ArthurVandelay wrote:Scase wrote:ArthurVandelay wrote:
He hit 45% of his corner 3s and statically played some of the best perimeter defense in the league. That is something of value that can be worked with.
The problem is that most of his shots are not from the corner. And he's really only good from one corner. This year he's only had 82 of his 177 3's from the corners, and 43 of those he's shooting 35% on them, league average being 39%.
Over his (short) career it doesn't change much either, 179 of 405 attempts are from the corner, and only 48 of those are being shot at a good clip, the other corner he shoots below league average 37% vs 39%, or just horrendous percents above the break at 26%.
He's basically a good shooter from a single place on the entire court. And that's off a pretty small sample size as well, I wouldn't claim someone is a great shooter off essentially less than 50 career attempts.
His defence is nice, but it isn't good enough to justify the negative he is on the court. Can this change, for sure, but this isn't a highly touted prospect or anything, so chances are it doesn't get all that great. I'd be happy to be wrong.
You’re not having a conversation here. You pretend to be objective and open minded and claim you could be wrong, but then definitely state how another person is totally wrong and Agbaji is done yet you’ve ignored things I’ve already stated numerous times about what Agbaji needs to do to be an effective player. Your shooting stats lifted from basketball reference only confirm my previously stated opinions of what he needs to do and what the coaches need to do to ensure he is utilized to his strengths.
This is mind boggling.
I'm simply providing context to what you said, I don't see how that is stating that anything is "done".
You said he has hit 45% of his corner threes, and I provided the context of where and how he hit them. How exactly is that NOT objective, like it is a literal fact that he is only shooting well from a single place on the court.
How is raising a counter to your point not a conversation? I'm actually confused here. I never discounted what you said about the work the coaches need to do, in my own post above I said him playing outside of his game is something I hope the coaching staff can reign in.
But if you're going to use a blanket statement and say a player shoots 45% from the corner, why is it an issue for me to point out the specific details of said claim?
As of now, he offers good shooting from a singular area on the court, and good defence. I never said he's worthless, I'm being realistic. Like damn man, if you can't handle someone pointing out base level stats of a player without getting offended, I don't know what to say here.
I'm clearly stating that he CAN get better, but based on his perceived potential, it's not likely that he becomes a lights out 45% shooter from both corners of the court and a lockdown defender. How is this a controversial statement?
You can't claim it's not a conversation, just because I provided additional context to a statement. Your response here is the only thing that is mind boggling.