EXACTLY. Read what you just said. You said a player with only college experience is more likely to be at his peak. Read that again. That means that you think that in MOST CASES, players with lots of college experience reach their peak before they hit the pros! That doesn't make sense!
Yep. I think the true indicator is actually looking at what's above those shoulders. Lillard has the eye of the tiger. You know he is a competitor and won't be complacent. He wants to be the best and doesn't mind working hard to get there. That's why he will be a top tier pg. it doesn't matter how old he is or how many years of college. It's how much drive he has to be the best.
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.
No, I didn't. I said a player with four years of college experience is more likely to be at their peak in comparison a player with one year of college experience.
Huh? You're completely confused. Nate4Prez is saying players reach their peak in college if they play too much college. That has nothing to do with what your saying. Sure, Kobe gets better in year 4 of NBA than he would've in college BUT that doesn't mean Tim Duncan reached his peak in college because he played four years there. The idea that any basketball player reaches his peak BEFORE playing in the pros is preposterous.
There you go again. In your world, a four years of college player can reach his peak before gong to the pros.
I think he makes a perfectly valid point. A guy like Taj Gibson played 4 years of college. He was quite NBA ready. I don't think he's improved very much, though he's still a quality contributor who might start for a few teams. Duncan? He graduated college at 20, and was pretty much great the whole of his career. His PER shot up when Duncan turned 36 and was putting up 12/8 kind of numbers. He simply became their #1 guy. EDIT: for comparison, I picked a random player, Steve Smith, who played 4 years at Michigan State. He graduated at age 22.
I never said any such thing. But Denny does appear to be saying that players that came out of high school were better after years in the NBA than players that spent 4 years in college. It's more likely that players who came out of high school to the NBA weren't in the NBA after 4 years.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
