Page 7 of 10
Re: The dumb and stupid Wiggins thread
Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2014 3:53 pm
by mjs34
AbeVigodaLive wrote:sjm34 wrote:AbeVigodaLive wrote:thedoper wrote:AbeVigodaLive wrote:thedoper wrote:.
Wiggins has also shown similarities to Kobe and TMac as 19 year olds.
I'm not seeing any similarities between Kobe Bryant and Andrew Wiggins at age 19 by the way.
Actually 20 games in to his second season, Kobe's percentages looked worse
http://espn.go.com/nba/player/gamelog/_/id/110/year/1998/kobe-bryant
What? No. Look again.
Are you certain you're not looking at his 20 games in the playoffs?
Bryant averaged 15 ppg the first month of the season. And 20 ppg in December.
On 40% shooting and 28% from 3, and he did on the lakers who had a few more weapons on the team.
Re: The dumb and stupid Wiggins thread
Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2014 3:58 pm
by AbeVigodaLive
sjm34 wrote:AbeVigodaLive wrote:sjm34 wrote:AbeVigodaLive wrote:thedoper wrote:I just don't get what is underwhelming about a rookie who everyone new needed work on his offensive game having ups and downs. One of the areas he was criticized on was his jump shot. Well regardless of sample size you don't shoot 40% from three in the NBA with a bad jumper. His decision making over the last five games was bad, but that stretch included getting very sick and recovering from that. To me his performance should be considered exactly what we expected, regardless of where he was picked. There are a lot of rookies with talent in this class but when the top 10 are all one and done players from now until forever, this is what you get out of 90% of the top tier draft picks in their rookie years. Very few have bucked the trend since the draft has trended toward youth and potential.
But that's the point. How many transcendent players started off in that 90% group?
The Wolves traded for Wiggins to be more than an average rookie... or even at the top end of that 90%. For the team to finally make the playoffs, or even get to .500 for the first time in 10+ years, Wiggins has to be a good player.
John Wall
Derrick Rose
Blake Griffin
Kyrie Irving
Kevin Durant
Recent #1 or #2 draft picks. They produced out of the gate and you knew instantly that they were destined for bigger and better things.
That's not to say Wiggins can't do it too. But he's shown more similarities to Darius Miles at this point.
We're all hoping he's just a bit rawer than most and that brighter days are ahead.
Actually that's not exactly correct Abe
http://espn.go.com/nba/player/gamelog/_/id/3202/year/2008/kevin-durant
I didn't bother to go past Durant, but I'm guessing you would see similar percentages other than for Blake since he actually didn't play a game his first season, and then pretty much only took layups and dunks, but Durant is probably the closest comparison size wise.
Darius Miles!!!! Seriously!!!
Cam, I am pretty sure that Barnes had actually fallen to 5 or lower before he decided to stay at UNC for his second year.
Wait. What?
Durant *was averaging 21 ppg his first month of the season. That's almost 2x more and with better percentages than Wiggins is putting up.
Wall was a 16/8 guy. I don't care if Blake Griffin only dunked off Deeandre Jordan's back as long as he was making an impact. Rose was a 17/6 guy with decent efficiency. Irving was 19 and 5.
Each guy looked the part immediately. *even though I was less than impressed with 1st year Durant. He seemed to have some bad habits... but he sure proved to overcome them... and then some.
As for Darius Miles... He averaged 10 ppg / 6 reb / / 1.6 blk / 53% fg in the month of December his rookie season. Again... we're talking production here... who does Wiggins more similarly to?
I pretty sure you were dissing WIggins on his percentages which are actually better than Durant's. You can sit here and cherry pick stats if you want, but I am not going to worry about Wiggins because he isn't taking over 17 shots a game on a team that thinks they have several other options. I guess we could put MCW up there with these top players since he put up 17/6/6 last season.
I'm cherry-picking stats?
What the hell? Durant scored a lot more with better efficiency than Wiggins... in possibly every category except for 3 point shooting where Wiggins has taken all of 29 attempts.
Carter-Williams was chosen 11th in a supposedly weak draft. Feel free to include him if you want but he wasn't a super high pick. You could add Oladipo though, that fits a bit better. He was #2.
Please explain.
Re: The dumb and stupid Wiggins thread
Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2014 4:03 pm
by AbeVigodaLive
sjm34 wrote:AbeVigodaLive wrote:sjm34 wrote:AbeVigodaLive wrote:thedoper wrote:AbeVigodaLive wrote:thedoper wrote:.
Wiggins has also shown similarities to Kobe and TMac as 19 year olds.
I'm not seeing any similarities between Kobe Bryant and Andrew Wiggins at age 19 by the way.
Actually 20 games in to his second season, Kobe's percentages looked worse
http://espn.go.com/nba/player/gamelog/_/id/110/year/1998/kobe-bryant
What? No. Look again.
Are you certain you're not looking at his 20 games in the playoffs?
Bryant averaged 15 ppg the first month of the season. And 20 ppg in December.
On 40% shooting and 28% from 3, and he did on the lakers who had a few more weapons on the team.
I feel like you're moving the goalposts on me. Let's backtrack...
So we agree you erred with your initial post, right?
Re: The dumb and stupid Wiggins thread
Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2014 4:17 pm
by mjs34
I included MCW because he put up the requisite volume stats you seem to be in love with. I've actually been hoping you might pick up the underlying point here, but you haven't. Stats only take you so far.
Kobe was taken at the end of the lottery. Cherry picking!
Kobe was playing on a well established team, and was coming off the bench. The lakers went 15-5 over that stretch with Kobe having a TS% around 50. He wasn't the reason they were winning games. Wiggins is starting on a team with no real PG, and 60% of the starting lineup out injured against other teams starters. Might not be a very good comparison.
You keep harping on 29 3's with Doper, but yet you seem willing to represent Wiggins on the other numbers. So only the 3pt% is a small sample size then?? got it!!
Durant, Rose and Wall were all below average players in efficiency in their rookie seasons. Of all the players you listed, Wiggins is the only one that has been touted for defensive ability. Shouldn't we have been more worried about the others?
Rose and Wall both scored less than 2pts more per 36 than Wiggins btw.
Re: The dumb and stupid Wiggins thread
Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2014 4:21 pm
by mjs34
AbeVigodaLive wrote:
I feel like you're moving the goalposts on me. Let's backtrack...
So we agree you erred with your initial post, right?
I don't think so, but you certainly did on holding back on the commentary at this point! :o
Re: The dumb and stupid Wiggins thread
Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2014 4:22 pm
by thedoper
I really need to reiterate that this thread is crazy. Let's not annoint Wiggins as the 2nd coming yet. In contrast let's not trade him. He needs better handles so he can get to the hoop more. His shot does look better than advertised despite the small sample size. He is not Wes Johnson. Do we all agree now?
Re: The dumb and stupid Wiggins thread
Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2014 4:29 pm
by khans2k5 [enjin:6608728]
How many of those top guys were drafted and played summer league with one team and then proceeded to be traded to a different team and have to learn a new system right out of the gate? How many of those top rookies joined teams where they were instantly the 4th option on offense instead of top 2? Combine those factors out of his control with the fact that he came into the league raw on offense already and I'd say he has fared pretty well. All of those players mentioned with the exception of Wall were bad to terrible defenders out of the gate who spent their time in college caring about offense, not defense. Some of them are still terrible defenders now. Wiggins is arguably the most raw of the bunch coming into the league and yet he is supposed to be at their level within 20 games of his NBA career? Jabari has been largely disappointing up until the last week or two and yet people have no problem thinking he'll turn out fine. This ten year drought has just sucked the patience out of most of this board and people are already starting to questions a 19 year olds future after 20 games of his career. I've seen how much Bennett and Bazz improved with one legitimate offseason. All I can say is watch out if Wiggins has an offseason of that caliber.
Re: The dumb and stupid Wiggins thread
Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2014 4:32 pm
by AbeVigodaLive
sjm34 wrote:AbeVigodaLive wrote:
I feel like you're moving the goalposts on me. Let's backtrack...
So we agree you erred with your initial post, right?
I don't think so, but you certainly did on holding back on the commentary at this point! :o
No. I thought with the blatant errors and leaps of statistical evidence, you were trolling me.
Honest.
Re: The dumb and stupid Wiggins thread
Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2014 5:13 pm
by Camden [enjin:6601484]
"18. Andrew Wiggins | Age: 19 | TimberwolvesProjected 3-year WARP: Minus-4.0Pelton: As promising as Wiggins is, he's been ineffective as a pro, making just 38.5 percent of his 2-point attempts with an assist-to-turnover ratio barely better than 1-to-2. As a result, his minus-1.4 WARP is the league's worst total.Thorpe: Wiggins already is showing the signs of being the best perimeter defender in the league, and perhaps the best shooting athlete (as a rookie) in generations. He's far from being skilled enough with his dribble to dominate games, though he will post up wings effectively, rare for a teenager.Elhassan: A lot of the gripe people have with Wiggins is actually tied to his lack of skill level. He doesn't settle for midrange jumpers because he's misguided; rather, it's because he doesn't possess the skill level to get to where he can be more efficient."
This is everything I've been saying for weeks/months.
Re: The dumb and stupid Wiggins thread
Posted: Wed Dec 10, 2014 5:56 pm
by mjs34
AbeVigodaLive wrote:sjm34 wrote:AbeVigodaLive wrote:
I feel like you're moving the goalposts on me. Let's backtrack...
So we agree you erred with your initial post, right?
I don't think so, but you certainly did on holding back on the commentary at this point! :o
No. I thought with the blatant errors and leaps of statistical evidence, you were trolling me.
Honest.
What blatant errors. I was absolutely positively correct on my statistics. The leaps seem to have come from your corner.