re: Brandon Ingram shows Lakers he isn't the same player they traded

I promise you I read the link you posted before. I do not agree with the basis of it. It is too constricted and small of a sample size. I can't be any more clear. a huge number of "all stars" are many time repeaters. They dominate the pool. You took that and threw Ingram into that group, then stated that is his new normal. This is a guy that almost had to medically retire at 21. But now he is expected to peak at 27 and play until 35. You are stating that is normal.

Further, if he is improving until 27, where exactly are you projecting him? 40/8/8? He can only get his numbers so high. He has never played on a winning team or been to the playoffs. But you are touting him for Superstardom? Where does he go from here?

quote:

---

I promise you I read the link you posted before. I do not agree with the basis of it. It is too constricted and small of a sample size. I can't be any more clear. a huge number of "all stars" are many time repeaters. They dominate the pool.

---

Explain to me how the sample size is too small? What about that construction is more problematic than drawing analysis from a pool of data highly skewed by scrubs? You keep wanting to dismiss my criteria but refuse to give me a reason that doesn’t involve falsely characterizing the criteria.

And what are you talking about? If you make an appearance at an all star game you get your name and data counted. By rough count that would be 450 unique individual players since 1951.You don’t get counted multiple times for multiple appearances. And amongst those players the average career for players that make an all star game is 12 seasons. And we can reasonably deduce that a player today who appears in an all star game likely has a slightly longer than that career on average because the data pool contains decades of data when players couldn’t come out to the pros as early.

quote:

---

This is a guy that almost had to medically retire at 21. But now he is expected to peak at 27 and play until 35. You are stating that is normal.

---

He would have to retire if: it was deemed a recurring issue and not a one off event. It was in fact determined a one off event and not a recurring issue so it poses no real heightened risk to shortening his career at this point. Furthermore that would have nothing to do with determining his estimated peak when that number is derived from looking at the past performances of the league.

quote:

---

Further, if he is improving until 27, where exactly are you projecting him? 40/8/8? He can only get his numbers so high. He has never played on a winning team or been to the playoffs. But you are touting him for Superstardom? Where does he go from here?

---

Improving as a player doesn’t just involve your basic counting stats: defense, efficiency, diversification of skillset are all ways a player can improve year over year while not drastically increasing his counting stats. That said, it doesn’t matter, this is a conversation derived by looking at what the average career growth and decline looks like and Ingram doesn’t appear to be some outlier to that. I personally think 28-30ppg and 7 and 7 is a pretty doable stat line while playing above average defense and having further diversified his scoring and facilitation efficiency. And more importantly, counter to your assertion just a week ago, there is not evidence Ingram has peaked.

quote:

---

is pretty inconsistent with his shot. Pure iso player at this point.

---

none of this is true

Blame david griffen, not ingram

Swear you are a moron troll

Good luck arguing with bias fans with homer goggles on. These same fans on this board have defended every single move dell demps made and every coaching hire/fire including firing Monty.

quote:

---

You read an article, which pulled data from a "study", and used it to set a new standard. It is using specific criteria to identify particular players. How would that be common knowledge? Why would that be the default?

---

You made several dumb comments and continue to defend said dumb comments, that a players average career is only 4 years, Ingram will be out of the league by 30, and that an NBA player’s peak is at age 24 and are in decline around 25-26. With no real development to be realized with this group.

I called bullshite and showed the receipts(you also tried to assert we were an old team but seem to have at least given up on defending that nonsense)

There is nothing invalid with that criteria. I’ve asked you multiple times to try and either provide other supporting data or explain to me why your desire to use calculations from raw data and not properly smoothed data such as this would be superior.

You have been unable to do either/ now you are seemingly attempting to dismiss those studies while not actually providing 1.) a reason why we should 2.) Any sort of defensible alternative research that would provide better results 3.) anything that backs up what you have asserted or defended for weeks now.

Seriously, how hard is it to just admit it you were wrong???

quote:

---

But the article you posted put the peak at 27 based on the average age of All Stars each year.

---

FYI, those studies about peak output looked at ALL players. I personally did the calculation for career length by gathering BBall Reference data on players that appeared in an all star game, removing dual occurrences and than averaging the total number of seasons they played. Which was a little over 12 seasons.

quote:

---

The average NBA career less than 5 years

---

Only if you look at raw data that doesn’t filter out scrubs and journeyman bouncing in and out of the league, so again, it is simply WRONG to apply that to Ingram. A player that doesn’t fit that criteria.

quote:

---

The peak of player performance is also about 25.

---

No it is not. Both studies I showed you prove otherwise and they look at ALL NBA players, not just all stars. You haven’t provided anything to support this or your earlier claim that peak player performance was 24.


Listen, you made a bunch of asinine comments and have continued to waste my time having to correct you over and over again over the course of weeks and are surprised I’ve gotten fed up?

All star caliber players have an average career length of 12 seasons(longer if you exclude 50-70’s when players came out later), prime/peak for players is 26-28, most all star caliber players play into their 30’s. A players physical peak is not 24 and his decline is not 25-26. We are not an old team and Ingram’s growth from last to this season suggests he is not tapped out. To make such a statement would require observing an overall stagnation, which we haven’t seen.

quote:

---

You stfu. You’re the dude that was praising the Asik trade. You have zero credibility on this board.

---

Would love your triggered little bitch arse troll body to try and find any evidence of that.

Why don’t you go talk shite to some more posters than pussy out you bitchmade keyboard warrior