Most mind-boggling basketball comments you've heard from people

[Pachinko_]

2nd more baffling is using +/- as a player stat and saying things like "he was +25". Also extremely common, also I ignore it.

Depends on the context. If a player is a plus for 7 straight games....

I disagree from the first sentence.
No player "is" anything, it's a team stat.

[ellobo]

The three point shot has ruined basketball.

[tsherkin]

The three point shot has ruined basketball.

Counterpoint: no it hasn't, you just don't like it personally.

I happen to enjoy what it's done for the game. Two equally valid perspectives on the shot and how it has evolved within the game over the last 40-some years. Subjectivity needs to be recognized.

[BayWarrior]

Is realgm slowly becoming like Reddit with low IQ takes like the overrating of Curry and other trash takes?

This thread is full of hilarious comments by the OP

[Egg Nog]

The three point shot has ruined basketball.

Counterpoint: no it hasn't, you just don't like it personally.

I happen to enjoy what it's done for the game. Two equally valid perspectives on the shot and how it has evolved within the game over the last 40-some years. Subjectivity needs to be recognized.

I think you forgot which thread you're reading.

[tsherkin]

The three point shot has ruined basketball.

Counterpoint: no it hasn't, you just don't like it personally.

I happen to enjoy what it's done for the game. Two equally valid perspectives on the shot and how it has evolved within the game over the last 40-some years. Subjectivity needs to be recognized.

I think you forgot which thread you're reading.

Damnit all, I'm 0/2 tonight. I think it's time for me to have a beer and STFU this evening... *facepalm*

[dhsilv2]

2nd more baffling is using +/- as a player stat and saying things like "he was +25". Also extremely common, also I ignore it.

Depends on the context. If a player is a plus for 7 straight games....

I disagree from the first sentence.
No player "is" anything, it's a team stat.

It's a lineup stat. But if when a player is on the floor they out score the other team, and fans blame that player for a loss...we need to look further.

[GreatWhiteStiff]

I always bring up Cam Reddish's plus minus since he's a historicly bad plus minus player, and has had a bad plus minus since joining the knicks.

[Pachinko_]

Depends on the context. If a player is a plus for 7 straight games....

I disagree from the first sentence.
No player "is" anything, it's a team stat.

It's a lineup stat. But if when a player is on the floor they out score the other team, and fans blame that player for a loss...we need to look further.

I don't think it is even a lineup stat, because there's hardly ever only one lineup if a player is in for any sort of substantial minutes.

You can put a sleeping bag on the logo and snooze throughout the game, and still have anything from -50 to +50 against your name.
And that's what makes it a team stat.

This stat as disconnected as you can get from one guy's performance without saying "the team lost that game by 20".

[yellowknifer]

My buddy (who knows more about basketball than me) told me that he thought Michael Kidd Gilchrist was a scottie pippen clone.

You can sort of see the comparison. Like a guy who went all in on Enron version of him.

[dhsilv2]

I disagree from the first sentence.
No player "is" anything, it's a team stat.

It's a lineup stat. But if when a player is on the floor they out score the other team, and fans blame that player for a loss...we need to look further.

I don't think it is even a lineup stat, because there's hardly ever only one lineup if a player is in for any sort of substantial minutes.

You can put a sleeping bag on the logo and snooze throughout the game, and still have anything from -50 to +50 against your name.
And that's what makes it a team stat.

This stat as disconnected as you can get from one guy's performance without saying "the team lost that game by 20".

I think you're being obtuse for that sake of being it.

If you're playing 40 minutes a game and you're + 10 in all 7 games and your team loses in 7. The team lost when you were off the court. That doesn't mean you were playing well but it also doesn't mean you were why the team lost. It is what it is. An additional set of data. If you ignore it, you're ignoring useful information. If you use that to mean you were great, you're miss using data.

[Ritzo]

Ayton over Luka was the right pick after the Suns reached Finals.

[Pachinko_]

It's a lineup stat. But if when a player is on the floor they out score the other team, and fans blame that player for a loss...we need to look further.

I don't think it is even a lineup stat, because there's hardly ever only one lineup if a player is in for any sort of substantial minutes.

You can put a sleeping bag on the logo and snooze throughout the game, and still have anything from -50 to +50 against your name.
And that's what makes it a team stat.

This stat as disconnected as you can get from one guy's performance without saying "the team lost that game by 20".

I think you're being obtuse for that sake of being it.

If you're playing 40 minutes a game and you're + 10 in all 7 games and your team loses in 7. The team lost when you were off the court. That doesn't mean you were playing well but it also doesn't mean you were why the team lost. It is what it is. An additional set of data. If you ignore it, you're ignoring useful information. If you use that to mean you were great, you're miss using data.

Do you remember my original point? What I actually said? It was not about ignoring it, or using it, or not using it.
It was about calling it a player stat and starting a sentence with "he was +/- so many points".

You call it intentionally obtuse to persevere on this point, I call it the most important point because that is where the whole confusion starts. If you say instead "the team was +/- so many points when that guy was on the floor", it puts the discussion on the right foot. It's important.

[dhsilv2]

I don't think it is even a lineup stat, because there's hardly ever only one lineup if a player is in for any sort of substantial minutes.

You can put a sleeping bag on the logo and snooze throughout the game, and still have anything from -50 to +50 against your name.
And that's what makes it a team stat.

This stat as disconnected as you can get from one guy's performance without saying "the team lost that game by 20".

I think you're being obtuse for that sake of being it.

If you're playing 40 minutes a game and you're + 10 in all 7 games and your team loses in 7. The team lost when you were off the court. That doesn't mean you were playing well but it also doesn't mean you were why the team lost. It is what it is. An additional set of data. If you ignore it, you're ignoring useful information. If you use that to mean you were great, you're miss using data.

Do you remember my original point? What I actually said? It was not about ignoring it, or using it, or not using it.
It was about calling it a player stat and starting a sentence with "he was +/- so many points".

You call it intentionally obtuse to persevere on this point, I call it the most important point because that is where the whole confusion starts. If you say instead "the team was +/- so many points when that guy was on the floor", it puts the discussion on the right foot. It's important.

That's just semantics. Either way you say it you're saying the exact same thing and everyone reading it knows it.

[AussieCeltic]

Someone here told me OJ Mayo was flat out better than Mitch Richmond.

'You mean more talented?'
'No...better.'
'On, like his best day?'
'Every day'

I knew there were Kobe stans it could be hard to get a rational conversation out of, but OJ Mayo?

Lilojmayo was the stan of all stans… until one day, he finally admitted Mayo just wasn’t it and we never saw him again. I’m sure he’s here with a different name though.

[Pachinko_]

That's just semantics. Either way you say it you're saying the exact same thing and everyone reading it knows it.

I guess that's the only point where we disagree.

[DeBrick]

was talking to my friend about the finals after game 2, and he said he thought the celtics had a good chance since James Wiseman wasn't playing

[FuShengTHEGreat]

"Jordan was out of the league when Hakeem made it to the Finals".

"Hakeem and Houston were never good enough to face Jordan and Chicago in the Finals"

"Prime Wilt would absolutely destroy Kareem"

[Kingdibs19]

I think a lot people believe that Curry is a better player than LeBron but are too scared to say it.

Not me tho,

Steph > LeBron

[Optimus_Steel]

A Tennessee Vols fan tried to convince me that Admiral Schofield was more talented than Zion Williamson in 2019. I get that Zion has had his injury issues, but that's still a dumb opinion to hold three years later.

He is destroying the G league