BoogieTime wrote:
I read a lot of takes from a lot of posters. Personally I think if you looked at Chuck’s history on Ayton, Bagley, Young and Jackson, and assessed how the general fans on Real GM feel about them, Chuck would have a 1 in a sliding scale of 1-5 opinion on all said players
The every day poster may look at my reaction towards him as petty and not accurate
If it doesn’t contribute to the discussion to note that in my reply to him, I can ignore it and not say it
I dont think having an opinion differing from the realGM consensus is a bad thing at all
Honestly I find that when most people are challenged on 'majority' opinions, their argument just tends to be volume based - "look at how many people agree!" - which doesn't reinforce an argument to me at all. I think a lot of widely accepted analyses on players are often times wrong because they are too general and I find myself at odds with people constantly because of it. With players who are not Warriors, never have been Warriors, etc etc.. is that bias? I'd think bias would be more like "KD is barely a top 20 player" - something patently untrue and obviously influenced by something unrelated
But when I say things like "I think Isaac Okoro was a regrettable top 5 pick", I might not be with the majority there, but there's no underlying reason behind it other than thinking Okoro just wasnt that good
Because funny enough, of the 4 prospects you listed up there, I'd probably only be a non 1 for JJJ/Trae.. and I obviously have minimal skin in the game personally because the W's never had access to any of those 4