That's would be an extremely outlier situation....
Hardy Says Keyonte Has a Chance to be a Star
- Thread starter Saint Cy of JFC
- Start date
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
Agreed. I would also be cool with keyonte playing poorly next season which helps us get a top pick who becomes a star and keyonte never becoming great (I think it's an outlier situation that he becomes a star himself anyway). Or keyonte balling out and becoming a star himself.
Just saying that there is no pressure for him to play great next year for me.
He plays bad and that helps get a better draft pick? Cool. He plays great and looks like he might become a star? Also cool. I just hope he gets a ton of minutes.
Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
There’s some middle ground between, “this is no concern at all” and “he’s doomed”. Of course his performance rookie year means something. What it means to me is that he’s not one of these obvious Tier 1 prospects that looked certain to be stars. He’s not a Ja, Mitchell, Trae, Lamelo etc. Those guys are just different.
Key is in a group with other guards who received a ton of opportunity and usage early but weren’t necessarily good. There’s a wide spectrum of outcomes there. You have your guys like Garland and Fox who became all stars….you also have guys like Mudiay and Burke and your in betweens like Clarkson/CWhite.
Poor play is always a concern, it doesn’t mean he’s doomed….but it is a valid concern nonetheless. Personally, I think more attention should be given to his defense. His overall numbers/projections are in the dump right now because of that awful defense. On paper he was one of the worst in the entire NBA and the eye test ain’t pretty either. Offensively, he’s really not that bad even though he was inefficient.
Key is in a group with other guards who received a ton of opportunity and usage early but weren’t necessarily good. There’s a wide spectrum of outcomes there. You have your guys like Garland and Fox who became all stars….you also have guys like Mudiay and Burke and your in betweens like Clarkson/CWhite.
Poor play is always a concern, it doesn’t mean he’s doomed….but it is a valid concern nonetheless. Personally, I think more attention should be given to his defense. His overall numbers/projections are in the dump right now because of that awful defense. On paper he was one of the worst in the entire NBA and the eye test ain’t pretty either. Offensively, he’s really not that bad even though he was inefficient.
Some of the best players in NBA history are petulant children
You are so funny, like I'm not really sure if you really don't get it or not.
EFG% isn't some black box stat, it's an equation. Part of the equation is the same as fg%, so of course they are highly correlated.
(EFG% = (fgm + 0.53PM) / FGA)
True but guys like Iverson, Rodman, Cousins, etc. had the talent to get away with it, not sure Keyonte does.
Well, I can provide some context: out of 23 rookies who played at least 1,000 minutes Keyone had the 21st eFG with only Kris Murray and Scoot Henderson behind him. Keyonte's shooting efficiency has not simply been bad for the NBA player, it was among the worst for rookies playing meaningful minutes as well.
When you have such bad shooters as Ausar Thompson and Anthony Black being more efficient then there is some legitimate concern. Not a huge concern, but definetely something to watch for this season.
Sure but Utah was also putting out an unusually bad product for a decent portion of the season while asking Keyonte to play a new position. There's plenty of context to explain Keyonte's poor numbers that make them less concerning
I can’t tell if people are trolling or just don’t actually have any nuance when talking about these %’s. Makes it impossible to have a genuine conversation.
FG% is useless and efficiency only matters in the context of usage/degree of difficulty. I feel like this should be obvious but it’s at the center of all these posts.
FG% is useless and efficiency only matters in the context of usage/degree of difficulty. I feel like this should be obvious but it’s at the center of all these posts.
Interestingly, you did not have this "plenty of context" when commenting on another rookie who had a bad shooting season on a team putting out an unusually bad product, Scoot Henderson. You were consistently pretty hard on him.
Scoot Henderson had two years experience playing the PG position at a professional level with NBA rules....
Fosto
Well-Known Member
That's they key detail here. You can't be as bad as Keyonte was and still act like you're some big deal.
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
Exactly what I said in multiple posts. I literally posted that field goal percentage is not the only thing that determines efficiency. Just one indicator. I literally posted that they are related. Turns out they were/are.
I posted how efficiency and shooting (field goal% which includes 2pt% and 3 point%) can often be interchangeable terms (though not always. There are exceptions)
Ya i never got all the fuss. I simply said that keyontes poor shooting is no bueno which led to a huge discussion about nothing really. EFG is a better stat to show shooting efficiency. But field goal percentage is also a stat to show shooting efficiency. Was never a big deal to me.
I used fg% to show that KEYONTE (not another player) is an inefficient shooter. People be like you cant use fg% to show that keyonte is an inefficient shooter you have to use EFG. So I use EFG to show the exact same thing that the FG% showed. Eh, whatevers. Both stats show the thing that I want them to show to illustrate the point i was making. (keyonte was/is a bad inefficient shooter)
Last edited:
Key's attitude is almost always mentioned in a positive light. He's competive, plays with fire, talks a lot of trash ect....I'm more with you that his attitude/mentality is actually a concern. I think Key is competitive, but how does he see himself competing? Right now, and probably for his whole life, it's been by scoring on the other team. That's how he sees himself beating the other team. I don't think that's necessarily bad, but I don't think he's demonstrated the competitiveness that leads to him doing anything to win. Mamba mentality is a great brand....Tim Duncan mentality is probably what young players should aspire to have.
I think the intersection of both Key's and Hardy's disinterest in defense is a real concern.
When you say someone is inefficient, you are making a comparison vs what you think is efficient. Even though in the case of Keyonte fg% and efg% matches up, it won't in every case, so why not just use the metric that tells the more complete story?
It's only a big deal in the sense that you spend so much of your time talking about basketball that it's surprising you would use fg% to describe efficiency. It also becomes a big fuss when you try and justify using fg% despite our attempts to help you understand.
It's like saying I'm going to use my odometer to tell you how fast I'm going. Sure miles driven is part of the equation, but it only really makes sense to talk about mph.
There is nothing wrong about the Mamba mentality. Kobe has not been only obsessed with scoring, he was driving himself and teammates hard to improve in all facets of the game. He also pushed himself to become a great defender, free-throw shooter and rebounder, he was a totally elite passer for a SG, practiced hard, competed hard, was a strong leader... Kobe is a great role model for any young guard.
I think Key’s efficiency is a concern, but these arguments about FG% and/or comparing his efficiency against players in completely different roles really cheapen the argument.
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
Eh if I ever see that someone is shooting 39% from the field for a season then I know that player just had an inefficient season.
I can look at the efg as well to show me that the player was inefficient but I don't need to.
The mph things isn't true though. I have never seen miles driven to tell speed. I have seen field goal percentage used a million times to describe whether someone is playing efficiently or not.
Anyway, you could have seen me post that keyonte is inefficient and simply left it alone or agreed (as I'm sure you do)
Then when I used his 39% field goal percentage and his 37% college field goal percentage to add an indicator showing his inefficiency you could have left it alone or agreed (I'm sure you understand that those field goal percentages almost always, or maybe even 100% of the time, equal poor efg) but you chose to make a big fuss. Despite the multiple times of saying "I'm not trying to be a dick" (which usually means you realize you might be acting like a dick) and then acting condescending to me over and over again I just kept trying to explain myself without insult.
Maybe you could have been the problem in this situation?
Maybe next time I talk about statistics I should @ you to make sure I'm using the correct stats that you prefer in the correct way. Or you could just look at the point I'm making with the stats I'm using and see if you think it's an accurate point. If it is (like in this case) just accept that I didn't make my point the way you would and see that the point made was sound.
Sent from my CPH2451 using Tapatalk
Last edited: