whats overrated 2 u?
what in ur opinion are overrated aspects of bball that ppl just go goo goo gaga over?
mine is arm span
Points on a bad team.
Sure players that do this ARE talented there is no question, it is the NBA and you are putting up 20+ points nightly, but lets not act like you would be doing the same on a team that wants to win.
When you go to a team that wants to win your whole role changes, that's why I think a player like Monta Ellis, if you were to put him on the Lakers hypothetically he would be a slightly more talented Shannon Brown. He wouldn't be Iso'ed in the middle of the floor taking 20 shots. He would take 8-12 in the flow of the offense and be a sixth man.
i dont think ellis would be a sixth man for the lakers...
i mean hes oretty dam good.. whether the warriors are good or not...
he gets u 23-24 a game shoots a pretty good percentage and gets to the line
hes also a great athlete
true he can be a ball stopper... no doubt hes a great scorer tho
lets say he did play for LAL... and kobe was gnna play the starting two no matter what... then yeah he would come off the bench... he would still take more than 12 shots a game tho
Ellis would start at the point no questions asked. That or they would start bean at the 3 instead and allow Monta to run the 2. Trust me, Shannon Brown has nowhere near the bball IQ, shot selection, or shot creating abilities of Monta Ellis. Thats honestly a pretty piss poor comparison. If Shannon played for GSW no doubt he'd have some decent scoring numbers with as much fast breaking as they do, but Monta is an actual go-to payer in this league. Something Shannon wasn't even able to do in COLLEGE. Shannon is lucky he had the right coach and talent around him otherwise he'd have found himself completely out of the league, because lord knows he failed miserably in Cle.
If you wanna tlk about a guy who can put up num,bers on a bad team, then lets talk about Mike James with Toronto. The guy goes to a team with a bunch of scrubs(even more than himself) and averages 20 and 5 yet can't even get playing time anywhere else. Now saying a guy like that would be Derek Fisher at best on a Laker's team would be understandable, but Monta actually averaged something like 18 ppg his SECOND year in L out of high school on a team that put the Mavs out of the first round in playoffs. And that was long before he developed a TRUE go-to scorer's mentality and ability. Not to mention as much crap as he gets for his mediocre playmaking skills, Shannon Brown's are that much worse. Shanwow is a SF trapped in a pg's body. Good fast break player but almost nothing else.
I think Ellis would be a 6th man for the Lakers too. An elite 6th man, but a 6th man nonetheless. He's not a PG at all really.
Scoring on bad teams.
NBA Draft athletic measurements. Guys get more athleticism and stuff playing in the NBA most times, due to the strength and conditioning aspects. Some guys stay the same, some guys improve, some guys pass others that were more athletic. People go crazy over it every year like it makes a difference in NBA games though. Never fails.
No, Ellis clearly is no PG, but on a team like LA who has no other ball handler beside of Kobe who himslef is starting to lose his handle due to finger issues, I could see Monta starting at the point. Kobe has for quite some time been wanting to go off ball and you just allow him to gradually make that shift with Ellis taking on the Kobe-pseudo point role. Kobe and Monta would actually play QUITE well together assuming they signed a sharpshooter to play with them. Kobe/Bynum in the low post(with Kobe having a lot of off ball movement), Monta creating from the perimeter, Pau around foul line/High post, and a shaarpshooting defender for spacing.
Though like I said, I agree he's not much a point so potentially they'd move Kobe up a position. But with LAL's lack of perimiter pay, I really don't see them NOT starting him over Blake or Fisher. If they were though, he'd be a 6th mna garnering 30+ MPG and would by no means only a SLIGHTLY better Shannon Brown.
BTW, Derek Fisher isn't a PG at all either. Just has a high BBal Iq, Poor ballhandling, can't create for others and absolutely has NO ability to feed the post. In fact, I've often reffered to him as "The Anti-Guard". A terrific leader though nonetheless. You could be right JNixon, I just don't see enough talent between Fisher/Blake or Artest for Monta not to start.
A player is overrated when:
They are given unwarranted praise based on potential alone:
I feel that a player is considered overrated whenever "experts" place absurb expectations on a player based solely on potential...By doing this the player is given too much credit without ever actually accomplishing anything
A player is the big name on a team but has terrific players of lesser known names around them.
players that score a bunch of points but need to take about the same amount of shots to get there ex. 30pts on 25 shots
Players that are rated high based off one game
players who have great potential but have a horrible work ethic
"BTW, Derek Fisher isn't a PG at all either. Just has a high BBal Iq, Poor ballhandling, can't create for others and absolutely has NO ability to feed the post. In fact, I've often reffered to him as "The Anti-Guard". A terrific leader though nonetheless"
Derek Fisher has 15 years of playing PG that says otherwise. Just because you call him names doesn't mean he doesn't play PG.
Statistics ,and I mean all of them
I am not saying they aren't important but sometimes ppl put too much analyzing the stats that I feel this is a science not a game
Using blocked shots as a means for determining how good a player is defensively. Just because Javale McGee can go out and block some shots, does not mean he is a good defender overall- because he's not. I suppose steals can be grouped in the same category, too.
Add Al Jefferson to that list. He has the worst PnR defense in the league, he has slow help defense but he got about 2 BPG last year so people in Utah thought that he was great.
AGREED! I think it's even more true with steals. Like those years when the Cavs had LBJ & Ricky Davis jumping passing lanes & getting breakaway dunks or when Wizards had Larry Hughes & Gilbert both getting 2+ stls, but they would still give up a lot of points to their matchup. Guys who get on-ball steals are a different story, but there's not many of them in the league.
I believe height for certain positions is overrated.
Like if a Point Guard is 6'4 and up, he will more than less be considered a better than his shorter counterparts.
Not always though.
An example would be Sun Yue being a 6'9 PG and was drafted or signed by the Lakers. The guy is not in the league anymore. He was basically scouted for being 6'9...
Let's not forget Charles Barkley! The guy was 6'5 and was the best PF ever! So height should be overlooked and actual SKILL should be more appreciated.
+ 1 from me, the reason you prob got those negs is because people really feel that wingspan/armlength cant be overstated. I have to agree with you, not all the time but sometimes it is overated.
Kevin Willis, one of the greatest rebounders and power forwards of all time also had short arms...in relation to his size. He was 7' but had narrow shoulders and a 6'10" wingspan. Nowadays you have guards like Reggie Jackson who is 6'3" with a 7' wingspan.
I would imagine if he were in todays draft, his stock may have dropped considerably due to this physical anomaly.
On the other hand, if Willis had a longer wingspan, he would have been an all-time great player/HOF. Willis averaged 15.5rpg one season and was often referred to as "T-Rex" Willis due to the short arms for his height.
you know what is really overated to me.....again, this is not all the time, but every now and then you have a player who is young and has less basketball experience than some of his peers...then they rapidly "improve" or so it seems.
the one that comes to mind for me is Olowokandi. Scouts thought this guy was another Olajuwon because from his last year at Pacific he doubled his scoring and rebound avgs from the previous year. It appeared as his meteoric rise was a sign of his basketball skills rounding a corner if you will, being that he had just started playing b-ball only about 3 years prior.
I NEVER believed in this guy. The scouts clamored about him for the sole reason that he made a huge leap from one season to the next. So in a lot of cases, I believe scouting based on a "quick learning curve" is overated.
I don't remember the Olowokandi situation at all. After reading what was just written it makes me think about Derrick Williams in thid years draft. I know that they are not exactly the same situation but hear me out.
Everyone around the country saw what he did in the tournament. He was putting up great numbers. Prior to that he had a little bit of talk about him but not much. Suddenly he goes through the tourney and now people are saying that he will probably be the best player in this draft. I have my own concerns about him. First, he says that he is a SF. He had his success this year as a PF, not SF so trying to transfer positions as soon as you get to the NBA seems like a bad idea. Secondly, he did have some great games but he also had some games that he dissappeared and didn't try. He had some amazing blocks in March Madness and in the PAC 10 tourney but that doesn't mean that he plays defense. Lastly, whichever positio he plays he is going to have issues. He is an undersized PF and a slow SF without the handles. I want to see what he will do becuase I have the same sort of concerns about him as others had about Olowokandi.
Olowokandi is a VERY different situation from DW. I will address both:
- A 7 footer of Nigerian descent, living in Britain, who found his college in a phone book (as was reported by SLAM)
- Had a HUGE wingspan (reportedly 7'8) and very solid athleticism
- Went from 4 ppg as a freshman to 10.9 as a sophomore to 22.2 as a junior (so rapid improvement was there)
- Also, playing at University of Pacific, was not playing the most stalwart competition
- Even more clearly, he had very little concept of how to play basketball
All in all, while he was an obviously AWFUL first pick, he more than likely would have been a pretty decent late lottery pick, which is what his early projections seemed to be. However, the guy must have been a workout warrior, because he impressed the heck out of teams. Going in to the draft, it seemed almost pre-determined that Mike Bibby was going to be the first pick. He had lead Zona to the championship the year before, and was seen as a potentially great PG. However, I remember seeing a few days before the draft, talks of the Clippers seriously thinking of Kandi over Bibby, and that is what they did. Even still, no way Kandi would have snuck past the Grizz, word was.
It was a very awful pick, mainly due to his utter lack of understanding of the game and seeing that he probably should have been brought along slowly. If you want to know what is REALLY funny, is that I VIVIDLY remember ESPN saying they felt Kandi might be the 2nd best C in the league (after Shaq, of course) that summer of 2002-03 when he was a Free Agent. Having high hopes for Kandi early on, I had even given up on him at that point. Ended up doing little to nothing on better Minnesota teams, and busted out of the league. But, surve is right that he was picked due to a quick learning curve and monstrous potential. People saw that next Hakeem Olajuwon, instead of the first Hasheem Thabeet, lol. If you want to see a case of teams not learning from mistakes of the past, look no further than the Grizz pick in 2009. Almost a mirror situation, except Thabeet at least played in the Big East. Nonetheless, he was nowhere as athletic as Olowokandi and his getting thrown over DeJuan Blair's back like a rag doll was an early warning sign that he should not be counted on as a top 10 pick.
- Severely underrated as a recruit, he burst onto the college scene averaging 15.7 and 7.1 as a freshman. The Pac-10 may not have been considered strong that year, but those are pretty impressive numbers for any freshman.
- Sophomore season, expectations are higher, and he exceeds them. Averages 19.5 and 8.3 and shoots near 60% from the field and 56.8% from 3 (Obscene). Yes, triples are 3 feet further back in the NBA, but seeing that he hit more than one per game, still really shows his range.
- Averages, obscenely again, 1.95 points per shot. To give perspective, Jimmer averaged 1.4, which is really good. So, Williams, pretty amazing, and he averaged 1.72 pps as a freshman. So, can get to the line and shoots a high percentage. Very efficient as a college player.
- Really strong, fast and actually has a concept of how to play basketball.
- The key is, where will he excel as far as position is concerned?
The difference between he and Olowokandi are pretty vast. Williams did not come out of nowhere, and his main issues were with bigger players, rather than be outquicked or held down by smaller, faster players. I guess that is why people believe he might excel as a SF in the NBA, because he just might be athletic and quick enough to do so. He obviously plays very hard, and skill set wise, I do not believe he is necessarily not skilled enough to be a 3. The guy can actually handle the rock, he is not someone you want as a primary handler, but he is not lost off of the dribble. His clutch blocks (he had a few) may overstate his defensive capabilities, he actually is not really a big time shot blocker. Also, it is still unknown whether he will excel at defending smaller, quicker players, but they at the same time should have a hard time defending him. Williams seemed to be fairly appropriately rated, and while I am not sold on him as a franchise cornerstone, he should turn into a very solid player, and probably had the fewest question marks out of anyone in this draft, as the guy can flat out play the game.
See, I think "arm span" and certain things are overrated when it comes to certain players. Verticals seem to be INCREDIBLY overrated by people, as whatever so and so did at the combine now becomes the height they go up on every jump, lol. Dwyane Wade and Russell Westbrook were measured at about 36, and I think they are maybe two of the more explosive players driving to the hoop in the league (Yes, Derrick Rose and LeBron James might be more so, but you get my point). There is little direct correlation between any of the combine stats and direct success. What I will say is, many of the best players in the league seem to stand out in one way or another. Many of them are taller than most at their position (probably most, other than PG's), stronger or more athletic. Still, an overall concept of the game trumps all, and say what you will about players living off of certain qualities, you do not live off of pure athleticism, you succeed ultimately off of knowing what to do with what you have. If so and so can jump high, but has little clue what to do with it, or a poor understanding of their limitations as a player, they will not succeed. What is most overrated is pretty much everything outside of the mental realm of a player, as that is the one thing that is the most difficult to measure.
As a Toronto Raps fan i can remember when we passed on Danny Granger because Joey Graham's measurables were better athletically. We pretty much drafted an athlete hoping he would become a baller instead of drafting someone who could actually ball. Who cares if he was the strongest at the combine or had the least amount of body fat. Those measurables mean nothing if you have no handle no range and the basis of your game is straight muscling people. When did body fat determine if you could put the biscuit in the basket? Worst pick ever!!!!!!
@ JNixon, Fisher may have played the "PG" position, but he also has about 15 years experience playing off of superstars. He cn't run a pick and roll consistently, he can't create for others, he can't make post passes, and is horrible at controlling tempo. Wanna tell me how many teams would start him at the pg spot in the L?
Just because a guy plays PG beside of other stars doesn't make him anymore a pg than Ellis. Kobe has always played the Pseudo PG role. You gonna say Gilbert Arenas is a pg? What about Allen Iverson? NOPE. It's a position, great players can play anywhere. Especially when they have great players around them. Think what you want, but the Lakers front office actually inquired about Ellis early in the offseason in a three way involving Odom, Iggy, Monta and Lee, to have Monta come play the PG.
Just because a guy plays at a position, doesn't mean they are simply that position, otherwise Fisher wouldn't have lasted in the L. BTW, anyone who watches them knows he plays the role of sg. Even PJ and Tex Winter have mentioned this not to mention millions of broadcasters and fans alike.
BTW, Monta actually played 17% of his minutes at PG this year.
Under Phil Jackson, there's no doubt Ellis would've started and played point guard (or guard alonside Kobe). You don't have to be a true point guard to play in the triangle. IF he didn't start, he'd definitely have been on the floor to finish games.
Under Mike Brown, I have no idea though. I have no idea what kind of offense he'll play. He may require more of a point guard who can get a team in it's sets, etc.
He is apparently going to be running an offense similar to the one Poppovich ran with the Twin Towers with a dash of the Triangle(Basic triangle plays), which btw seems like the perfect offense given that LAL wants to utilize their size more. Tony Parker at that point was a very erratic score first pg who played beside of ballhandling guards such a Capt. Jax and Manu Ginobli so I don't think it would be too far fetched to see Ellis playing a similar role with a lot of feeding the high post to Gasol and slashing to the basket.
Knowing Mike Brown, I wouldn't be surprised to see a bit of Monta Ellis iso and p&r like he did with LBJ or similar to how Steve Francis used to iso at the top of the key.
first off... surve... i understand totally... idk y i got minsued 6 points for stating an opinion... when the ppl that minsued me didnt even explain as to y they did it... but who cares...
and mikey that was greatly wrote...
and another thing on arm spans and what not....
u want players with good length, great length, w.e.
but how much does it really help u? defensively it helps more no question... offensively, it wont help all that much imo...
im 6'2'' with a 6'2'' armspan... and idk how me having a.. lets say 6'7'' arm span is gnna take my game to crazy new heights...it helps no doubt... but its taken for granted to much
guys like monta ellis, stephen curry, steve nash... all have average arm spans...all three guys are awesome players...
and combines are TOOO OVER DAMN RATED!!!!
i remeber luke babbitt last yr measured a 37 inch vert and stanely robinson who jumps outta the freakin gym got like 33 or sumthin.. and pll were on babbitts nuts...when clearly robinson is the much much much better athlete and jumper
I think altheticism is overrated. I don't care how fast a guy runs or how high he jumps if he shoots 32 percent from the field. Sure, athleticism will often translate to higher percentages because it usually means a player gets some easier opportunities to make shots, but I will never, ever sacrifice basketball IQ and well-rounded skill set in the fundamentals of the game for shear athleticism.
Give me a guy who is not the fastest or highest jumper, but is skilled shooting, passing, dribbling, and has great basketball instincts. I'll take a slower player who shoots 52 percent from the field over a fast guy who can occasionally get some alley-oops and monster dunks, but shoots only 31 percent from the field.
to sum it all up
no matter how athletic u r.. or how long ur arms r, etc...
if u dont have skills... then who cares who high u jump...
A more succinct way to say it: you don't get points in a basketball game for running faster than someone, you get points for the ball actually going through the hoop.
You having a 6'7 wingspan actually would make you better offensively. Closer to the rim when going for contested layups, better chances at getting your shot off over your defender, higher release on floaters, ayour arm is closer to the ground while dribbling, angles on passes that a shorter arm guy could not, and more than likely you'll be a better offensive rebounder.
Combine ath;etic results aren't everything, but they re something. Sometimes, you simply have to use the eye test. Just as you stated above with Robinson and Babbit. When a guy you know is athletic as hell puts up elite combine numbers, he's more than likely showing you the real deal. When a guy you know is unathletic yet shows terrific COMBINE numbers, you should just realize that you watch them everyday and they are nowhere near that athletic as BASKETBALL PLAYERS, same for athletes like Iguodala who don't measure up nearly as good as expected.
Danny Granger and Monta Ellis are bother good athletes, but both had knee injuries that weren't fully healed by the time the combine came around ultimately causing their numbers to be lower than they shoud have been. Again, just use the eyes test when a combine number comes up rather unexpectedly odd.
I mean, Fisher doesn't play the role of a traditional PG in the Lakers offense. He's not a Chris Paul-type PG or a Rajon Rondo. But does that mean he's not a PG for the LA Lakers? No. That's the position he plays. Monta Ellis playing a grand total of 17% of the time as a PG doesn't make him a PG. Whoopy do. Allen Iverson played more than that at PG for the 76ers when Snow left, and Arenas played PG for the Wizards alot too. The 76ers struggled when Iverson was the PG. The Wizards played Antonio Daniels and Larry Hughes at PG with Arenas. No one is calling those guys pure PG's. But you can't just say they aren't PG's because of the team's scheme or because they don't play the position exclusively. Especially if you're going to try and make a case that Monta Ellis is. It's backwards.
Ellis played 40 mpg last year, averaged 5 apg and 3 topg. 17% of 40 minutes is 6.8 mpg. What about having an A/TO like that, and him playing less than half a quarter COMBINED (and alot of that % probably came when Curry was out for those 8 games) on average, per night, makes him a PG? And what about Fisher probably playing close to all of his minutes over the past 15 years at PG makes him not a PG? Monta Ellis isn't the positional defender, spot-up shooter, or decision-maker Fisher is. He could start over Fisher, but that doesn't make him more of a PG. It doesn't even make him a better fit in the triangle offense the team ran. It makes him more talented and no one disputes he's more talented.
I never said he played mostly point, simply that he would strt over Fisher. And I;'m sorry to tell you, but I know LAL, and their desire for a ballhandling guard. Monta would have started the guard position beside of Bryant. Call him whatever you want, but he would start in place of Fisher. This is one point I absolutley will not argue with you because if their is one team i know in the NBA, it's LAL. I don't need you to agree with me about Ellis strting over Fisher. lol. no big deal. We'll just agree to disagree.
BTW, you said Ellis wasn't a pg of ny kind, sorry to tell you, but if he were put at the pg spot, he would be just as much a pg as Gil, Fish or any other pseudo PG who can't win as a TRADITIONAL point guard.
"BTW, you said Ellis wasn't a pg of ny kind, sorry to tell you, but if he were put at the pg spot, he would be just as much a pg as Gil, Fish or any other pseudo PG who can't win as a TRADITIONAL point guard"
When has Fisher or Iverson put up an A/TO as bad as Ellis' at the PG spot?? Monta Ellis has averaged 5 apg the last 2 years, but with over 3 topg. I don't think any team would allow a guy to play PG for any extended time if they are that bad making decisions with the ball.
When has Fisher averaged 5 assists?
Never, due to the role he plays. But I'd rather have him running my offense than Monta Ellis, he also has never averaged 2 topg.
IT'S A TEAM SPORT! I DONT CARE HOW MANY CHAMPIONSHIPS OSCAR ROBERTSON HAD, HE WAS AS GOOD AS JORDAN
I think people look at championships too much when evaluating one's legacy
Yeah, you're right. He didn't ever average 5 assists or 2 turnovers. But the one time he was asked to be a pg with GSW, he averaged a meer 4.1 and 4.3 assists. It's just like I said, he may be the one listed at pg, but he has ALWAYS played the role of a sg. Had he EVER been good enough to actually handle the ball and not just throw it off to the real playmaker at halfcourt, he very well would have had just as many T.O.
Sorry to tel you, but I'll trade the 1 or 2 more turnoversfor the 10-12 ppg more along with not being absolutely destroyed for career highs by EVERY other opposing PG in the L. Say what you want, but there is no way that Fisher would Start over Ellis.