Lillard overrated?

[KingSpeed]

Actually it does.

When they allowed players to go from HS to the pros, they consistently became better players in 4 years than their 4-year college counterparts. Maybe it had to do with spending 100% of their time focused on basketball with professional coaches, top of the line facilities, and competing against the best competition in the world.

Also, not sure about CONSISTENTLY. Did Al Harrington and Jonathan Bender become better players than Tim Duncan?

 

[Denny Crane]

Also, not sure about CONSISTENTLY. Did Al Harrington and Jonathan Bender become better players than Tim Duncan?

That's just silly.

They became better players than they would have been if they played 4 years of college.

And Nate4Prez - I think it's quite clear the guys like Kobe, Garnett, LeBron, TMac, etc. didn't miss college.

Here's a list of guys drafted from HS to the pros who didn't stay in the league for long: Korleone Young, Leon Smith (who was literally nuts), Ousmane Cisse (injured right after being drafted), Ndudi Hamani Ebi, Robert Swift (knee injury his third season), and that's it. At Least the guys since 1999. The list of players who were MVP caliber (Kobe, Garnett, etc.) was one shorter. The list of guys who played years in the league (Monta Ellis, Blatche, JR Smith, Al Jefferson, etc.) is quite long.

EDIT: I missed Ricky Sanchez, drafted by the Blazers in 2005 More like a euro stash who never made the NBA tho.

 

[KingSpeed]

So be it. I'm not arguing for anything important. Hopefully, Lillard busts out this season. I trust he will. He made ROY his goal and got it. Now he wants MVP. Doesn't sound like a guy who has peaked.

 

[KingSpeed]

That's just silly.

They became better players than they would have been if they played 4 years of college.

And Nate4Prez - I think it's quite clear the guys like Kobe, Garnett, LeBron, TMac, etc. didn't miss college.

If Bender played college, he might've had a better pro career. Needed more playing time before being thrown into the fire. I think they changed the age minimum because they saw too many players skipping college and busting in the pros.

 

[Denny Crane]

If Bender played college, he might've had a better pro career. Needed more playing time before being thrown into the fire. I think they changed the age minimum because they saw too many players skipping college and busting in the pros.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_high_school_draftees

There's the list. Prove me wrong

 

[magnifier661]

If Bender played college, he might've had a better pro career. Needed more playing time before being thrown into the fire. I think they changed the age minimum because they saw too many players skipping college and busting in the pros.

Certain players can handle the pressure of the nba, but the majority can't. College helps to grow a player and teach them to know the game at a higher level; without the nba pressure.

There are more busts than gems because of this. Nate does have a point for the average players like Gibson. They do reach their peak, but are nba ready and can contribute right out of the gate. There are players like Roy, drexler and countless others that have played 4 years and became superstars.

It's about drive + talent; not experience, IMO.

 

[3RA1N1AC]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_high_school_draftees

There's the list. Prove me wrong

whats the point you are trying to make?

because that list is full of players who didnt realize their potential until a few years into their careers, or complete flameouts

i mean, if you are basing your point around transcendent players like lebron james and kevin garnett, thats just silly, they comprise a small portion of that list

 

[BlazerDuckSeahawkFan94]

I didn't say anything about age. I simply said having four years of collegiate level play gets you more ready for NBA level play, and a player with more years of college is more likely to be at their peak than they are to make a huge jump. I'm not saying he won't get better, I'm saying his PER isn't going to go from 16 to 24. It's far more likely that he tops out at 19 which would put him in the second tier conversation with John Wall and Kemba Walker, than he makes a jump to the Paul, Westbrook, Parker, and Irving level.

Can you define peak for me? I have a hard time believing a 23 year old is close to peaking. Maybe in 2-4 years but now? No, not imo.

PER isn't the end all be all either. I think of it this way... Only two other PGs averaged more points than Dame, Westbrook and Curry. He was average for assists at 15 but I expect that number to rise this season.

 

[Denny Crane]

whats the point you are trying to make?

because that list is full of players who didnt realize their potential until a few years into their careers, or complete flameouts

i mean, if you are basing your point around transcendent players like lebron james and kevin garnett, thats just silly, they comprise a small portion of that list

Looks to me like they turned out better than a lot of NBA draft picks who attended college, no? Guys like LaRue Martin ring a bell?

Even Diop, who is still playing in the NBA after 13 years, wasn't a flop by any stretch. he was a project. Hard to call 13 years in the NBA a flop tho.

 

[3RA1N1AC]

Looks to me like they turned out better than a lot of NBA draft picks who attended college, no? Guys like LaRue Martin ring a bell?

Even Diop, who is still playing in the NBA after 13 years, wasn't a flop by any stretch. he was a project. Hard to call 13 years in the NBA a flop tho.

who turned out better?

all of them?

what are you trying to say i guess i missed your point

 

[magnifier661]

Looks to me like they turned out better than a lot of NBA draft picks who attended college, no? Guys like LaRue Martin ring a bell?

Even Diop, who is still playing in the NBA after 13 years, wasn't a flop by any stretch. he was a project. Hard to call 13 years in the NBA a flop tho.

I see your High Schoolers and raise you Karl Malone, Duncan, David West, John Stockton, Al Horford, Grant Hill, Your Boy Noah, Cylde Drexler, Brad Daughtery, Terry Porter, and countless other superstars that made a huge impact in this league.

 

[BlazerDuckSeahawkFan94]

Certain players can handle the pressure of the nba, but the majority can't. College helps to grow a player and teach them to know the game at a higher level; without the nba pressure.

This is spot on. College develops the mental side of the game, that's why I have always liked taking "complete" players out of college. Of course I wouldn't pass on an elite athlete who can play at the same level right away.

 

[Denny Crane]

who turned out better?

all of them?

what are you trying to say i guess i missed your point

I guess you miss the point.

I give up.

 

[magnifier661]

This is spot on. College develops the mental side of the game, that's why I have always liked taking "complete" players out of college. Of course I wouldn't pass on an elite athlete who can play at the same level right away.

Yes I totally agree. Do we pass on Durant because he came out early? HELLZ NO!

 

[Denny Crane]

I see your High Schoolers and raise you Karl Malone, Duncan, David West, John Stockton, Al Horford, Grant Hill, Your Boy Noah, Cylde Drexler, Brad Daughtery, Terry Porter, and countless other superstars that made a huge impact in this league.

And you have a point?


I didn't think so.

 

[3RA1N1AC]

I guess you miss the point.

I give up.

seriously...was it that lebron is good?

going out on a limb there buddy

 

[magnifier661]

And you have a point?


I didn't think so.

A better point than your hyperbole.

 

[Run BJM]

Surprised it hasn't been brought up yet, but Stephen Curry is an interesting comparison. He also came out as a 4 year college player, posted a 16.3 PER his rookie year (Lillard posted a 16.4). He jumped up to 19.4 PER the following season and then hes been at 21 and change the last two seasons. Curry had to defer to Monta most of his career though so the jump in PER might not be as sure of a thing for Lillard, but he'll get better and he'll play with better teammates in the future.

 

[magnifier661]

Kareem had a per of 22.5 his rookie season. He played 3 years of college (he couldn't play varsity being a freshman). He jumped to a 29 PER the following season, then kept that average for another 2 years. Dropped to 26 average for another 8 years; then dropped to a 23 per; still better than his rookie per. I don't see how coming out from high school suddenly makes a player better?

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Roy thought about going into the NBA right out of high school, even had a workout for the Blazers. The feedback he got from those workouts convinced him to go to college.

 

[Denny Crane]

seriously...was it that lebron is good?

going out on a limb there buddy

Nah. More like of all the HS to pro guys, 1/3 were at least as good as Jermaine O'Neal. If you look at the guys who went to college for 4 years, you won't find 33% were as good as Jermaine O'Neal. Not even close.

 

[Denny Crane]

A better point than your hyperbole.

I'm in a battle of logic against an unarmed man.

Geez.

I'm done.

You win, if that'll shut you up.

 

[magnifier661]

Nah. More like of all the HS to pro guys, 1/3 were at least as good as Jermaine O'Neal. If you look at the guys who went to college for 4 years, you won't find 33% were as good as Jermaine O'Neal. Not even close.

For a geek that believes in mathematics; you really gone off the deep end Denny.

There are many variables that completely destroys your argument.

1.) the ratio of nba players that played a full tenure of college is much larger than that of high schoolers. Therefor there is a likelier chance of mediocre talent numbers.

2.) a high schooler that gets drafted is because that player is more talented than most in his class; therefor the chance of them succeeding is greater

3.) there are more total superstars that are clearly better than the majority of the high schoolers; like I've already posted off the top of my head.

Clearly your hyperbole is losing its footing. Maybe you need to back up, relax and find another argument you have a higher qualification of debating?

 

[magnifier661]

I'm in a battle of logic against an unarmed man.

Geez.

I'm done.

You win, if that'll shut you up.

Ah yes, the "I'm done, you win because you're stupid" argument. Well played sir

 

[Denny Crane]

I see your High Schoolers and raise you Karl Malone, Duncan, David West, John Stockton, Al Horford, Grant Hill, Your Boy Noah, Cylde Drexler, Brad Daughtery, Terry Porter, and countless other superstars that made a huge impact in this league.

How do you argue with this awesome logic.

It's a perfect example of a strawman.

I never argued you couldn't go to college and be an all-time great. Yet you stand up that argument and raise me what?

Facepalm.

My IQ goes down like 75 points when I read this kind of shit.

 

[magnifier661]

How do you argue with this awesome logic.

It's a perfect example of a strawman.

I never argued you couldn't go to college and be an all-time great. Yet you stand up that argument and raise me what?

Facepalm.

My IQ goes down like 75 points when I read this kind of shit.

Face palm x2. This was a discussion of a 4 year player reaching their peak and you butt in saying that high schoolers have good careers. Obviously if you were paying attention; you'd understand why this was posted.

And if you assumed something different; then maybe you should have made a new thread on just high schoolers being successful.

It seems you need to slap your face a little harder.

 

[Denny Crane]

For a geek that believes in mathematics; you really gone off the deep end Denny.

There are many variables that completely destroys your argument.

1.) the ratio of nba players that played a full tenure of college is much larger than that of high schoolers. Therefor there is a likelier chance of mediocre talent numbers.

2.) a high schooler that gets drafted is because that player is more talented than most in his class; therefor the chance of them succeeding is greater

3.) there are more total superstars that are clearly better than the majority of the high schoolers; like I've already posted off the top of my head.

Clearly your hyperbole is losing its footing. Maybe you need to back up, relax and find another argument you have a higher qualification of debating?

Another facepalm post.

All 3 "arguments" you make are also strawmen.

 

[magnifier661]

Another facepalm post.

All 3 "arguments" you make are also strawmen.

40 some high schoolers in the history of basketball, compared to the thousands of 4 year college players won't skew your %?

Lmao Denny has completely lost his mind!

 

[Denny Crane]

40 some high schoolers in the history of basketball, compared to the thousands of 4 year college players won't skew your %?

Lmao Denny has completely lost his mind!

Another strawman. You don't give up. I'll be the bigger man and let you "win."

You may want to read about strawman again and maybe look at why you keep making those faulty logic arguments.

 

[magnifier661]

Another strawman. You don't give up. I'll be the bigger man and let you "win."

You may want to read about strawman again and maybe look at why you keep making those faulty logic arguments.

Go hide in a corner and learn the game