[NYBALLASParticipant]

 If your an NBA GM in your draft room on draft night and your pick rolls around which kind of player would you rather go with 

a) a player who was highly recruited in hs and was a mcdonalds all american or all american on some level and didnt dominate the college game but without a doubt played well and is a 1st round/end of the lottery talent 

b) a player who made his name in college and wasnt highly touted in hs by college scouts to the same  degree as other players similar to Alec Burks, Gordon Hayward, but still played well enough deserving of a 1st round/end of lotter talent 

personally i go with the guy whose been consistent throughout and has the best overall talent which is most likely the scenario A. I dont normally trust how good players like Evan Turner and Derrick Williams will be in the NBA since in the case of turner alot of the NBA talent bolts early leaving the guys who stick around(turner) to develop physically way past the development of the younger guys like NBA talent freshmen and even sophmores. We all know how much we changed by the time we were 18 and when we were 22/23 thats why I say this. And as for Williams I dunno he just rubs me the wrong way he seems more suited for the college game hes a mismatch problem in college in the nba hes just a weak link too slow to guard the 3 and to small to guard the 4, too slow to beat you off the dribble putting pressure on his shot and too small to post you up making him really have to work for the dunk or use pump fakes all over the place. 

[bigblackNbeautifulParticipant]

 The b type player. Proven players are the type of players that championship teams like the spurs and celtics love. and last time I checked those players are getting farther than these players who make money off of potential.

[bigblackNbeautifulParticipant]

 The b type player. Proven players are the type of players that championship teams like the spurs and celtics love. and last time I checked those players are getting farther than these players who make money off of potential.

[GottaBeTheShoesParticipant]

In the words of Jay Bilas, He has the wingspan of a guy 7’1.(derrick Williams) He can guard the 4 and definitely isn’t "too small".. As for guarding 3’s how do we know if he is too slow to guard them if we haven’t even seen him face Nba competition…. The B sounds best.. Sounds like they can improve better and has a better work ethic because they got better.  Burks and Williams just got unlucky with not being noticed by scouts but they put up top 10 recruit like numbers in high school. 

[GottaBeTheShoesParticipant]

In the words of Jay Bilas, He has the wingspan of a guy 7’1.(derrick Williams) He can guard the 4 and definitely isn’t "too small".. As for guarding 3’s how do we know if he is too slow to guard them if we haven’t even seen him face Nba competition…. The B sounds best.. Sounds like they can improve better and has a better work ethic because they got better.  Burks and Williams just got unlucky with not being noticed by scouts but they put up top 10 recruit like numbers in high school. 

[Awesome-O-420Participant]

Option B – because option A is really no option. 

Todays league is all about potential. Few players anymore stick it out for 3-4 years unless they have to, so GM’s factor in potential now more than ever since most guys are far removed from being polished prospects with only 1-2 years of college play. Option B is a guy who shows more potential because he grew tremendously from highschool to college, and dominated as you suggest with your hypothetical scenerios. Option A means the guy is talented, but didn’t progress the way he was projected to, he may reach that potential if he sticks around in college for another year, but based off your scenerios, he may be a guy who’s talent/potential was misjudged. 

Just like doing a research paper, you go with the most update sources you can find, in sports, a 1 year old scouting report can easily be outdated – you go with option B cause it’s the best indicator of success and most recent source of information you have. In terms of potential a "nobody" who becomes a star in college shows more potential than a top recruit who does average in college. One shows growth the other not as much.

Lastly I can’t think of too many people who fit option A’s profile, but I can think of a few guys who fit option B’s and did well in the NBA.

[Awesome-O-420Participant]

Option B – because option A is really no option. 

Todays league is all about potential. Few players anymore stick it out for 3-4 years unless they have to, so GM’s factor in potential now more than ever since most guys are far removed from being polished prospects with only 1-2 years of college play. Option B is a guy who shows more potential because he grew tremendously from highschool to college, and dominated as you suggest with your hypothetical scenerios. Option A means the guy is talented, but didn’t progress the way he was projected to, he may reach that potential if he sticks around in college for another year, but based off your scenerios, he may be a guy who’s talent/potential was misjudged. 

Just like doing a research paper, you go with the most update sources you can find, in sports, a 1 year old scouting report can easily be outdated – you go with option B cause it’s the best indicator of success and most recent source of information you have. In terms of potential a "nobody" who becomes a star in college shows more potential than a top recruit who does average in college. One shows growth the other not as much.

Lastly I can’t think of too many people who fit option A’s profile, but I can think of a few guys who fit option B’s and did well in the NBA.

[surveParticipant]

….because from your description of A-type, that player a lot of times would be considered an underachiever on the college level, but it depends.  To play D.A. here, me personally, it would depend on my needs.  Do I have a championship calibur squad and need to add some pieces or am I rebuilding? 

I think there is realm where you choose the A-type player.  One that jumps out at me right now is Tyler Zeller.  Almost identical to your A-type description.

[surveParticipant]

….because from your description of A-type, that player a lot of times would be considered an underachiever on the college level, but it depends.  To play D.A. here, me personally, it would depend on my needs.  Do I have a championship calibur squad and need to add some pieces or am I rebuilding? 

I think there is realm where you choose the A-type player.  One that jumps out at me right now is Tyler Zeller.  Almost identical to your A-type description.

[RICO 1981Participant]

That’s a good question, some players that are great in highschool and are just ok in college turn out to be good or great players.  I guess it would depend on how their game is, because talent is talent. Somebody like D-wade was not a 5 star player in highschool and only got Marquette, Illinois State and DePaul to look at him but now he is a top 5 player. But then you have his someone like Lebron who just had the talent in highschool and carried it over to the NBA. I would go more towards A because its better bang for my money,  plus also most of the time if they are like a McDonalds all American and can put up good (not great numbers) in college they turn out to be soild if not superstars. but it has to be because of their talent and not size, because in highschool most of the time the good players are taller or bigger than the rest of the kids.  you saw the talent in a KD and lebron in highschool even though they was taller than most of the other players, while somebody like eddy currie was just a big dude playing against kids until he got to the league and bummed out. 

[RICO 1981Participant]

That’s a good question, some players that are great in highschool and are just ok in college turn out to be good or great players.  I guess it would depend on how their game is, because talent is talent. Somebody like D-wade was not a 5 star player in highschool and only got Marquette, Illinois State and DePaul to look at him but now he is a top 5 player. But then you have his someone like Lebron who just had the talent in highschool and carried it over to the NBA. I would go more towards A because its better bang for my money,  plus also most of the time if they are like a McDonalds all American and can put up good (not great numbers) in college they turn out to be soild if not superstars. but it has to be because of their talent and not size, because in highschool most of the time the good players are taller or bigger than the rest of the kids.  you saw the talent in a KD and lebron in highschool even though they was taller than most of the other players, while somebody like eddy currie was just a big dude playing against kids until he got to the league and bummed out. 

[thparadoxParticipant]

 

Agree with  most of those who posted. Player B is further along in the process… you should factor potential in, but obviously you should look at both players at their equivalent level. (factoring in college play is like betting on the horses after the first third of the race, instead of at the start of the race).

Also, it really depends on where you’re drafting. Drafting a top 3 pick, I expect a high combination of potential and recent success. If I’m drafting at the end of the first round, maybe I relax the constraints. If I’m rebuilding, just go for the home run pick… Jeremy Tyler, etc.

[thparadoxParticipant]

 

Agree with  most of those who posted. Player B is further along in the process… you should factor potential in, but obviously you should look at both players at their equivalent level. (factoring in college play is like betting on the horses after the first third of the race, instead of at the start of the race).

Also, it really depends on where you’re drafting. Drafting a top 3 pick, I expect a high combination of potential and recent success. If I’m drafting at the end of the first round, maybe I relax the constraints. If I’m rebuilding, just go for the home run pick… Jeremy Tyler, etc.

[joecheck88Participant]

i could go with player a. it sepends on your scouting. i guy i think of that fits the “a” description is jrue holiday. i really like him as a player. you also get the avery bradleys as well, so it is a risk. it depends on where i am picking. in the lotto i probably wouldnt take the “a” player.

[joecheck88Participant]

i could go with player a. it sepends on your scouting. i guy i think of that fits the “a” description is jrue holiday. i really like him as a player. you also get the avery bradleys as well, so it is a risk. it depends on where i am picking. in the lotto i probably wouldnt take the “a” player.

[Ahkasi ClayParticipant]

 I trade the pick for Ricky Rubio!

[Ahkasi ClayParticipant]

 I trade the pick for Ricky Rubio!

[boxn1Participant]

Player B is a late bloomer. The fact that he has grown by so much in college shows he has more potential than the guy who played good but was inconsistant but was the All-everything coming into college. Now,to be fair factors like if either player picked the right school to go to,who was there when they got there,if a coaching change happens,shocking growth spirts.

[boxn1Participant]

Player B is a late bloomer. The fact that he has grown by so much in college shows he has more potential than the guy who played good but was inconsistant but was the All-everything coming into college. Now,to be fair factors like if either player picked the right school to go to,who was there when they got there,if a coaching change happens,shocking growth spirts.

[Memphis MadnessParticipant]

Derrick Williams only played 2 years, it’s not like he was around that long. 

I think some college players hurt themselves by going back to school and then not really improving that much.  Jordan Hamilton could have been drafted higher last year, and Kyle Singler hurt his draft stock by not really shooting well last year.  So you get guys with more upside going ahead of Kyle Singler since scouts think that Singler’s game has "peaked."

 

[Memphis MadnessParticipant]

Derrick Williams only played 2 years, it’s not like he was around that long. 

I think some college players hurt themselves by going back to school and then not really improving that much.  Jordan Hamilton could have been drafted higher last year, and Kyle Singler hurt his draft stock by not really shooting well last year.  So you get guys with more upside going ahead of Kyle Singler since scouts think that Singler’s game has "peaked."

 

[aamir543Participant]

Toss up, you can’t teach talent, but its also hard to coach a bad attutude. And it is clearly evident that teams are going with option B most of the time, as proved by Josh Selby falling to 49th. (49th!)

[aamir543Participant]

Toss up, you can’t teach talent, but its also hard to coach a bad attutude. And it is clearly evident that teams are going with option B most of the time, as proved by Josh Selby falling to 49th. (49th!)

[Author]

Posts