Projections are always "premature." By definition. Once they've reached a level, it's no longer a projection. And a "best case" projection is always a projection that is not the likeliest case. So, while we seem to be arguing, I'm really not sure that we disagree on a whole lot. If I were comparing Oden to Duncan right now, it would be absurdly premature. I don't think "top-tier big man" as his ceiling is unreasonable considering the scouting consensus of him and what he's already shown, in college and his rookie season.
Oden had an 18.1 PER as a rookie, despite being clearly limited as he recovered from injury. I don't know if he could have matched 22.6 if he had been at 100%, but I think it would have been a lot closer.
That's right. Not to mention Duncan had the benefit of playing 4 years in college. I think this upcoming season will tell quite a bit about Oden's ceiling.
Of course it isn't. I think he'll be a 'top-teir big man'. It is premature, however, to attach "first ballot Hall of Famer, 3-time Finals MVP, and 2-time NBA MVP" as a reasonable ceiling. Duncan is arguably the greatest C/PF-combo player of his generation, and perhaps even of all-time. Does Brandon Roy have a Michael Jordan or even a Kobe Bryant "ceiling", for the sake of argument? I don't think so in either case. It doesn't mean Brandon can't be a great player, but why burden him with unrealistic expectations. Or perhaps we should just call every greatest-ever player as Player X's "ceiling" and devalue the entire concept.
Too many people, for too long now have thrown around so promiscously the "BUST" label at or near Oden. None of them have a fucking clue. You want to find out what a "bust" center looks like stat-wise look up the numbers for Olowokandi and Kwame and Darko Milicic. I put bust in quotes as bust in this meaning is a center who was drafted high, didn't pan out as hoped - AND YET - played in the league for years and years. The true busts never make it past their rookie deal. When you look it up, you see that Greg, hobbling on surgically repaired knee, out of condition from inability to train in the off-season, during his rookie year, had a significantly higher PER than Olowokandi, Kwame or Darko did in any of their very best years.
Although it's still too early to put him in the "bust" category with the others, Andrea Bargnani has now played three full season in the NBA - and has yet to top PER = 15.0 (average player). His career PER is 12.9. I think Bargnani has sufficient offensive talent to avoid the bust label - certianly more than the three you mentioned. However, I am SO FREAKING GLAD WE HAVE ODEN INSTEAD OF BARGNANI. Even if Bargnani someday has a PER approaching Oden's rookie PER of 18.1, I'd still rather have Oden. Defense and rebounding win championships. Simply put, Oden gives you both, Bargnani gives you neither. Oden, as an out of shape rookie recovering from microfracture surgery was one of the top rebounders in the league last season (in terms of TRB%). Bargani is one of the worst rebounding starting 7-footers in the entire history of the NBA (2nd worst all-time behind Brad Sellers, to be exact). So, even if Bargnani ends up averaging 25 PPG and completely shakes the bust label and Oden only averages a career high of 15 PPG, I'd still rather have Oden and his great defense and 20% TRB% over Bargnani and his lousy 10% (career best) TRB%. Casual fans, and media assclowns put far too much value in scoring and seriously undervalue rebounding and defense. If a number 1 pick doesn't immediately average 20 PPG, they label him a bust. High scoring gets you on Sportscenter and helps sell jerseys, but great defense wins rings. I'll take the latter any day. BNM
A good post, but I would like to make a note about PER 15.0 - it most certainly not the average player PER in the NBA - but it is the average production per minute of all the players in the NBA divided by all play-minutes - and because the better players will usually play more - it is easy to make the mistake you made - but PER 15.0 can be thought of as roughly the PER of an average starter in the league - most certainly not the average player.
Not according to the man who invented the formula: "I've set it up so that the league average, every season, is 15.00" So, 15.00 is average production for all NBA players. If you are above 15.0, your production (according to Hollinger's formula) is above average. If you are below 15.0, your production is below average. PER does account for PT and pace differences. So, it's very possible for a player with limited minutes to post a PER above 15.0 - in fact it's very common and one of the flaws of the formula - a guy who plays garbage minutes against other scrubs can have a higher PER than a starter who clearly contributes more against tougher competition. That said, whe I look at Andrea Bargnani, and take into account everything he does (and doesn't) do - the scoring, the poor shoopting percentages, the weak rebounding, the poor man-to-man post defense, I see an below average NBA player. So, my observations are in agreement with Hollinger's formula in this case. I also see that he has the potential to score more, shoot a higher percentage, and improve his rebounding a little - which would both push his PER above 15.0, and make him an above average NBA player in my opinion. BNM
The average of what? It is not the average per player - but the average per minute played - see "calculating PER" from basketball-reference and notice how the weights are applied to the minutes to create the "average": If you actually go to Hollinger's personal site - and look at the approximation of what a specific PER means - he sets 15 at "Pretty good player: 15.0" - which is most definitely not the average player in the NBA. See http://www.alleyoop.com/prates.shtm for the way JH breaks it down. Again, going to the horse's mouth: Again - it's the "league average" of "accomplishments" - which tells you that this is the average per minute played, not the players average. A confusing point, for sure, but that seems to be the nature of the beast (statistics).
Just out of curiosity, what label do *you* use for the Sam Bowie or Pervis Ellison type player? I'm sure both put up very nice PERs when they were healthy - they just weren't on the court enough for it to make a difference. From the team's perspective, they were just as much of a wasted draft pick as Kwame or Olowokandi.
I don't know what their injuries were, but I do know that you are talking about pre-microfracture surgery (at least in common use). Medical technology has improved since then.
No, but Brandon Roy hasn't been evaluated as one of the best talents at his position ever. Oden has. I think we should use greatest-ever players as the "ceiling" for greatest-ever prospects, until that prospect shows convincing evidence that the evaluations were wrong!
Right now, I believe we have a 7ft Ben Wallace (an "in his prime" Ben Wallace, I mean) with a lot more offensive potential. Can actually make free throws too. All Time Great? Way too early to say but I lean towards a no. Ain't nothin' wrong with what he already is though
Guys, don't confuse once-in-a-generation with all-time-great. He just has to be the best in a 10-15 year span. And looking at the past 5 years, and forward to the next 5, I'd say he has a good chance at it.
7 ft Wallace with offense and FT shooting? So that would make him... a taller Alonzo Mourning? I'm fine with that.
One thing I saw from Oden at the Fanfest: a Dream Shake attempt. The shot didn't go in, but he did do the shake on Joel, and got a shot off. I'd love to see him work on that some more.
Well I think the first step is for him to stay out of foul trouble. I think the more he can "stay in the game" the more his game will develop. It's too hard to try to get used to the NBA speed, when you are constantly on the bench with foul trouble. If Oden can average about 30 minutes a game, he will be a dominator by mid season. IMO.
