Woodside > wolters

[Bisonator98]

Just curious, did you watch Wolters put up 34-5-7 and no turnovers against Washington and their 2 first round guards? How about his 28-5-7 performance against New Mexico?

A fan's perspective is always going to skew toward the player they watched more, because you will remember more highs and less lows.

No I didn't.

You're probably right. How much of Woodside did you see in person?

[TAILG8R]

No I didn't.

You're probably right. How much of Woodside did you see in person?

Oh no, you can't do that. Did you just use someones own logic to refute their point of view? Ouch.

[2002jack]

What the hell does it really matter?

Exactly. Maybe they will both play against each other in Turkey and settle the debate for us. I think both were better college players than George Hill.

[ndsubison1]

ITT - Bison fans doing gymnastics to try to prove Woodside > Wolters by cherry picking stats and using eye test metrics. And crickets.

How about a blind comparison of career statistics using ESPN's player profiles?

Strangely, ESPN (the world-wide leader in sports) doesn't include things like rivalry records, tournament points, or top 25 wins.

Here is what they do have:

Rebounds
Player A - 602
Player B - 349

Assists
Player A - 669
Player B - 640

Blocks
Player A - 192
Player B - 17

Steals
Player A - 192
Player B - 176

Turnovers
Player A - 283
Player B - 373

Points
Player A - 2363
Player B - 2315

Player A is better in every single statistical category. In several cases, much better.

Hint - Player A is Nate Wolters. Not even a debate for anyone who lives outside North Dakota.

ill give him rebounds, blocks, and steals, but woodside had more scorers around him than wolters. wolters had the ball in his hands more i would say. plus with turnovers woodside played 22 more minutes than wolters in their careers. (yes i did the math)

[ndsubison1]

[QUOTE=steelbison;726098]

ITT - Bison fans doing gymnastics to try to prove Woodside > Wolters by cherry picking stats and using eye test metrics. And crickets.

How about a blind comparison of career statistics using ESPN's player profiles?

Strangely, ESPN (the world-wide leader in sports) doesn't include things like rivalry records, tournament points, or top 25 wins.

Here is what they do have:

Rebounds
Player A - 602
Player B - 349

Assists
Player A - 669
Player B - 640

Blocks
Player A - 192
Player B - 17

Steals
Player A - 192
Player B - 176

Turnovers
Player A - 283
Player B - 373

Points
Player A - 2363
Player B - 2315

Player A is better in every single statistical category. In several cases, much better.


So stats are your only measuring stick?? You did leave out shooting percentage which Woody was better than Wolters and 3pt percentage and FT percentage. Which again Woody was better than Nate.

Wolters scored more points because he took more shots. He is 6'4 he should have more rebounds and blocks. Thats common sense.

Eyeball test. Bigtime player in bigtime games. Woody....hands down....no comparison. That's how I judge players, not how many points they put up against a UMKC

wow youre just cherry picking stats!!!!

[ndsubison1]

What the hell does it really matter?

cuz it's BISON vs JACKS!!!!

[NDSUstudent]

Wolters has no supporting cast. Woodside had Tviet, Winkelman, Nelson, and for a short time Dre. Also a big man in Luke Moorman. And better coaching staff too.

Besides Dre I'm not sure Woodside played with significantly better players. There is some talent on that SDSU team besides Wolters...Fiegen, Dykstra, Carlson and White are all pretty decent. I'm guessing Dykstra will finish pretty highly on SDSU's career scoring list. Obviously Wolters made them all better but so did Woodside.

[jacksfan29]

cuz it's BISON vs JACKS!!!!

But it is not a rivalry

[silkamilkamonico]

Wolters was terrible last night. Woodside at least showed up and had a great game in the tournament which Wolters never did. Some of their other players have really stepped up. I also have to laugh at believing the analysts who also said he was a first round pick. I am also thinking SDSU isn't going to be as bad as I thought next year.

[EndZoneQB]

But it is not a rivalry

Damnit, that was going to be my post haha.