Udidthizz
Well-Known Member
Exum is. By a whole 87 days.Who’s Older?
Exum is. By a whole 87 days.Who’s Older?
Point is do we want to devote a roster spot to someone who might, in 5 years or so, turn into a 9 ppg bench player.
I thought he was horrific. Gawd awful defense and the Jazz offense just cratered with him on the floor. Yeah, he might have improved a bit as the year went on, but his early impressions just stick with me. He'll have to get leaps and bounds better to just be a rotation guy. Right now he's Jimmer without the shot.
Who’s Older?
Most fans draw conclusions on rookies way too soon....
season. Here is a list of every single rookie season between 7.0 and 8.0 PER. 226 players and the only non-busts here are Draymond and Zach Collins? Maybe you can find some more in there, I got tired of looking.
Well it’s relevant re their timelines to improve and current skill sets.exum is older by a few months but i don't see how this is relevant.
It's deja vu all over again!Interesting coincidence --
CJ Miles most points scored in an NBA game: 40.
Grayson Allen most points scored in an NBA game: 40.
On a semi-relevant note, does anyone remember the tv commercial with John Stockton and Frank Layden where Stockton played the piano? It was for some bank. Anyway, while John is playing a song, Frank says something like "I knew that kid had talent". I think it was still airing at the beginning of Stockton's 3rd season. He was backing up Ricky Green. He must have been 24 or 25. I just remember thinking it's a good thing he has other talents because after this much time (he still couldn't shoot) this is probably all he's going to be as an NBA player.John Stockton averaged 5.6 ppg his rookie year and 7.7 his sophmore year.
Steve Nash averaged 3.3 ppg his rookie season.
John Stockton averaged 5.6 ppg his rookie year and 7.7 his sophmore year.
Jimmy Butler averaged 2.6 ppg his rookie season.
Those would be better comparisons, as they were playing behind very good players their rookie season alla Grayson Allen.
All three put up better efficiency numbers than Allen. Nash and Stockton were significantly better. Maybe Grayson will get it turned around next season, but it's not looking good. RXum part 2.
Lmao.
Talking about efficiency numbers on 2.6 ppg or 3.3 ppg.
How can you not see how those numbers could be easily skewed?
Correlation doesn't mean causation. You shouldn't draw conclusions or an statistical finding because "x" number of players don't appear on a list based on a criteria selected by you. In that sense: I) why PER? a ii)Why a range of 7-8 III)has it been determined that PER is a reliable measurement for future rookie success? Iv) same for efficiency, Is it a good criteria? Is PER the best measurement for it? V) is the data on rookies reliable? Are you cleaning the data by ensuring you only have rookies that have a minimum number of minutes or field goals attempted (especially if you decide PER is the variable to use) vi) even then, data might be skewed bc of when those minutes/attempts happened.PER based on they
PER based on their season stats. Stockton played 1500 minutes his rookie season. Anyway, if the stats were so "skewed" like you say, then the list I sent you would have a lot of good players on it... It doesn't.
I thought it was a typical Jazz pick since he a white kid and I also thought wow what a wasted pick because didn't think his game would translate and he a punk too on top of it.I always thought the Jazz made a great pick last year with Allen. The kid has potential and a passion for the game, he'll be in the league for a long time.
All three put up better efficiency numbers than Allen. Nash and Stockton were significantly better. Maybe Grayson will get it turned around next season, but it's not looking good. RXum part 2.
... But seriously, this is getting ridiculous.