Minnesota Sports Forum

sjm34 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

Look at what I wrote again.

To summarize: Based on #1 draft picks in recent NBA history (10+ years), Wiggins at the pace he was playing at... would be an anomaly if he ended up as a superstar. None of the other stars had started out that poorly. But there was still time...

And I was clear to mention that I didn't think Wiggins was in the camp of the failed #1 picks.

Was it fair to group Wiggins only with other #1 draft picks? That part can be debated. But that's where the anomaly part came in from in any case. As for the free throw stuff... meh. Whether it's only from free throws or respect from opponents, it's not realistic to expect a rookie to get preferential treatment from officials. I took the post as "it's the refs fault." Personally, I think Wiggins has been officiated pretty fairly. He shoots a ton of mid-range jumpers yet still shoots a pretty solid number of free throws.

In fact, I think shooting 4 attempts already is a great sign. There's so much more opportunity there. I'd like to see him double that total in the next couple of years so he's near the league leaders. As Goldberry's article discusses today, learning what is and what isn't a good shot should help a lot.

That isn't true though. You looked at a full season for those other #1 picks, not their first twenty some games. I remember watching the wolves a game later (believe you stated you went to the game), and Petersen put up a stat that Lebron after 20 games had a fg% of 38 or 39. Some rookies hit the ground running and teams learn to adjust to them, while others need to find their way, and make slow steady progress. Most of us knew that Wiggins was going to be the latter. Bottom line is that all the rookies go through steps during the year, and comparing one guy after 26 games to full seasons for the rest is an unfair comp.

Regardless of how you interpreted my ref bias has no bearing on you making a jump to Wiggins shooting 11 FT's and then in another post poking fun at that jump. You skewed what I said, even after I further explained what I meant, and then had some snarky comment about you will continue to watch the games objectively.

You said something like Wiggins would be scoring (x) number of points more if wasn't for lousy officiating.
I found that statement humorous and unrealistic. Meh. Big deal. I'll probably rip you for other comments like that about officiating too. It was pure conjecture with a "they're out to get us" vibe. Every player in the NBA can complain about not getting foul calls. It's not just Wiggins.

James did struggle with his shooting for most of his rookie season. But shooting isn't the only stat. James was also averaging around 20 points with 5+ assists and 5+ rebounds after 26 games. From his first game, he "looked" like a star, and had multiple games or moments when he played like it... we can debate whether that's relevant or not.

Wiggins really wasn't filling the stat sheet like James and his "whoa" moments were harder to come by. A play here, a play there. But, a game? Granted, since then he's had some definite moments and games. He went on a very good, very promising run.

And for the 312th time... that's awesome. That's what we all were wishing for then and we're still wishing for now. It's ok to use stats to show that a player isn't playing well. Even if it's your favorite player for your favorite team. Even it's after 26 games, 4 seasons or one week. As long as it's with a disclaimer, which we all gave in that thread. He's playing bad now... but he has time to improve. Again. Pretty simple premise. Don't know how it got to this point.

Not a person said Wiggins was a lousy player or wouldn't amount to anything. Not one. So let's get that straight for the 312the time. But he was struggling at the time more than any recent "legit" #1 pick. Not in every category, but in some of them. More categories than the other #1 picks (and there are many factors for this, obviously, that have been and can be discussed without personal shots).

Good to see Wiggins getting better though. I knew all along that he would. I'm pretty smart that way.

Q12543 wrote:Cool, if you are going to go single out a comment I made from an old thread and regurgitate it as a "gotcha" post (which I didn't really appreciate, but hopefully responded to in a respectful manner), than you shouldn't get all hot and bothered when Cam makes a couple of snarky comments in the course of a game thread.

Generally this board keeps things respectful. We should try to keep it that way.

Gotta say... I found the backlash from a couple of posters toward q more puzzling than anything.

I don't agree with everything he discusses (I mean, Adrien and Dieng together? What an idiot!!!) But I think the guy is one of the more astute basketball minds here with good insights often supported by stats. And, I don't remember a single time when he's gotten too snarky or disrespectful.

Keep up the good work, q.



[Note: Wasn't it q's thread that sorta got the clownshow going again? It was a great premise. Sadly, that disaster seemed to have curbed those. Too bad.]

"[Note: Wasn't it q's thread that sorta got the clownshow going again? It was a great premise. Sadly, that disaster seemed to have curbed those. Too bad.]"

I believe Q started a thread defending Thad... And you know where that went.

Q, Lip and LST rarely get into any sort of altercation on here. While I don't always agree with their views on the NBA, Wolves or Twins (LST -- Pelfrey lol), I always value their posts because of how they're written. So, kudos to them. Hopefully this board gets back to what it used to be without losing any of the regulars.

AbeVigodaLive wrote:You said something like Wiggins would be scoring (x) number of points more if wasn't for lousy officiating. I found that statement humorous and unrealistic. .

Here's a recent quote from Flip on Wiggins not getting calls: "He can't play in a game like that," Saunders said. "He got fouled. They didn't call any fouls. He didn't shoot any free throws. Next year or the year after, he'll gain a reputation and get more calls."

http://www.startribune.com/sports/wolves/288901981.html

Carlos Danger wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:You said something like Wiggins would be scoring (x) number of points more if wasn't for lousy officiating. I found that statement humorous and unrealistic. .

Here's a recent quote from Flip on Wiggins not getting calls: "He can't play in a game like that," Saunders said. "He got fouled. They didn't call any fouls. He didn't shoot any free throws. Next year or the year after, he'll gain a reputation and get more calls."

http://www.startribune.com/sports/wolves/288901981.html

I think Phil Jackson said something similar about Kobe Bryant back in the day.


[Note: And as I noted previously, I think Wiggins has a chance to be among the league leaders in attempts within a couple or few years. He'll be bigger and stronger. And, he'll have a better handle. And, he'll know how to sell those calls. How to get in position for them. AND... he'll have more of a reputation. But even with all those things happening, we're looking at an average of 4 or 5 more attempts per game. That's a lot of stuff that has to happen to get there... officiating is but one of them.]

Camden wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:There's a monumental difference between being critical of a 7 year veteran simply not playing hard until recently and a 19 year old rookie 26 games into his career. Getting a week of good play from Thad doesn't make him being terrible for a month+ ok. When you're in the league that long making 9 million dollars and you aren't playing hard, you are basically stealing money from the franchise. Then Cam trolling us with his "look, Thad finally had a good game" leads to people attacking him because he has been talking up Thad all year and Thad just hasn't been worth the money and the pick he cost us. Wiggins being bad for that stretch is part of the growing pains of being a rookie, but nobody has ever questioned whether or not he was at least trying on the court. That's the huge difference between the two situations.

Not what I said. Just more misquoting on this board.

Hey, I was 100% on board with trading Bennett instead of the draft pick, but you more-or-less said I was terribly wrong and that we wouldn't get a comparable player of his talent with that pick. That can be found in the "Which would you rather give up?" thread.

And again, I digress.

I wasn't quoting a direct line, but more of your process of insistently posting every time Thad is close to a good game trying to prove he is a good starting PF in this league. You even give Thad credit for stuff like efficiency in games where his point total equals his shot total. That isn't efficient and yet there you are trying to talk him up again like he is doing something he is not. Thad hasn't put together 10 good games this year and it's been 38 games. That's a little troubling given his tenure in the league. You were the conductor of the Thad train coming into the season and it hasn't worked out well so far. You have diverted blame for his level of play more to the players around him than him just not being that good to date. Trading the cheaper player for the pick doesn't make sense on a team who is going to lose anyway. You take the chance on the cheaper, unknown #1 pick over the 7 year veteran role player every time on a rebuilding team. Thad has played well lately, but that is a 5 game stretch out of 38 games this year and for a veteran that just isn't good enough. Thad could still improve and play well the rest of the season, but he is posting less empty stats than Love with just as crappy defense and it cost us a 1st round pick. I said right when we got Thad that he wouldn't be a good fit on this roster, but I was willing to give him a shot. He took that shot and brutally murdered it with his lack of effort for a large chunk of the season and being an atrocious defender (of which a big factor has been his lack of effort).

khans2k5 wrote:

Camden wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:There's a monumental difference between being critical of a 7 year veteran simply not playing hard until recently and a 19 year old rookie 26 games into his career. Getting a week of good play from Thad doesn't make him being terrible for a month+ ok. When you're in the league that long making 9 million dollars and you aren't playing hard, you are basically stealing money from the franchise. Then Cam trolling us with his "look, Thad finally had a good game" leads to people attacking him because he has been talking up Thad all year and Thad just hasn't been worth the money and the pick he cost us. Wiggins being bad for that stretch is part of the growing pains of being a rookie, but nobody has ever questioned whether or not he was at least trying on the court. That's the huge difference between the two situations.

Not what I said. Just more misquoting on this board.

Hey, I was 100% on board with trading Bennett instead of the draft pick, but you more-or-less said I was terribly wrong and that we wouldn't get a comparable player of his talent with that pick. That can be found in the "Which would you rather give up?" thread.

And again, I digress.

I wasn't quoting a direct line, but more of your process of insistently posting every time Thad is close to a good game trying to prove he is a good starting PF in this league. You even give Thad credit for stuff like efficiency in games where his point total equals his shot total. That isn't efficient and yet there you are trying to talk him up again like he is doing something he is not. Thad hasn't put together 10 good games this year and it's been 38 games. That's a little troubling given his tenure in the league. You were the conductor of the Thad train coming into the season and it hasn't worked out well so far. You have diverted blame for his level of play more to the players around him than him just not being that good to date. Trading the cheaper player for the pick doesn't make sense on a team who is going to lose anyway. You take the chance on the cheaper, unknown #1 pick over the 7 year veteran role player every time on a rebuilding team. Thad has played well lately, but that is a 5 game stretch out of 38 games this year and for a veteran that just isn't good enough. Thad could still improve and play well the rest of the season, but he is posting less empty stats than Love with just as crappy defense and it cost us a 1st round pick. I said right when we got Thad that he wouldn't be a good fit on this roster, but I was willing to give him a shot. He took that shot and brutally murdered it with his lack of effort for a large chunk of the season and being an atrocious defender (of which a big factor has been his lack of effort).

Deep down this is what bothers me too. Cam never misses an opportunity to single out Thad for something he does well, even if it wasn't anything special. And he never criticizes him for some of his atrocious play. Even though I've been particularly hard on him, at least I've given him the occasional compliment when deserved. I've just never seen a player be so inept and careless on defense. I mean he is really a joke on that end of the floor. I don't care what statistics you can come up with to say otherwise, I see him through the lens of a coach. And he would rarely see the floor on my team.

As far as some of the recent off comments by myself go, I wish I could take them back. Most of you know that is not my normal demeanor on here. Maybe it's the frustration of this season that is getting to me, or I just had some bad moments. I truly respect all the posters on here, and can't think of anyone I harbor any real dislike for.

AbeVigodaLive wrote:


And for the 312th time... that's awesome. That's what we all were wishing for then and we're still wishing for now. It's ok to use stats to show that a player isn't playing well. Even if it's your favorite player for your favorite team. Even it's after 26 games, 4 seasons or one week. As long as it's with a disclaimer, which we all gave in that thread. He's playing bad now... but he has time to improve. Again. Pretty simple premise. Don't know how it got to this point.

Not a person said Wiggins was a lousy player or wouldn't amount to anything. Not one. So let's get that straight for the 312the time. But he was struggling at the time more than any recent "legit" #1 pick. Not in every category, but in some of them. More categories than the other #1 picks (and there are many factors for this, obviously, that have been and can be discussed without personal shots).

Okay, on a real serious note. I have to know... what made you pick 312? :cool:

CoolBreeze44 wrote:As far as some of the recent off comments by myself go, I wish I could take them back. Most of you know that is not my normal demeanor on here. Maybe it's the frustration of this season that is getting to me, or I just had some bad moments. I truly respect all the posters on here, and can't think of anyone I harbor any real dislike for.

Respect to you for owning up. It's not easy to admit wrong. We all get frustrated at times and I know for me personally once in a while it's hard to keep contained.