PDA

View Full Version : Steph Curry: Pre Draft Scouting Report



Tony_Starks
09-25-2015, 02:38 PM
The gist:

-Explosiveness and athleticism substandard

-not a great finisher around the basket

-must develop as a pg

-will have limited success

- NEEDS TO CONSIDERABLY IMPROVE AS A BALL HANDLER

-Do not rely on him to run your team




So much for the experts...



http://www.complex.com/sports/2015/09/stephe-curry-reads-pre-draft-scouting-report?utm_source=yoruba%20facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=cmcm

Slug3
09-25-2015, 03:14 PM
Kind of seems easier if they would have just said "he will suck".

Tony_Starks
09-25-2015, 03:30 PM
Kind of seems easier if they would have just said "he will suck".


They practically did. All I remember hearing is this stuff, he' can't play point and is too little to play 2, and his ankles were glass.

Let the suits tell it he had bust written all over him. Even after he was in the league a while a lot of folks here on this very site made a big huge fuss about his contract calling him the famous psd "overrated."

PraiseJesus
09-25-2015, 03:32 PM
LOL :)

evaluating talent is NOT rocket science.

who here knows someone that predicted Curry's MVP in 2009/10? Who did that?

PraiseJesus
09-25-2015, 03:37 PM
the consensus among 'experts' and consequently - psd members (they ride the majority opinion) - was that Curry was a SG playing out of position (not a true PG). He was also undersized for the SG position so that made him garbage.

...meanwhile - Bobby Knight had a different opinion

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-JyTIQq5H-g

On one side the experts say Curry cant play PG - on the other side Bobby Knight said he was the best passer in NCAA history

Contrary to what many want to say - Curry was OBVIOUSLY going to be great and it was evident in College and his rookie year.

The idea that "he worked hard and got rid of his weaknesses" is BS. THe only thing that happened was he got the chance to run a team after Monta Ellis got canned

Chronz
09-25-2015, 04:09 PM
What's with the caps on ball handling?

5ass
09-25-2015, 04:22 PM
Curry improved at handling his balls.

tredigs
09-25-2015, 04:33 PM
He improved both finishing around the basket and his ball handling tremendously from his rookie year to now. His decision making and BBIQ in general is also a significant upgrade. I honestly was always sold on Curry so long as he could stay on the court, and even in that regard they've documented the off-court work he puts in to help ensure that.

Slug3
09-25-2015, 05:26 PM
They practically did. All I remember hearing is this stuff, he' can't play point and is too little to play 2, and his ankles were glass.

Let the suits tell it he had bust written all over him. Even after he was in the league a while a lot of folks here on this very site made a big huge fuss about his contract calling him the famous psd "overrated."

Well to be fair his ankles were kind of glass for the first couple years. But from what I think I read before is he did a good job of working to strengthen his hips and knees to help with his ankles, and it looks like its helped out.

jerellh528
09-25-2015, 06:10 PM
Yes, there have been some predraft evaluations on rookies that turned out to be wrong. They scout em how they seem em, it's up to that player to continue to work on his game and improve. Obviously curry works hard on his game.

MonroeFAN
09-25-2015, 06:24 PM
What's with the caps on ball handling?

Likely the most offensive part to the OP. Makes sense, he's being mentioned as a top 5 ball handler of all time in another topic on here and it's hard to disagree.

SLY WILLIAMS
09-25-2015, 06:25 PM
I think Brandon Jennings scored around 55 points (in the last 3 quarters of a game) as a rookie against the Warriors. If I remember correctly some people were blaming Curry's lack of defense in that game. What a difference 5 years makes.

Chronz
09-25-2015, 07:09 PM
Likely the most offensive part to the OP. Makes sense, he's being mentioned as a top 5 ball handler of all time in another topic on here and it's hard to disagree.

What makes sense. I've seen the thread, commented in it. Not seeing what's so hard to disagree with.

flea
09-25-2015, 07:15 PM
Yeah, accurate scouting report. I watched probably as much of Curry in college as anyone who isn't a Davidson alum. Exciting player then, but nothing close to what he is now. He was about as big as Serena Williams's left thigh and had all sorts of questions about his defense, ballhandling, awareness, and finishing ability. But he could shoot just as well then as he can now.

You can't always predict who is going to improve and who isn't, and by the time a player is 25 I think they're pretty much done improving with maybe a handful of exceptions, but he is an example of a guy who did.

PraiseJesus
09-25-2015, 07:46 PM
reading some of this is as annoying as scratching chalkboard

I'm not even a Warriors fan and I knew Curry was the real deal out of college

Scoots
09-25-2015, 08:03 PM
It wasn't hard to tell in college that he had a LOT of potential. After his rookie year I thought he could be great. 2 years ago he was a great player in a flawed system.

I still didn't think he'd win MVP with LeBron, Durant, Davis, Griffin, Paul, George, et al still in the NBA.

tredigs
09-25-2015, 09:30 PM
reading some of this is as annoying as scratching chalkboard

I'm not even a Warriors fan and I knew Curry was the real deal out of college

After he lost a 3pt contest at the All Star game 3 years ago you also said he'd surely be exposed and fail under the lights of the post-season if he ever got there. How'd that work out? You also said D'Angelo Russell would turn the world upside down in Summer league and have him showing us why he will be a front-runner for the MVP as a rookie this season. How'd that work out?

Basically, you just vomit words and hope something sticks.

MonroeFAN
09-25-2015, 10:16 PM
:o

Leftcoast_yg
09-25-2015, 11:10 PM
After he lost a 3pt contest at the All Star game 3 years ago you also said he'd surely be exposed and fail under the lights of the post-season if he ever got there. How'd that work out? You also said D'Angelo Russell would turn the world upside down in Summer league and have him showing us why he will be a front-runner for the MVP as a rookie this season. How'd that work out?

Basically, you just vomit words and hope something sticks.

Rekt

5ass
09-25-2015, 11:47 PM
After he lost a 3pt contest at the All Star game 3 years ago you also said he'd surely be exposed and fail under the lights of the post-season if he ever got there. How'd that work out? You also said D'Angelo Russell would turn the world upside down in Summer league and have him showing us why he will be a front-runner for the MVP as a rookie this season. How'd that work out?

Basically, you just vomit words and hope something sticks.
Lol Russell an MVP his rookie season? I want what he's smoking. Didn't this guy also swear he'd boycott the NBA? I think it was after the CP3 trade to the Lakers was overruled by the owners.

BKLYNpigeon
09-26-2015, 12:23 AM
Curry was really raw coming out of college. He had all the skills but it really took a lot of hard work and dedication.

Raps18-19 Champ
09-26-2015, 01:20 AM
reading some of this is as annoying as scratching chalkboard

I'm not even a Warriors fan and I knew Curry was the real deal out of college

You want a trophy or something?

asandhu23
09-26-2015, 03:12 AM
You want a trophy or something?

no, he wants a samosa.

kdspurman
09-26-2015, 11:20 AM
Curry improved at handling his balls.

Indeed he did

PraiseJesus
09-26-2015, 01:35 PM
You want a trophy or something?

The idea that its 'impossible' to know how good a young player will be is completely garbage.

That's all Im trying to prove. While there are 'scouts' and GMs that get it wrong 90% of the time there are people out there that understand basketball and can reliably scout good young players.

I'm so thankful that the Lakers drafted D'Angelo Russell instead of Jokeafor.

I'm so glad that the front office of the Lakers saw that Russell is a once in a generation talent that was too good to pass up on.

This is the same situation Curry had when he entered the NBA though. He was stuck having to share the rock with Monta Ellis and it held him back for 3 years. Russell has Kobe, Clarkson, and Randle to deal with so I can only hope that the coaches make it clear that Russell is the man.

Until DLO gets to run the team no one will see how good he is

PraiseJesus
09-26-2015, 01:42 PM
Curry was really raw coming out of college. He had all the skills but it really took a lot of hard work and dedication.

BS

Look at this video of Curry as a rookie

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGNnHDksvJ8

When Monta Ellis got hurt at the end of the season Curry finally got a chance to run the team. He dropped 36, 10, and 13 one night. And for a few weeks had games like that. He was one of the only rookies in NBA history to score a triple double with 30 pts joining Michael Jordan and Jason Kidd

Curry SHOULD of won the Rookie of the Year but was again snubbed for Tyreke Evans. What a joke that was. I remember arguing that garbage when it was going down as well. Tyreke got more credit because he got to run a team from day and thats all that really matter when it comes to padding stats. Efficiency is the true mark of a great player - not stat totals

To people that know basketball - Curry was ready to dominate the day he stepped in the NBA.

bgdreton
09-26-2015, 02:25 PM
I have to agree he really has only got stronger a bit faster and plays better D. Most of everything else he had coming into the league. It's funny how they used to play D on him some years back. The high pick and roll was never really trapped or high hedged. Now that's almost a double team every high P and R at the three pt line. Crazy..

slashsnake
09-26-2015, 02:51 PM
He got a lot better. I loved the guy in college, not anywhere near what I'd call anything close to a scout but here's what scared me.

He got a nice little crap conference schedule he dominated and and wow he looked overwhelmed most of the time when he'd play a name school. Duke, Purdue, Butler, West Virginia, Georgetown, North Carolina... He was just throwing up shots, turning it over, and kinda looking like a Jeremy Lin out there (no offense). Anytime he faced one of those good schools, it seems like he'd be 4-15 from downtown as they contested shots better, try and dribble through traffic and lose the ball constantly. Had a nice run in the tourney his sophomore year in a couple games, but which do you buy into?

That is what scared me. He'd light up Wofford, Samford, and Elon but then he'd look like a chucker with bad ball skills vs. the good schools. And at what point do you say that's just weaker coaching and teammates, or that's him tearing up tiny colleges, and us seeing reality when he faces good NCAA teams.

Not many thought he was going to be anywhere where he is now. I remember a few Warriors fans on here blasting me for thinking they should part ways with Ellis and keep Curry.

As for the PG part, before his final year he looked like a very undersized 2 guard shoved into a PG spot. And that last year he looked way too wild with the ball against solid teams to play the point.

But I was sold that second half of his rookie season. Only thing I worried about him early on was staying healthy after that. Then Grant Hill ankles were the only thing I could see stopping him.

5ass
09-26-2015, 03:25 PM
Indeed he did

No question. I've been watching him handle his balls since he was a high school kid.

5ass
09-26-2015, 03:26 PM
The idea that its 'impossible' to know how good a young player will be is completely garbage.

That's all Im trying to prove. While there are 'scouts' and GMs that get it wrong 90% of the time there are people out there that understand basketball and can reliably scout good young players.

I'm so thankful that the Lakers drafted D'Angelo Russell instead of Jokeafor.

I'm so glad that the front office of the Lakers saw that Russell is a once in a generation talent that was too good to pass up on.

This is the same situation Curry had when he entered the NBA though. He was stuck having to share the rock with Monta Ellis and it held him back for 3 years. Russell has Kobe, Clarkson, and Randle to deal with so I can only hope that the coaches make it clear that Russell is the man.

Until DLO gets to run the team no one will see how good he is
Boycott the NBA.

Raps18-19 Champ
09-26-2015, 07:53 PM
The idea that its 'impossible' to know how good a young player will be is completely garbage.

That's all Im trying to prove. While there are 'scouts' and GMs that get it wrong 90% of the time there are people out there that understand basketball and can reliably scout good young players.

I'm so thankful that the Lakers drafted D'Angelo Russell instead of Jokeafor.

I'm so glad that the front office of the Lakers saw that Russell is a once in a generation talent that was too good to pass up on.

This is the same situation Curry had when he entered the NBA though. He was stuck having to share the rock with Monta Ellis and it held him back for 3 years. Russell has Kobe, Clarkson, and Randle to deal with so I can only hope that the coaches make it clear that Russell is the man.

Until DLO gets to run the team no one will see how good he is

All people are saying is that no one is right 100% of the time. Your arrogant self is the only one acting like that.

PraiseJesus
09-26-2015, 07:59 PM
All people are saying is that no one is right 100% of the time. Your arrogant self is the only one acting like that.

No one is right 100% of the time? really???

Way to go out on a limb there pal

What people are saying is that drafting is a crapshoot and it's impossible to know how a player will turn out after hes drafted.

All im saying is that is bs

Raps18-19 Champ
09-26-2015, 08:07 PM
No one is right 100% of the time? really???

Way to go out on a limb there pal

What people are saying is that drafting is a crapshoot and it's impossible to know how a player will turn out after hes drafted.

All im saying is that is bs

Have you ever heard of an exaggeration?

Obviously it's not a simple random pick process. There's a lot of skill and knowledge involved when it comes to drafting. Their point is that there is a lot of luck involved apart from that too. You can be the best scout ever but you're not going to be right on your prediction all the time and that you're going to need some luck as well along with the players themselves contributing to make that prediction right.

PraiseJesus
09-26-2015, 08:24 PM
Have you ever heard of an exaggeration?

Obviously it's not a simple random pick process. There's a lot of skill and knowledge involved when it comes to drafting. Their point is that there is a lot of luck involved apart from that too. You can be the best scout ever but you're not going to be right on your prediction all the time and that you're going to need some luck as well along with the players themselves contributing to make that prediction right.

The level of idiocy is beyond measure in the current scouting system

Under so circumstances should Anthony Bennett EVER have been a #1 pick and Hasheem Thabeet should NEVER have been taken 4 spots ahead of a player like Stephen Curry

There is no excuse, other than a flawed system, to explain that happening year after year.

Thank god the Lakers got DSHOW and not Jokeafor.. that's all I can say

Raps18-19 Champ
09-26-2015, 08:26 PM
The level of idiocy is beyond measure in the current scouting system

Under so circumstances should Anthony Bennett EVER have been a #1 pick and Hasheem Thabeet should NEVER have been taken 4 spots ahead of a player like Stephen Curry

There is no excuse, other than a flawed system, to explain that happening year after year.

Thank god the Lakers got DSHOW and not Jokeafor.. that's all I can say

So like this paragraph has nothing to do with what you were saying earlier or what I just said.

slashsnake
09-26-2015, 09:45 PM
Have you ever heard of an exaggeration?

Obviously it's not a simple random pick process. There's a lot of skill and knowledge involved when it comes to drafting. Their point is that there is a lot of luck involved apart from that too. You can be the best scout ever but you're not going to be right on your prediction all the time and that you're going to need some luck as well along with the players themselves contributing to make that prediction right.

Agree...

Even when you choose the clear cut best option by every single professional scout in the league you can be completely wrong with your pick.

Manu Ginobili might have been the best player of his draft (Arguable with Kirilenko, Brand, Marion, Odom)... and he was the 2nd to last player drafted. Every single team saw him and said "he isn't worth even drafting". Couple years later EVERYONE said Kwame Brown was a top pick, and not one wanted Gilbert Arenas or Tony Parker. If Kwame was there at the 28th pick, SA would have Kwame instead of Parker.

If SA thought those guys were that good, they wouldn't have been waiting for the entire league to have a chance to get them first too. It's like Tom Brady. Great job by NE there, but they passed 6 times on drafting him too.

It isn't a crapshoot, but if every single scouting department can make those moves, and they can all agree on something that is just dead wrong. It isn't just "no one is right 100% of the time". It is more "everyone can be completely wrong on a player".

asandhu23
09-26-2015, 10:21 PM
Hindsight is 20/20.

cmellofan15
09-26-2015, 11:54 PM
scouts were wrong? this should for some reason be front page news!

MILLERHIGHLIFE
09-27-2015, 10:27 AM
Warriors probably could thank the Bucks for a few things. In the Bogut trade we had the option of injured Curry or Ellis. Our win now previous owner back then wanted 8th seed or bust so we took Ellis since he was healthy. Also we moved down that draft in 3 team trade with Kings and Charlotte Bobcats at the time we traded #9 and Salmons for #19 and Jackson. If we didn't move down in the trade we probably took Klay. So in hindsight we could of had Curry and Klay in the east. But then we been to good to draft either Giannis or Parker. But in the trade we drafted Kings selection of Jimmer at #9 then traded him to Kings. At #19 we drafted Tobias Harris and he was buried deep at end of bench since Skiles a hated rookies. Later Harris was dealt for rental JJ Redick. So all in all glad Bucks got new owners.

PraiseJesus
09-27-2015, 12:48 PM
I lost all respect for the Warrior fanbase after this happened

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMfn6-mb8_4

They booed their owner for doing the right thing and ensuring they dont lose a high draft pick thatyear.

Chris Mullin put those clowns in their place LOL

Looking back - this is one of the more embarassing representations of a fan base that Ive ever seen. THis just proves how uninformed the average fan is about how to actually build a winning team. People who know basketball knew the Warriors were on the verge of becoming great

PraiseJesus
09-27-2015, 12:52 PM
What a bunch of bandwagon idiots they are hahaha

Chris Mullin. "You're doing yourself a disservice" "hes going to turn the franchise around"

Cant deny people with real knowledge of the game

Saddletramp
09-27-2015, 04:46 PM
Question: Why is Praise Jesus in here fellating himself instead of putting together his scouting résumé for an NBA team? He's obviously one of the greatest talent evaluators I've ever seen (when he tells everyone repeatedly about that one time he was correct [but before he quit on the guy]).

tredigs
09-27-2015, 11:54 PM
Question: Why is Praise Jesus in here fellating himself instead of putting together his scouting résumé for an NBA team? He's obviously one of the greatest talent evaluators I've ever seen (when he tells everyone repeatedly about that one time he was correct [but before he quit on the guy]).

My question for the kid as well if I did not know any better. Fortunately, I have seen through/called out his hilarious ignorance and know what a fool and blowhard he is.

Saddletramp
09-28-2015, 04:35 AM
My question for the kid as well if I did not know any better. Fortunately, I have seen through/called out his hilarious ignorance and know what a fool and blowhard he is.

It's pretty great how he consistently ducks you when you call him out. He's still not quite at lol, please's level of ignoring being called out, but he's getting there.

JasonJohnHorn
09-28-2015, 09:18 AM
This actually seems like a fair assessment of his skills coming out of college. They were scouting him at 20 years old, not 25. Other than the 'limited success', I'd say this was spot on.

In college he was more of a shooter, so yes, he needed to improve at finishing at the basket. His rookie year he had less than 2 assists for each turnover; this year he had about 2.5. So yes, his handling of the ball has improved (even if a guy is good at dribbling behind his back, scouts won't say he's a good ball handler if he's causing turnovers). As for leading a team, he's gone from 6 assists per36 to 8.5. That is a big jump. As for 'finishing', his 2pt% jumped from 47% as a rookie, to almost 53% this last season.

This scouting report doesn't prove the scout wrong, it proves how good a player can become when he addresses his short comings. If Curry still played like he did as a rookie, or in college, the Warriors wouldn't have won it all this year. A scout can't see if a player WILL put the work in to improve, he/she only sees what the player is playing like at that time. If every player improved the way Curry did, then Jennings would be an MVP right now too.

As a scout, it is hard to predict if a player will improve. Any number of players have 'potential'. Curry just reached his. GMs/scout draft based on potential a lot, but only about 1/30 players will reach theirs.

Those things the scout said Curry needed to work on, he NEEDED to work on. And he DID. But the scout sounds like he/she was still spot on outside of the 'limited success' comment.

Scoots
09-28-2015, 11:21 AM
The idea that its 'impossible' to know how good a young player will be is completely garbage.

Incorrect. It's impossible to know ANYTHING. Nobody knows the future. You work hard to minimize the variables but they can never all be eliminated. To deny it does not help your other arguments.

Scoots
09-28-2015, 11:25 AM
Warriors probably could thank the Bucks for a few things. In the Bogut trade we had the option of injured Curry or Ellis.

Not sure I believe this ... the Warriors were pretty clearly loving Curry and distancing themselves from Ellis well before the trade.

Scoots
09-28-2015, 11:28 AM
I lost all respect for the Warrior fanbase after this happened

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMfn6-mb8_4

They booed their owner for doing the right thing and ensuring they dont lose a high draft pick thatyear.

Chris Mullin put those clowns in their place LOL

Looking back - this is one of the more embarassing representations of a fan base that Ive ever seen. THis just proves how uninformed the average fan is about how to actually build a winning team. People who know basketball knew the Warriors were on the verge of becoming great

As a VERY long time fan of the Warriors I hated that event. But to say it's one of the "more embarassing representations of a fan base" ... no, not even top 10. There are fans that have committed murder for their fandom. Huge brawls have broken out in the stands. Things thrown at players with intent to injure. The list is long and varied ... booing the owner is WAY down the list.

Scoots
09-28-2015, 11:30 AM
My question for the kid as well if I did not know any better. Fortunately, I have seen through/called out his hilarious ignorance and know what a fool and blowhard he is.

When people like that bloviate like this they can go back and find times they were "right" as proof, if anybody brings up times they were "wrong" it wasn't that they were wrong it was that the system failed to maximize the player.

There is no winning there.

MILLERHIGHLIFE
09-28-2015, 01:37 PM
Not sure I believe this ... the Warriors were pretty clearly loving Curry and distancing themselves from Ellis well before the trade.

Well it's legit. We heard all the ins and out's back then. Our previous owner back then was win now so he didn't want injured Curry which reinjured his ankle second time. So Kohl was more PPG guy so he went with healthy Ellis. Also Bucks were gonna pick Klay if we decided not to move down in that draft with 3 way trade. Kohl was always 8th seed or bust kinda meddling owner. Also we were held hostage at the time with maxed out injured Redd and Bogut always misses games every season. Also believe Bogut was injured when we traded him. Redd wasn't playing. Insurance was paying 80% of his max deal.

Chronz
09-28-2015, 01:55 PM
Well it's legit. We heard all the ins and out's back then. Our previous owner back then was win now so he didn't want injured Curry which reinjured his ankle second time. So Kohl was more PPG guy so he went with healthy Ellis. Also Bucks were gonna pick Klay if we decided not to move down in that draft with 3 way trade. Kohl was always 8th seed or bust kinda meddling owner. Also we were held hostage at the time with maxed out injured Redd and Bogut always misses games every season. Also believe Bogut was injured when we traded him. Redd wasn't playing. Insurance was paying 80% of his max deal.

Yea I think I remember you correcting me on that as well. I couldn't believe they would offer Curry in place of Ellis. I always felt ditching Ellis was a no brainer.

Scoots
09-28-2015, 02:00 PM
I wasn't intending to call you a liar, in case you thought so. It just seems like the sort of thing that gets out as a rumor but isn't actually true. If it is actually true, it's surprising based on what the Warriors coaches and front office were saying the year and a half before the trade.

PraiseJesus
09-28-2015, 02:16 PM
Jerry West is the puppet master behidn the curtain of this Warriors team.

Drafting Curry, Drafting Klay, adding pieces like Igoudala and Draymond Green.

Does anyone forget the idiotic calls of 'bandwagon fans" and ESPN following honks to "WIN NOW" and TRADE KLAY THOMPSON FOR KEVIN LOVE???

what a ridiculous joke of an idea that was.

It was JERRY WEST who laid down the law with the Warrior and said if they make that trade then he is leaving the organization.

That's called understanding basketball at a fundamental level and not paying attention at all to "EXPERTS" and the common fan.

Gotta give respect to those that know what they're talking about.

You also have to look at things from your OWN perspective and remember to not let popular opinion impact your own

PraiseJesus
09-28-2015, 02:23 PM
This actually seems like a fair assessment of his skills coming out of college. They were scouting him at 20 years old, not 25. Other than the 'limited success', I'd say this was spot on.

In college he was more of a shooter, so yes, he needed to improve at finishing at the basket. His rookie year he had less than 2 assists for each turnover; this year he had about 2.5. So yes, his handling of the ball has improved (even if a guy is good at dribbling behind his back, scouts won't say he's a good ball handler if he's causing turnovers). As for leading a team, he's gone from 6 assists per36 to 8.5. That is a big jump. As for 'finishing', his 2pt% jumped from 47% as a rookie, to almost 53% this last season.

This scouting report doesn't prove the scout wrong, it proves how good a player can become when he addresses his short comings. If Curry still played like he did as a rookie, or in college, the Warriors wouldn't have won it all this year. A scout can't see if a player WILL put the work in to improve, he/she only sees what the player is playing like at that time. If every player improved the way Curry did, then Jennings would be an MVP right now too.

As a scout, it is hard to predict if a player will improve. Any number of players have 'potential'. Curry just reached his. GMs/scout draft based on potential a lot, but only about 1/30 players will reach theirs.

Those things the scout said Curry needed to work on, he NEEDED to work on. And he DID. But the scout sounds like he/she was still spot on outside of the 'limited success' comment.

It's utterly impossible for me to disagree anymore with your viewpoint.

I think you're ignorant and unable to understand the fundamentals of basketball

Curry was ready to produce the moment he arrived in the NBA but was unable to get the freedom and opportunity to do so because of fellow ball hogs on the team such as Monta Ellis.

Given the opportunity to run the team from day one he would of been the run away rookie of the year winner and his stats would of been a lot closer to what they are today

Scoots
09-28-2015, 02:43 PM
Given the opportunity to run the team from day one he would of been the run away rookie of the year winner and his stats would of been a lot closer to what they are today

The Warriors general unwillingness to do promotional campaigns for their players cost Curry the ROY and last year cost Green the DPOY and Kerr the COY.

On the DPOY, the Clippers promoted DaAndre Jordan for DPOY at every opportunity and the result was that somehow Green was completely left off of 44 DPOY ballots but was significantly the top receiver of 1st place votes.

I find some of the slavish self promotion some teams go for distasteful, but there is a definite cost to not doing it.

Chronz
09-28-2015, 03:18 PM
Jerry West is the puppet master behidn the curtain of this Warriors team.

Drafting Curry, Drafting Klay, adding pieces like Igoudala and Draymond Green.

Does anyone forget the idiotic calls of 'bandwagon fans" and ESPN following honks to "WIN NOW" and TRADE KLAY THOMPSON FOR KEVIN LOVE???

what a ridiculous joke of an idea that was.

It was JERRY WEST who laid down the law with the Warrior and said if they make that trade then he is leaving the organization.

That's called understanding basketball at a fundamental level and not paying attention at all to "EXPERTS" and the common fan.

Gotta give respect to those that know what they're talking about.

You also have to look at things from your OWN perspective and remember to not let popular opinion impact your own

No one is infallible man. Even West has made mistakes, I cant remember them tho but Im sure he has some. I do remember he felt Mike Miller was a #1 option in the making, or a 20PPG type of guy or something. He was wrong on that one. He never got Memphis beyond 1st round fodder material.

Chronz
09-28-2015, 03:38 PM
It's utterly impossible for me to disagree anymore with your viewpoint.

I think you're ignorant and unable to understand the fundamentals of basketball

Curry was ready to produce the moment he arrived in the NBA but was unable to get the freedom and opportunity to do so because of fellow ball hogs on the team such as Monta Ellis.

Given the opportunity to run the team from day one he would of been the run away rookie of the year winner and his stats would of been a lot closer to what they are today

Vague critique doesn't expose his ignorance. He was ready to produce and DID produce. Given a team from day 1 he wouldn't have come close to his current numbers for the simple fact that he didn't even come close the 2 years prior when he WAS the guy in charge. You could argue his numbers were closer to his rookie days than they were during his MVP days.

Whether you believe it or not, players do improve. Some moreso than others. Steph improved his body, his handles and I find it hard to believe he didn't study film on how teams began to trap him on the PnR, he handles them much more fluidly than he did even 2 years ago.

Rookie Steph was nothing like the player we see today, sorry, dems facts. And didn't you yourself give up on the kid?

PraiseJesus
09-28-2015, 03:54 PM
No one is infallible man. Even West has made mistakes, I cant remember them tho but Im sure he has some. I do remember he felt Mike Miller was a #1 option in the making, or a 20PPG type of guy or something. He was wrong on that one. He never got Memphis beyond 1st round fodder material.

Even I make mistakes.

So it's understandable

What I'm saying, obviously, is that some people get it right A LOT more than others (others being 'scouts' and the general public)

Scouts and the general consensus are wrong every single year while people like Jerry West are almost always right

PraiseJesus
09-28-2015, 03:57 PM
Vague critique doesn't expose his ignorance. He was ready to produce and DID produce. Given a team from day 1 he wouldn't have come close to his current numbers for the simple fact that he didn't even come close the 2 years prior when he WAS the guy in charge. You could argue his numbers were closer to his rookie days than they were during his MVP days.

Whether you believe it or not, players do improve. Some moreso than others. Steph improved his body, his handles and I find it hard to believe he didn't study film on how teams began to trap him on the PnR, he handles them much more fluidly than he did even 2 years ago.

Rookie Steph was nothing like the player we see today, sorry, dems facts. And didn't you yourself give up on the kid?

Nah u wrong. He was already the top 1 or 2 shooter in the NBA the day he stepped in.

There is a learning curve to everything and he needed the opportunity that's all.

Tyreke Evans got to run his team from day 1 and look how 'good' everyone thought he was.

Getting the freedom to make plays, make mistakes, and learn quickly is essential to a young player making an impact.

That's why I'm hoping D'Angelo Russell isn't stifled by Kobe and Jordan Clarkson

PraiseJesus
09-28-2015, 03:58 PM
D'Angelo Russell is ready to make an impact his first season in the NBA just like Steph Curry.

...I hope he gets the opportunity

Chronz
09-28-2015, 04:58 PM
Nah u wrong. He was already the top 1 or 2 shooter in the NBA the day he stepped in.
Nah Im right. I never said he wasn't an elite shooter.


There is a learning curve to everything and he needed the opportunity that's all.

The learning curve is exactly what Im alluding to, and he needed more than the opportunity. He needed to improve his handle, his body and his intelligence.


Tyreke Evans got to run his team from day 1 and look how 'good' everyone thought he was.

How "good" was he? I didn't have him as my ROY so wtf is you going with this one?



Getting the freedom to make plays, make mistakes, and learn quickly is essential to a young player making an impact.

Depends on the mental conditioning of the player. Others are better off learning behind others and growing into their bodies/roles.


That's why I'm hoping D'Angelo Russell isn't stifled by Kobe and Jordan Clarkson

You should be hoping he has the mental fortitude to take those advantages of learning from former greats. Some players have mentioned how much more you can learn from the sidelines than actually being on the court. Theres obviously a balance to it but thats why you shouldn't live by your extreme/resolute stance.

JasonJohnHorn
09-28-2015, 06:54 PM
It's utterly impossible for me to disagree anymore with your viewpoint.

I think you're ignorant and unable to understand the fundamentals of basketball

Curry was ready to produce the moment he arrived in the NBA but was unable to get the freedom and opportunity to do so because of fellow ball hogs on the team such as Monta Ellis.

Given the opportunity to run the team from day one he would of been the run away rookie of the year winner and his stats would of been a lot closer to what they are today

I think you are responding to what you think I wrote, and not what I wrote. I didn't say he wasn't ready to contribute. I said there were aspects of his game that he had to work on, and he has.


My point is that each of the issues the scout took issue with are elements of his game that Curry has improved. If you disagree with that... have at it. I'd be curious to hear your statistical analysis of that.

PraiseJesus
09-28-2015, 08:27 PM
I think you are responding to what you think I wrote, and not what I wrote. I didn't say he wasn't ready to contribute. I said there were aspects of his game that he had to work on, and he has.


My point is that each of the issues the scout took issue with are elements of his game that Curry has improved. If you disagree with that... have at it. I'd be curious to hear your statistical analysis of that.

I believe I understood exactly what you meant and I responded accordingly

In fact, I don't think you're responding to what I'm obviously trying to convey...

Did a rookie play (Curry) improve since his rookie year????

ummm.... yeaa??? 99% of players do

Was Curry anywhere near the type of player that scouting reports (including the one for this thread) portrayed him to be?

-Absolutely not.

If a young player gets MVP and wins a ring as the leader of team I believe that is proof that he is on his way to be an all time great.

The scouting reports on Curry portrayed him as Steve Blake and they were 100% wrong while some people knew how good he was going to be

Chronz
09-29-2015, 01:26 AM
Steve Blake doesn't get drafted that high tho

Scoots
09-29-2015, 11:44 AM
D'Angelo Russell is ready to make an impact his first season in the NBA just like Steph Curry.

You said the Russell would be an MVP candidate as a rookie ... what changed?

MILLERHIGHLIFE
09-29-2015, 11:52 AM
Not so sure Russell gets MVP for rookie of the year. Not with Kobe still at the helm. Wiggins wouldn't of had the chance doing it with LeBron and the Cavs. It helped him by being traded.

PraiseJesus
09-29-2015, 01:04 PM
You said the Russell would be an MVP candidate as a rookie ... what changed?

Bad coaching in preseason and the realization that Jordan Clarkson, Randle, and Kobe are going to be massive ballhogs.

Sadly, DShow is likely to be 4th on the totem pole... I'm still holding out hope that Byron Scott does the right thing and makes him the primary ball handler and playmaker on the team from day 1

IN any event, he will be the primary guy at some point in the season... it just might not be well after the 50th game :(

Scoots
09-29-2015, 04:15 PM
Bad coaching in preseason and the realization that Jordan Clarkson, Randle, and Kobe are going to be massive ballhogs.

Sadly, DShow is likely to be 4th on the totem pole... I'm still holding out hope that Byron Scott does the right thing and makes him the primary ball handler and playmaker on the team from day 1

IN any event, he will be the primary guy at some point in the season... it just might not be well after the 50th game :(

Soooo, basically your perfect scouting ability was blind to the realities of his situation. Doesn't sound like any kind of perfection.

You should also admit that it's possible Russell will fail completely, even if it's because of factors out of his control. There are no certainties in life or in sport.

PraiseJesus
09-29-2015, 04:22 PM
Soooo, basically your perfect scouting ability was blind to the realities of his situation. Doesn't sound like any kind of perfection.

You should also admit that it's possible Russell will fail completely, even if it's because of factors out of his control. There are no certainties in life or in sport.

It's a certainty he will be great. The only question is when ;)

SF8
09-29-2015, 05:55 PM
What makes sense. I've seen the thread, commented in it. Not seeing what's so hard to disagree with.

You don't think Curry has elite ball handling skills?

Scoots
09-29-2015, 06:02 PM
It's a certainty he will be great. The only question is when ;)

There is no certainty. He could be shot and killed tomorrow. And far short of that he could fail to put in the work now that he's got the money and simply fail to live up to his potential.

Besides, you said MVP rookie year ... you already declared "when".

PraiseJesus
09-29-2015, 07:33 PM
You don't think Curry has elite ball handling skills?

No No... he thinks that he had no skills out of college then suddenly they appeared

...so the scouts in question and everyone who thought Hasheem Thabeet was a way better pick are all correct still.... (even though they were dead wrong)

JasonJohnHorn
09-29-2015, 08:18 PM
I believe I understood exactly what you meant and I responded accordingly

In fact, I don't think you're responding to what I'm obviously trying to convey...

Did a rookie play (Curry) improve since his rookie year????

ummm.... yeaa??? 99% of players do

Was Curry anywhere near the type of player that scouting reports (including the one for this thread) portrayed him to be?

-Absolutely not.

If a young player gets MVP and wins a ring as the leader of team I believe that is proof that he is on his way to be an all time great.

The scouting reports on Curry portrayed him as Steve Blake and they were 100% wrong while some people knew how good he was going to be

All I got out of that is "I'm right, you're wrong."

Not much of a contribution to the conversation. There were holes in Curry's game when he came into the league, just as there are holes in every player's game when he comes in the league. Everybody has potential. Some guys reach it; others don't. Scouts don't have a crystal ball. This guy was obviously way off on Curry's ceiling, and also his athleticism, but the other elements were parts of the game Curry had to work on and did.

That doesn't seem like a bad scouting report to me. It seems like one that identified his weaknesses but had a lack of foresight and underrated his athleticism.

If a scout sees 100 guys with the same flaws, best case scenario is the two of them improve. Being able to tell which ones will improve is next to impossible. It's why so many busts get picked in the first ten picks.

flea
09-29-2015, 08:21 PM
The book on MJ was he couldn't shoot and wasn't a good defender as a prospect. Those idiots, why didn't they teleport to PraiseJesus of PSD to 1984 so he could set them straight.

likemystylez
09-29-2015, 09:53 PM
LOL :)

evaluating talent is NOT rocket science.

who here knows someone that predicted Curry's MVP in 2009/10? Who did that?

well the warriors media didnt literally say hed be MVP, but they said he could be a comparable player to steve nash because of his creativity and shooting ability. He was also viewed as an extremely high IQ player immediately when he entered the league.

likemystylez
09-29-2015, 09:57 PM
The book on MJ was he couldn't shoot and wasn't a good defender as a prospect. Those idiots, why didn't they teleport to PraiseJesus of PSD to 1984 so he could set them straight.

Ummm MJ couldnt shoot for his first 4 or 5 yrs. Things I always heard about Jordan was that he was a ball hog though. He was a scoring guard- but he was an elite passing 2 guard right when he came into the league and the best passer in his draft class not named john stockton. (who was insanely good right off the bat)

Chronz
09-29-2015, 10:02 PM
You don't think Curry has elite ball handling skills? Where did i say that? Currently he does. Back then they werent.

Chronz
09-29-2015, 10:04 PM
There is no certainty. He could be shot and killed tomorrow. And far short of that he could fail to put in the work now that he's got the money and simply fail to live up to his potential.

Besides, you said MVP rookie year ... you already declared "when".
Straws for days don't do ****

likemystylez
09-29-2015, 10:07 PM
What a bunch of bandwagon idiots they are hahaha

Chris Mullin. "You're doing yourself a disservice" "hes going to turn the franchise around"

Cant deny people with real knowledge of the game

wasnt chris mullin the same idiot who did the marcus williams trade in 2008?- where he made the warriors first round picks untradeable for 5 straight years. Yeah I guess his knowledge of the game wasnt so great then. the amount of trade conversations that the warriors couldnt get involved in just because mullin wanted marcus williams (who was with the team for like 30 games)... makes me question anything he says about understanding the the direction of an organization.

likemystylez
09-29-2015, 10:08 PM
Where did i say that? Currently he does. Back then they werent.

He wasnt as good as he is now, his ball handling was still at the level of top tier point guards who get drafted.

tredigs
09-29-2015, 10:35 PM
His issues were his decision making (he had high BBIQ, but way too often attempted plays that he just wasn't quite ready to make), strength (he's a good bit stronger now, and knows how to take contact in the lane, which is something he would RARELY attempt in the past), and his handles were just average, maybe slightly above. Now he's in the GOAT conversation from a moves/handle standpoint and can damage you from 2 feet to 32 feet. I'm definitely on record as a big fan of him at Davidson + lauding him as the ROY and having the ability of a future superstar from the get go, but the kid put in a serious amount of work to get to the level he is currently at. It certainly was not a forgone conclusion.

Scoots
09-29-2015, 10:35 PM
No No... he thinks that he had no skills out of college then suddenly they appeared


Nobody said Curry had no skills. Just that he developed and overcame some of his weaknesses since he's been in the NBA.

PraiseJesus
09-29-2015, 11:03 PM
Nobody said Curry had no skills. Just that he developed and overcame some of his weaknesses since he's been in the NBA.

That is what you and other clowns try to purvey in here but IT's not the truth. It's an excuse for people who were dead wrong

He should of been the #1 pick the year he was drafted and its not even close. It' amusing to me that he's now an all time great and people still have excuses.

haha

Scoots
09-30-2015, 01:50 AM
That is what you and other clowns try to purvey in here but IT's not the truth. It's an excuse for people who were dead wrong

He should of been the #1 pick the year he was drafted and its not even close. It' amusing to me that he's now an all time great and people still have excuses.

haha

Quote me where I said anything like that. With every post you are more the clown that those you call clown.

Chronz
09-30-2015, 10:40 AM
He wasnt as good as he is now, his ball handling was still at the level of top tier point guards who get drafted.
I disagree entirely. Cp3 came in with much better handles. A clear tier above him. Ball handling can be subjective tho

Scoots
09-30-2015, 11:18 AM
I disagree entirely. Cp3 came in with much better handles. A clear tier above him. Ball handling can be subjective tho

He didn't say he came in with the ball handling of the best PGs, he said top tier drafted PGs which includes a lot of worse ball handlers than Paul.

Stinkyoutsider
09-30-2015, 12:08 PM
Goes to show everyone what some natural talent and a lot of mentality can get you.

Confidence, focus, desire, and determination helped Curry become the player he is today even when the talent evaluators said he couldn't do it.

Not sure if Jerry West recommended to the Warriors to draft Curry but if so, that just tells you that the best talent evaluators can look past certain things and find there's a player who has the mentality to be great.

Scoots
09-30-2015, 12:22 PM
Goes to show everyone what some natural talent and a lot of mentality can get you.

Confidence, focus, desire, and determination helped Curry become the player he is today even when the talent evaluators said he couldn't do it.

Not sure if Jerry West recommended to the Warriors to draft Curry but if so, that just tells you that the best talent evaluators can look past certain things and find there's a player who has the mentality to be great.

I think that is the single greatest aspect for success and the single hardest thing to evaluate.

Chronz
09-30-2015, 12:43 PM
He didn't say he came in with the ball handling of the best PGs, he said top tier drafted PGs which includes a lot of worse ball handlers than Paul.

I know what he said, I gave an example of a player who came in with elite ball handling and improved upon them. Im not denying there are worse ball handlers than Paul, Im sure many of them had the same question marks. Again its very subjective tho, some people grade ball handlers differently. Others have the skillset, they just need to develop their bodies to better apply those skills.

PraiseJesus
09-30-2015, 12:53 PM
Goes to show everyone what some natural talent and a lot of mentality can get you.

Confidence, focus, desire, and determination helped Curry become the player he is today even when the talent evaluators said he couldn't do it.

Not sure if Jerry West recommended to the Warriors to draft Curry but if so, that just tells you that the best talent evaluators can look past certain things and find there's a player who has the mentality to be great.

Careful... you might make some of these guys' head explode with logic like that lol

PraiseJesus
09-30-2015, 01:00 PM
Some people like Stinky are starting to get it.

The problem is that GMs and scout put WAYYYYYYY too much focus on athleticism and physcial attributes of players

"Height, Wingspan, Explosiveness, Vertical Jump, etc"

They will take a guy with those attributes who shoots 40% from the field and 55% from the FT line with terrible decision making over a guy like Curry who has REAL skills such as

"Shooting, Passing, Intelligence, and Good Character"

It's really not that hard to do...

Kobe mentioned this before and said that Larry Bird probably wouldnt have been drafted in todays NBA... he's right

Scoots
09-30-2015, 01:23 PM
I know what he said, I gave an example of a player who came in with elite ball handling and improved upon them. Im not denying there are worse ball handlers than Paul, Im sure many of them had the same question marks. Again its very subjective tho, some people grade ball handlers differently. Others have the skillset, they just need to develop their bodies to better apply those skills.

This is silly. Stylez said "He wasnt as good as he is now, his ball handling was still at the level of top tier point guards who get drafted." to which you replied "I disagree entirely." and then brought up CP3 to support your position supposedly that Curry didn't have ball handling skills comparable to the average PG drafted early in the draft. When I point that out you reply with something that to me seems to demonstrate that we are have two very different arguments at each other rather that with each other.

To re-state: Curry was a good ball handler out of college, at or above the average PG drafted in the top third of the first round. That was I believe the essence of Stylez post.

Please explain why you "disagree entirely" with such a reasonable point? And don't use one of the best ball handlers of his generation as the sole example to prove your counter considering that players such as Dante Exum, Marcus Smart, Trey Burke, Damian Lillard, Austin Rivers, Kyrie Irving, Brandon Knight, John Wall, Tyreke Evans, Ricky Rubio, Jonny Flynn, Brandon Jennings, etc are the players we are talking about ... I believe Curry's ball handling skills out of college are comparable to the average of that group. What makes you think it's not? Are you saying Curry was better or worse? I suppose you could disagree entirely that Curry's ball handling skills belong in that group at all thinking that he's clearly worse than every individual in that group or clearly better than every individual in that group. I don't know. The group of top 1/3 of the 1st round draft picks can be expanded to include every draft in NBA history and thus include Paul and I still believe that Curry's ball handling was comparable to that group as a whole out of college.

Scoots
09-30-2015, 01:26 PM
Some people like Stinky are starting to get it.

The problem is that GMs and scout put WAYYYYYYY too much focus on athleticism and physcial attributes of players

"Height, Wingspan, Explosiveness, Vertical Jump, etc"

They will take a guy with those attributes who shoots 40% from the field and 55% from the FT line with terrible decision making over a guy like Curry who has REAL skills such as

"Shooting, Passing, Intelligence, and Good Character"

It's really not that hard to do...

Kobe mentioned this before and said that Larry Bird probably wouldnt have been drafted in todays NBA... he's right

What is your point? Is it that scouts make mistakes? Yes they do and nobody is denying it. Is it that less than optimal athletes sometimes excel? Yes they do and thankfully being a fan of the Warriors I get to see Curry, Thompson, and Green do it game after game. It seemed your argument was that Curry was just as good coming out of college as he is now ... but you backed off of that and said he did develop in the NBA and overcome some of his shortcomings out of college ... so I really don't know what your position is other than arrogance.

PraiseJesus
09-30-2015, 01:31 PM
What is your point? Is it that scouts make mistakes? Yes they do and nobody is denying it. Is it that less than optimal athletes sometimes excel? Yes they do and thankfully being a fan of the Warriors I get to see Curry, Thompson, and Green do it game after game. It seemed your argument was that Curry was just as good coming out of college as he is now ... but you backed off of that and said he did develop in the NBA and overcome some of his shortcomings out of college ... so I really don't know what your position is other than arrogance.

I wish reading comprehension was something that schools puts more emphasis on nowadays....

A semi rational person can clearly see my point and that is the current scouting and drafting system that exists is fundamentally flawed and that's why players like Curry, Klay, Khawi Leonard, and Lillard fall in the draft year after year.

It's ok to be wrong... what's not ok is to have a system in place that is placing too much value on certain factors over and over

PraiseJesus
09-30-2015, 01:38 PM
The first thing I look at when evaluating a young guard is his shooting %s.

A player in college that shoots 40%+ from the 3pt line and 46% or better from the field is a premium shooter. That is a skill that translates 95% of the time to the NBA. It also show maturity in decision making and taking the right shots.

The next thing I look at is playmaking ability and courtvision. Does the player see things develop before they happen? Does he have creativity and leadership qualities?

After that I take a look at physical attributes such as size and athleticism. These things are a factor but need to be put in the proper context

Based on this system I was able to forecast Curry as being a future superstar as well as CP3.

If I'm correct, then DAngelo Russell is going to OFF THE CHARTS good in the NBA once he gets his opporunity to run a team.

Russell is the first Lottery Guard that I've ever seen in my life that has REAL elite basketball skills coupled with physical advantages.

The closest thing I can remember was LeBron but he wasn't a guard obviously... he had more physical gifts than Russell but Russell's skills are off the freakign chart

Chronz
09-30-2015, 01:44 PM
This is silly. Stylez said "He wasnt as good as he is now, his ball handling was still at the level of top tier point guards who get drafted." to which you replied "I disagree entirely." and then brought up CP3 to support your position supposedly that Curry didn't have ball handling skills comparable to the average PG drafted early in the draft. When I point that out you reply with something that to me seems to demonstrate that we are have two very different arguments at each other rather that with each other.

To re-state: Curry was a good ball handler out of college, at or above the average PG drafted in the top third of the first round. That was I believe the essence of Stylez post.

Please explain why you "disagree entirely" with such a reasonable point? And don't use one of the best ball handlers of his generation as the sole example to prove your counter considering that players such as Dante Exum, Marcus Smart, Trey Burke, Damian Lillard, Austin Rivers, Kyrie Irving, Brandon Knight, John Wall, Tyreke Evans, Ricky Rubio, Jonny Flynn, Brandon Jennings, etc are the players we are talking about ... I believe Curry's ball handling skills out of college are comparable to the average of that group. What makes you think it's not? Are you saying Curry was better or worse? I suppose you could disagree entirely that Curry's ball handling skills belong in that group at all thinking that he's clearly worse than every individual in that group or clearly better than every individual in that group. I don't know. The group of top 1/3 of the 1st round draft picks can be expanded to include every draft in NBA history and thus include Paul and I still believe that Curry's ball handling was comparable to that group as a whole out of college.
Not seeing whats so silly, to me, grading your skills on a curve based on your draft class is silly and even then my opinion stands (especially since he mentioned elite PG's). Being above average for your draft is a far cry from being an ELITE ball handler in the NBA. When scouts break down a players strengths and weaknesses, I dont think they base it on their draft class, rather how they project those skill translating to the NBA. Like lets pretend its a weak rebounding class, lets say the guy projects as a below average rebounder in the NBA but hes ahead of the pack for his class. Would you call him a strong rebounder or someone with a deficiency compared to the guys hes about to play against. Just an example, Im trying to understand your argument.

A guy like CP3 didn't just have great handles for his class, but great handles when compared to the NBA at large. He then improved upon them and became the best in the league for a stint there.

Look at the initial post SF8 quoted, which stylez then quoted. SF8 asked me if I thought Curry lacked elite handles. He most definitely did back when he was drafted, you have to have a really, REALLY lose definition of the word ELITE to say Curry was in that group pre-NBA. Even just going by grading on a curve, he needed to improve more than most of the players you listed IMO.

PraiseJesus
09-30-2015, 01:45 PM
Not seeing whats so silly, to me, grading your skills on a curve based on your draft class is silly and even then my opinion stands (especially since he mentioned elite PG's). Being above average for your draft is a far cry from being an ELITE ball handler in the NBA. When scouts break down a players strengths and weaknesses, I dont think they base it on their draft class, rather how they project those skill translating to the NBA. Like lets pretend its a weak rebounding class, lets say the guy projects as a below average rebounder in the NBA but hes ahead of the pack for his class. Would you call him a strong rebounder or someone with a deficiency compared to the guys hes about to play against. Just an example, Im trying to understand your argument.

A guy like CP3 didn't just have great handles for his class, but great handles when compared to the NBA at large. He then improved upon them and became the best in the league for a stint there.

Look at the initial post SF8 quoted, which stylez then quoted. SF8 asked me if I thought Curry lacked elite handles. He most definitely did back when he was drafted, you have to have a really, REALLY lose definition of the word ELITE to say Curry was in that group pre-NBA. Even just going by grading on a curve, he needed to improve more than most of the players you listed IMO.

Ball handling is way down on the list of priorties for me

Chronz
09-30-2015, 01:55 PM
Ball handling is way down on the list of priorties for me

Why? I feel like its an area you can improve considerably more than shooting but I have no way of knowing for sure. Too many guys I felt had the athletic ability and shooting ability (think Gerald Green or Wiggins now) but lacked any sort of creativity with the ball. I remember Luther Head improving his handles but still being unable to bring the ball up the court. My thought is that there is more to it than just improving your handles, its a byproduct of an assembly of skills. Like Curry has become an ELITE ball handler but if he didn't have his jumper, I dont see his handles being as impressive. For a better example look at Deron Williams. He came into the league with a NASTY crossover, once his change of pace diminished, once he could no longer get a head of steam to the basket, those same skills with the ball were SIGNIFICANTLY less effective.

Maybe thats why you dont prioritize it, because its based on so many other factors. The only skill I know translates the highest to the NBA is rebounding and thats not always a good thing.

PraiseJesus
09-30-2015, 01:59 PM
Why? I feel like its an area you can improve considerably more than shooting but I have no way of knowing for sure. Too many guys I felt had the athletic ability and shooting ability (think Gerald Green or Wiggins now) but lacked any sort of creativity with the ball. I remember Luther Head improving his handles but still being unable to bring the ball up the court. My thought is that there is more to it than just improving your handles, its a byproduct of an assembly of skills. Like Curry has become an ELITE ball handler but if he didn't have his jumper, I dont see his handles being as impressive. For a better example look at Deron Williams. He came into the league with a NASTY crossover, once his change of pace diminished, once he could no longer get a head of steam to the basket, those same skills with the ball were SIGNIFICANTLY less effective.

Maybe thats why you dont prioritize it, because its based on so many other factors. The only skill I know translates the highest to the NBA is rebounding and thats not always a good thing.

Because ball handling is something that all guards need to even become a starting college player... it's not one of those skills where it sets someone apart. Kyrie Irving has amazing ball handling abilities - but that doesn't always translate to a winning player. I would rather see a player with elite passing, courtvision, and shooting skills over a player that has a nice crossover but doesn't keep his teammates involved and disrupts the flow the game by trying to break down his man and draw fouls all the frickin time (Harden)

I guess the short answer is that ball handling is a one on one skill... It's a factor in my evaluation but not a priority

Scoots
09-30-2015, 02:19 PM
I wish reading comprehension was something that schools puts more emphasis on nowadays....

A semi rational person can clearly see my point and that is the current scouting and drafting system that exists is fundamentally flawed and that's why players like Curry, Klay, Khawi Leonard, and Lillard fall in the draft year after year.

It's ok to be wrong... what's not ok is to have a system in place that is placing too much value on certain factors over and over

Okay ... THAT point I got, but that has not been the point of quite a few of your posts. I guess the argument changed.

Okay, so, has anybody disagreed with the point that the scouting system is flawed? You seem to be arguing with nobody.

Scoots
09-30-2015, 02:23 PM
The first thing I look at when evaluating a young guard is his shooting %s.

A player in college that shoots 40%+ from the 3pt line and 46% or better from the field is a premium shooter. That is a skill that translates 95% of the time to the NBA. It also show maturity in decision making and taking the right shots.

I disagree with the 95% ... if the player doesn't have the athletic ability to get open or the size to shoot over people they quite often struggle with the NBA transition.

But it's all part of a complete evaluation so I certainly don't disagree that shooting in college demonstrates a level of not only physical control, but effort in practice and away from practice to develop a key skill. Certainly a key aspect to most of the better guards in the NBA.

PraiseJesus
09-30-2015, 02:26 PM
Okay ... THAT point I got, but that has not been the point of quite a few of your posts. I guess the argument changed.

Okay, so, has anybody disagreed with the point that the scouting system is flawed? You seem to be arguing with nobody.

The consensus among posters seems to be that

"Curry has improved greatly since he was drafted" and that "he was nothing special out of college"

complete and utter nonsense he was special from day 1 and should of been #1 pick

Scoots
09-30-2015, 02:26 PM
Not seeing whats so silly, to me, grading your skills on a curve based on your draft class is silly and even then my opinion stands (especially since he mentioned elite PG's). Being above average for your draft is a far cry from being an ELITE ball handler in the NBA. When scouts break down a players strengths and weaknesses, I dont think they base it on their draft class, rather how they project those skill translating to the NBA. Like lets pretend its a weak rebounding class, lets say the guy projects as a below average rebounder in the NBA but hes ahead of the pack for his class. Would you call him a strong rebounder or someone with a deficiency compared to the guys hes about to play against. Just an example, Im trying to understand your argument.

A guy like CP3 didn't just have great handles for his class, but great handles when compared to the NBA at large. He then improved upon them and became the best in the league for a stint there.

Look at the initial post SF8 quoted, which stylez then quoted. SF8 asked me if I thought Curry lacked elite handles. He most definitely did back when he was drafted, you have to have a really, REALLY lose definition of the word ELITE to say Curry was in that group pre-NBA. Even just going by grading on a curve, he needed to improve more than most of the players you listed IMO.

Stylez didn't mention Curry's draft class, and he didn't mention ELITE PGs in the NBA. He said in the top tier of PGs in the draft. That means PGs drafted early. Not top tier of NBA PGs but top tier of PGs in the draft. BIG difference. Jonny Flynn was in the top tier of PGs in the draft.

PraiseJesus
09-30-2015, 02:28 PM
I disagree with the 95% ... if the player doesn't have the athletic ability to get open or the size to shoot over people they quite often struggle with the NBA transition.

But it's all part of a complete evaluation so I certainly don't disagree that shooting in college demonstrates a level of not only physical control, but effort in practice and away from practice to develop a key skill. Certainly a key aspect to most of the better guards in the NBA.

Can you give me some examples of college guards that shot close to those %'s (at a high usage rate) and then struggled in the NBA? Just curious...

Scoots
09-30-2015, 02:45 PM
The consensus among posters seems to be that

"Curry has improved greatly since he was drafted" and that "he was nothing special out of college"

complete and utter nonsense he was special from day 1 and should of been #1 pick

I haven't seen anyone say anything close to the bolded part. If that's what you think is the "consensus" among all posters I can see where your confusion lies.

Curry had issues with his game and development coming out of college. That does NOT mean he had no special skills. Curry has overcome his limitations and expanded and enhanced the skills he did have when he was drafted to become the elite player he is now.

Is that a fair assessment?

Scoots
09-30-2015, 02:51 PM
Can you give me some examples of college guards that shot close to those %'s (at a high usage rate) and then struggled in the NBA? Just curious...

You added a high usage rate since you made the point initially so I'm not going to look into that, but off the top of my head Jimmer Fredette and Nik Stauskas both failed to impress. Now both had the misfortune of being drafted by the Kings ... but you didn't say "and went to a quality team that would maximize those skills" when you said 95% would translate to the NBA. IIRC neither got to .400 from 3 and I think struggled to get to .400 from 2 too.

Part of the problem is that the majority of drafted players fail to impress in the NBA so anytime a stat like 95% shows up for a player in the draft it's going to be a suspect stat.

PraiseJesus
09-30-2015, 03:02 PM
I haven't seen anyone say anything close to the bolded part. If that's what you think is the "consensus" among all posters I can see where your confusion lies.

Curry had issues with his game and development coming out of college. That does NOT mean he had no special skills. Curry has overcome his limitations and expanded and enhanced the skills he did have when he was drafted to become the elite player he is now.

Is that a fair assessment?

No it's not fair

The only limitations on Curry was playing in the same backcourt as Monta Ellis

Chronz
09-30-2015, 03:10 PM
Stylez didn't mention Curry's draft class, and he didn't mention ELITE PGs in the NBA. He said in the top tier of PGs in the draft. That means PGs drafted early. Not top tier of NBA PGs but top tier of PGs in the draft. BIG difference. Jonny Flynn was in the top tier of PGs in the draft.
Thats the thing, Im comparing them vs their NBA counterparts, not simply the players in a draft or multiple drafts(tho my argument stands either way). When he quoted MY post it was from a discussion with ANOTHER member, the discussion was about exactly that. I find it silly to grade players based on how they compare vs guys in their class (hence my rebounding comp) when what scouts care about is how those skills might translate to the NBA.

I feel like you dont understand my argument which is prolly my fault but it gets confusing when several different people chime in on a topic that began with another member. To reiterate, there is nothing wrong with questioning his ball handling considering it wasn't anything special back then and a FAR cry from being elite (Unlike CP3 who came into the league with a great handle and became the best). This evaluation is based on the NBA not just his own draft class and even among most the players you mentioned, Curry still had more work to do.

Scoots
09-30-2015, 03:25 PM
No it's not fair

The only limitations on Curry was playing in the same backcourt as Monta Ellis

So now you are back to saying Curry hasn't improved. This is what I mean, your argument keeps changing.

PraiseJesus
09-30-2015, 03:29 PM
So now you are back to saying Curry hasn't improved. This is what I mean, your argument keeps changing.

Of course he improved????????????????

Dude, everyone improves (95%+) from being 18/19 to being 25.........

He should of been the #1 pick

Scoots
09-30-2015, 03:30 PM
Thats the thing, Im comparing them vs their NBA counterparts, not simply the players in a draft or multiple drafts(tho my argument stands either way). When he quoted MY post it was from a discussion with ANOTHER member, the discussion was about exactly that. I find it silly to grade players based on how they compare vs guys in their class (hence my rebounding comp) when what scouts care about is how those skills might translate to the NBA.

I feel like you dont understand my argument which is prolly my fault but it gets confusing when several different people chime in on a topic that began with another member. To reiterate, there is nothing wrong with questioning his ball handling considering it wasn't anything special back then and a FAR cry from being elite (Unlike CP3 who came into the league with a great handle and became the best). This evaluation is based on the NBA not just his own draft class and even among most the players you mentioned, Curry still had more work to do.

Okay, all good. I was just brought up short by your vehement disagreement with what looked to me like a fairly reasonable point he was making, I suppose tangential to your original argument.

I think the only reason to compare a player to their draft class is if you are talking about a re-draft which is a totally different exercise. But comparing a player when they were drafted to other players of that or any class when they were drafted when talking about comparables makes sense to me and we do it all the time.

Player A as a rookie is a lot like Player B was when he was a rookie, etc, etc. Even though the two players may not even have been in the NBA at the same time.

Scoots
09-30-2015, 03:31 PM
Of course he improved????????????????

Dude, everyone improves (95%+) from being 18/19 to being 25.........

He should of been the #1 pick

But you just said his only limitation was Ellis ... meaning there was nothing to improve (you know, his limitations) other than getting rid of Ellis. Or do you have a different definition of "only" or "limitation" than I do?

PraiseJesus
09-30-2015, 04:57 PM
But you just said his only limitation was Ellis ... meaning there was nothing to improve (you know, his limitations) other than getting rid of Ellis. Or do you have a different definition of "only" or "limitation" than I do?

When Ellis got hurt towards the end of Curry's rookie season he started putting up monster numbers and nearly won the ROY despite Tyreke being the primary PG for his team the entire season.

Curry joined Michael Jordan, Jason Kidd, and Isiah Thomas as the only rookies to log a triple double with 30 pts as a rookie...

He was clearly ready to contribute but just needed the ball

Scoots
09-30-2015, 05:26 PM
When Ellis got hurt towards the end of Curry's rookie season he started putting up monster numbers and nearly won the ROY despite Tyreke being the primary PG for his team the entire season.

Curry joined Michael Jordan, Jason Kidd, and Isiah Thomas as the only rookies to log a triple double with 30 pts as a rookie...

He was clearly ready to contribute but just needed the ball

Yes, he needed the ball ... and he needed to develop some of his skills to get to the all-star level, and he needed some more to get to the MVP level.

I never said he wasn't ready to contribute. The only person in this whole thread I've seen say something negative about Curry was the scout in the OP.

PraiseJesus
09-30-2015, 06:31 PM
Yes, he needed the ball ... and he needed to develop some of his skills to get to the all-star level, and he needed some more to get to the MVP level.

I never said he wasn't ready to contribute. The only person in this whole thread I've seen say something negative about Curry was the scout in the OP.

you are hopeless

Scoots
09-30-2015, 07:02 PM
you are hopeless

You are an idiot.