So your telling me that only 4 people in the history have had a quadruple double and that is not special!?
Since Alvin Roberston and Nate Thurmond got quadruple doubles, I would say they were good, but not great.
Are you pullin' my leg? Last time I checked, 20 ppg is pretty great....while 5 rebounds a game is pretty good for a guy that was playing PG....and now that he is SG, 5 assists per game is pretty much above average. When you are getting props from Chris Paul, Jerry Sloan, and leading your team back from 35 pt deficits...you're pretty good unless I'm missing something Too bad those are only rookie numbers on a shitty team, guess they don't mean anything
I'm not disagreeing with any of those assessments. I'm just asking whether he's historically great, as suggested by the rarity of 20/5/5. I never said he isn't good or even very good.
No, it doesn't. Think. Rare and Special are two different thoughts. Some fans, most especially baseball fans are so caught up in numbers that they often celebrate rare. In Evan's case, he is having a rare statistical season. He is most definately NOT having a Special rookie season. A very good one. Rookie of the Year good in a year that there are no other rookies having an excellent rookie campaign. Best of the Year is not Special. Players who had Special rookie seasons include: Chris Paul Tim Duncan Chris Webber Shaq Hakeem David Robinson (check out his rookie numbers. They are INSANE!) http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/r/robinda01.html Michael Jordan (same, same) http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jordami01.html Larry Bird Magic Kareem and catch this murderer's row of Special rookies three years running back in the 50's: Elgin Baylor, then Wilt Chamberlin, then Oscar Robertson By the way, LeBron had a decent rookie season, excellent considering his age, but not qualifying as Special, despite the whole 20-5-5 thing, which is nothing more than coincidental noise. There are other modern era rookies that had better rookie season's than Evans that fell short of special: Pau Gasol, Elton Brand, Vince Carter, Steve Francis, Grant Hill (19.9! - 6.4 - 5.0), Larry Johnson, Penny Hardaway, Alonzo Mourning, Charles Barkley. No, sorry, Evan's rookie season is far from Special.
If he's even leading Stephen Curry it's by a hair. I've followed both pretty close as they're on my fantasy squad... Steph has really come on of late. Dude is a solid playmaker/floor general with a great stroke. http://www.basketball-reference.com...m=0&p1=evansty01&y1=2010&p2=curryst01&y2=2010 STOMP
I'd have to agree. He's having a Brandon Roy level rookie season when you look at advanced stats. Very good, yes. We knew Roy was a find, but it didn't seem likely he would make the jump to a 22-24 PER level player by his third and fourth year, considering his age. Given Evans's age (20), he looks extremely promising, a big surprise and a great candidate for ROY, but let's not get carried away with putting him with Lebron and Oscar, saying only three players have averaged this and that. I've always found those stats pretty misleading, as you can set the levels right at said player's averages in every category and narrow the list down, while there could be lots of players who averaged 20/6/4, 18/8/3, 22/10/2 etc.
Well, just what the hell is 'special' and what is rare' anyway? From Webster's Dictionary: 1 : distinguished by some unusual quality; especially : being in some way superior <our special blend> 2 : held in particular esteem <a special friend> 3 a : readily distinguishable from others of the same category : unique <they set it apart as a special day of thanksgiving> b : of, relating to, or constituting a species : specific 4 : being other than the usual : additional, extra 5 : designed for a particular purpose or occasion Show me the part where being the third rookie in league history to do that is not special
You guys are losers. This is all semantics at this point. He's doing really well his rookie year, really not that difficult to understand.
The point of "not necessarily" is that the special part is open to interpretation/definition, while the rare part is pretty cut and dry.
Because 20-5-5 is a statistical oddity that only very loosly is coorelated to a high level of production, game impact and team victories. It IS a bar that indicates you are seeing a very good rookie year. But, we ALREADY KNOW THAT. This observation told us NOTHING NEW. Why 20-5-5? Why not 18-12-3? Why not 24-4-4? Why not 15-3-10? Why not 12-12-2-3? Because it (20-5-5) is just made up silliness? Where is the accounting for pace, minutes role on team, defense and team victories? Is IS NOT a bar that can tell you that rookie had an all-time great - ie Special season. Therefore, this stat is worse than worthless trivia. It is deceptive, implying that Evans is having a much better season than he really is. It tries to equate a pretty ho-hum rookie of the year level season into an all-time great one. Fuck that. As you might imagine I have a pet peeve about observations in sports that are little more than numerical cooincidence; worthless trivia. For some odd reason sports announcers LOVE this shit. I find it assinine. "The Celtics haven't won a road game in the Pacific Time Zone on Sundays on National Television since 1988." I say a pox on coincidence trivia.
You guys are tools! I was just sayin' the kid is having an amazing year and you guys are actually questioning his accomplishments. Lock this thread............. please.
I have to agree with Masbee...the fact that Evans is meeting a statistical mark that A. is not remarkably productive (merely quite productive) and B. only several players have ever met is just a celebration of arbitrariness. It's akin to being more impressed by "hitting for the cycle" than by hitting two home runs and a two doubles. The cycle may be rarer...the second line is more impressive. Is 20-5-5 more impressive than 25-7-4? The second one doesn't qualify for the "James/Jordan/Robertson" club, but is just more impressive and productive.
Yes, I am a tool. I have been impressed by Evans this year. He has exceeded all my expectations and I am thrilled for the hapless Sacramento fans. In fact, I am planning to attend a few Kings games (assuming they stay in Sacramento) in the next couple of years just so I can watch this kid play. I love his game. You just have to understand that us internet tools get all twisted in a knot when players like Evans are compared to the GOAT and the Big O. I am sorry, but it rubs the wrong way when you are putting someone in a revered class who clearly doesn't belong.
The whole point was that Evans was pretty good to be able to put up numbers that only a few other players, that happened to be great, did. No one ever said that he was MJ or the Big O, just that he's having a special season. Then some fool comes along questioning if Evans was special or just having a rare season. If you think that Evans isn't going to be a star in this league, then you are fooling yourself, that's all "The" is saying.
