| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Luminous8
Star Player
Joined: 26 Apr 2017
Posts: 2192
|
 Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 5:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MJST wrote: | | SocalDevin wrote: | | MJST wrote: | | Halflife wrote: | | On his way to an all star career, from next year on. |
based on? |
These are the kinds of exchanges that lead to nothing.
You can't prove that he won't be an all-star.. Half can't prove that he will.
Why not just let him believe that? |
usually there's evidence you can go off of outside of "it's just a feeling." that's all I'm asking for, really.
But it's apparently gotten to the point you no longer have to use facts to backup what you say and if someone brings a legitimate argument or concern or criticism which is backed up with facts, the response is.
"Why can't you just be happy with what we have?" or "Why do you have to be so critical?" or "oh this site.. where all people wanna do is bring down our young talent."
That's not the best response to someone that is bringing fact to the table along with legit criticism, and it's usually a response to said criticism when there's no real defense for it.
It's essentially saying "I'd rather live in my own bubble where all the problem are miniscule and they'll obviously be a star one day."
there's nothing wrong with wanting someone to be a star, there's also nothing wrong with acknowledging a player's shortcomings because you actually want to see them improve them.
It seems like when it comes to short comings, it's either hyperbole, or legitimate, but if you respond with facts against hyperbole, you're a "homer" or a "stan" and if someone brings legitimate facts to the table, they're a "hater" or "Non appreciative of what we have."
It's tiring tbh. |
What's tiring is how quick you are to jump at the opportunity to jump all over everybody's flaws on this team except one certain player who 4 years in still shows PLENTY of flaws including making decisions, team D, shooting, and finishing over legit length. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
SocalDevin
Star Player
Joined: 26 May 2016
Posts: 7825
Location: Long Beach
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 5:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MJST wrote: | | SocalDevin wrote: | | MJST wrote: | | Halflife wrote: | | On his way to an all star career, from next year on. |
based on? |
These are the kinds of exchanges that lead to nothing.
You can't prove that he won't be an all-star.. Half can't prove that he will.
Why not just let him believe that? |
usually there's evidence you can go off of outside of "it's just a feeling." that's all I'm asking for, really.
But it's apparently gotten to the point you no longer have to use facts to backup what you say and if someone brings a legitimate argument or concern or criticism which is backed up with facts, the response is.
"Why can't you just be happy with what we have?" or "Why do you have to be so critical?" or "oh this site.. where all people wanna do is bring down our young talent."
That's not the best response to someone that is bringing fact to the table along with legit criticism, and it's usually a response to said criticism when there's no real defense for it.
It's essentially saying "I'd rather live in my own bubble where all the problem are miniscule and they'll obviously be a star one day."
there's nothing wrong with wanting someone to be a star, there's also nothing wrong with acknowledging a player's shortcomings because you actually want to see them improve them.
It seems like when it comes to short comings, it's either hyperbole, or legitimate, but if you respond with facts against hyperbole, you're a "homer" or a "stan" and if someone brings legitimate facts to the table, they're a "hater" or "Non appreciative of what we have."
It's tiring tbh. |
That's an interesting perspective.. It's off, but interesting. Here's what's wrong with it.
You're using what you refer to as facts to make predictions. Predictions and facts are two entirely different things.
I suppose you could make the argument that your "prediction" and that's really all it is.. is more valid because it's based on data. And that's fine, I'm a man of reason, this makes sense to me.
At the end of the day your conclusion is nothing more than a guess not a fact. It can't be proven, which makes you questioning half about Ingram being an all-star pointless.
Your current facts/stats aren't the equivalent to a crystal ball. Never will be. Nor can they be for a raw product, and that's what you have in Ingram.. A raw product. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MJST
Retired Number
Joined: 06 Jul 2014
Posts: 26392
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 5:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Halflife wrote: | | MJST wrote: | | Halflife wrote: | | On his way to an all star career, from next year on. |
based on? |
Because strength is the only thing holding him back. He picked up where he ended last season. |
But it's not. His jumper is.
Ingram's lack of 'strength' is not preventing him from being a good finisher.
Ingram is shooting 59.1% on his finishes. That's pretty darn impressive for a kid without strength, but it's because of his length. So that's no longer an issue.
The problem with Ingram, which people hated on GT for pointing out, IS his jumper.
Brandon Ingram is shooting 25.5% from mid, and 30.4% from three.
THOSE are what's wrong with Ingram right now.
Ben Simmons for his lack of shooting ability shoots 36.8% from mid.
Giannis for his lack of shooting ability shoots 37.8% from mid.
Both at a higher % than Brandon Ingram and their jumpshots are considered the weakest parts of their game. But they are both better at it than Ingram. That's the problem for a kid whose jumper was supposed to be his strength while his strength was weak.
So people can harp on GT bringing up Ingram's jumper all they want to and act like it's just a matter of strength... but it's just not true.
Acting like it isn't a big deal, or outright ignoring the fact that Brandon Ingram is shooting 25.5% from mid, and 30.4% from three. Is part of the problem.
If we remove "heaves" from Julius Randle's three point shooting, he's shooting 33% from three this year, if you remove the one corner three Randle's missed he's shooting 37.5% from three this year.
But you see... THIS is where analytics are supposed to come into the equation. Because Ingram's three point percentage could be much different if we had a coach that understood how to utilize the information given.
What if I told you that Brandon Ingram has shot 12.5% on his corner threes(both sides including) this season?
But everywhere else around the three point line, he's shot 42.9% ...
Now, what would that little bit of information tell you? That you want to set him up for spot up situations anywhere but the corners right? Welp.... someone tell Luke that too..or maybe they have, and he just doesn't utilize it cause his X's and O's suck.
Either way, when we consider Ingram's 'inside the arc' game that gets so much praise, he's shooting 25.5% from mid...
It's not a matter of strength at this point... and it's about time that got acknowledged.
| SocalDevin wrote: |
That's an interesting perspective.. It's off, but interesting. Here's what's wrong with it.
You're using what you refer to as facts to make predictions. Predictions and facts are two entirely different things.
I suppose you could make the argument that your "prediction" and that's really all it is.. is more valid because it's based on data. And that's fine, I'm a man of reason, this makes sense to me.
At the end of the day your conclusion is nothing more than a guess not a fact. |
It's a guess based on statistical data. Which is always the most accurate basis to form a 'guess' or a 'theory' upon. You don't want to be the guy that goes "You guess/theory based on statistical evidence, facts, and backed up with an actual point holds less merit than the person without all of those things but pushing the opposite."
The person that has evidence against a fact gets told "you're just not patient enough/just wrong" by the person whom has none to back up the other side of things. That's a problem.
As soon as there's actual evidence given for the other side of things, then I'll join in and go "He has all-star potential." Because the stats will actually start to back up that evidence beyond 'just a feeling' cause that's how these things work.
But till then, I need more than "wait and see" when the facts are right there in front of me for a second year guy. The moment Ingram starts turning around those kind of numbers AND the ones I posted about above, then I'll maybe join into that line of thinking. Till then I'm gonna need more than "just have faith".
_________________
How NBA 2K18 failed the All-Time Lakers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxMBYm3wwxk
Last edited by MJST on Sun Nov 19, 2017 5:57 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mookielala
Star Player
Joined: 29 Jul 2012
Posts: 3026
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 5:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Developing strength will help BI's game a lot, as will shooting practice. Given his work ethic, both will be a focus for the next couple years. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MJST
Retired Number
Joined: 06 Jul 2014
Posts: 26392
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 6:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mookielala wrote: | | Developing strength will help BI's game a lot, as will shooting practice. Given his work ethic, both will be a focus for the next couple years. |
He worked on it(his jumper) this off-season but it's actually been worse, thus far this season.
Brandon Ingram last season:
Mid Range - 33.6%
Three Pointers - 33.3%
Brandon Ingram this season
Mid Range - 25.5%
Three Pointers - 30.4%
The only improvement in Ingram's offensive game has been his finishing
Brandon Ingram last season
Finishing in the paint - 57.1%
Brandon Ingram this season
Finishing in the paint - 59.1%
So his jumper has regressed, while his finishing is 2% higher with his added strength.
Again... strength isn't the issue.
_________________
How NBA 2K18 failed the All-Time Lakers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxMBYm3wwxk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SocalDevin
Star Player
Joined: 26 May 2016
Posts: 7825
Location: Long Beach
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 6:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You keep using that word facts wrong.. Again..
You are using what you call facts to arrive at a conclusion. Now you can make the argument that the vehicle you are using to arrive at that conclusion is more sound or has more validity. That I will give you.. but outside of that you're simply off the mark.
Here is an actual fact.. You are making a prediction. You aren't expressing a fact when you express your conclusion. Predictions and facts aren't the same thing boss, lets not confuse the two.
The facts/data you are using to arrive at those conclusions you are making are subject to change. Since the facts/data you are using aren't immutable your opinions are fluid in nature.
All you have is a snapshot of what he is currently, and how one interprets the entirety of that picture is subjective. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MJST
Retired Number
Joined: 06 Jul 2014
Posts: 26392
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 6:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SocalDevin wrote: | \
You are using what you call facts to arrive at a conclusion. |
And that is how you do it.
I'm making a prediction or a conclusion about where he currently is based upon the facts that actually exist and the evidence that actually exists.
I am not making a prediction based upon evidence I don't have. I can hope it, wish it, or even dream it, but I'll have nothing to back it up.
Again, like I said, IF Ingram's play started to trend toward him being an all-star, or soon to be all-star talent, then the stats WILL back up the trend and show him progressing in that direction and then I can buy into it and have actual evidence to prove it.
Again, that's how this works.
_________________
How NBA 2K18 failed the All-Time Lakers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxMBYm3wwxk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
VicXLakers
Franchise Player
Joined: 08 Feb 2006
Posts: 11823
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 6:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
good thing this young team has a year to grow...should be fun to watch  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SocalDevin
Star Player
Joined: 26 May 2016
Posts: 7825
Location: Long Beach
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 6:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Bottom line.. you can't prove anything in regards to Ingram's future with stats.
You can do the "my position is more valid than yours" thing I suppose. If that floats your boat. =) But you're still just giving an opinion at the end of the day. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Baron Von Humongous
Retired Number
Joined: 02 Jul 2015
Posts: 32979
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 6:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SocalDevin wrote: | Bottom line.. you can't prove anything in regards to Ingram's future with stats.
You can do the "my position is more valid than yours" thing I suppose. If that floats your boat. =) But you're still just giving an opinion at the end of the day. |
Brandon Ingram will be better than Jordan. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MJST
Retired Number
Joined: 06 Jul 2014
Posts: 26392
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 6:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Let me put this into further perspective for you.
Lonzo Ball
Mid Range Percentage thus far - 26%
Brandon Ingram
Mid Range Percentage thus far - 25.5%
But it's not a problem and it doesn't mean anything to "back up a theory with evidence"
Keep thinking that and glossing over stats because you don't like what they say.
Unless you have a better alternative beyond "just believe." it's not going to change, till their play forces it to change, which is how stats and evidence like this works.
| SocalDevin wrote: | Bottom line.. you can't prove anything in regards to Ingram's future with stats.
|
You can't 'prove' anything till someone's career is over.
But you can however make an accurate assessment of where they currently are and how that's trending towards the direction they may be headed.
The stats will change once Ingram changes them. Till then for the people that just wanna say "just believe" while having no stats to back it up while proclaiming him to be a future all-star. I'll wait till there's actual evidence to start backing that up.
Like I said, it's gonna take more than "just believe" to get there.
The stats/evidence will change once Ingram changes them. Till then, they are what they are, and he is what he is.
_________________
How NBA 2K18 failed the All-Time Lakers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxMBYm3wwxk
Last edited by MJST on Sun Nov 19, 2017 6:14 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dao
Star Player
Joined: 02 Jan 2013
Posts: 5572
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 6:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I have no idea where you're getting those stats from. NBA.com has Ingram at 39.2% from mid range. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SocalDevin
Star Player
Joined: 26 May 2016
Posts: 7825
Location: Long Beach
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 6:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
That's how it works with you personally... That's not how it works in actuality.
Predictions based on immutable data would be one thing. Your data doesn't meet that criteria. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mookielala
Star Player
Joined: 29 Jul 2012
Posts: 3026
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 6:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MJST wrote: | | mookielala wrote: | | Developing strength will help BI's game a lot, as will shooting practice. Given his work ethic, both will be a focus for the next couple years. |
He worked on it(his jumper) this off-season but it's actually been worse, thus far this season.
Brandon Ingram last season:
Mid Range - 33.6%
Three Pointers - 33.3%
Brandon Ingram this season
Mid Range - 25.5%
Three Pointers - 30.4%
The only improvement in Ingram's offensive game has been his finishing
Brandon Ingram last season
Finishing in the paint - 57.1%
Brandon Ingram this season
Finishing in the paint - 59.1%
So his jumper has regressed, while his finishing is 2% higher with his added strength.
Again... strength isn't the issue. |
I think anyone watching BI play for the last couple years has to agree strength is AN issue. He's finishing better, but he could be amazing if he was sturdier. Also, it would help a lot on defense. He gets screened out pretty easily.
Shooting is also an issue. I'm not arguing it isn't. But I think he will keep getting better in both areas. It's not easy to change your shooting mechanics, but he seems like the kind of guy who will keep working hard at it. If that midrange jumper goes in more often, not many people can stop him from taking the shot because he's so long. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MJST
Retired Number
Joined: 06 Jul 2014
Posts: 26392
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 6:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| dao wrote: | | I have no idea where you're getting those stats from. NBA.com has Ingram at 39.2% from mid range. |
His shot chart
http://nbasavant.com/player.php?ddlYear=2017&ddlShotMade=&ddlTeamDefense=&player_id=1627742
actually keeps better track of his shots and includes the free throw line as mid.
There you can see where he shoots from mid, and where he shoots in the paint.
Take both those numbers, add them, divide by 2 etc.
Also allows you to see where he's shooting from the corners, in comparison to everywhere else around the three point line.
Hence why I said we should be taking advantage of that. He's shooting 42.9% from three in areas not to do with the corners while shooting 0% from one corner and 25% from the other. Etc.
_________________
How NBA 2K18 failed the All-Time Lakers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxMBYm3wwxk
Last edited by MJST on Sun Nov 19, 2017 6:19 pm; edited 3 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mookielala
Star Player
Joined: 29 Jul 2012
Posts: 3026
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 6:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Baron Von Humongous wrote: | | SocalDevin wrote: | Bottom line.. you can't prove anything in regards to Ingram's future with stats.
You can do the "my position is more valid than yours" thing I suppose. If that floats your boat. =) But you're still just giving an opinion at the end of the day. |
Brandon Ingram will be better than Jordan. |
But not better than Lavar Ball. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GoldenThroat
Moderator
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 37474
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 6:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SocalDevin wrote: | | GoldenThroat wrote: | | SocalDevin wrote: | Smh.. These comments illustrate why I say those on the fence will stay there until Ingram is consistently good in all facets of the game.
Absolutely nothing will change that. He's only another bad game away from the "what is he even good at?" narrative resurfacing.
For those that are enjoying watching his growth, let's just continue to celebrate his successes and improvements. |
Consistently good in all facets? How about consistently good in one first? |
You just gave me exhibit A with your post.. He's not good at anything right?.. I don't think you can reason with someone who holds this position in regards to Ingram. There's no point in trying.
His play will have to change your mind. No amount of reasoning or debate will do that. |
No, he isn't good at anything offensively from an objective standpoint. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mookielala
Star Player
Joined: 29 Jul 2012
Posts: 3026
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 6:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| GoldenThroat wrote: | | SocalDevin wrote: | | GoldenThroat wrote: | | SocalDevin wrote: | Smh.. These comments illustrate why I say those on the fence will stay there until Ingram is consistently good in all facets of the game.
Absolutely nothing will change that. He's only another bad game away from the "what is he even good at?" narrative resurfacing.
For those that are enjoying watching his growth, let's just continue to celebrate his successes and improvements. |
Consistently good in all facets? How about consistently good in one first? |
You just gave me exhibit A with your post.. He's not good at anything right?.. I don't think you can reason with someone who holds this position in regards to Ingram. There's no point in trying.
His play will have to change your mind. No amount of reasoning or debate will do that. |
No, he isn't good at anything offensively from an objective standpoint. |
Not to get too philosophical, but that is subjective statement based on your definition of "objective." Stats are facts, but the ones you focus on or their meaning, that is a subjective process. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SocalDevin
Star Player
Joined: 26 May 2016
Posts: 7825
Location: Long Beach
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 6:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Who said anything about "just believe".. some of you cats have trouble expressing counter views and perspectives without misinterpreting the position you're countering.
How many times do I have to say that you can make a better argument with data than you can without it??
My point is.. you are engaged in nothing more than making a prediction. I don't agree with your prediction, I'm okay with you not agreeing with mine or anyone elses. I can't prove you wrong, neither can you prove you are correct.
So where does this leave us? Are we supposed go back and forth on predictions neither of us can prove will come to fruition? Would this make sense? I don't think it does.
Which brings us back to what I said initially. If half wants to believe he'll be an all-star and you can't prove that he won't be.. what's the point in trying to debate it.. or challenge him on that belief? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MJST
Retired Number
Joined: 06 Jul 2014
Posts: 26392
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 6:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mookielala wrote: | | GoldenThroat wrote: | | SocalDevin wrote: | | GoldenThroat wrote: | | SocalDevin wrote: | Smh.. These comments illustrate why I say those on the fence will stay there until Ingram is consistently good in all facets of the game.
Absolutely nothing will change that. He's only another bad game away from the "what is he even good at?" narrative resurfacing.
For those that are enjoying watching his growth, let's just continue to celebrate his successes and improvements. |
Consistently good in all facets? How about consistently good in one first? |
You just gave me exhibit A with your post.. He's not good at anything right?.. I don't think you can reason with someone who holds this position in regards to Ingram. There's no point in trying.
His play will have to change your mind. No amount of reasoning or debate will do that. |
No, he isn't good at anything offensively from an objective standpoint. |
Not to get too philosophical, but that is subjective statement based on your definition of "objective." Stats are facts, but the ones you focus on or their meaning, that is a subjective process. |
Lonzo Ball is shooting better from mid than Ingram currently is.
I think that says enough.
_________________
How NBA 2K18 failed the All-Time Lakers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxMBYm3wwxk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MJST
Retired Number
Joined: 06 Jul 2014
Posts: 26392
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 6:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SocalDevin wrote: | | Who said anything about "just believe".. |
Cause that's really the only evidence they have to support the theory of Brandon Ingram becoming an all-star one day.
You bring facts like GT does and "well just because you have facts doesn't make it true"
or
"doesn't mean it will always be true"
But let's talk about where he actually is right now.
RIGHT NOW he's not trending to those directions in any way, shape or form, and there is no evidence to back up that he is.
Once there's evidence to back up that he's headed in that direction, then that will be how I see it. Otherwise the only thing anyone else that wants to argue against that point has, is just 'believe' because they darn sure don't have evidence to back it up which is why they hate it being brought up or try diminish facts.
If Ingram was such a sure thing, they'd have more to go off of than another version of "Well just because your facts are true..doesn't mean they're true"
_________________
How NBA 2K18 failed the All-Time Lakers:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kxMBYm3wwxk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dao
Star Player
Joined: 02 Jan 2013
Posts: 5572
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 6:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MJST wrote: | | dao wrote: | | I have no idea where you're getting those stats from. NBA.com has Ingram at 39.2% from mid range. |
His shot chart
http://nbasavant.com/player.php?ddlYear=2017&ddlShotMade=&ddlTeamDefense=&player_id=1627742
actually keeps better track of his shots and includes the free throw line as mid.
There you can see where he shoots from mid, and where he shoots in the paint.
Take both those numbers, add them, divide by 2 etc.
Also allows you to see where he's shooting from the corners, in comparison to everywhere else around the three point line.
Hence why I said we should be taking advantage of that. He's shooting 42.9% from three in areas not to do with the corners while shooting 0% from one corner and 25% from the other. Etc. |
your math must be fuzzy. NBA.com's synergy data is the gold standard. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mookielala
Star Player
Joined: 29 Jul 2012
Posts: 3026
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 6:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MJST wrote: | | mookielala wrote: | | GoldenThroat wrote: | | SocalDevin wrote: | | GoldenThroat wrote: | | SocalDevin wrote: | Smh.. These comments illustrate why I say those on the fence will stay there until Ingram is consistently good in all facets of the game.
Absolutely nothing will change that. He's only another bad game away from the "what is he even good at?" narrative resurfacing.
For those that are enjoying watching his growth, let's just continue to celebrate his successes and improvements. |
Consistently good in all facets? How about consistently good in one first? |
You just gave me exhibit A with your post.. He's not good at anything right?.. I don't think you can reason with someone who holds this position in regards to Ingram. There's no point in trying.
His play will have to change your mind. No amount of reasoning or debate will do that. |
No, he isn't good at anything offensively from an objective standpoint. |
Not to get too philosophical, but that is subjective statement based on your definition of "objective." Stats are facts, but the ones you focus on or their meaning, that is a subjective process. |
Lonzo Ball is shooting better from mid than Ingram currently is.
I think that says enough. |
I have no idea if that's true, but as to subjectivity, even you guys do not agree if BI is "objectively good" at anything. Weren't you just saying he's good at finishing? SocalDevin is right that there is a lot of subjective opinion involved even in these numbers-based posts. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
GoldenThroat
Moderator
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 37474
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 6:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mookielala wrote: | | Not to get too philosophical, but that is subjective statement based on your definition of "objective." Stats are facts, but the ones you focus on or their meaning, that is a subjective process. |
I am open to hearing any objective subset of data on the offensive end where he's good.
-3.2 OBPM (0.0 is the average player)
-1.99 ORPM (0.00 is the average player)
11.5 PER (I never use PER because I think it's a bad stat, but for the sake of not selecting, here it is. Average player is 15.0)
-0.1 Offensive Win Shares (not a huge fan of OWS either)
50.7 TS% (55.3% is the average player)
11.2 AST% (IDK what the average player is, but this is 7th on the Lakers)
You're welcome to focus on other ones and their meaning to paint the case that he's been good on the offensive end, because I'm not aware of any.
Last edited by GoldenThroat on Sun Nov 19, 2017 6:30 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SocalDevin
Star Player
Joined: 26 May 2016
Posts: 7825
Location: Long Beach
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2017 6:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| MJST wrote: | | SocalDevin wrote: | | Who said anything about "just believe".. |
Cause that's really the only evidence they have to support the theory of Brandon Ingram becoming an all-star one day.
You bring facts like GT does and "well just because you have facts doesn't make it true"
or
"doesn't mean it will always be true"
But let's talk about where he actually is right now.
RIGHT NOW he's not trending to those directions in any way, shape or form, and there is no evidence to back up that he is.
Once there's evidence to back up that he's headed in that direction, then that will be how I see it. Otherwise the only thing anyone else that wants to argue against that point has, is just 'believe' because they darn sure don't have evidence to back it up which is why they hate it being brought up or try diminish facts.
If Ingram was such a sure thing, they'd have more to go off of than another version of "Well just because your facts are true..doesn't mean they're true" |
You're still missing it.. we're talking past one another at this point. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
