Q12543 wrote:Abe, I just think the "he hasn't won in Minnesota" is weak sauce in judging him as a player given ALL of the other variables. I think that would be a valid argument if we were trying to compare him to Russell Westbrook or LeBron James - guys with singular talent that can impose their will on the game - but no one here is trying to do that.
You mentioned the myriad of advanced stats and how they say different things about the same player. But the thing is, every single one of those advanced stats pegs Ricky as an above average starting PG. Some more than others, but there is no real conflicting data when it comes to those stats, so there isn't much to debate unless you want to squabble over the one that says he's the 7th best PG versus the 11th best PG.
I think the Rubio skeptics have two legitimate things to hang their hat on:
1) His injury history/durability.
2) His potential issues in a drawn out playoff series
I personally worry more about #1 than #2.
Cripes. Finally - some nicely stated logic. Attempting to tie Rubio's value to the team's overall record has to be one of the worst arguments I've ever seen on this board. It would mean that Towns is also part of the problem - we only have 16 wins - right? Guess KAT's not as good as we thought he was. And Kevin Love must have been part of the problem too. Thank goodness we got rid of him. Only terrible players can be on bad teams - right? Good Gawd man! With all the data available to people today, it shouldn't be that hard to see Rubio is a good player. If you get a bunch of good players and one or All Star players - then you have something. Hopefully one or two of: KAT, Wiggins, LaVine and our next #1 Pick become All Star type players. Rubio certainly will continue to be a good player assuming he stays healthy. We have a good, young, affordable group. Now they need time to play together and a coach. The worst thing that could happen IMO is for the Wolves to do any deals until they get a GM/Coach in place.
Q12543 wrote:Abe, I just think the "he hasn't won in Minnesota" is weak sauce in judging him as a player given ALL of the other variables. I think that would be a valid argument if we were trying to compare him to Russell Westbrook or LeBron James - guys with singular talent that can impose their will on the game - but no one here is trying to do that.
You mentioned the myriad of advanced stats and how they say different things about the same player. But the thing is, every single one of those advanced stats pegs Ricky as an above average starting PG. Some more than others, but there is no real conflicting data when it comes to those stats, so there isn't much to debate unless you want to squabble over the one that says he's the 7th best PG versus the 11th best PG.
I think the Rubio skeptics have two legitimate things to hang their hat on:
1) His injury history/durability.
2) His potential issues in a drawn out playoff series
I personally worry more about #1 than #2.
Cripes. Finally - some nicely stated logic. Attempting to tie Rubio's value to the team's overall record has to be one of the worst arguments I've ever seen on this board. It would mean that Towns is also part of the problem - we only have 16 wins - right? Guess KAT's not as good as we thought he was. And Kevin Love must have been part of the problem too. Thank goodness we got rid of him. Only terrible players can be on bad teams - right? Good Gawd man! With all the data available to people today, it shouldn't be that hard to see Rubio is a good player. If you get a bunch of good players and one or All Star players - then you have something. Hopefully one or two of: KAT, Wiggins, LaVine and our next #1 Pick become All Star type players. Rubio certainly will continue to be a good player assuming he stays healthy. We have a good, young, affordable group. Now they need time to play together and a coach. The worst thing that could happen IMO is for the Wolves to do any deals until they get a GM/Coach in place.
I'm going to assume Danger isn't referring to my takes.
AbeVigodaLive wrote:
I'm going to assume Danger isn't referring to my takes.
Then you'd be wrong about that too.
I can only assume you're trolling me then. Considering I just pointed out how people quote me and misrepresent what i wrote... and then you did the exact same thing.
AbeVigodaLive wrote:
I'm going to assume Danger isn't referring to my takes.
Then you'd be wrong about that too.
Well considering you assumed people were claiming that Rubio is the reason for the Wolves bad record, as opposed to saying Rubio deserves some of the blame for the Wolves record and claims he's a winner without actually producing wins.
Just to make sure were still going on the right track, The Wolves record has been what it is the past 5 seasons, What percentage is the reason for this record based on Rubio's play?
TeamRicky wrote:Someone on the Knicks Board brought up a good point: "First, Ricky isn't injury prone, his first one (ACL) was a beat against Kobe's knee and the second one (ankle) was a bad jump over the defender foot. I'm watching him since he was 16 and I can't remember another injury. He can play 82 games of a RS.
Second, this isn't objective but I think he can improve his shot and the layups because both are product of lack of physical work, both aerobic and anaerobic. He couldn't work in the preseason and he was cleared to play in November and his legs are weak and he suffers at the last quarters. I I bet he can improve a lot and average more than 15 ppg and nobody will say he is overpaid, especially with the next collective bargain."
Ricky's injuries have cut into developmental time and affected this season. Sam said as much. Given his free throw shooting is very good and that his shooting outside of the fourth quarter (when he isn't fatigued) is ok, I think we shouldn't assume Ricky can't improve on his FG%. That said even with the low FG%, Ricky makes up for it in so many ways. With a FG% north of 40%, he'd be an allstar.
Injury prone, not injury prone, it doesn't matter. Rubio has missed a huge chunk of time in his tenure with the Wolves. he doesn't get credit because the Wolves stunk without him, nor does it matter if they were accidental or chronic injuries. They happened, and the Wolves suffered because of it.
If you still think Rubio can improve because he's never had time even though he's 25 years old and going into his 5th season, then your too far down the well and I hope you enjoy that fantasy land
AbeVigodaLive wrote:
I'm going to assume Danger isn't referring to my takes.
Then you'd be wrong about that too.
Well considering you assumed people were claiming that Rubio is the reason for the Wolves bad record, as opposed to saying Rubio deserves some of the blame for the Wolves record and claims he's a winner without actually producing wins.
Just to make sure were still going on the right track, The Wolves record has been what it is the past 5 seasons, What percentage is the reason for this record based on Rubio's play?
IDK. Since you obviously have a system - what percentage of our current record is due to Karl Anthony Town's play? Apply that same formula to Rubio and you'll have your answer. It's a team game. You can have good players on bad teams. Kevin Love didn't win here. Now he's winning in Cleveland. Did he suddenly improve his game? Or could most people tell he was a good player on a bad team back then? It's really not that hard to determine who's a good player these days with all the available metrics. KAT is a very good player on a bad team. Rubio is a good player on a bad team. If you want to improve, then hold onto the good players and get rid of the dead weight on this team. The future depends on the development of the young core of Towns, Wiggins, LaVine and Rubio along with adding some good complimentary players.
AbeVigodaLive wrote:
I'm going to assume Danger isn't referring to my takes.
Then you'd be wrong about that too.
I can only assume you're trolling me then. Considering I just pointed out how people quote me and misrepresent what i wrote... and then you did the exact same thing.
Nobody's trolling. I've read the same argument used multiple times. Linking Rubio's value to the Timberwolves' overall record just doesn't seem like an accurate way to measure. There are plenty of better available metrics to determine a player's value. I mean...Mark Madsen played on 50+ win teams his first five years. Using your system he should be voted into the Hall of Fame!
AbeVigodaLive wrote:
I'm going to assume Danger isn't referring to my takes.
Then you'd be wrong about that too.
I can only assume you're trolling me then. Considering I just pointed out how people quote me and misrepresent what i wrote... and then you did the exact same thing.
Nobody's trolling. I've read the same argument used multiple times. Linking Rubio's value to the Timberwolves' overall record just doesn't seem like an accurate way to measure. There are plenty of better available metrics to determine a player's value. I mean...Mark Madsen played on 50+ win teams his first five years. Using your system he should be voted into the Hall of Fame!
1. Quote somebody.
2. Make leap which completely skews/bastardizes or even fabricates what they just wrote.
3. Further said leap with unrelated hyperbole.
4. Rinse. Repeat.
