Lookin back at JJ Redick

[statis22]

Originally Posted by RoOk

Btw, lets us not forget:

\

Dominique "clamps" Kirk appreciation post.

 

[statis22]

Originally Posted by RoOk

Btw, lets us not forget:

\

Dominique "clamps" Kirk appreciation post.

 

[jehlers02]

Originally Posted by itsaboutthattime

Originally Posted by Jehlers02

Your making a good argument, its arguable. The teammates thing goes both ways, yea he had worse teammates but he was playing no talent. Redick had better teammates but he was playing better competition. Even if he had better teammates, its not like they were the whole reason he was the best player in all of college at the time. Like coach k didnt put the ball through the hole from 30 feet out, neither did his teammates. No one was doing what he did. He was gaurded so heavily for the 3 that the only shots he could get were from 5-10 feet out. And he still drained him. He was ungaurdable, unless you wanted to full court pressure him the whole game. 
FTR i know this shouldnt factor into the argument a whole lot. But Redick was the 7th in the country for all positions. 2nd at SG behind McCants. Curry was ranked 189th in the country.

Again there's a reason Curry wasnt at Duke playing with better talent. Cause he wasnt as good as Redick

since you want to keep harping on competition.. why do you dismiss what each player has done in the NBA? is that not a leveled playing field by which we can judge?

curry in his rookie season (1 year removed for college) was able to find success in the nba, both as a player AND from 3pt range (43%)

reddick was a good shooter (38%), but not 43% good

and it's laughable to talk about high school rankings.. A TON of players weren't highly rated coming into college.. does that make them better or worse shooters in the COLLEGE game

we have college stats we can compare, CURRY IS BETTER.. duke will always be better than davidson, WITH OR WITHOUT REDDICK.. curry was 2 points away from leading DAVIDSON past the eventual champs.. duke won the national title last year and are ranked first again this year, where has davidson been without curry?



name 1 game at duke where the opposing team devoted 2/3 players to reddick EVERY TIME they came down the floor


Curry had better stats than Deron Williams and Chris Paul, what you trying to say? 
No we're not bringing up the NBA. I made this about college specifically. We all know he's a bust now. .

And are you trying to tell me Redick didn't get double teamed? 

 

[jehlers02]

Originally Posted by itsaboutthattime

Originally Posted by Jehlers02

Your making a good argument, its arguable. The teammates thing goes both ways, yea he had worse teammates but he was playing no talent. Redick had better teammates but he was playing better competition. Even if he had better teammates, its not like they were the whole reason he was the best player in all of college at the time. Like coach k didnt put the ball through the hole from 30 feet out, neither did his teammates. No one was doing what he did. He was gaurded so heavily for the 3 that the only shots he could get were from 5-10 feet out. And he still drained him. He was ungaurdable, unless you wanted to full court pressure him the whole game. 
FTR i know this shouldnt factor into the argument a whole lot. But Redick was the 7th in the country for all positions. 2nd at SG behind McCants. Curry was ranked 189th in the country.

Again there's a reason Curry wasnt at Duke playing with better talent. Cause he wasnt as good as Redick

since you want to keep harping on competition.. why do you dismiss what each player has done in the NBA? is that not a leveled playing field by which we can judge?

curry in his rookie season (1 year removed for college) was able to find success in the nba, both as a player AND from 3pt range (43%)

reddick was a good shooter (38%), but not 43% good

and it's laughable to talk about high school rankings.. A TON of players weren't highly rated coming into college.. does that make them better or worse shooters in the COLLEGE game

we have college stats we can compare, CURRY IS BETTER.. duke will always be better than davidson, WITH OR WITHOUT REDDICK.. curry was 2 points away from leading DAVIDSON past the eventual champs.. duke won the national title last year and are ranked first again this year, where has davidson been without curry?



name 1 game at duke where the opposing team devoted 2/3 players to reddick EVERY TIME they came down the floor


Curry had better stats than Deron Williams and Chris Paul, what you trying to say? 
No we're not bringing up the NBA. I made this about college specifically. We all know he's a bust now. .

And are you trying to tell me Redick didn't get double teamed? 

 

[wildkycat]

JJ ain't no bust... I think what he's doing in the league is about what was expected of him. Anyone who expected super stardom was nuts.

I thought 'Dorf was a douche, and woulda thought he was a douche off the court... good player, tho.

 

[wildkycat]

JJ ain't no bust... I think what he's doing in the league is about what was expected of him. Anyone who expected super stardom was nuts.

I thought 'Dorf was a douche, and woulda thought he was a douche off the court... good player, tho.

 

[IATT]

Originally Posted by Jehlers02

Curry had better stats than Deron Williams and Chris Paul, what you trying to say? 
No we're not bringing up the NBA. I made this about college specifically. We all know he's a bust now. .

And are you trying to tell me Redick didn't get double teamed? 

was deron or cp better shooters than curry then?

are they better shooters than curry now?

if your life was on the line and you had to win a shooting contest and had a choice of curry, reddick, deron or cp who would you take? (then or now)



which part of "EVERY TIME they came down the floor" is hard to understand?

never said he "didn't get double teamed".. but did a team ever do this:
http://ncaabasketball.fan...reless-still-lose-by-30/

 

[IATT]

Originally Posted by Jehlers02

Curry had better stats than Deron Williams and Chris Paul, what you trying to say? 
No we're not bringing up the NBA. I made this about college specifically. We all know he's a bust now. .

And are you trying to tell me Redick didn't get double teamed? 

was deron or cp better shooters than curry then?

are they better shooters than curry now?

if your life was on the line and you had to win a shooting contest and had a choice of curry, reddick, deron or cp who would you take? (then or now)



which part of "EVERY TIME they came down the floor" is hard to understand?

never said he "didn't get double teamed".. but did a team ever do this:
http://ncaabasketball.fan...reless-still-lose-by-30/

 

[wjun15]

that wasnt that impressive. his form changes a lot further back.

 

[wjun15]

that wasnt that impressive. his form changes a lot further back.

 

[jehlers02]

Originally Posted by itsaboutthattime

Originally Posted by Jehlers02

Curry had better stats than Deron Williams and Chris Paul, what you trying to say? 
No we're not bringing up the NBA. I made this about college specifically. We all know he's a bust now. .

And are you trying to tell me Redick didn't get double teamed? 

was deron or cp better shooters than curry then?

are they better shooters than curry now?

if your life was on the line and you had to win a shooting contest and had a choice of curry, reddick, deron or cp who would you take? (then or now)



which part of "EVERY TIME they came down the floor" is hard to understand?

never said he "didn't get double teamed".. but did a team ever do this:
http://ncaabasketball.fan...reless-still-lose-by-30/

Chris Paul shot a better FG% his freshman year then Curry did his last and best seson. You wanted to talk stats...
We're done talking about the NBA.

To your link..

That's friggin Loyola. They probably would do something dumb like that. Which is why they lost by 30.

Im sure if you really wanted to you could do that to JJ Redick too, but no ones dumb enough to do that in the ACC to just give away a loss like that.

Redick was doubled when it was smart, so your in the position to win the game. They didnt double him to lose by 30.

 

[jehlers02]

Originally Posted by itsaboutthattime

Originally Posted by Jehlers02

Curry had better stats than Deron Williams and Chris Paul, what you trying to say? 
No we're not bringing up the NBA. I made this about college specifically. We all know he's a bust now. .

And are you trying to tell me Redick didn't get double teamed? 

was deron or cp better shooters than curry then?

are they better shooters than curry now?

if your life was on the line and you had to win a shooting contest and had a choice of curry, reddick, deron or cp who would you take? (then or now)



which part of "EVERY TIME they came down the floor" is hard to understand?

never said he "didn't get double teamed".. but did a team ever do this:
http://ncaabasketball.fan...reless-still-lose-by-30/

Chris Paul shot a better FG% his freshman year then Curry did his last and best seson. You wanted to talk stats...
We're done talking about the NBA.

To your link..

That's friggin Loyola. They probably would do something dumb like that. Which is why they lost by 30.

Im sure if you really wanted to you could do that to JJ Redick too, but no ones dumb enough to do that in the ACC to just give away a loss like that.

Redick was doubled when it was smart, so your in the position to win the game. They didnt double him to lose by 30.

 

[woody2626]

Originally Posted by ryaneff23

Originally Posted by woody2626

Originally Posted by JamesOnNT

Originally Posted by shogun

didn't he take it to the hole often against Erin Andrews?
i gotta give him props for that.  

what the? is this true?

   That's the word. Unlike that bobby frasor crap to "boost his street cred"

It's pretty much the exact same situation.  You're such a homer. 

How? The fact that Bobby Frasor went along with it and called his dad and told him it was "boosting his street cred" so he wasn't stopping it, whatever book that story was published in.

Same situation? It's the @%!#!$% internet, stories are all over online, whether they are true or not I have no idea. 

 Homer? Actually,fool compared to some people in the CBB thread I post hardly anything that could be considered homerism. 

I'm surprised your %%! isn't saying McCants was a better shooter. $$+% outta here with that

  

 

[woody2626]

Originally Posted by ryaneff23

Originally Posted by woody2626

Originally Posted by JamesOnNT

Originally Posted by shogun

didn't he take it to the hole often against Erin Andrews?
i gotta give him props for that.  

what the? is this true?

   That's the word. Unlike that bobby frasor crap to "boost his street cred"

It's pretty much the exact same situation.  You're such a homer. 

How? The fact that Bobby Frasor went along with it and called his dad and told him it was "boosting his street cred" so he wasn't stopping it, whatever book that story was published in.

Same situation? It's the @%!#!$% internet, stories are all over online, whether they are true or not I have no idea. 

 Homer? Actually,fool compared to some people in the CBB thread I post hardly anything that could be considered homerism. 

I'm surprised your %%! isn't saying McCants was a better shooter. $$+% outta here with that

  

 

[japanair21]

JJ is still a good NBA player, dare I saw starting caliber player.

He's become a very good defender, he's still a great shooter, he's developed his passing ability.

I've always been a huge fan though..

 

[japanair21]

JJ is still a good NBA player, dare I saw starting caliber player.

He's become a very good defender, he's still a great shooter, he's developed his passing ability.

I've always been a huge fan though..

 

[AZwildcats]

Originally Posted by PMatic

Salim >

One of my favorite wildcats after Bibby/Arenas

 

[AZwildcats]

Originally Posted by PMatic

Salim >

One of my favorite wildcats after Bibby/Arenas

 

[executive76]

Originally Posted by JapanAir21

JJ is still a good NBA player, dare I saw starting caliber player.

He's become a very good defender, he's still a great shooter, he's developed his passing ability.

I've always been a huge fan though..

If ORL didn't match I'm pretty sure he would be starting for CHI.

Them matching and paying luxury tax says a lot

. why do you dismiss what each player has done in the NBA? is that not a leveled playing field by which we can judge?

curry in his rookie season (1 year removed for college) was able to find success in the nba, both as a player AND from 3pt range (43%)



Curry is a better pro offensively but you have to take into account where they were drafted. GSW is like the handicapped little brother of PHX.

 

[executive76]

Originally Posted by JapanAir21

JJ is still a good NBA player, dare I saw starting caliber player.

He's become a very good defender, he's still a great shooter, he's developed his passing ability.

I've always been a huge fan though..

If ORL didn't match I'm pretty sure he would be starting for CHI.

Them matching and paying luxury tax says a lot

. why do you dismiss what each player has done in the NBA? is that not a leveled playing field by which we can judge?

curry in his rookie season (1 year removed for college) was able to find success in the nba, both as a player AND from 3pt range (43%)



Curry is a better pro offensively but you have to take into account where they were drafted. GSW is like the handicapped little brother of PHX.

 

[IATT]

Originally Posted by Executive76

. why do you dismiss what each player has done in the NBA? is that not a leveled playing field by which we can judge?

curry in his rookie season (1 year removed for college) was able to find success in the nba, both as a player AND from 3pt range (43%)

Curry is a better pro offensively but you have to take into account where they were drafted. GSW is like the handicapped little brother of PHX.



ok.. and the point being argued is who is the better shooter.. and to your point about the warriors, wouldn't the percentages from teams like those (who try to outscore their oppenents) be a truer reflection of a shooter's abilities.. since we would have a larger sample size to base their performance upon, since they shoot so many shoots

my problem in this discussion is that reddick is being overvalued as a result of the national stage he was on because he played at duke (trust me I watched a TON of dudes games, I'm a UNC fan.. and I did the same overevoulation of ALOT of UNC and duke players)

the simple way to answer who was the better of the 2 players would be to switch them and to think of the results.. IF curry had played for duke, would they miss a beat? would curry's percentages not be even better with actual NBA talent surrounding him and threatening opposing teams, thus giving him more open looks?

what happens with JJ if he went to davidson and he becomes the ONLY option for that team? 




maybe it's just me.. but I will always take the player whose team is only relavent because of that one player, over the guy who if he were to get hurt THAT SEASON, that team wouldn't miss a beat
(side note.. the logic being used for reddick, is the same I used that made me so wrong about chris paul and raymond felton.. 1) I was being a homer and 2) felton had WAYYYYYY better teammates)

 

[IATT]

Originally Posted by Executive76

. why do you dismiss what each player has done in the NBA? is that not a leveled playing field by which we can judge?

curry in his rookie season (1 year removed for college) was able to find success in the nba, both as a player AND from 3pt range (43%)

Curry is a better pro offensively but you have to take into account where they were drafted. GSW is like the handicapped little brother of PHX.



ok.. and the point being argued is who is the better shooter.. and to your point about the warriors, wouldn't the percentages from teams like those (who try to outscore their oppenents) be a truer reflection of a shooter's abilities.. since we would have a larger sample size to base their performance upon, since they shoot so many shoots

my problem in this discussion is that reddick is being overvalued as a result of the national stage he was on because he played at duke (trust me I watched a TON of dudes games, I'm a UNC fan.. and I did the same overevoulation of ALOT of UNC and duke players)

the simple way to answer who was the better of the 2 players would be to switch them and to think of the results.. IF curry had played for duke, would they miss a beat? would curry's percentages not be even better with actual NBA talent surrounding him and threatening opposing teams, thus giving him more open looks?

what happens with JJ if he went to davidson and he becomes the ONLY option for that team? 




maybe it's just me.. but I will always take the player whose team is only relavent because of that one player, over the guy who if he were to get hurt THAT SEASON, that team wouldn't miss a beat
(side note.. the logic being used for reddick, is the same I used that made me so wrong about chris paul and raymond felton.. 1) I was being a homer and 2) felton had WAYYYYYY better teammates)

 

[dman14]

can someone drop some of jj's raps/poetry?

 

[dman14]

can someone drop some of jj's raps/poetry?

 

[retro23j]

Originally Posted by Jehlers02


Actually Redick had balls to be taking those shots under a coach like K. They went in though.