DCZards wrote:nate33 wrote:...I rank him [i.e. Kuz] high because I know real NBA experts rank him high. I've seen enough posts from guys like Bobby Marks and John Hollinger to know that Kuzma has value. Teams desperately need big wings who can do lots of stuff. Kuzma may be trying to do too much with the Wizards, so his efficiency suffers, but he has the skillset to help a playoff team.
Yeah…and that’s why numbers alone can’t tell you whose a better or more valued player.
nate -- I haven't seen those posts by Marks, Hollinger, et. al. If you can link to any, I'll be very interested.
Note as well that if you trade a guy for a R1 pick, that alone is indication that he has value. Teams don't give away first round picks.
Zards -- "numbers" are simply a record of what actually happens on the court. I do not see how a player who puts up bad numbers (in significant minutes of course) can be a good player anyway.
After all, the final score of a game is no more than a pair of numbers. If you win very few games, can you be a good team anyway?
& that pair of numbers, the final score, is no more than the simple product of all the other numbers represented in the box score.
& the numbers in the box score are no more than the simple sums of all the players' individual numbers.
& if the final scores actually represent wins & losses accurately -- i.e. if a team's record tells you how good or bad a team is -- then how can the individual players' numbers, which totally determine team numbers, not tell you how good those players are?
Is that what makes basketball interesting?
No, of course not! Basketball isn't arithmetic!
Is there room for interdependency of players.
Of course there is! & over time you do find out who makes other players somewhat better or worse.
All the same, we won 15 games this year.
Why? Because the numbers our players put up, as a team, in the games we played, were bad. Their numbers were significantly worse than the numbers put up by the players on opposing teams.
IOW, if you win 15 games your team lacks talent.
I.e. your team lacks talent, because your players lack talent.
Good players put up good numbers -- is there any way to doubt that?
Bad players put up bad numbers. Period.
Edit...
1 other thing: "good" & "bad" are comparative terms not absolutes.
Kuz is no doubt one of the very best basketball players in the global population of basketball players!
But, looked at among the @200 guys who play Forward in the NBA... no. In that select company, he's below average overall.
Is he a good teammate? -- sure looks like it! Is he a good person? -- it seems very much the case. Is he an interesting man? -- that's the impression I get for sure.