|
On June 22 2014 11:06 AgentW wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2014 10:38 RowdierBob wrote:
Smart's a better player now but you've got to look long term.
Exum is very raw but has the great tools to become an NBA star.
Does Smart turn out much better than Tony Allen with a little more offence (or that Stuckey reference)? As you say, that's a really good NBA player but not someone you can build around. If Exum hits his ceiling, that's a franchise type guy there.
Plenty of young guys like Exum are taken on potential. Look at T Mac, KG, Kobe. Of course there's always the flip side like Gerald Green or Seb Telfair but these teams aren't going to take Exum on a hope and prayer--they've obv seen something they think will translate to longer term success. Perhaps I'm keying in on too minute of a point that you made, but I think there's a discussion to be had about how valuable a Tony Allen like player is. Here's Allen's stats: http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/a/allento01.htmlSo he can't shoot the three, which obviously hurts his team's spacing. He is, however, an extremely efficient offensive player who doesn't require a large number of possessions or minutes. On the defensive end, he's elite. Does that make him a top fifty or hundred player in terms of value? Probably not, because he's a wing, but if he was a center, he'd certainly be worth being picked in the top handful of selections.
Isn't that just positional value, in general though? I mean most teams have trouble finding a center who is competent, let alone elite at any skill. I mean, if Tim Duncan had even 2014 Finals Dwayne Wade levels of athleticism he would be the greatest player in the history of the NBA, and it wouldn't be close.
|
Well, the positional value issue doesn't really apply to the Exum vs. Smart thing because they're both guards, but maybe that's the answer to my question. Guards who can't score perhaps are just limited. I don't understand your theoretical though. Care to explain?
|
United States22883 Posts
On June 22 2014 10:38 RowdierBob wrote:
Smart's a better player now but you've got to look long term.
Exum is very raw but has the great tools to become an NBA star.
Does Smart turn out much better than Tony Allen with a little more offence (or that Stuckey reference)? As you say, that's a really good NBA player but not someone you can build around. If Exum hits his ceiling, that's a franchise type guy there.
Plenty of young guys like Exum are taken on potential. Look at T Mac, KG, Kobe. Of course there's always the flip side like Gerald Green or Seb Telfair but these teams aren't going to take Exum on a hope and prayer--they've obv seen something they think will translate to longer term success.
I'm saying 1. potential talk is dubious at best 2. The competition thing is going to be a factor. He had a couple games against good American college players and didn't impress. Beating up on foreign u19 teams, even Spain's, doesn't impress me.
I don't think he's that rare.
|
On June 22 2014 11:49 AgentW wrote:
Well, the positional value issue doesn't really apply to the Exum vs. Smart thing because they're both guards, but maybe that's the answer to my question. Guards who can't score perhaps are just limited. I don't understand your theoretical though. Care to explain?
The athletic Tim Duncan theoretical? Lets just pretend we have 2003?2004? Duncan. He is an incredibly skilled 7 foot tall player. But even at his peak he was slower, with less vertical than 2014 Wade. It has nothing to do with Exum vs. Smart, as you said, I was just commenting on whoever said defensive centers are more valuable than defensive wings, with the point that centers with any skill are more valuable than any other position X with that same skill, because its almost impossible to find 7'0" people who can hold a basketball, let alone jump and shoot and run.
|
I think the funny thing about this discussion is how binary great big men are. With guards you can argue all day whether this guard is better than that guard. I can name the great big men in NBA history right now:
Russell, Chamberlain, Abdul-Jabar, Malone, Ewing, Olajuwon, Shaq, Robinson, Duncan. That's it. The second tier is like Ralph Sampson and Yao. This seems to suggest that most big men aren't very talented and the few that are really stand out.
|
On June 22 2014 12:47 cLutZ wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2014 11:49 AgentW wrote:
Well, the positional value issue doesn't really apply to the Exum vs. Smart thing because they're both guards, but maybe that's the answer to my question. Guards who can't score perhaps are just limited. I don't understand your theoretical though. Care to explain? The athletic Tim Duncan theoretical? Lets just pretend we have 2003?2004? Duncan. He is an incredibly skilled 7 foot tall player. But even at his peak he was slower, with less vertical than 2014 Wade. It has nothing to do with Exum vs. Smart, as you said, I was just commenting on whoever said defensive centers are more valuable than defensive wings, with the point that centers with any skill are more valuable than any other position X with that same skill, because its almost impossible to find 7'0" people who can hold a basketball, let alone jump and shoot and run.
I brought it up. I see the argument: athletic guards are a relative dime a dozen. But what if Allen's just a tier above the run of the mill guys, which he seems to be?
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
|
On June 22 2014 13:08 oneofthem wrote:
olajuwon lol?
Sorry, missed that. I didn't forget him, it just didn't get in there for some reason. :p
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
well if you look at guys like yao and howard you can see why in the modern context, what it takes for a center to have a 15 year, best 3 player in the league career is just incredibly rare. physical ability, skill, and health. reason why 'golden age' of basketball had more dominant big men was because of the generally lower skill and ability of play back in the day and hte associated different strats equilibrium.
|
I don't think it's a controversial thing to suggest that being a dominant big man in today's NBA is far more difficult than it was in the past.
|
Howard is a funny example because he's much shorter than all of the other guys on that list.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
he is shorter but still makes up for it with the athleticism. i guess pure height is also devalued in the modern game compared to the russell-chamberlain era.
i mean why stand around when you can jump lol
|
On June 22 2014 12:03 Jibba wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2014 10:38 RowdierBob wrote:
Smart's a better player now but you've got to look long term.
Exum is very raw but has the great tools to become an NBA star.
Does Smart turn out much better than Tony Allen with a little more offence (or that Stuckey reference)? As you say, that's a really good NBA player but not someone you can build around. If Exum hits his ceiling, that's a franchise type guy there.
Plenty of young guys like Exum are taken on potential. Look at T Mac, KG, Kobe. Of course there's always the flip side like Gerald Green or Seb Telfair but these teams aren't going to take Exum on a hope and prayer--they've obv seen something they think will translate to longer term success. I'm saying 1. potential talk is dubious at best 2. The competition thing is going to be a factor. He had a couple games against good American college players and didn't impress. Beating up on foreign u19 teams, even Spain's, doesn't impress me. I don't think he's that rare.
He was still only 17 at that tournament carrying the bulk of the offensive load for that team.
You can't judge him on one game--I doubt he's ever played anyone near Smart's ability and it's something he'll have to work on. But does he have the tools to do that? Obviously yes. Professional scouts have been working him over for weeks now--he's not going top five on "potential talk" alone. The kid obviously has something worth investing in. This of course is no guarantee he'll make it but he's worth the chance.
Given you're a big Michigan fan, how do you think Stauskas will go in the NBA and is he more than a role player?
|
On June 22 2014 13:01 Jerubaal wrote:
I think the funny thing about this discussion is how binary great big men are. With guards you can argue all day whether this guard is better than that guard. I can name the great big men in NBA history right now:
Russell, Chamberlain, Abdul-Jabar, Malone, Ewing, Olajuwon, Shaq, Robinson, Duncan. That's it. The second tier is like Ralph Sampson and Yao. This seems to suggest that most big men aren't very talented and the few that are really stand out.
There is a severe lack of Dirk on that list.
|
|
|
On paper, Dirk could be on that list, but that guy is such a weird big man cause his primary weapon is his jump shot, not his post presence. He also kinda sucks on the defensive end, which is the reason why he couldn't win a ring until the Mavs got Tyson Chandler.
|
Klay Thompson to Lakers would be very interesting indeed
|
United States22883 Posts
On June 22 2014 14:24 RowdierBob wrote:
Given you're a big Michigan fan, how do you think Stauskas will go in the NBA and is he more than a role player?
Before last year I would've said no. He picked up a lot of slack though after Burke left, especially in handling the ball. He's by no means elite at anything besides shooting, but he can put the ball on the ground so he's more than just a spot up shooter. I doubt he'll even be an average slasher at the NBA level (not quick and dribbles too high,) but he's got a pretty slick step back and fadeaway, so he can usually create his own shot from a PnR or handoff. He's also a surprisingly clever passer.
Defensively, he'll probably be bad. Not super quick or long. On ball, he'll work for it but just isn't quick for the NBA. Off-ball, he's surprisingly bad at chasing guys around (even though he's good at it on offense.)
I think the appeal of him is that he shoots like a pure shooter, but he's a little bit more versatile than they usually are. Kevin Martin is a pretty fair comparison, although Stauskas is probably a bit more athletic at his age and I like his shot more.
|
On June 22 2014 15:31 imBLIND wrote:
On paper, Dirk could be on that list, but that guy is such a weird big man cause his primary weapon is his jump shot, not his post presence. He also kinda sucks on the defensive end, which is the reason why he couldn't win a ring until the Mavs got Tyson Chandler.
and what about Shaq, Malone, and Kareem then? Mavs couldn't win because the roster wasn't good enough and they ran into better teams. I hope you weren't expecting Dirk to stop Wade in 2006 and 2011 
|
I didn't include Dirk because I don't think he fits what we were talking about. Dirk is a stretch 4 who happens to be 7 feet tall.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
