Mudiay's game is nice he seems like a traditional point guard with great vision. I get the feeling you don't have to guard him though and coaches will find ways to make him beat the other guard 1 on 1
Let's talk about Emmanuel "Heart of the Congo" Mudiay
- Thread starter knickscrusaderm
- Start date
It's clear your basketball I.Q. is limited as you're just spouting general nonsense with no facts to back up your comments. In Tim Duncan's case, "decline" has nothing to do with age! Duncan's skill set is still premiere & his lower stat numbers now are only based on Pop limiting his minutes throughout the season.
Marbury's numbers were always consistent until towards the last couple of years in New York when he was basically relegated to a backup. Plus you keep trying to overlook the personal issues he was having outside of the game along with the NBA politics which was the real cause of his "falloff" not his talent or skills.
You went from TOP nba talent and TOP tier PG to a back-up in the "right system". Unless you have a very wide understanding of top tier/talent, this is backtracking. You don't even think he'd be a starter or compete with the top PGs. The best he can do is be a veteran PG with very limited playing time on a mediocre team, if even. That's very far from top tier breh. Either give me a hard & clear definition of top talent or we're just arguing semantics and abstract bullshyt, breh
The only bullshyt is you repeating the same rhetoric over & over. I plainly emphasized that Marbury's PG skills & knowledge of the game are still top tier, however based on his age, injury history & declining athleticism, this would obviously relegate him to backup status. Marbury could compete with the best PG's in the NBA with limited minutes, not as a starter. If you can't seem to comprehend this, it's not my problem.
It's only unimportant now because you emphatically stated that Gary Neal wasn't a PG, to which you were wrong, AGAIN! Neal is a combo guard and plays both SG & PG. Trying to overlook these facts because you choose to, doesn't make it true. Here are the previous links which you obviously chose to ignore because it disproves your original argument.
http://www.cbssports.com/nba/players/playerpage/1758396/gary-neal
http://www.bucksketball.com/2013/11...neal-at-point-guard-bucks-vs-celtics-preview/
http://www.poundingtherock.com/2012/3/1/2835941/gary-neal-back-up-point-guard
You're really not this dense are you? If Mudiay had a lackluster season in China, this could have dropped his draft stock down even further, even possibly from top ten status, as nothing is really "surefire" when GM's & organizations are evaluating talent & spending millions of dollars to enhance their teams. With no college season to base his play on & if Mudiay had a bad overall performance in China, it could have really fukked up his draft projection & potential earnings so his playing time in China was definitely important from a NBA standpoint.
It's clear your basketball I.Q. is limited as you're just spouting general nonsense with no facts to back up your comments. In Tim Duncan's case, "decline" has nothing to do with age! Duncan's skill set is still premiere & his lower stat numbers now are only based on Pop limiting his minutes throughout the season.
Can Duncan play 35-40 mins day-in, day-out like he used to in his prime? There's a reason Pop has been limiting his minutes season after season breh.
Nah, he began to fall off by 2007 breh. He's always had issues but by that time, the Knicks nor any other organization was willing to put up with it because he was clearly not the player he was during the early-mid 2000s.
All this "PG skills & knowledge of the game" get thrown out of the window if he cannot compete or be productive, breh. You don't even believe he'd start of be productive, so all of this is some abstract shyt.
at the bolded, son. There's delusion, and then... there is this.. 
The best PGs right now are better than Marbury in a lot of ways, but you think a 38yo, 6 years removed from the league, Marbury could compete with them?
I'd take current Westbrook, Curry or Paul over any version of Marbury, let alone a 2015 Marbury?
Lillard, Irving, Teague, Wall, Dragic..etc would all give Marbury that work breh. They've got a lot of skills with the advantage of being in prime physical condition, unlike Starbury.
And what do you mean with limited minutes. What team is willing to give him 15-20 mins a game?
The only reasons I think this isn't important because it's irrelevant to the conversation we're having. When I see Neal, I don't think of a PG. Situations might have made him play at the 1 briefly but he's mostly an SG. It's not rare to see players out of position: Nowitzki had to play C at moments for the Mavs, LBJ played different positions, Wade played at the 1, Kobe played sometimes at the 3 & 1..etc. And even then, I'd take Neal over Marbury since I know what I'll be getting: solid shooting and scoring off the bench. While Marbury probably won't give me much.
Yes, but he didn't. Scouts were enamored with Mudiay's potential and qualities and know that, at 18yo, and playing in a vey different environment than he used to, GMs would still bet on him.
You stated below that Duncan's decline was due to his age, which was incorrect. Resting a player because of the physical demands based on age versus not having the or losing the required skill set to play the game effectively based on age are two totally separate things altogether.And at the end of day his drop off in production still had nothing to do with Marbury losing his overall skills. NBA politics along with playing a backup role and limited minutes derailed his stats from previous seasons.
This is truly a stupid comment. You don't have to be a starter to be an effective, productive PG for a team.No, actually the Gary Neal discussion is relevant because you made a comment specifically mentioning that he didn't play PG which was clearly erroneous. All this other garbage you wrote here trying to present an alternative position is just a bunch of rubbish and doesn't change that you were wrong in your previous assessment.
When you have millions of dollars of extra potential income on the line, that's not something worth risking . Being drafted is one thing, while being drafted as high as possible is another. Again, there are no guarantees in the NBA and it would have been stupid for Mudiay not to take the his stint in China serious just because he was "supposed" to be drafted in the top ten because which wasn't a guarantee. In fact, it is rumored that the reason behind Russell being chosen over Mudiay by the Lakers is because he had a shytty workout with them & couldn't shoot so if you think that scouts weren't taking his overall performance in China into consideration, you're a damn fool.
Breh...
Duncan clearly has declined from his prime. Physical fitness is a very big part in this game and TD can simply no longer play 35m every game and post 23/12/3 statlines. He's no longer as dominating as he was (albeit still very effective). If he was, you think Pop would rest him as much as possible?
Breh, Marbury has been a knucklehead since the Minny days. Difference is teams back then knew he could ball at a very high level. When that was no longer the case in the late 2000s, they weren't willing to support that and he found himself out of the league. He only began to see his play limited in 2008 and before that, his level and stock in the league was no longer as good as it was in the early 2000s.
OTE="O.G.B, post: 14290684, member: 7540"]
This is truly a stupid comment. You don't have to be a starter to be an effective, productive PG for a team.[/QUOTE]IDK if you're being stupid on purpose breh. You said Marbury would be a top tier PG and compete with the best
So if he doesn't have the productivity of a top tier PG, why would anyone consider him as such?
Breh... I said Neal is a SG (which he is) and he may have played PG out of necessity. Nobody really considers him as a PG and his quality has always been his shooting rather than his playmaking or other PG duties. Hakeem spent time at the 4 (with Sampson) but he's considered a 5, Wade spent some time as a PG but people think of him as a 2..etc
Neal offers the qualities you want from your SG and doesn't offer much as a PG at all.
When you have millions of dollars of extra potential income on the line, that's not something worth risking . Being drafted is one thing, while being drafted as high as possible is another. Again, there are no guarantees in the NBA and it would have been stupid for Mudiay not to take the his stint in China serious just because he was "supposed" to be drafted in the top ten because which wasn't a guarantee. In fact, it is rumored that the reason behind Russell being chosen over Mudiay by the Lakers is because he had a shytty workout with them & couldn't shoot so if you think that scouts weren't taking his overall performance in China into consideration, you're a damn fool.
Mudiay was a 18yo playing pro in a very distant environment and he did well enough to go 7th in the draft. Unless he got into a freak incident (such as a serious injury), you know he was going into the lottery/top 10 and he did just that. Everyone knows he's a raw player with huge potential and unless he played like crap there (which he didn't), he'd still have a stock in the league.
what were the Lakers thinking
what everyone else was.
funny thing is i got laughed at when i said before the draft i'd take mudiay over russell.
Of course "physical fitness" plays a very big part in basketball but so do overall skills. And Popovich doesn't need to have Duncan play 35 - 40 minutes a game in the regular season anymore because he now realizes from his extensive experience as a coach that the Spurs are comprised in a such a way that they can get through the primary season & make the playoffs and his players are rested for the post season to where he can then utilize Tim Duncan more. It's also the reason that Duncan can play 35 minutes average in the post season this year vs his regular season average of 28.9. It's all about efficiency and priming your best players to be ready for the playoffs where it really counts.
Coming up with usual media drivel on Marbury shows me your aren't a very analytical thinker. Maybe you should read this article below and learn something before quoting the usual misguided negative points of view on Marbury.
"Much has been written about Marbury's feuds with past coaches, and everyone has an opinion. However, this analysis is strictly X?s and O?s. It?s time for some real basketball questions:
1) Why would you start line-ups that minimize or eliminate the exceptional skills of your best player?
2) How can you justify taking the ball out of the hands of your best point guard?
3) How on mother earth does an elite, penetrate-and-dish point guard go his entire career without playing alongside top 3-point shooters? or even just good ones?
Before answering these questions let's first revisit our main Knick characters. No, not current Knick coach Mike D'Antoni. His inexplicable benching of Marbury was simply the culmination of coaching that Larry Brown started and Isiah Thomas perfected. Brown and Thomas were once former all-star point-guards in the ABA and NBA. Instead of coaching Stephon according to his strengths, each coached him to THEIR strengths. The only Knick coach that ever grasped Marbury's exceptional skills was that other former all-star point guard: Lenny Wilkens.
http://basketball.realgm.com/article/209035/The_Incredible_Mismanagement_Of_Stephon_Marbury
You're obviously not the brightest bulb in the lamp as you seem to have a issue with reading comprehension. What the fukk don't you understand? I stated numerous times that Marbury would be a top tier PG based on his skills and basketball acumen but only as a backup and would be able to compete in the NBA from a limited capacity standpoint.
Again, you don't know what the fukk you're talking about. Just because you think Gary Neal should strictly be a SG doesn't make him one. He's a combo guard who plays both positions now. Ignoring this and other facts aren't going to make you correct because you constantly repeat the same things over and over!"The Wizards have had rumored interest in a number of guards in free agency to fill their combo-guard role off the bench, and according to Yahoo! Sports' Adrian Wojnarowski,
have finally landed one in Gary Neal."
http://www.bulletsforever.com/2015/...ree-to-1-year-2-1-million-deal-with-gary-neal
http://www.atthehive.com/2015/2/2/7...alysis-Gary-Neal-Lance-Stephenson-point-guard
Mudiay was also projected to be a top 5 pick by many, so regardless of whether he would have been selected as a top ten lottery pick is irrelevant. Again, the point is that his performance mattered over in China regardless of how good the Chinese pro league is because the ultimate goal for Mudiay or any athlete in his position is to be picked as high as possible.
The reason he doesn't play as much as he used to or have the same dominance is due to a decline cause of age, I don't know how you can argue this. Even then, TD still styaed a stable and productive NBA player. The same cannot be said about Marbury.
But, why didn't other teams take a chance on him? Why did he flop so bad when he went to Boston? The truth is teams really didn't see a top tier PG anymore. Not like he was taking that Knicks team anywhere too.
This is too fukkING stupid breh. How the fukk would he be a " top tier PG based on his skills and basketball acumen". A top tier PG is recognized by his productivity, not by this bullshyt you keep pushing
I guess bench warmers are top tier in 2015 Listen, there's plenty of PGs who I'd take over a 38 yo Marbury and who would be more productive and valuable then him.
"The Wizards have had rumored interest in a number of guards in free agency to fill their combo-guard role off the bench, and according to Yahoo! Sports' Adrian Wojnarowski,
have finally landed one in Gary Neal."
http://www.bulletsforever.com/2015/...ree-to-1-year-2-1-million-deal-with-gary-neal
http://www.atthehive.com/2015/2/2/7...alysis-Gary-Neal-Lance-Stephenson-point-guard
I've already told you this Gary Neal shyt was mostly irrelevant. The only reason I mentionned him was because you posted a list of PGs outside of the top 25 PER. He's mostly a SG who happens to play some stretches at PG (even if he's not someone who's great at PG duties). It's not uncommon for players to play multiple positions due to various reasons, it doesn't negate that Neal is mainly a SG and that's his best position. It's also irrelevant because if he was paired with Marbury (won't happen), there's no need for him to ever play the 1 and he'll focus on his strongest position: the 2-guard.
All I told you is the motivation for Mudiay and Marbury in the CBA is vastly different. The former used it because he couldn't go pro directly and did good enough to be a high pick in the draft, while the other has made it his career for the last 6 years.
Lakerman0834
Veteran
breh i was stanning Mudiay before draft and got personal vendetta against those LG cacs tryin to say kids trash for the past yr while hyping up chokafor. I want DLoading to succeed but Im also down with Mudiay. Russell wont show out until he starts playing with legit NBA talent that understands the game like him instead of these scrubs like brown, nance, burke itll be Gawd, Hibbert and bass catching those passes
I want Mudiay to excel too #africanexcellence
but I saw you throwing shots at d-loading on LG
I got my eye on you breh
don't turn your back on our soldier.
Lakerman0834
Veteran
I troll LG breh love seeing those fakkit mods an 45 yr old asian and indian fans get furiousI want Mudiay to excel too #africanexcellence
but I saw you throwing shots at d-loading on LG
I got my eye on you breh
don't turn your back on our soldier.
Tim Duncan is still one of most dominant players at his position, even with a decrease in his overall minutes so his age has nothing to do with his overall ability. He is simply being preserved for the playoffs & as a precaution for potential injuries that may come up. It's that simple. Just because you have the skills to perform as you previously could at one time in your career doesn't mean you still attempt to do so. Duncan is ranked 12th this season for PPG but he also played the lowest minutes per game than his other higher 11 peers.
It's about being smart and using common sense, 2 traits you simply seem not to have.
Marbury was basically blackballed from the NBA because of his numerous personal issues along with his feud & public dissatisfaction with the Knicks organization & coaches. Anyone that truly has a real understanding of the inner working of the NBA & this particular situation and not just repeating a bunch of nonfactual jargon knows this. Players aren't always banished or prevented from playing in the NBA based on skills alone, there are in some cases where other circumstances are definitely involved which have nothing to do with overall performance on the court.
This is too fukkING stupid breh. How the fukk would he be a " top tier PG based on his skills and basketball acumen". A top tier PG is recognized by his productivity, not by this bullshyt you keep pushing
Listen, there's plenty of PGs who I'd take over a 38 yo Marbury and who would be more productive and valuable then him.
You're about as dumb as a rock. See the bold in red within the definition below. You don't have to be a 40 minute per game PG to be productive. Now let's see you try to deny the definition here and come up with a bunch of other silly arguments in an attempt to twist your way out of being incorrect once again.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/productive
pro·duc·tive
(prə-dŭk′tĭv, prō-)
adj.
1. Producing or capable of producing crops, goods, or services, especially in abundance: a productive stretch of land; a productive employee.
2. Marked by abundant production or achievement: a productive career. See Synonyms at fertile.
3. Yielding favorable or useful results; constructive: a productive suggestion.
4. Economics Of or involved in the creation of goods and services to produce wealth or value.
5. Effective in achieving specified results; originative. Used with of: policies productive of much harm.
6. Medicine
a. Producing mucus or sputum: a productive cough.
b. Forming new tissue: a productive inflammation.
7. Linguistics
a. Of or relating to the linguistic skills of speaking and writing.
b. Of or relating to a linguistic element or rule that can be used to form further examples of a particular feature or pattern. The English past tense suffix -ed is productive since it continues to be added to new verbs to form the past tense.
pro·duc′tive·ly adv.
pro·duc′tive·ness n.
productive
(prəˈdʌktɪv)
adj
1. producing or having the power to produce; fertile
2. yielding favourable or effective results
3. (Economics) economics
a. producing or capable of producing goods and services that have monetary or exchange value: productive assets.
b. of or relating to such production: the productive processes of an industry.
4. (foll by: of) resulting in: productive of good results.
5. (Grammar) denoting an affix or combining form used to produce new words
proˈductively adv proˈductiveness n
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/productive
Sorry, but the Gary Neal shyt is certainly applicable because it shows that your basketball awareness is poor. Neal is a combo guard & has played both positions throughout his career with every team he's been on, including the Spurs. You were wrong, I was right, point blank.
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure this out. But you previously stated Mudiay "had a very limited ambition in China" which would stupidly suggest or imply that he wouldn't play up to his potential or better just because it was the CBA.
So based on your own premise that Mudiay used the CBA to enhance his NBA draft stock, his overall performance and stats mattered, despite lack of NBA type talent in the Chinese league.
Tim Duncan is still one of most dominant players at his position, even with a decrease in his overall minutes so his age has nothing to do with his overall ability. He is simply being preserved for the playoffs & as a precaution for potential injuries that may come up. It's that simple. Just because you have the skills to perform as you previously could at one time in your career doesn't mean you still attempt to do so.
It's about being smart and using common sense, 2 traits you simply seem not to have.
TD is still effective because he's a supremely talented player. But it's obvious that at this point he's far removed from the dominant force he was in his prime. He can no longer play 35-40m night-in, night-out while being arguably the best or one of the best in the league. People tend to decline at advanced ages
Like I said, he's had issues since the Minnesota days (where he thought he should be the star over Garnett). By that point, the Knicks were no longer willing to build around him or tolerate it. He still got chances but wasn't a top tier PG anymore. He still played after leaving the Knicks but his play didn't make any team wanting him.
You're about as dumb as a rock. See the bold in red within the definition below. You don't have to be a 40 minute per game PG to be productive. Now let's see you try to deny the definition here and come up with a bunch of other silly arguments in an attempt to twist your way out of being incorrect once again.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/productive
pro·duc·tive
(prə-dŭk′tĭv, prō-)
adj.
1. Producing or capable of producing crops, goods, or services, especially in abundance: a productive stretch of land; a productive employee.
2. Marked by abundant production or achievement: a productive career. See Synonyms at fertile.
3. Yielding favorable or useful results; constructive: a productive suggestion.
4. Economics Of or involved in the creation of goods and services to produce wealth or value.
5. Effective in achieving specified results; originative. Used with of: policies productive of much harm.
6. Medicine
a. Producing mucus or sputum: a productive cough.
b. Forming new tissue: a productive inflammation.
7. Linguistics
a. Of or relating to the linguistic skills of speaking and writing.
b. Of or relating to a linguistic element or rule that can be used to form further examples of a particular feature or pattern. The English past tense suffix -ed is productive since it continues to be added to new verbs to form the past tense.
pro·duc′tive·ly adv.
pro·duc′tive·ness n.
productive
(prəˈdʌktɪv)
adj
1. producing or having the power to produce; fertile
2. yielding favourable or effective results
3. (Economics) economics
a. producing or capable of producing goods and services that have monetary or exchange value: productive assets.
b. of or relating to such production: the productive processes of an industry.
4. (foll by: of) resulting in: productive of good results.
5. (Grammar) denoting an affix or combining form used to produce new words
proˈductively adv proˈductiveness n
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/productive
So we posting dictionary definitions now?
I said that Marbury simply do not have the production or level to be considered as a top tier PG anymore. Once again, people don't consider bench warmers as being top tier because they don't have the sufficient productivity to be considered like one.
Sorry, but the Gary Neal shyt is certainly applicable because it shows that your basketball awareness is poor. Neal is a combo guard & has played both positions throughout his career with every team he's been on, including the Spurs. You were wrong, I was right, point blank.
I already spoke on this enough
Neal is primarily a SG and that's what he mainly plays. He may play at PG at times, it's not surprising to see players play at different positions. The Suns had Thomas/Dragic or Bledsoe playing together at time when all of them are considered PGs. If paied with a PG like Marbury, he'd obviously play at the 2. This whole shyt is irrelevant to the main point at hand.Mudiay played in the Chinese league because he couldn't go to the NBA directly, which was always his main objective. Unlike Marbury (whose career now is in the CBA), he did just well enough to earn a spot in the NBA.
Futuristic Eskimo
All Star
Marbury stans in 2015