payitforward wrote:hands11 wrote:closg00 wrote:Just saw Clarkson once in that game against us, he looked good on a bad team.
Thats the question that still needs answered.
Hard to account for numbers when a player is on a terrible team. We saw that on past Wizards teams. We know what that looks like.
He does look the part of a NBA player though. We should have a better picture after this year.
I liked him as our pick for that draft. So I'm not shocked he looks like a viable prospect.
I read this kind of thing *all the time* and it is meaningless.
When we were a terrible team, no one discounted Wall playing well. Guys play as well as they play. If you have more guys who play well, you win more games. That's why when you're choosing guys for your team in the park, you pick the best players!
The other thing that makes this kind of statement meaningless is that we also, and equally and from the same people, hear the exact opposite! The reason a guy looks good is because he's playing on a good team. This was said over and over about Kawhi Leonard.
It can't be both ways -- a rookie plays well but it really doesn't mean he's a good player, because he's playing on a bad team it's all "garbage minutes." Or because he's playing on a good team where he's getting better coaching and he isn't being guarded closely either.
Moreover, the statements are used selectively -- when a person is looking for a reason to discount someone. I don't mean to focus on Hands, because so many people do this, but as it happens I remember the praise he gave Vucevic for his play -- on a terrible team! -- and the skepticism about Nerlens Noel's play -- also on a terrible team!
Another version of the contradiction is saying, for example, "Kevin Seraphin would have become a better player had he been drafted by the Spurs instead of the Wizards when we were terrible", and then saying some other player is only looking good because he is playing for a terrible team. Kevin Seraphin was terrible when the Wizards were terrible, and he was terrible when the Wizards were pretty good.
Yes.. Both can be true and there is no contradiction. Different players. Different situation. Different outcome metrics. Different topics. Rarely in life does the simple this or that answer one shoe fits all cover all situations. Also, there is a line of logic you don't seem to use which is, sometimes both things are true. The glass is half full and half empty. So yes, it does come down to what people want to focus on. I post on that topic frequently. Negative outcome thinkers vs positive outcome thinkers. You can read up on the topics if you would like.
As for this specific reply to my specific post.. read what I wrote and try to understand the intent. It a sports board on a sport board. Post are made in summary of a thought. These are not technical written scientific research papers. At least most the time they aren't. Here is all I wrote.
"Hard to account for numbers when a player is on a terrible team. We saw that on past Wizards teams. We know what that looks like.
He does look the part of a NBA player though. We should have a better picture after this year."
That were fair and accurate statements and there was really nothing to nip pick.
I do find it curious how your mind fragments and resembles things to create story lines that are misrepresenting on what was actually posted. I also notice you tend to do it in a argumentative way were you assume the superior intellect. Curious.
I stand by what I have said in other posts. Kevin S would have had a better shot at reaching his potential sooner if he landed on a stable winning team were his role was better defined with good mentoring. K Leonard in my view benefited from this by landing on SAS. Had he landed in SAC, I don't think he would be the player he is today. There are other instances where I believe it can be beneficial that a player land on a lessor good team where they can get up a lot of efficient reps so they can develop their game. But you do always want good mentoring on the team. Even if it's older less productive players.
As for Clarkson. I liked him as a prospect that year. I even wanted us to draft him. As a PG with his skills and maturity, I think its easier to produce even when you land on a worse team. Him getting the reps up he did last year on a losing team is fine for a player like him for a year. But with more good players around him and being a PG, he will be asked to draw of different skills. We will see how that effects his numbers. Specially when he has Kobe who is a ball dominate player on the floor with him.
So what I said stands.
"He does look the part of a NBA player though. We should have a better picture after this year."
No reply is needed.
