A large majority of rookies aren't good. I didn't realize I'd get negative feedback on that. I thought that was mostly understood. Yes, Ja and Zion are the only rookies that I would say were good in large roles. However, there were a few others that performed well as role players (Clarke, Hayes, Thybulle). KPJ had a promising rookie year, but no, I don't think he was a good player this year. Like most rookies, he was a net negative.
I'm not sure why you felt the need to be hostile here, so I'll just move past the bolded comment.
You don't need to bring up Barrett to me, I'm not a big fan.
The last statement you made I am in 100% agreement with. You should be encouraged! I am too! I have never said otherwise!
I think you are taking the wrong lesson from the stats you are looking at. If it doesn't predict anything, what good is it and why should you use it on rookies if most rookies are a net negative? Stats are meant to give us information, but in the case of rookies they tell us they are all bad. To me that is like saying a baby is bad at walking. Compared to an adult, yeah they are. What good does that do? Does it mean the baby will never walk?
Looking at full year stats for rookies tell you not much. If you look at stats on Garland's floater it looks like it sucks or is ok. But that doesn't tell the whole story because it greatly improved from horrible to real weapon for him over the course of the year. No way to tell that without looking at the stats over time.
We seem to get into this argument every day where you talk about how much stats hate rookies. I am well aware.
I guess I totally can't tell what your point is? "there's no guarantee Porter is an allstar". We all know that. You can take that argument to an absurd degree and say that the NBA may not be around by the time Porter is in his prime or the world may explode and you wouldn't be wrong, but I can't tell what it adds?
I said that about not paying attention because commentators and other fan bases like Porter more than you do. Why are all of these people and the articles below so far off about him?
USA today says he might be our best prospect
On a team with two recent top 10 picks, a man picked at the end of the first round has emerged as a potential star.
therookiewire.usatoday.com
"Cavaliers may have struck gold"
The Cleveland Cavaliers struck gold when they traded for the draft rights to Kevin Porter Jr. Here is an analysis of his incredible potential.
hoopshabit.com
IS KPJ the most underrated prospect
RJ Barrett, Zion Williamson, and Cam Reddish. The three Duke freshman star headline the 2019 draft class, but the rest of the playing field is wide open. In what is becoming a hard to predict draft class, USC basketball’s Kevin Porter Jr. has been making waves for his stellar play thus...
www.newsbreak.com
Voted steal of the draft by his peers before the season.
KPJ is 21stin the league in drawing fouls at the rim.
"On attempts 0-3 feet out, KPJ has hit
71.8 percent of those on a frequency of 29.5 percent" That's better percentage than Lebron his rookie year.
We all know the stats aren't all in and there is no guarantee that he is going to be an allstar, but you can't say there is no hint of him being elite.
He had a 30 pts 8 rebounds 3 steals and 3 assists in that win over Miami. Who has put up such stats before the age of 22 since 2000? The only 2 non-multiple allstars to do it of which there are 47 are Aaron Gordon and Quentin Richardson. Lebron shows up on that list a bunch. Only 2 guys did it before 20 like KPJ did. Lebron and Kevin Durant. That's it.
You can pretend our enthusiasm is not based on anything, but the Cavs spent a lot of money on him, other teams are jealous, and the fans are excited. I am not sure you are the one being realistic and we are the ones that aren't.