What's new
By:
Filters

Jabari Parker will be better than Andrew Wiggins

Computer said:
Cause the object of betting is to win, and you dont win apparently.
Click to expand...
1. Did I make a bet with someone? No? Ok.
2. Looking at wiggins career stats vs jabari it would appear that wiggins has a slight edge over Jabari though both have been pretty good.
3. I was saying that I thought Jabari would be the best stretch 4 of all time before he was drafted.
 
Last edited:
pretty clear that Hack spent christmas alone... on jazzfanz and his favorite porn sites. This is one of the saddest things I've ever seen on the internet
 
Computer said:
Yes we can. So far its looking very good for me. This will be my favorite presiction to come true.

Im sure their will still be people who dont believe it, but I believe it even more.

My man Jabari Parker. Straight up beast.

Its funny the thing that people disliked the most about him was his body. He is one of the most explosive players in the league right now.

The only thing stopping Jabari from averaging 25+ ppg right now is Giannis and his super high usage rate.
Click to expand...
Yeah, if it wasn't for Gianni's Parker would average 25 and the Bucks would never win a game.

Sent from my A0001 using JazzFanz mobile app
 
Jabari's breakdown:

Offense: Pts per 100 Poss.
ON COURT: 106.9
OFF COURT: 111.4
NET: -4.4
Defense: Pts per 100 Poss.
ON COURT: 109.6
OFF COURT: 100.7
NET: +8.9
Net Points per 100 Possessions
ON COURT: -2.7
OFF COURT: +10.7
NET: -13.3

Jabari obviously beasting it. These terrible ON/OFF COURT are true despite the fact that Jabari spends the VAST majority of his minutes surrounded by Giannis (an elite help defender) and a defense-oriented big (Henson or Plumlee). In other words, he's literally surrounded by help. Snell and Delly are the guards he plays the majority of his minutes with, and they aren't slouches either. Parker is the obvious problem on the defensive side of the ball.


For comparison, here's Giannis's breakdown:

Offense: Pts per 100 Poss.
ON COURT: 110.9
OFF COURT: 101.9
+9.0
Defense: Pts per 100 Poss.
ON COURT: 105.1
OFF COURT: 110.8
NET: -5.7
Net Points per 100 Possessions
ON COURT: +5.8
OFF COURT: -9.0
NET: +14.8

It would be ****ing terrifying if he were playing next to Gobert.
 
NAOS said:
Jabari's breakdown:

Offense: Pts per 100 Poss.
ON COURT: 106.9
OFF COURT: 111.4
NET: -4.4
Defense: Pts per 100 Poss.
ON COURT: 109.6
OFF COURT: 100.7
NET: +8.9
Net Points per 100 Possessions
ON COURT: -2.7
OFF COURT: +10.7
NET: -13.3

Jabari obviously beasting it. These terrible ON/OFF COURT are true despite the fact that Jabari spends the VAST majority of his minutes surrounded by Giannis (an elite help defender) and a defense-oriented big (Henson or Plumlee). In other words, he's literally surrounded by help. Snell and Delly are the guards he plays the majority of his minutes with, and they aren't slouches either. Parker is the obvious problem on the defensive side of the ball.


For comparison, here's Giannis's breakdown:

Offense: Pts per 100 Poss.
ON COURT: 110.9
OFF COURT: 101.9
+9.0
Defense: Pts per 100 Poss.
ON COURT: 105.1
OFF COURT: 110.8
NET: -5.7
Net Points per 100 Possessions
ON COURT: +5.8
OFF COURT: -9.0
NET: +14.8

It would be ****ing terrifying if he were playing next to Gobert.
Click to expand...

Watch this son. That defense though. Nasty!

[video=youtube_share;zkIDHBZHqXU]https://youtu.be/zkIDHBZHqXU
 
NAOS said:
how is a highlight video from one game an adequate counterargument to what I posted?
Click to expand...

Because you try to imply that he cant play defense. What does Giannis being a better defender have to do with Jabari anyways? You make it sound like you would rather have Tony Snell, John Henson, and Delly, on your team rather than Jabari. You arent making any good points at all actually. A basketball players worth is about the big picture. Not just some random stats you post to fit your narrative. James Harden is still a very good player despite being a subpar defender. But Im not even admitting Jabari is a bad defender. He is still young, and I beleive he will be a pretty good defender. But his offense is totally legit.

Point is, Jabari is going to be a top10 player very soon, and will be recognised as a better player than Wiggins when its all said and done.

Now post some stats about Wiggins. Youve proved nothing about the argument at hand.
 
Computer said:
Because you try to imply that he cant play defense. What does Giannis being a better defender have to do with Jabari anyways? You make it sound like you would rather have Tony Snell, John Henson, and Delly, on your team rather than Jabari. You arent making any good points at all actually. A basketball players worth is about the big picture. Not just some random stats you post to fit your narrative. James Harden is still a very good player despite being a subpar defender. But Im not even admitting Jabari is a bad defender. He is still young, and I beleive he will be a pretty good defender. But his offense is totally legit.

Point is, Jabari is going to be a top10 player very soon, and will be recognised as a better player than Wiggins when its all said and done.

Now post some stats about Wiggins. Youve proved nothing about the argument at hand.
Click to expand...

you're truly dumb
 
Wiggins:

Offense: Pts per 100 Poss.
ON COURT: 110.8
OFF COURT: 107.6
NET: +3.2
Defense: Pts per 100 Poss.
ON COURT: 114.4
OFF COURT: 110.6
NET: +3.8
Net Points per 100 Possessions
ON COURT: -3.6
OFF COURT: -3.0
NET:-0.6

*All the defensive stats for Wiggins have to be asterisked because he shares the floor with Lavine in his three most used lineups (essentially he's always on the floor with Lavine), and Lavine is a sieve. Rubio has also been bad this year, and Wiggins is either sharing the floor with him or Dunn, a rookie. In other words, Wiggins has no help on the perimeter. His stats are actually pretty impressive when all this is considered.
 
NAOS said:
Wiggins:

Offense: Pts per 100 Poss.
ON COURT: 110.8
OFF COURT: 107.6
NET: +3.2
Defense: Pts per 100 Poss.
ON COURT: 114.4
OFF COURT: 110.6
NET: +3.8
Net Points per 100 Possessions
ON COURT: -3.6
OFF COURT: -3.0
NET:-0.6

*All the defensive stats for Wiggins have to be asterisked because he shares the floor with Lavine in his three most used lineups (essentially he's always on the floor with Lavine), and Lavine is a sieve. Rubio has also been bad this year, and Wiggins is either sharing the floor with him or Dunn, a rookie. In other words, Wiggins has no help on the perimeter. His stats are actually pretty impressive when all this is considered.
Click to expand...

Haha.

This is a perfect example of how those stats dont matter as much as you think they do. You just debunked your own argument. Instead of putting the blame squarley on Wiggins like you do Lavine, suddenly now the teammates matter. I could just as easily say that its Wiggins and Rubio that are the defensive problem. But thats when you will run with my eye balls argument.
 
Computer said:
Haha.

This is a perfect example of how those stats dont matter as much as you think they do. You just debunked your own argument. Instead of putting the blame squarley on Wiggins like you do Lavine, suddenly now the teammates matter. I could just as easily say that its Wiggins and Rubio that are the defensive problem. But thats when you will run with my eye balls argument.
Click to expand...

You can run the exact same stats for Rubio and Lavine, then look at the lineups when Lavine and Rubio are off the court and Wiggins is on, and see that Wiggins is not the problem. This is all very basic stuff, but since it doesn't conform to your predetermined outcome, you won't consider it.

Frankly, I don't even know why I'm doing this. You're hopeless and pathetic. I have you on ignore, btw, so the only times I interact with you is when you quote one of my posts and I get an alert. I'm going to stop interacting for this reason, too.

Everybody who was responsible for your education failed. At some point in your life you're going to have stop surveying things for how they conflict with what you're already certain of, and let the facts change what you think you know. Until then, you'll be stuck with your miserable lot. Ciao dummy.
 
NAOS said:
You can run the exact same stats for Rubio and Lavine, then look at the lineups when Lavine and Rubio are off the court and Wiggins is on, and see that Wiggins is not the problem. This is all very basic stuff, but since it doesn't conform to your predetermined outcome, you won't consider it.

Frankly, I don't even know why I'm doing this. You're hopeless and pathetic. I have you on ignore, btw, so the only times I interact with you is when you quote one of my posts and I get an alert. I'm going to stop interacting for this reason, too.

Everybody who was responsible for your education failed. At some point in your life you're going to have stop surveying things for how they conflict with what you're already certain of, and let the facts change what you think you know. Until then, you'll be stuck with your miserable lot. Ciao dummy.
Click to expand...

Thats ok bruh. When Lavine is an allstar in a couple years you can cling to meaningless stats from the past all you want. Wont make a difference. He will still be a damn good player, and recognized as one by the entire NBA. You will just have to live with your bitter old self, and wonder where the calculations went wrong.
 
Computer said:
Thats ok bruh. When Lavine is an allstar in a couple years you can cling to meaningless stats from the past all you want. Wont make a difference. He will still be a damn good player, and recognized as one by the entire NBA. You will just have to live with your bitter old self, and wonder where the calculations went wrong.
Click to expand...

I've said all along that he might be a good player if he put in a lot of work. And I've also said that he's further along than I thought he'd be at this point. My major gripe with you is that you think you're peddling some proven truth that you were the first on JFC to uncover, when the performance on the court is provably against what you're saying. Both Jabari and Zach have to TRANSFORM certain elements of their game in order to be plus players. Not IMPROVE. TRANSFORM. It's also ****ing annoying how you think you're on the cutting edge, when all you're doing is repackaging the college hype that those of us who follow the darft threads are already so versed on that you simply sound 9 months late to the party, at best. You're not hyping Jabari or Zach for different reasons than they were being hyped as seniors in High School. It's dumb. Keep pounding your chest, doe. Asshat.
 
NAOS said:
I've said all along that he might be a good player if he put in a lot of work. And I've also said that he's further along than I thought he'd be at this point. My major gripe with you is that you think you're peddling some proven truth that you were the first on JFC to uncover, when the performance on the court is provably against what you're saying. Both Jabari and Zach have to TRANSFORM certain elements of their game in order to be plus players. Not IMPROVE. TRANSFORM. It's also ****ing annoying how you think you're on the cutting edge, when all you're doing is repackaging the college hype that those of us who follow the darft threads are already so versed on that you simply sound 9 months late to the party, at best. You're not hyping Jabari or Zach for different reasons than they were being hyped as seniors in High School. It's dumb. Keep pounding your chest, doe. Asshat.
Click to expand...

So in other words. You lose, and you give up. Lmao. Dont try to spin it. We both know what you have been saying over the last 3 years. Now you look stupid. Dont try to erase the past weak *** chump.

Your opinion is garbage son. I straight pwned you. Basketball is not your thing. Maybe you should try another forum.
 
Computer said:
So in other words. You lose, and you give up. Lmao. Dont try to spin it. We both know what you have been saying over the last 3 years. Now you look stupid. Dont try to erase the past weak *** chump.

Your opinion is garbage son. I straight pwned you. Basketball is not your thing. Maybe you should try another forum.
Click to expand...

It's no surprise that you mistake my EXHAUSTION WITH YOUR STUPIDITY with WINNING.

This is my last message to you. I sincerely hope you turn things around.
 
NAOS said:
It's no surprise that you mistake my EXHAUSTION WITH YOUR STUPIDITY with WINNING.

This is my last message to you. I sincerely hope you turn things around.
Click to expand...

You still dont get it. Lol

I win no matter what. I beat your lame *** arguments, and I win by you quiting because its always a win when you stfu.

Double L for you son.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top