I think we are warranted in suggesting that a player
who demonstrates ability as a starter and who was a
consensus lottery pick has a certain value. [...]
So it's more assumption than evidence, but I assume
that JJ was of more value than we got for him.
Yes, but I think it's not very reasonable to think that basing this on
"assumption" is very convincing for the rest of us. i realize that we're
"just" fans and not basketball professionals, but it's not so out of left
field to suggest that some sort of evidence be given to support a theory.
Especially if that person is so convinced he's right. (Not speaking about
you specifically, Gene.)