Rookie Discussion [19/20] [part I]

[Feel_the_Heat15]

Coby per36: 16.9 / 5.2 / 3.3 / 1.2

Nunn per36: 18.4 / 3.2 / 4.2 / 1.1

Coby is 19 and Nunn is like 25...ill take Coby here

I'll take Coby over the long term, too, but that's not what all-Rookie teams are set to consider. Nunn's a meaningful contributor on the 4th best team in basketball. Coby's got a 48 TS% and doesn't (yet) impact games if his shot isn't falling (which it usually isn't).

And Nunn will be 24 for another 8 months.

rookie teams are about who's more impressive to me, context of how old they are matters to me tbh, i'll take Coby's production at 19 than Nunn's at 24

That's not how rookie teams are done...

[clyde21]

I'll take Coby over the long term, too, but that's not what all-Rookie teams are set to consider. Nunn's a meaningful contributor on the 4th best team in basketball. Coby's got a 48 TS% and doesn't (yet) impact games if his shot isn't falling (which it usually isn't).

And Nunn will be 24 for another 8 months.

rookie teams are about who's more impressive to me, context of how old they are matters to me tbh, i'll take Coby's production at 19 than Nunn's at 24

That's not how rookie teams are done...

thanks for telling me what I should emphasize for my rookie teams

[Marcus]

I'll take Coby over the long term, too, but that's not what all-Rookie teams are set to consider. Nunn's a meaningful contributor on the 4th best team in basketball. Coby's got a 48 TS% and doesn't (yet) impact games if his shot isn't falling (which it usually isn't).

And Nunn will be 24 for another 8 months.

rookie teams are about who's more impressive to me, context of how old they are matters to me tbh, i'll take Coby's production at 19 than Nunn's at 24

That's not how rookie teams are done...

"To me" is the important take away here

[frothbrain]

Heat homers please stop ruining this thread. Coby>Nunn. All GMs would value Coby over Nunn including Pat Riley.

[VCfor3]

Ja is 5th in the league in 4th quarter scoring this year.

Read on Twitter

[Feel_the_Heat15]

rookie teams are about who's more impressive to me, context of how old they are matters to me tbh, i'll take Coby's production at 19 than Nunn's at 24

That's not how rookie teams are done...

"To me" is the important take away here

No, it isn't. Anyone that creates an all rookie teams list would generally be ranking it with their own opinions in mind. Saying "to me" doesn't change anything, the context of his post would remain the same even if he didn't use those two words. Am I right or wrong here? What he's created isn't a genuine all rookie teams list. It's understood that age isn't suppose to be an important factor in these lists.

[Feel_the_Heat15]

Heat homers please stop ruining this thread. Coby>Nunn. All GMs would value Coby over Nunn including Pat Riley.

In what way is White better than Nunn?

[MetalFingaz]

Heat homers please stop ruining this thread. Coby>Nunn. All GMs would value Coby over Nunn including Pat Riley.

In what way is White better than Nunn?

He's 5 years younger. Apparently that's enough.

[clyde21]

That's not how rookie teams are done...

"To me" is the important take away here

No, it isn't. Anyone that creates an all rookie teams list would generally be ranking it with their own opinions in mind. Saying "to me" doesn't change anything, the context of his post would remain the same even if he didn't use those two words. Am I right or wrong here? What he's created isn't a genuine all rookie teams list. It's understood that age isn't suppose to be an important factor in these lists.

not sure what you're not understanding here.

let me make this as simple as possible: i like what Coby is doing at 19 better than what Nunn is doing at 24, Coby is more impressive to me, so it'll be Coby> Nunn for my all rookie team.

if your philosophy is different more power to you, but it's starting to get real annoying have to explain myself to you every other page in this thread.

[clyde21]

Heat homers please stop ruining this thread. Coby>Nunn. All GMs would value Coby over Nunn including Pat Riley.

In what way is White better than Nunn?

He's 5 years younger. Apparently that's enough.

uh yea? is that supposed to be a gotcha? that's makes a huge difference in my evaluation of rookies.

[MetalFingaz]

In what way is White better than Nunn?

He's 5 years younger. Apparently that's enough.

uh yea? is that supposed to be a gotcha? that's makes a huge difference in my evaluation of rookies.

Well no, you just confusingly used a convention (all-rookie teams) to evaluate your preferred rookies in a manner contrary to the way that convention is normally used, which certainly you're welcome to do. But it'd be like posting in the MVP thread that my top 3 candidates are Gobert, Embiid, and Jokic without explaining that I place particular value on centers. Anyway, it's fine, we're all fine now here.

[clyde21]

He's 5 years younger. Apparently that's enough.

uh yea? is that supposed to be a gotcha? that's makes a huge difference in my evaluation of rookies.

Well no, you just confusingly used a convention (all-rookie teams) to evaluate your preferred rookies in a manner contrary to the way that convention is normally used, which certainly you're welcome to do. But it'd be like posting in the MVP thread that my top 3 candidates are Gobert, Embiid, and Jokic without explaining that I place particular value on centers. Anyway, it's fine, we're all fine now here.

i already explained to you why I have Coby> Nunn three times already, and I have made my stance on Nunn clear this entire thread that I devalue his contributions vs. other rookies because he's already 24 and he has already spent a year in the G league

so, with that context in mind, yes, I am more impressed with Coby. pretty simple stuff.

[Feel_the_Heat15]

"To me" is the important take away here

No, it isn't. Anyone that creates an all rookie teams list would generally be ranking it with their own opinions in mind. Saying "to me" doesn't change anything, the context of his post would remain the same even if he didn't use those two words. Am I right or wrong here? What he's created isn't a genuine all rookie teams list. It's understood that age isn't suppose to be an important factor in these lists.

not sure what you're not understanding here.

let me make this as simple as possible: i like what Coby is doing at 19 better than what Nunn is doing at 24, Coby is more impressive to me, so it'll be Coby> Nunn for my all rookie team.

if your philosophy is different more power to you, but it's starting to get real annoying have to explain myself to you every other page in this thread.

And that's not how a true all rookie team ranking is done, that's what I'm arguing. You're changing the meaning of all rookie 1st team. Calling what you created an all rookie team list isn't accurate since you're going off some criteria you created. I can't say that Trae Young should be the MVP because he's young and scores a lot and claim that he's just the MVP to me and not expect any backlash. Opinions are not protected from criticism.

[clyde21]

No, it isn't. Anyone that creates an all rookie teams list would generally be ranking it with their own opinions in mind. Saying "to me" doesn't change anything, the context of his post would remain the same even if he didn't use those two words. Am I right or wrong here? What he's created isn't a genuine all rookie teams list. It's understood that age isn't suppose to be an important factor in these lists.

not sure what you're not understanding here.

let me make this as simple as possible: i like what Coby is doing at 19 better than what Nunn is doing at 24, Coby is more impressive to me, so it'll be Coby> Nunn for my all rookie team.

if your philosophy is different more power to you, but it's starting to get real annoying have to explain myself to you every other page in this thread.

And that's not how a true all rookie team ranking is done, that's what I'm arguing.

can I get a link to how the 'rookie team rankings are done' for future reference?

thanks.

[Marcus]

That's not how rookie teams are done...

"To me" is the important take away here

No, it isn't. Anyone that creates an all rookie teams list would generally be ranking it with their own opinions in mind. Saying "to me" doesn't change anything, the context of his post would remain the same even if he didn't use those two words. Am I right or wrong here? What he's created isn't a genuine all rookie teams list. It's understood that age isn't suppose to be an important factor in these lists.

any list posted in this thread is going to be preference and opinion based because none of it will be official till the season is over and the league puts out the list. Therefore if someone says they have player A over player B and you disagree with that assessment (which is perfectly fine) it doesn't have to be multiple pages of that person needing to justify it if the two parties aren't ever going to see eye to eye on it because it's a preference or opinion. Agree to disagree and move on.

[Feel_the_Heat15]

"To me" is the important take away here

No, it isn't. Anyone that creates an all rookie teams list would generally be ranking it with their own opinions in mind. Saying "to me" doesn't change anything, the context of his post would remain the same even if he didn't use those two words. Am I right or wrong here? What he's created isn't a genuine all rookie teams list. It's understood that age isn't suppose to be an important factor in these lists.

any list posted in this thread is going to be preference and opinion based because none of it will be official till the season is over and the league puts out the list. Therefore if someone says they have player A over player B and you disagree with that assessment (which is perfectly fine) it doesn't have to be multiple pages of that person needing to justify it if the two parties aren't ever going to see eye to eye on it because it's a preference or opinion. Agree to disagree and move on.

This is like every RealGM argument. No one wants to admit when they're wrong. And again, opinions are not protected from criticism. Okay.

[Whole Truth]

Ja is averaging - 49.4 FG% / 40.7 3pt% / 80.4 FT%

Only 8 players, ever, have averaged - 50 / 40 / 90

Steph Curry: .504 | .454 | .908 | 2015/16.
Kevin Durant: .510 | .416 | .905 | 2012/13
Jose Calderon: .519 | .429 | .908 | 2007/08

Dirk Nowitzki
Steve Nash x4
Reggie Miller
Larry Bird
Mark Price.

[beeshma]

Ja is averaging - 49.4 FG% / 40.7 3pt% / 80.4 FT%

Only 8 players, ever, have averaged - 50 / 40 / 90

Steph Curry: .504 | .454 | .908 | 2015/16.
Kevin Durant: .510 | .416 | .905 | 2012/13
Jose Calderon: .519 | .429 | .908 | 2007/08

Dirk Nowitzki
Steve Nash x4
Reggie Miller
Larry Bird
Mark Price.

Interesting, but the FT is so far off. I'm curious how many players have averaged 50/40/80 before. I don't know how to find such a list. If you do, then I'd appreciate it if you posted it.

[Whole Truth]

Ja is averaging - 49.4 FG% / 40.7 3pt% / 80.4 FT%

Only 8 players, ever, have averaged - 50 / 40 / 90

Steph Curry: .504 | .454 | .908 | 2015/16.
Kevin Durant: .510 | .416 | .905 | 2012/13
Jose Calderon: .519 | .429 | .908 | 2007/08

Dirk Nowitzki
Steve Nash x4
Reggie Miller
Larry Bird
Mark Price.

Interesting, but the FT is so far off. I'm curious how many players have averaged 50/40/80 before. I don't know how to find such a list. If you do, then I'd appreciate it if you posted it.

Unfortunately, I'm not much of a stat guy either. Sorry.

But if you want another interesting fact, I know none have shot 60 / 40 / 80 ever.

Ja's teammate Jonas Valanciunas, is currently averaging 60 / 43 / 76

[Jazztop]

This kid Thybulle is a beast...probably get traded by the inept Sixers.