This board really needs to apologize to Andrew Wiggins

[MrBigShot]

This is something I brought up on the W's board a while back and I kinda wonder what the GB thinks

I've in the past avoided calling Wiggins our 3rd best player outright for this reason. I think he's our #3 option offensively when he's on the court, and I think he's our 3rd most important player. For me, "best" is kinda all-inclusive WRT other teams. For example - Wiggins is our 3rd scoring option because we almost always have 2 guys entrenched ahead of him on the court (Curry/Klay/Poole). So he almost always gets to slot into the role he's perfect for. But a lot of teams may not have that option, and its a lot harder and more important to find the 2 primary scoring options. So to some teams, Klay is 3rd best. Some might even have Poole ahead of him...

But for us, if he goes down, its a huge deal. Big domino effect. And while Dray and Curry share tier 1, I think Wiggins is alone in tier 2 there. We did survive without Klay for a long time, were #1 in the league even. Poole has stretches/games where he's more important to the other team. Its the worst time to say it, but Looney has limitations that usually prevent him from being an impact guy.

I love Klay but if you told me the Warriors had to pick between him and Wiggins going forward.. all things considered, I'd have to go Wiggins too. Klay's a great scorer and everything, but finding players who can play next to Draymond as well as Wiggins has, its a really tough thing to do. Everyone except Iguodala has had a rough learning period when they've joined up, and even Curry has a play or 2 per game where he and Dray miscommunicate. It's a premium for us, but not one that likely applies league wide

You are vastly underrating Poole imo. Poole's play this post season has been downright absurd, 20/5 on very close to 50/40/90. He is not far off of Steph in win shares per 48 either (0.172 vs 0.193). He's scored 27 or more (what wiggins put up tonight) 5 or more times this post season, including 2 performances where he was pretty clearly the best player on the entire floor. Not just on the warriors, best player on the entire floor. Once against Jokic/Nuggets and another against Morant/Grizzlies. He has stretches where he sucks but overall he's been really damn good for the warriors. And given how much time Steph spends off the ball, I think Poole's playmaking ability is pretty important to the warriors as well. Draymond is a terrific passer and leads the team in assists, but he can't break down a defense and create something out of nothing the way the primary playmakers for other teams are able to; his playmaking is a function of good court vision, unselfishness, and making intelligent reads within the offense.

Wiggins is consistent and the mix of three point shooting and defense he provides is great and all, but he's not a guy that wins games for you the way Poole can. He's more replaceable. And as great as his defense on Luka has been, Luka is still averaging a whopping 34ppg on 63 TS% this series.

I wont necessarily fault you for you maybe considering Wiggins over Klay moving forward, but that's because Klay is 5 years older earning 40 mil. I'm not sure there's any legitimate argument impact wise for Wiggins to be any higher than 4th most important player on the team, and you could argue he's not even 4th. Aside from that, there is definitely something to be said about how prolific a scorer Klay can be sometimes; when he gets hot he can carry the team offensively and steal you a game (OKC game 6).

I’m vastly underrating Poole by putting him below Wiggins, not you vastly overrating him by comparing him to Curry?

ok

Quoting this just to highlight the strawman and lack of any attempt at a good faith/logical argument. I'd expect better from a retired moderator.

You are vastly underrating Poole imo. Poole's play this post season has been downright absurd, 20/5 on very close to 50/40/90. He is not far off of Steph in win shares per 48 either (0.172 vs 0.193).

[FNQ]

You are vastly underrating Poole imo. Poole's play this post season has been downright absurd, 20/5 on very close to 50/40/90. He is not far off of Steph in win shares per 48 either (0.172 vs 0.193). He's scored 27 or more (what wiggins put up tonight) 5 or more times this post season, including 2 performances where he was pretty clearly the best player on the entire floor. Not just on the warriors, best player on the entire floor. Once against Jokic/Nuggets and another against Morant/Grizzlies. He has stretches where he sucks but overall he's been really damn good for the warriors. And given how much time Steph spends off the ball, I think Poole's playmaking ability is pretty important to the warriors as well. Draymond is a terrific passer and leads the team in assists, but he can't break down a defense and create something out of nothing the way the primary playmakers for other teams are able to; his playmaking is a function of good court vision, unselfishness, and making intelligent reads within the offense.

Wiggins is consistent and the mix of three point shooting and defense he provides is great and all, but he's not a guy that wins games for you the way Poole can. He's more replaceable. And as great as his defense on Luka has been, Luka is still averaging a whopping 34ppg on 63 TS% this series.

I wont necessarily fault you for you maybe considering Wiggins over Klay moving forward, but that's because Klay is 5 years older earning 40 mil. I'm not sure there's any legitimate argument impact wise for Wiggins to be any higher than 4th most important player on the team, and you could argue he's not even 4th. Aside from that, there is definitely something to be said about how prolific a scorer Klay can be sometimes; when he gets hot he can carry the team offensively and steal you a game (OKC game 6).

I’m vastly underrating Poole by putting him below Wiggins, not you vastly overrating him by comparing him to Curry?

ok

Quoting this just to highlight the strawman and lack of any attempt at a good faith/logical argument. I'd expect better from a retired moderator.

You are vastly underrating Poole imo. Poole's play this post season has been downright absurd, 20/5 on very close to 50/40/90. He is not far off of Steph in win shares per 48 either (0.172 vs 0.193).

lol being a retired mod has nothing to do with me needing to respond to an opinion where your first line is to tell me that I'm underrating the guy I had to sell the Warriors board on.

I didnt respond because so much of it was cherry-picked and made wildly inaccurate general assessments. I've dropped extreme detail on games all season, and you throw very general arguments that say why I'm underrating, or overrating, or how my arguments cant be legitimate. So what do I owe you here?

But it sounds like you didnt like your take being oversimplified and then talked down to. Interesting.. If you want to have a conversation, fine, but I just mirror what people give to me So we can talk here if you like, or you can keep it as is, I'll and-1 your post, and then all done

[G35]

That's the bonus. His offense is a bonus. His primary role is not to provide offense, he's there to be a utility player and play defense. His defense has been exceptional and his offense has been really good.

I don't think it is a bonus. I think it's a significant part of his contribution, though his defense has been another large part of his value as well. With that, I can certainly agree.

That is the rub, just because a player can be put in a good situation does not mean every player takes advantage of it. In fact many players do not take advantage of being put in a good situation.

That's very true; Wiggins is doing a good job of accepting and filling his role. I have acknowledged as much in response to you and in several other spots earlier in this thread, so that's an easy one xD

In all honesty, you don't know if a player is in a good situation until after the fact...the player has to show this is a good situation for his abilities. That is the point of this thread, that Wiggins has shown he can make a good team better and Wiggins has.....

Mmm. No, I think we can often identify what is and isn't a good situation for a player at the time. Not always, of course, but yeah, pretty often. The original point of this thread seemed to be hyperbole, but yes, it's good to acknowledge that Wiggins has figured out how to take advantage of this new situation for himself and to the benefit of the Warriors. He's been very good in role, that part isn't really up for debate, nor has it been much ITT, from what I can tell.

There doesn't seem to be much acknowledgement from the Wiggins detractors...its more like Nick Wright and how he "lost" his internet connection during the show where he was called out for calling the Wiggins contract an albatross.

People can try and church it up now that Wiggins is performing well, but I have seen plenty of threads trashing Wiggins. I think Barkley had the best summary; if Wiggins was not selected #1 he would not be getting as much criticism as he has been getting. But he can be a good player. Look at some of the other #1 picks in the last 15 years:

Greg Oden
Anthony Bennett
Ben Simmons
Andrea Bargnani
Markelle Fultz

You don't think Philly or Brooklyn would like to have Wiggins in place of Ben Simmons? No he's not a #1 option but a lot of players are not #1 options, that is a rare talent. Wiggins is just continuing to prove that he was not put in the best position. I mean why doesn't Kevin Garnett get that same criticism? He didn't do anything in Minnesota either and he had to go to a stacked Boston team. What's the difference with Wiggins......

[Johnny Bball]

https://www.espn.com/nba/player/stats/_/id/3059319/type/nba/seasontype/3

Here's his playoff averages. Why is this thread even in existence?

[dc]

You don't think Philly or Brooklyn would like to have Wiggins in place of Ben Simmons? No he's not a #1 option but a lot of players are not #1 options, that is a rare talent. Wiggins is just continuing to prove that he was not put in the best position. I mean why doesn't Kevin Garnett get that same criticism? He didn't do anything in Minnesota either and he had to go to a stacked Boston team. What's the difference with Wiggins......

I think the main thing people are still overlooking is that Wiggins has legit improved his role player/do the little things type of things as a Warrior. People said it's as simple as "Well, he's now the 4th option instead of the 1st option. Easy."

That's not all there's been to it, because he wasn't a very good role player when he first got to GS. He was still just a well below avg. 1st option who wasn't great at the things you want from a role player. Contrast this with a guy like Igoudala, who everyone knew wasn't a true #1, but it was obvious that he was a high level role player/glue guy.

Now Wiggins is actually better at doing those role player things. He's rebounding and hustling after loose balls. Sticking his nose in the scrum. He's defending better. Then add to that, he's actually making TIMELY plays, which he never seemed to do before. He's making clutch shots. Even some "bail us out" shots as the shot clock expires and he's keying 4th quarter spurts that help turn the tide for his team.

Before (even with the Warriors), he was just some guy who may or may not show up for the 1st half of the game and then you'd all but forget about him in the 2nd half and crunch time. He's really changed that at the end of this year and the playoffs. In my eyes, he's gone from some replacement level guy who just serves as filler/depth to a guy who's actually a difference maker.

[tsherkin]

People can try and church it up now that Wiggins is performing well, but I have seen plenty of threads trashing Wiggins. I think Barkley had the best summary; if Wiggins was not selected #1 he would not be getting as much criticism as he has been getting.

Of course not. Draft slot and expectations naturally influence evaluation and opinion. But for the Warriors, Wiggins is doing what has been asked of him, even excelling at it, particularly this year. That is clear enough.

I mean why doesn't Kevin Garnett get that same criticism? He didn't do anything in Minnesota either and he had to go to a stacked Boston team. What's the difference with Wiggins......

Because Garnett was actually a very, very good player and also dragged some fairly bunk teams into the playoffs consistently. Wiggins was nothing like that level of player. Though again, that doesnt matter to the Warriors. They didnt draft him, and he is far from underperforming on their watch, so it doesnt matter to them at all.

[YourBuddy]

People can try and church it up now that Wiggins is performing well, but I have seen plenty of threads trashing Wiggins. I think Barkley had the best summary; if Wiggins was not selected #1 he would not be getting as much criticism as he has been getting.

Of course not. Draft slot and expectations naturally influence evaluation and opinion. But for the Warriors, Wiggins is doing what has been asked of him, even excelling at it, particularly this year. That is clear enough.

I mean why doesn't Kevin Garnett get that same criticism? He didn't do anything in Minnesota either and he had to go to a stacked Boston team. What's the difference with Wiggins......

Because Garnett was actually a very, very good player and also dragged some fairly bunk teams into the playoffs consistently. Wiggins was nothing like that level of player. Though again, that doesnt matter to the Warriors. They didnt draft him, and he is far from underperforming on their watch, so it doesnt matter to them at all.

Garnett led his teams to multi playoff appearances, went to the WCF win MVP as the leader of his team. Meanwhile Wiggins was the leader of exactly zero playoff teams. One of the most ridiculous comparisons I have ever seen on this board.

[SF_Warriors]

That's the bonus. His offense is a bonus. His primary role is not to provide offense, he's there to be a utility player and play defense. His defense has been exceptional and his offense has been really good.

I don't think it is a bonus. I think it's a significant part of his contribution, though his defense has been another large part of his value as well. With that, I can certainly agree.

That is the rub, just because a player can be put in a good situation does not mean every player takes advantage of it. In fact many players do not take advantage of being put in a good situation.

That's very true; Wiggins is doing a good job of accepting and filling his role. I have acknowledged as much in response to you and in several other spots earlier in this thread, so that's an easy one xD

In all honesty, you don't know if a player is in a good situation until after the fact...the player has to show this is a good situation for his abilities. That is the point of this thread, that Wiggins has shown he can make a good team better and Wiggins has.....

Mmm. No, I think we can often identify what is and isn't a good situation for a player at the time. Not always, of course, but yeah, pretty often. The original point of this thread seemed to be hyperbole, but yes, it's good to acknowledge that Wiggins has figured out how to take advantage of this new situation for himself and to the benefit of the Warriors. He's been very good in role, that part isn't really up for debate, nor has it been much ITT, from what I can tell.

There doesn't seem to be much acknowledgement from the Wiggins detractors...its more like Nick Wright and how he "lost" his internet connection during the show where he was called out for calling the Wiggins contract an albatross.

People can try and church it up now that Wiggins is performing well, but I have seen plenty of threads trashing Wiggins. I think Barkley had the best summary; if Wiggins was not selected #1 he would not be getting as much criticism as he has been getting. But he can be a good player. Look at some of the other #1 picks in the last 15 years:

Greg Oden
Anthony Bennett
Ben Simmons
Andrea Bargnani
Markelle Fultz

You don't think Philly or Brooklyn would like to have Wiggins in place of Ben Simmons? No he's not a #1 option but a lot of players are not #1 options, that is a rare talent. Wiggins is just continuing to prove that he was not put in the best position. I mean why doesn't Kevin Garnett get that same criticism? He didn't do anything in Minnesota either and he had to go to a stacked Boston team. What's the difference with Wiggins......

You left out the part where wiggins led the wolves to 8 straight playoff appearances and won an mvp...

[audiosway]

What for? A lot of players look great playing next to Steph Curry, Klay Thompson, and Draymond Green.

Klay gets a lot of credit for the work the other 2 do

I could see that. I live in the Bay area and watch a lot of GS. Klay is a great shooter but the movement from the other two (Especially Curry) is what makes it all work)

[ILOVEIT]

To be fair,Andrew Wiggins was putting up empty numbers when he was with the Timberwolves. He has only started to found his footing within the last year or so as the 3rd/4th option on a Championship contender. He still has underperformed as the 1st overall pick when many was expecting him to become a true Superstar.

What is the definition of "empty numbers?" IMO any talented player putting up numbers are a crappy team could be considered empty numbers. Are numbers only meaningful if that same output is in the context of a talent team?

Just curious to all the critiques during Wiggin's Wolves time....what was he supposed to do with that team? KAT didn't change things....even Jimmy Butter couldn't do enough to keep that team from continuous suckage.

I'm not saying he wasn't inefficient etc.....but there are maybe 5 players in the last 20 years that you could have put on THOSE Wolves teams and gotten them into the playoffs.

[tsherkin]

What is the definition of "empty numbers?" IMO any talented player putting up numbers are a crappy team could be considered empty numbers. Are numbers only meaningful if that same output is in the context of a talent team?

It is no doubt a reference to his inefficient volume scoring coupled to lack of playmaking, added to low impact stats suggesting that he wasn't really moving the needle on their chance to actually win games most of those seasons.

I'm not saying he wasn't inefficient etc.....but there are maybe 5 players in the last 20 years that you could have put on THOSE Wolves teams and gotten them into the playoffs.

I don't think it's just that they weren't making the playoffs. Without help, there's only so much one guy can do and Wiggins certainly wasn't a PnR spam artist or playmaker who had unlimited floor-raising potential. There are a lot more than 5 guys who could have pushed the Wolves past 31 wins, though. Now in 2018, they made the playoffs and they even won 47 games. They were also the 4th-best offense in the league, though they had KAT and Butler at that point. Wiggins had a pretty brutal year and looked like garbage on offense for them, which is a large part of why his reputation and numbers seem to line up, you know? When they won, it wasn't because he was doing anything special for them at all, it's because they had other guys driving the team and they'd minimized him.

Now, you take Wiggins from today and try to slot him in as #3 on that 2018 Minny team and he probably finds a way to perform better. He's grown as a player, and his evaluation in Golden State needs to be independent of his time with the Wolves, for sure. But looking back, yeah, he was a large bomb as a #1 pick and primary offensive focal point for them until better talent got onto the roster. That's why people say he had empty numbers; the year he posted his career-best 23.6 ppg, they were a 31-win team and he was still below average in efficiency on a team whose overall offensive success (10th in the league) was more driven by KAT and half a season from LaVine than from Wiggins. Wiggins himself was a 0.1461 ORAPM player that year and ranked 340th in overall RAPM. -0.8 OBPM (b-ref), 0.034 WS/48, +0.41 O-LEBRON (98th in the league), +0.4 OBPM (Backpicks), +1.1 AuPM/g, -0.4 ScoreVal.. Like, nothing makes him look good on offense, even in his highest-volume year. He was bad in that role by every angle of examination.

He's a good example of how points get scored and they get distributed one way or another when you change personnel, so when you've got someone who scores below league average, it isn't nearly as challenging as it seems to redistribute that offense. This is even more true when you have someone who isn't a noteworthy playmaker; you take a guy like Allen Iverson and it was a little different, of course, because he was at least a notably better playmaker than Wiggins... and we can see a lot of his impact in places where Wiggins just never registered, you know? So that's how it all circles back to "empty stats."

What he's doing in Golden State is far, far better. He's found a way to use his talents in a sensible fashion, is working within a team context with some confidence and he's not getting overplayed/overextended.

[DroseReturnChi]

dray fixed him hes still trash if he leaves.