Back when I was taking correspondence courses from the Skip Bayless School of Journalism, I equated Shelden Williams with Emeka Okafor. Honestly, I don’t think I’ve received more feedback about something I’ve posted here. I can see why Bayless is so successful at his racket of providing weak evidence for absurd positions.
But I felt like I supported my absurd position well. Williams appeared to be just as effective as Okafor on both ends of the floor. Granted, Okafor ran the court better than Williams, but based on what could be measured, there wasn’t much difference between what each provided his respective team.
Much of the criticism from the piece on Williams centered on my choice of using stats from the easier half of Duke’s season and comparing them with an enitre UConn season. Among a recent spate of quality posts, Ryan made a similar comparison based on Williams’ full season stats, and as it turns out, Shelden improved just about all of his numbers after conference play began.
Skip also taught me the fine art of patting one’s self on the back.