CoolBreeze44 wrote:Below average NBA basketball player? No. I'm sure you would point to some metrics to back up your point, but you just can't think in a box. You have to consider the situation he was in - playing mostly with inexperienced players, playing on a very thin roster (and poor one), and having to play too many minutes as a rookie. If he was below average last year, give me 5 just like him and I will kick the shit out of most NBA teams.
If you had 5 Andrew Wiggins last season your team would have been badly out-rebounded, badly outshot, and you would have no one to run the offense or break people down off the dribble. It would actually be the other way around: You would get beaten badly on most nights.
Now perhaps a few years from now, a team of 5 Andrew Wiggins would dominate the NBA.
CoolBreeze44 wrote:Below average NBA basketball player? No. I'm sure you would point to some metrics to back up your point, but you just can't think in a box. You have to consider the situation he was in - playing mostly with inexperienced players, playing on a very thin roster (and poor one), and having to play too many minutes as a rookie. If he was below average last year, give me 5 just like him and I will kick the shit out of most NBA teams.
If you had 5 Andrew Wiggins last season your team would have been badly out-rebounded, badly outshot, and you would have no one to run the offense or break people down off the dribble. It would actually be the other way around: You would get beaten badly on most nights.
Now perhaps a few years from now, a team of 5 Andrew Wiggins would dominate the NBA.
See, this is where your stat based mentality doesn't allow you to see the forest through the trees. But I know what you are thinking, and why you are thinking it. I just don't believe you can come to the conclusions you come to without another analytical step. You leap from sheet data to your conclusion and you miss a step or two in the process. We've been over this many times, metric data alone cannot be applied the way you apply it without making mistakes.
CoolBreeze44 wrote:Below average NBA basketball player? No. I'm sure you would point to some metrics to back up your point, but you just can't think in a box. You have to consider the situation he was in - playing mostly with inexperienced players, playing on a very thin roster (and poor one), and having to play too many minutes as a rookie. If he was below average last year, give me 5 just like him and I will kick the shit out of most NBA teams.
If you had 5 Andrew Wiggins last season your team would have been badly out-rebounded, badly outshot, and you would have no one to run the offense or break people down off the dribble. It would actually be the other way around: You would get beaten badly on most nights.
Now perhaps a few years from now, a team of 5 Andrew Wiggins would dominate the NBA.
See, this is where your stat based mentality doesn't allow you to see the forest through the trees. But I know what you are thinking, and why you are thinking it. I just don't believe you can come to the conclusions you come to without another analytical step. You leap from sheet data to your conclusion and you miss a step or two in the process. We've been over this many times, metric data alone cannot be applied the way you apply it without making mistakes.
Fair enough.
Can you point out the mistakes or what that next analytical step is....?
CoolBreeze44 wrote:Below average NBA basketball player? No. I'm sure you would point to some metrics to back up your point, but you just can't think in a box. You have to consider the situation he was in - playing mostly with inexperienced players, playing on a very thin roster (and poor one), and having to play too many minutes as a rookie. If he was below average last year, give me 5 just like him and I will kick the shit out of most NBA teams.
If you had 5 Andrew Wiggins last season your team would have been badly out-rebounded, badly outshot, and you would have no one to run the offense or break people down off the dribble. It would actually be the other way around: You would get beaten badly on most nights.
Now perhaps a few years from now, a team of 5 Andrew Wiggins would dominate the NBA.
See, this is where your stat based mentality doesn't allow you to see the forest through the trees. But I know what you are thinking, and why you are thinking it. I just don't believe you can come to the conclusions you come to without another analytical step. You leap from sheet data to your conclusion and you miss a step or two in the process. We've been over this many times, metric data alone cannot be applied the way you apply it without making mistakes.
Mmmm, it seems like you are holding me to a higher standard than you hold for yourself, as I have articulated in both stat and non-stat ways how I think Andrew was a slightly below average player last year.
So pray tell, how would five of last year's version of Andrew Wiggins "kick ass" over the rest of the NBA?
I could give you average but Wiggins was not below average. Maybe he was a below average #1 option but in compared to the entire league (about 500 guys played) he was not worse than 250 of them.
thedoper wrote:He was amazing and a huge disappointment.
Heh, I'm trying to figure out if this board is capable of nuanced perspectives. I think overall it is, but yeah, obviously when I say he was "below average", I am not saying he was a "huge disappointment"! Hopefully part #1 of my statement makes that very clear.
thedoper wrote:He was amazing and a huge disappointment.
Heh, I'm trying to figure out if this board is capable of nuanced perspectives. I think overall it is, but yeah, obviously when I say he was "below average", I am not saying he was a "huge disappointment"! Hopefully part #1 of my statement makes that very clear.
I think it is all relative to what the realistic expectations are at the beginning of a season. I think last year he performed or outperformed most of his scouting reports going into the season. Which is why I personally wouldn't call him below average, because he should be compared relative to his 19 year old peers or comparable players. At the same time, I think the shortcomings you list are spot on and a successful season this year would be him making improvements in some or all of those areas without regressing in his strengths. You are very nuanced Q, just having fun.
