RUSH for Three says Owen
Well Kansas really wasn't muxh better then Syracuse this year. While Hakim and Wayne both played there butts off, there teams were disappointing.vadimivich said:Except Wayne Simien had a much better season across the board than Warrick. And lets not pretend that Syracuse was really all that good in any of his seasons outside of the "Carmello" year.
And what would Simien's stats been had he not played four or five games with a cast on his shooting hand?JuniorNoboa said:All the stats were close, with Hakim being slightly ahead in most of them.
Wayne did have a significant 2 more boards a game, partly because Hakim started playing alot of 3 once Edelin flamed out. It would have been closer, still a good edge for Simien.
Whoa! Don't just throw the argument out like that. Explore it. Let's do some objective analysis here, shall we?But there is no evidence to support a much better season for Simien or Kansas (Syracuse won some sort of conference title as well)
Good call.JuniorNoboa said:Efficiency is not a great measure. Let's close the gap.
1. Efficiency stat fails to adequately measure players who get to the line alot like Hakim and shoot a decent but not good ft%.
Sure...but doesn't this make Simien more valuable to his team?2. Efficiency overrates rebounders (i.e 4 and 5's) especially if they are the top option on a team. Of course Simien will have more rebounds then a bottom-wing player in the 2-3 zone.
Why don't you want to discuss any further? Talk about not wanting to investigate a topic...damn.I am not willing to concede that Simien was better then Warrick. I am willing to say they were the best two seniors. If you want to argue more, go ahead. I am no longer going to discuss the point.
And your second argument was this:JuniorNoboa said:A statistical argument cannot be made for Warrick, even if its close.
My original argument was to Vadimivich's argument that accross the board Simien was MUCH better then Warrick. I don't agree with the MUCH.