I don't want to argue anymore in a heated fashion. So let's be civil about it. How many shots attempted/made does it take a player this far into the season to make him a 3pt shooter? 100? 50? 25? What?
You originally said Cade Davis was average because he is 321st in 3 point shooting in college basketball. I point out that there are over 3,900 college basketball players so he is much better than average.
Then you say well they all aren't 3 point shooters. I give you that and reduce my number to 60% of all college basketball players (I round by 3,900 to 4,000 and multiply by .6 - I am comofortable with rounding because I know there are more than 300 teams) to 2,400. At 321 Cade is still well within the top 15% of all players that should be shooting the 3 point shot.
Then you say we need to focus on designated three point shooters. You debate the topic and decide a designated 3 point shooter is someone shooting 100 attempts or more. Now you have limited your pool to a sample size that makes Cade Davis' 321st ranking look average.
However, that ranking is not based on your criteria. That is his 321st ranking is not limited to guys with more than 100 shot attempts. Furthermore, even if you find a ranking based on your criteria you are now ranking Cade Davis against people that start in college basketball (for the most part only a starter takes 4 three point shots a game) and excell at 3 point shooting (only good three point shooters take 4 a game). Essentially you created a sample of above average players and then said Cade Davis is average in that group. I can certainly accept that Cade Davis is average when compared to all above average players. I concur, Cade Davis is not a superstar, he will not play in the NBA and he is merely average among all above average college basketball players. Roughly he is in the 75th percentile or above but would not likely rank in the 95th percentile or above of all college basketball players.
Now I say not likely (in the 95th percentile) because if we had some fair measure to rank all college basketball players, I am not posiitve Cade Davis does not rank in the top 5% We have to remember that Big XII players (13 X 12=156 players) and BCS players (73 X 13 = 949) are both a small percentage of all D-1 teams (Answers.com says 347 D-1 teams or 4,511 scholarship players). While it cannot be said as an abosolutely fact, it is fairly reasonable to say the starters in the major conferences are better than the other players. The starters in the BCS conferences account for 365 players (5X73 = 365). Therefore, the BCS starters are arguably the top 8% of all college basketball players. We have to be honest about Cade Davis' ability and recognize that a few teams are so deep he would not even be the 6th man and/or would not start additionally some guys playing mid-major and lower levels are better than Cade Davis. But for every BCS team he could not start on (call it 50%) he would probably start over someone on the other 50%. If you agree with these statements/assumptions, Cade Davis ranks in the 95th percentile of all college basketball players (.5 X 73 X 5= 182) 182/4,511 or .04%. Whether Cade is actually in the Top 4% of all college basketball is not particularly important to me. I am simply trying to point out how silly it is to say he is simply an average college basketball player.
Cade Davis is not going to the NBA. He is not a first team All-Big XII player. But he is clearly an above average college basketball player. That will be my final word on the subject because I really don't care if you are capable of admitting that Cade Davis is an above average college basketball player and I am quite positive I have made my point.
