Someone else's take on Fredette, Rubio

pshn80

Starter
Headline from "Bruce Jenkins NBA column today, Jan. 23 (SF Chronicle)
Rubio is passing his aura exams as Fredette flails"
Rubio: " He's 21 now, but Rubio can't really be called a rookie - or anything else that isn't highly complimentary. His fancy passing displays have become the talk of the league."

Fredette: "He's really a heck of a guy, Jimmer. Aims to please. But he's stuck between roles in the wilds of Sacramento, a city deeply concerned about losing the franchise. Someday, probably in a different uniform, he'll be a solid shooting guard in a responsible half-court offense - perhaps along the lines of Orlando's J.J. Redick. At the moment he's dealing with me-first teammates, the transition from point guard (his position a BYU) and a new head coach, Keith Smart, who is trying to resurrect the magic."

There's more but that's the gist of it. Always interesting to see where folks are coming from.


 
Seems about right. Although If you look at a lot of the other rookies this year they are all really struggling with their shots. The % is not good. Even Rubio has had a bunch of pee poor shooting nights but the critics give him a break because he can make a fancy pass every once in a while.
 
Seems about right. Although If you look at a lot of the other rookies this year they are all really struggling with their shots. The % is not good. Even Rubio has had a bunch of pee poor shooting nights but the critics give him a break because he can make a fancy pass every once in a while.

That is a key though. Jimmer's NBA career is likely going to live and die by the shot, so when its off, that's not good. Guys like Rubio can help you even when the shot isn't going.

As for the article, its just kind of a shrug. Obviously everybody in the nation knows the kid is struggling to make the transition, but outside of being white I'm not sure where the Rubio comparison comes in.
 
Last edited:
That is a key though. Jimmer's NBA career is likely going to live and die by th shot, so when its off, that's not good. Guys like Rubio can help you even when the shot isn't going.

As for the article, its just kind of a shurg. Obviously everybody in the nation knows the kid is struggling to make the transition, but outside of beign white I'm not sure where the Rubio comparison comes in.

I think the author is flailing to make a comparison. Why he chose those two players, who the heck knows?
 
The other problem with comparing Jimmer to Redick is that there games were not at all similar coming out of college. Jimmer has to completely retool his game in order to fit in at the next level, as his style is a pull-up off the dribble, for example, as opposed to a set shot. It doesn't seem like much, but there's a bit of rhythm you develop when you have the ball all the time, and I think that's playing into it as well.
As for the Rubio comparison, I don't get it either. Rubio is about as much a rookie as as Griffin was last year.
 
Headline from "Bruce Jenkins NBA column today, Jan. 23 (SF Chronicle)
Rubio is passing his aura exams as Fredette flails"
Rubio: " He's 21 now, but Rubio can't really be called a rookie - or anything else that isn't highly complimentary. His fancy passing displays have become the talk of the league."

Fredette: "He's really a heck of a guy, Jimmer. Aims to please. But he's stuck between roles in the wilds of Sacramento, a city deeply concerned about losing the franchise. Someday, probably in a different uniform, he'll be a solid shooting guard in a responsible half-court offense - perhaps along the lines of Orlando's J.J. Redick. At the moment he's dealing with me-first teammates, the transition from point guard (his position a BYU) and a new head coach, Keith Smart, who is trying to resurrect the magic."

There's more but that's the gist of it. Always interesting to see where folks are coming from.



Matches 100% what I've been saying. See guys? Sometimes non-biased, objective opinions are a GOOD thing. Don't be offended by them! Or threatened.
 
Matches 100% what I've been saying. See guys? Sometimes non-biased, objective opinions are a GOOD thing. Don't be offended by them! Or threatened.

You might want to check the definitions of "non-biased" and "objective."

And for the record? You might also want to cease and desist with the pontificating.
 
You might want to check the definitions of "non-biased" and "objective."

And for the record? You might also want to cease and desist with the pontificating.

Just pointing out that this outside opinion matches very closely what I've been saying all along. Outside opinions tend to be less corrupted by insider subjectivity/bias and hold less of an agenda. And so what I said probably didn't deserve your scrutiny, as it is true. I think you were just eager to use the word "pontificating."
 
Just pointing out that this outside opinion matches very closely what I've been saying all along. Outside opinions tend to be less corrupted by insider subjectivity/bias and hold less of an agenda. And so what I said probably didn't deserve your scrutiny, as it is true. I think you were just eager to use the word "pontificating."


They also tend to be much less informed, and thus lazy. Your views would tend to fit in with this, as you're not a Kings fan, but a Jimmer fan. The patronising isn't going to help your reputation on this forum either.
 
They also tend to be much less informed, and thus lazy. Your views would tend to fit in with this, as you're not a Kings fan, but a Jimmer fan. The patronising isn't going to help your reputation on this forum either.
This is so true. Outsiders don't pay very close attention to each team. They often have no clue about a team and rely too much on what everyone else is saying, rumor, innuendo, or use the stats the support their opinion and ignore the ones that don't. This happens with big, national sportswriters all the time.
 
This is so true. Outsiders don't pay very close attention to each team. They often have no clue about a team and rely too much on what everyone else is saying, rumor, innuendo, or use the stats the support their opinion and ignore the ones that don't. This happens with big, national sportswriters all the time.

So everyone else is wrong, but Kings fans are right? Because everywhere on the internet (and in real life) OUTSIDE of kingsfans.com seems to agree with the quotes in the OP's post. Not that it matters... everyone is entitled to their opinion as long as they are respectful about it... but realistically - looking at the King's current state - I'm not sure how anyone could argue to the contrary. It's pretty obvious to non-kings fans (and many Kings fans themselves) what things/players are holding this team down.
 
Can we all just can it? This is getting nowhere and never will. Pretty soon it will degenerate TOTALLY into a pissing match about people and not the team or its players. Did I say "pretty soon?"
 
Patronizing*

Actually, that's explanatory. And to be both patrionizing and explanatory: your arguments are generally childish and would seem designed more to annoy than inform. Everyone here is entitled to their opinion, but your claims about being somehow less biased and capable of more "true" comments and insights as a "fan" (isn't that why you're here?) are simply irrational.
 
So everyone else is wrong, but Kings fans are right? Because everywhere on the internet (and in real life) OUTSIDE of kingsfans.com seems to agree with the quotes in the OP's post. Not that it matters... everyone is entitled to their opinion as long as they are respectful about it... but realistically - looking at the King's current state - I'm not sure how anyone could argue to the contrary. It's pretty obvious to non-kings fans (and many Kings fans themselves) what things/players are holding this team down.
Yes, but I forgive Jimmer, he's young. Keep the faith , he'll come around. Go Kings, we need a few close games right now.
 
Can we all just can it? This is getting nowhere and never will. Pretty soon it will degenerate TOTALLY into a pissing match about people and not the team or its players. Did I say "pretty soon?"
From the little I've seen, it already is. Meantime I see the Kings tomorrow night, my second game this season at "Arco".
 
Patronizing*


Actually, considering that I'm not American, you're wrong to correct me. In your childish, petty and ultimately failed attempt to be witty, you have, in fact, shown yourself to exactly what you're purported to be - patronising. I'd wager you're not the sharpest tool in the box, and certainly not near as intelligent as you'd like to believe.
 
Actually, considering that I'm not American, you're wrong to correct me. In your childish, petty and ultimately failed attempt to be witty, you have, in fact, shown yourself to exactly what you're purported to be - patronising. I'd wager you're not the sharpest tool in the box, and certainly not near as intelligent as you'd like to believe.

I'm rainmaker, and I approve this message.

DimeDropper, why are you still up? Tonight's one of those rare nights you can actually get to bed at a decent hour.
 
They did not name him the worst rookie of the season. It was the most disappointing. Big difference.

Honest folks, we don't have to nit pick this. I don't run this place but I just want to point out that we are on a slippery slope to the same tiring argument.

I will give you my brief view of how I feel about Jimmer. I like him and I think he will come out of whatever he is in; I guess it's a funk but certainly the fact he is in the NBA and not NCAA has something to do with it. I'm surprised at how he's playing but I am not going to complain. No one needs to argue with me. I wanted more from him and had no reason to expect what is happening. I also have no reason to think he won't snap out of it which of course, with my awful judgment, may have damned him. :) Let's just watch him come out of this and be what the team needs. I will enjoy watching him.

I wanted us to draft him.
 
They did not name him the worst rookie of the season. It was the most disappointing. Big difference.

Ok, really? While ok, valid point, when did it turn to that every reply by someone is generally one being a nit-picking snob? Jesus.

I'm starting to get why there are always so many people viewing this forum but not as many ever signed in. It's ridiculous.

But okay. "Worst in terms of being a disappointment." I wasn't going to call that the best. And since the link was staring you in the face I figured you could draw the line from A to B.
 
Just pointing out that this outside opinion matches very closely what I've been saying all along. Outside opinions tend to be less corrupted by insider subjectivity/bias and hold less of an agenda. And so what I said probably didn't deserve your scrutiny, as it is true. I think you were just eager to use the word "pontificating."

Which proves my point. Had the outside opinion not matched yours, would you have been as anxious to point to it? I'm thinking probably not. As for "pontificating," it was a perfectly valid use of the word.
 
Back
Top