Nobody needs to do any homework to debunk your bullshyt, because you only post purely to further your own agenda, almost entirely of which is protecting the legacy of your namesake and cosplaying Huey P. Newton (which comes off as satire when you play dress up for something as trivial as stan wars in sports).
If you made a thread right now asking who was France's best player during the Olympics, it would comprehensively be in favor of Wemby. Would all those folks only be voting for him because he's half white, or because you know, he actually was their best performing player?
To even make that a point of emphasis shows how you can't view this in any objective manner.
This goes against your argument.
If Yabusele was leading them during the Olympics then he would've been leading them from the first game. If Yabusele wasn't getting minutes to start off with than France didn't think he was good enough to lead them; if Yabusele wasn't getting minutes to start off with than he can't have a greater case than someone who did.
You can't pick and choose which games during the Olympics matter, when they all matter, as a whole. You can't penalize Wemby for playing more minutes when that's one of the reasons why he was actually
leading them.
All the games matter (after all, you have to win your group games in order to progress to the elimination round).
By singling out elimination games, you're twisting the point I was trying to make.
I could care less about this strawman you're fighting against all because a general point I was making about Wemby went right over your head.
Even if you want to distort reality and say that he didn't lead them, it still doesn't take away the point of him being a key figure on an Olympic team that went to the Gold medal game, whereas Zion has been part of nothing of consequence.
You took a joke I made about what Wemby was doing during the offseason vs. what Zion was doing during the offseason, and missed the point, altogether.
Out of the six games France had during the Olympics, you cherry pick 33% of the games they played, and you only reference their points scored.
Are points, in a vacuum, the only thing that matter now?
You don't talk about the defensive attention Wemby received which allowed complementary players like Yabusele to score; you don't talk about how Wemby created offense directly and indirectly for complementary players like Yabusele to score; you don't talk about the other side of the floor which Wemby was anchoring and changing the momemtum of.
And you're out here talking about other cats being casuals when you can't argue anything else but points scored (in two games), without any accompanying context.
You gon' kick the rocks that are ratlling around in your head.