KnickDanger wrote:ESOMKnicks wrote:KnickDanger wrote:This is all time machine stuff, which means projecting ahead as well as reconsidering. But looking back, I think it is very unlikely we would have picked Quickley later if we had chosen Hali or another PG at 8. So a question for me would be would you prefer Obi and IQ or Halliburton and...?
This is a very good point. Especially given that IQ is not all that far behind Hali. Almost the same point average at 2/3 of Hali's playing time. Hali a better 3pt shooter right now and assists-man, but then Sancto probably trusts him more with the ball and runs plays for him.
And we can't know what Halliburton's development would be here. He might be getting Obi's minutes -- or less.
We don’t draft Quickley if we take Halliburton at 8. Both are combo guards and Quickley > Halliburton
Philc1 wrote:KnickDanger wrote:ESOMKnicks wrote:KnickDanger wrote:This is all time machine stuff, which means projecting ahead as well as reconsidering. But looking back, I think it is very unlikely we would have picked Quickley later if we had chosen Hali or another PG at 8. So a question for me would be would you prefer Obi and IQ or Halliburton and...?
This is a very good point. Especially given that IQ is not all that far behind Hali. Almost the same point average at 2/3 of Hali's playing time. Hali a better 3pt shooter right now and assists-man, but then Sancto probably trusts him more with the ball and runs plays for him.
And we can't know what Halliburton's development would be here. He might be getting Obi's minutes -- or less.
We don’t draft Quickley if we take Halliburton at 8. Both are combo guards and Quickley > Halliburton
How? Seems like Hali is more than holding his own and doing it better than IQ
martin wrote:Philc1 wrote:KnickDanger wrote:ESOMKnicks wrote:KnickDanger wrote:This is all time machine stuff, which means projecting ahead as well as reconsidering. But looking back, I think it is very unlikely we would have picked Quickley later if we had chosen Hali or another PG at 8. So a question for me would be would you prefer Obi and IQ or Halliburton and...?
This is a very good point. Especially given that IQ is not all that far behind Hali. Almost the same point average at 2/3 of Hali's playing time. Hali a better 3pt shooter right now and assists-man, but then Sancto probably trusts him more with the ball and runs plays for him.
And we can't know what Halliburton's development would be here. He might be getting Obi's minutes -- or less.
We don’t draft Quickley if we take Halliburton at 8. Both are combo guards and Quickley > Halliburton
How? Seems like Hali is more than holding his own and doing it better than IQ
Quickley is averaging almost as much ppg (12.3 for Quick versus 13.1 for Halliburton) despite coming off the bench while Halliburton starts and plays 35-40 minutes per game
Philc1 wrote:martin wrote:Philc1 wrote:KnickDanger wrote:ESOMKnicks wrote:KnickDanger wrote:This is all time machine stuff, which means projecting ahead as well as reconsidering. But looking back, I think it is very unlikely we would have picked Quickley later if we had chosen Hali or another PG at 8. So a question for me would be would you prefer Obi and IQ or Halliburton and...?
This is a very good point. Especially given that IQ is not all that far behind Hali. Almost the same point average at 2/3 of Hali's playing time. Hali a better 3pt shooter right now and assists-man, but then Sancto probably trusts him more with the ball and runs plays for him.
And we can't know what Halliburton's development would be here. He might be getting Obi's minutes -- or less.
We don’t draft Quickley if we take Halliburton at 8. Both are combo guards and Quickley > Halliburton
How? Seems like Hali is more than holding his own and doing it better than IQ
Quickley is averaging almost as much ppg (12.3 for Quick versus 13.1 for Halliburton) despite coming off the bench while Halliburton starts and plays 35-40 minutes per game
Do you want to try again or is just throwing stuff against a wall and hoping it turns out right is good enough?
35-40 minutes per game... I mean at this rate I'm just banging Rebecca every night and we'll just call that a thing
martin wrote:Philc1 wrote:martin wrote:Philc1 wrote:KnickDanger wrote:ESOMKnicks wrote:KnickDanger wrote:This is all time machine stuff, which means projecting ahead as well as reconsidering. But looking back, I think it is very unlikely we would have picked Quickley later if we had chosen Hali or another PG at 8. So a question for me would be would you prefer Obi and IQ or Halliburton and...?
This is a very good point. Especially given that IQ is not all that far behind Hali. Almost the same point average at 2/3 of Hali's playing time. Hali a better 3pt shooter right now and assists-man, but then Sancto probably trusts him more with the ball and runs plays for him.
And we can't know what Halliburton's development would be here. He might be getting Obi's minutes -- or less.
We don’t draft Quickley if we take Halliburton at 8. Both are combo guards and Quickley > Halliburton
How? Seems like Hali is more than holding his own and doing it better than IQ
Quickley is averaging almost as much ppg (12.3 for Quick versus 13.1 for Halliburton) despite coming off the bench while Halliburton starts and plays 35-40 minutes per game
Do you want to try again or is just throwing stuff against a wall and hoping it turns out right is good enough?
35-40 minutes per game... I mean at this rate I'm just banging Rebecca every night and we'll just call that a thing
It seems a good percentage of the threads on this board are "what if?" or regret threads. Unless we are going to ban these threads (I'm okay with that) countering the premise that Obi is a bust and we should have taken Halliburton with we likely wouldn't have then taken IQ seems fair enough. And then to compare the two rookie guards. That's what we do here right?
KnickDanger wrote:martin wrote:Philc1 wrote:martin wrote:Philc1 wrote:KnickDanger wrote:ESOMKnicks wrote:KnickDanger wrote:This is all time machine stuff, which means projecting ahead as well as reconsidering. But looking back, I think it is very unlikely we would have picked Quickley later if we had chosen Hali or another PG at 8. So a question for me would be would you prefer Obi and IQ or Halliburton and...?
This is a very good point. Especially given that IQ is not all that far behind Hali. Almost the same point average at 2/3 of Hali's playing time. Hali a better 3pt shooter right now and assists-man, but then Sancto probably trusts him more with the ball and runs plays for him.
And we can't know what Halliburton's development would be here. He might be getting Obi's minutes -- or less.
We don’t draft Quickley if we take Halliburton at 8. Both are combo guards and Quickley > Halliburton
How? Seems like Hali is more than holding his own and doing it better than IQ
Quickley is averaging almost as much ppg (12.3 for Quick versus 13.1 for Halliburton) despite coming off the bench while Halliburton starts and plays 35-40 minutes per game
Do you want to try again or is just throwing stuff against a wall and hoping it turns out right is good enough?
35-40 minutes per game... I mean at this rate I'm just banging Rebecca every night and we'll just call that a thing
It seems a good percentage of the threads on this board are "what if?" or regret threads. Unless we are going to ban these threads (I'm okay with that) countering the premise that Obi is a bust and we should have taken Halliburton with we likely wouldn't have then taken IQ seems fair enough. And then to compare the two rookie guards. That's what we do here right?
IDK I'm too busy making plans with Rebecca for tomorrow night
martin wrote:KnickDanger wrote:martin wrote:Philc1 wrote:martin wrote:Philc1 wrote:KnickDanger wrote:ESOMKnicks wrote:KnickDanger wrote:This is all time machine stuff, which means projecting ahead as well as reconsidering. But looking back, I think it is very unlikely we would have picked Quickley later if we had chosen Hali or another PG at 8. So a question for me would be would you prefer Obi and IQ or Halliburton and...?
This is a very good point. Especially given that IQ is not all that far behind Hali. Almost the same point average at 2/3 of Hali's playing time. Hali a better 3pt shooter right now and assists-man, but then Sancto probably trusts him more with the ball and runs plays for him.
And we can't know what Halliburton's development would be here. He might be getting Obi's minutes -- or less.
We don’t draft Quickley if we take Halliburton at 8. Both are combo guards and Quickley > Halliburton
How? Seems like Hali is more than holding his own and doing it better than IQ
Quickley is averaging almost as much ppg (12.3 for Quick versus 13.1 for Halliburton) despite coming off the bench while Halliburton starts and plays 35-40 minutes per game
Do you want to try again or is just throwing stuff against a wall and hoping it turns out right is good enough?
35-40 minutes per game... I mean at this rate I'm just banging Rebecca every night and we'll just call that a thing
It seems a good percentage of the threads on this board are "what if?" or regret threads. Unless we are going to ban these threads (I'm okay with that) countering the premise that Obi is a bust and we should have taken Halliburton with we likely wouldn't have then taken IQ seems fair enough. And then to compare the two rookie guards. That's what we do here right?
IDK I'm too busy making plans with Rebecca for tomorrow night
Damn -- I gotta get me a new pretend girlfriend!
KnickDanger wrote:martin wrote:KnickDanger wrote:martin wrote:Philc1 wrote:martin wrote:Philc1 wrote:KnickDanger wrote:ESOMKnicks wrote:KnickDanger wrote:This is all time machine stuff, which means projecting ahead as well as reconsidering. But looking back, I think it is very unlikely we would have picked Quickley later if we had chosen Hali or another PG at 8. So a question for me would be would you prefer Obi and IQ or Halliburton and...?
This is a very good point. Especially given that IQ is not all that far behind Hali. Almost the same point average at 2/3 of Hali's playing time. Hali a better 3pt shooter right now and assists-man, but then Sancto probably trusts him more with the ball and runs plays for him.
And we can't know what Halliburton's development would be here. He might be getting Obi's minutes -- or less.
We don’t draft Quickley if we take Halliburton at 8. Both are combo guards and Quickley > Halliburton
How? Seems like Hali is more than holding his own and doing it better than IQ
Quickley is averaging almost as much ppg (12.3 for Quick versus 13.1 for Halliburton) despite coming off the bench while Halliburton starts and plays 35-40 minutes per game
Do you want to try again or is just throwing stuff against a wall and hoping it turns out right is good enough?
35-40 minutes per game... I mean at this rate I'm just banging Rebecca every night and we'll just call that a thing
It seems a good percentage of the threads on this board are "what if?" or regret threads. Unless we are going to ban these threads (I'm okay with that) countering the premise that Obi is a bust and we should have taken Halliburton with we likely wouldn't have then taken IQ seems fair enough. And then to compare the two rookie guards. That's what we do here right?
IDK I'm too busy making plans with Rebecca for tomorrow night
Damn -- I gotta get me a new pretend girlfriend!
Taylor Rooks is taken! But I'm pretty sure you can score yourself a nice pretend girlfriend offnofbthe NFL network or Telemundo.
KnickDanger wrote:martin wrote:Philc1 wrote:martin wrote:Philc1 wrote:KnickDanger wrote:ESOMKnicks wrote:KnickDanger wrote:This is all time machine stuff, which means projecting ahead as well as reconsidering. But looking back, I think it is very unlikely we would have picked Quickley later if we had chosen Hali or another PG at 8. So a question for me would be would you prefer Obi and IQ or Halliburton and...?
This is a very good point. Especially given that IQ is not all that far behind Hali. Almost the same point average at 2/3 of Hali's playing time. Hali a better 3pt shooter right now and assists-man, but then Sancto probably trusts him more with the ball and runs plays for him.
And we can't know what Halliburton's development would be here. He might be getting Obi's minutes -- or less.
We don’t draft Quickley if we take Halliburton at 8. Both are combo guards and Quickley > Halliburton
How? Seems like Hali is more than holding his own and doing it better than IQ
Quickley is averaging almost as much ppg (12.3 for Quick versus 13.1 for Halliburton) despite coming off the bench while Halliburton starts and plays 35-40 minutes per game
Do you want to try again or is just throwing stuff against a wall and hoping it turns out right is good enough?
35-40 minutes per game... I mean at this rate I'm just banging Rebecca every night and we'll just call that a thing
It seems a good percentage of the threads on this board are "what if?" or regret threads. Unless we are going to ban these threads (I'm okay with that) countering the premise that Obi is a bust and we should have taken Halliburton with we likely wouldn't have then taken IQ seems fair enough. And then to compare the two rookie guards. That's what we do here right?
What if Quickley was averaging almost as many points as Halliburton despite coming off the bench while Halliburton starts?
Oh wait, that’s actually currently happening
Philc1 wrote:KnickDanger wrote:martin wrote:Philc1 wrote:martin wrote:Philc1 wrote:KnickDanger wrote:ESOMKnicks wrote:KnickDanger wrote:This is all time machine stuff, which means projecting ahead as well as reconsidering. But looking back, I think it is very unlikely we would have picked Quickley later if we had chosen Hali or another PG at 8. So a question for me would be would you prefer Obi and IQ or Halliburton and...?
This is a very good point. Especially given that IQ is not all that far behind Hali. Almost the same point average at 2/3 of Hali's playing time. Hali a better 3pt shooter right now and assists-man, but then Sancto probably trusts him more with the ball and runs plays for him.
And we can't know what Halliburton's development would be here. He might be getting Obi's minutes -- or less.
We don’t draft Quickley if we take Halliburton at 8. Both are combo guards and Quickley > Halliburton
How? Seems like Hali is more than holding his own and doing it better than IQ
Quickley is averaging almost as much ppg (12.3 for Quick versus 13.1 for Halliburton) despite coming off the bench while Halliburton starts and plays 35-40 minutes per game
Do you want to try again or is just throwing stuff against a wall and hoping it turns out right is good enough?
35-40 minutes per game... I mean at this rate I'm just banging Rebecca every night and we'll just call that a thing
It seems a good percentage of the threads on this board are "what if?" or regret threads. Unless we are going to ban these threads (I'm okay with that) countering the premise that Obi is a bust and we should have taken Halliburton with we likely wouldn't have then taken IQ seems fair enough. And then to compare the two rookie guards. That's what we do here right?
What if Quickley was averaging almost as many points as Halliburton despite coming off the bench while Halliburton starts?
Oh wait, that’s actually currently happening
I just dont get it. Your comparison of 2 players, one bench one starting, is limited to and defined by Points Scored?
Halliburton is special and an All Star in the future. That was our biggest positional need.
Randle was averaging a double double at 21 years of age after breaking his leg in his rookie season. So it’s not like it took him time to put up stats.
I watch Obi out there and he’s like Frank as a power forward, how can I give the ball up immediately and not look at the rim. Anytime Obi takes it to the rack he makes himself smaller. He misses layups wildly often.
The fact that he’s 23 and can’t come in and make an impact is troubling. RJ is 20! It should not be this hard for Obi to have an impact. He’s needs to be special at something and right now we aren’t seeing it.
Just to put something in context. If you're not producing at 23 years old it's troubling. Below are some of the NBA's best young talent, as ranked by ESPN.
Luka – 22
Zion – 20
LaMelo – 19
Mitchell – 24
Tatum – 23
Fox -23
MPJ - 23
Booker – 24
Bam – 23
SGA – 22
Ingram – 23
Collins – 23
J. Allen -23
If the Knicks could sign Allen and Lonzo in the offseason and flip 4 first round picks, toppin, quickly, mitch for Bradley Beal would you do it?
Not all rooks are the same. some of those guys are in the league 4 years and while you make a good point about age its not absolute that after 50 games. This years rookie crop is really underwealming. Much to do about the covid, the draft two weeks before camp and no summer league/time to train to get ready. some of those guys needed a few years but if your looking at age as the qualifier then its a bad look for Obi when presented as such.
Fox I’m not sure really plays up to his draft position and contract which are all high water marks. Lamelo had a real nice breakout and was obviously more ready than thought. The hornets success this year might have more to do with Haywood as they were winning without Lamelo. Minny lets Edwards shoot and get stats. Halliburton was seen as very NBA ready and given what we know now might have been the better choice. Sac got it wrong so many times it was bound to work out for a change! Luca was a star at age 17 inEurope and a lot of people got him wrong. draft is not easy
One can add many players who did real well by 23 including Amare whose draft position was a joke in hindsight. THere is a long list of guys that did not break out until age 25 also. Obi will tell his own story. Thus far he has been a late bloomer at every level.
martin wrote:Philc1 wrote:KnickDanger wrote:martin wrote:Philc1 wrote:martin wrote:Philc1 wrote:KnickDanger wrote:ESOMKnicks wrote:KnickDanger wrote:This is all time machine stuff, which means projecting ahead as well as reconsidering. But looking back, I think it is very unlikely we would have picked Quickley later if we had chosen Hali or another PG at 8. So a question for me would be would you prefer Obi and IQ or Halliburton and...?
This is a very good point. Especially given that IQ is not all that far behind Hali. Almost the same point average at 2/3 of Hali's playing time. Hali a better 3pt shooter right now and assists-man, but then Sancto probably trusts him more with the ball and runs plays for him.
And we can't know what Halliburton's development would be here. He might be getting Obi's minutes -- or less.
We don’t draft Quickley if we take Halliburton at 8. Both are combo guards and Quickley > Halliburton
How? Seems like Hali is more than holding his own and doing it better than IQ
Quickley is averaging almost as much ppg (12.3 for Quick versus 13.1 for Halliburton) despite coming off the bench while Halliburton starts and plays 35-40 minutes per game
Do you want to try again or is just throwing stuff against a wall and hoping it turns out right is good enough?
35-40 minutes per game... I mean at this rate I'm just banging Rebecca every night and we'll just call that a thing
It seems a good percentage of the threads on this board are "what if?" or regret threads. Unless we are going to ban these threads (I'm okay with that) countering the premise that Obi is a bust and we should have taken Halliburton with we likely wouldn't have then taken IQ seems fair enough. And then to compare the two rookie guards. That's what we do here right?
What if Quickley was averaging almost as many points as Halliburton despite coming off the bench while Halliburton starts?
Oh wait, that’s actually currently happening
I just dont get it. Your comparison of 2 players, one bench one starting, is limited to and defined by Points Scored?
While Haliburton has a better shooting percentage and is higher in assists per - they are fairly close in a number of per 36 / per 100 stats including TS% and scoring. Also, the starting vs. bench is a BS argument when Haliburton has only become a starter over the past 11-12 games and is alongside Fox who garners much of the defensive focus.
Points per 36 - IQ (22.2) / TH (15.5)
Points per 100 possessions - IQ (30.8) / TH (20.7)
Free Throw % - IQ (89.4) / TH (87.5)
TS% : IQ (54.3%) / TH (59.9%)
martin wrote:Philc1 wrote:KnickDanger wrote:martin wrote:Philc1 wrote:martin wrote:Philc1 wrote:KnickDanger wrote:ESOMKnicks wrote:KnickDanger wrote:This is all time machine stuff, which means projecting ahead as well as reconsidering. But looking back, I think it is very unlikely we would have picked Quickley later if we had chosen Hali or another PG at 8. So a question for me would be would you prefer Obi and IQ or Halliburton and...?
This is a very good point. Especially given that IQ is not all that far behind Hali. Almost the same point average at 2/3 of Hali's playing time. Hali a better 3pt shooter right now and assists-man, but then Sancto probably trusts him more with the ball and runs plays for him.
And we can't know what Halliburton's development would be here. He might be getting Obi's minutes -- or less.
We don’t draft Quickley if we take Halliburton at 8. Both are combo guards and Quickley > Halliburton
How? Seems like Hali is more than holding his own and doing it better than IQ
Quickley is averaging almost as much ppg (12.3 for Quick versus 13.1 for Halliburton) despite coming off the bench while Halliburton starts and plays 35-40 minutes per game
Do you want to try again or is just throwing stuff against a wall and hoping it turns out right is good enough?
35-40 minutes per game... I mean at this rate I'm just banging Rebecca every night and we'll just call that a thing
It seems a good percentage of the threads on this board are "what if?" or regret threads. Unless we are going to ban these threads (I'm okay with that) countering the premise that Obi is a bust and we should have taken Halliburton with we likely wouldn't have then taken IQ seems fair enough. And then to compare the two rookie guards. That's what we do here right?
What if Quickley was averaging almost as many points as Halliburton despite coming off the bench while Halliburton starts?
Oh wait, that’s actually currently happening
I just dont get it. Your comparison of 2 players, one bench one starting, is limited to and defined by Points Scored?
Points scored is an accepted metric yes. Quickley has also been a good defender and facilitator
MS wrote:Just to put something in context. If you're not producing at 23 years old it's troubling. Below are some of the NBA's best young talent, as ranked by ESPN. Luka – 22
Zion – 20
LaMelo – 19
Mitchell – 24
Tatum – 23
Fox -23
MPJ - 23
Booker – 24
Bam – 23
SGA – 22
Ingram – 23
Collins – 23
J. Allen -23
If the Knicks could sign Allen and Lonzo in the offseason and flip 4 first round picks, toppin, quickly, mitch for Bradley Beal would you do it?
And Obi has been playing better in recent games. He’s stuck behind Randle who plays 40 minutes per game once Randle is eventually traded Obi will do well as the new full time PF
foosballnick wrote:martin wrote:Philc1 wrote:KnickDanger wrote:martin wrote:Philc1 wrote:martin wrote:Philc1 wrote:KnickDanger wrote:ESOMKnicks wrote:KnickDanger wrote:This is all time machine stuff, which means projecting ahead as well as reconsidering. But looking back, I think it is very unlikely we would have picked Quickley later if we had chosen Hali or another PG at 8. So a question for me would be would you prefer Obi and IQ or Halliburton and...?
This is a very good point. Especially given that IQ is not all that far behind Hali. Almost the same point average at 2/3 of Hali's playing time. Hali a better 3pt shooter right now and assists-man, but then Sancto probably trusts him more with the ball and runs plays for him.
And we can't know what Halliburton's development would be here. He might be getting Obi's minutes -- or less.
We don’t draft Quickley if we take Halliburton at 8. Both are combo guards and Quickley > Halliburton
How? Seems like Hali is more than holding his own and doing it better than IQ
Quickley is averaging almost as much ppg (12.3 for Quick versus 13.1 for Halliburton) despite coming off the bench while Halliburton starts and plays 35-40 minutes per game
Do you want to try again or is just throwing stuff against a wall and hoping it turns out right is good enough?
35-40 minutes per game... I mean at this rate I'm just banging Rebecca every night and we'll just call that a thing
It seems a good percentage of the threads on this board are "what if?" or regret threads. Unless we are going to ban these threads (I'm okay with that) countering the premise that Obi is a bust and we should have taken Halliburton with we likely wouldn't have then taken IQ seems fair enough. And then to compare the two rookie guards. That's what we do here right?
What if Quickley was averaging almost as many points as Halliburton despite coming off the bench while Halliburton starts?
Oh wait, that’s actually currently happening
I just dont get it. Your comparison of 2 players, one bench one starting, is limited to and defined by Points Scored?
While Haliburton has a better shooting percentage and is higher in assists per - they are fairly close in a number of per 36 / per 100 stats including TS% and scoring. Also, the starting vs. bench is a BS argument when Haliburton has only become a starter over the past 11-12 games and is alongside Fox who garners much of the defensive focus.
Points per 36 - IQ (22.2) / TH (15.5)
Points per 100 possessions - IQ (30.8) / TH (20.7)
Free Throw % - IQ (89.4) / TH (87.5)
TS% : IQ (54.3%) / TH (59.9%)
I love how you conveniently leave out this stat - MINUTES PER GAME:
Halliburton: 30 minutes per game avg for the entire regular season
Quickley: 19
foosballnick wrote:martin wrote:Philc1 wrote:KnickDanger wrote:martin wrote:Philc1 wrote:martin wrote:Philc1 wrote:KnickDanger wrote:ESOMKnicks wrote:KnickDanger wrote:This is all time machine stuff, which means projecting ahead as well as reconsidering. But looking back, I think it is very unlikely we would have picked Quickley later if we had chosen Hali or another PG at 8. So a question for me would be would you prefer Obi and IQ or Halliburton and...?
This is a very good point. Especially given that IQ is not all that far behind Hali. Almost the same point average at 2/3 of Hali's playing time. Hali a better 3pt shooter right now and assists-man, but then Sancto probably trusts him more with the ball and runs plays for him.
And we can't know what Halliburton's development would be here. He might be getting Obi's minutes -- or less.
We don’t draft Quickley if we take Halliburton at 8. Both are combo guards and Quickley > Halliburton
How? Seems like Hali is more than holding his own and doing it better than IQ
Quickley is averaging almost as much ppg (12.3 for Quick versus 13.1 for Halliburton) despite coming off the bench while Halliburton starts and plays 35-40 minutes per game
Do you want to try again or is just throwing stuff against a wall and hoping it turns out right is good enough?
35-40 minutes per game... I mean at this rate I'm just banging Rebecca every night and we'll just call that a thing
It seems a good percentage of the threads on this board are "what if?" or regret threads. Unless we are going to ban these threads (I'm okay with that) countering the premise that Obi is a bust and we should have taken Halliburton with we likely wouldn't have then taken IQ seems fair enough. And then to compare the two rookie guards. That's what we do here right?
What if Quickley was averaging almost as many points as Halliburton despite coming off the bench while Halliburton starts?
Oh wait, that’s actually currently happening
I just dont get it. Your comparison of 2 players, one bench one starting, is limited to and defined by Points Scored?
While Haliburton has a better shooting percentage and is higher in assists per - they are fairly close in a number of per 36 / per 100 stats including TS% and scoring. Also, the starting vs. bench is a BS argument when Haliburton has only become a starter over the past 11-12 games and is alongside Fox who garners much of the defensive focus.
Points per 36 - IQ (22.2) / TH (15.5)
Points per 100 possessions - IQ (30.8) / TH (20.7)
Free Throw % - IQ (89.4) / TH (87.5)
TS% : IQ (54.3%) / TH (59.9%)
Bro that efficiency disparity lol. Not to mention Hali is the far better passer.
TPercy wrote:foosballnick wrote:martin wrote:Philc1 wrote:KnickDanger wrote:martin wrote:Philc1 wrote:martin wrote:Philc1 wrote:KnickDanger wrote:ESOMKnicks wrote:KnickDanger wrote:This is all time machine stuff, which means projecting ahead as well as reconsidering. But looking back, I think it is very unlikely we would have picked Quickley later if we had chosen Hali or another PG at 8. So a question for me would be would you prefer Obi and IQ or Halliburton and...?
This is a very good point. Especially given that IQ is not all that far behind Hali. Almost the same point average at 2/3 of Hali's playing time. Hali a better 3pt shooter right now and assists-man, but then Sancto probably trusts him more with the ball and runs plays for him.
And we can't know what Halliburton's development would be here. He might be getting Obi's minutes -- or less.
We don’t draft Quickley if we take Halliburton at 8. Both are combo guards and Quickley > Halliburton
How? Seems like Hali is more than holding his own and doing it better than IQ
Quickley is averaging almost as much ppg (12.3 for Quick versus 13.1 for Halliburton) despite coming off the bench while Halliburton starts and plays 35-40 minutes per game
Do you want to try again or is just throwing stuff against a wall and hoping it turns out right is good enough?
35-40 minutes per game... I mean at this rate I'm just banging Rebecca every night and we'll just call that a thing
It seems a good percentage of the threads on this board are "what if?" or regret threads. Unless we are going to ban these threads (I'm okay with that) countering the premise that Obi is a bust and we should have taken Halliburton with we likely wouldn't have then taken IQ seems fair enough. And then to compare the two rookie guards. That's what we do here right?
What if Quickley was averaging almost as many points as Halliburton despite coming off the bench while Halliburton starts?
Oh wait, that’s actually currently happening
I just dont get it. Your comparison of 2 players, one bench one starting, is limited to and defined by Points Scored?
While Haliburton has a better shooting percentage and is higher in assists per - they are fairly close in a number of per 36 / per 100 stats including TS% and scoring. Also, the starting vs. bench is a BS argument when Haliburton has only become a starter over the past 11-12 games and is alongside Fox who garners much of the defensive focus.
Points per 36 - IQ (22.2) / TH (15.5)
Points per 100 possessions - IQ (30.8) / TH (20.7)
Free Throw % - IQ (89.4) / TH (87.5)
TS% : IQ (54.3%) / TH (59.9%)
Bro that efficiency disparity lol. Not to mention Hali is the far better passer.
Quick also shoots more and for a better percentages in isolation. 52% of Hal's baskets are assisted compared to like 38% for IQ. Not saying Hal isn't deserving of rookie of the year. I think he should win by default. But it tells you how different each player's situation are. No guarantee Hal could come in and produce the way IQ has. Hal came into the perfect situation and he's making the most out of it. I'm just glad we came away with Quick. I can honestly say I'm not that upset that we missed out on Hal and I'm still not entirely convinced that he's a lead guard or a future "All-Star." That said, I'm looking forward to future IQ vs. Hal battles.
If we're going to evaluate a player based on 3/4 of their rookie season, no question Haliburton comes out on top. Similar to Michael Carter-Williams his first year in the league. I care more about what they're going to look like in year 3 and 4. Didn't DSJ impress people as a rookie?
