**NCAA Basketball Thread**

[robthomas]

Originally Posted by UNC41

Oakland is a team that is physically and athletically on a different level UNC. If your opinion is based on that, I can see why you think that.

This doesn't matter because:

Originally Posted by whygohome?

Carolina is absolutely destroying Oakland. They are playing fantastic but to be fair oakland is awful. they look like they've never played together. UNC is just doing whatever they want. just judging by how they are looking, keeping in mind how bad their opponent is, while missing their 2nd best player, i think UNC is a legit top 5 team.

[whygohome?]

James McAdoo 2012-2013: 14.4 ppg, 7.3 rpg, 1.1 apg, 44% from the floor

PJ Hairston 2012-2013: 14.6 ppg, 4.3 rpg, 1.4 apg, 43% from the floor, currently not playing because of rules violations

Their stats are very close. McAdoo turns it over more. I happen to like his style of play, and he hasn't hurt his team, repeatedly, off the court. So please tell me why that is so ridiculous of me to think that.

[robthomas]

Originally Posted by whygohome?

James McAdoo 2012-2013: 14.4 ppg, 7.3 rpg, 1.1 apg, 44% from the floor

PJ Hairston 2012-2013: 14.6 ppg, 4.3 rpg, 1.4 apg, 43% from the floor, currently not playing because of rules violations

Their stats are very close. McAdoo turns it over more. I happen to like his style of play, and he hasn't hurt his team, repeatedly, off the court. So please tell me why that is so ridiculous of me to think that.

You are free to like anyone and any style that you please - it isn't ridiculous. But citing little more than personal style preferences, assumptions of how stupid a player is, and your respect for players to support the claim that McAdoo is better by a good margin is ridiculous.

[whygohome?]

Maybe I cited those things because statistically there's barely any difference between them? Since what I said was ridiculous, please explain in your own words why Hairston is the better player using empirical data and not inferences based on opinion because that's not allowed.

[whygohome?]

What I said about his intelligence and my respect for him was just one part of my overall view of the guy. Once again, my main point was that I like McAdoo's style of play more. I don't really need more than that, I shouldn't have to prove why I think he's a better player, and I've never had this argument with anyone about a player before, especially when we are talking about 2 players with such comparable statistics. At the end of the day, its all opinion unless someone's statistics are just considerably superior and that's not the case here so I'm really curious as to what your criteria is since you've done nothing but criticize mine and are keeping yours a secret apparently.

[robthomas]

Originally Posted by whygohome?

Maybe I cited those things because statistically there's barely any difference between them? Since what I said was ridiculous, please explain in your own words why Hairston is the better player using empirical data and not inferences based on opinion because that's not allowed.

1) Are you reversing the "mcadoo is better by a good margin" stance?.
2) It isn't that opinions aren't allowed - that's absurd. It's the numerous opinions that aren't really related to who is the better basketball player, that's all.

[whygohome?]

Nope, i personally think McAdoo is a better overall player by a wide margin because i take into account off the court issues when they affect the rest of the team and his performance on the court (i.e. not playing). And again, since my numerous opinions aren't relevant, and their stats are nearly identical except for turnovers, i'd love to hear how you decide Hairston is superior. Please enlighten me so I can stop with my silly reasons and decide which players I think are better the right way.

[robthomas]

Originally Posted by whygohome?

I'm really curious as to what your criteria is since you've done nothing but criticize mine and are keeping yours a secret apparently.

I'll provide for you my previous comments, as you obviously do not work for the NSA:

Originally Posted by robthomas

I feel (primarily based last year's performance), Hairston could very well be the best player on this team. McAdoo is still not as polished and too volatile as a player. Hairston is more likely to dominate his defender and take control of a game. They're both good players and I hope PJ will be back soon - both on the court at the same time will help each other with spacing immensely.

Originally Posted by robthomas

PJ was a beast in the 2nd half of the season when Roy decided to go small. That despite having to compete with Bullock for shots on the perimeter. He has a great ability to shoot and penetrate. I used to feel that he was a bit selfish with shot selection but that thought went away after he got into the starting rotation last year and was a major contributor. McAdoo is is too turnover prone. This problem is exacerbated because McAdoo isn't a traditional post player. I like both players a lot but think Hairston might just be the better player.

Originally Posted by robthomas

This doesn't explain his constant turnovers in transition and on the wing. Throughout the summer Roy constantly mentioned the team's need for McAdoo to limit turnovers and play in control. Also, he'll always be a post player, and will more than likely be at the "4" position 90% of the time he's on the court.

Originally Posted by whygohome?

Nope, i personally think McAdoo is a better overall player by a wide margin because i take into account off the court issues when they affect the rest of the team and his performance on the court (i.e. not playing). And again, since my numerous opinions aren't relevant, and their stats are nearly identical except for turnovers, i'd love to hear how you decide Hairston is superior. Please enlighten me so I can stop with my silly reasons and decide which players I think are better the right way.

Again, the question was regarding how you came to the conclusion that "McAdoo is a better overall player by a wide margin". Again, as stated previously, we obviously have different criteria on how we compare players - you place weight on subjectivity, unfounded assumptions, brash opinions, and personal feelings whereas I try not to. Moreover, I never claimed PJ to be a far better player than JMM (hence the "Hairston could very well be the best player on this team" comment).

[whygohome?]

Ignoring your own comments that were opinions (mcadoo too volatile, not as polished, hairston more likely to dominate, somehow you can be subjective but I can't be right?) let's break this down:

"Hairston has a great ability to shoot" Hairston shot 44% from the floor, 1% higher than McAdoo, Being that Hairston is a jump shooter and not a post player, he shot 39% from 3. Not great.
"McAdoo is too turnover prone" McAdoo averaged ONE more turnover per game than Hairston.

I said that Hairston's off the court issues affected his team and that his violations, well documented in the press, were stupid and made me lose respect for him. How is that unfounded? Brash, sure, but I didn't just decide out of nowhere that Hairston made bad decisions and adversely affected his team. That is an objective fact. You're a hypocrite, you include opinions and subjective comments in your own posts and zero statistics, then tell me that my reasoning is based on unfounded personal feelings. You are contradicting yourself, and none of your statements disagreeing with me can be backed up by statistics yet you act like what you said was 100% fact and what I said was conjecture. Strictly as basketball players, which is all you take into account, their stats suggest they are extremely similar in ability and production at their respective positions. Taking into account being a good teammate and following teams rules (which YOU DONT THINK MATTERS, I get it, but I DO) I am saying that McAdoo is a better all around player by a wide margin.

Read this slowly: What you do off the court does factor into what kind of player you are when it affects your team negatively. When you do something that gets you suspended, it lowers your value as a player cause you aren't....fucking....playing.

[robthomas]

Originally Posted by whygohome?

Ignoring your own comments that were opinions (mcadoo too volatile, not as polished, hairston more likely to dominate, somehow you can be subjective but I can't be right?)

As I said before:

Originally Posted by robthomas

It isn't that opinions aren't allowed - that's absurd. It's the numerous opinions that aren't really related to who is the better basketball player

Originally Posted by whygohome?

"Hairston has a great ability to shoot" Hairston shot 44% from the floor, 1% higher than McAdoo, Being that Hairston is a jump shooter and not a post player, he shot 39% from 3. Not great.
"McAdoo is too turnover prone" McAdoo averaged ONE more turnover per game than Hairston.

~Overall, McAdoo (as expected) had a higher fg%, not sure where your data came from.
~JJ Redick shot 39.9% & 39.5% from beyond the arc his first two years at dook. I'm not comparing PJ to Redick, but if PJ shot 39.6% throughout the year (and possibly higher towards the end of the season). He was third in the conference in three-pointers (second-most in a season by a Tar Heel) and fifth in three-point percentage so, I'd say that was a good year shooting from beyond the arc.
~McAdoo is a post player with more turnovers than a guard. Again, even Roy Williams stated (this preseason) that McAdoo playing under control and not turning the ball over is a key for the team.
~Anyone who watched UNC last year knows how strong PJ was after the lineup change and he got the big boost in minutes: Starting with the 1st dook game onwards, PJ averaged 18ppg and 0.846 t.o. while McAdoo saw 13.5ppg and 2.54 t.o. (I will say it's disingenuous to compare guards/wings like this but it does show how strong PJ came on at the end of the year in addition to McAdoo's issue with turnovers).

Originally Posted by whygohome?

I said that Hairston's off the court issues affected his team and that his violations, well documented in the press, were stupid and made me lose respect for him. How is that unfounded?

Actually, in any substantive way, the bold is unfounded right now (sure, technically he affected their play today but not in a way that really matters).

Originally Posted by whygohome?

Brash, sure, but I didn't just decide out of nowhere that Hairston made bad decisions and adversely affected his team. That is an objective fact. You're a hypocrite, you include opinions and subjective comments in your own posts and zero statistics, then tell me that my reasoning is based on unfounded personal feelings.

Again, it is that you make bring up completely subjective issues that don't really matter regarding who is the better player as your basis. Not that subjectivity was involved.

Originally Posted by whygohome?

Strictly as basketball players, which is all you take into account, their stats suggest they are extremely similar in ability and production at their respective positions.

Precisely. Which is why on numerous occasions I said the same:

Originally Posted by robthomas

one of which is arguably their best player.

Originally Posted by robthomas

I like both players a lot but think Hairston might just be the better player.

Originally Posted by robthomas

Hairston could very well be the best player on this team.

I never said PJ was a better by a wide margin, just that McAdoo isn't better by a wide margin.

Originally Posted by whygohome?

Read this slowly: What you do off the court does factor into what kind of player you are when it affects your team negatively. When you do something that gets you suspended, it lowers your value as a player cause you aren't....fucking....playing.

I'm still in the process of (slowly) reading this, I'll reply when I'm....fucking...... finished.

[SmoothD41]

IU is so damn athletic and talented, but so raw. They're going to make me want to pull my hair out at times this year, but I'm really excited to watch them grow. They have a lot of work to do.

[dmbbearcat]

The last 2+ pages of this thread are pretty horrible. Lots of arguing over seemingly nothing. Must be hoops season!

[seekupig]

Originally Posted by dmbbearcat

The last 2+ pages of this thread are pretty horrible. Lots of arguing over seemingly nothing. Must be hoops season!

No shit. Quickly reminded me of why I took a break from ants.

[Rodey]

Three posts without arguing over McAdoo. Are we officially back to normal?

[kydmb99]

Tuesday night is going to be epic.

[dmbbearcat]

I forgot how early in the season those games are.

[kydmb99]

Originally Posted by dmbbearcat

I forgot how early in the season those games are.

Yeah, I think MSU is easily the most polished of the 4, but I can't wait to see all of the young talent on a big stage.

[dmbbearcat]

Predictions on who wins each game? I think UK is more talented than MSU, but as you said they are the most polished of the four teams right now. Wiggins v. Parker should be fun. The supporting cast on each team needs to step up.

[Rodey]

Hard to say, without seeing any of the other teams yet. Duke looked really, really sharp against a Davidson team that isn't terrible. Hood and Parker are going to be really tough for teams to shutdown. They both give Duke a dynamic they haven't had in years in that they can score in so many different ways. Quinn Cook will still be the wild card this year. If he's inconsistent, Duke will hit some rough spots. Interior defense will be another weakness. Rebounding should be okay, I think. Hood and Parker both crash the boards real well for wings.

Very excited or the Kansas game.

[whygohome?]

Yeah guys sorry for the pissing contest. That's what I get for trying to discuss UNC in a positive way, believe me it won't happen again

[dmbbearcat]

We don't really expect positivity from you when it's not UK being discussed

[whygohome?]

Come on man look at what i was saying before that bullshit started. I was being very positive and contributing without saying a word abut UK. I know you're joking but that argument was forced down my throat after I repeatedly tried to let it go. I have matchbox on ignore its over and done with

[dmbbearcat]

Indeed, I was joking.

[UNC41]

I just hope McAdoo is as good as wgh thinks he is. That would be a huge improvement from last year and necessary for the Heels to be competitive. Britt, Meeks and Tokoto have all impressed early on, and if PJ comes back, I might finally start to buy into this team. I think Paige breaks out into an All-ACC player.

[seekupig]

These handchecking rules are terrible. Games are going to last forever. 58 fouls called in the KU game last night. No flow whatsoever. Interested to see what happens on Tuesday.

[Rodey]

They're pretty dumb.

[whygohome?]

Absolutely agree those hand checking calls are so unecessary

[Rodey]

Honestly, they should have allowed another foul if they were going to change the rules and be so adamant about enforcing them. There are going to be so many cheap fouls picked up throughout the season.

[seekupig]

Originally Posted by Rodey

Honestly, they should have allowed another foul if they were going to change the rules and be so adamant about enforcing them. There are going to be so many cheap fouls picked up throughout the season.

Teams with deep rotations have the advantage. If I'm Bill Self I'm running nothing but ISO plays for Wiggins or Selden on every possession. Both unguardable if new rule is called by the book.

[robthomas]

Originally Posted by UNC41

I just hope McAdoo is as good as wgh thinks he is. That would be a huge improvement from last year and necessary for the Heels to be competitive. Britt, Meeks and Tokoto have all impressed early on, and if PJ comes back, I might finally start to buy into this team. I think Paige breaks out into an All-ACC player.

I think if PJ & Leslie return, we could see a very similar 1-2 outside punch like with Bullock/PJ last year. Leslie isn't as good as Reggie but he could be a serious second option threat from outside along with Marcus especially if McAdoo and Meeks force teams to respect the interior. Balance is key.