What are your thoughts on "potential"

[l3ulvl]

Re: What are your thoughts on "potential"

This reminds me of a conversation I had with a friend that's a teacher. We were talking about how parents laud their children for being intelligent instead of encouraging a good work ethic. In the real world, intelligence is nice, but an employer is way more interested in work ethic. I'd like to see the NBA adopt similar standards and rely less on potential and more on a combination of talent and desire/drive.

[wwharton]

Re: What are your thoughts on "potential"

Dwight Howard disagrees.

Not really. He has barely scratched the surface of what he could potentially be, and what he is right now isn't good enough to put a team on his back to a title.

[wwharton]

Re: What are your thoughts on "potential"

I meant more that he has gone from extremely raw to one of the best players in the league.

But he really hasn't. He was raw, yes, but he was also so physically dominant that he didn't have to do much to have the level of success he's had to this point. The "potential" that he had coming into the league hasn't really changed much. Yes, he's a great player but he hasn't won a thing and has a long way to go before he will without some big time help around him. Success is relative. If his career ended today he'd have nothing to be ashamed of, but in relation to this discussion he's not an exception at all.

[Drewski]

But he really hasn't. He was raw, yes, but he was also so physically dominant that he didn't have to do much to have the level of success he's had to this point. The "potential" that he had coming into the league hasn't really changed much. Yes, he's a great player but he hasn't won a thing and has a long way to go before he will without some big time help around him. Success is relative. If his career ended today he'd have nothing to be ashamed of, but in relation to this discussion he's not an exception at all.

Honestly I think the fact that he's had to be the best guy on that team every night for god knows how long has stunted his progress. He needs a better team, and I think wed start to see him really evolve into the super dominant guy he should be. Not that he's not great as it stands.

Sent from the free throw line

[wwharton]

Re: What are your thoughts on "potential"

Honestly I think the fact that he's had to be the best guy on that team every night for god knows how long has stunted his progress. He needs a better team, and I think wed start to see him really evolve into the super dominant guy he should be. Not that he's not great as it stands.

Sent from the free throw line

I can agree with that... and I'm not hating on Dwight, he's a beast. But he just can't be used in argument to dispute this post (imo)

But it just seems like the people who come into the league raw with "a ton of potential" never end up being that good.

We can call it semantics but the point of that post is that guys come in and are expected to grow to a level of dominance they don't show when they come in the league. Dwight hasn't really progressed much past what he was when he got into the NBA. It's kind of like saying Shaq or Lebron. These guys are physical freaks who are beast that still have potential to be even better. Dwight is more "raw" than these two, but even at that level, he's dominant in what he does and always has been.

Better examples would be McGrady, Kobe, even Jermaine Oneal to a certain extent. But then it's a question of what "raw" means bc these guys were skilled, and not just physical freaks.

[Drewski]

Re: What are your thoughts on "potential"

I can agree with that... and I'm not hating on Dwight, he's a beast. But he just can't be used in argument to dispute this post (imo)

We can call it semantics but the point of that post is that guys come in and are expected to grow to a level of dominance they don't show when they come in the league. Dwight hasn't really progressed much past what he was when he got into the NBA. It's kind of like saying Shaq or Lebron. These guys are physical freaks who are beast that still have potential to be even better. Dwight is more "raw" than these two, but even at that level, he's dominant in what he does and always has been.

Better examples would be McGrady, Kobe, even Jermaine Oneal to a certain extent. But then it's a question of what "raw" means bc these guys were skilled, and not just physical freaks.

I'd venture to say Dwight went under a TON of evolution from when he entered the league, till 2009. Since 2009 its been very stagnant, and since 2009 his team has more or less 300% relied on him for any stitch of success. I agree he has a ways to go before he taps into all of that potential, but he definitely improved for the first few years in the league (as almost every player does). His jump from where he started, to where he ended in 2009, was pretty impressive. He hasn't necessarily developed a new aspect of his game in that time frame, but he definitely refined what he could do, and worked hard at getting his body on point so he could do what he does best.

[1Rose]

Re: What are your thoughts on "potential"

Dwight hasn't really progressed much past what he was when he got into the NBA. It's kind of like saying Shaq or Lebron. These guys are physical freaks who are beast that still have potential to be even better. Dwight is more "raw" than these two, but even at that level, he's dominant in what he does and always has been.

It's crazy to you say that Dwight hasn't tapped his potential, or progressed when you could argue that he's the best player in the league.

I have a hard time believing that he hasn't. Guy has put on a ton of lean weight, weighs about 265. He wasn't always a physical freak when he came into the league. He was a stick who people thought would get pushed around. Developed a bank shot, a hook shot and more moves in the post. Has improved from the free throw line. Most dominant defensive player in the league, not sure what else you would have liked him to develop, obviously you want him to be more consistent, but to say that he is still raw is a little off base.

[wwharton]

Re: What are your thoughts on "potential"

I'd venture to say Dwight went under a TON of evolution from when he entered the league, till 2009. Since 2009 its been very stagnant, and since 2009 his team has more or less 300% relied on him for any stitch of success. I agree he has a ways to go before he taps into all of that potential, but he definitely improved for the first few years in the league (as almost every player does). His jump from where he started, to where he ended in 2009, was pretty impressive. He hasn't necessarily developed a new aspect of his game in that time frame, but he definitely refined what he could do, and worked hard at getting his body on point so he could do what he does best.

If we look at the "potential" players I'd say someone like Kwame Brown. Kwame has probably improved his game as much as Dwight has in his time in the league. The difference is Kwame wasn't half the player Dwight was to begin with, so the same level of improvement still leaves him irrelevant.

I compared Dwight to Shaq bc, even though Shaq wasn't necessarily "raw" he had a lot of room to grow even though he was the best player in the league. Dwight was raw but he wasn't ONLY potential when he was drafted, like Kwame was. He doesn't go against the thought because he would've had to be a pretty big bust to not have some kind of success. Kwame is only considered a but bc he was drafted so high. The reality is he just never reached his potential, and isn't good enough on his natural athletic ability to be successful at his current pace of improving.

It's crazy to you say that Dwight hasn't tapped his potential, or progressed when you could argue that he's the best player in the league.

I have a hard time believing that he hasn't. Guy has put on a ton of lean weight, weighs about 265. He wasn't always a physical freak when he came into the league. He was a stick who people thought would get pushed around. Developed a bank shot, a hook shot and more moves in the post. Has improved from the free throw line. Most dominant defensive player in the league, not sure what else you would have liked him to develop, obviously you want him to be more consistent, but to say that he is still raw is a little off base.

Bank shot? Hook shot? Moves in the post? Really? We aren't grading on a curve here. Yes, it is impressive that he's STILL arguably the best player in the league but his offensive game leaves a lot to be desired, and on an NBA level (let alone superstar level) is still very, very raw.

He may never be a refined offensive player, possibly bc he doesn't have to be with his "raw talent" but that was my understanding of the point of Weeks' post. And that's the reason I don't believe he's an exception. He was just better with the raw talent he had to begin with.

[Drewski]

Re: What are your thoughts on "potential"

If we look at the "potential" players I'd say someone like Kwame Brown. Kwame has probably improved his game as much as Dwight has in his time in the league. The difference is Kwame wasn't half the player Dwight was to begin with, so the same level of improvement still leaves him irrelevant.

I compared Dwight to Shaq bc, even though Shaq wasn't necessarily "raw" he had a lot of room to grow even though he was the best player in the league. Dwight was raw but he wasn't ONLY potential when he was drafted, like Kwame was. He doesn't go against the thought because he would've had to be a pretty big bust to not have some kind of success. Kwame is only considered a but bc he was drafted so high. The reality is he just never reached his potential, and isn't good enough on his natural athletic ability to be successful at his current pace of improving.



Bank shot? Hook shot? Moves in the post? Really? We aren't grading on a curve here. Yes, it is impressive that he's STILL arguably the best player in the league but his offensive game leaves a lot to be desired, and on an NBA level (let alone superstar level) is still very, very raw.

He may never be a refined offensive player, possibly bc he doesn't have to be with his "raw talent" but that was my understanding of the point of Weeks' post. And that's the reason I don't believe he's an exception. He was just better with the raw talent he had to begin with.

I agree with you 100%, especially on the fact of his offensive game leaving much to be desired as a superstar (seems to be the very common with these new batched up superstars). Not sure if Kwame and Dwight have improved on the same path, I'd be lying if I said I could vouche for Kwame's "improvement", but I also wouldnt be surprised if they both improved, for example, 20% from when they each entered the league.'

I see you, I just think Dwight did use that potential for the first 3 years of his career, then it just kind of stopped.

[wwharton]

Re: What are your thoughts on "potential"

I agree with you 100%, especially on the fact of his offensive game leaving much to be desired as a superstar (seems to be the very common with these new batched up superstars). Not sure if Kwame and Dwight have improved on the same path, I'd be lying if I said I could vouche for Kwame's "improvement", but I also wouldnt be surprised if they both improved, for example, 20% from when they each entered the league.'

I see you, I just think Dwight did use that potential for the first 3 years of his career, then it just kind of stopped.

Yeah, I definitely can't verify how much Kwame has improved but just threw him out there as an example. Like you said, if Dwight has improved 20% and Kwame has improved 20%, Dwight is still at worse the best center in the league and Kwame is fighting for minutes. And like I said, this isn't a knock on Dwight. I believe he's working hard and you can see his improvement... but the reason we can tell how much he's improved but have no idea about Kwame is bc he was a beast that was going to get a ton of minutes and be on our TVs all the time from the start. His physical dominance mask his deficiencies in ways other "raw" players can't take advantage of.