Duke4life831 wrote:I do watch. I watch most ACC teams and especially Pit because of Capel.
That's great! You could try showing that you've watched by actually talking about his game, the pace that he plays with, his court vision, maybe break down his strengths/weaknesses a little bit so we know you've watched him play...rather than just posting cherry picked stats on a small sample size of games.
Duke4life831 wrote:I also had Chet #1 for that year.
Great! That only proves my point. IIRC, Chet's PPG and shooting splits were WAY higher vs weaker teams than they were vs top 25 or top 50 ranked teams. Yet you ranked Chet #1 and you completely dismiss Carrington as someone we shouldn't even discuss (You said "Im surprised Carrington has been brought up a few times. Why?").
That makes no sense.
Duke4life831 wrote:My point is, the main reason people are talking about him is because he put up a triple double against arguably the worst team in college basketball (the worst defense statistically).
I didn't bring that game up in my post and I don't see many people talking about that game on here.
However, I do think that:
a) getting a triple double in your first ever college game (especially when you're one of the youngest freshmen in college basketball and have to carry the load as your team's PG and pretty much the only guy on the team running the offense, creating shots, facilitating, etc.) is impressive, regardless of competition level
b) Competition aside, if we watch the film of that game I was impressed with his poise, just seems like he really belongs out there, doesn't make silly freshman mistakes (like we've seen quite a few times from guys like Wagner and Collier) the way he sees the floor, plays with good pace, seems to have good feel for running the PnR, etc.
Duke4life831 wrote:While the 3 times he’s played against actual solid competition (mid level college basketball teams) he’s putting up
10/5/5 on 32/17/87 (42 TS%)
Cherry picked games on a small sample size.
Carrington has played 7 games. That sample size is small enough. Let's not make it smaller to try and fit your agenda.
You're not really making some insightful observation here. Gee, a guy has better numbers vs low major/mid major teams who aren't ranked in the top 25 than he does vs high major teams - wow, no kidding! Ya don't say! That's probably true about pretty much every college basketball player ever. It was true about Chet (yet you still ranked him no. 1), it was true about Brandon Miller. It was true about most every player who got drafted in the lottery...ever.
Duke4life831 wrote:Is it really “harping on competition level” if we talk about that there is a clear difference between putting up stats against teams like NC A&T and actual legit competition?
Hmm, since you seem to be implying that NC A&T is a trash team that anybody could easily get a triple double on with high efficiency, let's take a look here...
BY that logic, Reece Beekman should have also put up an 18 point triple double with high shooting efficiency, right? Sure, Beekman isn't a projected lottery pick, but many people do have him going 2nd round (some even have him going 1st round) and he's FOUR years older than Carrington, has played in big march madness and ACC games, has one of the best coaches in college basketball guiding him, etc.
So surely by your logic, Beekman must have had a career night vs NC A&T, right?
Here's their stats vs NC A&T:
Carrington at age 18: 18/12/10 on 7/12 FG, 4/7 from 3 and 1 turnover
Beekman at age 22: 5/4/7 on 2/9 FG, 1/3 from 3 and 0 turnovers
No one is throwing Beekman's stats from that game out. They count. Everyone is including that NC A&T game in Beekman's stats. Only fair that we do the same for Carrington.
Duke4life831 wrote:If you had Carrington high before the season, cool. I just don’t get the reasoning on jumping a player from basically off your board to your top 10 because of what he did to start the year against bottom level college basketball teams
Perhaps you missed this part of my post:
When watching his pre-college film, it was clear that Carrington is a guy who moves really smooth out there, really smooth with the ball in his hands. Can play on ball or off ball, but is a legit PG prospect at 6'5" who can distribute the ball, run offense, run PnR and was one of the better shooters in this year's freshman class. That's a nice baseline to have coming into college, especially when you're one of the youngest players in the freshman class and the 2024 draft class is weaker at the top..and teams (when seeing the success of Haliburton) might not want to miss again on a skinny 6'5" PG who can handle the ball, drop dimes and stroke the 3 ball..
Duke4life831 wrote:We’ve had this discussion for years on here and it’s been one of the most talked about things from college basketball talking heads lately as well. Early season college basketball sucks. The vast majority of out of conference games are against teams that shouldn’t even be in discussion for D1 and you can’t learn anything about the teams or anything legit about the players as prospects when they play games beating up on these teams.
Here's a live look at Duke4life831:
Look, dude. Every game is a data point. Some data points mean more than others. UConn beat UNH the other night, a school that's never made the tournament and never sent a player to the NBA. But Clingan looked good. His footwork looked good, his aggressiveness around the basket was good. Showed some soft touch around the rim, made a nice pass to an open teammate, etc. Is it gonna drastically change my eval on him? Of course not. But it's a data point. And it's encouraging to see the way he was moving out there, coming back from the foot injury.
Am I going to base my whole eval on Clingan off the UNH game? Of course not. Am I going to factor in what I saw on film from Clingan in that game? Yeah. Am I going to completely dismiss that game, just because it was against a weaker team? Nope..
If your main point is that early season games vs low major or mid major schools don't matter, then whatever. We can agree to disagree. I don't even disagree completely with that. I think those games mean less..they certainly don't mean a ton. But they do mean something, imo. Every game is a data point. A game vs Duke matters more, but a game vs NC A&T or a game vs the YNG Dreamerz matters too, imo.
