What level of success would make the Gobert trade acceptable?

[urinesane]

Do you have a quote of me saying that? You argue like a drunk know-it-all 20 something at a party.

It's in the tone of your text, you may say you argue from a position of understanding but you don't really.

Where have I ever said that? You are the one that regularly brings up the fact that you played bball in college as some sort of proof that you're right and people are wrong. I have opinions and views on things, almost always different than you (somehow), but unlike you I am not here to "win" a discussion. I enjoy hearing well thought out views, but you pretty much just shift the conversation anytime someone brings up data counter to your argument (or doesn't agree with your opinions).

You are a hypocrite, because you'll point to one cherry picked stat, metric, blog post etc as definitive proof of your opinion somehow being fact (none of our opinions are fact), but when anyone presents anything to you, you instantly dismiss it because it doesn't mesh with your views.

Your arguments are just as harsh just as stubborn. I may be more reactionary at times, but I'm not sitting here pretending that I don't think I'm right. I absolutely do think that and unless you can present me with real in game evidence or proof that's video based chances are Ill argue against whatever stat you have, because metrics don't mean **** without your own eyes viewing it.

Harsh, not sure about that. Stubborn, sure I can be stubborn, but I don't partake in your level of mental gymnastics. You will basically say anything to avoid the potential of ever being wrong, because you are insecure and cannot put your ego aside (hence the constantly bringing up your college ball experience as if that makes you some sort of authority on the NBA).

When someone pushes back and you don't have a leg to stand on, you either call names, cry to the admins, or both.

You seem like the type of person that alienates their friends by never letting an argument go (and acting like you know everything) and then wonders why nobody wants to hang out with you.

I feel like you're projecting quite a bit.

If you say so. What do your friends think?

[shrink]

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/rudy-gobert-was-supposed-to-take-the-t-wolves-to-the-next-level-why-isnt-it-working/

Seems like 538 is cool comparing the years. You probably will find some way to criticize the literal stat based paper just so you can lick Goberts ball sweat for another second.

I read this and thought it was pretty bad methodology, especially since they put “Why isn’t it working?” In the title.

The basic problem here is applying team results to individual players. For example, Gobert’s offense decreased in the first half of the year. Is that really a Rudy problem, going from getting fed by Conley in Utah to getting fed poorly by DLo and not at all by Ant? Obviously Rudy can’t play one-on-one, but fortunately, basketball is played with five players, right?

And is it really a surprise MIN’s offense was worse, if Towns isn’t in it? Unless there is a McGruder film somewhere of Rudy injuring Towns calf from a grassy knoll, I have a hard time blaming Rudy for this.

I expect the team to be more productive next year, and Rudy should be a big part of that, like we already saw, more towards the end of the season. Bringing in Conley, and improvement from Ant will get him better feeds, and Towns on the floor will give him more room to work.

Basketball is still a team game. It is bad logic to look for a team effect and blame it all on one player. Towns gets this treatment frequently, since the team hasn’t had much playoff success.

[urinesane]

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/rudy-gobert-was-supposed-to-take-the-t-wolves-to-the-next-level-why-isnt-it-working/

Seems like 538 is cool comparing the years. You probably will find some way to criticize the literal stat based paper just so you can lick Goberts ball sweat for another second.

I read this and thought it was pretty bad methodology, especially since they put “Why isn’t it working?” In the title.

The basic problem here is applying team results to individual players. For example, Gobert’s offense decreased in the first half of the year. Is that really a Rudy problem, going from getting fed by Conley in Utah to getting fed poorly by DLo and not at all by Ant? Obviously Rudy can’t play one-on-one, but fortunately, basketball is played with five players, right?

And is it really a surprise MIN’s offense was worse, if Towns isn’t in it? Unless there is a McGruder film somewhere of Rudy injuring Towns calf from a grassy knoll, I have a hard time blaming Rudy for this.

I expect the team to be more productive next year, and Rudy will be a big part of that, like he was more towards the end of the season. Bringing in Conley, and improvement from Ant will get him better feeds, and Towns on the floor will give him more room to work.

Basketball is still a team game. It is bad logic to look for a team effect and blame it all on one player. Towns gets this treatment frequently, since the team hasn’t had much playoff success.

Rudy being the sole reason for the struggles this season does have a very "single bullet theory" vibe to it

Note: Also, the first time I read it my brain changed it to MacGruber, which made it even more fun.

[shrink]

Bump from last May. Have your opinions changed?