You do when those perimeter players chuck up 15 shots a game and can't even make 40% of them.
24 games. 24 games. 24 games. 24 games. 24 games.
How many times do I need to repeat that's only based on 24 games last season, after coming back from a knee reconstruction, are you really going to disregard his previous seasons where he was an efficient scorer over 200+ games? LaVine's previous 206 games: 45 FG%, 51 eFG%, and 38 three-pt% - again, great efficiency for a player of his caliber. Kawhi only averaged 16 ppg on 46.8 FG% last season, are we suddenly going to marginalize his game/ability just because he didn't perform to his usual standard due to injuries, based on a small sample size? Plus FG% isn't the best measurement for his efficiency - he scored 16.7 ppg on 15.8 shots (34% of his shots were from behind the arc, so it would pay to look at his eFG% which takes into account 3-pt makes/attempts - 44 eFG%), which isn't great, but it's not as bad as looking at his FG% in general view.
"Lavine '16/'17 season:
19 ppg on 46 FG% (54 eFG% - great efficiency for a perimeter player of his caliber), 38.7 three-point% on 6.6 attempts, 50.8 eFG% on jumpshots."
Why are you ignoring this?
Randle has NEVER shown he can come close to replicating this type of offensive production while being a legit scoring-option.
Again, as I said above, so a 24-game sample size after coming back from a knee reconstruction means he's one of the most inefficient players in the league, and fukk the fact that he was one of the most efficient SGs over the previous 200+ games of his career? You're putting all this weight behind 24 games (affected by injury and reacclimating back into the league), but ignoring the fact he was efficient over the other 200+ games of his career? How do 24 games frame his ability, and not the other 200 games? How does that make sense to you?
I think you're the one who needs to be "locked away in a mental institute" if that's the type of logic you work on.
Last edited:
for a guy on a team you aren't a fan of and have never watched that's getting paid $20 million to shoot 38% from the field on 15 shots a game while playing non-existent defense. Every GM in this league would take Randle's current and future potential production (he's the same age as Lavine and isn't coming off a potentially career altering injury) at $9 million over Lavine's at $20 million, without even a second thought about it. Don't ever @ me again with your schizophrenic tantrums, but I assume you'll just block me and start stalking every one of my posts like you do to everyone who calls you out on your bullshyt 
