What did General Board fans say when asked to project how many top 5 MVP finishes Trae Young will have in his career?

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

... hmmm....

No word yet whether Travis Schlenk was one of the voters, or how he would have voted if he didn't... but we'll know soon enough.

[REHawksFan]

Well statistically he's off to similar or better starts to his career offensively which is given more emphasis obviously.

I would think any year where he's top 5 scoring and top 2 or 3 in assists he'll get consideration so long as that production also results in Hawk wins.

We'll see I guess. Schlenk obviously thinks he has his superstar.

[King Ken]

Its too early to ask the general board this question. They still think hes a inefficient shooter who can't defend.

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

Well, ya take what you can get, right? 50 views or so here, and practically no one wanted to cast a vote.

That, in itself, makes a statement, if not a couple of statements.

But, too, it's at least interesting to see what some casual observers are thinking.

[Jamaaliver]

^I [think] the lack of response is less of an indictment on Trae's future prospects...and more of a disinterest in the topic.

Top 5 MVP finishes?

This...kind of feels like the aforementioned click-bait.

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

I would ***love*** to make money on every click of a thread I'd posted.

How does that work exactly? I must have missed something here.

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

Oh. And. Guess I'm just one of those really weird people, Liver, who tends to click on a thread when I *am* interested in a topic, and who *doesn't* tend to click on a thread when I'm *not* interested in the topic.

[REHawksFan]

Well, ya take what you can get, right? 50 views or so here, and practically no one wanted to cast a vote.

That, in itself, makes a statement, if not a couple of statements.

But, too, it's at least interesting to see what some casual observers are thinking.

Not voting doesn't make a statement. I didn't vote, but I did respond to your initial post. Me not voting should not be taken as doubting Trae in any way. I clearly do not have the reservations you do with him.

I simply didn't vote because I didn't want to participate in your game. And yes, I view this tit for tat argument you are attempting to have all the time as a game. I've already seen your "superstar players should finish top 5 in the MVP more than 2 times in their career" theory so I know what angle you are going after.

You have a quote from Travis Schlenk saying his "players project as superstars" and yet instead of taking his specific word for it as his opinion, you move the target and now say, "yes, but does he think they are cornerstones?"

You are determined to wait and see what moves are made and how the draft unfolds in an attempt to read into these moves to see how TS "REALLY thinks about Trae" when he has specifically told you what he thinks. You don't agree that Trae is an elite, superstar, franchise player and that is perfectly fine. I won't argue your belief or opinion with you. But let's stop pretending that TS hasn't explicitly stated what his thoughts are on the matter.

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

Well, ya take what you can get, right? 50 views or so here, and practically no one wanted to cast a vote.

That, in itself, makes a statement, if not a couple of statements.

But, too, it's at least interesting to see what some casual observers are thinking.

Not voting doesn't make a statement. I didn't vote, but I did respond to your initial post. Me not voting should not be taken as doubting Trae in any way. I clearly do not have the reservations you do with him.

I simply didn't vote because I didn't want to participate in your game. And yes, I view this tit for tat argument you are attempting to have all the time as a game. I've already seen your "superstar players should finish top 5 in the MVP more than 2 times in their career" theory so I know what angle you are going after.

You have a quote from Travis Schlenk saying his "players project as superstars" and yet instead of taking his specific word for it as his opinion, you move the target and now say, "yes, but does he think they are cornerstones?"

You are determined to wait and see what moves are made and how the draft unfolds in an attempt to read into these moves to see how TS "REALLY thinks about Trae" when he has specifically told you what he thinks. You don't agree that Trae is an elite, superstar, franchise player and that is perfectly fine. I won't argue your belief or opinion with you. But let's stop pretending that TS hasn't explicitly stated what his thoughts are on the matter.

1. You should have voted then. The explanation for not voting is less than satisfying... even if we accept the part that I'm playing a game, why wouldn't you, then, "foil" the game by casting a vote that reflected your exceptional enthusiasm for his future? To the contrary, the only way you would be helping "the game" would be to vote zero or 1.

Sorry, but from here, that appears fairly disingenuous.

And I should add, there's nothing wrong with believing Trae isn't going to reach a level where the Iversons and the Nashes reside, just as there's nothing wrong with believing he will. That's where you miss me. I'm okay with people believing he will. It's interesting to know, but that's all it is. It's not compelling. It's not like there's a popular vote of fans that, in the end, matters. What's compelling is discovering what Schlenk thinks... and yes, sue me, but I'm anxious to see what his actions say about that.

2. I'm not like you. I'm okay with ambiguity in ways that you evidently are not. I'm satisfied to say I could be wrong... maybe Schlenk's use of the term was all you presume that it is.

[REHawksFan]

Well, ya take what you can get, right? 50 views or so here, and practically no one wanted to cast a vote.

That, in itself, makes a statement, if not a couple of statements.

But, too, it's at least interesting to see what some casual observers are thinking.

Not voting doesn't make a statement. I didn't vote, but I did respond to your initial post. Me not voting should not be taken as doubting Trae in any way. I clearly do not have the reservations you do with him.

I simply didn't vote because I didn't want to participate in your game. And yes, I view this tit for tat argument you are attempting to have all the time as a game. I've already seen your "superstar players should finish top 5 in the MVP more than 2 times in their career" theory so I know what angle you are going after.

You have a quote from Travis Schlenk saying his "players project as superstars" and yet instead of taking his specific word for it as his opinion, you move the target and now say, "yes, but does he think they are cornerstones?"

You are determined to wait and see what moves are made and how the draft unfolds in an attempt to read into these moves to see how TS "REALLY thinks about Trae" when he has specifically told you what he thinks. You don't agree that Trae is an elite, superstar, franchise player and that is perfectly fine. I won't argue your belief or opinion with you. But let's stop pretending that TS hasn't explicitly stated what his thoughts are on the matter.

1. You should have voted then. The explanation for not voting is less than satisfying... even if we accept the part that I'm playing a game, why wouldn't you, then, "foil" the game by casting a vote that reflected your exceptional enthusiasm for his future? To the contrary, the only way you would be helping "the game" would be to vote zero or 1.

Sorry, but from here, that appears fairly disingenuous.

And I should add, there's nothing wrong with believing Trae isn't going to reach a level where the Iversons and the Nashes reside, just as there's nothing wrong with believing he will. That's where you miss me. I'm okay with people believing he will. It's interesting to know, but that's all it is. It's not compelling. It's not like there's a popular vote of fans that, in the end, matters. What's compelling is discovering what Schlenk thinks... and yes, sue me, but I'm anxious to see what his actions say about that.

2. I'm not like you. I'm okay with ambiguity in ways that you evidently are not. I'm satisfied to say I could be wrong... maybe Schlenk's use of the term was all you presume that it is.

You're getting it wrong. I'm not interested in "foiling" your game. I'm not interested in trying to prove to you that Trae is who I think he is. I also don't have any issue with you thinking as you do about Trae. That's the point in me not voting. I'm not interested in playing the game because I simply don't care that your opinion of Trae is different than mine.

Neither position is ultimately provable at this point in time. And trying to chase down TS's opinion of Trae to either verify your own opinion or disprove it using your own opinion about TS's actions and commentary is just an exercise in futility, imo.

I tried to give you my honest opinion on the matter in the post, which I felt was more instructive than voting. Of course, you didn't bother to respond or acknowledge my opinion on the matter (which is fine, btw), but you seemingly take offense at my not voting in a silly poll? It's almost as if you care more about your game than honest discussion.

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

Interested enough to click to open. Interested even to comment. Not interested enough to click to vote. Got it.

And, yes, actually I care more about "the game"... or in my vocabulary, simply the less deviously-stated, "results of the poll."

No offense to anyone, but no single opinion was considered to be all that interesting.... hence the decision initially to run a poll instead of posting a thread.

And you're welcome to believe what you choose to believe, but probably shouldn't read too much into my suggestion that the lack of poll participation was "taking offense." Rather, I thought it interesting, and probably, in a roundabout way, made its own statement about what people think.... that they don't feel comfortable that Trae is a cornerstone player, but felt like they were somehow supporting the premise if they acknowledged they don't.

Last, I don't think I've spoken very much about how I feel about Trae. I'm on the fence. Whatever it turns out that Schlenk thinks is going to be an opinion I'm comfortable with.

[saloonyk8]

How many top 5 MVP finishes did Chris Paul have? Probably the best PG of last generation.

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

How many top 5 MVP finishes did Chris Paul have? Probably the best PG of last generation.

Use this...

https://www.basketball-reference.com/awards/awards_2018.html#mvp

[kg01]

I did not vote in the poll. If I vote does it make you hate me less, @sturt. If I don't vote, will you descend further into madness? Can I call you Colonel Kurtz from now on?

Perhaps you can call me Capt. Willard.

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

kg, you seriously have me wrong if you think I feel any hate toward you... and I've already spoken to and dismantled the "takes offense" thing.

[kg01]

That's "Capt. Willard" to you, Colonel.

[Jamaaliver]

I find it amusing that the original topic of the thread gained little-to-no traction.

But has exploded thanks to a debate on why the original topic gained no traction.

Oy

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

Interesting... and so, well, I find it amusing that you'd characterize it as "exploded," and that the previous comment would come from you, the person who originally posited your own fairly thin explanation, ie without any prompting from anyone, claiming his selective "disinterest."

[kg01]

Heh, this is the equivalent of Col. Sturtz going into his bag. What's in his bag? A thesaurus.

C'mon. That was funny.

[_s_t_u_r_t_]

That's "Capt. Willard" to you, Colonel.

I suppose I'm supposed to know what that means, but admittedly not only do I not, I don't even have interest to go look it up. But I'm sure I would have laughed.