This board really needs to apologize to Andrew Wiggins

[vagelis]

Minny gave him the green light when he was 19, 20 and 21 years old. He had not the green light the next years(except maybe his last year with Ryan Saunders)

Yes, that's how the draft works. As it has for so many others over the decades. He had plenty of green light his entire time in Minnesota, he just didn't develop the skills to be a worthwhile primary option.

Scoring 17,20 and 24 ppg at 21 yo does not mean that he didn't develop the skills. In Minesota he lost the green light because Thibodeau arrived and brought Jimmy Butler, Jeff Teague and Derrick Rose. And Thibodeau decided to send Wiggins at the corner after a 24ppg season. When Tibodeau left, Wiggins averaged 22.5ppg the next year again.
If we talk about Warriors, Wiggins could not be the main scorer because there is Curry, one of the best offensive players of all time. This is fair enough. He took a step back in order to win a title with a great team

I don't know what people expected from him in such a young age.

Yes, you do. They expected him to fill the expectations of his draft slot and role. They wanted him to be a quality volume scorer. That never happened.

If you can remember his draft expectations were that he is raw offensively and will be a good defender from first day. He exceeded expectations in his first years

He is a better player now, more skilled and better shooter.

Not really? He's leveraging corner 3s at a rate similar to his career rate. He's getting more straight catch-and-shoot opportunities, and he could always hit those. He is still weak to poor at the foul line and he still doesn't have a great long 2pt jumper. He was actually pretty weak from 10' to the 3pt line this year.

Wiggins averaged 41 3p% at catch and shoot this year.
He averaged around 35% for his career if we exclude this season. I don't know why you prefer only corner 3s as evidence

You judjed him for his whole career based on his 20yo skills

No, I didn't. We're discussing what he's doing now, too. Even in Golden State, not acting as a focal scorer, playing against single coverage and getting more assisted buckets, he's still only marginally better than league-average scoring efficiency. He still doesn't consistently draw fouls, he still isn't an elite shooter.

You need to grasp that this guy was drafted to be a franchise player, and he isn't even an elite roleplayer right now. He suits Golden State's needs and he's connecting pretty well from 3 for them. He is mostly not that different from what he was in Minny. A little bit more polish in his handle and post game at times, but not to much effect relative to his earlier scoring output, even in this role. I can't stress enough how inaccurate most of what you have said in this thread has been.

You say that he is only marginally better than league's average in scoring efficiency as an argument that he cannot be a focal scorer but there are plenty of superstars who score in worse than league's average efficiency.
Tatum for example has a 52.6 efg%, Doncic 52.9 efg%.
Wiggins had 54.3 efg%.
His main asset is driving to the basket, something that Warriors don't use.
He does not get screens and plays for him and he drives 1vs1, this is not possible for role players. Wiggins is elite in 1vs1 but gets no plays to showcase his main asset.


You say that he is not even an elite role player but he does that for the best team in the league.

Anyway let's see how the series will go, we have a game tonight. Doncic is a tough matchup for Wiggins.
This is it from me for today, I respect all the opinions and I wrote a lot in this thread

[Yoshun]

I remember when the Kevin Love trade happened and half the people on this board said Cleveland got ripped off.

[FNQ]

He's doing great at his role but he's also on a max contract to be the 4th scoring option and maybe(?) 4th or 5th best player on the team.

I've seen people call him anywhere between 4th - 6th best player on this team

Are people actually putting Klay ahead of him? Or Poole? Or Looney?

Clear #3.. nostalgia going 2 ways if people see Wiggins as worse than Klay at this point

Clear #3? Obviously I think you put Curry and Dray ahead of him, but personally I'd put GP2's season above Wiggins' quite easily. Id personally also put OPJ's, Poole's, and Looney's (certainly not Klay though) seasons' above Wiggins', which for me, would slot Wiggins in at 7, though I think it's at least debatable with those 3, but that's more based on the fact Wiggins is starting/playing more minutes, and it's difficult to untangle those effects. I certainly wouldn't say it's crazy to put Wiggins above those last 3. That said, all 6 of those guys lead Wiggins in PER, WS/48, BPM, VORP, etc. Wiggins is 8th on the team in PER, 11th in WS/48, 10th in BPM, and 6th in VORP. Now, there is certainly some evidence from advanced stats in Wiggins' favor, for example Poole and Looney's various RAPTOR metrics aren't as good as Wiggins', but OPJ and especially GP2 fairly handily beat Wiggins in just about every advanced stat I can find.

If I could give a baseball analogy, I view Wiggins as more of a solid back of the rotation starter that will eat up a lot of innings, whereas GP2/OPJ are more like ace relievers. You can certainly argue about which is more valuable, but personally I tend to be biased more towards guys that are specialists (for this squad).

I've really hedged on whether or not to break this down. I'm not going to right now, because I dont know if you have any interest in going as deep into the discussion as I will (if you're down to have that conversation, I am too, but I'm blunt about it so most dont like that). But I'll break it down into some really quick bullet points

- Wiggins being 7th is laughable, I'm sorry, but it is, and that you'd even suggest it is why metric-based arguments here are really frustrating

- you listed a ton of metrics that no one uses anymore beyond online conversations. They aren't the basis for anything, most of them have strict rules for their usage that makes them valuable at all. PER, WS, BPM, VORP.. aside from PER, and only in very very specific conditions, these hold no value. Or at least they shouldn't.

- lastly, you seem to be employing a bit of the per36 mentality. X player does ok in 6 minutes, so extrapolate to 36. Not how it works, especially when trying to use general metrics to evaluate niche players

[FNQ]

Everybody ripped him for years in Minnesota calling him a bust and a bad teammate. Then when he was traded everybody said Minnesota won the trade by getting Dlo. In reality he is a great 2 way player who has been great for the Warriors during this postseason run.

Time for people to just accept while not as good as Embiid or Jokic, he is a damn good player.

Huh?

1) Minnesota gave up a highly prized 1st round pick in that deal. It wasn't a one-for-one trade. So you'll have to prove to me that there was any sort of consensus that MN won that trade hands-down.

I linked to the initial GB thread, take a look at the thread there. People were flaying the Warriors for it

[Lalouie]

sorry. i choose my apologies carefully

[FNQ]

I've seen people call him anywhere between 4th - 6th best player on this team

Are people actually putting Klay ahead of him? Or Poole? Or Looney?

Clear #3.. nostalgia going 2 ways if people see Wiggins as worse than Klay at this point

Clear #3? Obviously I think you put Curry and Dray ahead of him, but personally I'd put GP2's season above Wiggins' quite easily. Id personally also put OPJ's, Poole's, and Looney's (certainly not Klay though) seasons' above Wiggins', which for me, would slot Wiggins in at 7, though I think it's at least debatable with those 3, but that's more based on the fact Wiggins is starting/playing more minutes, and it's difficult to untangle those effects. I certainly wouldn't say it's crazy to put Wiggins above those last 3. That said, all 6 of those guys lead Wiggins in PER, WS/48, BPM, VORP, etc. Wiggins is 8th on the team in PER, 11th in WS/48, 10th in BPM, and 6th in VORP. Now, there is certainly some evidence from advanced stats in Wiggins' favor, for example Poole and Looney's various RAPTOR metrics aren't as good as Wiggins', but OPJ and especially GP2 fairly handily beat Wiggins in just about every advanced stat I can find.

If I could give a baseball analogy, I view Wiggins as more of a solid back of the rotation starter that will eat up a lot of innings, whereas GP2/OPJ are more like ace relievers. You can certainly argue about which is more valuable, but personally I tend to be biased more towards guys that are specialists (for this squad).

Looney runs him close, but is not as important in every single game. Peak Klay is obviously better, and I would be very happy if peak Klay returned to demote Wiggs, but that hasn’t happened yet. The other 2 players you mention I also value highly, but there is a reason he plays more minutes than they do, durability as well as ability, the first not unimportant. If he went down it would imo be the end of any title chances for GSW, not so for GPII and OPJ, much though I would like to have both playing. OPJ looked fantastic in his minutes in game 1, but no way is he playing 35 minutes; I would be delighted if he can just play every game.

I agree almost entirely, but I wouldn't say that peak Klay is obviously better. Peak Klay got to work with 2 HOFers in front of him on the shot chart, and a 3rd who was distributing to him. Put today's Wiggins on that team, and are we worse? Better? Wiggins wouldnt have to score as much as Klay did, but he could defend and recover much better. Imagine that team's death squad: Curry - Wiggins - Iguodala - KD - Draymond. Aside from Curry that's a defensive dream team, and has 2 of the best scorers of their generation to boot

[runtmc]

I've really hedged on whether or not to break this down. I'm not going to right now, because I dont know if you have any interest in going as deep into the discussion as I will (if you're down to have that conversation, I am too, but I'm blunt about it so most dont like that). But I'll break it down into some really quick bullet points

By all means, you seem like an intelligent and knowledgeable guy, Id certainly welcome the discussion.

- Wiggins being 7th is laughable, I'm sorry, but it is, and that you'd even suggest it is why metric-based arguments here are really frustrating

As opposed to... what other sort of argument? Personal opinion? I'm a bit surprised to hear you say something like that, honestly. If you have better/other objective evidence, please, share -- otherwise, Im not sure this will be a very long or fruitful conversation.

- you listed a ton of metrics that no one uses anymore beyond online conversations. They aren't the basis for anything, most of them have strict rules for their usage that makes them valuable at all. PER, WS, BPM, VORP.. aside from PER, and only in very very specific conditions, these hold no value. Or at least they shouldn't.

Of course they have biases, and Im happy to discuss that and how those biases might change the analysis, but "no value"? Do you have any reason for saying that or evidence to back that claim up? Because there is certainly evidence that suggests they do -- nearly all of them correlate reasonably well with team success, for example (to varying degrees, of course).

- lastly, you seem to be employing a bit of the per36 mentality. X player does ok in 6 minutes, so extrapolate to 36. Not how it works, especially when trying to use general metrics to evaluate niche players

[/quote]

Im more than a bit perplexed you would say that -- I even went out of my way to point out that I was aware of that issue, e.g. "Wiggins is starting/playing more minutes, and it's difficult to untangle those effects", and making the baseball analogy to a lower usage reliever. Additionally, I think you're overblowing the case a bit -- all of those guys play a significant chunk of minutes, more than half of what Wiggins plays, Looney is also playing starter minutes, if fewer overall, and GP2/OPJ are playing 6th/7th man type roles, it's not like their minutes are Moody minutes, coming only in garbage time. True, there's a difference between 30mpg and 20mpg, and starter vs reserve minutes, but you're making it sound like the two cannot be compared at all. Id also point out I mentioned that I understood that some interpretation was necessary and I wouldn't call someone crazy that had Wiggins higher than I do -- that said, the gap between GP2/OPJ and Wiggins is rather large, across a range of different metrics, which points to the result being fairly robust.

[FNQ]

As opposed to... what other sort of argument? Personal opinion? I'm a bit surprised to hear you say something like that, honestly. If you have better/other objective evidence, please, share -- otherwise, Im not sure this will be a very long or fruitful conversation.

You're right, its not. But I have to levelset early on - the metrics often times used on this forum and most others are used incorrectly. PER is for evaluating similar style players in similar usage situations, otherwise it means less.

As for the others: it comes down to one key issue (possessions) and a host of minor ones. But focusing on the major one, possessions. People use PPP all the time in evaluations, especially in regards to defense. I hate that. And thats why I love tracking, because it counts opportunities. A possession is defined when something ends. A shot, a turnover, even an assist. But if I'm playing quality defense on you, I stifle what you want to do, and you cleanly pass it to someone else.. I get no credit for that. I get no credit for fronting you and denying you the ball. I get no credit for hounding you up the court, making you pick up the dribble. But now, you pass it to someone with a few seconds left on the SC, they fire up a bad shot because of it, and the defender was Jordan Poole, who now gets the metric credit for defense.

Now specifically about WS, I dont like the idea of shoehorning a baseball stat into basketball, but it also works backwards from answers and is entirely boxscore based. Pts, assists (which they call points produced) and then use an arbitrary %, I think it was 92%, to generate an end number. How does defense factor in at all? So as an overall metrics, I scrap those immediately

VORP is again, taking a baseball stat and trying to shoehorn it in again, based entirely on boxscore metrics, skewing heavily offensive. Siri, copy/paste my WS argument

In general, these stats are close to accurate. Most great players are going to carry the load offensively, so that skews thing. Overall team success skews things (check Iguodala's WS/VORP the past 3 seasons). But an avalanche of flawed metrics pointing in one direction isn't unusual, but its far from final.

Of course they have biases, and Im happy to discuss that and how those biases might change the analysis, but "no value"? Do you have any reason for saying that or evidence to back that claim up? Because there is certainly evidence that suggests they do -- nearly all of them correlate reasonably well with team success, for example (to varying degrees, of course).

I would not argue that they have biases. People do. They had certain roles to play, and they don't do well outside those roles. Wiggins is a perfect example. Failed in Minnesota, bad role. Thriving in GS, good role.

The base data we use is from Second Spectrum and I gave a small window of insight into what the contractor does in terms of evaluating each play. It is multi-level analysis that shies away from metrics and instead provides more context for raw data to hold up against metrics, with the clear difference being metrics' undeniable failure to recognize defensive talent. It applies to offense as well (see Jordan Poole, GP2), but those are more special cases, whereas defensively its almost universal. I only did it with Luka, but results are here, complete with legal disclaimer :

viewtopic.php?f=15&t=2194287&start=380#p99160038
(also keep in mind this is a very condensed version of it. its not even half of what's tracked play to play, which is why full analysis usually takes much longer)

Im more than a bit perplexed you would say that -- I even went out of my way to point out that I was aware of that issue, e.g. "Wiggins is starting/playing more minutes, and it's difficult to untangle those effects", and making the baseball analogy to a lower usage reliever. Additionally, I think you're overblowing the case a bit -- all of those guys play a significant chunk of minutes, more than half of what Wiggins plays, Looney is also playing starter minutes, if fewer overall, and GP2/OPJ are playing 6th/7th man type roles, it's not like their minutes are Moody minutes, coming only in garbage time. True, there's a difference between 30mpg and 20mpg, and starter vs reserve minutes, but you're making it sound like the two cannot be compared at all. Id also point out I mentioned that I understood that some interpretation was necessary and I wouldn't call someone crazy that had Wiggins higher than I do -- that said, the gap between GP2/OPJ and Wiggins is rather large, across a range of different metrics, which points to the result being fairly robust.

[/quote]

Well you acknowledged the time part, but that's only a small part of it. OPJ's heavy lifting is due to rebounding, which he's been great at, but his defense has actually been poor. Misses so many rotations on both sides of the ball, bogging down our offense as well as creating messes defensively. GP2 is the same, except everyone can visibly see how impactful he is defensively, man to man. But that energy can work against him too, as he can miss rotations frequently and is absolutely awful when playing on someone who's a good off-ball player. So we never let him do that. Both of them play in extremely advantageous conditions.

If either one of them was to be tasked with being the #3 offensive option while taking the most difficult defensive assignment for the majority of a game, what would their metrics look like? If Wiggins went down for the season today, who do we replace him with? If either GP2 or OPJ went out for the season, how impactful is that to our team's ability to win?

If Wiggins was barely 3rd, or if there was someone on our team with similar impact for the season, I wouldn't double down as hard I have on this. But frankly, Wiggins is closer to top 2 than our 4th (Poole or Klay, its pretty close) is to him. Only one other player can do what he does defensively on this team, and Dray's busy as our defensive QB. Wiggins was the #1 defensive SF this past season - players shot 39.7% against him, a full 1.5% above the #2 guy Mikal Bridges and 2% ahead of the 3rd guy, Franz Wagner.

And to address one thing you said.. the 30mpg vs 20mpg cant be compared at all? Of course it can, just not generally. And most stats do compare them generally, and thats why I dont value them in arguments, especially about defense. Metrics cannot and will not ever be able to understand the nuances of defense. There's a big gap between Poole's defense and Klay's defense metrically as well, is Poole way better than Klay defensively? Is Bjelica one of our top 5 defensive players? Or are they hitting on points that the metric values?

[Blame Rasho]

I see him as a Richard Jefferson type player at his apex and should we really be praising him since he was supposed to be significantly better? I mean begging for praise is lame. When he is good enough, he will just be acknowledged. It is that simple.

[JN61]

He made the All-Star team. Let's not pretend he's underappreciated.

There was whole smear campaign by Curry fans how he shouldn't be an all-star to prop their guy as if he played with just bunch of nobodies.

Proof?

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2153193

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2161170

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2161176


A lot of usual suspect "fans" giving all credits to Curry or downplaying impact Wiggins had on their own team.

[FNQ]

.

And just to add on (because RGM links break easy)

Spoiler:

this information was presented on NBA.com so it is not providing any non-public information

Among players who have contested at least 700 shots this season, that’s ninth-best in the league. The only two small forwards with a better contesting defensive field goal percentage are Andrew Wiggins (39.6 percent) and Mikal Bridges (41.1 percent)

Wiggins was very close to #1. Bridges was just one spot ahead of Franz

[tsherkin]

Scoring 17,20 and 24 ppg at 21 yo does not mean that he didn't develop the skills
[/quote\

Yeah, him not developing the skills is what meant he didn't develop the skills. You can see it in the statistical representation of his FTr and his shooting percentages by range zone. You can see it in how he's deployed on the court. This is not the profile of a player who has developed the skill set necessary to do what he was drafted for.

. In Minesota he lost the green light because Thibodeau arrived and brought Jimmy Butler, Jeff Teague and Derrick Rose. And Thibodeau decided to send Wiggins at the corner after a 24ppg season. When Tibodeau left, Wiggins averaged 22.5ppg the next year again.
If we talk about Warriors, Wiggins could not be the main scorer because there is Curry, one of the best offensive players of all time. This is fair enough. He took a step back in order to win a title with a great team

You are equating volume and efficacy. Opportunity is what most NBA players require to put up any given of points per game. Whether or not that is actually a good idea is another story entirely. Wiggins in a primary volume scoring role isn't a good idea as far as fostering quality team offense. He isn't a franchise-level offensive player. He is very clearly better off as a complementary player.

Wiggins averaged 41 3p% at catch and shoot this year.
He averaged around 35% for his career if we exclude this season. I don't know why you prefer only corner 3s as evidence[/quote[

He's a career 41.8% 3pt shooter from the corner, shooting 41.9% and 40.0% in his first two seasons...

You say that he is only marginally better than league's average in scoring efficiency as an argument that he cannot be a focal scorer but there are plenty of superstars who score in worse than league's average efficiency.
Tatum for example has a 52.6 efg%, Doncic 52.9 efg%.

Wiggins is a career 53.1% TS and 96 TS+ player. EVen in Golden State, he's only a 99 TS+ player. Tatum, by contrast, is a career 57.1% TS player. He's not a really hot high volume option either, but he's a 101 and 102 TS+ player these past two seasons. Also not great. He has other value, of course, but strictly speaking of him as a scorer, he's not stunning relative to era. TS+ has some limitations, because league average TS% has of course been rising, and the same is true for Wiggins. You take the 56% TS he posted this season and 56.8% last year and match those with his volume from earlier in his career, and even relative to a higher league average, he looks very different. But he didn't do that. He's needed to fill a very different role for that to happen.

Wiggins had 54.3 efg%.
His main asset is driving to the basket, something that Warriors don't use.
He does not get screens and plays for him and he drives 1vs1, this is not possible for role players. Wiggins is elite in 1vs1 but gets no plays to showcase his main asset.

I mean, no, that's not true. He gets DHOs and screens all the time. He MOSTLY gets catch-and-shoots, which are far higher-efficiency shots for him, as it happens, and he does a little PnR handling. He's actually been quite average in isolation as far as per-possession efficiency (0.867 PPP this year). That's a lot better than the .744 he dropped in 2017, of course, which reflects the shift in how he is being defended and his overall offensive context, of course. But no, he isn't an elite isolation scorer by any stretch of the imagination. He is good about protecting the ball, this is something which has always been true of Wiggins.

You say that he is not even an elite role player but he does that for the best team in the league.

That's... not a meaningful or well-constructed statement. The quality of the team doesn't reflect his individual ability in his role. This is a dude with an negative ORPM this year, rocking out a vigorous +0.3 OBPM (+0.4 from Backpicks), a brisk -0.1 EPM Yes, he does a decent job for the Warriors. I've already credited him for adapting his game. He fills their catch-and-shoot role well enough and here and there, he sneaks in a drive and runs well for lobs, etc. He's a pretty good roleplayer. There are better, but he does pretty well. It's nice that he's been able to adapt to a new role while still young, as I said before. The Warriors, and his role there, suit him. He isn't brilliant at it, but he's fit in well for the Warriors in this new role... to comparatively tepid effect. Replaceable, not stunning, but he's doing okay (offensively).

Defensively, he's been quite solid, no question. But offensively, he's not a lot different than he's always been, it just works out for the Warriors because they have an absolute embarrassment of riches on the offensive end of the floor and he is permitted to fill a very limited and advantageous role.

[rtiff68]

There was whole smear campaign by Curry fans how he shouldn't be an all-star to prop their guy as if he played with just bunch of nobodies.

Proof?

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2153193

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2161170

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2161176


A lot of usual suspect "fans" giving all credits to Curry or downplaying impact Wiggins had on their own team.

Those links function about as well as your "arguments."

"A lot" of Curry and Warriors fans have not been downplaying Wiggins; in fact, it's mostly been the opposite. Whether or not you found a few outliers does not prove that it happened "a lot."

Of course, you don't care about being accurate or having a productive dialogue-- you only come here to to do drive-by troll takes devoid of substance, and you immediately vanish when called to task.

[tsherkin]

"A lot" of Curry and Warriors fans have not been downplaying Wiggins; in fact, it's mostly been the opposite. Whether or not you found a few outliers does not prove that it happened "a lot."

Of course, you don't care about being accurate or having a productive dialogue-- you only come here to to do drive-by troll takes devoid of substance, and you immediately vanish when called to task.

It is pretty reasonable to question Wiggins as an All-Star this year for being a 3+D guy of comparatively tepid offensive value. But AS selections have also meant only so much for a very long time, particularly the one-offs. The intended meaning of the accolade has evolved over the years.

[dc]

It is pretty reasonable to question Wiggins as an All-Star this year for being a 3+D guy of comparatively tepid offensive value. But AS selections have also meant only so much for a very long time, particularly the one-offs. The intended meaning of the accolade has evolved over the years.

I think it's really less controversial to have him named as an all-star starter through the vote. Everyone knows fan voting can be mercurial to begin with (in 1990 AC Green got voted in as a starter over Karl Malone, LOL). Also add in the fact that player voting is now a factor as well (I think 25% of the vote?), and Wiggins got a lot of votes from his peers, probably because they just felt like he's a good guy who "deserved" it because he's been maligned for so long.

To me, it'd would've been more controversial if he made it as an all-star reserve, where those spots are basically up to the coaches.

Wiggins making the all-star team based on some pity/sentiment votes by players, media members and some cult followings outside the country really shouldn't be considered a big deal.

[tsherkin]

I think it's really less controversial to have him selected through the vote. Everyone knows fan voting can be mercurial to begin with (in 1990 AC Green got voted in as a starter over Karl Malone, LOL). Also add in the fact that player voting is now a factor as well (I think 25% of the vote?), and Wiggins got a lot of votes from his peers, probably because they just felt like he's a good guy who "deserved" it because he's been maligned for so long.

Oh it isn't surprising, that's a different story entirely, for sure. And no, it isn't a big deal, I agree. Casual fans will inappropriately extend from the selection the quality of the player, but AS selection has not been entirely about player ability for a long time, to be sure. We've known this for ages.

[rtiff68]

"A lot" of Curry and Warriors fans have not been downplaying Wiggins; in fact, it's mostly been the opposite. Whether or not you found a few outliers does not prove that it happened "a lot."

Of course, you don't care about being accurate or having a productive dialogue-- you only come here to to do drive-by troll takes devoid of substance, and you immediately vanish when called to task.

It is pretty reasonable to question Wiggins as an All-Star this year for being a 3+D guy of comparatively tepid offensive value. But AS selections have also meant only so much for a very long time, particularly the one-offs. The intended meaning of the accolade has evolved over the years.

I have no problem with people questioning the Wiggins AS selection-- it was very borderline.

The person I was responding to was claiming that "a lot Curry fans were trashing Wiggins to prop Curry up," and I was disputing that silly notion. That poster is also an anti-Curry troll.

[hauntedcomputer]

On behalf of the General Board, I sincerely apologize, Mr. Wiggins.

Am I doing this right? Or do I need the 21st century "apology": "It sucks that this bad thing bothered other people and that isn't who I am, despite always being that way. I regret that other people were upset by my words/thoughts/actions, and I promise to do better once I figure out what I supposedly did wrong. People are saying it wasn't so bad. But why did this become a thing in the first place? Because some politically correct SJWs were upset that I got a little too close to the truth. Makes you wonder who is really wrong here, and, hint, it's not me. Do I get my endorsement/career/hot wife back now?"

[Anticon]

We all laughed when their owner said they were light years ahead.

Little did we know it meant a sign and trade for D'Angelo Russell and then trading him for Andrew Wiggins and draft assets.

[tsherkin]

"A lot" of Curry and Warriors fans have not been downplaying Wiggins; in fact, it's mostly been the opposite. Whether or not you found a few outliers does not prove that it happened "a lot."

Of course, you don't care about being accurate or having a productive dialogue-- you only come here to to do drive-by troll takes devoid of substance, and you immediately vanish when called to task.

It is pretty reasonable to question Wiggins as an All-Star this year for being a 3+D guy of comparatively tepid offensive value. But AS selections have also meant only so much for a very long time, particularly the one-offs. The intended meaning of the accolade has evolved over the years.

I have no problem with people questioning the Wiggins AS selection-- it was very borderline.

The person I was responding to was claiming that "a lot Curry fans were trashing Wiggins to prop Curry up," and I was disputing that silly notion. That poster is also an anti-Curry troll.

Yeah, that is an odd take. I wish people would look more to enjoy our generational stars. But things, including style, polarize people. Jokic and Steph dont match traditional models and that sometimes threatens people from given fandoms and whatever. And it is easy to kick someone like Steph in a down year.