It has Lazar going 45th to the Raptors
http://www.nbadraft.net/2010mock_draft
NBAdraft.net is a great resource for player profiles but they have consistently proven to be nothing more. Regardless, I love the site, but they had all the MU guys getting picked at certain points last year and we all know the outcome.
However, I do think Lazar will be taken, and I actually agree with the range they have him at now. Some teams might want him early second round. I'd love to see the Bucks pick him up with one of their second rounders. I think there are going to be a number of second round steals this year.
Still early for these but Draftexpress is a quality site.
http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-mock-draft/2010/
Quote from: martyconlonontherun on April 11, 2010, 06:42:42 PM
Still early for these but Draftexpress is a quality site.
http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-mock-draft/2010/
I was surprised to see Zoubek on there. I know he is big, but never thought he was effective enough at the college level for NBA consideration.
I think that is a pretty good prediction
I think it says something about how screwed up NBA teams priorities are if Lazar doesn't get drafted. Why wouldn't you want to take a summer league/training camp flier on a guy who finished top 5 all time in points and rebounds at a school that ESPN called one of the 30 best all time programs in the country?
Quote from: Brewtown Andy on April 12, 2010, 08:35:16 AM
I think it says something about how screwed up NBA teams priorities are if Lazar doesn't get drafted. Why wouldn't you want to take a summer league/training camp flier on a guy who finished top 5 all time in points and rebounds at a school that ESPN called one of the 30 best all time programs in the country?
You can say what you want about the NBA, but if you're a GM of a professional team what would you do? Draft a 6'6" PF that isn't extremely athletic with an ok J and a great motor that you know will be too slow to guard 3's and too short to guard 4's, or draft an athletic freak that hasn't proven anything yet but has a slight chance of being a rotational player?
Quote from: Brewtown Andy on April 12, 2010, 08:35:16 AM
Why wouldn't you want to take a summer league/training camp flier on a guy who finished top 5 all time in points and rebounds at a school that ESPN called one of the 30 best all time programs in the country?
Can you explain how this would be an indicator as to how successful he would be in the NBA? Sorry to inform you, but these days, if a college player even sticks around for 4 years, he obviously isnt that good (or that his game doesnt translate well to the NBA).
Quote from: goodgreatgrand on April 12, 2010, 09:29:46 AM
Can you explain how this would be an indicator as to how successful he would be in the NBA? Sorry to inform you, but these days, if a college player even sticks around for 4 years, he obviously isnt that good (or that his game doesnt translate well to the NBA).
Tim Duncan does kind of suck doesn't he?
Quote from: KipsBayEagle on April 12, 2010, 09:31:08 AM
Tim Duncan does kind of suck doesn't he?
Tim Duncan came out of college in 1997. I'm not sure that still counts as "these days" as the original poster said.
Now that I think about it, who
is the most successful NBA player (since, say, 2005) who spent 4 years in college?
Quote from: goodgreatgrand on April 12, 2010, 09:29:46 AM
Can you explain how this would be an indicator as to how successful he would be in the NBA? Sorry to inform you, but these days, if a college player even sticks around for 4 years, he obviously isnt that good (or that his game doesnt translate well to the NBA).
I wonder how long Wesley can keep fooling them in the NBA if that's the case.
I think you are right that MU being a top 30 program isn't an indicator, but to say because you played 4 years you won't amount to anything in the NBA is wrong.
Quote from: KipsBayEagle on April 12, 2010, 09:31:08 AM
Tim Duncan does kind of suck doesn't he?
I bet I can create a longer list than you can (at least 20x longer). And let's start post-2000 (the early and mid-90's was a different era for college babsketball).
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on April 12, 2010, 09:34:26 AM
Tim Duncan came out of college in 1997. I'm not sure that still counts as "these days" as the original poster said.
Now that I think about it, who is the most successful NBA player (since, say, 2005) who spent 4 years in college?
Danny Granger and Brandon Roy are the biggest names...and of course Steve Novak ;D
Jameer Nelson stayed for 4 years even though he won various awards during his undergraduate years. Now he's the starting PG on a Championship-caliber team.
Ummm Tim Tebow, hello
Quote from: goldeneagles09 on April 12, 2010, 09:46:06 AM
Jameer Nelson stayed for 4 years even though he won various awards during his undergraduate years. Now he's the starting PG on a Championship-caliber team.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think his problem was playing at a small school and teams being weary of him. Kind of like S. Curry. It's not like Lazar had such a great year that was flashing with potential. He was just solid through his whole college career and added a lot of stats. He did great things at MU, but its not like he led us to anything like an elite 16 bid that would get him noticed.
W. Matthews is the exception to the rule. How about the other 2 amigos?
(http://hoopedia.nba.com/images/0/00/Act_david_lee.jpg)
I'm an All-Star. No, really, I am.
Quote from: goldeneagles09 on April 12, 2010, 09:46:06 AM
Jameer Nelson stayed for 4 years even though he won various awards during his undergraduate years. Now he's the starting PG on a Championship-caliber team.
Let's take a look at his teammates....
Vince Carter........3 years
Dwight Howard....didnt go
Rashard Lewis.....didnt go
Jason Williams.....arguable (2 seasons played)
Adonal Foyle.......3 years
Brandon Bass......2 years
4 year college players
Nelson
Anthony Johnson
Matt Barnes
JJ Redick
Quote from: martyconlonontherun on April 12, 2010, 09:25:12 AM
You can say what you want about the NBA, but if you're a GM of a professional team what would you do? Draft a 6'6" PF that isn't extremely athletic with an ok J and a great motor that you know will be too slow to guard 3's and too short to guard 4's, or draft an athletic freak that hasn't proven anything yet but has a slight chance of being a rotational player?
My criticism was more leveled at the "pick a Euro and just leave him there for a couple of years to see if he develops" crap. Such a weak 2nd round pick. If you aren't required to give the guy a contract, then why not roll the dice on the guy who managed to put up numbers that no one else ever did at a high profile school?
And even to your point, we're talking about drafting something where you know EXACTLY what you get, and drafting something that might exist in the future if you're lucky.
Quote from: goodgreatgrand on April 12, 2010, 09:29:46 AM
Can you explain how this would be an indicator as to how successful he would be in the NBA? Sorry to inform you, but these days, if a college player even sticks around for 4 years, he obviously isnt that good (or that his game doesnt translate well to the NBA).
I flat out said it would be a summer league/training camp flier. I'm not saying it's an obvious indicator of anything, I'm saying that NBA GMs know exactly what they're getting with Lazar.
I had the same criticism of the draft last year when Jerel broke a 40 year old scoring record and couldn't get a sniff.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on April 12, 2010, 09:34:26 AM
Tim Duncan came out of college in 1997. I'm not sure that still counts as "these days" as the original poster said.
Now that I think about it, who is the most successful NBA player (since, say, 2005) who spent 4 years in college?
Tyler Hansbrough.
Quote from: tower912 on April 12, 2010, 11:35:05 AM
Tyler Hansbrough.
If that were true, it would be really sad.
Quote from: Brewtown Andy on April 12, 2010, 11:26:20 AM
My criticism was more leveled at the "pick a Euro and just leave him there for a couple of years to see if he develops" crap. Such a weak 2nd round pick. If you aren't required to give the guy a contract, then why not roll the dice on the guy who managed to put up numbers that no one else ever did at a high profile school?
And even to your point, we're talking about drafting something where you know EXACTLY what you get, and drafting something that might exist in the future if you're lucky.
The problem is that you know exactly what you will get with Lazar. He's a borderline roster guy and nothing more. Where as a Euro may suck, but at least there is a chance you get a rotational player. There's also benefits to having a Euro stashed. It saves a roster spot for a vet that can contribute. Why waste a roster spot and money on a guy who you don't think is ready. Look at Ersan for the Bucks. He's a second round pick that spent a couple seasons in Europe. If he was a 4-year college player (he's only 22 right now), he would've been a rookie this year. Instead this is his second year on the Bucks and got 2 years on a team (FC Barcelona) in a league way more competitive than the NCAA.
Trust me, I would love to see hometown guys on the Bucks over Euros, but they are doing what's best for them.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on April 12, 2010, 11:38:34 AM
If that were true, it would be really sad.
I retract my answer. I read the question wrong.
Notable 4-year players in the draft:
2005 - Danny Granger, Hakim Warrick, David Lee, Travis Diener, Ryan Gomes
2006 - Brandon Roy, Randy Foye, Steve Novak, Craig Smith
2007 - Al Thornton, Aaron Brooks, Carl Landry
2008 - Jason Thompson, Roy Hibbert
2009 - Terrence Williams, Tyler Hansbrough, Darren Collison, Toney Douglas, Sam Young, Marcus Thornton, AJ Price, Wesley Matthews
It's not the cream of the crop, but guys like Granger, Lee, Roy, Foye, Thornton, and Hibbert are looking like very good pros. I included MU guys, not to say that Diener and Novak have had comparable careers, but they're our guys. This past year was a very good year for seniors. All of the guys listed are averaging at least 7 ppg, which at least shows quality contribution from a rookie.
Quote from: martyconlonontherun on April 12, 2010, 11:40:45 AM
The problem is that you know exactly what you will get with Lazar. He's a borderline roster guy and nothing more. Where as a Euro may suck, but at least there is a chance you get a rotational player. There's also benefits to having a Euro stashed. It saves a roster spot for a vet that can contribute. Why waste a roster spot and money on a guy who you don't think is ready. Look at Ersan for the Bucks. He's a second round pick that spent a couple seasons in Europe. If he was a 4-year college player (he's only 22 right now), he would've been a rookie this year. Instead this is his second year on the Bucks and got 2 years on a team (FC Barcelona) in a league way more competitive than the NCAA.
Trust me, I would love to see hometown guys on the Bucks over Euros, but they are doing what's best for them.
This is all the Dream Team's fault. ;)
QuoteNotable 4-year players in the draft:
2005 - Danny Granger, Hakim Warrick, David Lee, Travis Diener, Ryan Gomes
2006 - Brandon Roy, Randy Foye, Steve Novak, Craig Smith
2007 - Al Thornton, Aaron Brooks, Carl Landry
2008 - Jason Thompson, Roy Hibbert
2009 - Terrence Williams, Tyler Hansbrough, Darren Collison, Toney Douglas, Sam Young, Marcus Thornton, AJ Price, Wesley Matthews
good research, its nice to have the names out there in this discussion.
I think Lazar's best point of comparison here might be a guy like David Lee. Lee is sort of a guy without a position, but does really well in a fast paced offense under D'Antoni. One theme among a lot of those guys that unfortunately doesn't apply to Lazar is there seem to be a lot of big time athletes (with size) that needed the time to refine their offensive games (Hibbert, Landry, Thompson, to an extent Gomes)
How 'bout Brandon Jennings?
Talking UK players entering the draft looks a little crazy. I can't really see more than two of these guys having bright futures, not because their not good but because of the hard transition. If you look at how dominant Thabeet was in 08-09 he just doesn't look near as good with the Thunder (seems happens to a lot of guys). So how will Patterson and the delightful Cousins join the NBA? I could see why Bledsoe left ($$) but I also see why he shouldn't have. Tell me what you think cuz I sure am confused. Also, don't bring up Orton because I think we all know how that's going to play out.
Quote from: 4everwarriors on April 12, 2010, 03:45:46 PM
How 'bout Brandon Jennings?
I'd like a nice Chardonnay if Lazar makes it.
Still have my address on file?
Quote from: 4everwarriors on April 12, 2010, 08:48:36 PM
Still have my address on file?
I do....will they accept strippers at the 4ever household to deliver the goods? If I'm going to pay, I think it should be blown out.
Quote from: jwalsh on April 12, 2010, 04:16:52 PM
Talking UK players entering the draft looks a little crazy. I can't really see more than two of these guys having bright futures, not because their not good but because of the hard transition. If you look at how dominant Thabeet was in 08-09 he just doesn't look near as good with the Thunder (seems happens to a lot of guys). So how will Patterson and the delightful Cousins join the NBA? I could see why Bledsoe left ($$) but I also see why he shouldn't have. Tell me what you think cuz I sure am confused. Also, don't bring up Orton because I think we all know how that's going to play out.
I've never understood the argument a player should stay to get better. Why have a guy try to balance school and play against amateur athletes with college-level training facilities? You can play against the world's best everyday in practice in pro-facitilities and get your body used to the 82 game schedule and travel.
If your argument is to stay and get an education, then I would agree. Unfortunately, most college players don't take advantage of that.
Quote from: jwalsh on April 12, 2010, 04:16:52 PM
Talking UK players entering the draft looks a little crazy. I can't really see more than two of these guys having bright futures, not because their not good but because of the hard transition. If you look at how dominant Thabeet was in 08-09 he just doesn't look near as good with the Thunder (seems happens to a lot of guys). So how will Patterson and the delightful Cousins join the NBA? I could see why Bledsoe left ($$) but I also see why he shouldn't have. Tell me what you think cuz I sure am confused. Also, don't bring up Orton because I think we all know how that's going to play out.
Patterson and Cousins will be very good players in the NBA
Wall = stud
Orton and Bledsoe will be projects in the NBA
Quote from: martyconlonontherun on April 12, 2010, 11:11:42 PM
I've never understood the argument a player should stay to get better. Why have a guy try to balance school and play against amateur athletes with college-level training facilities? You can play against the world's best everyday in practice in pro-facitilities and get your body used to the 82 game schedule and travel.
If your argument is to stay and get an education, then I would agree. Unfortunately, most college players don't take advantage of that.
Do you really think Calipari's players have to balance school with basketball?
Players learn the game better by staying in college longer. There is not a lot of teaching going on in the NBA because the players basically run the show. Also, the best way to get better at basketball is to play basketball. Coasting through practices and then sitting on the bench collecting a paycheck doesn't make a player better.
Unfortunately, the key word in that paragraph is "paycheck." Why play for free if someone will pay you to do it? It's a flawed system.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on April 13, 2010, 07:59:55 AM
Do you really think Calipari's players have to balance school with basketball?
Players learn the game better by staying in college longer. There is not a lot of teaching going on in the NBA because the players basically run the show. Also, the best way to get better at basketball is to play basketball. Coasting through practices and then sitting on the bench collecting a paycheck doesn't make a player better.
Unfortunately, the key word in that paragraph is "paycheck." Why play for free if someone will pay you to do it? It's a flawed system.
Where do base your opinion on? The college game and pro game are completely different.
Quote from: martyconlonontherun on April 12, 2010, 11:11:42 PM
I've never understood the argument a player should stay to get better.
In addition to what MM said above, bear in mind that teams are going to draft players who will make them better, especially when it comes to the second round. Would Wesley Matthews have come in and been an instant starter at Utah after his freshman or sophomore year? Would he have been given enough chances and opportunities to ever develop into that, or would he now be playing in Europe? It's not just staying to get better, but staying to develop into your potential. Look at the number of NBA draft picks that end up out of the league within 2 years. My guess would be it's 50-60% of them. And once you're out, the odds of ever getting back in are slim. For the mid-level players, it's often better to stay in school, hone your craft, and make sure that you are as ready as possible when you are given your first shot in the NBA, because you probably won't get a second chance.
Quote from: Hards_Alumni on April 13, 2010, 08:20:54 AM
Where do base your opinion on? The college game and pro game are completely different.
My opinion is based on the basketball IQs of most one-and-done or HS-to-pro players being significantly lower than 3- or 4-year college players. Kobe Bryant, for example, just recently started figuring out how to play effective team basketball. If you don't believe me, read some Phil Jackson quotes about Kobe sometime.
again, that is just conjecture.
Phil Jackson talking about Kobe is one coach talking about one player.
Does Kevin Durant have a low BB IQ? Lebron?
Quote from: Hards_Alumni on April 13, 2010, 09:35:20 AM
again, that is just conjecture.
Phil Jackson talking about Kobe is one coach talking about one player.
Does Kevin Durant have a low BB IQ? Lebron?
Yes, that is one example. However, most people understand that using examples is a good way to back up an opinion.
Yes, Durant and LeBron have relatively low basketball IQs.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on April 13, 2010, 09:52:33 AM
Yes, that is one example. However, most people understand that using examples is a good way to back up an opinion.
Yes, Durant and LeBron have relatively low basketball IQs.
I disagree. Lebron does NOT have a low basketball IQ.
Quote from: Hards_Alumni on April 13, 2010, 10:01:55 AM
I disagree. Lebron does NOT have a low basketball IQ.
I will give you that it's not as low as it was when he first entered the league but, he still has some learning to do.
LeBron is just one example though. Here is a list of drafted players since 2000 who played no more than 1 year in college (other than LeBron and Durant - I apologize if I missed any). How many of these guys would you consider to have a high basketball IQ?
Darius Miles, Ricky Davis, DerMarr Johnson, Jamal Crawford, Donnell Harvey, DeShawn Stevenson, Kwame Brown, Tyson Chandler, Eddy Curry, Eddie Griffin, DeSagana Diop, Rodney White, Zach Randolph, Gerald Wallace, Omar Cook, Ousmane Cisse, Alton Ford, DaJuan Wagner, Jamal Simpson, Ndudi Ebi, James Lang, Robert Swift, Kris Humphries, Dorell Wright, Marvin Williams, Martell Webster, Gerald Green, CJ Miles, Ricky Sanchez, Monta Ellis, Lou Williams, Andray Blatche, Amir Johnson, Tyrus Thomas, Shawne Williams, Dwight Howard, JR Smith, Greg Oden, Mike Conley, Brendan Wright, Spencer Hawes, Thaddeus Young, Javaris Crittenton, Daequan Cook, Derrick Rose, Michael Beasley, OJ Mayo, Kevin Love, Jerryd Bayless, Eric Gordon, Anthony Randolph, JJ Hickson, Kosta Koufos, Donte Greene, DeAndre Jordan, Bill Walker, Tyreke Evans, DeMar DeRozan, Jrue Holiday, BJ Mullens, Brandon Jennings, Carmelo Anthony.
EDIT: Somehow left off Carmelo.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on April 13, 2010, 10:23:58 AM
Darius Miles, Ricky Davis, DerMarr Johnson, Jamal Crawford, Donnell Harvey, DeShawn Stevenson, Kwame Brown, Tyson Chandler, Eddy Curry, Eddie Griffin, DeSagana Diop, Rodney White, Zach Randolph, Gerald Wallace, Omar Cook, Ousmane Cisse, Alton Ford, DaJuan Wagner, Jamal Simpson, Ndudi Ebi, James Lang, Robert Swift, Kris Humphries, Dorell Wright, Marvin Williams, Martell Webster, Gerald Green, CJ Miles, Ricky Sanchez, Monta Ellis, Lou Williams, Andray Blatche, Amir Johnson, Tyrus Thomas, Shawne Williams, Dwight Howard, JR Smith, Greg Oden, Mike Conley, Brendan Wright, Spencer Hawes, Thaddeus Young, Javaris Crittenton, Daequan Cook, Derrick Rose, Michael Beasley, OJ Mayo, Kevin Love, Jerryd Bayless, Eric Gordon, Anthony Randolph, JJ Hickson, Kosta Koufos, Donte Greene, DeAndre Jordan, Bill Walker, Tyreke Evans, DeMar DeRozan, Jrue Holiday, BJ Mullens, Brandon Jennings.
Amazed how poor that list is. Yes, there are plenty of studs in there, like Dwight Howard, Derrick Rose, and Brandon Jennings, but in general I would say the 4-year player list I posted above has more quality players in just the past 5 years. I realize that I didn't put all of the 4-year players on my list, but most of the names on that list are simply "meh" type players.
I think the broader point of view for an NBA GM is that its worth missing on half a dozen picks if you find the next superstar with the seventh. The NBA is dominated by stars unlike any other professional sport. The haves have the money to get one of the top 10 stars in the league, and the rest do not. Sure every year there is a good team or two built around playing the right way, high basketball IQs, etc. But sustained income via ticket and merch, and most of the time team success lives and dies with your team's star. If you find a player you think can be that star, you pick him as soon as you can. If you don't someone else will. High IQ, contributer team types can be found and had relatively cheaply/often in the grand scheme of things.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on April 13, 2010, 07:59:55 AM
Do you really think Calipari's players have to balance school with basketball?
Players learn the game better by staying in college longer. There is not a lot of teaching going on in the NBA because the players basically run the show. Also, the best way to get better at basketball is to play basketball. Coasting through practices and then sitting on the bench collecting a paycheck doesn't make a player better.
I will use Brandon Jennings as an example. He played in Europe where he had to mature as a person and learn how to play within a system that didn't fit his game instead of going to Arizona and letting his ego get to him (Yes, I know he only went cause he didn't get into Arizona) Now, he's working with Bill Peterson (one of the best player development coaches in the league See: Nash, Steve) and Coach Sampson (who besides his texting problems is a pretty good coach). Not to mention Coach Skiles who was a PG and is known for preaching defense. You think he would've got better coaching in Arizona?
Quote from: brewcity77 on April 13, 2010, 08:25:18 AM
In addition to what MM said above, bear in mind that teams are going to draft players who will make them better, especially when it comes to the second round. Would Wesley Matthews have come in and been an instant starter at Utah after his freshman or sophomore year? Would he have been given enough chances and opportunities to ever develop into that, or would he now be playing in Europe? It's not just staying to get better, but staying to develop into your potential. Look at the number of NBA draft picks that end up out of the league within 2 years. My guess would be it's 50-60% of them. And once you're out, the odds of ever getting back in are slim. For the mid-level players, it's often better to stay in school, hone your craft, and make sure that you are as ready as possible when you are given your first shot in the NBA, because you probably won't get a second chance.
I understand a player who is not good enough shouldn't go to the pros. But if you are a guaranteed first round pick you should leave. The reason why 50-60% of the guys are out of the league in 2 years is because they weren't good enough. College wouldn't have changed that for most guys. Might as well take the pay-check for 2 years instead of none when GMs realized you never developed from 19-22.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on April 13, 2010, 09:29:29 AM
My opinion is based on the basketball IQs of most one-and-done or HS-to-pro players being significantly lower than 3- or 4-year college players. Kobe Bryant, for example, just recently started figuring out how to play effective team basketball. If you don't believe me, read some Phil Jackson quotes about Kobe sometime.
Depends where Kobe would have went. If he played under Coach K or Coach Smith I would agree that he might have learned to play team ball. But most likely it is just because he is one of the greatest players in the game and he always thought he had to be Alpha-dog. Even Jordan took years to realize to trust his teammates. It isn't really an IQ problem but a ego problem. These guys think they can hit every shot.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on April 13, 2010, 10:23:58 AM
I will give you that it's not as low as it was when he first entered the league but, he still has some learning to do.
LeBron is just one example though. Here is a list of drafted players since 2000 who played no more than 1 year in college (other than LeBron and Durant - I apologize if I missed any). How many of these guys would you consider to have a high basketball IQ?
Darius Miles, Ricky Davis, DerMarr Johnson, Jamal Crawford, Donnell Harvey, DeShawn Stevenson, Kwame Brown, Tyson Chandler, Eddy Curry, Eddie Griffin, DeSagana Diop, Rodney White, Zach Randolph, Gerald Wallace, Omar Cook, Ousmane Cisse, Alton Ford, DaJuan Wagner, Jamal Simpson, Ndudi Ebi, James Lang, Robert Swift, Kris Humphries, Dorell Wright, Marvin Williams, Martell Webster, Gerald Green, CJ Miles, Ricky Sanchez, Monta Ellis, Lou Williams, Andray Blatche, Amir Johnson, Tyrus Thomas, Shawne Williams, Dwight Howard, JR Smith, Greg Oden, Mike Conley, Brendan Wright, Spencer Hawes, Thaddeus Young, Javaris Crittenton, Daequan Cook, Derrick Rose, Michael Beasley, OJ Mayo, Kevin Love, Jerryd Bayless, Eric Gordon, Anthony Randolph, JJ Hickson, Kosta Koufos, Donte Greene, DeAndre Jordan, Bill Walker, Tyreke Evans, DeMar DeRozan, Jrue Holiday, BJ Mullens, Brandon Jennings, Carmelo Anthony.
EDIT: Somehow left off Carmelo.
I'll make a case for
DeSagana Diop having an
excellent basketball IQ. After only one year of college ball, he was able to tell that he stunk and had little chance of getting better, so rather than staying in school where his inability to improve would be demonstrated, he jumped to the NBA to get his before NBA GM's could get wise.
You have to be crazy if you think Javaris Crittendon doesn't have a high basketball IQ. And JC, if you are reading this, let me reiterate, that I think you have a stunningly high basketball IQ.
Correlation=/=causation.
The reason those guys left early is because they had the raw ability. Whereas the guys who stay and make it to the NBA only make it because of their high IQ, players like Battier. Rarely does a player have extreme athleticism and IQ. College would not necessarily raise that IQ. Eddy Curry wouldn't be any better just cause he went to college.
Quote from: martyconlonontherun on April 13, 2010, 11:49:08 AM
Correlation=/=causation.
The reason those guys left early is because they had the raw ability. Whereas the guys who stay and make it to the NBA only make it because of their high IQ, players like Battier. Rarely does a player have extreme athleticism and IQ. College would not necessarily raise that IQ. Eddy Curry wouldn't be any better just cause he went to college.
This is my point as well.
Quote from: martyconlonontherun on April 13, 2010, 11:49:08 AM
Correlation=/=causation.
The reason those guys left early is because they had the raw ability. Whereas the guys who stay and make it to the NBA only make it because of their high IQ, players like Battier. Rarely does a player have extreme athleticism and IQ. College would not necessarily raise that IQ. Eddy Curry wouldn't be any better just cause he went to college.
It's a good point.
I'd like to say that if a guy like Curry spent 4 years in college he could learn the finer points of being a post player... but in reality his physical talent would allow him to dominate without having to really learn the finer points, in which case college really wouldn't have helped him become a better player.
BUT, there is something to be said for the overall maturation process that occurs in college, even for basketball players. I might not have technically been "smarter" when I graduated school (higher IQ), but certainly I was more mature, had some decent life lessons, and was prepared for the "real world".
While Curry might not have been "better" at basketball with 4 years of college, he might have had the maturity and work ethic to work hard to develop his skills in the NBA.
Quote from: 2002MUalum on April 13, 2010, 12:44:15 PM
It's a good point.
I'd like to say that if a guy like Curry spent 4 years in college he could learn the finer points of being a post player... but in reality his physical talent would allow him to dominate without having to really learn the finer points, in which case college really wouldn't have helped him become a better player.
BUT, there is something to be said for the overall maturation process that occurs in college, even for basketball players. I might not have technically been "smarter" when I graduated school (higher IQ), but certainly I was more mature, had some decent life lessons, and was prepared for the "real world".
While Curry might not have been "better" at basketball with 4 years of college, he might have had the maturity and work ethic to work hard to develop his skills in the NBA.
+1
Very well put.
http://www.nbadraft.net/2010earlyentry
Check out the list for the early entries only and those who are expected to declare. This is a serious list so far for this draft and doesn't even include the seniors.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on April 13, 2010, 10:23:58 AM
I will give you that it's not as low as it was when he first entered the league but, he still has some learning to do.
LeBron is just one example though. Here is a list of drafted players since 2000 who played no more than 1 year in college (other than LeBron and Durant - I apologize if I missed any). How many of these guys would you consider to have a high basketball IQ?
Darius Miles, Ricky Davis, DerMarr Johnson, Jamal Crawford, Donnell Harvey, DeShawn Stevenson, Kwame Brown, Tyson Chandler, Eddy Curry, Eddie Griffin, DeSagana Diop, Rodney White, Zach Randolph, Gerald Wallace, Omar Cook, Ousmane Cisse, Alton Ford, DaJuan Wagner, Jamal Simpson, Ndudi Ebi, James Lang, Robert Swift, Kris Humphries, Dorell Wright, Marvin Williams, Martell Webster, Gerald Green, CJ Miles, Ricky Sanchez, Monta Ellis, Lou Williams, Andray Blatche, Amir Johnson, Tyrus Thomas, Shawne Williams, Dwight Howard, JR Smith, Greg Oden, Mike Conley, Brendan Wright, Spencer Hawes, Thaddeus Young, Javaris Crittenton, Daequan Cook, Derrick Rose, Michael Beasley, OJ Mayo, Kevin Love, Jerryd Bayless, Eric Gordon, Anthony Randolph, JJ Hickson, Kosta Koufos, Donte Greene, DeAndre Jordan, Bill Walker, Tyreke Evans, DeMar DeRozan, Jrue Holiday, BJ Mullens, Brandon Jennings, Carmelo Anthony.
EDIT: Somehow left off Carmelo.
Of this list... how many are STILL in the LEAGUE collecting millions of dollars?
Do they care about being a bench guy in the NBA, not with their millions of dollars for a paycheck.
I'm confused by a lot of people on here that state that Coach Cal's boys should stay in college to get "basketball smarts"... Isn't the smart thing to do is leave when your ceiling is HIGH, before people begin to realize your faults in the game, or worse, you get hurt. Get the guaranteed contract, and maybe you break out in the NBA.
I would be surprised by the list of guys you think have "high basketball IQ". If you look around the league, it is dominated by stars who play off raw talent. The league has turned into a slasher league. Drive to the hoop, go for the dunk, or get fouled. If you have a great player, it's a one on one league, there are very few teams in the league that play a purely team game (The Bucks now being one, which is why they are good, because they didn't have a star to go to). But teams like the Cavaliers, Magic, Lakers, Nuggets are very boring to watch because you know where the ball is going.
So really what I am asking is: Do people on this board really think players shouldn't go one and done to receive a HUGE paycheck, one the likes of no one on this board will get... just so they can become "basketball smart"? Really? Thought this board had some intelligence.
I'm not saying that he can guard every 3 in the nba but i think this 'lazar is too slow to guard the 3' mantra is overused.
There are plenty of players that lazar could hold his own against especially once you start looking at bench players. And with his strength and abilities to shoot, post up and rebound he'll be able to cause more match up problems on O than he'll ever be responsible for on D.
Not to mention they won't find a harder working, more coachable or better character guy in the draft(possibly the world).
Any NBA GM who doesn't think he's worth a late 2nd round pick should be taken to the woodshed.
Quote from: RawdogDX on April 15, 2010, 07:49:04 AM
I'm not saying that he can guard every 3 in the nba but i think this 'lazar is too slow to guard the 3' mantra is overused.
There are plenty of players that lazar could hold his own against especially once you start looking at bench players. And with his strength and abilities to shoot, post up and rebound he'll be able to cause more match up problems on O than he'll ever be responsible for on D.
Not to mention they won't find a harder working, more coachable or better character guy in the draft(possibly the world).
Any NBA GM who doesn't think he's worth a late 2nd round pick should be taken to the woodshed.
But why take a 22/23 year old player whos ceiling is a roleplayer off the bench and floor is a roleplayer off the bench when you can go find an 18 year old european who's floor might be just terrible (calling Darko), however their ceiling could be an NBA all-star?
Thats what goes through GM's minds... You can make lousy pick after lousy pick, however once you hit it big, everyone forgets your lousy picks (Bucks...)
Quote from: Mayor McCheese on April 15, 2010, 07:54:03 AM
But why take a 22/23 year old player whos ceiling is a roleplayer off the bench and floor is a roleplayer off the bench when you can go find an 18 year old european who's floor might be just terrible (calling Darko), however their ceiling could be an NBA all-star?
Thats what goes through GM's minds... You can make lousy pick after lousy pick, however once you hit it big, everyone forgets your lousy picks (Bucks...)
First of all, you need role players to win championships, especially shooters and rebounders who will gladly accept the role you give them. Some teams already have their star or future stars set and are tyring to win now.
I'm not a bucks fan so i'm not sure what 2nd round pick you are talking about. I know you can't possibly be comparing this situation to Jennings. I also had no clue that there were 30 hyper athletic 18 year old euro's who will be going in the 2nd round.
I understand that what you are saying will go through some gm's mind, but you sound exactly like the people who said that deiner and novak would never be on an NBA roster. If you can shoot and do one other thing well than you can find a spot on an NBA team. If you can get a guy who will be able to shoot and out muscle guys for rebounds and play well in the post than he does enough to be on your team.
those role players, though crucial to deep playoff runs, arent worth draft picks. with draft picks, its much more advantageous to take a high risk/high reward player, or a euro you can stash.
role players are pretty cheap on the free agent wire, in the grand scheme of things. plus, getting them after a few years of service gives teams a chance to see exactly what roles they fill in the NBA rather than trying to predict that based off their inflated college stats. its really tough to correctly draft a guy that will fill your niche needs on the court, as well as provide the perfect personality in the locker room, etc. in fact, you might use a pick on a role player, only to strike out on what kind of role player you were looking for. the most overlooked fallacy of this board is that all glue guys/role players are created equal. 3pt shooters are not 3pt shooters, empty rebounders are not empty rebounders, etc. to draft a role player is to guess exactly what way he will fill the cracks in your roster, which can be every bit as hit or miss as hoping to find a diamond in the rough. at that point, you are better taking the higher ceiling risk/stashing a euro that doesnt count against your team and develops in europe.
Quote from: MUBurrow on April 15, 2010, 09:13:10 AM
its really tough to correctly draft a guy that will fill your niche needs on the court, as well as provide the perfect personality in the locker room, etc
You are right. Exactly spot on, which is why when one comes around you should draft him.
Quote from: MUBurrow on April 15, 2010, 09:13:10 AM
at that point, you are better taking the higher ceiling risk/stashing a euro that doesnt count against your team and develops in europe.
Once agian, are there 30 of those? You can say you are better off but that isn't what every team does.