Minnesota Sports Forum

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

Carlos Danger wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:They did? Who?

Can you provide a link?

Seriously?

Yes. Seriously.

Almost all of the guys with any negative thoughts toward Wiggins were in the "he's playing poorly right now but there's no reason not to give him more time" camp. In fact, sans the sensationalist headline to the thread, I don't remember a single person writing him off.

Somehow, the narrative has been skewed since. Repeatedly, even though Q and I repeatedly point it out.

Maybe because in a very very very pro-Wolves forum, some dissonance is needed when a player is playing poorly... to actually say that player is playing poorly.

Wiggins was playing poorly. If we're not allowed to call him out on that, then we're being intellectually dishonest and any actual basketball discourse around here is probably moot.

I call it like I see it. He was playing poorly (inefficiently)... for a #1 draft pick. Even for a rookie of his stature. That doesn't mean we have to make far-reaching prognostications about his entire career. Those are two very different types of threads. We've seen the same thing with Ricky Rubio. People who questioned Rubio (usually with stats) were routinely ganged up on. That's not to say those guys didn't want Rubio to do well. They were simply pointing out his flaws about his current play.

I've seen the same things with guys like Beasley. McCants. And so many others. Criticism does NOT make you less of a fan.

"Get on the train or get off" is a silly statement. I'm not in this for a "I told you so" moment, if we are... I can start listing them. Hedging bets... that's BS and irrelevant.

Criticizing just to criticize and bring people down is so petty. Did you notice how everyone arguing against you in the thread wasn't arguing that we thought Wiggins was playing well? We simply didn't care that he was playing bad because of the sample size and age variables. We didn't let that stretch affect our belief that he is going to be a good player. Again I ask, with nobody arguing he was playing well at the time, what is the point of going to such depths to show how bad he was playing? We all have eyes and could see what he was doing on the court. You were arguing against nobody because nobody in that thread said Wiggins was playing well. We were all just overlooking his play because we believed it to be temporary. I'm sorry you are a petty person who feels the need to bring people down to your level because we have faith in some of the guys on our team and have the ability to overlook poor stretches of play. This is a T Wolves forum. If you try to take away our optimism we literally have nothing left because of how garbage this franchise has been for a decade strong.

What? That's bullshit. That's not what I'm doing. And name-calling and character assumptions/assassinations here? Seriously? Be better than that. I've treated you with respect. If you want to get into that kind of posting... I'm all in.

But I've always considered this forum (sans one poster) to be better than that.

I've said it in the past... I'll say it again. I'm a basketball fan. I won't make believe the Wolves are better than they are. I will watch them when they're bad (I have since 1989) and I'll watch them when they become good (eventually). But I will do my very best to be objective every step of the way. There's nothing wrong with being an optimistic fan.

Likewise, there's nothing wrong with being an objective one either.



[Note: As for ripping guys when they're playing bad... so that's off limits in certain cases. Then, I assume praising them for small sample sizes is also off limits?]

sjm34 wrote:Abe, you talk about someone skewing things, but it was you who tried to put words in my mouth stating that wiggins would have to take over 11 FT's a game to score the 4 or 5 points. Then you took another shot about that same subject a few days later in another thread, even after I pointed out that it wasn't about necessarily getting and taking more FT's. You are the one that is skewing things.

DIdn't you use the word anomaly when describing Wiggins chances of improving significantly? Why weren't you pointing out how Wiggins was significantly more efficient right out of the gate? Seems like you only want to point out his faults.

It is truly amazing how a guy with so many weaknesses, managed turn his game around in a matter of ten games.

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

sjm34 wrote:You made a ridiculous statement and I used stats to prove how silly your claim was.

I think you even flashed the "the refs are out keep him down" card. C'mon man.


[Note: It actually is pretty amazing the turnaround Wiggins has had since the thread. Remember, he was something like 297th out of 322 qualifying players for TS% at the time. He's been right around 50% just on fg% alone ever since. I think everybody in that thread figured he would get better (even significantly better)... but not this quickly. It's been a fun ride. I think everybody around here is happy about that and was hoping for it. I'm not just saying this because I have a huge ego... I firmly believe everybody here should be thanking q, camden and I for inspiring Wiggins to play better. You think the timing of his improvement is a mere coincidence?]

Ugh. I'm not sure you should really be calling anyone else "ridiculous" or "silly" at this point. Those are words I'd use to describe someone over analyzing and overreacting to a 19 year old's first 20+ games. I'm pretty confident most people assumed Wiggins would improve across the board as the season progressed. I mean...except maybe a couple people.

Carlos Danger wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

sjm34 wrote:You made a ridiculous statement and I used stats to prove how silly your claim was.

I think you even flashed the "the refs are out keep him down" card. C'mon man.


[Note: It actually is pretty amazing the turnaround Wiggins has had since the thread. Remember, he was something like 297th out of 322 qualifying players for TS% at the time. He's been right around 50% just on fg% alone ever since. I think everybody in that thread figured he would get better (even significantly better)... but not this quickly. It's been a fun ride. I think everybody around here is happy about that and was hoping for it. I'm not just saying this because I have a huge ego... I firmly believe everybody here should be thanking q, camden and I for inspiring Wiggins to play better. You think the timing of his improvement is a mere coincidence?]

Ugh. I'm not sure you should really be calling anyone else "ridiculous" or "silly" at this point. Those are words I'd use to describe someone over analyzing and overreacting to a 19 year old's first 20+ games. I'm pretty confident most people assumed Wiggins would improve across the board as the season progressed. I mean...except maybe a couple people.

I guess I should apologize for noting that Wiggins was 297th out of 322 qualifying players (or something like that) for TS%.

Thanks for showing me that no player with potential should ever be discussed negatively in any way, using any context.

AbeVigodaLive wrote:I guess I should apologize for noting that Wiggins was 297th out of 322 qualifying players (or something like that) for TS%.

Thanks for showing me that no player with potential should ever be discussed negatively in any way, using any context.

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

sjm34 wrote:Abe, you talk about someone skewing things, but it was you who tried to put words in my mouth stating that wiggins would have to take over 11 FT's a game to score the 4 or 5 points. Then you took another shot about that same subject a few days later in another thread, even after I pointed out that it wasn't about necessarily getting and taking more FT's. You are the one that is skewing things.

DIdn't you use the word anomaly when describing Wiggins chances of improving significantly? Why weren't you pointing out how Wiggins was significantly more efficient right out of the gate? Seems like you only want to point out his faults.

It is truly amazing how a guy with so many weaknesses, managed turn his game around in a matter of ten games.

You made a ridiculous statement and I used stats to prove how silly your claim was.

I think you even flashed the "the refs are out keep him down" card. C'mon man.


[Note: It actually is pretty amazing the turnaround Wiggins has had since the thread. Remember, he was something like 297th out of 322 qualifying players for TS% at the time. He's been right around 50% just on fg% alone ever since. I think everybody in that thread figured he would get better (even significantly better)... but not this quickly. It's been a fun ride. I think everybody around here is happy about that and was hoping for it. I'm not just saying this because I have a huge ego... I firmly believe everybody here should be thanking q, camden and I for inspiring Wiggins to play better. You think the timing of his improvement is a mere coincidence?]

Carlos Danger wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:I guess I should apologize for noting that Wiggins was 297th out of 322 qualifying players (or something like that) for TS%.

Thanks for showing me that no player with potential should ever be discussed negatively in any way, using any context.

The context was a "Wiggins is a Huge Disappointment" thread. It was hard for many people to wrap their heads around how anyone could view Wiggins as a Huge Disappointment after his first 20+ games. You made several comments which certainly appeared aimed at agreeing with the title. That's your right. But certainly you can understand why others might now use that as an example of over analyzing smaller samples - right?

TheGrey08 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

sjm34 wrote:Abe, you talk about someone skewing things, but it was you who tried to put words in my mouth stating that wiggins would have to take over 11 FT's a game to score the 4 or 5 points. Then you took another shot about that same subject a few days later in another thread, even after I pointed out that it wasn't about necessarily getting and taking more FT's. You are the one that is skewing things.

DIdn't you use the word anomaly when describing Wiggins chances of improving significantly? Why weren't you pointing out how Wiggins was significantly more efficient right out of the gate? Seems like you only want to point out his faults.

It is truly amazing how a guy with so many weaknesses, managed turn his game around in a matter of ten games.

You made a ridiculous statement and I used stats to prove how silly your claim was.

I think you even flashed the "the refs are out keep him down" card. C'mon man.


[Note: It actually is pretty amazing the turnaround Wiggins has had since the thread. Remember, he was something like 297th out of 322 qualifying players for TS% at the time. He's been right around 50% just on fg% alone ever since. I think everybody in that thread figured he would get better (even significantly better)... but not this quickly. It's been a fun ride. I think everybody around here is happy about that and was hoping for it. I'm not just saying this because I have a huge ego... I firmly believe everybody here should be thanking q, camden and I for inspiring Wiggins to play better. You think the timing of his improvement is a mere coincidence?]

To be fair you pulled stats based off of an incorrect assumption that you made about SJM's comment. You assumed his statement was based on him getting X amount of additional points off FTs which it wasn't. It was an overall figure based on him getting another trip or 2 to the FT line b/c it would lead defenders to back up a bit and not be as aggressive like they had been.

There was nothing ridiculous about his statement. If you are defending a guy who doesn't get as many calls you are able to play them more aggressively & physically. When a guy is getting more calls you have to play more conservatively and it becomes easier for the offensive player. It's as simple as that.