February Games Discussion Thread

[dubcity]

Re: February Games Discussion Thread

To be clear, you’re speaking strictly on Wiseman and not rookies/young players in general, correct?

The first part was about Wiseman. But the part about teams not having to give every player that is hyped up by fans online bigger minutes so they can do better individually/statistically is about any/all players.

[ProfessaPackMan]

Re: February Games Discussion Thread

Its the value of a conversation. There's no value if I were to post "you know I think Kwame Brown is a bust" or on the other end, "I think Joker is an MVP caliber player." That doesn't lead to any kind of discourse. If we just sit here and exchange universally agreed upon opinions there's no value in that imo.



There's this happy medium where you can both be patient and give enough time, while not waiting



I'm mostly zeroing in on OJ's early comment that we can't label a guy a bust until we know he won't have a successful career. That's one end of the extreme, maybe someone would argue that my labeling Wiseman a bust is on the other extreme of not giving nearly enough time. That's a fair criticism.



But to me the label is tentative. Joker is an MVP caliber player as long as he plays to the level of an MVP. Likewise Wiseman is a bust as long as he fails to play to the level expected of a #2 overall pick. Three years from now he can make an all star appearance and no longer be a bust. I don't have a problem with that approach, but some people view the label of bust as having finality to it. I can see why those people prefer to wait longer.

In regards to your first point, we already do that. Difference is we’ll pick and choose when to do it and who to do it for.

As for the part about timeframe, it’s position dependent. Like for folks that have been watching and studying Basketball for a long *** time, we know that the two positions that require having patience at is the PG and C spot, especially if you’re 18-19 years old(and there’s a TON of evidence to support this too and statements from Players, Coaches, Scouts, also).

Your 2s and 3s will probably make the most immediate impact right away, especially with how the game has been played for the last 10-12 years. But for the most part, 1 and 5 spot take the most time to learn and develop at the position.

PG because of the amount of stuff you have to process/see(it’s why they’ve called that position the “Qb” of the team)on Offense.

And PF/C because you need to not only get your body up to NBA Standards, but to also adjust to the fact that you’re no longer the biggest, strongest, quickest one for your size on the court. Not to mention, you can’t just “Athleticism” your way to an easy basket all the time like you could do in HS/College. You need to have or develop some sort of BBIQ, skill set, learn your role and play it great, etc.

Now those players could show flashes over the course of the season and may even have a good 2-3 week stretch at one point, but as far as making a consistent impact night in/out, that’ll more than likely take AT LEAST a year or two.

And I’m definitely one of those “If you’re a bus, then you’re a bust” type of guys too. There’s no going back on that, especially if your track record shows that from more than 1 situation(ala Anthony Bennett where he was on 3 different teams and nothing changed at all).

But like you said earlier, context and nuance matter when discussing these situations. Enjoying this convo BTW too y’all. Much rather this because I damn sure won’t have much to say about this silly *** All Star Weekend taking place in Utah of all places, lol.

[ggsimmonds]

Re: February Games Discussion Thread

I feel like the learning curve for PG has decreased in the past 10 years. Or maybe more accurate to say its increased for 2s and 3s to bring them a bit more in line with the 1. There aren't many Chris Pauls left. Maybe still longer than your wings, but not as pronounced as it use to be.

Think its increased for the bigs though. Developing your help D to the point it becomes instinctual is still a big factor, but throw in all the different PnR coverages/schemes too and being asked to operate further from the basket. Being an effective big man on defense is harder today then in the past. Bigs today are just asked to do more than they were previously. To your point about not being able to athleticism your way to easy buckets, 20 years ago it was post footwork that was the major development piece. We use to hear or have questions on whether the young guys were working on that over the summer, didn't they make a big deal out of Dwight working with Hakeem on this for example? That skillset is rarer today so maybe they cancel each other out.

Viewing the bust label as permanent is probably more common than me saying its tentative. I tend to view it in the context of trade value. Most may not apply the bust label if a guy's trade value is significantly less than where he was drafted at since bust is a huge black mark or cloud kind of like calling someone soft, but I feel like it is what it is with or without using the word. If you were taken top 5 and can get had by a protected 1st or worse, not a good indication for your career.

[King_B_Mack]

Re: February Games Discussion Thread

Actually King, after thinking about it some more, I do see where you’re coming from(in regards to Wiseman)and don’t really disagree with you because you are right.🤝🏾

For whatever reason, he didn’t workout there and by definition, he would be a bust for GSW. Now he could still go and cook in Detroit but it won’t change the fact that it didn’t workout in Golden State. And that’s a fair take to have.

I think for me, I was too focused on the word “bust” and took it as he won’t ever be able to shake that label again, when that’s not the case nor what you’re saying.

I still stand by everything else but I’ll cede that one to you, sir.

That's all I was really trying to say. We take the word too seriously I think and when people hear it it's automatically the worst thing in the world when in fact it's not, particularly if the guy can eventually put it all together and reach that potential his original team saw in him. I figure it really goes without saying that every situation is different hence why I mentioned the Andrew Wiggins situation because things like that or Harden as you pointed out are special circumstances.

I do feel like I need to clarify that I'm all for giving guys time to develop because I know it's a process. You can probably find in my post history somewhere preaching patience with young guys here. Hell, I do it on a near daily basis here with Bulls fans that were trying to ship Patrick Williams out of town for Jerami Grant last deadline and Rudy Gobert in the offseason and any other number of mid tier player possible. Hell I just got into an argument with a dude a couple weeks ago saying Ayo had hit his ceiling and needed to be moved for whatever you can get for him. Like dude, it's been a year and a half we can pump the brakes a bit and not try to cap what a dude is gonna be before he's even got 2 years in the league. I think for the most part a team has basically 5 years to make a decision on if a guy is worth keeping around. That's more than enough time for a proper evaluation and outside of the aforementioned Harden, Wiggins type situations if your team is moving on from you because you still haven't shown them you're what they were drafting and they move you or let you walk then it's all well and good if you somewhere and kill it or become a "solid" player for some other team, but you are a bust for the team that drafted you. It's a draft bust.

Please feel free to correct any and everybody from now on when they call 9.7 a 10 lol. My bad, you got me.

Playing 50 games in year 3 also isn't much of an issue when you only have like 60 games regardless because of the pandemic.

Bulls played him off the bench more when they added Thad Young and preferred that experience, defense, spacing. Not being aggressive enough, having a good off ball game, all of that is completely normal for a 3rd year player, and coming off the bench with a role is still completely normal for a 3rd year player. Bulls went a direction that didn't' suit him as much, that is normal too. All of this is normal.

He hasn't JUST put up good stats on bad teams since then. He started for Cleveland as more of a SF role, something Chicago didn't want him to be. He flourished in that role. They lost the play-in but were 8th, basically a playoff team in 99% of all other seasons. He also flourished in Utah when they were a playoff level team too. Regardless of where they stand now and where they finish after trading all their vets and playing the young guys.

You can mention all the little things he didn't do well, pretty much every non-superstar doesn't do all those things well in year 3 either. Again your standards of expecting a 7th pick to come in and be dominant aren't realistic. I just listed off 20 years of number 7 picks and Steph is literally the only star.

Okay cool OJ. You can school me on the day-to-day going ons of the Chicago Bulls. You got your thumb on the pulse of what was happening here, I don't.

[Majingir]

Re: February Games Discussion Thread

Nvm.......

[MrDubya]

Re: February Games Discussion Thread

I didn’t know if there was an All-Star thread, but damn Giannis looking clean out there with that coat tonight.

[ojandpizza]

Re: February Games Discussion Thread

I just want to add, this is the first time in any “bust” conversation that I’ve seen bust looked at from the team point of view rather than the player. Almost like saying the team is a bust for drafting a guy that didn’t fit. But labeling bust on the player because the team can’t scout or changed their direction after the fact.

Even in King’s example, I completely get what he’s saying, I’ve just never heard that be the criteria for a bust until this specific back and forth.

Typically bust conversions are one of the following.
1.) player just isn’t an NBA player - the Anthony Bennett or Derick Williams example
2.) player just doesn’t live up to being anything close to a top level pick. The Kwame Brown types
3.) The player is never healthy, Greg Oden types.
4.) Player is actually good but for whatever reason can’t/won’t buy in to the NBA not being a 1 on 1 tournament, the Michael Beasley types.

This player signs his second contract elsewhere or has most his success for another team is a first for me. Like I said at the very start, kinda depends what each person actually considers a bust I guess.

[ojandpizza]

Re: February Games Discussion Thread

Okay cool OJ. You can school me on the day-to-day going ons of the Chicago Bulls. You got your thumb on the pulse of what was happening here, I don't.

Nobody is saying that though. I’m saying you’re expectations of a 7th pick, regardless of the Bulls or whoever, doesn’t line up to what you typically get from a 7th pick. Him lacking the aggression of a star player is normal for a guy who is 22 years old.

He played well in the areas he excelled at while he was with Chicago from basically day 1. Hell as a rookie he made the first team. If that wasn’t the type of player they wanted they should have drafted somebody else. That’s not the players fault. They wanted him to be better in areas that wasn’t his strengths and play him in roles that he wasn’t built/ready for. They played him 51% as a center his last year there. He’s just fine in his role for Cleveland, Finland, Utah, etc. Just like he appeared to be his first couple of years with the Bulls too.

I don’t think anybody is trying to say they know more about the Bulls or that you haven’t watched x amount more games of his and know a few more of his flaws. That’s fine. But are those flaws not flaws that pretty much every player drafted out of the top 3-5 have at 22 years old?

And if lack of aggression with him was an issue is that not at least somewhat on Chicago to fix it? Because it wasn’t a problem with Cleveland, in the Olympics, or now with Utah. And is a trend now with Lauri, Carter Jr, Payne, Portis, Gafford, and guys like Dinwiddie and Strus who they didn’t draft but waived for nothing before they went and started for Nets and Heat... You don’t think it’s possible they just haven’t done the best with their young talent the past few years? Is Coby White currently not regressing too? 3 years in to 4th overall pick Pat Williams putting up career numbers of 9 and 4 on not so great teams too.

[Majingir]

Re: February Games Discussion Thread

What kind of WWE writing is this?

Richard Jefferson was the special guest referee in the game and now he joined one of the two teams.

[King_B_Mack]

Re: February Games Discussion Thread

Nobody is saying that though. I’m saying you’re expectations of a 7th pick, regardless of the Bulls or whoever, doesn’t line up to what you typically get from a 7th pick. Him lacking the aggression of a star player is normal for a guy who is 22 years old.

He played well in the areas he excelled at while he was with Chicago from basically day 1. Hell as a rookie he made the first team. If that wasn’t the type of player they wanted they should have drafted somebody else. That’s not the players fault. They wanted him to be better in areas that wasn’t his strengths and play him in roles that he wasn’t built/ready for. They played him 51% as a center his last year there. He’s just fine in his role for Cleveland, Finland, Utah, etc. Just like he appeared to be his first couple of years with the Bulls too.

I don’t think anybody is trying to say they know more about the Bulls or that you haven’t watched x amount more games of his and know a few more of his flaws. That’s fine. But are those flaws not flaws that pretty much every player drafted out of the top 3-5 have at 22 years old?

And if lack of aggression with him was an issue is that not at least somewhat on Chicago to fix it? Because it wasn’t a problem with Cleveland, in the Olympics, or now with Utah. And is a trend now with Lauri, Carter Jr, Payne, Portis, Gafford, and guys like Dinwiddie and Strus who they didn’t draft but waived for nothing before they went and started for Nets and Heat... You don’t think it’s possible they just haven’t done the best with their young talent the past few years? Is Coby White currently not regressing too? 3 years in to 4th overall pick Pat Williams putting up career numbers of 9 and 4 on not so great teams too.

I didn't say it's not possible they haven't done the best with guys. But I'm not gonna sit here and put all the blame for players not getting on the court and performing completely on the team particularly when they are given the minutes to do so.

Coby has actually looked better than he's looked in a few years since AK/ME got here.

Pat Williams is the fourth or fifth scoring option on this team and also has to carry the load of gaurding the best player on the other team what do you expect his numbers to look like? He's also being pushed by everyone on the team to be more aggressive. Where he's currently at isn't a flaw of player development on the team it's squarely on Patrick right now. He's being given every opportunity to perform with the coaching staff, DeMar, Zach etc. pushing him to not pass up open shots, learn when to look for his shot and when to move the ball along, etc. But again, keep looking at box score stats and determining what is or isn't going on.

All this still doesn't address the situation with Lauri either that when AK/ME got here they wanted to bring Lauri back and negotiated with him ahead of the rookie extension deadline during their first season in charge. They wanted him at a deal starting at around $15 million a year based on the development he'd shown to that point. He was looking for something north of $19-20. Why would you commit long term money at a high price to a guy that was coming off career low numbers going into that and well into that season? After they didn't agree on an extension knowing he was headed to restricted free agency he wanted out of Chicago and they were fine with him leaving and got something for him. He ultimately ended up signing a deal with the Cavs starting him at......$15 mil a year. Think the Bulls were proven right in their evaluation of him at that point to not sign him to a bigger deal that the rest of the league clearly didn't think he was worth either.

[dubcity]

Re: February Games Discussion Thread

Typically bust conversions are one of the following.
1.) player just isn’t an NBA player - the Anthony Bennett or Derick Williams example
2.) player just doesn’t live up to being anything close to a top level pick. The Kwame Brown types
3.) The player is never healthy, Greg Oden types.
4.) Player is actually good but for whatever reason can’t/won’t buy in to the NBA not being a 1 on 1 tournament, the Michael Beasley types.

But there are people who will argue against all of these except the injury one, just because of the unknown and the what if. Examples: Anthony Bennett on the right team/situation could have been great. This new team will figure him out. Kwame Brown played in the league for years and years, so he's not a bust. He contributed. Give Markelle Fultz more minutes, he'll get you 20 ppg, etc.

[ojandpizza]

Re: February Games Discussion Thread

But there are people who will argue against all of these except the injury one, just because of the unknown and the what if. Examples: Anthony Bennett on the right team/situation could have been great. This new team will figure him out. Kwame Brown played in the league for years and years, so he's not a bust. He contributed. Give Markelle Fultz more minutes, he'll get you 20 ppg, etc.

You can do this with every player on every team in every situation in every role in every era though if you really want to get that specific with it. This player could be an All-Star, this player would get more minutes here, this player would win a championship here, this player could/couldn’t play in this era, and so on.

But in general we know the term “bust” is typically applied to players who were historically the worst draft picks in NBA history. Who Wiseman might be, or might not be, who someone like Lauri sure as hell is not or has never been.

[ggsimmonds]

Re: February Games Discussion Thread

You can do this with every player on every team in every situation in every role in every era though if you really want to get that specific with it. This player could be an All-Star, this player would get more minutes here, this player would win a championship here, this player could/couldn’t play in this era, and so on.

But in general we know the term “bust” is typically applied to players who were historically the worst draft picks in NBA history. Who Wiseman might be, or might not be, who someone like Lauri sure as hell is not or has never been.

I hate that part of it. Any way we slice it "bust" is not a positive, but if you're equating bust with = one of the worst draft picks in history that definitely explains your reaction to putting that label on Wiseman.

Every draft has busts, some are bigger than others. Even in the worst case scenario I don't think Wiseman is anywhere near an all-time bust though. I don't think he'll be cracking any top 10 lists of the biggest busts or anything.

I'm a Wizards fan. So drafting guys who fail to reach expectations or produce at the hoped for level is something I am something of an expert on. Maybe I'm so use to draft picks not delivering that I've become more liberal with my use of the word

[ggsimmonds]

Re: February Games Discussion Thread

I just want to add, this is the first time in any “bust” conversation that I’ve seen bust looked at from the team point of view rather than the player. Almost like saying the team is a bust for drafting a guy that didn’t fit. But labeling bust on the player because the team can’t scout or changed their direction after the fact.

Even in King’s example, I completely get what he’s saying, I’ve just never heard that be the criteria for a bust until this specific back and forth.

Typically bust conversions are one of the following.
1.) player just isn’t an NBA player - the Anthony Bennett or Derick Williams example
2.) player just doesn’t live up to being anything close to a top level pick. The Kwame Brown types
3.) The player is never healthy, Greg Oden types.
4.) Player is actually good but for whatever reason can’t/won’t buy in to the NBA not being a 1 on 1 tournament, the Michael Beasley types.

This player signs his second contract elsewhere or has most his success for another team is a first for me. Like I said at the very start, kinda depends what each person actually considers a bust I guess.

To me 1 thru 4 doesn't matter. A bust is a player who fails to produce at the level expected out of his draft position and/or pre-draft hype.

Why he failed to do so (injury, mental factors, etc) is another matter.

[ojandpizza]

Re: February Games Discussion Thread

But again, keep looking at box score stats and determining what is or isn't going on.

What do you actually want me to do, I can’t reference roles, I can’t reference stats, you want me to judge players on who I think has the coolest tattoos or something?

Ain’t nobody in here trying to act like they know more about the Bulls than you do. Should I start every post I make saying “I know I’ve only watched x amount of Bulls games and you’ve watched every possession but”.. like it’s a basketball thread. We talk hoops, players, roles, stats.. I’ve watched plenty of Bulls games, I just said last year they were my favorite team to watch before everything spiraled downwards. That doesn’t mean I’m trying to say I know more about the Bulls than what you do. Or that if I reference a stat that I’m only looking at a box score and haven’t watched them play at all.

My general point was, I’m sure you didn’t draft a player 4th overall to play solid defense and be a 4th/5th option still 3 years into his career. I realize he’s young, he’s strong, he defends, he can space the floor, the Bulls likely keep and continue to develop him.. BUT if they don’t keep him like they didn’t any of those other guys and he develops into a good player elsewhere is he also a bust? That’s my point. And if he never develops into a top 4 pick type of player for them or anybody else but say maximizes what he is now and becomes a DFS type (which has high value) but isn’t what you want at pick 4 but technically meets your criteria of getting a 2nd contract, does that make him a bust or does it mean Chicago should have never picked him at 4 to begin with. Most mocks had him around 8, some had him out of the lottery.

And your general point about him was what we were saying about Wiseman from the start. What did people expect from him basically at this point to play as a 6th-ish option. Some dude who’s likely never played a role of never having the ball. Needing to make plays that make Steph, Klay better, make advanced defensive rotations out the gate. On top of missing a full season with a knee injury. They won a ring with Looney in that role, and 3 other rings with using their non-starter minutes with Draymond at the 5.. Did people expect them to just start this 20 year old kid over him, and ditch the small ball 5 minutes too and try to fix what isn’t necessarily broken? Would Chicago draft some 20 year old kid and tell him to come in and take Rodman’s spot because Rodman cant shoot and actually expect that to make them better in what they actually needed in that role, of course not.

Basically Wiseman may/may not be a bust, but if Golden State wanted a player that from day 1 could fill a team need as a “big” but already understood how to play the role of hustle, defend, rim-run, maybe be 6th or 7th in shots on any given night, they should have drafted a guy like Okongwu who spent his entire childhood playing that role with the Ball brothers. Or just traded back in the draft, traded the pick, or traded Wiseman 2 years ago.. Not draft Wiseman who had only ever played the role of being #1 and only had 3 college games under his belt to learn how to integrate with other guys and not have everything go through him and expect him to instantly be able to understand everything about playing off ball for a championship caliber team.