2020-21 NBA Season Discussion

Moderators: PaulieWal, Quotatious, Doctor MJ, Clyde Frazier, trex_8063, penbeast0

User avatar
Jaivl
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,365
And1: 4,665
Joined: Jan 28, 2014
Location: Lugo, Spain
Contact:
   

Re: 2020-21 NBA Season Discussion 

Post#5341 » by Jaivl » Sat Aug 14, 2021 7:15 am

falcolombardi wrote:
penbeast0 wrote:
Colbinii wrote:
He definitely has arguments over a handful of guys here.


Then pick one and make the argument.


also has to be argued over embiid/jokic who has comparable seasons too so technically a pick 3

I would have Luka around #40 myself, I would take him over peak Gilmore, McAdoo (maybe Reed, Pettit and a couple more as well but those other two are more clear IMO), but I would have Baylor or Mourning over him (the implication being that I think Baylor peaked slightly higher than Pettit, yes).

I take peak Luka over peak Embiid considering health.
Maf wrote:I'd undestand if anyone had KG outside top ten PF's. Having him top five all-time? Often I jokingly rank Kyle Korver as the GOAT but I never try to fake serious discussion about it.

ShawnKemp96 wrote:Infact he made a lot more steals than the statisticians think.
penbeast0
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Posts: 24,253
And1: 5,947
Joined: Aug 14, 2004
Location: South Florida
 

Re: 2020-21 NBA Season Discussion 

Post#5342 » by penbeast0 » Sat Aug 14, 2021 12:34 pm

Peak Gilmore (75) led a Kentucky team with Dampier, Bird Averitt, Wil Jones, and Dan Issel's worst year to the ABA championship in the ABA's strongest year with both dominating defense and pretty decent offense. I'd have him over Luka considering the postseason. Not sure about McAdoo, depends how you value Mac's ability to be a stretch big with still impressive rebounding v. Luka's ability to create for his teammates. Agree about Embiid.

Baylor v. Pettit. Baylor was flashier and had more of the handles and playmaking skills but Pettit was more efficient relative to league, the better rebounder, relative to league and played better defense. Pettit was also more consistent and played more games in their average seasons (though Baylor's potential peak season was interrupted by military service -- if he'd done that for a full year I'd agree with you). Baylor might have an argument for postseason resilience but he never broke through in the finals where Pettit, who was not a very resilient postgame scorer for his career, had arguably the greatest closeout 4th quarter in the history of the NBA to bring the Hawks their only NBA title over the Celtics (albeit with an injured Bill Russell).

I'd have both over Mourning who was one of my favorite guys to watch but one of the worst post passers of the great post scorers (he or Moses); if you caught him in a double, you got a lot of turnovers and relatively few kickouts to the open shooter. And he didn't finish as well as peak Moses in heavy traffic. That's a big issue with him.
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
User avatar
eminence
RealGM
Posts: 10,178
And1: 6,353
Joined: Mar 07, 2015
 

Re: 2020-21 NBA Season Discussion 

Post#5343 » by eminence » Sun Aug 15, 2021 3:32 am

Don’t forget Rudy also had a better season than Luka ;)
'17-'18 APBR Win Projections Champion (1st of 20)
'18-'19 5th of 18
'19-'20 2nd of 17
falcolombardi
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,523
And1: 1,037
Joined: Apr 13, 2021
       

Re: 2020-21 NBA Season Discussion 

Post#5344 » by falcolombardi » Wed Aug 25, 2021 12:28 am

reading some thinghs in this board got me thinking about how we evaluate the value of a player and i got thinking that the way we evaluate "floor vs ceiling" raising and portability is not as much wrong as it is incomplete

the reason why sometimes we can argue for draymond green or shame Marion over the likes of Carmelo Anthony or iverson (random examples) is the perception that while the latter is more likely to take a bad team to the playoffs the former is more likely to get a team over the top for ring contention

both are better for different thinghs, but championship is the more valued goal. the reasoning la that you wont sin with draymond nor Carmelo as your best players, making draymond better cause he is better as a second or third best

this is discussible but generally consensus and a good way to evaluate portability. the problem is that we dont go to the other Extreme

if a super stacked with great scorers team adds garnett is possible they are better than if they added duncan since he ks theorically more portable in a higher talent team (basically the whole reason elgee prefers garnett)

but at the end of the day any stacked team that adds either will be overwhelming favorites

the 2017 warriors were gonna win whether their forward was durant, kawhi or even paul george ( bit more arguable)

so jusy like draymond vs Carmelo wont be the difference for a ring run in a bad team, garnett portability vs duncan wont make a difference for a stacked team either

the real place where we should look for impact is in the middle, that is where portability should be valued

not in whether curry or harden fit a 70 win team better or who is more likely to carry a bad team to a 6th-8th seed
Fadeaway_J
RealGM
Posts: 17,442
And1: 4,056
Joined: Jul 25, 2016
Location: Kingston, Jamaica
   

Re: 2020-21 NBA Season Discussion 

Post#5345 » by Fadeaway_J » Wed Aug 25, 2021 3:33 am

falcolombardi wrote:reading some thinghs in this board got me thinking about how we evaluate the value of a player and i got thinking that the way we evaluate "floor vs ceiling" raising and portability is not as much wrong as it is incomplete

the reason why sometimes we can argue for draymond green or shame Marion over the likes of Carmelo Anthony or iverson (random examples) is the perception that while the latter is more likely to take a bad team to the playoffs the former is more likely to get a team over the top for ring contention

both are better for different thinghs, but championship is the more valued goal. the reasoning la that you wont sin with draymond nor Carmelo as your best players, making draymond better cause he is better as a second or third best

this is discussible but generally consensus and a good way to evaluate portability. the problem is that we dont go to the other Extreme

if a super stacked with great scorers team adds garnett is possible they are better than if they added duncan since he ks theorically more portable in a higher talent team (basically the whole reason elgee prefers garnett)

but at the end of the day any stacked team that adds either will be overwhelming favorites

the 2017 warriors were gonna win whether their forward was durant, kawhi or even paul george ( bit more arguable)

so jusy like draymond vs Carmelo wont be the difference for a ring run in a bad team, garnett portability vs duncan wont make a difference for a stacked team either

the real place where we should look for impact is in the middle, that is where portability should be valued

not in whether curry or harden fit a 70 win team better or who is more likely to carry a bad team to a 6th-8th seed

The problem comes when portability is being tied solely to fit with other elite players, when it's exceedingly rare for a team to have enough of those players for it to matter.

Also, there can be situations where two "portable" players aren't actually all that portable with each other because they have similar skill gaps. Kawhi and PG come to mind as guys who would both probably fit more naturally with a less "portable" player, i.e. someone who is more of a lead playmaker type who works with the ball in their hands a lot.
falcolombardi
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,523
And1: 1,037
Joined: Apr 13, 2021
       

Re: 2020-21 NBA Season Discussion 

Post#5346 » by falcolombardi » Wed Aug 25, 2021 6:32 pm

i visited the nba subreddit and saw a joke thread about simmons having a higher efg% than jordan and all the discussion is why it proves than is an awful stat and that "analytics" suck

when even a literal "points per shot" measure like that la seen as "dumb nerd stuff" you realize how bad mainstream basketball understanding is

it borders in antiintelectualism at points even, granted is not a big deal since is only basketball and not vaccination or climate change
User avatar
Odinn21
Analyst
Posts: 3,388
And1: 2,789
Joined: May 19, 2019
 

Re: 2020-21 NBA Season Discussion 

Post#5347 » by Odinn21 » Wed Aug 25, 2021 6:47 pm

falcolombardi wrote:reading some thinghs in this board got me thinking about how we evaluate the value of a player and i got thinking that the way we evaluate "floor vs ceiling" raising and portability is not as much wrong as it is incomplete

The issue with floor and ceiling raising, many people do not realise the concept is built around scoring distribution (relevant to team structure) and floor raising, ceiling raising are not separate occasions, they happen at the same time.

Portability is incomplete in the sense that the balance between on-ball production and impact rates & off-ball production and impact rates not being there. There are some more layers to ball usage and space usage.
The issue with per75 numbers;
36pts on 27 fga/9 fta in 36 mins, does this mean he'd keep up the efficiency to get 48pts on 36fga/12fta in 48 mins?
The answer; NO. He's human, not a linearly working machine.
Per75 is efficiency rate, not actual production.
Doctor MJ
Senior Mod
Senior Mod
Posts: 44,796
And1: 13,695
Joined: Mar 10, 2005
Location: Cali
     

Re: 2020-21 NBA Season Discussion 

Post#5348 » by Doctor MJ » Wed Aug 25, 2021 10:38 pm

falcolombardi wrote:reading some thinghs in this board got me thinking about how we evaluate the value of a player and i got thinking that the way we evaluate "floor vs ceiling" raising and portability is not as much wrong as it is incomplete

the reason why sometimes we can argue for draymond green or shame Marion over the likes of Carmelo Anthony or iverson (random examples) is the perception that while the latter is more likely to take a bad team to the playoffs the former is more likely to get a team over the top for ring contention

both are better for different thinghs, but championship is the more valued goal. the reasoning la that you wont sin with draymond nor Carmelo as your best players, making draymond better cause he is better as a second or third best

this is discussible but generally consensus and a good way to evaluate portability. the problem is that we dont go to the other Extreme

if a super stacked with great scorers team adds garnett is possible they are better than if they added duncan since he ks theorically more portable in a higher talent team (basically the whole reason elgee prefers garnett)

but at the end of the day any stacked team that adds either will be overwhelming favorites

the 2017 warriors were gonna win whether their forward was durant, kawhi or even paul george ( bit more arguable)

so jusy like draymond vs Carmelo wont be the difference for a ring run in a bad team, garnett portability vs duncan wont make a difference for a stacked team either

the real place where we should look for impact is in the middle, that is where portability should be valued

not in whether curry or harden fit a 70 win team better or who is more likely to carry a bad team to a 6th-8th seed


Okay, so some thoughts:

1st, my problem with a Dray vs Melo conversation here is that only one of these guys has ever shown the ability to be super-impactful in the NBA in any context. This isn't a situation where both guys have strong indicators of impact, but people are making arguments for Green based on portability. Green has for years been one of the most impactful players in the league, Melo's never been close.

Now, you can point out that Green's had the luxury of being with better teammates when contributing the value and that this makes the comparison apples vs oranges. However that dismisses what it is about Green that makes him so valuable: Intelligence. Simply put, Green is one of the most intelligent on-court players in the history of the game. He reads what's going on the court super-quick, makes great decisions, tells teammates what to do.

Melo by contrast just gets buckets, and while he does so on a level that makes it make sense for one of the 30 NBA teams to let him be the best scorer, he's never been able to use his scoring toolkit to achieve the kind of extreme volume/efficiency that makes you elite in today's game, he's not a great passer, he's not a great defender, and he's not the kind of guy who finds little ways to impact.

Hence, when you're talking about contenders, one of these guys is still likely to add impact - better defender than anyone else, even on a good defending team, smarter than everyone else, even on a smart team - and one of these guys isn't - not your best scorer, can't do anything else.

Now, you can argue that Melo's skills are more valuable than what I've stated certainly, but the thing about your post is that you're not actually talking about how these guys actually play, and to me talking about how these actually play so that they can fit in in a team context is THE thing to be talking about here, regardless of whether the "portable" attribute resonates with you.

I'll add that I see clear differences between all of these players in how they fit with stronger talent around them. That difference is more complicated than a one-number metric because it all depends on the type of stronger talent we're talking about - great shooters? great passers? great iso guys? great defenders? - but while you can point to that nuance to indicate that it's not so clear from a one-number portability perspective who should rate where, you cannot deny that the players in question have different skills in different degrees.

To consider Curry vs Harden: It's within the realm of possibility that Harden will next year be the MVP of the greatest team in history...but if he achieves this, it won't be happening because he's out-Currying Curry. He'll be playing a different role than Curry plays, and his value be a result of partially different things

Re: "the real place where we should look for impact is in the middle, that is where portability should be valued not in whether curry or harden fit a 70 win team better or who is more likely to carry a bad team to a 6th-8th seed".

Really disagree with how you're thinking about this. The big thing remains that being able to thrive on elite teams is about having specific elite skill sets that work well with others, but here there's also the matter that the implication of what you say is that if we want to find diamonds in the rough - guys who are literally demonstrating the value you say we should be looking - we should expect to find them on the stars of treadmill teams.

It's fine to look at those teams and ask who could do great things on a contender, but if you've got a guy who is adding value on a mediocre team by volume score with mediocre efficiency while others take on the side roles, how do you expect he's going to be able to add value on a team with scorers better than he is? Maybe he can do it by changing the role he plays - that's something that only can be understood on a player by player basis - but you're not going to plug Melo on the Jordan Bulls and say "Mike get out the way so Melo can do his thing".
Hey: With what's going on in the world, my fuse is shorter than it used to be, and it's leading my lose my cool and then go on self-imposed breaks from things (such as RealGM). Please try to keep it civil, and I'll be looking to do the same.
Doctor MJ
Senior Mod
Senior Mod
Posts: 44,796
And1: 13,695
Joined: Mar 10, 2005
Location: Cali
     

Re: 2020-21 NBA Season Discussion 

Post#5349 » by Doctor MJ » Wed Aug 25, 2021 10:41 pm

falcolombardi wrote:i visited the nba subreddit and saw a joke thread about simmons having a higher efg% than jordan and all the discussion is why it proves than is an awful stat and that "analytics" suck

when even a literal "points per shot" measure like that la seen as "dumb nerd stuff" you realize how bad mainstream basketball understanding is

it borders in antiintelectualism at points even, granted is not a big deal since is only basketball and not vaccination or climate change


I feel ya and I'll add this:

It's not bordering on anti-intellectualism, it's extreme anti-intellectualism, and while this isn't a fundamentally new thing, the social internet has really stoked some of these fires.
Hey: With what's going on in the world, my fuse is shorter than it used to be, and it's leading my lose my cool and then go on self-imposed breaks from things (such as RealGM). Please try to keep it civil, and I'll be looking to do the same.
Doctor MJ
Senior Mod
Senior Mod
Posts: 44,796
And1: 13,695
Joined: Mar 10, 2005
Location: Cali
     

Re: 2020-21 NBA Season Discussion 

Post#5350 » by Doctor MJ » Wed Aug 25, 2021 11:00 pm

Fadeaway_J wrote:The problem comes when portability is being tied solely to fit with other elite players, when it's exceedingly rare for a team to have enough of those players for it to matter.

Also, there can be situations where two "portable" players aren't actually all that portable with each other because they have similar skill gaps. Kawhi and PG come to mind as guys who would both probably fit more naturally with a less "portable" player, i.e. someone who is more of a lead playmaker type who works with the ball in their hands a lot.


Here's the thing:

The root of portability/scalability comes with the recognition that there's only one ball, and hence ball-dominant skills don't scale as easily as other types of skills. And this isn't something that began with our internet conversations. John Wooden made points clearly alluding to the phenomenon in the '60s.

Consider college teammates Trey Burke and Tim Hardaway Jr. When they played together, Burke was the on-ball star and Hardaway played off of him. Burke won awards as the best college player in the country while putting up much bigger stats than Hardaway, and he got drafted higher as a result.

But Hardaway is the one with the much better NBA career, while playing in a role pretty similar to what he did in college, while Burke has never been able to convince any team to be their star on-ball player, because when there are just 30 teams of the best of the best, Burke just isn't good enough.

I'd be remiss if I didn't point to how short Burke is, and that Hardaway's extra height is central to why he can play the role he does at the NBA level. The key point remains the same though: Hardaway's game scaled to the NBA and Burke's did not, and it's not a coincidence that the guy whose game didn't was an on-ball guy.

As far as the focus on elite players with other elite players, it's about two things a) the fact that the guys we think of as elite tend to be on-ball players, and b) the entire idea is that you're not just trying to make your team pretty good, you're trying to make it better than all comers - and so if you entrust your offense to someone who is clearly a step behind the elites, you're hurting your chances.
Hey: With what's going on in the world, my fuse is shorter than it used to be, and it's leading my lose my cool and then go on self-imposed breaks from things (such as RealGM). Please try to keep it civil, and I'll be looking to do the same.
falcolombardi
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,523
And1: 1,037
Joined: Apr 13, 2021
       

Re: 2020-21 NBA Season Discussion 

Post#5351 » by falcolombardi » Wed Aug 25, 2021 11:11 pm

Doctor MJ wrote:
falcolombardi wrote:i visited the nba subreddit and saw a joke thread about simmons having a higher efg% than jordan and all the discussion is why it proves than is an awful stat and that "analytics" suck

when even a literal "points per shot" measure like that la seen as "dumb nerd stuff" you realize how bad mainstream basketball understanding is

it borders in antiintelectualism at points even, granted is not a big deal since is only basketball and not vaccination or climate change


I feel ya and I'll add this:

It's not bordering on anti-intellectualism, it's extreme anti-intellectualism, and while this isn't a fundamentally new thing, the social internet has really stoked some of these fires.


is one of the thinghs that annoy me with barkley when otherwise he seems a pretty chill guy

he loves to automatically mock and discredit the use of Math as nerd **** or discredit those who use it like he is a jock character in some 80's college frat movie
HeartBreakKid
RealGM
Posts: 19,725
And1: 15,824
Joined: Mar 08, 2012
     

Re: 2020-21 NBA Season Discussion 

Post#5352 » by HeartBreakKid » Thu Aug 26, 2021 2:38 am

People have a large insecurity that they can be measured by numbers. Makes them feel like tools or something.

Most people who are dismissive of basketball statistics don't want to learn them, don't want their opinions to be contradicted by them, or simply don't understand them (which piggies back to not wanting to learn them).
Brofessor24
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,787
And1: 887
Joined: Sep 06, 2018
Location: Inside of your mom.

Re: 2020-21 NBA Season Discussion 

Post#5353 » by Brofessor24 » Thu Aug 26, 2021 11:12 am

falcolombardi wrote:i visited the nba subreddit and saw a joke thread about simmons having a higher efg% than jordan and all the discussion is why it proves than is an awful stat and that "analytics" suck

when even a literal "points per shot" measure like that la seen as "dumb nerd stuff" you realize how bad mainstream basketball understanding is

it borders in antiintelectualism at points even, granted is not a big deal since is only basketball and not vaccination or climate change


RealGM is just as bad in that regard.

Don't kid yourself.
User avatar
Dr Positivity
RealGM
Posts: 51,966
And1: 12,940
Joined: Apr 29, 2009
       

Re: 2020-21 NBA Season Discussion 

Post#5354 » by Dr Positivity » Sun Aug 29, 2021 12:48 am

People being guided by emotions and tribalism in the way it happens on 2021 internet kills critical thinking skills and ability to have rational discourse as it largely leads to people starting with their biased opinion and then working backwards to support it and when that's the case there's not going to be any idea chemistry or learning, there's just going to be people playing games like cherry picking the line of your post that discredits it the most and intentionally pretending the meat of your argument doesn't exist, or if they can't find one ignoring the whole thing and calling you names, in a way that demoralizes the people who genuinely enjoy having extended arguments from having convos like that in that place again. Basketball forums are probably halfway in that they are driven less by emotion than politics, but since they have homer attachment to players and teams arguably has more of it than other subjects like art (except for when it involves fanboy friendly TV shows and films etc.) I'm more bothered by the decline of RealGM than a place like reddit, for those with newer sign up dates I can tell you this forum used to be better.
penbeast0
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Posts: 24,253
And1: 5,947
Joined: Aug 14, 2004
Location: South Florida
 

Re: 2020-21 NBA Season Discussion 

Post#5355 » by penbeast0 » Sun Aug 29, 2021 11:38 am

I've been here for quite a few years and I would say that on the three forums I frequent (this one, the trade forum, and the Wizards forum), it varies as the active posters grow more or less active rather than being a consistent improvement or decline that you could map over time. I actually find the current forum to be more open to stats, rationality, and a willingness to consider that older players were actually quite good than it has been on the average though maybe not at its peak. A bit less combative too, though there are still a few players that have a tendency to attract the irrational fanboys and trolls looking to get those fanboys upset.
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
penbeast0
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
Posts: 24,253
And1: 5,947
Joined: Aug 14, 2004
Location: South Florida
 

Re: 2020-21 NBA Season Discussion 

Post#5356 » by penbeast0 » Mon Aug 30, 2021 3:03 am

Strangely enough, just after making the previous comment I got drawn into a discussion with another poster that argued:

"no part of life (before the 21st century) isn't a bush league compared to today; and the NBA is no different. "

That's the type of attitude system that I think we were talking about.
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
User avatar
Texas Chuck
Senior Mod - Mavericks and NBA TnT Forum
Senior Mod - Mavericks and NBA TnT Forum
Posts: 69,271
And1: 65,512
Joined: May 19, 2012
Location: Purgatory
   

Re: 2020-21 NBA Season Discussion 

Post#5357 » by Texas Chuck » Mon Aug 30, 2021 3:57 pm

falcolombardi wrote:if a super stacked with great scorers team adds garnett is possible they are better than if they added duncan since he ks theorically more portable in a higher talent team (basically the whole reason elgee prefers garnett)


This is a confusing take on the KG is more portable argument(side bar, KG is more versatile, not more portable, which is an important distinction that doesn't get made enough.). Because Duncan is the better defensive player and certainly proved he was more than content to take a backseat offensively to concentrate on anchoring the defense.

I'm struggling to find an offensive juggernaut team where I would want KG over Duncan. I guess maybe if it was based around Shaq specifically?
bondom34 wrote:This is stupid and you know this is stupid.
User avatar
Texas Chuck
Senior Mod - Mavericks and NBA TnT Forum
Senior Mod - Mavericks and NBA TnT Forum
Posts: 69,271
And1: 65,512
Joined: May 19, 2012
Location: Purgatory
   

Re: 2020-21 NBA Season Discussion 

Post#5358 » by Texas Chuck » Mon Aug 30, 2021 4:06 pm

HeartBreakKid wrote:People have a large insecurity that they can be measured by numbers. Makes them feel like tools or something.

Most people who are dismissive of basketball statistics don't want to learn them, don't want their opinions to be contradicted by them, or simply don't understand them (which piggies back to not wanting to learn them).



I'd put myself in the dismissive/skeptical category of those stats that propose to be an all-in-one measure of goodness especially those whose creators admit to tweaking the formula until it gives them the results they want. I have zero issues with any stats that are simply a recording of what happened in the games.

I'm not opposed to learning them, but definitely not interested in actively trying to learn them either because I'm convinced we don't have the ability to parse out individual impact in a sport with 10 competitors on the court mathematically to the degree some believe they can.

I don't care at all about my opinions being contradicted by them. But I will admit that posters who base their opinions strictly based on their stat of choice don't hold a lot of appeal for me. I don't waste much time in a back in forth with those posters because there is nothing to discuss if they are letting a stat reach conclusions for them. I can't learn anything new from them and obviously they aren't going to be open to my perspective when it differs from their chosen stat.

I definitely don't fully understand them. In part because I simply don't have the required statistical background, but also many of them hide the specific formulas so its impossible for anyone else to understand them thus we are required to take them on faith.

But yeah I feel pretty strongly we cannot adequately measure individual NBA impact accurately simply by numbers. And if that makes me insecure or a Neanderthal so be it.
bondom34 wrote:This is stupid and you know this is stupid.
Brofessor24
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,787
And1: 887
Joined: Sep 06, 2018
Location: Inside of your mom.

Re: 2020-21 NBA Season Discussion 

Post#5359 » by Brofessor24 » Tue Aug 31, 2021 11:19 pm

It's hilarious how some people in the General Board have their panties in a twist over the recent news regarding Ben Simmons.

Players are entitled to ask for trades (their contracts don't prohibit them from doing that). Teams can either agree to trade them or not. Teams definitely aren't forced to trade players.

Anyone who doesn't understand that needs to get their head examined.
falcolombardi
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,523
And1: 1,037
Joined: Apr 13, 2021
       

Re: 2020-21 NBA Season Discussion 

Post#5360 » by falcolombardi » Tue Aug 31, 2021 11:57 pm

i think the way people approach player and team relationship is wrong because we see it emotionally to a fair extent and as fans feel owed/entitled to the players drafted or hired

of course that doesnt mean everythingh players do is ok, but there is a big difference between, lets say, refusing to play. and asking for a trade

and there is a difference between doing somethingh considered wrong and doing somethingh that breaks a contract (people often call demanding trades as an example of contracts being worth less even though being tradeable is part of that contract)
that often gets confused

Return to Player Comparisons