[blackflash234Participant]

Hey Aran and the mods on this website. I’ve been a fan for years when it comes to the work and time you guys put into these scouting reports and player ratings on players profiles. A question that I’ve always wondered is how do you guys determine a players potential out of 10? You guys usually always hit the bulls eye when it comes to determining that that what factors do you guys base on determining that. It really intrigues me.

[thparadoxParticipant]

 My guess is that it’s some combination of:

– Age (obvious)

– Athleticism (vertical, quickness of vertical, foot speed, lateral quickness, etc)

– Co-ordination (does the player show flashes of being able to perform more fluid + advanced skills? or are they mechanical? do they have balance and body control?)

– Awareness (do they have a gut instinct for where the ball in going off rebounds?, do they intuitively know where their teammates are and where the defense is?, do they flash brilliant plays that only come from intuition?)

 

I love this site, and I’m looking forward to Aran and other scouts answers.

[shipargosParticipant]

 For me, potential is related with the physical profile, age, size (height, frame size, space to put muscle) and more important, athleticism.

You can increase a person bkb skillset, since you are able to learn, but is difficult to increase your athleticism unless it is related to weight issues, and most guys are almost finished growing in the college level.

It can also be related to develop leadership and intangibles, from a psicological standpoint.

 

[ilike.panochasParticipant]

Physical tools + Age + level of skill-set = player’s potential

[Quincey Hodges]

Level of skill for me. Even if they aren’t great physically.

[blackflash234Participant]

I know you guys mention size alot but sometimes,  I think that it has nothing to do with basing a player on their potential. For example, guys like Michael Beasley who was a 6’8 power forward converted into a small forward had a 10 out of 10 when it came to potential and I bet you that most experts had him being a power forward full time. Another example would be Russell Westbrook who was a 6’3 shooting guard converted to point guard. Most experts probably had being a shooting guard long term too. My point is that a player’s size doesn’t neccesarily have anything to do with potential in my opinion.

[butidonthavemoney]

But look at [Player: Anthony Randolph], [Player: Patrick OBryant], [Player: JaVale McGee] and [Player: Perry Jones]. Without their freakish size there is no way they would have had a 10/10 for potential. [Player: Kevin Durant]’s size gives him a big advantage over anybody guarding him on the wing.

Size + Athleticism + Fluidity = Potential in the eyes of a lot of scouts.

Potential is like intangibles. The ranking really depends on the scout who does the profiles.

[Author]

Posts