Very good post Harcher.
Only one team plays in this game then? For a second there, I thought you were being outrageously intellectually dishonest.
This "evidence" doesn't prove that he'll be worthy of the pick, it just is what we have to go on. It is more than "one game."
Thee Jazz Fan has pointed out that only 4 players from the list in Borat's OP provide were EXPECTED to be something at the NBA level. The others weren't busts because they were not expected to be NBA players.
May I ask why you chose point cut-off value of 15? Why not 10? That would prove you right even more. I'm struggling to understand since when 15pts game makes it outstanding for a player.I didn't address this comment, because I thought the answer was obvious, but let me spell it out for you. You have to look at entire list, not just 4 guys. If Kanter played anywhere, maybe he wouldn't be on the 1st round radar either, like many other guys who did well. But Kanter did not play for any senior team in Europe nor NCAA, so we just don't know. So, you have to look at entire list, not at 4 guys who were projected in the first round after they actually accomplished something. And out of this list, I see only 1 franchise player: Dirk.
What are you talking about?
I didn't address this comment, because I thought the answer was obvious, but let me spell it out for you. You have to look at entire list, not just 4 guys.
I wouldn't think you'd be that dense, you should keep trying.
Why do you have to look at the entire list? And as a previous poster said, why did you pick 15 pts? Why not 20 pts? Why not 25 pts? Without explaining why 15 pts is the magic number, it is nonsensical for you to say you have to look at the entire list.
Also, please post the comparable list for U.S. players. I'm sincerely wondering how many of the 15 pt scorers of them are stars vs busts. And for that matter, how many of the 30 pt scorers are stars vs busts.
15 points is no magic number, I just used it as a logical indicator that someone did "well" in the game. As far as US players, I can provide these stats too later on, but felt world's team would be more relevant. Kanter would not even make the US team based on his HS record.
If you have a point to make, feel free to make one any time. So far you have not succeeded in that department.
So you picked the # and the side that benefited your argument. An irrelevant # that you came up with off the top of your head. Why not go with 30 Pts? Because it did not fit your argument. Why not go with 15 pts and a 1st round pick? because it did not fit your argument.
The point is you came up with a worthless stat that means nothing and now your defending it like it's the only argument. Convienient since it's the only argument you have.
I have not succeeded because you are too dumb, then, apparently.
My point is, the international team isn't the only team playing.
You isolate his team (and points scored in a completely arbitrary fashion) to make a point that is absurd. Why don't you show a list of the GAME-high scores over the years, from BOTH teams? That's rhetorical, I know why, and that's why it's terrible 'analysis'.
You are just being ridiculous here and ignore a valuable finding.
So humble too. I guess I'll go on being ridiculous while you do clearly slanted research to support this axe you have to grind against some kid from Turkey.
I'm not sure how I feel about Kanter, but anything you have to say I put in the same box as underKANTER and Turkish Delight.