No sir, not the post….and you know that….so who is being “disingenuous “.
Those are two different things you said.
What are you talking about? he increased the volume. At the time of that post, he he was barely shootng it. Since then, he has regularly taken three to four a game. I was never under the assumption that he needed to be a super high-volume shooter. I just said he needed to get to the middle of the pack, which he has done.
And how am I hedging? In the very first post, I said he just needed to “slightly increase” his volume. In that very first post, I did not know you would take offense to it and drag it out. How is that hedging??? volume shooter was never my intent if we are being genuine here
from the very start i said only a slight increase (so its not noticably low)
you made a straw man argument:
you turned me stating “slighlty increase volume”… to “volume shooter”… when clearly that is not what i meant
he went from
to this
"the word “slight” was on the very 1st post
1 Like
this was after that argument… why did you clip out other post thats said “since we were talking about this” in the post…
are you intentionally doing this???
Whatever you say Pesik……must be true.
You’ve never been wrong in your life….
Pretty sure you also said that Kingston was very slight and would not know the defensive rotations so he couldn’t start….
But I’m sure you can use chat gpt to spin a yarn for you….
call me out on real takes… stop with the strawman… i never said he had to be a volume shooter
the spin here is you, looking for a madeup gotcha
lol the deabtes i have about kingston youd think i made some crazy takes that he was bad…
preseason: “man, kingston is great at everything but 3pt shooting”… we got into a debate becuase i didnt say he was great at 3pt shooting…ignoring that i said he was great at everything else
game 4: {kingston who wasnt even on draft boards yet}… i say if he just slightly increases his volume by 1 or 2 shots a game (maintaining percentages) he will be a lottery pick… debate insues … ignoring that i noted that he was a super small minor change away from being a lottey pick
What is your definition of regularly?
In the past 5 games, he has had more than 3 three point attempts twice. So. Is 40% of the time regularly? Even if you take the full season, he has only done it in 50% of the games. And 1 of those games was the second game of the season.
What is your definition of regularly? Has his draft stock declined the last 5 games? When he has more times than not taken less than three a game.
3 Likes
he also had reduced minutes in most of those games, becuase they were blowouts… theres clearly been a increase in the volume. not big but a slight increase
read espns latest take on kingston…its basically revolved around the shooting … and yes his 3pt shooting in the players/era and Fsu was a huge reason for his spike… espn for now the shooting looking good enough, but they are sure if it will sustain the full season, and natural “correction” will happen and that might modify his stock
lol. This dude really just says things.
4 Likes
Still waiting on that stock to drop….lol
Is far as your non-sense above, that’s what you do when you know you’re wrong……you tell someone they’re making things up….you also just completely ignore things that you are wrong about and just hope they get forgotten.
And then you hide behind “well ESPN “ says this….that way when your take is wrong you can say it wasn’t yours it was just what “they said”.
4 Likes
I think the Coogs will be taken high in the draft this year unless they are not.
2 Likes
stop making up things its annoying
…when did i say his stock would drop
he wasnt on most draft boards when we had this conversation… at the time he was showing out in the auburn game, i said he is gone he has pretty much guaranteed his 1st round, and if he slighty increases his shootng volume he would be lottery pic
please use comprehension and tell me where in any of those statements did say his stock would drop???
and statistically Kingston increased his volume… im so confused … that is just a statistcal fact
I hate having conversations with you because you either have terrible memory or you are just manipulative.
-
Preseason, I said “Kingston is amazing at everything except 3-point shooting”. You went into a deep debate with me saying Kingston is an amazing 3pt shooter and that you had seen it with your own eyes.
- Game 2, Kingston has an amazing game, almost exclusively scoring 2s. You then made up a crazy argument that I said “he wasn’t good enough start.” I never said that. That never happened. you made up a fictional debate and pretend that was what we debated preseason
-
During the Auburn game, when Kingston wass having a great game, I said Kingston (who at the time was projected as a multi-year player) was a lock to be gone after this year, a first-round lock, and that slightly increasing his 3-point volume would push him into lottery range.
- Now Kingston, who has slightly increased his 3-point volume, is a projected lottery pick, and you have gone on yet another made-up rant saying I claimed “he had to be a high-volume 3-point shooter” and “his stock would drop.” That never happened. (kingston didnt even really have stock during those games)
you constantly make up strawmans… its annoying
YOU MAKE BAD TAKES AND I NEVER CALL YOU OUT
What is crazy is that you swore up and down all offseason that Kingston was an elite shooter. Everyone with eyes knows that is not true and that it is an area for improvement for him. I am not even calling you out for being blatantly wrong on that take.
like a year ago, Before Mercy even arrived, I said “he would need some time to adjust”. I said his shooting needed development, and that a lot of his high-scoring high school games were built on cherry-picked points. I thought he would need development before being a star for us. You went on a tirade, at least 50 posts, about how Mercy would be a star on day 1, an elite shooter on day 1, and likely the starter by midseason as a freshman.
That was a very very bad take looking at it now especially for how hard you went in on it, and I do not call you out for your bad takes the way you keep trying to rewrite mine. you arent even calling me out on real takes
I hate it when y’all have conversations too.
11 Likes
lol fair
1 Like
I enjoy posts from both of u and never do i go back to see if they are right or wrong. I take them as opinion and get what i need from them. Nobody cares who has the bigger peepee. Post away but stop with the back and forth!
8 Likes
Kingston is going to be a top 5 pick. Shooting under three threes per game. But Pesik will still tell you that he told you so.
5 Likes
I have never done an unprovoked “ I told you so” ever to anyone!!!
I regularly allow people to have bad takes, let it be wrong and we move on
What’s common here is that there a small contingent of people here who are obsessed with trying to prove me wrong… what’s wierd is that they never call me out on the takes I made but on some fictional version of it … that they try to bring up 3months later…
Jo from the very start I never said he had to be a volume shooter… my debate was about minor increases, so it goes from “the very bottom” to “middle of the pack”
It is a statistical fact that his volume has increased you are debating facts!!!
- He shot .08 3s per minute when that quote was made
- He shots .1 3s per minute in his last 7 games… a 20% increase in volume
I even gave a numbers example, I noted he was on pace for about 30 3s (at that time)… and said if he got to 45-60 that would be great number… he is on pace for 45-60 now…
These are statistical facts that are backing me …
I never said he had to be a volume shooter
2 Likes
So he’s Lottery pick now because he shot the three .5 times more?
1 Like
One thing about internet forums and social media. People are used to lying about what people say in order to manipulate the social milieu. It is easier to demonstrate online, since there is a document trail, but it still takes effort and time. I have not spent any time parsing any of these disputes on this board, but I would not be surprised if someone were lying. But just about every regular poster here understands basketball better than I do, so I just enjoy the learning experience. Even the posters here from rival teams are good. There is a lot of good content here.
3 Likes