These two things are simultaneously true

[khans2k5 [enjin:6608728]]

I'd say he was average. His estimated wins added and value added are in line with Giannis, Joe Johnson, Josh Smith and Jeff Green. Both of those stats are based on production over what a replacement player would normally produce. He was the 14th SF in the league in both of those categories which is middle of the pack.

[Coolbreeze44]

I'd say he was average. His estimated wins added and value added are in line with Giannis, Joe Johnson, Josh Smith and Jeff Green. Both of those stats are based on production over what a replacement player would normally produce. He was the 14th SF in the league in both of those categories which is middle of the pack.

So that means he's average? I just don't get it I guess. He's the player other teams had to stop. He normally drew the toughest defensive assignment. Those facts just don't show up in the metrics you reference.

Here's what I would suggest. Can we come to a consensus on an NBA pundit, or a small group of pundits who's opinion would be respected on this matter? I'm talking about NBA analysts, not number crunchers. I'm talking about guys who have played or coached in the league. If we can agree on who to ask, let's simply ask them if Andrew Wiggins was a below average player last year. And that's exactly how the question should be phrased based on the argument here. Most of these guys have twitter accounts, I'd be happy to reach out to them and post the results.

[Coolbreeze44]

Let's ask Jim Peterson for one. Tim legler, Kenny Smith also come to mind. There's a ton to choose from. Let me know who else and I'll create a poll to choose the right guys.

[The Rage Monster [enjin:8010341]]

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.

OK, if we include the D-league call-ups, 10-day contract types, and 15th men on rosters that barely see the light of day, I can probably agree...Perhaps I should have narrowed my definition to regular rotation players, meaning the top 10 or so guys on most rosters. That's kind of what I had in mind.

I guess I get what you're trying to say but why? Why not just leave it as Wiggins was a fantastic rookie but still has work to do to reach his full potential. We finally have player with elite potential why not keep it positive. There's no reason to make him out to be worse than he was by saying he was below average by arbitrarily setting who gets to count. By that same measure I could say Draymond Green was below average if we only count the top 1 or 2 players per team.

I'd also argue even by your standard Wiggins is average. Looks at the playoff teams, given how Wiggins played last year he'd be at least the first wing off the bench for most of them and probably would have started for a couple.

[khans2k5 [enjin:6608728]]

I'd say he was average. His estimated wins added and value added are in line with Giannis, Joe Johnson, Josh Smith and Jeff Green. Both of those stats are based on production over what a replacement player would normally produce. He was the 14th SF in the league in both of those categories which is middle of the pack.

So that means he's average? I just don't get it I guess. He's the player other teams had to stop. He normally drew the toughest defensive assignment. Those facts just don't show up in the metrics you reference.

Here's what I would suggest. Can we come to a consensus on an NBA pundit, or a small group of pundits who's opinion would be respected on this matter? I'm talking about NBA analysts, not number crunchers. I'm talking about guys who have played or coached in the league. If we can agree on who to ask, let's simply ask them if Andrew Wiggins was an average player last year. And that's exactly how the question should be phrased based on the argument here. Most of these guys have twitter accounts, I'd be happy to reach out to them and post the results.

I don't see how his role with our team determines his status among his peers in the league and his overall quality of play. He had to guard and was guarded by a majority of the guys above him statistically at the position. Why does he get a break and a bump over the same guys scoring on him and defending him. It's not like he was guarding PG's or bigs. He was a high volume, low efficiency player who was a good but not great defender. There's nothing statistically or using the eye test that says he played better than the average SF in the league. Again, I think people are giving this guy a lot of credit for what he's going to be and not what he's done.

You mention he was our number 1 guy and thus his life was harder than the average SF. That gave him a big bump statistically that the average SF didn't have the luxury of getting. Look at his numbers when we were healthy compared to the end of the year. It's night and day. I just don't see how anyone could evaluate his season as above average compared to his peers. Go ahead and ask your expert what they think. Be sure to also ask where they rank Wiggins on the SF chart. Top 10? Top 15? If he's around 15 then he's an average SF.

[Coolbreeze44]

I'd say he was average. His estimated wins added and value added are in line with Giannis, Joe Johnson, Josh Smith and Jeff Green. Both of those stats are based on production over what a replacement player would normally produce. He was the 14th SF in the league in both of those categories which is middle of the pack.

So that means he's average? I just don't get it I guess. He's the player other teams had to stop. He normally drew the toughest defensive assignment. Those facts just don't show up in the metrics you reference.

Here's what I would suggest. Can we come to a consensus on an NBA pundit, or a small group of pundits who's opinion would be respected on this matter? I'm talking about NBA analysts, not number crunchers. I'm talking about guys who have played or coached in the league. If we can agree on who to ask, let's simply ask them if Andrew Wiggins was an average player last year. And that's exactly how the question should be phrased based on the argument here. Most of these guys have twitter accounts, I'd be happy to reach out to them and post the results.

I don't see how his role with our team determines his status among his peers in the league and his overall quality of play. He had to guard and was guarded by a majority of the guys above him statistically at the position. Why does he get a break and a bump over the same guys scoring on him and defending him. It's not like he was guarding PG's or bigs. He was a high volume, low efficiency player who was a good but not great defender. There's nothing statistically or using the eye test that says he played better than the average SF in the league. Again, I think people are giving this guy a lot of credit for what he's going to be and not what he's done.

You mention he was our number 1 guy and thus his life was harder than the average SF. That gave him a big bump statistically that the average SF didn't have the luxury of getting. Look at his numbers when we were healthy compared to the end of the year. It's night and day. I just don't see how anyone could evaluate his season as above average compared to his peers. Go ahead and ask your expert what they think. Be sure to also ask where they rank Wiggins on the SF chart. Top 10? Top 15? If he's around 15 then he's an average SF.

The argument is that he was below average last year. Stay on course here,.

[khans2k5 [enjin:6608728]]

I'd say he was average. His estimated wins added and value added are in line with Giannis, Joe Johnson, Josh Smith and Jeff Green. Both of those stats are based on production over what a replacement player would normally produce. He was the 14th SF in the league in both of those categories which is middle of the pack.

So that means he's average? I just don't get it I guess. He's the player other teams had to stop. He normally drew the toughest defensive assignment. Those facts just don't show up in the metrics you reference.

Here's what I would suggest. Can we come to a consensus on an NBA pundit, or a small group of pundits who's opinion would be respected on this matter? I'm talking about NBA analysts, not number crunchers. I'm talking about guys who have played or coached in the league. If we can agree on who to ask, let's simply ask them if Andrew Wiggins was an average player last year. And that's exactly how the question should be phrased based on the argument here. Most of these guys have twitter accounts, I'd be happy to reach out to them and post the results.

I don't see how his role with our team determines his status among his peers in the league and his overall quality of play. He had to guard and was guarded by a majority of the guys above him statistically at the position. Why does he get a break and a bump over the same guys scoring on him and defending him. It's not like he was guarding PG's or bigs. He was a high volume, low efficiency player who was a good but not great defender. There's nothing statistically or using the eye test that says he played better than the average SF in the league. Again, I think people are giving this guy a lot of credit for what he's going to be and not what he's done.

You mention he was our number 1 guy and thus his life was harder than the average SF. That gave him a big bump statistically that the average SF didn't have the luxury of getting. Look at his numbers when we were healthy compared to the end of the year. It's night and day. I just don't see how anyone could evaluate his season as above average compared to his peers. Go ahead and ask your expert what they think. Be sure to also ask where they rank Wiggins on the SF chart. Top 10? Top 15? If he's around 15 then he's an average SF.

The argument is that he was below average last year. Stay on course here,.

Read the thread. I said he was average. The thread creator said he was below average. Literally the first sentence that was quoted in this back and forth says that I said he was average.

[Coolbreeze44]

I'd say he was average. His estimated wins added and value added are in line with Giannis, Joe Johnson, Josh Smith and Jeff Green. Both of those stats are based on production over what a replacement player would normally produce. He was the 14th SF in the league in both of those categories which is middle of the pack.

So that means he's average? I just don't get it I guess. He's the player other teams had to stop. He normally drew the toughest defensive assignment. Those facts just don't show up in the metrics you reference.

Here's what I would suggest. Can we come to a consensus on an NBA pundit, or a small group of pundits who's opinion would be respected on this matter? I'm talking about NBA analysts, not number crunchers. I'm talking about guys who have played or coached in the league. If we can agree on who to ask, let's simply ask them if Andrew Wiggins was an average player last year. And that's exactly how the question should be phrased based on the argument here. Most of these guys have twitter accounts, I'd be happy to reach out to them and post the results.

I don't see how his role with our team determines his status among his peers in the league and his overall quality of play. He had to guard and was guarded by a majority of the guys above him statistically at the position. Why does he get a break and a bump over the same guys scoring on him and defending him. It's not like he was guarding PG's or bigs. He was a high volume, low efficiency player who was a good but not great defender. There's nothing statistically or using the eye test that says he played better than the average SF in the league. Again, I think people are giving this guy a lot of credit for what he's going to be and not what he's done.

You mention he was our number 1 guy and thus his life was harder than the average SF. That gave him a big bump statistically that the average SF didn't have the luxury of getting. Look at his numbers when we were healthy compared to the end of the year. It's night and day. I just don't see how anyone could evaluate his season as above average compared to his peers. Go ahead and ask your expert what they think. Be sure to also ask where they rank Wiggins on the SF chart. Top 10? Top 15? If he's around 15 then he's an average SF.

The argument is that he was below average last year. Stay on course here,.

Read the thread. I said he was average. The thread creator said he was below average. Literally the first sentence that was quoted in this back and forth says that I said he was average.

You're not the fulcrum on the argument. Read what I've been saying. Further, the original argument was not that he was a below average starter, it was a below average NBA player.

[Porckchop]

Two things are inherently true, I'm hard on Ricky. And Q is hard on every rookie that has ever played ... Except for Ricky.:)

[Shumway]

This is a great thread. Q, I think your points are probably true - but it feels a little bit like you're insulting my girlfriend and my instinct is to stand up for her. Funny how emotionally attached and biased we become.

I think we'd all agree that point one is far more important than point 2 though. Point one implies a projection of what he is likely to be for us over the course of his career whereas point 2 is very deliberately stated as a fact with limited context.