| . |
 |
It reminds me of the other day where he claimed that I had never said anything about Ingram having potential, and then I quoted two of my own posts that he had replied to in which I say that Ingram has potential and may well improve, and even that I think those improvements are probable, and he still kept pushing the nonsense angle that he invented out of nowhere.Originally Posted by Mythrol
Basketball.
LoL what!? Leonard averaged 12 and 16 ppg at age 22 and 23!! Paul George was averaging 12 and 17 ppg at age 21 with a much lower FG% with less rpg and apg.. These are also 2 MVP candidates proving what I am saying even further!! That only players even comparable to Ingram are MVP candidates.. the only players that even have an argument as playing at a level near his have all turned themselves into MVP caliber players.. but no Ingram sucks now and will suck later!! both were also inserted into great situations on good to great teams not a lottery team full of young players. WTH are you talking about they destroy him? Maybe check the numbers again my dude cause you are flat out wrong! Such a poor argument y’all have presented..
Last edited by GuardianAngel25; 03-06-2019 at 09:25 PM.
Go back and actually read my post you skipped over. You act like ppg is the only metric for measuring a player. . .Newsflash. It's not. Basketball has far more to it than just raw ppg. They didn't just beat Ingram. They completely crushed him in almost every major advanced stat. Which is my point, he just doesn't stack up to All Star players at the SF even when you compare them at 21.
LoL of course you go presenting some stats that aren’t nearly as important to fit your argument.. that’s very typical from you.. If you could use the PPG and % I guarantee you that would be your first option. They destroy him though right? Try again.. PPG and FG% are pretty damn important metrics especially when one is averaging a full 5-6 ppg while shooting a better %.. Asvanced stats are a direct reflection on how good your team is as well.. but let’s ifnore that!
He literally listed all the numbers he was talking about. Watch, I'll show you - highlighted stats are where they're better than Ingram:
Brandon Ingram, age 21: 18.3 pts, 5.1 rbds, 3.0 asts, 0.5stls, 0.6blks, 2.5 TOVs, 2.9 PFs, 49.7% fg, 33% 3pt, 67.5% FT, -8 Net RTG, -0.4 VORP, -2.8 BPM, 0.057 WS/48, 13.6 PER
Kawhi Leonard, age 21: 11.9pts, 6.0rbds, 1.6asts, 1.7stls, 0.6blks, 1.1 TOVs, 1.7 PFs, 49.4% fg, 37.4% 3pt, 82.5% FT, +15 Net RTG, +2.7 VORP, +3.9 BPM, 0.166 WS/48, 16.4 PER
Paul George, age 21: 12.1pts, 5.6rbds, 2.4asts, 1.6stls, 0.6blks, 1.8 TOVs, 2.9 PFs, 44% fg, 38.5% 3pt, 80.2% FT, +8 Net RTG, +2.9 VORP, +3.9 BPM, 0.148 WS/48, 16.5 PER
Just for ease of comparison therehope that helps.
Serious question: do you think Points Per Game is the best, and most important, metric for measuring how good a player is?
Why are you purposely being obtuse instead of just admitting you were wrong? PPG and FG% are two stats. But I listed like a dozen stats where they were better than Ingram. Advanced stats aren't a direct reflection of how good your team is, Advanced stats were specifically developed because PPG and FG% aren't good indicators by themselves of how good a player actually is. And those two stats completely ignore an entire half of the game of basketball - defense - where Ingram gets crushed by both of the players I listed.
Never said it was. But to ignore those stats because they edge him out in a few other categories is ridiculous. The stats you are presenting all have a huge part to do with the teams they were on as well. They were both put in much better situations and there is no question about that. Just funny y’all ignore everything Ingram does better while taking the stats that don’t favor him as the deciding factor. Again these are 2 MVP caliber players he is right there in the discussion with is my entire point. To act like these guys were far better or better period is nothing but opinion and ridiculous to act otherwise. Y’all have just continued to show your biases on this subject and no matter what he does it will be argued somehow.
I could see an argument that MAYBE BPM is dependent on how good your team is, as well as potentially net rating.
But PER, On/off, VORP, WS/48, etc, are all specifically individual metrics. There's no argument for those.
I would believe that except the Lakers are markedly better with Ingram off the court than on it. So I think he is part of the reason (probably due to his defense) that their stats skewer that way.
I know you never said it was. That's why I didn't claim you did. I asked.
Also, edge him out in a few other categories?! You mean absolutely annihilate him in almost every other category, right?
No, the starts are not dependent on teams. I can see an argument for that in regards to BPM, maybe, though I would debate it. But PER, WS/48, VORP, etc, are all specifically individual metrics. It doesn't matter how many games your team wins, or how dynamic your offense is. You can have a terrible team offense, and a great offensive rating individually, because they are specifically formulated for individuals.
I don't argue that they weren't in better situations. Yes, Kawhi and PG were in better situations. That doesn't change their individual performances within those teams.
What ''everything'' that Ingram does better? He literally does scoring, and assisting better, and edges them slightly in FG%. Literally every other metric he's worse at. No question.
They were not MVP calibre players then. Nobody is arguing they're better than him NOW, because of course they are. Nobody would deny that.
They were far better. Mythrol and I have produced the statistics to back this opinion up. Yes, it's an opinion, but it's an opinion with evidence supporting it. Your opinion is also an opinion, but it has no evidence. So you are, as far as anyone can be in regards to opinions, wrong.
These are individual metrics that can be hugely impacted by how good their team is. Like I said all y’all have done is dig for anything that agrees with your argument. What separates them is not by much in those areas and their is no way you can point to them being much better or even better. Again these are 2 players producing at an MVP level! So y’all are only proving my point further..
Yeah, when you look at Ingrams on/off stats, it does turn up a negative. His team offensive rating is +0.7 better with him on court. Lakers oppositions see their offensive rating rise +1. Not much, but the end result is that Ingram being on court produces a -0.3 rating.
We're proving you right, by providing mountains of evidence that you're wrong.
It's all over folks, that's how you know the person you're dealing with legitimately does not care if what they're saying is true. This is creationist style debate.
LoL yet you will say Lonzo is trash and ignore how much better the Lakers are with him on the court? Hey the Pelicans are playing better without AD in the court.. you literally are reaching for anything..
Do you admit that Kawhi and Leonard were better players overall than Ingram was at the age of 21?
Proving I’m right by presenting 2 players that played no better and are current MVP candidates.. yea you got me lol! Y’all sound so ridiculous it’s hilarious. Your biases are screaming through the screen.
Lonzo hasn't even been healthy enough to stay on the court. He's soon to reach the dreaded injury prone argument if he keeps this up. Nor does he matter in a coversation revolving around Ingram and how he ranks compared to other SFs at 21.
Presenting two players who played MUCH MUCH better, in almost every measurable way*
Those goalposts are moving...
The whataboutery is beginning...
No I watched both of these guys at that age and they absolutely weren’t better. If anything they were playing at a very similar level. Again these are 2 MVP candidates helping my case further how good Ingram has been.
LOL. Ok then, there's nothing left to discuss. You ignore nearly every major statistical category simply to avoid admitting you were wrong. Good Day.
LoL good way of deflecting when Lonzo was on the court for 47 games how they played. Showing how ridiculous you are reaching for anything lol.
You ladies argue with yourselves.. peace!!
That's basically how all these discussions go.
He makes a claim, you disagree. He tells you to prove it, you provide mountains of evidence. He then dismisses the evidence, implies that you only disagree because he just watches more basketball than you, and leaves.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote