Making up an arguement? Is LaVine having a quick first step and excellent ability in transition some sort of fiction in your eyes?? you literally can't respond to my points because you're so tethered to your advanced stats LOL, it's simple.
This is you making up an argument:
"These people with the advanced stats want to put together teams on paper, they want a bunch of stationary high percentage catch and shoot players and then to put the onus completely on fox to break the defense with the dribble, and distribute properly."
Nobody ever said they only want stationary catch and shooters, so that means you made up an argument and started arguing against it.
Advanced stats are easily best in BASEBALL, you have this situation where u get 1 batter vs 1 pitcher and there's lots of data to extrapolate and not too many variables... what goes on in basketball is a cluster**** of variables in comparison...........................(tell me im wrong...) ........................................ the advanced stats suck compared to baseball, it's not even close.......
Im not that into baseball so I cant comment on that. What I can comment on is that even if there is a lot of variables in basketball, these advanced metrics still predict pretty well how much certain players contribute to winning basketball. As its been stated here numerous times, players with VORP or WS as bad as Lavines usually have been quite bad players and havent contributed to winning basketball. If you want to tell the rest of us how Lavine is an outlier in that group and actually contributes to winning so much he is worth 4/80mil, please do so. "Those stats are stupid" or linking his highlight tape isnt the answer.
Is talking about the ACTUAL ****ING MOVES a player uses, not detailed analysis? LOLOLOLOLOLOL.... No? When did that happen? Not detailed enough for you? If you need numbers and %'s to look at as cold hard facts your takes will always lack vision..
First of all I didnt say your analysis werent detailed, I said there are a lot of detailed analysis on his metrics that you should try to argue against rather than making up an argument. But to be honest, if your analysis completely dismisses important metrics like RPM or VORP ect, dismisses why these metrics are very poor with him, imo its not very detailed analysis. If its only posting some highlight tapes and telling people "the actual moves he uses" while dismissing a lot ot other stuff, its not very detailed.
"Any artist can turn a garden into a desert. But can he turn a desert into a garden?"
I love this quote it destroys most know-it-all's on forums like this, who act like talking crap/down is on some equal plane as hyping or believing insomething, no it's not the same, being a hater/wetblanket is a much simpler task, anyone who understands the basics of semantics can be a hater..
Tbh I have no idea what this means but there is a word hater which I find pretty funny. I dont have nearly enough emotional intrest in Zach Lavine to be his "hater". I've seen him play for many years and many times, I've seen his advanced metrics that suggest he doesnt contribute to winning basketball, I've seen him being a horrible defender and low bbiq guy so from those obseravtions I've drawn a conclusion that I really dont want to pay him 4/80.
Ok fine, u don't like LaVine, WHATS YOUR SOLUTION THEN? You've got something solutions based? what do the advanced stats say the Kings should do?????????
Doing nothing is always better than doing something bad. Taking on an untradeable four year contract is a huge net negative move. If you want to know specifically what I would like to do with our cap space, its a different and long conversation but in a nutshell: last year I hated all our signings, I wouldve absolutely wantend to do that Demarre Carroll salary dump deal. This year I want us to be very aggressive in those type of deals and preserve cap space to do these. Thats because for us the draft is the easiest way and the least risky way to find talent in a value contract Also I'd like us to do some 2+1, 3+1 cheap and very team friendly unguaranteed wing signings in order to create either a tradeable asset or a valuable player. Low risk, mediocre reward type of deals. Again, retaining flexibility is a lot better than losing it to a high risk low reward deals like Lavine for 4/80.
We can;t talk about his first step or his change of direction, his burst, his creativity -------- ALL THINGS THAT THE KINGS CLEARLY COULD USE MORE OF... Only advanced stats. Only what he did for the timberwolves and chicago are what matters, projecting any sort of growth or variance could prove fatal to the Kings rebuild, staying true to advanced stats is the only safe course.
No, we can talk both but we obviously need to address why his metrics are so poor. If the answer is "those metrics are useless" its probably a wrong answer. Especially with Lavine whose highlight tapes look nice, its important to analyze why these metrics suggest he doesnt contribute to winning. And especially when we are handing out a massive contract like that it needs to be addressed.
Then while we address those concerns, we can talk about his fit with the current team and what he brings to the table and what he doesnt. I think those points have been addressed by most of the people who also want to talk about his metrics. He brings shot creating and shooting and he doesnt bring defense or basketball iq. His fit is also poor since we already have two shooting guards that are both undersized to play sf. But thats only a part of the conversation. Him being able to shoot off the dribble doesnt mean much if he constantly sucks on defense and doesnt contribute to ball movement ect. And that is where you combine the metrics to the eye test.
