Rubio Thread Seis (VI)

[BamBam9]

Not bad.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q07tma6co0E[/youtube]

[urinesane]

Yeah, but I really believe Jalen knows alot more basketball than any of us,

Basketball in general? Maybe, but not necessarily.
The NBA? Again, maybe, but not necessarily.
The Wolves and Rubio specifically? No, I really doubt it.

and he has been consistend with his critisism of Rubio

Consistent isn't the same as correct.

(dude`s been 3 years in the NBA now, he should have educated opinion)

He should. That doesn't mean that he does.

Do you know more basketball/NBA if you wanna seperate/ than Jalen?

Are you qualified to judge a former player's current analytical skills or knowledge based on some podcasts and analyst work?

I didn't know that basketball is so complicated that you have to be an NBA player to have a valid opinion on it, or in this case disagree with a former player's opinion.

So basically if you don't have as much basketball playing experience as a person, your opinion is less valid than there's. Regardless of facts or logic.

Also, just because Rose was a PG, does that mean even though he averaged less assists than Rubio his entire career (3.8/g career, 6.0/g being the most in 1 season) he is making an unbiased and objective judgement of him? On the topic of Rubio I'd much rather hear the opinions of similar style PGs like Nash and Kidd than a PG that looked to score first.

Otherwise, that player will most likely have a pretty strong bias towards their play style being "correct" or "better" than one that is counter to their own and will automatically approach their analysis in an overly critical or lazily biased way.

[YaleS]

Basketball in general? Maybe, but not necessarily.
The NBA? Again, maybe, but not necessarily.
The Wolves and Rubio specifically? No, I really doubt it.



Consistent isn't the same as correct.



He should. That doesn't mean that he does.

Do you know more basketball/NBA if you wanna seperate/ than Jalen?

Are you qualified to judge a former player's current analytical skills or knowledge based on some podcasts and analyst work?

I didn't know that basketball is so complicated that you have to be an NBA player to have a valid opinion on it, or in this case disagree with a former player's opinion.

So basically if you don't have as much basketball playing experience as a person, your opinion is less valid than there's. Regardless of facts or logic.

Also, just because Rose was a PG, does that mean even though he averaged less assists than Rubio his entire career (3.8/g career, 6.0/g being the most in 1 season) he is making an unbiased and objective judgement of him? On the topic of Rubio I'd much rather hear the opinions of similar style PGs like Nash and Kidd than a PG that looked to score first.

Otherwise, that player will most likely have a pretty strong bias towards their play style being "correct" or "better" than one that is counter to their own and will automatically approach their analysis in an overly critical or lazily biased way.

1st- The fact he was a great player and now is analyst qualify HIM to judge, and I take his over yours (strange yeah)
2nd- ya basketball is not hard, wonder why there are so many scouts, coaches, as.c., analysts and the game is developing... guess everybody knows it.
3rd- what fact and logic did Jalen Rose broke?
4rd- what? Haven`t heard him been down on other pass-first guards, so your argument is absolutly illogical.

[AQuintus]

Do you know more basketball/NBA if you wanna seperate/ than Jalen?

Not that it's at all relevent, but:

Basketball in general? Probably not.

NBA? I wouldn't be surprised if I was more knowledgeable than Jalen Rose, and I would say the same about most hardcore NBA fans that post here.

The Wolves' team and its players? Absolutely. I would say that anyone that regularly follows and watches the team likely knows more than Rose (or Simmons or the other guy).

1st- The fact he was a great player and now is analyst qualify HIM to judge, and I take his over yours

Also, you might want to look at this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority.

Just because someone is an "expert" in a field DOES NOT automatically mean they know what they're talking about or that their arguments are solid.

[mthead2121]

This thread and whole board in General is extremely close to "do not press send" territory. Pretty sad for a board ive followed for years..

[urinesane]

Do you know more basketball/NBA if you wanna seperate/ than Jalen?

Are you qualified to judge a former player's current analytical skills or knowledge based on some podcasts and analyst work?

I didn't know that basketball is so complicated that you have to be an NBA player to have a valid opinion on it, or in this case disagree with a former player's opinion.

So basically if you don't have as much basketball playing experience as a person, your opinion is less valid than there's. Regardless of facts or logic.

Also, just because Rose was a PG, does that mean even though he averaged less assists than Rubio his entire career (3.8/g career, 6.0/g being the most in 1 season) he is making an unbiased and objective judgement of him? On the topic of Rubio I'd much rather hear the opinions of similar style PGs like Nash and Kidd than a PG that looked to score first.

Otherwise, that player will most likely have a pretty strong bias towards their play style being "correct" or "better" than one that is counter to their own and will automatically approach their analysis in an overly critical or lazily biased way.

1st- The fact he was a great player and now is analyst qualify HIM to judge, and I take his over yours (strange yeah)
2nd- ya basketball is not hard, wonder why there are so many scouts, coaches, as.c., analysts and the game is developing... guess everybody knows it.
3rd- what fact and logic did Jalen Rose broke?
4rd- what? Haven`t heard him been down on other pass-first guards, so your argument is absolutly illogical.

1.) How exactly exactly does being a great player automatically validate someone as a good analyst? Are all great players qualified coaches or GMs? Michael Jordan is the greatest basketball player of all time, so by your criteria, he is a qualified and better equipped to be a GM than people who are not the best player ever.

I'm not even saying Jalen isn't qualified, I'm saying you aren't qualified to verify a person's credentials, because just like us YOU ARE A FAN. Since we aren't qualified to make that assessment, we can only go on the information he provides to back up his analysis and take it at face value. I don't care if he was an amazing player, we aren't playing basketball, we are discussing basketball players and he offered as much insight on this specific topic as any random fan on twitter that hasn't played a minute of basketball.

2.) This sentence doesn't make sense. Basketball isn't super simple, but it also isn't rocket science. Just because one person has insight as a player, doesn't automatically make their opinion more valid. Same with a guy like Skip Bayless, just because ESPN hired him to talk in front of a camera, doesn't mean he is more qualified or accurate with his assessments than a blogger. Regardless of a person's background, the information is what is important, not what they used to do.

3.) Even though I like Jalen Rose, his assessment at best is lazy and at worst just flat out wrong. Rubio is below Rudy Fernandez as a guard because Rudy is a knock down shooter? Is that really a fair assessment of guards, just whomever is the better shooter = the better guard? If you only offer that as your argument, then you are lazy and/or your mindset as a judge of guards is biased towards scoring guards. If that isn't the only reason he has for that assessment, he should expand further on his analysis, but since he doesn't, we can only judge his analysis based on the information he provided to validate his argument.

4.) This can go both ways. Have you heard him gush over pass first PGs? Also, why would that even matter? Even if he praised every pass first PG in the history of the NBA, his assessment of Rubio is based on 1 thing, scoring. How many pass first PGs are in the league today or in the past 5-10 years? He doesn't have to crap on other pass first PGs to be biased, he just has to say things like "I think Ricky Rubio is the 3-4th best guard on that team. Rudy Fernandez is a knockdown shooter" and then act like that is enough to validate his judgement. Not saying that he can't use that as part of an analysis, but that being THE ONLY argument he made to validate his point makes it lazy and not really worth any value.

Unless of course judging guards overall ranking only based on their shooting is a good enough for you (it's not for me).

Maybe instead of holding a baseball bat for no reason and singing about what people want, he should actually offer some in depth analysis and give more than one reason to back up his opinion. His job is to be entertaining and get people to watch, not be accurate with his analysis. The difference between an analyst and a Scout/GM/Coach/POBO is that their job often depends on them making accurate and correct assessments, Jalen only has to be entertaining, he NEVER has to be right as an analyst to keep his job (just ask Skip Bayless).

[YaleS]

Do you know more basketball/NBA if you wanna seperate/ than Jalen?

Not that it's at all relevent, but:

Basketball in general? Probably not.

NBA? I wouldn't be surprised if I was more knowledgeable than Jalen Rose, and I would say the same about most hardcore NBA fans that post here.

The Wolves' team and its players? Absolutely. I would say that anyone that regularly follows and watches the team likely knows more than Rose (or Simmons or the other guy).

1st- The fact he was a great player and now is analyst qualify HIM to judge, and I take his over yours

Also, you might want to look at this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority.

Just because someone is an "expert" in a field DOES NOT automatically mean they know what they're talking about or that their arguments are solid.

Look man, I`ve never said that his opinion is automatically true and thats the end. I posted the link, cuz i think it`s worth discussion, and you actually agreed with Jalen(hardcore min. fan) that Rubio is the 3th-4th best guard on this team. On the other hand the part about you/or fans here/ knowing more than him about NBA is just not serious to me.

[YaleS]

Are you qualified to judge a former player's current analytical skills or knowledge based on some podcasts and analyst work?

I didn't know that basketball is so complicated that you have to be an NBA player to have a valid opinion on it, or in this case disagree with a former player's opinion.

So basically if you don't have as much basketball playing experience as a person, your opinion is less valid than there's. Regardless of facts or logic.

Also, just because Rose was a PG, does that mean even though he averaged less assists than Rubio his entire career (3.8/g career, 6.0/g being the most in 1 season) he is making an unbiased and objective judgement of him? On the topic of Rubio I'd much rather hear the opinions of similar style PGs like Nash and Kidd than a PG that looked to score first.

Otherwise, that player will most likely have a pretty strong bias towards their play style being "correct" or "better" than one that is counter to their own and will automatically approach their analysis in an overly critical or lazily biased way.

1st- The fact he was a great player and now is analyst qualify HIM to judge, and I take his over yours (strange yeah)
2nd- ya basketball is not hard, wonder why there are so many scouts, coaches, as.c., analysts and the game is developing... guess everybody knows it.
3rd- what fact and logic did Jalen Rose broke?
4rd- what? Haven`t heard him been down on other pass-first guards, so your argument is absolutly illogical.

1.) How exactly exactly does being a great player automatically validate someone as a good analyst? Are all great players qualified coaches or GMs? Michael Jordan is the greatest basketball player of all time, so by your criteria, he is a qualified and better equipped to be a GM than people who are not the best player ever.

I'm not even saying Jalen isn't qualified, I'm saying you aren't qualified to verify a person's credentials, because just like us YOU ARE A FAN. Since we aren't qualified to make that assessment, we can only go on the information he provides to back up his analysis and take it at face value. I don't care if he was an amazing player, we aren't playing basketball, we are discussing basketball players and he offered as much insight on this specific topic as any random fan on twitter that hasn't played a minute of basketball.

2.) This sentence doesn't make sense. Basketball isn't super simple, but it also isn't rocket science. Just because one person has insight as a player, doesn't automatically make their opinion more valid. Same with a guy like Skip Bayless, just because ESPN hired him to talk in front of a camera, doesn't mean he is more qualified or accurate with his assessments than a blogger. Regardless of a person's background, the information is what is important, not what they used to do.

3.) Even though I like Jalen Rose, his assessment at best is lazy and at worst just flat out wrong. Rubio is below Rudy Fernandez as a guard because Rudy is a knock down shooter? Is that really a fair assessment of guards, just whomever is the better shooter = the better guard? If you only offer that as your argument, then you are lazy and/or your mindset as a judge of guards is biased towards scoring guards. If that isn't the only reason he has for that assessment, he should expand further on his analysis, but since he doesn't, we can only judge his analysis based on the information he provided to validate his argument.

4.) This can go both ways. Have you heard him gush over pass first PGs? Also, why would that even matter? Even if he praised every pass first PG in the history of the NBA, his assessment of Rubio is based on 1 thing, scoring. How many pass first PGs are in the league today or in the past 5-10 years? He doesn't have to crap on other pass first PGs to be biased, he just has to say things like "I think Ricky Rubio is the 3-4th best guard on that team. Rudy Fernandez is a knockdown shooter" and then act like that is enough to validate his judgement. Not saying that he can't use that as part of an analysis, but that being THE ONLY argument he made to validate his point makes it lazy and not really worth any value.

Unless of course judging guards overall ranking only based on their shooting is a good enough for you (it's not for me).

Maybe instead of holding a baseball bat for no reason and singing about what people want, he should actually offer some in depth analysis and give more than one reason to back up his opinion. His job is to be entertaining and get people to watch, not be accurate with his analysis. The difference between an analyst and a Scout/GM/Coach/POBO is that their job often depends on them making accurate and correct assessments, Jalen only has to be entertaining, he NEVER has to be right as an analyst to keep his job (just ask Skip Bayless).

Maybe you should re-read what i`ve typed, I never said I was qualified for anything, I`m saying Jalen being an analyst qualifies him to give opinions, don`t put words in my mouth.
Yes I agree the info. should be presented, but don`t think just becouse he didn`t give full analiz he forms his opinion on only scoring ability, thats crazy. The topic of their discussion wasn`t in-dept Rubio analiz afther all, doesn`t mean his opinion doesn`t matter.

[YaleS]

This thread and whole board in General is extremely close to "do not press send" territory. Pretty sad for a board ive followed for years..

And what`s so bad about this thread and posts here?

[mthead2121]

This thread and whole board in General is extremely close to "do not press send" territory. Pretty sad for a board ive followed for years..

And what`s so bad about this thread and posts here?

I'll just go with nothing. Not going to say anything specifically. My own thoughts. Proceed as you were..

[MrTwister]

I dont wanna nitpick but Rudy Fernandez played guard position last time when he was still in NBA.He is considered small forward in Europe and in his NT, i dont think he spent a second during this tournament playing SG.Spain guard rotation includes Calderon,Ricky.Llul,Sergio Rodriguez and J.C Navaro.Rudy cant be ahead of any of them(incl. Rubio) in guard rotation because he is not part of it, because he is playing SF and Spain guard position is pretty deep and filled with quality players, most of them also pretty good shooters.

[urinesane]

Maybe you should re-read what i`ve typed, I never said I was qualified for anything, I`m saying Jalen being an analyst qualifies him to give opinions

Maybe you should re-read what you just typed, because you contradict yourself in the same sentence.

So you're saying you're not qualified to judge someone's qualifications, but Jalen being an analyst qualifies him to give opinions.

don`t put words in my mouth.

Don't tell me what to do.

Yes I agree the info. should be presented, but don`t think just becouse he didn`t give full analiz he forms his opinion on only scoring ability, thats crazy. The topic of their discussion wasn`t in-dept Rubio analiz afther all, doesn`t mean his opinion doesn`t matter.

You are speculating. Do you know him personally? If not, my argument remains. He is totally able to have an opinion, and he doesn't have to make a huge in depth analysis, but if he ONLY GIVES ONE REASON why Rubio is the 3-4th best guard on that team, then his argument isn't worth listening to until he expands further.

It's one step above Rubio is the 3-4th best guard on that team, because I said so. He doesn't need to give a huge article worth of reasons, but you need more than 1 when you are making polarizing statements (or you can just be a lazy analyst and expect 1 reason to be enough to validate your opinion).

[Sugarless]

Don't waste your time. Everybody and their grandma knows Ricky is the best guard in the NT, and it's pretty obvious when you actually watch the games. As good as Pau and Marc have been, you could make a case for Ricky being the Spanish MVP so far (not the best player, that's Pau), as he's the catalyst of their defense and he sets the offense getting easy baskets for every teammate, with the Gasols being great beneficiaries of his assists.

[YaleS]

Maybe you should re-read what i`ve typed, I never said I was qualified for anything, I`m saying Jalen being an analyst qualifies him to give opinions

Maybe you should re-read what you just typed, because you contradict yourself in the same sentence.

So you're saying you're not qualified to judge someone's qualifications, but Jalen being an analyst qualifies him to give opinions.

3rd time is the charm

[YaleS]

Don't waste your time. Everybody and their grandma knows Ricky is the best guard in the NT, and it's pretty obvious when you actually watch the games. As good as Pau and Marc have been, you could make a case for Ricky being the Spanish MVP so far (not the best player, that's Pau), as he's the catalyst of their defense and he sets the offense getting easy baskets for every teammate, with the Gasols being great beneficiaries of his assists.

If the don`t waste your time comment is towards me, I`ve never said I agree with Jalen on this one, my post was that I`m offended by it...

[AQuintus]

3rd time is the charm

Being a human being that is alive qualifies someone to give an opinion, it doesn't mean that that opinion is intelligent, informed, or correct.

[YaleS]

3rd time is the charm

Being a human being that is alive qualifies someone to give an opinion, it doesn't mean that that opinion is intelligent, informed, or correct.

Ofc I mean his opinion actually has value because of his status, but whatever i`m not gonna argue interenet-got-ya-warrior style just for the sake of it.

[urinesane]

3rd time is the charm

Being a human being that is alive qualifies someone to give an opinion, it doesn't mean that that opinion is intelligent, informed, or correct.

Ofc I mean his opinion actually has value because of his status, but whatever i`m not gonna argue interenet-got-ya-warrior style just for the sake of it.

That's pretty subjective isn't it? You clearly read/write at a 6th grade level, so I'll just stop replying to you.

[YaleS]

Being a human being that is alive qualifies someone to give an opinion, it doesn't mean that that opinion is intelligent, informed, or correct.

Ofc I mean his opinion actually has value because of his status, but whatever i`m not gonna argue interenet-got-ya-warrior style just for the sake of it.

That's pretty subjective isn't it? You clearly read/write at a 6th grade level, so I'll just stop replying to you.

Every opinion by def. is subjective and how much value a person places on this op. is subjective as well, only facts aren`t subjective and an opinion isn`t an opinion if it`s not subj., cuz then it will be just a statement of a fact. If more people care about someone`s opinion (Jalen) it makes it more valuable. And if you go that route- yes an baseless opinion is meaningless, an opinion matters when is backed with information(facts), but yet again a person can`t do in-dept analyz on every word and Jalen`s topic wasn`t Rubio.
And trying to insult me schoolyard style on the net is just pointless. I`m fine not replying to you too since you just try to look like smart ass and put words in my mouth, invent arguments and proceed to varify clear points no one is arguing about but yourself.

[AQuintus]

Ofc I mean his opinion actually has value because of his status,

Once again: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority