCW is garbage. why does the fact that he was drafted 22nd matter? People that are drafted in the top spot are busts. You can be a bust from any spot in the draft. I dont think one can tell yet if Valentine is a bust or a player. He needs more time. I don't think you know the definition of "bust" define draft bust - Google Search https://www.google.com/search?ei=5lHgWI ... jl7VOZNUyc

Author:	RFDC [ Sat Apr 01, 2017 8:26 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Bulls Bets
long time guy wrote: RFDC wrote: long time guy wrote: IMU wrote: I was with you until you said Valentine is a player. Dude is garbage. He and Portis are busts. Valentine makes shots. It is hard to call a guy drafted 22nd a bust. MCW is garbage. why does the fact that he was drafted 22nd matter? People that are drafted in the top spot are busts. You can be a bust from any spot in the draft. I dont think one can tell yet if Valentine is a bust or a player. He needs more time. I don't think you know the definition of "bust" define draft bust - Google Search https://www.google.com/search?ei=5lHgWI ... jl7VOZNUyc I would say that anyone taken in the first round would be in consideration for being a bust. If not where is the cut off for when a player is a bust or not?

Author:	long time guy [ Sat Apr 01, 2017 8:31 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Bulls Bets
RFDC wrote: long time guy wrote: RFDC wrote: long time guy wrote: IMU wrote: I was with you until you said Valentine is a player. Dude is garbage. He and Portis are busts. Valentine makes shots. It is hard to call a guy drafted 22nd a bust. I'd say typically top 10. MCW is garbage. why does the fact that he was drafted 22nd matter? People that are drafted in the top spot are busts. You can be a bust from any spot in the draft. I dont think one can tell yet if Valentine is a bust or a player. He needs more time. I don't think you know the definition of "bust" define draft bust - Google Search https://www.google.com/search?ei=5lHgWI ... jl7VOZNUyc I would say that anyone taken in the first round would be in consideration for being a bust. If not where is the cut off for when a player is a bust or not? Typically top 10

Author:	Douchebag [ Sat Apr 01, 2017 8:50 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Bulls Bets
RFDC wrote: long time guy wrote: RFDC wrote: long time guy wrote: IMU wrote: I was with you until you said Valentine is a player. Dude is garbage. He and Portis are busts. Valentine makes shots. It is hard to call a guy drafted 22nd a bust. MCW is garbage. why does the fact that he was drafted 22nd matter? People that are drafted in the top spot are busts. You can be a bust from any spot in the draft. I dont think one can tell yet if Valentine is a bust or a player. He needs more time. I don't think you know the definition of "bust" define draft bust - Google Search https://www.google.com/search?ei=5lHgWI ... jl7VOZNUyc I would say that anyone taken in the first round would be in consideration for being a bust. If not where is the cut off for when a player is a bust or not? Lottery.

Author:	IMU [ Sun Apr 02, 2017 11:33 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Bulls Bets
Wow some of you have low standards from your front office. If your 22 overall pick is out of the league in 5 years, I consider it a bust. And we're trying to claim that there is an official definition of an NBA draft bust? Bitch pleeeeeaaaasse.

Chicago Fanatics Message Board http://chicagofanatics.com/

Bulls Bets http://chicagofanatics.com/viewtopic.php?f=34&t=102936	Page 4 of 5

Author:	FavreFan [ Sun Apr 02, 2017 11:55 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Bulls Bets
Valentine will have a 10+ year career.

Author:	long time guy [ Sun Apr 02, 2017 1:22 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Bulls Bets
IMU wrote: Wow some of you have low standards from your front office. If your 22 overall pick is out of the league in 5 years, I consider it a bust. And we're trying to claim that there is an official definition of an NBA draft bust? Bitch pleeeeeaaaasse. There is a definition. I just provided it

Author:	RFDC [ Sun Apr 02, 2017 1:24 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Bulls Bets
long time guy wrote: IMU wrote: Wow some of you have low standards from your front office. If your 22 overall pick is out of the league in 5 years, I consider it a bust. And we're trying to claim that there is an official definition of an NBA draft bust? Bitch pleeeeeaaaasse. There is a definition. I just provided it Who came up with that definition?

Author:	FavreFan [ Sun Apr 02, 2017 1:30 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Bulls Bets
IMU wrote: Wow some of you have low standards from your front office. If your 22 overall pick is out of the league in 5 years, I consider it a bust. And we're trying to claim that there is an official definition of an NBA draft bust? Bitch pleeeeeaaaasse. Valentine was the 14th pick. Ltg is correct tho that a 22nd overall pick isn't really a bust. Those guys are rarely good.

Author:	long time guy [ Sun Apr 02, 2017 1:32 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Bulls Bets
Even better definition and explanation of the term Celtics Life: What really is a "draft bust"? http://www.celticslife.com/2012/06/what ... t.html?m=1

Author:	RFDC [ Sun Apr 02, 2017 1:33 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Bulls Bets
So you are telling me that if Jimmy Butler would have been out of the league in a couple years that Bulls fans would not have considered him as a bust?

Author:	FavreFan [ Sun Apr 02, 2017 1:39 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Bulls Bets
RFDC wrote: So you are telling me that if Jimmy Butler would have been out of the league in a couple years that Bulls fans would not have considered him as a bust? Yes, I believe that is what we are telling you.

Author:	long time guy [ Sun Apr 02, 2017 1:42 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Bulls Bets
There were no expectations on Jimmy Butler coming out of college. Bust term is reserved for guys that have big expectations placed upon them

Author:	IMU [ Sun Apr 02, 2017 1:50 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Bulls Bets
That type of thought allows for a shitty organization like the Bulls to not be held accountable.

Page 4 of 5	All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	FavreFan [ Sun Apr 02, 2017 1:52 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Bulls Bets
IMU wrote: That type of thought allows for a shitty organization like the Bulls to not be held accountable. No, it's really just common sense. A bust is someone who performs significantly below expectations. That is literally not possible when there are no expectations. You're using a definition for bust that seems to be "someone who is not good".

Author:	IMU [ Sun Apr 02, 2017 2:59 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Bulls Bets
FavreFan wrote: IMU wrote: That type of thought allows for a shitty organization like the Bulls to not be held accountable. No, it's really just common sense. A bust is someone who performs significantly below expectations. That is literally not possible when there are no expectations. You're using a definition for bust that seems to be "someone who is not good". I have expectations for all draft picks. Those expectations do scale depending on where someone is picked. If you have no expectations for first round draft picks outside of the lottery, what the fuck are you doing as an organization? And how could you ever support not tanking unless you're a championship contender?

Author:	Curious Hair [ Sun Apr 02, 2017 3:09 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Bulls Bets
What kind of league is this where anyone drafted in the second half of the first round has no expectations for success?

Author:	IMU [ Sun Apr 02, 2017 3:31 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Bulls Bets
Don't mind them. They've put a lot on Portis and Valentine, between the two, and now need to cover a few angles so it does not reflect poorly upon them.

Author:	FavreFan [ Sun Apr 02, 2017 3:51 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Bulls Bets
IMU wrote: Don't mind them. They've put a lot on Portis and Valentine, between the two, and now need to cover a few angles so it does not reflect poorly upon them. It has nothing to do with your expectations, or mine, or the Bulls. It's just how it is. This is where not following the nba closely hurts you in these arguments. Let's look at the guys picked 22nd overall since 2006. 2016 - Malachi Richardson 2015 - Bobby Portis 2014 - Jordan Adams 2013 - Mason Plumlee 2012 - Fab Melo 2011 - Kenneth Faried 2010 - Elliot Williams 2009 - Víctor Claver 2008 - Courtney Lee 2007 - Jared Dudley 2006 - Marcus Williams So Faried is definitely better than Portis, and probably better than Portis ever will be. Plumlee is slightly better than Portis, but I think Portis will be a better player than him in the future. Courtney Lee had an ok career. Portis is probably the 3rd or 4th best player drafted in that spot over the last 11 years. You need to recalibrate your idea of what a bust is at that spot. It's fair to call Fab Melo a bust I guess.

Author:	long time guy [ Sun Apr 02, 2017 4:42 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Bulls Bets
FavreFan wrote: IMU wrote: Don't mind them. They've put a lot on Portis and Valentine, between the two, and now need to cover a few angles so it does not reflect poorly upon them. It has nothing to do with your expectations, or mine, or the Bulls. It's just how it is. This is where not following the nba closely hurts you in these arguments. Let's look at the guys picked 22nd overall since 2006. 2016 - Malachi Richardson 2015 - Bobby Portis 2014 - Jordan Adams 2013 - Mason Plumlee 2012 - Fab Melo 2011 - Kenneth Faried 2010 - Elliot Williams 2009 - Víctor Claver 2008 - Courtney Lee 2007 - Jared Dudley 2006 - Marcus Williams So Faried is definitely better than Portis, and probably better than Portis ever will be. Plumlee is slightly better than Portis, but I think Portis will be a better player than him in the future. Courtney Lee had an ok career. Portis is probably the 3rd or 4th best player drafted in that spot over the last 11 years. You need to recalibrate your idea of what a bust is at that spot. It's fair to call Fab Melo a bust I guess. Agreed. When you draft that low you're fortunate to find a rotation player. I won't bash any GM because he can't seem to find players at that spot. Actually one of the best guys at drafting late was Zeek who most on here believe is one of the worst GMs in history. How is that for irony?

Author:	Douchebag [ Sun Apr 02, 2017 5:52 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Bulls Bets
FavreFan wrote: IMU wrote: Don't mind them. They've put a lot on Portis and Valentine, between the two, and now need to cover a few angles so it does not reflect poorly upon them. It has nothing to do with your expectations, or mine, or the Bulls. It's just how it is. This is where not following the nba closely hurts you in these arguments. Let's look at the guys picked 22nd overall since 2006. 2016 - Malachi Richardson 2015 - Bobby Portis 2014 - Jordan Adams 2013 - Mason Plumlee 2012 - Fab Melo 2011 - Kenneth Faried 2010 - Elliot Williams 2009 - Víctor Claver 2008 - Courtney Lee 2007 - Jared Dudley 2006 - Marcus Williams So Faried is definitely better than Portis, and probably better than Portis ever will be. Plumlee is slightly better than Portis, but I think Portis will be a better player than him in the future. Courtney Lee had an ok career. Portis is probably the 3rd or 4th best player drafted in that spot over the last 11 years. You need to recalibrate your idea of what a bust is at that spot. It's fair to call Fab Melo a bust I guess. I would take Fab Melo right now over Portis.

Author:	Matches Malone [ Sun Apr 02, 2017 5:52 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Bulls Bets
Paxson's strength has always been finding solid talent in the draft. It's when he's reached that it's blown up in his face. In hindsight though, I wish he would've "reached" for Russell Westbrook.

Author:	long time guy [ Sun Apr 02, 2017 5:58 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Bulls Bets
Matches Malone wrote: Paxson's strength has always been finding solid talent in the draft. It's when he's reached that it's blown up in his face. In hindsight though, I wish he would've "reached" for Russell Westbrook. I remember reading the mock drafts that year and I was shocked when I saw Westbrook slotted top 5. He was considered to be the 4th best player on that team as I remember. Didn't have much of a game and was considered more defender than anything. Rose destroyed him in the tournament also. NBA guys had him scouted correctly.

Author:	long time guy [ Sun Apr 02, 2017 6:03 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Bulls Bets
Douchebag wrote: FavreFan wrote: IMU wrote: Don't mind them. They've put a lot on Portis and Valentine, between the two, and now need to cover a few angles so it does not reflect poorly upon them. It has nothing to do with your expectations, or mine, or the Bulls. It's just how it is. This is where not following the nba closely hurts you in these arguments. Let's look at the guys picked 22nd overall since 2006. 2016 - Malachi Richardson 2015 - Bobby Portis 2014 - Jordan Adams 2013 - Mason Plumlee 2012 - Fab Melo 2011 - Kenneth Faried 2010 - Elliot Williams 2009 - Víctor Claver 2008 - Courtney Lee 2007 - Jared Dudley 2006 - Marcus Williams So Faried is definitely better than Portis, and probably better than Portis ever will be. Plumlee is slightly better than Portis, but I think Portis will be a better player than him in the future. Courtney Lee had an ok career. Portis is probably the 3rd or 4th best player drafted in that spot over the last 11 years. You need to recalibrate your idea of what a bust is at that spot. It's fair to call Fab Melo a bust I guess. I would take Fab Melo right now over Portis. And Lance Stephenson

Author:	Matches Malone [ Sun Apr 02, 2017 6:10 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Bulls Bets
long time guy wrote: Matches Malone wrote: Paxson's strength has always been finding solid talent in the draft. It's when he's reached that it's blown up in his face. In hindsight though, I wish he would've "reached" for Russell Westbrook. I remember reading the mock drafts that year and I was shocked when I saw Westbrook slotted top 5. He was considered to be the 4th best player on that team as I remember. Didn't have much of a game and was considered more defender than anything. Rose destroyed him in the tournament also. NBA guys had him scouted correctly. Seattle/OKC hit on what, 4 or 5 straight drafts?

Author:	long time guy [ Sun Apr 02, 2017 6:54 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Bulls Bets
Matches Malone wrote: long time guy wrote: Matches Malone wrote: Paxson's strength has always been finding solid talent in the draft. It's when he's reached that it's blown up in his face. In hindsight though, I wish he would've "reached" for Russell Westbrook. Yep. Sam PrestI was doing the drafting and he was money in the bank at that time. Even Harden was sort of a reach at 3 but he had him pegged too. No one really saw Harden coming either. Ibaka was a helluva get too. I remember reading the mock drafts that year and I was shocked when I saw Westbrook slotted top 5. He was considered to be the 4th best player on that team as I remember. Didn't have much of a game and was considered more defender than anything. Rose destroyed him in the tournament also. NBA guys had him scouted correctly. Seattle/OKC hit on what, 4 or 5 straight drafts? Yep. Sam Presti was doing the drafting and he was money in the bank around that time. Harden was thought to be a reach at 3 but he had him scouted correctly. Ibaka was a helluva pick too. I don't bet against that guy when he locks in on a guy. Adams was a great pick at 12 too.