When talking about prospects, do scouts rely too much on potential? I understand guys have more upside, but do we get to caught up "in the hype" of a player?
Do you value what a player has shown or what he might do?
For instance would you take Demar DeRozan and the unlimited potential he could have tap into or do you go with a guy like James Harden who has shown good skills over the last 2 years of college?
I guess for every Kwame Brown that never lived up to the potential, there is a guy like Amare Stoudemire that has!
Some value it too much...some not at enough.
Look at the 2004 draft. That was a classic case, when Orlando had to pick between Dwight Howard vs. Emeka Okafor.
In that case, it was certainly the right choice to go for the potential.
For some reason, every draft, I think back to 2003!
Darko Milicic over Wade and Carmelo.
A unproven guy, who had unlimited potential drafted over two guys who had shown signs of being great in college and in the NCAA tournament.
Carmelo led Syracuse too championship and Wade had a triple-double against UK in elite 8.
I AGREE WITH JOHNNY GILROY
That Darko pick was not a good pick because the thing is they could have drafted Mele and traded him and gotten more than just Darko but in all honesty. Darko would have been better on another team. He has all the tool but lost confidence playing with Detroit. I think on the right team like if Cats were to get him, he would be nice pairing. Also he would do well in Minnesota.
I think the NBA is going away from drafting those players so high... Especially since the one year in college rule... D'Andre Jordan was picked based on potential and he went in the second round... But I also think it depends on the strength of the draft... If its a weak draft like this year, I WOULD DRAFT ON POTENTIAL or need... No need to go for the best player on the board because after Griffin its all the same... But the NBA goes in trends... First with KG, Draft 7 foot guys that can "potentially" play SF (Tyson Chandler)... Then it was the LeBron, draft a SF with a strong body (Marvin Williams) and for some reason people tend to try and find LBJ every year in the Draft!!!... And now its CP3 n Deron Williams (Derrick Rose)... I'm not saying that any of these choices were bad, but is saying that its a copy cat league...
So my assesment is that, potential is great in moderations... We all kno Blake's potential is off the charts, but he also come in with a player of the year award... So saying he will be an all-star isn't overrating his potential... But to say someone like an Ed Davis has off the charts potential is doing to much... Because he hasn't shown enough, but glimpses... Does that make sense?
And another point I want to get at is that with all these players that they say has a "low ceiling on potential" has become good players... Josh Howard, Emeka, Granger, and David West... I can't name too many players with low ceilings that didn't produce as role players...
every instance is different. there are so many factors. strength of the draft class, what pick you have, your current roster, team philosophy, etc...there is just so much to consider.
I say most scouts look at potential because most guys dont stay in college too long
If we knew Oden wasnt good on Offense, Portland would have taken Durant
Melo, Bosh and Wade over Darko
Brandon Roy over Baragini
among others. But drafting on potential is a 50/50 shot
I say it all it all the time. Potential is the most dangerous word in the draft.
At the start of the post you said that for every Kwame(lots of potential but nothing to show) there is a Amare(lots of potential put to good use). I have to disagree and say that there are lots more guys who flop on their butts than their are guys that get it done. If that was so, there would be 60 teams in the NBA just to house the great players and there would be less TERRIBLE draft picks.
Wow. Finally another person who thinks like me. Johnny Kilroy, your sentence should be: "for every Kwanme Browne, DeSagana Diop, Darko, Tschitischvili, Rodney White (remember him?- number...8 in 2001, I think) and Yi JianLian, there's an Amare!"
All those guys were top 8 picks within the last 10 years.
All I'm saying is that we tend to remember the successes rather than the Epic fails, pure pwnages, noobages, and FMLs that occur every few years when we're talking about drafting based on potential only.
potential is a bball players kryptonite for some guys. For some its hype that means they dont have to work hard anynore becuz one day it will jus show up and they will be great. For others its sumthin to work toward to but will never reach. potential ruins a lot of players careers. Jonathan bender is the best example next to kwame brown. Bender was posed to be all world but he ended up with a short career. I believe if greg oden doesnt become the player everyone thinks he is supposed to be people will label him also. potential really puts a lot of pressure n players. thats the life of a bball player point blank. there will always be higher expectations and ppl saying u can do better
Potential is a word that just means a player looks good in the uniform but isnt good enough to play yet. You will find a diamond in the rough every once in a while, and when you do the next GM will look for a star to emerge in their mold. It can work, but if you try it too early and fail it can set your franchise back for 3-5 seasons.