The ONE AND ONLY Luka Doncic discussion thread
- Thread starter VF21
- Start date
- Status
Remember when everyone laughed at me when we went through the draft and I had Trae Young as a future superstar? hehe.. I knew it! He is a very vocal leader and will not get shy if he misses shots. He will keep shooting!. I know this is a Doncic thread, but those were the two players I was looking at. Doncic and Young (because at that time I was not impressed with Fox at all).
Well then its probably better to just close all these draft topics in this forum. No reason to speculate or form (educated) opinions if the official doctrine in here is that you cant know anything until they have played in the Nba. Although in this case there is a full season of sample size in the Nba in addition to all the other data but it still isnt enough to form a solid opinion aparrently.
First of all (and I know you know this) its a huge difference if you have the 2nd or the 7th pick. At the 2nd pick you have a lot better odds to draft an allstar and a lot more options to choose from. If you fail to draft an all star at 2 its a much bigger mistake than if you fail to draft an allstar at 7.
When you draft 2nd overall, you have more choises. Fans these days have acces to so much film and data that they are perfectly capable to form their own educated opinions. If year after year the popular choise by fans keeps being much better than the pick this franchise does, it warrants a huge amount of criticism. Especially when you have the obvious choise, backed by all this tape and data and your disfunctional franchise passes on him, it will cause some discussion and when after a year the difference is so huge between these two players, it will hurt this franchise and this fanbase.
Since Luka was the obivous choise by all the information you got, then it is a mistake to pass on him. Its not about if Bagley could develope into a solid player, its about passing on an impactfull player that even the fans would've picked but for some reason the FO was idiotic.
Im not buying that bigs take more time than others. If I remember correctly @tyguy had some analysis on that. I would say that point guards or other ball handling creators take usually a year to be effective, for example Fox was one if the worst in advanced metrics in his rookie year.
So is the argument still that you cant be objective about this situation if pre draft you were saying that Luka should be the pick? If thats your argument, IMO it doesnt make any sense. If you had a strong argument for your opinion pre draft that proved to be right post draft, that doesnt make you biased or unobjective. IMO basing your opinion on facts and data available is objective.
First of all (and I know you know this) its a huge difference if you have the 2nd or the 7th pick. At the 2nd pick you have a lot better odds to draft an allstar and a lot more options to choose from. If you fail to draft an all star at 2 its a much bigger mistake than if you fail to draft an allstar at 7.
When you draft 2nd overall, you have more choises. Fans these days have acces to so much film and data that they are perfectly capable to form their own educated opinions. If year after year the popular choise by fans keeps being much better than the pick this franchise does, it warrants a huge amount of criticism. Especially when you have the obvious choise, backed by all this tape and data and your disfunctional franchise passes on him, it will cause some discussion and when after a year the difference is so huge between these two players, it will hurt this franchise and this fanbase.
Since Luka was the obivous choise by all the information you got, then it is a mistake to pass on him. Its not about if Bagley could develope into a solid player, its about passing on an impactfull player that even the fans would've picked but for some reason the FO was idiotic.
Im not buying that bigs take more time than others. If I remember correctly @tyguy had some analysis on that. I would say that point guards or other ball handling creators take usually a year to be effective, for example Fox was one if the worst in advanced metrics in his rookie year.
So is the argument still that you cant be objective about this situation if pre draft you were saying that Luka should be the pick? If thats your argument, IMO it doesnt make any sense. If you had a strong argument for your opinion pre draft that proved to be right post draft, that doesnt make you biased or unobjective. IMO basing your opinion on facts and data available is objective.
This seems like a spectacular misinterpretation of what I wrote. I'm just not sure whether it was a willful misinterpretation, or not?
Are you trying to misinterpret my post this hard, on purpose, because I thought that I was clear with my meaning, and what you appear to think I said is not what I said. What I said was that people can, and have, formed opinions rooted in personal biases, and that if future events validate their biased opinions, that doesn't mean that their opinions were objective, the whole time. What you appear to be getting out of that is I think that everybody who thought that Doncic was better before the draft was biased, but that's neither what I meant, nor what I actually said.
I think that part of the disconnect is that you appear to be operating from the belief that everybody who was pro-Doncic before the draft came to their opinion on the merits of "facts and data" alone. I make no such assumption. It's been my personal (admittedly anecdotal) experience that people without biases aren't as driven by the need to be acknowledged as being "right" as some of the people around here.
Posters like @tyguy are exactly why I question some posters' objectivity. I consider his analysis to be a textbook example of the abuse of numerical data. Numbers, as they say, don't lie, but they can be manipulated to either prove or disprove just about anything, and I truly believe that @tyguy is someone whom staked out his position, and then worked backwards from there to find the data that supported what he'd already made up his mind to believe.
Are you trying to misinterpret my post this hard, on purpose, because I thought that I was clear with my meaning, and what you appear to think I said is not what I said. What I said was that people can, and have, formed opinions rooted in personal biases, and that if future events validate their biased opinions, that doesn't mean that their opinions were objective, the whole time. What you appear to be getting out of that is I think that everybody who thought that Doncic was better before the draft was biased, but that's neither what I meant, nor what I actually said.
I think that part of the disconnect is that you appear to be operating from the belief that everybody who was pro-Doncic before the draft came to their opinion on the merits of "facts and data" alone. I make no such assumption. It's been my personal (admittedly anecdotal) experience that people without biases aren't as driven by the need to be acknowledged as being "right" as some of the people around here.
Posters like @tyguy are exactly why I question some posters' objectivity. I consider his analysis to be a textbook example of the abuse of numerical data. Numbers, as they say, don't lie, but they can be manipulated to either prove or disprove just about anything, and I truly believe that @tyguy is someone whom staked out his position, and then worked backwards from there to find the data that supported what he'd already made up his mind to believe.
Not to mention you’d still have Giles too.
PG - ??? / Ferrell
SG - Hield / Bogdanovic
SF - Doncic / Bogdanovic
PF - ??? / Bjelica
C - Porzingis / Giles
You’d definitely need some great defenders at PG (Brogdon, Beverley) and PF (Aminu) to help the perimeter defense but that would be a great looking team.
The shooting/spacing would be unreal though with Brogdon, Hield, Bogdanovic, Doncic, Bjelica, Aminu, and Porzingis. My lord...
PG - ??? / Ferrell
SG - Hield / Bogdanovic
SF - Doncic / Bogdanovic
PF - ??? / Bjelica
C - Porzingis / Giles
You’d definitely need some great defenders at PG (Brogdon, Beverley) and PF (Aminu) to help the perimeter defense but that would be a great looking team.
The shooting/spacing would be unreal though with Brogdon, Hield, Bogdanovic, Doncic, Bjelica, Aminu, and Porzingis. My lord...
Last edited:
He shot poorly too from the field but that's the nice thing about Luka.......even on poor shooting nights and losses he still puts up ridiculous numbers.
Dallas is still short one guy. I think in today's NBA you have to have 3 top-tier players to succeed and they only have 2 (Luka and Porzingis) and then a substantial dropoff.
Dallas is still short one guy. I think in today's NBA you have to have 3 top-tier players to succeed and they only have 2 (Luka and Porzingis) and then a substantial dropoff.
Biased opinions* are by definition not objective. Furthermore, objectivity does not require correctness. Objectivity only requires (according to the definition) exclusion of emotion when forming a judgement. Hence, validation or invalidation of that judgement has no bearing on determining whether the original judgement was arrived at objectively**. Therefore, the question posed has a trivial answer.
*Not making a comment on whether the opinions you are referring to were indeed biased, just commenting on the posed question.
**This comment applies only to the meta conversation about objectivity, not to the current context of Luka/Bagley discussion
*Not making a comment on whether the opinions you are referring to were indeed biased, just commenting on the posed question.
**This comment applies only to the meta conversation about objectivity, not to the current context of Luka/Bagley discussion
^^^^ Well then, now that we agree on that, that brings us back to the question: was everyone who was pro-Doncic before the draft basing their opinion on objective data alone? Because I'm willing to stipulate that some were, but I'm not remotely convinced that all of them were. Or, quite frankly, even that a statistical majority of them were. I certainly don't believe that the loudest, most obnoxious ones were; I'm sure that they found the correct data to support their position, but people who are that invested in being acknowledged for being right don't make stands rooted in objectivity.
I agree. Vast majority of opinions stated on sports fan forums are not rooted in objectivity 
. It is a self selected sample of passionate individuals which have an emotional stake in the topic of discussion. So in such an environment the meaning of "objectivity" gets downgraded to something like "presenting agreed upon facts which support the conclusions that I have made (as opposed to just stating the conclusion)"
. It is a self selected sample of passionate individuals which have an emotional stake in the topic of discussion. So in such an environment the meaning of "objectivity" gets downgraded to something like "presenting agreed upon facts which support the conclusions that I have made (as opposed to just stating the conclusion)"
Doncic has been a professional athlete for a long time. He has stepped right in and played well. Last night he was really good.
Bagley is a freakish athlete that is what 20 years old? He is going to take some time to figure out how to use all of that God given talent. He needs to grow some more, but what he really needs is to learn to make better decisions. He is going to be a great player, but it will take longer than for Doncic.
Bagley is a freakish athlete that is what 20 years old? He is going to take some time to figure out how to use all of that God given talent. He needs to grow some more, but what he really needs is to learn to make better decisions. He is going to be a great player, but it will take longer than for Doncic.
- Status