PDA

View Full Version : Why Do NBA Players not improve as much as other sports?



Fired-Up
02-12-2013, 01:35 PM
You see it all the time in the MLB and NFL. With some exceptions rookies are pretty much marginal players at best in the NFL and MLB. Particularly in baseball. It's not uncommon to see a 23 year old hitter come into the league and look like he's lost and then 5 years later he tearing through the league. In the NFL rookie QB's, hell sophomore and junior and even senior QB's can't hold a candle to the vets. Their production is simply far lower.

In the NBA if you are good you are good. These guys often debut much younger and have an immediate impact. Like Duncan, MJ, LeBron, Shaq. Basically by their 2nd seasons they were awesome. NBA superstars are typically far more than serviceable in their rookie and sophomore years.

Sure basketball players get a little better. But it's not like the MVP Duncan at 26 was light years ahead of the rookie Duncan. It still looked the same guy. It's not as if he just figured it out.

Chris Paul has been awesome forever and he's only 27. I'd say he's not as good as he once was in 2007-2009.

The examples are endless. It seems guys in the NBA walk into the league really good and the ceiling isn't much higher than the level they are at currently. In comparison to the other 2 leagues of course.

Swashcuff
02-12-2013, 01:42 PM
You do realize that there are other sports out there than just Basketball, Baseball and American football right?

This is largely your opinion however. There are examples from every angle in every sport to refute your claims.

Fired-Up
02-12-2013, 01:43 PM
You do realize that there are other sports out there than just Basketball, Baseball and American football right?

This is largely your opinion however. There are examples from every angle in every sport to refute your claims.

The only ones we care about here in America are NBA, NFL and MLB. No sane person would say the learning curve in the MLB isn't much steeper than the NBA.

el hidalgo
02-12-2013, 01:47 PM
this thread = fail


just use your brain dude. adjusting to MLB pitching is so much harder than adjusting to NBA pace and defense...

Chronz
02-12-2013, 01:50 PM
There are other sports outside of Basketball?

I have to say maybe our athletes are better from day 1 but they do improve quite abit. Maybe not the improvement you would see as often in other sports but guys like Chauncey/Ben Wallace do exist. Guys who take awhile to figure out the PG/C position see the most improvement late.

Football just confuses me, it seems like its more system/teammate based, so players might improve but it seems to me like their situation improves more.

Basketball has something like that but you can tailor systems around a select group of players so its more individual based. Thats prolly why their talent is showcased alot sooner.

Fired-Up
02-12-2013, 01:56 PM
There are other sports outside of Basketball?

I have to say maybe our athletes are better from day 1 but they do improve quite abit. Maybe not the improvement you would see as often in other sports but guys like Chauncey/Ben Wallace do exist. Guys who take awhile to figure out the PG/C position see the most improvement late.

Football just confuses me, it seems like its more system/teammate based, so players might improve but it seems to me like their situation improves more.

Basketball has something like that but you can tailor systems around a select group of players so its more individual based. Thats prolly why their talent is showcased alot sooner.

And Baseball is even more individual based than basketball.

LakersIn5
02-12-2013, 01:59 PM
billups

Fired-Up
02-12-2013, 02:00 PM
Fundamentally baseball is pitcher vs batter. 1 VS 1.

Fundamentally basketball is 5 on 5.

So saying that NBA players have an impact from day 1 because they don't have to adapt is false.

Stinkyoutsider
02-12-2013, 02:11 PM
I want to say basketball players don't improve quite as much because of the regular season but how can this be true when in baseball it seems the team has a game every day? Not much time to practice when you're going out in game situations every day?

With the schedule the NBA has, teams can barely fit one practice a week in and imo, that's where you really evolve your game. I know Iverson wouldn't agree though lol.

Now, if you have 2 days off between games (even on the road), you can get one practice in. But, it seems that in most schedules, guys get 1 day off between games. And, when you're on the road, that 1 day is used for travel.

Fired-Up
02-12-2013, 02:50 PM
You have question the talent of the league because of this scenario. You see NFL and MLB players work their whole lives and spend almost 3 decades of their life before they even begin to gain respect.

In the NBA you have 21 year olds ripping through the Association like it's nothing.

MassoDio
02-12-2013, 02:55 PM
This is largely your opinion however. There are examples from every angle in every sport to refute your claims.

This.

And it would be quite easy to list a number of them in Baseball and Football just from this last year alone.

Fired-Up
02-12-2013, 03:12 PM
This.

And it would be quite easy to list a number of them in Baseball and Football just from this last year alone.

When Tim Lincecum came into the league and at 24 and 25 and won back to back Cy Young Awards it was unheard of. People were just dumbfounded. It was quite literally shocking to MLB circles.

Kevin Durant became the best scorer in the league at 21. Duncan and MJ were basically the best players at their position the moment they stepped on the floor. Both at age 21. Yet no one thought anything of it. It wasn't abnormal.

See the difference.

Chronz
02-12-2013, 03:16 PM
You have question the talent of the league because of this scenario. You see NFL and MLB players work their whole lives and spend almost 3 decades of their life before they even begin to gain respect.

In the NBA you have 21 year olds ripping through the Association like it's nothing.
How does that put the talent in question?

Chronz
02-12-2013, 03:16 PM
And Baseball is even more individual based than basketball.

Agreed, its part of the reason why it bores me so much. NFL is too complex for my brain, but basketball has the brilliant mixture of team play and individual greatness to keep me enthused

Fired-Up
02-12-2013, 03:20 PM
How does that put the talent in question?

It shows the learning curve is less steep. Why are Minor League players so young? It's because they can't hang with the more experienced players. The fact that green players can come into the NBA and show up 7 year vets and blow them away says something about the players already in the league.

abe_froman
02-12-2013, 03:36 PM
because every sport is different and based around difference skill sets.you bring up baseball,which is a game based largely around timing,you see a different starting pitcher every night and different hitter after 3 strikes( your simply not use to a roy halladay fastball or curve until you see it enough to get use to it).basketball on the other hand is less dependent on timing,you can compensate for any mistiming with athleticism,which basketball is mainly build on

Fired-Up
02-12-2013, 03:40 PM
because every sport is different and based around difference skill sets.you bring up baseball,which is a game based largely around timing,your simply not use to a roy halladay fastball or curve until you see it enough to get use to it.basketball on the other hand is less dependent on timing,you can compensate for any mistiming with athleticism(you miss a shot,you can get the rebound and shoot as much as you want/need til you perfect it)

I disagree. Ichiro won MVP his first year in the MLB because he had years of high level experience. Players switch leagues and they tear it up. Halladay won the Cy Young his 1st season in the NL. Players switch divisions all the time and don't lose production.

It's more about the quality of players or lack thereof in the NBA.

TrueFan420
02-12-2013, 03:40 PM
The only ones we care about here in America are NBA, NFL and MLB. No sane person would say the learning curve in the MLB isn't much steeper than the NBA.

Speak for yourself

JdKing7
02-12-2013, 03:46 PM
The only ones we care about here in America are NBA, NFL and MLB. No sane person would say the learning curve in the MLB isn't much steeper than the NBA.

NHL no??

Chronz
02-12-2013, 03:50 PM
It shows the learning curve is less steep. Why are Minor League players so young? It's because they can't hang with the more experienced players. The fact that green players can come into the NBA and show up 7 year vets and blow them away says something about the players already in the league.
Learning curve prolly but talent? What exactly do you think it says?

abe_froman
02-12-2013, 03:52 PM
I disagree. Ichiro won MVP his first year in the MLB because he had years of high level experience. Players switch leagues and they tear it up. Halladay won the Cy Young his 1st season in the NL. Players switch divisions all the time and don't lose production.

It's more about the quality of players or lack thereof in the NBA.
thats not the rule,but an aberration.players werent use to his style of hitting(if you ever watch him ,its not conventional)thus disrupted the predictably of the ab (if you look at his 2nd year ,when they were more use to him,you see a dip in production)

for halladay-he played against most of those players already as there is interleague play and most players switch teams every few years with no staying in one league lifelong .besides its the pitcher who controls the timing


as for quality of players in the nba,they are of very high quality, substantial jumps in stats from year to year doesnt mean your not a quality player.your judging players based on the wrong criteria

Fired-Up
02-12-2013, 03:53 PM
Learning curve prolly but talent? What exactly do you think it says?

It says the quality of professionalism and skill is relatively low in the NBA.

Chronz
02-12-2013, 03:57 PM
It says the quality of professionalism and skill is relatively low in the NBA.
I wouldn't know how to measure that vs other sports, how did you go about comparing apples to oranges?

Fired-Up
02-12-2013, 04:16 PM
I wouldn't know how to measure that vs other sports, how did you go about comparing apples to oranges?

Learning curves usually have some correlation to the quality of the league. Given that the MLB is very steep and the NBA is very shallow. It'd say the quality of NBA players is low, in comparison.

Chronz
02-12-2013, 04:27 PM
Learning curves usually have some correlation to the quality of the league. Given that the MLB is very steep and the NBA is very shallow. It'd say the quality of NBA players is low, in comparison.
But what do you do when the learning curve is different depending on the player. Like I fail to see how Chauncey Billups taking forever to become a good player is a sign of anything other than his own unique talent/destination. Whereas a guy like Shaq comes in and dominates because of his sheer overwhelming talent, and even he improved drastically in year 2.

2 players with radically different learning curves playing in the same league. How does that signify anything other than their own talent?

JerseyPalahniuk
02-12-2013, 05:01 PM
In the NBA you have 21 year olds ripping through the Association like it's nothing.

There very few Lebron/Durant/Kyries in the NBA that have produced this early in their NBA careers. Lebron and Kyrie specifically had rookie/sophomore seasons that are among the best ALL-TIME. They are not normal



In the NFL rookie QB's, hell sophomore and junior and even senior QB's can't hold a candle to the vets. Their production is simply far lower.

QB's? Andrew Luck, RG3, Russel Wilson all in the same year?

Defense? Bobby Wagner, Lavonte David, Casey Hayward

JasonJohnHorn
02-12-2013, 06:10 PM
I admit that the guys at the top of a draft class can carry a more immediate impact in basketball than the guys at the top of a draft class in other sports, and that from time to time you get a player who seems to enter the league playing at an extremely high level.

You mentioned Duncan, who is a great example, but he also played all 4 years in college, so when he came in the league he was 4 years older than was Kobe, T-Mac and LBJ when they came in the league.

David Robinson also played like a HOFer as a rookie, but likewise, was much older when he came in the league.

LBJ and Kobe however both played like shadows of their future selves as rookies. James was a FAR better player in his second season than he was as a rookie, and is better still now.

You take a typical player though, and they usually take several year to developed. Granger is a great example, as is Ron Artest.

I think to, the league in general is very athletic, and the younger you are, the more athletic you tend to be, so when you get a young PG going against an older PG, it is often times a match-up of speed vs. basketball IQ. The 32 year-old Isiah Thomas would have been destroyed by a 25 year-old Thomas for example, but a 32 year old Stockton likely would have played better than a 25 year old Stockton.

It is a case by case basis.

ThuglifeJ
02-12-2013, 07:11 PM
that's not true at all. Any good role player takes a good few years to improve. Like JJ Redick? Yeah he's not a star, which is what your opinion is being based off of clearly, and he went from joke to starter (good role player elsewhere).

Tmac? Kobe? Billups? Nash? Kidd? were these guys dominant from rookie day? No they all improved year by year till they hit a peak. That's how it goes. Tony Parker was supposed to be an all star point guard? They all improved.

Also you act like just because they aren't stars in the NBA, where talent has such a large gap it's not even funny, they don't improve. I can say VC was the 2nd best player on UNC, and then in NBA he became a star and could shoot dribble lead, things he didnt do in UNC.

Think of non-star guy like Chalmers or Felton. Yeah they were beasts in college, and have lesser roles now. I can bet you if they went back to college NOW they would be even beastlier.

ThuglifeJ
02-12-2013, 07:12 PM
I think the biggest counter-argument is that in the NBA defenses adjust to superstars. Superstars are REQUIRED to keep adding to their game in order to stay at the top. It may not show up in their stats but if they remained the exact same year to year their stats would dip. Durant couldn't dribble as good as he can now, Kobe couldn't post up as good as he does now, Lebron used to shoot 3s off the backboard. They improve year to year you just don't notice unless you follow the NBA and not just check stat increases. Football players don't get THAT much faster, learn more jukes, throw further etc. NBA players DO so HA.

Fired-Up
02-12-2013, 09:09 PM
Basketball players typically don't see drastic increases in production throughout their careers. Especially past year 2. Baseball and Football players do. It's almost unheard of for a QB to have an MVP caliber year or even a career year before age 27. The average MLB player doesn't even debut until age 24.

I don't think this league is as talented as the other ones.

Plus we have players in the NBA debut at 19-20 and pretty much be at full capacity immediately.

Sactown
02-12-2013, 09:13 PM
There are other sports outside of Basketball?

I have to say maybe our athletes are better from day 1 but they do improve quite abit. Maybe not the improvement you would see as often in other sports but guys like Chauncey/Ben Wallace do exist. Guys who take awhile to figure out the PG/C position see the most improvement late.

Football just confuses me, it seems like its more system/teammate based, so players might improve but it seems to me like their situation improves more.

Basketball has something like that but you can tailor systems around a select group of players so its more individual based. Thats prolly why their talent is showcased alot sooner.

Like in all sports, it's possible to go on a 10-16 game hot streak.. luckily in the NFL if you go on a 16 game hot streak that's the whole season.

PrettyBoyJ
02-12-2013, 09:30 PM
Honestly I think NBA players don't have good work ethic.. I think too many guys after the season is over don't take advantage of working out with top players or conducting offseason programs with their teammates. I think they wait until training camp to try and develop or build chemistry with their team. The guys that work hard you notice them guys who don't work as hard fade away

IndyRealist
02-13-2013, 09:56 AM
Players improve dramatically over their first 3-6 years. Rebounding, fg%, go up, turnovers and fouls go down. Especially for big men. You can't even begin to rate big men until their 3rd year (see JJ Hickson). I think (American) football has the players most ready to play as rookies/sophomores. Linemen are already 300lbs, running backs and receivers are as fast as they're ever going to be, etc. And the NFL does not run the variety of systems like the NBA. Very few offenses actually work on an NFL level.You have very little hope of understanding the triangle during your rookie contract.

trueblue83
02-13-2013, 10:43 AM
Thats why the NFL has had how many guys come straight from high School! 18 Yr old frshman in college playing the OLine would get murdered by Suh or Watt or any other NFL starting Dlineman....RBs and WRs just being fast.....So if you can Jump High, dribble, as long as your tall you can make the NBA? Great Logic!

3RDASYSTEM
02-13-2013, 11:06 AM
You see it all the time in the MLB and NFL. With some exceptions rookies are pretty much marginal players at best in the NFL and MLB. Particularly in baseball. It's not uncommon to see a 23 year old hitter come into the league and look like he's lost and then 5 years later he tearing through the league. In the NFL rookie QB's, hell sophomore and junior and even senior QB's can't hold a candle to the vets. Their production is simply far lower.

In the NBA if you are good you are good. These guys often debut much younger and have an immediate impact. Like Duncan, MJ, LeBron, Shaq. Basically by their 2nd seasons they were awesome. NBA superstars are typically far more than serviceable in their rookie and sophomore years.

Sure basketball players get a little better. But it's not like the MVP Duncan at 26 was light years ahead of the rookie Duncan. It still looked the same guy. It's not as if he just figured it out.

Chris Paul has been awesome forever and he's only 27. I'd say he's not as good as he once was in 2007-2009.

The examples are endless. It seems guys in the NBA walk into the league really good and the ceiling isn't much higher than the level they are at currently. In comparison to the other 2 leagues of course.

I feel responsible for threads like this made

you're welcome

its like that for baseball also they just let them rot away in minor leagues and act too scared to call'em up and im thinking how will they ever learn to manup if you keep babying these so called great aa-aaa prospects



I told everybody from my day1 psd debut that a nba/nfl players game is there preNBA/NFL, I mean people couldn't tell how good BSANDERS was going to be at OKST.? same with PETERSON and MANNING and MOSS and VICK and slew of others

same with BEAN in LA, he was a backupguard to JONES(good player) and somehow he magically changed his game and got so much better, and im like do people actually watch a player play, hes no diff. just like you said DUNCAN was same player at 26 as he was at 24, the game just slows down for them as they master it mentally

BEAN is basically same player as JONES but he wanted to score like JORDAN and won 5rings so they mediahype it up

http://youtu.be/xgvo24F1kvA - now watch this and tell me how is he any diff from then and now, same player just more minutes played, you know not a backupguard anymore,mediahype is amazing

keep making more threads like this so I can take credit for it

Mitch Kramer
02-13-2013, 11:10 AM
Players improve dramatically over their first 3-6 years. Rebounding, fg%, go up, turnovers and fouls go down. Especially for big men. You can't even begin to rate big men until their 3rd year (see JJ Hickson). I think (American) football has the players most ready to play as rookies/sophomores. Linemen are already 300lbs, running backs and receivers are as fast as they're ever going to be, etc. And the NFL does not run the variety of systems like the NBA. Very few offenses actually work on an NFL level.You have very little hope of understanding the triangle during your rookie contract.

There is just so much wrong with this. :laugh: I mean what a terrible post.

Football players bodies are not mature enough to last in the NFL until they are juniors at the very least. Every team runs different "systems" that are far more complex than that of the NBA. In the NBA, if you have a melo or a lebron, you can run plays that are basically "gtfo of the way, Melo is going to get a bucket"

xRipCity
02-13-2013, 01:50 PM
The other sports (primarily baseball) require such fundamental skill and precision that takes years to master, whereas basketball requires a high level of athleticism

Fired-Up
02-13-2013, 02:51 PM
The other sports (primarily baseball) require such fundamental skill and precision that takes years to master, whereas basketball requires a high level of athleticism

Basketball players are the most athletic of the 3. Perhaps that is why they show little improvement throughout their career, relatively.

The NFL also has high caliber athletes. Especially at running back. And the last 5 running backs to win MVP were ages 27, 28, 27, 27 and 29. All of these guys had to spend many, many years in the league to reach that level of performance. They earned it.

I think it goes to show the lack of quality talent in the NBA that we have young players come in and show up vets immediately.

KnickaBocka.44
02-13-2013, 03:12 PM
Basketball players are the most athletic of the 3. Perhaps that is why they show little improvement throughout their career, relatively.

The NFL also has high caliber athletes. Especially at running back. And the last 5 running backs to win MVP were ages 27, 28, 27, 27 and 29. All of these guys had to spend many, many years in the league to reach that level of performance. They earned it.

I think it goes to show the lack of quality talent in the NBA that we have young players come in and show up vets immediately.

This just isn't really true. It took Lebron 5 years to win his first MVP, the same amount of years it took Adrian Peterson and LT to win their first MVP's in the NFL.

Fired-Up
02-13-2013, 03:19 PM
This just isn't really true. It took Lebron 5 years to win his first MVP, the same amount of years it took Adrian Peterson and LT to win their first MVP's in the NFL.

Yeah, but they didn't begin the season at age 23 like LeBron. It took them 27 years of hard work and training. And that's just running backs. QB's don't even begin to gain respect or have career years until they are around 29 or 30. There hasn't been a player over 30 win a scoring title since Jordan. That's sad from the vets. Just about any QB that's accomplished anything is close to 30 or even closer to 40 than 30.

It took LT and AP 6 years.

sp1derm00
02-13-2013, 04:07 PM
Basketball is so instinctual that it's hard to break habits or form new good ones.

Thinking about how much you have to do on the court, reading plays, dribbling the ball... basketball relies more on instinct than just about any sport. You have less time to adapt because while you're dribbling the ball, you have to simultaneously read your defender, help defenders, and where your teammates are.

Chronz
02-13-2013, 04:11 PM
Basketball players typically don't see drastic increases in production throughout their careers. Especially past year 2. Baseball and Football players do. It's almost unheard of for a QB to have an MVP caliber year or even a career year before age 27. The average MLB player doesn't even debut until age 24.

I don't think this league is as talented as the other ones.

Plus we have players in the NBA debut at 19-20 and pretty much be at full capacity immediately.

Numbers? Now we're talking. Show us these quantifiable figures plz, sounds very interesting.

I just have one question, how does the steroid era effect the MLB numbers? I dont follow it at all from a statistical perspective but I hear it all the time from Max Kellerman, that it greatly distorted statistics because its a game built much more around muscle strength or whatever.

Fired-Up
02-13-2013, 04:14 PM
Numbers? Now we are talking. Show us these quantifiable figures plz, sounds very interesting.

I just have one question, how does the steroid era effect the MLB numbers? I dont follow it all from a statistical perspective but I hear it all the time from Max Kellerman, that it greatly distorted statistics because its a game built much more around muscle strength or whatever.

What do I look like. A sports writer? I'm going off what I see. It's ****ing obvious as hell that baseball players improve MUCH more than basketball players.

KnickaBocka.44
02-13-2013, 04:41 PM
What do I look like. A sports writer? I'm going off what I see. It's ****ing obvious as hell that baseball players improve MUCH more than basketball players.

Isn't it possible that is because baseball requires much less athleticism than basketball does? They can keep improving because they don't have to deal with losing athleticism as they get older and it effecting their performance. In basketball, whether because of injuries or just aging, guys lose athleticism and it has a negative impact on their overall game.

Fired-Up
02-14-2013, 10:47 AM
Isn't it possible that is because baseball requires much less athleticism than basketball does? They can keep improving because they don't have to deal with losing athleticism as they get older and it effecting their performance. In basketball, whether because of injuries or just aging, guys lose athleticism and it has a negative impact on their overall game.

Athleticism doesn't really begin to wane until around age 28. And yet most NBA players are the same at 22 as they were at 28. At least in comparison to baseball players.

THE MTL
02-14-2013, 12:56 PM
You see it all the time in the MLB and NFL. With some exceptions rookies are pretty much marginal players at best in the NFL and MLB. Particularly in baseball. It's not uncommon to see a 23 year old hitter come into the league and look like he's lost and then 5 years later he tearing through the league. In the NFL rookie QB's, hell sophomore and junior and even senior QB's can't hold a candle to the vets. Their production is simply far lower.

In the NBA if you are good you are good. These guys often debut much younger and have an immediate impact. Like Duncan, MJ, LeBron, Shaq. Basically by their 2nd seasons they were awesome. NBA superstars are typically far more than serviceable in their rookie and sophomore years.

Sure basketball players get a little better. But it's not like the MVP Duncan at 26 was light years ahead of the rookie Duncan. It still looked the same guy. It's not as if he just figured it out.

Chris Paul has been awesome forever and he's only 27. I'd say he's not as good as he once was in 2007-2009.

The examples are endless. It seems guys in the NBA walk into the league really good and the ceiling isn't much higher than the level they are at currently. In comparison to the other 2 leagues of course.

I think this is an ignorant statement to make. I like how you named superstars and the greatest players of all time. Lebron James, Tim Duncan, Michael Jordan. But what about Kobe Bryant, Steve Nash, John Stockton? All those players significantly improved later on throughout the years.

Every sport has its examples and if I cared to follow baseball, I could probably find some of those examples as well.