OT- S.Jackson or Vince Carter?

[Hilltop]

I guess intangibles mean nothing now,.

Ah yes. The argument of someone who has no concrete, verifiable arguments. Talk about nonsense like "intangibles".

Well, it has already been proven statistically that VC is flawless. So you have to assume that intangebles are the reaon why he is not the GOAT.

You're the only who said that No one else here said Carter was flawless or even remotely implied that.

Hobo, instead of creating Strawmen and asking completely irrelevant questions in the hopes of pushing your whatever agenda you have, I suggest you stick to the discussion at hand. Answer the arguments with a valid rebuttal instead of some illogical line of questioning or some slippery slope assumption.

To make it clear to the haters, the statistical evidence provided doesn't prove that Carter is perfect (he is far from it), but it proves that Jackson has not been more productive this season or over his career for that matter. He is also most definitely NOT a better passer, rebounder, etc. as has been claimed in this thread. Hate him all you want, but accept the cold hard facts. I hate players too for a myriad of reasons, but I will not lie or blatantly go against facts to validate my 'hate". It is what it is.

[Hobo Gonzolez]

You're the only who said that No one else here said Carter was flawless or even remotely implied that.

Hobo, instead of creating Strawmen and asking completely irrelevant questions in the hopes of pushing your whatever agenda you have, I suggest you stick to the discussion at hand. Answer the arguments with a valid rebuttal instead of some illogical line of questioning or some slippery slope assumption.

To make it clear to the haters, the statistical evidence provided doesn't prove that Carter is perfect (he is far from it), but it proves that Jackson has not been more productive this season or over his career for that matter. He is also most definitely NOT a better passer, rebounder, etc. as has been claimed in this thread. Hate him all you want, but accept the cold hard facts. I hate players too for a myriad of reasons, but I will not lie or blatantly go against facts to validate my 'hate". It is what it is.

I was making a point showing how the stats are flawed. If there are stats that shows that Vince is better than Jackson, but the same stats also show that Vince Carter is a better player than it makes any logical sense to conclude, that means that the stats are flawed.

Also, don't get me started on VC and "passing". I am not going to post very much about it on here, because I don't want to, but concluding playmaking ability using assist statistics is extremely flawed. I'm just going to end it there.

Anyway, regarding Jackson and rebounding. Jackson is actually a worse rebounder than he should be, but part of the problem is similar to the Bargnani and offensive rebounding effect. Jackson is a perimeter defender, so he is usually out of position for rebounds despite his size advantage.

And again, statistically why is VC not GOAT? Point out one thing he can't do.

[JordansBulls]

Jackson overall for the season, but Vince has been picking up lately.

[Hilltop]

You're the only who said that No one else here said Carter was flawless or even remotely implied that.

Hobo, instead of creating Strawmen and asking completely irrelevant questions in the hopes of pushing your whatever agenda you have, I suggest you stick to the discussion at hand. Answer the arguments with a valid rebuttal instead of some illogical line of questioning or some slippery slope assumption.

To make it clear to the haters, the statistical evidence provided doesn't prove that Carter is perfect (he is far from it), but it proves that Jackson has not been more productive this season or over his career for that matter. He is also most definitely NOT a better passer, rebounder, etc. as has been claimed in this thread. Hate him all you want, but accept the cold hard facts. I hate players too for a myriad of reasons, but I will not lie or blatantly go against facts to validate my 'hate". It is what it is.

I was making a point showing how the stats are flawed. If there are stats that shows that Vince is better than Jackson, but the same stats also show that Vince Carter is a better player than it makes any logical sense to conclude, that means that the stats are flawed.

Also, don't get me started on VC and "passing". I am not going to post very much about it on here, because I don't want to, but concluding playmaking ability using assist statistics is extremely flawed. I'm just going to end it there.

Anyway, regarding Jackson and rebounding. Jackson is actually a worse rebounder than he should be, but part of the problem is similar to the Bargnani and offensive rebounding effect. Jackson is a perimeter defender, so he is usually out of position for rebounds despite his size advantage.

And again, statistically why is VC not GOAT? Point out one thing he can't do.

Your last question is utterly irrelevant. In fact, I have no idea why you even bother asking us to enumerate why Vince isn't the greatest, when there was never such an assertion in this thread. It was never implied so cut the bull.

And about statistics being flawed, give me a break man. I have never been one to live and die by statistics a la Hollinger, and I certainly know that they have their limitations. Nevertheless, your dismissal of statistics as inaccurate is hilarious. I've seen you bring up statistics to back up your points on numerous occasions and on many different threads and now because they favor Vince (the guy you hate with a passion), we must take them with a grain of salt?

It's also funny that how after you downplay whatever favors Carter, you quickly you revert to making excuses and justification for Jackson's rebounding numbers. But please, don't even begin to insinuate that Jackson is somehow being "marginalized" by the role/position he plays and Carter is enjoying some sort of invisible advantage which thus make his RPG superior. Rubbish. It is what it is Hobo, being defensive about these details is just you grasping straws now. Give it up.

As far as Carter's playmaking ability is concerned, I am hardly basing this comparison on statistics alone. That is one thing (and it is far from invalid), but anyone who has watched a good deal of Carter's play knows that the numbers don't lie. If you are insinuating that he is supposed to be a horrible/poor passer, then you're right, maybe you shouldn't get started with that because it would be stupid.

You're an intelligent poster and I can tell from your posts, but your deep-seated hatred for Carter has clouded your judgment terribly. It has become apparent that an objective discussion about him is impossible with you. There is absolutely nothing you will concede even if the facts, statistics, and historical anecdotes are right in front of you.

[Hobo Gonzolez]

Your last question is utterly irrelevant. In fact, I have no idea why you even bother asking us to enumerate why Vince isn't the greatest, when there was never such an assertion in this thread. It was never implied so cut the bull.

It was a clear exaggeration of facts, but if you would actually analyze the situation you would realize that you remove the hyperbole and actually understand what I am saying, you wouldn't need to write a long post full of nothing.
So I will re post my question in a more direct way.
Using statistics, is there anything that Carter is below average at? And if there isn't, then why isn't he a more successful player?

And about statistics being flawed, give me a break man. I have never been one to live and die by statistics a la Hollinger, and I certainly know that they have their limitations. Nevertheless, your dismissal of statistics as inaccurate is hilarious. I've seen you bring up statistics to back up your points on numerous occasions and on many different threads and now because they favor Vince (the guy you hate with a passion), we must take them with a grain of salt?

The thing is that usually when a statistic is flawed. For example, my PER comparison was flawed and somebody actually points out why, I admit it(you seem to have ignored the post in the other topic regarding Bosh and Carter), or I use a different statistic to prove my point.

It's also funny that how after you downplay whatever favors Carter, you quickly you revert to making excuses and justification for Jackson's rebounding numbers. But please, don't even begin to insinuate that Jackson is somehow being "marginalized" by the role/position he plays and Carter is enjoying some sort of invisible advantage which thus make his RPG superior. Rubbish. It is what it is Hobo, being defensive about these details is just you grasping straws now. Give it up.

And what exactly is the problem with what I said in that paragraph?

As far as Carter's playmaking ability is concerned, I am hardly basing this comparison on statistics alone. That is one thing (and it is far from invalid), but anyone who has watched a good deal of Carter's play knows that the numbers don't lie. If you are insinuating that he is supposed to be a horrible/poor passer, then you're right, maybe you shouldn't get started with that because it would be stupid.

Ok, I will take your word for it.

You're an intelligent poster and I can tell from your posts, but your deep-seated hatred for Carter has clouded your judgment terribly. It has become apparent that an objective discussion about him is impossible with you. There is absolutely nothing you will concede even if the facts, statistics, and historical anecdotes are right in front of you.

I will concede certain things. If people are using flawed arguments they deserve to be called out on it. Using career numbers like a lot of people have been using here in this comparison makes absolutely no sense and yet, despite you trying to be the King of Logic, you ignore this fact.

[Hilltop]

1) In certain cases, stats and advanced stats help prove a player is more efficient, a better scorer/rebounder etc. They don't determine the success of a player or indicate "greatness", but no blanket conclusions were made about Carter being great based on his numbers anyway. Your silly trap question assumes that I think statistics are absolute, which I do NOT

2) My point about stats was that it was rather amusing how you wasted no time in dismissing the numbers just coz they didn't favor your POV. And yet you have used these raw per game stats in the past to your own benefit. And mind you, in a similar context - to help prove someone is a better scorer/rebounder/passer/more productive etc.

3) Well duh, perimeter players will naturally account for less rebounds than guys who play in the post. What I am saying is you pretend Jackson's situation is unique yet not give Carter and other perimeter players the same pass. Are we supposed to believe that Jackson can easily average more rebounds while Vince cannot?

4) Don't take my word for it. Go ahead and start a thread titled exactly "Vince Carter is a horrible/poor passer and playmaker" if you vehemently disagree. Not only do I wanna see the responses you'd get, but exactly what proof you have of this

5) And why can't we use career numbers in this comparison? Statistics are useful if they are taken into context. And the context is this:

Carter doesn't exactly play C, and Jackson isn't the only guy who shoot three-pointers and defends the opposite team's wing. They play similar roles/positions and there is a sample size of 700 games for Jack and around 800 for Vince. When production is adjusted to 36 minutes (to be fair to Jackson who averages slightly less MPG), we find Carter averages 5.3 RPG and Jackson averages 4.3.

So yes, saying Stephen Jackson is a better rebounder is absurd. If you disagree with the numbers, quit whining and show us proof. You've done nothing but yap about the inaccuracy of statistics yet you've provided NOTHING in return.

[ajbry]

Jack is a mediocre rebounder, and it has nothing to do with his position on the floor. His vertical leap has always been underwhelming and he'd much rather leak out on the break than get under the glass and snatch a rebound.

VC is definitely the superior rebounder.

[Hilltop]

I can definitely understand why people would want Jackson on their team instead of Vince this season. I'd say Vince is the superior player, but it is pretty close, and you could go either way (Jackson's defense is definitely something to value).

But then you have the Carter-haters whose main arguments have consisted of:

- Carter has no balls/heart
- he's a quitter/pussy
- he cares more about individual stuff
- Screw statistics! Jackson is the better rebounder yo! Who cares if even GS and Charlotte fans in this thread have disagreed!
- He has better FG% too!

It's easy to see which side has been objective and which one is talking out their ass, saying the statistics are wrong while providing no counter-proof, and bringing up things that have absolutely no merit in an intelligent discussion

It's also become clear that moderators need a new policy on these Vince Carter threads. I remember how they became strict on those LeBron/Kobe/Wade discussions because they ended up nowhere, ended up in flame wars, and became a hotbed for haters. The same goes for here. People on RealGM hate Carter so much that there can NEVER be an objective discussion anymore. It's the same old wince/no heart/quitter/he sucks/hes selfish kind of garbage being recycled again and again, regardless of what that VC thread is even about. It ruins any potentially good discussion.

People don't need to hear about how LeBron is a crybaby/soreloser/immature and egotistical punk, how Kobe is a ballhog/selfish/a rapist, or how KG is a douchebag/whiteboy bully/pussy/back-peddler in every single hreads about them. Same thing here. People need to grow up.

[C.Boshly]

A buddy of mine were arguing about who would be more valuable to the magic, he claims Carter is better because he is more of a playmaker and drives the ball inside, I think Stephen Jackson would give the magic a championship because hes a better passer and more of a leader,

what do you think?

If the Magic want a championship in most strip club incidents in a season I guess Jackson would be an appropriate piece.

Amazes me how people still consider this guy a leader. Sure he looks good now in Bobcat land right now but he is under the watchful eye of MJ (Player tamer extraordinaire) and Larry Brown. Even so I give him two years until he flames out again.

[Hobo Gonzolez]

1) In certain cases, stats and advanced stats help prove a player is more efficient, a better scorer/rebounder etc. They don't determine the success of a player or indicate "greatness", but no blanket conclusions were made about Carter being great based on his numbers anyway. Your silly trap question assumes that I think statistics are absolute, which I do NOT

2) My point about stats was that it was rather amusing how you wasted no time in dismissing the numbers just coz they didn't favor your POV. And yet you have used these raw per game stats in the past to your own benefit. And mind you, in a similar context - to help prove someone is a better scorer/rebounder/passer/more productive etc.

3) Well duh, perimeter players will naturally account for less rebounds than guys who play in the post. What I am saying is you pretend Jackson's situation is unique yet not give Carter and other perimeter players the same pass. Are we supposed to believe that Jackson can easily average more rebounds while Vince cannot?

4) Don't take my word for it. Go ahead and start a thread titled exactly "Vince Carter is a horrible/poor passer and playmaker" if you vehemently disagree. Not only do I wanna see the responses you'd get, but exactly what proof you have of this

5) And why can't we use career numbers in this comparison? Statistics are useful if they are taken into context. And the context is this:

Carter doesn't exactly play C, and Jackson isn't the only guy who shoot three-pointers and defends the opposite team's wing. They play similar roles/positions and there is a sample size of 700 games for Jack and around 800 for Vince. When production is adjusted to 36 minutes (to be fair to Jackson who averages slightly less MPG), we find Carter averages 5.3 RPG and Jackson averages 4.3.

So yes, saying Stephen Jackson is a better rebounder is absurd. If you disagree with the numbers, quit whining and show us proof. You've done nothing but yap about the inaccuracy of statistics yet you've provided NOTHING in return.

Career numbers are only good when talking about someones career. This topic is about which player would fit better on the Magic THIS YEAR. You aren't going to get VC from 2001 to come through a time machine and show up to outplay Jackson.

I have never said Jackson was a better rebounder. In fact I will say right now VC is better, but he is not that much better, and he isn't really worth of any special mention when talking about players who 'box out their man".

The part about statisics for some reason really didn't make any sense to me. I think you were jumping to conclusions about my views on stats. My view is pretty much what you said. However, some people have been acting like VC is better than Jackson due to statistics, while observing games seems to tell me the opposite. To completely ignore the error in statistics is just incomprehensible to me, however a lot of people have been doing it in this topic.

The playmaking stuff I will get around to writing, but it will take a while because I am not stupid enough to write up something controversial without any backup.

[Hobo Gonzolez]

I can definitely understand why people would want Jackson on their team instead of Vince this season. I'd say Vince is the superior player, but it is pretty close, and you could go either way (Jackson's defense is definitely something to value).

But then you have the Carter-haters whose main arguments have consisted of:

- Carter has no balls/heart
- he's a quitter/pussy
- he cares more about individual stuff
- Screw statistics! Jackson is the better rebounder yo! Who cares if even GS and Charlotte fans in this thread have disagreed!
- He has better FG% too!

It's easy to see which side has been objective and which one is talking out their ass, saying the statistics are wrong while providing no counter-proof, and bringing up things that have absolutely no merit in an intelligent discussion

It's also become clear that moderators need a new policy on these Vince Carter threads. I remember how they became strict on those LeBron/Kobe/Wade discussions because they ended up nowhere, ended up in flame wars, and became a hotbed for haters. The same goes for here. People on RealGM hate Carter so much that there can NEVER be an objective discussion anymore. It's the same old wince/no heart/quitter/he sucks/hes selfish kind of garbage being recycled again and again, regardless of what that VC thread is even about. It ruins any potentially good discussion.

People don't need to hear about how LeBron is a crybaby/soreloser/immature and egotistical punk, how Kobe is a ballhog/selfish/a rapist, or how KG is a douchebag/whiteboy bully/pussy/back-peddler in every single hreads about them. Same thing here. People need to grow up.

What are you complaining about? How many VC threads are there? There is this, my one that turned into a VC thread. What else is there? The last one that I remember about is the VC hall of fame thread, which was only really a hate fest if saying he doesn't deserve to be in the hall of fame is hating(it isn't btw).

[Hilltop]

The only one talking about Carter from 2001 and Time Machines is you. When referring to productivity this season, statistics exclusive to 2009-2010 were also brought up, so stop acting like we are making blanket conclusions based on career stats The numbers from this season show that Jackson is superior in steals and is at par or even inferior to Carter in every other area. He is also less efficient, far more turnover prone (while averaging slightly less APG), and he has less win shares to show for.

Carter's RPG is nothing special, BUT the difference in rebounding numbers between him and Jackson becomes note-worthy once people begin making bogus claims about Jackson being the better rebounder.

Only reason career stats were brought up was to prove that Jackson was never a better rebounder than Carter EVEN outside this year, thus making the original claim infinitely more absurd. They were also used to dispute the claim that he hasn't had better FG% as per that idiot Bomb_First. Moreover, damillboi and a few others used Jackson's "career" as some sort of basis in this comparison (page 1). That's why all these VC career numbers even came to the fore to begin with.

Career-wise, Carter has been the better player, period. It's not merely a matter of superior statistics, but about accolades historical anecdotes, and a good amount of common sense. Carter is chided for his lack of All-NBA presence, well Jackson, he has had none at all. Not even an All-Star selection

Now if we narrow it down to this season, if you would take Jackson, then that's cool. He has his case so to each his own opinion. Just don't come out here making stupid claims that cannot be backed by anything but your sorry/uneducated opinion (not targeted to you Hobo, I'm speaking generally).

[Hilltop]

What are you complaining about? How many VC threads are there? There is this, my one that turned into a VC thread. What else is there? The last one that I remember about is the VC hall of fame thread, which was only really a hate fest if saying he doesn't deserve to be in the hall of fame is hating(it isn't btw).

Don't be so defensive, I wasn't even referring to you. It's not as if you have ever chimed in to say Carter has no balls/heart/he is selfish/quitter/wince harder, etc. You're a die-hard hater, but a different kind - the more "cerebral" type who likes deliberating and arguing rather than driving by with an insult or some (Please Use More Appropriate Word) comment as many others do.

But such is the truth. There are always several idiots who will come to any Carter thread pollute any potentially good discussion with these lamebrain remarks. Carter threads these days are as hopeless as Wade/Kobe/LeBron debacles simply because there are too many haters just waiting for the chance to pounce.