Because being a good basketball player is only about making 3 pointers and hitting free throws.
Are we the third best team in Iowa?
- Thread starter longtimer
- Start date
Because being a good basketball player is only about making 3 pointers and hitting free throws.
deanvogs
Well-Known Member
Only because Jordan is hitting a crazy low % of his 2 point shots. That won't continue forever and then the efficiencies will equal out.
The fact of the matter is Jordan has been every bit as good as Mike as a Fr. You are grasping at straws contend differently. If you want I could make you look stupid by quoting players efficiencies and trying to say that determines who is better. Doubt I have time today, but efficiency stats are just one piece, just like other stats.
If you think Jordan has been as good as Mike was as a freshman you don't understand the game of basketball. Sorry if that comes off as rude but I thought you were smarter than someone who just looks at ppg
deanvogs
Well-Known Member
I don't just look at PPG. Jordan does 2 things much, much better than Mike did as a Fr. He spaces the floor with his shooting ability. This helps the offense in ways that simply don't show up on a stat sheet. Jordan also passes the ball better than Mike did at a Fr. This is also a function of spreading the floor. If you don't understand the difference between 4.8 APG and 2.6 APG, I can't help you out. One is pretty poor for a PG and one is really pretty good for a PG.
They both struggle with silly Turnover, and they both weren't the best defenders. Both are good players, both are pretty good as Fr. For some idiotic reason you want to pretend one was awesome and one is horrible.
deanvogs
Well-Known Member
Hey Per man. Who is gonna be a better player. The Fr. who has the following PER stats, who is Mr. awesome, who is the 4/5* recruit, who had the better overall career:
26 PER
18 PER
13 PER
9 PER
I mean all you gotta do is look at the PER right, that tells you everything you need to know.....Welp who is the stud 4/5* kid, who had the best career???
Mike was more efficient offensively and way better defensively than Jordan as a freshman. Mike and Sapp were both good defenders right away but continue to bash Mike now that he's gone
I have no clue what you're referencing
deanvogs
Well-Known Member
I'm sorry, but you have to know literally nothing about basketball if you think Mike was way better than Jordan as a Fr. Sorry if that comes off as rude but I thought you were smarter than someone who just looks at PER
deanvogs
Well-Known Member
Who is the better play. I'll list off PER stats, that is all you seem to care about, tells us the whole story according to you.
InGoodCo
Well-Known Member
Saying that Jordan has played as well as Mike did as a Frosh is not bashing Mike. Saying that one can see his potential be as good or better than Mike is also not bashing Mike. We all loved Mike, Mike is gone - it's time to look forward and we're all pretty stoked about what we have, well not you, but the rest of us see some things in Jordan to be excited about and some believe he may end up being better overall. That's not bashing Mike even slightly. Mike was a great Hawk, I'd take 10 more of him, but he had his limits. So will Jordan - but so far, from what I've seen, his ceiling seems higher.
You didn't do a very good job listing off PER stats but please include offensive ratings as well if you do since I haven't mentioned PER since you made it clear it didn't fit your narrative
Making things up like saying Mike wasn't a good defender is bashing him. I haven't made anything up about Jordan
deanvogs
Well-Known Member
Are you talking about points produced per 100 possessions? Are you talking about offensive box +/-?
No matter what way you cut it, you are gonna look stupid. I'm going to use random players, Fr. ratings, and you aren't going to be able to tell me shat about any of them.
Offensive ratings, do you not understand them or do you just think a player putting up 8 ppg while shooting 30% from that floor is efficient?
deanvogs
Well-Known Member
No, it isn't. If that is what Jordan is at the end of the year, that isn't very efficient. Where did I ever say Jordan was some "efficient" scorer?
Do you consider 1.5 Assist to turnovers to be very efficient? Do you think shooting under 32% from 3 PT range effiecent?
No I don't consider those to be very efficient
InGoodCo
Well-Known Member
I think Mike was a good defender too as a Frosh - much better than Jordan. I think Jordan is much better offensively - the 2 even themselves out IMO. They have very comparable stats thus far 11 games in, Jordan better on O - Mike better on D. Jordan has had 2 games over 20 pts already, Mike had 0 all season long. Jordan looks to have the capability to take over a game and impact it offensively that Mike never really developed consistently. There's no bashing Mike here at all. No one is saying Mike is "Terrible" or a "miss" or citing him as the reason Iowa only made the NIT his Frosh year - but YOU on the other hand do that with Jordan.
Mike was better offensively as a freshman too but I agree knocking Mike's D is stupid and he's doing it because he's just trying to argue
deanvogs
Well-Known Member
Do you think whoever has the higher offensive rating is the better player, or do you think the highest PER tells that story. I want this to be about how YOU DETERMINE who is the better player.
Either way I'll be able to make you look stupid. I'd bet you have a better shot picking the better player if I just gave you his MPG, PPG, APG, RPB, and shooting %
InGoodCo
Well-Known Member
Jordan's #'s are all better through 11 games w/ the exception of shooting percentage - which I think will even out both from 2 and 3- we've went around and around on this - He also looks way more offensively capable with the eye test. i think they've have very similar starts to their career, but I will give you that I think Mike was better at D out of the gate.
