I'm waiting for your age?
Following potential 2014 draftees
- Thread starter Dr. Jones
- Start date
I'm waiting for your age?
Lol I'm 17, going to be a senior in high school. I am pwning you supposed "old experts".
One time he told us it really got to him that he couldn't use the N word in casual conversation like others in his peer group.
Lol!!!!!
Bump
This man speaks the truth here.
A. Gordon > Vonleh
Doublea
Well-Known Member
I said "So I'm taking that as a no." Because Damian Lillard wasn't in the tournament, meaning you couldn't watch him. The next part of what I wrote was the whole intent of that message, which you just ignored.
Game6Conley
Well-Known Member
im 26. whats it got to do with anything?
Man, chill. It was one question.
Game6Conley
Well-Known Member
Whats up though? you said you were sure im 19 or 20 explain yourself.
fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
2025 Award Winner
Weak Sauce
If you were to look at those four games in isolation, that would be a mistake (which you just did). That is the point.
Okay, 17 is half of 30. If you say so. I guess that is almost as reasonable as the rest of the analysis
So again you are analyzing a sample size smaller than 17 by subdividing the 17 into parts. Hard to make a strong argument that way, don't you think?
I'm very please to amuse you, you are welcome. And I'm glad you find "the indisputable truth" so laughable. Or are you saying that he did not make a higher frequency in his last 17 games? If so, go back and check the stats or the definition of "frequency"
In 15 of those game he did not shoot a three and his worst shooting game ever he was a horrendous 0-2 (yawn, this is like shooting fish in a barrel)
He really sucked in that Wisconsin game where he was 8-15 and 2-3 on 3P. And he only scored 18. If only he had been 9-15 we could draft him, because we know that the arbitrary threshhold of 20 points is what defines a player with great potential.
Great point, he sucked in that game too! Making 13 of 16 free throws against fourth ranked Syracuse, 3 blocks, 6 rebounds against a team who played a packed-in zone and hacked him every time he got a decent look. A truly subpar game, he only scored 17 points (because we know 20 is a very special number).
Malone at 20/10, not his fault. Vonley at 11/9, it is his fault. I'm following. And we know that La Tech had a stronger supporting cast than Indiana, so that Vonleh and Karl probably got the same number of touches and scoring opportunities. Truly apples to apples comparison, touche! (btw, I don't think Vonleh = Malone, so don't go there)
You grasped my argument perfectly. My logic is that we should evaluate a player based on their last 17 games. I've been schooled.
MMMMmmmmmm I like sauces!
If you were to look at those four games in isolation, that would be a mistake (which you just did). That is the point.
Okay, 17 is half of 30. If you say so. I guess that is almost as reasonable as the rest of the analysis
So again you are analyzing a sample size smaller than 17 by subdividing the 17 into parts. Hard to make a strong argument that way, don't you think?
I'm very please to amuse you, you are welcome. And I'm glad you find "the indisputable truth" so laughable. Or are you saying that he did not make a higher frequency in his last 17 games? If so, go back and check the stats or the definition of "frequency"
In 15 of those game he did not shoot a three and his worst shooting game ever he was a horrendous 0-2 (yawn, this is like shooting fish in a barrel)
He really sucked in that Wisconsin game where he was 8-15 and 2-3 on 3P. And he only scored 18. If only he had been 9-15 we could draft him, because we know that the arbitrary threshhold of 20 points is what defines a player with great potential.
Great point, he sucked in that game too! Making 13 of 16 free throws against fourth ranked Syracuse, 3 blocks, 6 rebounds against a team who played a packed-in zone and hacked him every time he got a decent look. A truly subpar game, he only scored 17 points (because we know 20 is a very special number).
Malone at 20/10, not his fault. Vonley at 11/9, it is his fault. I'm following. And we know that La Tech had a stronger supporting cast than Indiana, so that Vonleh and Karl probably got the same number of touches and scoring opportunities. Truly apples to apples comparison, touche! (btw, I don't think Vonleh = Malone, so don't go there)
You grasped my argument perfectly. My logic is that we should evaluate a player based on their last 17 games. I've been schooled.
MMMMmmmmmm I like sauces!
orangello
Well-Known Member
orangello
Well-Known Member
orangello
Well-Known Member
Well considering the ambush I got last year I'm gonna go with Smart.
In all honestly, I really see one of Wiggins/Parker/Embiid/Exum falling and being available at 5. I'd go with whoever falls and if they are all gone the Smart is my guy.
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Trashtalk
I am he as you are he as you are me
And we are all together
Old enough to know the song?