It is never as simple as picking the better player. The Rockets won that Battier for Gay trade couple years back because they needed to win then and now the Grizz took him back because they needed to win now. Battier is a great glue guy and you are missing the point of comparing him to stars that are better than him. Sounds like you only play NBA Jam.
It is never as simple as picking the better player. The Rockets won that Battier for Gay trade couple years back because they needed to win then and now the Grizz took him back because they needed to win now. Battier is a great glue guy and you are missing the point of comparing him to stars that are better than him. Sounds like you only play NBA Jam.
I offer the rebuttal asked and you refuse me?, I'd love a response.Originally Posted by kix4kix
Game bruh, seriously. For instance, alot of these guys in the pro were statistically unimpressive in college/Europe, Take Marvin Williams, and Brandon Jennings respectively- If they were drafted on college production like Sheldon Williams who was perhaps the greatest reach in NBA draft history than they would have never been drafted as high as they were.Originally Posted by dland24
When you have a group of players who are extremely close in terms of their value to their teams, what should you use to compare them then?Originally Posted by kix4kix
Don't use that talk on here, cats love talking about stats I didn't even know existed, let alone used to determine the value of a basketball player. I love stats as much as the next man, but when it is the crux of an argument.Sometimes I don't need to see the stat line to know a value of a given player, I just need eyes.
You say it shouldnt be used as the crux of an argument. But what should then? Your eyes? Isnt the point of arguing to provide some sort of evidence or basis of your argument? When you are comparing two (or three) players to each other, if you cant use stats to compare, what can you use?
I am seriously asking this. Id love a response.
Also stats rely so much on playing time, and rosters. For instance, before Al Jefferson was traded, if one based off stats alone would they not say Jefferson > Love?
Stats are nice to support an argument, but the first and foremost thing should be their game, and anyone who has hooped, knows damn well 80% of what goes on does not show up in the boxscore. It's really quite simple, can one play or not? If they are close enough to where stats are needed, it is probably subjective at that point anyway......
"Lies, damned lies, and statistics"
I offer the rebuttal asked and you refuse me?, I'd love a response.Originally Posted by kix4kix
Game bruh, seriously. For instance, alot of these guys in the pro were statistically unimpressive in college/Europe, Take Marvin Williams, and Brandon Jennings respectively- If they were drafted on college production like Sheldon Williams who was perhaps the greatest reach in NBA draft history than they would have never been drafted as high as they were.Originally Posted by dland24
When you have a group of players who are extremely close in terms of their value to their teams, what should you use to compare them then?Originally Posted by kix4kix
Don't use that talk on here, cats love talking about stats I didn't even know existed, let alone used to determine the value of a basketball player. I love stats as much as the next man, but when it is the crux of an argument.Sometimes I don't need to see the stat line to know a value of a given player, I just need eyes.
You say it shouldnt be used as the crux of an argument. But what should then? Your eyes? Isnt the point of arguing to provide some sort of evidence or basis of your argument? When you are comparing two (or three) players to each other, if you cant use stats to compare, what can you use?
I am seriously asking this. Id love a response.
Also stats rely so much on playing time, and rosters. For instance, before Al Jefferson was traded, if one based off stats alone would they not say Jefferson > Love?
Stats are nice to support an argument, but the first and foremost thing should be their game, and anyone who has hooped, knows damn well 80% of what goes on does not show up in the boxscore. It's really quite simple, can one play or not? If they are close enough to where stats are needed, it is probably subjective at that point anyway......
"Lies, damned lies, and statistics"
