DO IT KP! http://www.realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/60586/20090715/diogu_unlikely_to_re_sign_with_kings/
Yeah, I actually think Diogu would be a decent "backup banger," considering we have Przybilla and Oden for all the center minutes and just need someone for the 11-12 minutes that Aldridge doesn't play. He's no great shakes on defense, but he's always been an efficient player because he rebounds reasonably well and scores at a strong efficiency. One reason he's an efficient scorer is he draws free throws really well (21.4% draw-foul rate). For a cheap contract, he'd fill a minor need and preserve almost all of Portland's cap space for an upgrade to the starting unit.
Neither has Sessions. He took over from Ridnour due to injury to Ridnour. Sometimes coaches make mistakes. Diogu was a superior player to Frye, even if McMillan didn't play him over Frye much.
Yeah, good point. He only shot 52.7% from the field last year overall. It's much better to judge him on the 19 field goals he attempted as a Blazer than on his career. Ed O.
Good point!!!1 But, in Bayless defense... He was a rookie on a team giving their backup PG his one last shot. Ike just flat out never made anything on any team he ever played on lol
Except at ASU, where he set many of the records Pendergraph's fans will point out he's a Top 10 member of.
Dude you're actually comparing Diogu's 5 seasons in the league to Bayless' 1? No comparison, Diogu has had adequate time to show what he can be, unfortunately that is a guy who is not good enough to get on the court regularly.
I agree Bayless was a PG and a Rookie, it wasnt a knock on him, it was more in agreement with Minstrel's comment saying sometimes the coach doesnt always make the right decision.
1 coach, fine. 2? Maybe. How many coaches does Diogu have to go through before people understand that he's not a very good basketball player relative to NBA competition? Sessions has been through 1 coach. Diogu? Plenty.
No, you're right. It's much better to judge him on the rest of his career. A guy who has played for numerous teams and coaches and can't seem to find time on the court regularly. Coincidence? I don't think so.
What does that have to do with the post I replied to? Does he not play a lot because he can't make layups? Or are you changing the subject because you know you were typing out of your ass? Ed O.
If you can't see that it's hyperbole then you must have a learning disability. We're allowed make hyperbolic statements on sports forums. I would think that you could comprehend when someone makes a statement like "this guy can't play defense, or make a jump shot" it's hyperbolic. I didn't say he doesn't play because he can't make layups. Try to follow along.
Number of coaches "gone through" doesn't measure a player's ability level, his on-court production does. His per-minute efficiency is very high and when he got time with Sacramento at the end of last season, he was hugely productive for full games. A player can be systematically undervalued. This has happened plenty in baseball and that New York Times Mag article about Shane Battier was describing how it happens in basketball, too. If a player is systematically undervalued, then being benched by a number of coaches isn't all that surprising or meaningful. I'm hardly advocating giving him a starting position. 10-12 minutes is not a lot to gamble on a player who's per-minute efficiency is great. He doesn't even need to be able to translate that to big minutes, because no one is advocating giving him big minutes.
