HOW DO YOU DETREMINE HOW GOOD A PLAYER IS
i wonder about his because so many people say how good one player is but say another player isnt as good even if he is putting up better stats because hes on a worst team or that a player whos putting up worst stats on a much better team isnt as good because of the talent the player has around him. i thought about this because my uncles used to say how good some player who i cant rmeber now would be if he had the talent that jordan had around him( thats whole other topic)..i see how some people say the player on the worst team is better because he puts up better numbers for one guy but for another who is on a team just as bad or worst whos doing the same thing isnt that good because his team isnt that good. pass examples are players like
is kevin martin a good player even thought he puts up great numbers on a bad team or is he not that good because of it?
is rondo not that good because he doesnt put up the same amount of numbers another player or not as good because of the talent around him?
how can you truthfully judge how good a player is? does a player who puts up good numbers on a good team do it because of who he has around him or does he put up good numbers despite who he has around him? scottie pippen put up good numbers but had jordan on his team. did he do because of jordan or inspite of playing with jordan?
and what sense does it make to down what one player is doing on a bad team but for another whos doing just as well on a bad team we say how good that player is?...im curious on what ever ones take on this because i see how people use one rule for one player they like but not for a player they dont like as much
i've brought this up before. Stats matter and how good the team is matters. But I'll repeat that anyone can read a boxscore and see 2>1, it takes knowledgable fans who watch the games to really see how good a player is and how much he impacts a game.
liperz 22 hit the head on the coffin!!!!! i was bout to say the same thing, its all bout how a player impacts a game. rondo is real good, cuz he impacts a game, martin is real good, cuz even on a shit team, he still can impact his team, and get his pts. its actually harder to get more pts on a bad team cuz the d will eye u the most
yeah, i don't know if he is an all-star, but KMart is a very good player and has a great impact. He doesn't get a lot of plays drawn for him and he still ends up with 25 points by getting open on the break and getting to the line. He would put up numbers on even a good team not just a a bad team.
interesting interesting. nso is a player who does that on a bad team better then a player who doesnt do as much on a good team since lets say lmart has a bulls eye on him while the player on the other team has other good players to help him out??.. and wouldnt that make kmart more of a allstar since he has a bulls eye on him?....i havent given my opinion im just gonna ask each person question to find out how they view things
I agree with Llperez22 100%.
i try not to talk about players that i will be biased to. i will tell you about players or teams that i don't care about either way.
Can you re-write that? I don't understand what you're asking.
yeah i kinda didnt understand what i was saying after i reread it..lol..what i was saying is when i ask someone why they said what they said or ask another question after they give there opinion im not asking because i dissagree or agree with them im asking just to have them explain there answers.