PDA

View Full Version : Is Potential Overrated?



Run&Gun
05-19-2010, 04:33 AM
Since the draft was today and everyone always talks about potential just wondering if anyone feels like potential is an overrated attribute. Then again this is probably the sole reason why the draft and whole lottery system is so interesting yet frustrating at the same time. Looking over the years it seems like potential has screwed a lot more teams than not, what does everyone else think? Another question to throw out there; is the NBA rule that forces players to play in college or overseas really helping, or should they even make it longer like 2 to 3 years in college to better gauge what kind of potential they have.

abe_froman
05-19-2010, 04:44 AM
Since the draft was today and everyone always talks about potential just wondering if anyone feels like potential is an overrated attribute. Then again this is probably the sole reason why the draft and whole lottery system is so interesting yet frustrating at the same time. Looking over the years it seems like potential has screwed a lot more teams than not, what does everyone else think? Another question to throw out there; is the NBA rule that forces players to play in college or overseas really helping, or should they even make it longer like 2 to 3 years in college to better gauge what kind of potential they have.

how has it screwed more teams than not??

rabzouz 96
05-19-2010, 10:34 AM
Since the draft was today and everyone always talks about potential just wondering if anyone feels like potential is an overrated attribute. Then again this is probably the sole reason why the draft and whole lottery system is so interesting yet frustrating at the same time. Looking over the years it seems like potential has screwed a lot more teams than not, what does everyone else think? Another question to throw out there; is the NBA rule that forces players to play in college or overseas really helping, or should they even make it longer like 2 to 3 years in college to better gauge what kind of potential they have.
its not overrated, its just overused on some guys that dont really have that much potential.

GSW Hoops
05-19-2010, 12:25 PM
I think teams underestimate character. For instance, guys like Michael Beasley and Josh Smith have great upside, but without character and work ethic they won't reach their full potential.

Kobe, LeBron, Wade, Bosh, Duncan, Durant, Roy--you can't name many NBA stars who have poor character and lack a great work ethic.

CowboysKB24
05-19-2010, 12:26 PM
Yes it is overrated.

ballpd05
05-19-2010, 12:26 PM
It isn't overrated. There are skills that can be taught and then talent that you are born with. When someone has raw skills and immense talent you hope that that guy has the knowledge, discipline, and work ethic to improve, some guys do some don't. Some guys just can't be taught because they have become who they are as players and others are just hard headed. That is why you have busts, but sometimes its not always the players fault... They may have been misguided or put in positions to fail by their coaches too.

But it is all high risk high reward. Lebron had potential... So did KG and Kobe... But then you look at guys like Ndubi Ebi, Kwame Brown, Eddie Curry, and Michael Beasley. You win some you lose some...

J-Relo
05-19-2010, 12:35 PM
it can't be overrated

Sadds The Gr8
05-19-2010, 12:36 PM
I think teams underestimate character. For instance, guys like Michael Beasley and Josh Smith have great upside, but without character and work ethic they won't reach their full potential.

Kobe, LeBron, Wade, Bosh, Duncan, Durant, Roy--you can't name many NBA stars who have poor character and lack a great work ethic.

this.

BoognishMN
05-19-2010, 01:29 PM
nicholas tskitishvili, Darko, Michael Olowokandi, Kwame Brown, the list goes on. 9/10 times I am taking the sure thing over potential.

ldc62
05-19-2010, 01:47 PM
The sure thing also has potential to be something big... This year: John Wall...

ballpd05
05-19-2010, 02:29 PM
I think teams underestimate character. For instance, guys like Michael Beasley and Josh Smith have great upside, but without character and work ethic they won't reach their full potential.

Kobe, LeBron, Wade, Bosh, Duncan, Durant, Roy--you can't name many NBA stars who have poor character and lack a great work ethic.

Amare Stoudemire, Shawn Kemp (was great at one point), Zach Randolph (can't knock his production), Greg Oden (good character/possible bust), Shaq (work ethic questioned/one of the greatest to ever do it/disputes with coaches), Carmelo Anthony (character issues), Allen Iverson (alot of issues).....

Kobe does not have a spotless character as he has had his cry baby, teammate putting down, caught cheating, and coach disobeying before too; His work ethic is unquestioned though.

It is really hard to judge, but I think character plays a role. But there are success stories of guys with attitudes and off court issues being great players as well as model citizens who have found it hard to adjust.

cheerio
05-19-2010, 02:39 PM
yes, no, yes, no, yes, no

n83417
05-19-2010, 02:45 PM
Chris Bosh was a "potential" guy. He was raw and unpolished coming out of college, and everyone said it was a terrible pick. If a guy has potential, as well as desire, it is not overrated. However one without the other, is very overrated.

ohreally
05-19-2010, 02:58 PM
Depends on what the potential is based on. If it's based on sound skills, intelligence, and determination, I don't think it can be overrated. If it's based on athleticism or height alone, it can certainly be overrated.

No matter what though, it all comes down to situations. You can have a skilled intelligent guy locked behind a star or an athletic player, or playing with a bunch of dunderheads. The team, teammates, coach, and just pure luck play a big part in whether potential is ever reached. Then there's injury and off-court habits or way of life.

If the question is whether potential should ever trump proven ability on the NBA level, then yes, potential can be vastly overrated. Most guys that make it to the NBA have potential. Relatively few guys ever maximize that potential. So if I have a choice between a proven NBA player who fits my needs, is available, and is not going to weight my team too far into old age or poor defense, or poor offense, or knuckleheadedness, or absurdly over the cap, I'd go with proven in all but the rarest circumstance.

ryder78c
05-19-2010, 03:02 PM
very over overrated

they dont add character issues or how much they train beasley was suppose to be like Melo

you cant call players other people when they all have a different playing skill Evan Turner is suppose to be the next brandon roy only thing that looks alike with the two is how they shoot John wall Brian westbrook with better court vision.....Greg Oden David Robinson worst case emeka okafor.....Kevin Durant more athletic Dirk or worst case rashard lewis

RadiantShot
05-19-2010, 03:11 PM
It's not a legit question. It doesn't really make sense.. You can't overrate "having potential." If you're talking about the phrase, that makes a bit more sense I guess. If you are saying, "Is it talked about too much?" Then yes. Play should speak, not 'potential.'

igPay atinLay
05-19-2010, 03:25 PM
Potential at 20 is extremely valuable at 30 or 40 not so much.

pebloemer
05-19-2010, 03:28 PM
It's not a legit question. It doesn't really make sense.. You can't overrate "having potential." If you're talking about the phrase, that makes a bit more sense I guess. If you are saying, "Is it talked about too much?" Then yes. Play should speak, not 'potential.'

That was similar to my thought. Do general managers fall in love with potential too much when making their draft choices? Sometimes, but it isn't the rule or anything. At times a GM or team's situation lead them to try and aim for a "potential player" rather than a more proven prospect, but I don't think that means the term "potential" is overrated. Seems like an odd question that really doesn't make sense ot me either.

Truheatfan
05-19-2010, 03:37 PM
I think teams underestimate character. For instance, guys like Michael Beasley and Josh Smith have great upside, but without character and work ethic they won't reach their full potential.

Kobe, LeBron, Wade, Bosh, Duncan, Durant, Roy--you can't name many NBA stars who have poor character and lack a great work ethic.

so true :clap:

RadiantShot
05-19-2010, 03:40 PM
That was similar to my thought. Do general managers fall in love with potential too much when making their draft choices? Sometimes, but it isn't the rule or anything. At times a GM or team's situation lead them to try and aim for a "potential player" rather than a more proven prospect, but I don't think that means the term "potential" is overrated. Seems like an odd question that really doesn't make sense ot me either.

I agree, and since we can't see in to the future, I'm pretty sure players aren't picked upon 'Potential,' 99% of the time.

GSW Hoops
05-19-2010, 03:41 PM
Amare Stoudemire, Shawn Kemp (was great at one point), Zach Randolph (can't knock his production), Greg Oden (good character/possible bust), Shaq (work ethic questioned/one of the greatest to ever do it/disputes with coaches), Carmelo Anthony (character issues), Allen Iverson (alot of issues).....

Kobe does not have a spotless character as he has had his cry baby, teammate putting down, caught cheating, and coach disobeying before too; His work ethic is unquestioned though.

It is really hard to judge, but I think character plays a role. But there are success stories of guys with attitudes and off court issues being great players as well as model citizens who have found it hard to adjust.

Notice how none of the guys you mentioned, except Shaq, have won a title? And I think you missed my point about work ethic. Very, very few guys turn into stars without a good work ethic. Carmelo, AI, Shaq, Amare each have a great work ethic, but they aren't necessarily character guys.

If I'm starting a team tomorrow, I'd much rather have a Shane Battier or Tayshaun Prince than a Michael Beasley or Rasheed Wallace.

RadiantShot
05-19-2010, 03:49 PM
Agreed with GSW hoops. Idk, it depends on your personal standpoint on the situation. I'd much rather have Battier over Beasley too.

pebloemer
05-19-2010, 03:56 PM
I agree, and since we can't see in to the future, I'm pretty sure players aren't picked upon 'Potential,' 99% of the time.

I think you you could also argue that players are picked on potential 100% of the time. Maybe a better question would be: Are certain potential attributes over/under valued?

FarOutIos
05-19-2010, 04:16 PM
nicholas tskitishvili, Darko, Michael Olowokandi, Kwame Brown, the list goes on. 9/10 times I am taking the sure thing over potential.

Bargnagni was all potential and was picked over the proven Adam Morrison.

Channing Frye was the more proven player as a college senior while Bynum was unproven.

Dwight Howard was the unproven player while Okafor had success in college and was the more proven player.

In that same draft... Al Jefferson was passed because he was only potential, while the proven Luke Jackson was taken 5 picks ahead.

Point is, every pick is different. Sometimes potential wins out, some times proven players are better.

blue bleeder09
05-19-2010, 04:20 PM
It isn't overrated. There are skills that can be taught and then talent that you are born with. When someone has raw skills and immense talent you hope that that guy has the knowledge, discipline, and work ethic to improve, some guys do some don't. Some guys just can't be taught because they have become who they are as players and others are just hard headed. That is why you have busts, but sometimes its not always the players fault... They may have been misguided or put in positions to fail by their coaches too.

But it is all high risk high reward. Lebron had potential... So did KG and Kobe... But then you look at guys like Ndubi Ebi, Kwame Brown, Eddie Curry, and Michael Beasley. You win some you lose some...

u can put lebron with kwame ,and curry intil he really does something to deserve to b with KOBE & KG ,try wining a ring and quit making excuses:facepalm:

thekmp211
05-19-2010, 04:24 PM
Notice how none of the guys you mentioned, except Shaq, have won a title? And I think you missed my point about work ethic. Very, very few guys turn into stars without a good work ethic. Carmelo, AI, Shaq, Amare each have a great work ethic, but they aren't necessarily character guys.

If I'm starting a team tomorrow, I'd much rather have a Shane Battier or Tayshaun Prince than a Michael Beasley or Rasheed Wallace.


I also think coaches and GM's get arrogant about how much they can mold a player/person. You see this 18 year old kid with all the potential in the world and think "I can work out his kinks and get him to where he needs to be." The fact is, there are so many factors that contribute to the mental fortitude of a young prospect. The friends and family around him, his upbringing, his priorities, his work ethic ect. I think franchises overestimate their ability to shape a prospect and thus overlook signs that point to a problematic player.

thekmp211
05-19-2010, 04:27 PM
u can put lebron with kwame ,and curry intil he really does something to deserve to b with KOBE & KG ,try wining a ring and quit making excuses:facepalm:


completely unnecessary lebron bash. so completely untrue. does it make you feel good?

KnicksorBust
05-19-2010, 04:36 PM
Bargnagni was all potential and was picked over the proven Adam Morrison.

Channing Frye was the more proven player as a college senior while Bynum was unproven.

Dwight Howard was the unproven player while Okafor had success in college and was the more proven player.

In that same draft... Al Jefferson was passed because he was only potential, while the proven Luke Jackson was taken 5 picks ahead.

Point is, every pick is different. Sometimes potential wins out, some times proven players are better.

Great post. Potential can be both overrated and underrated at times as well. Like Ben Wallace and Paul Millsap, it fluctuates depending on who you are talking to.

thekmp211
05-19-2010, 04:39 PM
Bargnagni was all potential and was picked over the proven Adam Morrison.

Channing Frye was the more proven player as a college senior while Bynum was unproven.

Dwight Howard was the unproven player while Okafor had success in college and was the more proven player.

In that same draft... Al Jefferson was passed because he was only potential, while the proven Luke Jackson was taken 5 picks ahead.

Point is, every pick is different. Sometimes potential wins out, some times proven players are better.


I thought Okafor would be better....oops.

SteveNash
05-19-2010, 04:44 PM
Potential is everything.

Name one player drafted with limited potential that worked into something great.

thekmp211
05-19-2010, 05:10 PM
Potential is everything.

Name one player drafted with limited potential that worked into something great.

plenty of "limited potential" players in the eyes of the scouting/coaching/fan community who have worked hard to become star players.

Jax, Ben Wallace, Brad Miller, Anthony Morrow, Bruce Bowen ect...

second round picks who supposedly had less potential than the busts drafted before them..

Arenas, Ginobili, rodman, price, boozer ect

in hindsight yes they all had "potential". but the question i think is debating the idea of potential ie athleticism flashiness pure shooting range improvisational abilities and the like. personally, i think that these things are somewhat overrated when other factors are not taken into account. i think there are telltale signs with most bust prospects in their makeup or professionalism that teams don't see when they see the physical specs. arrogance per my previous post

GSW Hoops
05-19-2010, 05:13 PM
Potential is everything.

Name one player drafted with limited potential that worked into something great.

Tony Parker, Mani Ginobili, George Hill, DeJaun Blair, Ben Wallace (undrafted). And don't forget your namesake, Steve Nash.

Iodine
05-19-2010, 05:16 PM
Not only in basketball, but most overrated thing in sports

Iodine
05-19-2010, 05:17 PM
Tony Parker, Mani Ginobili, George Hill, DeJaun Blair, Ben Wallace (undrafted)

I love you

SteveNash
05-19-2010, 05:29 PM
plenty of "limited potential" players in the eyes of the scouting/coaching/fan community who have worked hard to become star players.

Jax, Ben Wallace, Brad Miller, Anthony Morrow, Bruce Bowen ect...

second round picks who supposedly had less potential than the busts drafted before them..

Arenas, Ginobili, rodman, price, boozer ect

in hindsight yes they all had "potential". but the question i think is debating the idea of potential ie athleticism flashiness pure shooting range improvisational abilities and the like. personally, i think that these things are somewhat overrated when other factors are not taken into account. i think there are telltale signs with most bust prospects in their makeup or professionalism that teams don't see when they see the physical specs. arrogance per my previous post

Jax had potential, it was character issues that scared the team off.

Ben, Brad Miller Morrow and Bowen were undrafted.

Arenas had potential there were just questions whether he could play PG or SG.

Ginobili had potential that he developed in Europe after he was drafted.

I'll give you Price and Rodman. Boozer's still up in the air.


Tony Parker, Mani Ginobili, George Hill, DeJaun Blair, Ben Wallace (undrafted). And don't forget your namesake, Steve Nash.

So getting drafted later = no potential in your world?

sargon21
05-19-2010, 05:30 PM
if im not mistaken brandon roy was considered to have limited potential, b/c he was already a very solid player in college, and he turned into a star, i think the same thing could "potentially" happen with evan turner

GSW Hoops
05-19-2010, 05:31 PM
I love you

I could have thrown Bruce Bowen in the mix too :)

GSW Hoops
05-19-2010, 05:33 PM
So getting drafted later = no potential in your world?

Pretty much.

SteveNash
05-19-2010, 05:36 PM
Yeah, I'm sure the Spurs though Tony Parker had no upside when drafting him as a 19 year old.

thekmp211
05-19-2010, 05:48 PM
Jax had potential, it was character issues that scared the team off.

Ben, Brad Miller Morrow and Bowen were undrafted.

Arenas had potential there were just questions whether he could play PG or SG.

Ginobili had potential that he developed in Europe after he was drafted.

I'll give you Price and Rodman. Boozer's still up in the air.



So getting drafted later = no potential in your world?



their being undrafted only further illustrates my point. all of those players have become far more productive than 75% of the guys taken ahead of them. presumably the franchises that passed on them felt that their picks had more "potential" for success in the NBA. and they were wrong.

GSW Hoops
05-19-2010, 06:17 PM
Yeah, I'm sure the Spurs though Tony Parker had no upside when drafting him as a 19 year old.

I'll let you in on a little sports secret: the "good" prospects are drafted before the "poor" prospects.

So when a guy is drafted late 1st round (like Tony Parker), 2nd round (Manu Ginobili) or not drafted at all (Ben Wallace), I would say his "potential" is low.

SteveNash
05-19-2010, 07:22 PM
their being undrafted only further illustrates my point. all of those players have become far more productive than 75% of the guys taken ahead of them. presumably the franchises that passed on them felt that their picks had more "potential" for success in the NBA. and they were wrong.

OP was talking about picking players in the draft. You can't say how undrafted players would have turned out had they have been drafted, we can only deal with facts.


I'll let you in on a little sports secret: the "good" prospects are drafted before the "poor" prospects.

So when a guy is drafted late 1st round (like Tony Parker), 2nd round (Manu Ginobili) or not drafted at all (Ben Wallace), I would say his "potential" is low.

So you confused prospect with potential because they both start with a p? You aren't making any sense.

blue bleeder09
05-19-2010, 07:23 PM
Yeah, I'm sure the Spurs though Tony Parker had no upside when drafting him as a 19 year old.???

blue bleeder09
05-19-2010, 07:27 PM
Yeah, I'm sure the Spurs though Tony Parker had no upside when drafting him as a 19 year old.

Top 5 of all time ??? are u kidding me ??? Wilt ,SHAQ,KAREEM,WALTON,RUSSLE,HAKIM,EWING,.....SHALL I GO ON ?????
What are u going by??? learn ur history before you say all time

Reyes6
05-19-2010, 07:33 PM
Potential is not overrated, it's exactly what you think it is. Players like Kwame Brown, Michael Olowakandi, and Kenyon Martin all had big upside, but never panned out because their 'potential' was either never reached or much more limited than previously believed.

But potential cannot be overrated because it is important for drafting players like Rubio, whereas you can't look at his stats now and call him a bust, for he is what... 19 now?

SteveNash
05-19-2010, 07:46 PM
Top 5 of all time ??? are u kidding me ??? Wilt ,SHAQ,KAREEM,WALTON,RUSSLE,HAKIM,EWING,.....SHALL I GO ON ?????
What are u going by??? learn ur history before you say all time

Dwight Howard has 2 DPOY awards.

Wilt 0
Shaq 0
Kareem 0
Walton 0
Russle 0
Hakim 0
Ewing 0

igPay atinLay
05-19-2010, 07:54 PM
When you draft any one you are drafting them solely on what you perceive their potential to be, both in year one after they are in the league for a few years. When you sign or resign a player you are signing them on what you project them to do based on past results and future projections. This comes solely form potential.

If a guy can't hit free throws but has the potential to hit them you will push them to work harder and harder at it until they start hitting them.

It sounds like many many people don't have a clue what potential means....rather than define it myself and have people say that's not what it means because even though its accurate it hurts my point of view so you are wrong (using different words of course) here is a definition from dictionary.com so you can't really argue with the definition.


potential -
–adjective
1.
possible, as opposed to actual: the potential uses of nuclear energy.
2.
capable of being or becoming: a potential danger to safety.
3.
Grammar . expressing possibility: the potential subjunctive in Latin; the potential use of can in I can go.
4.
Archaic . potent1 .
–noun
5.
possibility; potentiality: an investment that has little growth potential.
6.
a latent excellence or ability that may or may not be developed.
7.
Grammar .
a.
a potential aspect, mood, construction, case, etc.
b.
a form in the potential.
8.
Electricity . electric potential ( def. 1 ) .
9.
Mathematics, Physics . a type of function from which the intensity of a field may be derived, usually by differentiation.
10.
someone or something that is considered a worthwhile possibility: The list of job applications has been narrowed to half a dozen potentials.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/potential



See so potential is what you could (or are capable of) do but are not at this point in
time.



For all those of you saying potential is not important explain is detail why you think its not important keeping in mind what potential literally means. Its easy to say no its overrated or no your wrong and I am right....what I'm asking is explain what you mean or that you didn't really know what the word means.

basketfan4life
05-19-2010, 08:08 PM
i think a lot of scouts/teams are missing to look at one thing, and that is footwork...when a guy is an athletic freak people start to look him like "gonna be superstar"...it may very well turn out to be james white/gerarld green...breaking down defences with dribbling is not all about athleticism,it is more about footwork.

a legitimate q for you, what makes paul pierce 2x better player than j-rich,who is a great shooter and far superior athlete, yes it is called footwork(also heart has a lot to do with it,no bashing j-rich)

blue bleeder09
05-19-2010, 08:36 PM
Dwight Howard has 2 DPOY awards.

Wilt 0
Shaq 0
Kareem 0
Walton 0
Russle 0
Hakim 0
Ewing 0

and when did they start giving that award out ??
howard couldn't hold hakim's jockstap when it comes to defence ....
got to your local library and learn your history before you say BS. Hakim won it 1992-93,and 1993-94 i belive that would be twice .....:facepalm:

FarOutIos
05-19-2010, 08:59 PM
Dwight Howard has 2 DPOY awards.

Wilt 0
Shaq 0
Kareem 0
Walton 0
Russle 0
Hakim 0
Ewing 0

If by Hakim you mean Hakeem, then you are wrong. He has won twice.

http://www.nba.com/history/awards_defensiveplayer.html

And they did not start giving out the award until just recently... otherwise, Wilt would have probably won a couple of times. If not, then Russel.

And by your standards, the best Center so far in the history of the nba is Ben Wallace or Dikembe Mutombo, both with 4 DPOY awards.

blue bleeder09
05-19-2010, 09:31 PM
If by Hakim you mean Hakeem, then you are wrong. He has won twice.

http://www.nba.com/history/awards_defensiveplayer.html

And they did not start giving out the award until just recently... otherwise, Wilt would have probably won a couple of times. If not, then Russel.

And by your standards, the best Center so far in the history of the nba is Ben Wallace or Dikembe Mutombo, both with 4 DPOY awards.

probably another young kid who thinks lebron is the best player of all time too...Howard is good but not in the class of the elite ,far from it ..

GSW Hoops
05-19-2010, 09:36 PM
And by your standards, the best Center so far in the history of the nba is Ben Wallace or Dikembe Mutombo, both with 4 DPOY awards.

Anyone who says Dwight Howard is a top 5 of all-time probably ranks his heroes based on how many McDonalds commercials they've been in.

All-Time McDonalds Commercials

Dwight Howard 4
Wilt 0
Russell 0
Ewing 1
Hakim (lol @ at the spelling he used) 0

Nuff said. D Howard greatest of all time.

CowboysKB24
05-20-2010, 03:20 PM
Dwight Howard has 2 DPOY awards.

Wilt 0
Shaq 0
Kareem 0
Walton 0
Russle 0
Hakim 0
Ewing 0

..................^^^^^^

Hawkeye15
05-20-2010, 04:11 PM
potential itself is not overrated. But WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY too many guys get this label. Its like you automatically get it if you are 19 and athletic or tall

JayW_1023
05-21-2010, 06:45 AM
In the upcoming draft potential is overrated yes. The Wizards will draft Wall no.1 because he has more potential. It is a big mistake. The John Wall kid is a cocky flashy kid. He may become a stat sheet stuffer, but I don't like his attitude.

Give me Evan Turner anytime, a smart low key kid who stayed in school and learned the fundamentals of the game. This kid plays the right way and wants to be a student of the game. This kid has more the attitude of a winner.

RipVW
05-21-2010, 07:20 AM
how has it screwed more teams than not??

Potential has set back a lot of franchises, the Bulls included. When they traded Brand to take two top HS kids in the top 10, that set the franchise back. Both Curry and Chandler were drafted on potential.

The fact that GMs couldnt stop themselves led to the league implementing an age limit. Theres too much money tied up in these HS kids and its too inexact. Having them play in college, even if only for a year, provides a higher level of assurance.

FarOutIos
05-21-2010, 08:05 AM
Potential has set back a lot of franchises, the Bulls included. When they traded Brand to take two top HS kids in the top 10, that set the franchise back. Both Curry and Chandler were drafted on potential.

The fact that GMs couldnt stop themselves led to the league implementing an age limit. Theres too much money tied up in these HS kids and its too inexact. Having them play in college, even if only for a year, provides a higher level of assurance.

How many times do we have to go over this... for every time a player was drafted on potential and failed, there is also the time that the opposite is true.

Look at the playoffs this year... the Magic took Dwight Howard over Emeka Okafor based on potential alone. That leap of faith turned out well.

Look at the Celtics, they took Rondo who was not as accomplished as other players. I know, because my Kings made one of their only drafting mistakes by passing on the unproven Rondo and his 11 point average for the 25 point average Quincy Douby. Great decision that was.

And how did Rondo's teammate Garnet do in college?

The Lakers picked Bynum on potential alone. And how about that guy that plays with Bynum... I think his name is Kobe?

Or maybe Pau Gasol wasn't picked on potential?

Should we take a look at the Suns? Amare? How about Jason Richardson, picked ahead of Shane Battier in the 2001 nba draft. Battier was the more proven player as a senior; Richardson was a sophmore who only scored 14 point per game.

But then again lets REALLY look at the 2001 nba draft. Those picks you mentioned earlier- Curry and Chander, were not the best selections. Sure they were drafted on potential- BUT LOOK AT THAT DRAFT! Of the 28 first round picks... only 10 players were juniors or seniors thoughout that first round.

The Jrs and Seniors were : Battier, Richard Jefferson, Troy Murphy, Kirk Haston, Michael Bradley, Jason Collins, Jeryl Sasser, Brendan Hayward, Brandon Armstron, and Jamaal Tinsley.

The best Non-Junior/Senior players in that draft were: Gasol, Richardson, Joe Johnson, Zach Randolph, Gerald Wallace, Samuel Dalambert, Tony Parker, and Gilbert Arenas (who was a second round pick).

I would say that the potential group (second group) had a better ratio of good players to picks than the first group (the proven players).

This would lead us to think that your statement is not complete.

Your statement SHOULD read - Potential has set back some franchises, and it has greatly helped other franchises.

Seems to me like the only thing that drafting on potential does is that it makes the draft more of a gamble. You really need to be able to guess at whether or not a player will ever reach the potential. Many factors go into that realization- including work ethic, desire and injuries. Also, opportunity comes into play.

arkanian215
05-21-2010, 09:53 AM
In the upcoming draft potential is overrated yes. The Wizards will draft Wall no.1 because he has more potential. It is a big mistake. The John Wall kid is a cocky flashy kid. He may become a stat sheet stuffer, but I don't like his attitude.

Give me Evan Turner anytime, a smart low key kid who stayed in school and learned the fundamentals of the game. This kid plays the right way and wants to be a student of the game. This kid has more the attitude of a winner.

I don't think a guy with 4.4 TO/G has learned his fundamentals.

JayW_1023
05-21-2010, 12:21 PM
I don't think a guy with 4.4 TO/G has learned his fundamentals.

Don't be fooled by that. Turner had to play PG while being a natural wing player at Ohio State.

Picking Wall over Turner is picking style over substance.

LTS
05-21-2010, 12:51 PM
Orlando take Howard over Emeka (who considered polished ready to go) it's a gamble but sometimes pays which is why its a gamble

SteveNash
05-21-2010, 04:59 PM
and when did they start giving that award out ??
howard couldn't hold hakim's jockstap when it comes to defence ....
got to your local library and learn your history before you say BS. Hakim won it 1992-93,and 1993-94 i belive that would be twice .....:facepalm:

Hakim Warrick has never won the award.

GSW Hoops
05-21-2010, 06:24 PM
Hakim Warrick has never won the award.

So you're bashing him for spelling it "Hakim" even though you spelled it that way in a previous post? :facepalm:


Dwight Howard has 2 DPOY awards.

Wilt 0
Shaq 0
Kareem 0
Walton 0
Russle 0
Hakim 0
Ewing 0

gmac2824
05-21-2010, 06:48 PM
.

Chronz
05-21-2010, 07:26 PM
So you're bashing him for spelling it "Hakim" even though you spelled it that way in a previous post? :facepalm:

How do you know he meant Hakeem?

GSW Hoops
05-22-2010, 03:02 AM
How do you know he meant Hakeem?

I doubt he'd throw Hakim Warrick into the same conversation as Russell, Wilt, Shaq, etc.