15 points is no magic number, I just used it as a logical indicator that someone did "well" in the game. As far as US players, I can provide these stats too later on, but felt world's team would be more relevant. Kanter would not even make the US team based on his HS record.
Kanter and Nike Hoop Summit History
- Thread starter Borat
- Start date
15 points is no magic number, I just used it as a logical indicator that someone did "well" in the game. As far as US players, I can provide these stats too later on, but felt world's team would be more relevant. Kanter would not even make the US team based on his HS record.
gregbroncs
Well-Known Member
So you picked the # and the side that benefited your argument. An irrelevant # that you came up with off the top of your head. Why not go with 30 Pts? Because it did not fit your argument. Why not go with 15 pts and a 1st round pick? because it did not fit your argument.
The point is you came up with a worthless stat that means nothing and now your defending it like it's the only argument. Convienient since it's the only argument you have.
I have not succeeded because you are too dumb, then, apparently.
My point is, the international team isn't the only team playing. You isolate his team (and points scored in a completely arbitrary fashion) to make a point that is absurd. Why don't you show a list of the GAME-high scores over the years, from BOTH teams? That's rhetorical, I know why, and that's why it's terrible 'analysis'.
Unfortunately your blind love for Kanter does not allow you to see the historical perspective of the only noteworthy accomplishment Kanter has. And no, I don't count PKM's statement that he did well in a pick game he saw as a serious accomplishment, nor his junior success against pathetic competition. The whole importance of Nike game was that he went against best selected US HS prospects, many of whom historically end up as good NBA players and put up good numbers against them. So, without any bias at all, I wanted to look at all games and see how the guys who have done well against these prospects turned out. So, 15 is no magic number. It's just a basic indicator of whether the guy has done well or not against top HS prospects. We can use any other indicator, but I think you agree if someone could put up 15+, he did well against these top guys. And when I compiled the list of these guys, the fact they have done well in this game mostly didn't translate into so much as 3d stringer in NBA. So, the conclusion is that doing well in this game alone, even though against good competition, is extremely poor indicator of NBA success.
Now, once again to address your point about first round picks projections, all these guys played against Euro or NCAA competition before they were projected in or out of first round. It is because of their other accomplishments at a more senior level that they were ruled out or in of the first round. Kanter doesn't have any of these accomplishment. They only noteworthy thing is this game. That's why you can't say "and a first round projection", you gotta look at all. And I am not trying to make complete statistical analysis here, but I would think people want to know the fact that nearly everyone else who has done well in that game against top HS competition never was good enough to even make it to NBA. This fact is very relevant, when the only meaningful thing you have to look at is this game, don't you agree?
No, you have not succeeded because your never had any meaningful or coherent point to begin with. At least attempt to start exhibiting enough intellectual capabilities to understand the conclusions that are to be made from the data I provided.
This is true, but completely irrelevant. International team is the only one that is playing against good competition. That's the whole point here. This game is the only one where Kanter played against potentially decent competition. The whole idea behind the numbers here is that doing well against potentially decent competition in one game doesn't mean you will go far. NEARLY EVERYONE from that group who had good games against top HS talent didn't qualify to be NBA 3d stringers, even though they did better than many of their counterparts, who later became great NBA players.
Why don't you start thinking a little for a change? How is the fact that good performance against top HS talent not translating anywhere near NBA success absurd? You are just being ridiculous here and ignore a valuable finding. This is not statistical analysis to determine probability of Kanter's success in NBA. But this is a strong indication that doing well against decent competition comprised of top HS talent in that game means nothing at all. It does not even mean you are likely to make NBA roster. Given this is the only meaningful accomplishment Kanter has, I have concerns about risk/reward proposition of him at #3. Really, you don't need to be that thick, it is a basic point that you fail to grasp.
This reminds me of last year, when I was pointing out to you that Haywards accomplishments were significant (leading his team from unranked to ranker as a freshman and to #2 rank as a sophomore while putting up good numbers), and you kept dismissing them, using similar lingo. Now we have similar story, except I am pointing out to you lack of accomplishments, and it looks like your absorptive capacity needs a lot of improvement.
So humble too. I guess I'll go on being ridiculous while you do clearly slanted research to support this axe you have to grind against some kid from Turkey.
I'm not sure how I feel about Kanter, but anything you have to say I put in the same box as underKANTER and Turkish Delight.
Yes, just like my "love" for Hayward last year, right? Your statement is ludicrous, especially in light of the fact I was right last year about Hayward, and and you missed the mark big time. You are even less intelligent than I thought.
And I didn't care about Hayward, and I could care less about Kanter or any other prospect. I want the best talent for the Jazz, and I see Kanter is too big a risk. I went through the trouble of gathering data to show the only accomplishment he has not often translated to NBA success. So, huge risk for #3 pick is there. I have nothing against (or for) Kanter, but I see a huge risk here, given the fact many others who did well in that game against top US talent, failed to make 3d string in NBA, and Kanter has nothing else of note to show for him. Too bad you are intellectually incapable of understanding it.
gregbroncs
Well-Known Member
Okay 1st off, I'm not even in the draft Kanter camp. I hope Williams falls as I'd rather have him.
2nd off the very thing you are accusing me of being is exactly the opposite of what you are actually doing. You hate him so bad you won't even consider another point of view. Your historical stats on his accomplishment are trash. It's just your version of the stats. You picked a random # that fit your argument. And only looked at 1 of the 2 teams playing. 15 IS A MAGIC # to you. You picked that # because it fits your argument. Well use 30 PTS, and use both teams. 15 points is hardly a big game, and Kanter scored double that amount.
I would say scoring 30 points in this game has a very good track record of success in the NBA. 100% actually. Using your own list only Dirk scored 30 and he is a huge success in the NBA.
Again nothing in your post has any basis in fact. It's all just random stats you are trying to twist into some sort of coherent argument to back your hate. Unfortunately you have failed on an epic scale.
I can lead a horse to the water, but I can't make it drink...
I've heard Kanter compared to Koufos before. They both participated in the Euroleague U18 championships, and here are their stats:
Kanter: 22.8 pts / 35 min (54.2 FG% [65-120], 50.0 3PT% [2-4])
Koufos: 26.6 pts / 35 min (51.5 FG% [87-169], 0.91 3PT% [2-22])
Kanter: 20.23 reb (6.7 offensive) / 35 min (148 reb/256 min)
Koufos: 13.05 reb (3.3 offensive) / 35 min (104 reb/279 min)
Kanter: 70.0 FT% (35-50) (6.84 FTA/35 min)
Koufos: 59.0 FT% (36-61) (7.65 FTA/35 min)
Kanter: 1.64 assists / 35 min
Koufos: 0.38 assists / 35 min
Kanter: 2.19 blocks / 35 min
Koufos: 3.51 blocks / 35 min
Kanter: 2.05 fouls / 35 min
Koufos: 1.63 fouls / 35 min
Kanter: 0.96 steals / 35 min
Koufos: 1.38 steals / 35 min
It's hard to argue that U18 performance means much, though Kanter rebounded noticeably better than Koufos—doubling his offensive rebounding rate. Koufos also shot a better percentage than Kanter inside the arc (2PT FG%) but has an overall lower FG% because he shot 2-22 from downtown.
Picking Kanter is a risk. We could either win big or get boom bitched. The problem I have with picking Knight is that we'd be picking a guy who'd very likely fall another 2 or 3 spots if we don't pick him. I don't like selecting a guy as high as 3 who the next team wouldn't select. I hope the Jazz select Kanter, and if they like Knight, then have a trade in place.
Kanter: 22.8 pts / 35 min (54.2 FG% [65-120], 50.0 3PT% [2-4])
Koufos: 26.6 pts / 35 min (51.5 FG% [87-169], 0.91 3PT% [2-22])
Kanter: 20.23 reb (6.7 offensive) / 35 min (148 reb/256 min)
Koufos: 13.05 reb (3.3 offensive) / 35 min (104 reb/279 min)
Kanter: 70.0 FT% (35-50) (6.84 FTA/35 min)
Koufos: 59.0 FT% (36-61) (7.65 FTA/35 min)
Kanter: 1.64 assists / 35 min
Koufos: 0.38 assists / 35 min
Kanter: 2.19 blocks / 35 min
Koufos: 3.51 blocks / 35 min
Kanter: 2.05 fouls / 35 min
Koufos: 1.63 fouls / 35 min
Kanter: 0.96 steals / 35 min
Koufos: 1.38 steals / 35 min
It's hard to argue that U18 performance means much, though Kanter rebounded noticeably better than Koufos—doubling his offensive rebounding rate. Koufos also shot a better percentage than Kanter inside the arc (2PT FG%) but has an overall lower FG% because he shot 2-22 from downtown.
Picking Kanter is a risk. We could either win big or get boom bitched. The problem I have with picking Knight is that we'd be picking a guy who'd very likely fall another 2 or 3 spots if we don't pick him. I don't like selecting a guy as high as 3 who the next team wouldn't select. I hope the Jazz select Kanter, and if they like Knight, then have a trade in place.