Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Everything WNBA

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • DanH
    replied
    Primer wrote: View Post

    Yeah, I'm done. Let's see if anyone else agrees with you that the Fever are just as good without Clark as they are with her.
    Last little while, they aren't. Earlier in the season, they absolutely were, and that exact point was brought up in several rookie ranking type articles discussing the ROY race.

    Leave a comment:


  • Primer
    replied
    DanH wrote: View Post

    Without Clark the Fever are once again the worst team in the league? Her absence would transport them back a couple of seasons? They were third from the bottom last year. They had a .325 record in 2023. This year they have a .423 record. Yeah, LeBron James level impact there.

    Meanwhile the Sky lost a recent finals MVP winner and added Reese and have essentially the same record they had last year (.417 vs .450).
    Yeah, I'm done. Let's see if anyone else agrees with you that the Fever are just as good without Clark as they are with her.

    Leave a comment:


  • DanH
    replied
    Primer wrote: View Post

    This is when I'm done with the conversation. Your obsession with stats makes you sound so freaking delusional. Without Clark the Fever are once again the worst team in the league without a doubt.
    Without Clark the Fever are once again the worst team in the league? Her absence would transport them back a couple of seasons? They were third from the bottom last year. They had a .325 record in 2023. This year they have a .423 record. Yeah, LeBron James level impact there.

    Meanwhile the Sky lost a recent finals MVP winner and added Reese and have essentially the same record they had last year (.417 vs .450).

    Leave a comment:


  • Primer
    replied
    DanH wrote: View Post

    I'm suggesting that for much of the season, her team was pretty much as good with her on the floor as off (this is not an opinion, it is a number - heck on the season still her team's net rating with her is practically identical to their net rating when she sits), which is not the case for Reese. Lately Clark has been way better - and has barely even sat because she's been so good - but the point is that's a lately thing, not an early season thing. Her play earlier on is not what it has been lately.

    I don't understand how "at this point Clark is playing so well that all she has to do is stay doing the exact same thing and the award is hers" is some sort of weird take. Or how "Clark playing significantly worse than she's playing now would make the debate more interesting" is some sort of crazy stance to take.
    This is when I'm done with the conversation. Your obsession with stats makes you sound so freaking delusional. Without Clark the Fever are once again the worst team in the league without a doubt. Stats are extremely limited in telling the full story but you hold them as gospel to the point you say absurd things like the fever are just as good without Clark as they are with her. That should make you think twice but nope, never does.
    Last edited by Primer; Yesterday, 01:41 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • DanH
    replied
    Primer wrote: View Post

    Are you suggesting Clark isn't the biggest win driver for her team?
    I'm suggesting that for much of the season, her team was pretty much as good with her on the floor as off (this is not an opinion, it is a number - heck on the season still her team's net rating with her is practically identical to their net rating when she sits), which is not the case for Reese. Lately Clark has been way better - and has barely even sat because she's been so good - but the point is that's a lately thing, not an early season thing. Her play earlier on is not what it has been lately.

    I don't understand how "at this point Clark is playing so well that all she has to do is stay doing the exact same thing and the award is hers" is some sort of weird take. Or how "Clark playing significantly worse than she's playing now would make the debate more interesting" is some sort of crazy stance to take.

    Leave a comment:


  • Primer
    replied
    DanH wrote: View Post

    She is also the biggest win driver for her team, she has great on/off splits, which is so rare for a rookie. Just a winning player.

    Again, we've looked at the rebounding and inefficiency several times to try to contextualize that, you ignoring that doesn't mean no one else can see the value she brings.
    Are you suggesting Clark isn't the biggest win driver for her team?

    Leave a comment:


  • DanH
    replied
    Primer wrote: View Post

    Reese just gets lots of rebounds, many from her own embarrassingly bad misses. She's incredibly inefficient for a big. The narrative that it was close was driven by something not performance related, is the nicest way I can put it.
    She is also the biggest win driver for her team, she has great on/off splits, which is so rare for a rookie. Just a winning player.

    Again, we've looked at the rebounding and inefficiency several times to try to contextualize that, you ignoring that doesn't mean no one else can see the value she brings.

    Leave a comment:


  • Primer
    replied
    DanH wrote: View Post

    See that's silly. She misses the rest of the season and she's ROY? I doubt it.

    Her early season form was not superior to Reese by any realistic measure. Her recent form has been great. If she reverts to her early season form she opens herself up to the debate continuing, and she'd be banking on this one good stretch to carry her argument.

    You may never have thought it was close but everyone else did.
    Reese just gets lots of rebounds, many from her own embarrassingly bad misses. She's incredibly inefficient for a big. The narrative that it was close was driven by something not performance related, is the nicest way I can put it.

    Leave a comment:


  • DanH
    replied
    Primer wrote: View Post

    I think she could not play another game and she's still ROY. I also think it's ludicrous to suggest she would score 1 point per game. Her ealry season form was still superior to Reese. I never thought it was close and now it's over.
    See that's silly. She misses the rest of the season and she's ROY? I doubt it.

    Her early season form was not superior to Reese by any realistic measure. Her recent form has been great. If she reverts to her early season form she opens herself up to the debate continuing, and she'd be banking on this one good stretch to carry her argument.

    You may never have thought it was close but everyone else did.

    Leave a comment:


  • Primer
    replied
    DanH wrote: View Post

    Hyperbole is exaggeration. I'm not doing that, I'm asking a literal question. What if indeed?

    If Angel scored 50 PPG for the rest of the season she would win the ROY and MVP. I think we can agree on that. Meaning we also agree that the way the rest of the season plays out matters.

    I think we also both agree that Clark is likely to continue her excellent play of late and she should currently be considered the favourite for winning the award based on her recent play. But we should also both be reasonable enough to accept that the way she actually plays from here on out matters, right?
    I think she could not play another game and she's still ROY. I also think it's ludicrous to suggest she would score 1 point per game. Her ealry season form was still superior to Reese. I never thought it was close and now it's over.

    Leave a comment:


  • DanH
    replied
    Primer wrote: View Post

    It's the definition of hyperbole.

    What if she scores 0 points and just moonwalks around the court the whole time? Would she still win?

    What if Angel Reese scores 50 ppg the rest of the season?

    Lets throw out more ridiculous what if suggestions, very helpful.
    Hyperbole is exaggeration. I'm not doing that, I'm asking a literal question. What if indeed?

    If Angel scored 50 PPG for the rest of the season she would win the ROY and MVP. I think we can agree on that. Meaning we also agree that the way the rest of the season plays out matters.

    I think we also both agree that Clark is likely to continue her excellent play of late and she should currently be considered the favourite for winning the award based on her recent play. But we should also both be reasonable enough to accept that the way she actually plays from here on out matters, right?

    Leave a comment:


  • Primer
    replied
    DanH wrote: View Post

    It’s not hyperbole. I’m asking a literal question. If she did, she still wins?

    The answer is no. Meaning you think whether she wins depends on how she plays the rest of the way. Meaning my statement that if she keeps playing well she should win is exactly the situation. If she even reverts to her early season play her case is certainly not rock solid. But I don’t expect that to happen. It’s just not impossible. Hence: if she keeps up her recent play, it’s her award.
    It's the definition of hyperbole.

    What if she scores 0 points and just moonwalks around the court the whole time? Would she still win?

    What if Angel Reese scores 50 ppg the rest of the season?

    Lets throw out more ridiculous what if suggestions, very helpful.

    Leave a comment:


  • DanH
    replied
    Primer wrote: View Post

    When you have to use insane hyperbole to defend your argument you should just concede.
    It’s not hyperbole. I’m asking a literal question. If she did, she still wins?

    The answer is no. Meaning you think whether she wins depends on how she plays the rest of the way. Meaning my statement that if she keeps playing well she should win is exactly the situation. If she even reverts to her early season play her case is certainly not rock solid. But I don’t expect that to happen. It’s just not impossible. Hence: if she keeps up her recent play, it’s her award.

    Leave a comment:


  • Primer
    replied
    DanH wrote: View Post

    OK, so Clark averages 1 PPG the rest of the season, she should win ROY?

    Silly. What on earth could possibly be wrong with saying that she still needs to keep playing well to win the award? Saying basically anything else is just exposing a bias, no?

    If your point is of course she will keep playing like this, then you should have no issue with the condition!
    When you have to use insane hyperbole to defend your argument you should just concede.

    Leave a comment:


  • DanH
    replied
    Primer wrote: View Post

    Haha, he still won't concede the ROY race to Caitlin.
    OK, so Clark averages 1 PPG the rest of the season, she should win ROY?

    Silly. What on earth could possibly be wrong with saying that she still needs to keep playing well to win the award? Saying basically anything else is just exposing a bias, no?

    If your point is of course she will keep playing like this, then you should have no issue with the condition!

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X