[Hoffman] Jahlil Okafor in Philly outlasted D'Angelo Russell in LA. Didn't see that coming a few months ago.

Wait..I am confused. Do stats mean anything or not? I could have sworn that two comments ago you said "those numbers don't mean anything" and now you are throwing more numbers at me?

Is it possible you are cherry picking data that supports your per-determined view and ignoring everything else?

Snark aside, my point was not that Oakfor is a good player at this point. My point is you are trying too hard to make him look worse than he is. Mainly in saying he can't shoot free throws and that he doesn't rebound. The raw numbers here disagree with you. Though I will admit he was pretty bad a for long stretches rebounding-wise last year, which I think was made worse by injuries he played through.

Sixers have been horrifically bad for the entirety of Okafor's time here. It is pointless to judge a rookie individually based on his team's performance when you are talking about an all time bad team. Oakfor had a good rookie year. Shot over 50%, put up something like 17 and 7 shooting just below 70% from the line on a team with horrific shooting and no other offensive weapons. He is just a really bad defensive player. His rookie year, the teams strength (at least the thing that brought them maximum success) was to put out a bunch of long and young athletes and hunker down defensively and run for offense -aka the two things Oak is worst at. So yes, the sixers may have been marginally better that year without Oak, but at best they win another 2-3 games by playing unskilled guys that can defend but can't score to save their lives.

The point is the sixers were not remotely trying to win games. They were trying to evaluate talent and develop talent. That's why I don't really care about whether the sixers were marginally better without Oak in a year they had the talent to win somewhere around 10 games. Look at the Warriors, by your metric they are a worse team with KD because their record is worse. Would any sane person agree with that? I don't think so. You need context.

Stat and cherry picked stats aside, the context of the numbers and why they are what they are is important too.

/r/nba Thread Parent Link - twitter.com