Nov 4, 2009 -- 1:19AM, cbi wrote:

Nov 4, 2009 -- 12:44AM, D-Wreck wrote:

I think Jennings can be better,

more efficient scorer,

and better shooter

did you ever watch AI in the nineties and early 2000's??

Yeah, he was quick as heck and could fill it up, but I never liked how inefficient he was,

he shot 39.8% FOR AN ENTIRE SEASON, while shooting the ball 27.8 times/game

I understand Iverson's a HoF'er and everything, 

but he's the opposite of everything I'd want in a player(except for toughness)

He is gonna be good if he can keep his ego in check....

I thought this was about  that Flynn kid in Minn.. he reminds me of iverson more than Jennings BJ actually knows how to run the point well somewhat Iverson was always a 2guard trying to be a point guard

Nov 4, 2009 -- 11:22PM, RightDownEuclid wrote:

Nov 4, 2009 -- 2:48PM, Stu Discus (T.V. Casualty) wrote:

He is gonna be good if he can keep his ego in check....

I thought this was about  that Flynn kid in Minn.. he reminds me of iverson more than Jennings BJ actually knows how to run the point well somewhat Iverson was always a 2guard trying to be a point guard

That is probably the more accurate comparison, Flynn wasn't dishin nothin but was hittin everything.

Yeah but I was never a very big fan of A.I., I already like Flynn more than him go figure

IMHO, Jennings is really closer to Nate Archibald.

He's a willing passer and an adequate shooter from midrange. But he has excellent quickness, speed and shiftiness that make him hard to guard in the open court, which lets him drive past defenders to the hoop. Once in the paint, Jennings is a triple threat to either pass, lay the ball in or shoot for two points.

Jennings was why Milwaukee let Sessions go in a salary dump.