There's a difference. Players picked #11 and onwards are usually busts or just role players man. I'm just trying to get y'alls reality checked. Hyping up a player who probably won't even be great. Take off your homer glasses and temper your expectations.
And before someone points out players who became stars #11 pick and onwards, note they keyword USUALLY. There is probably a less than a 10% players in that range become more than role players.
Lamb by a mile. We're just at the tip of Lamb's potential. Parsons is a nice player, but he doesn't have much growth left. He was NBA ready which is why he has early success, but he is not high upside in my opinion. Both are nice pieces, but I would throw Parsons in a trade for Dwight, but I would not throw Lamb in the trade. Lamb has the "it" factor.
Nash, Kobe, Malone, Stockton, Miller.... Plenty of great players taken out of the top 10. It's not about where you are taken, it's more about what you've done before coming to the NBA. Not Lamb's fault that guys like Dion Waiters were picked before him.
So essentially, you think the slot were player gets selected is directly related to how his gonna be? right? LMAO!
How many players in the top 10 become busts? It's not about that at all. Lamb was a top 5 prospect coming into the year, sometimes teams pick on position(like the Blazers set on taking a PG) and sometimes guys with a lot of skill fall because someone has a "NBA Body" or can jump really high or run really fast.
Parsons was picked in the 2nd round, so if your saying Lamb isn't good because he was picked after the top 10, take a look at where Parsons draft stock was. I said he had potential, I didn't say he would win ROY. Parsons will be 24 when the season starts while Lamb will be 20, all I'm saying is Lamb has more potential and I'd rather keep him.
Dion Waters will be a BUST I dont know how Lamb can go from a top-5 pick last year to 12th overall, but im happy he did
Definitely agree about Dion Waiters. He has bust written all over him. Lamb will have a waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay better career.
Nope, I'm saying it decreases the probability of landing a star player the lower the selection is. What's so terrible about that statement? Listen, I get that it's natural to hope for a player to become a star, but some of you are being irrational. Clouding your views and letting optimism affect your expectations.
Who's saying he's a superstar? I'm just saying he has a lot more potential and room to grow than Parsons, and I'd much rather have Lamb.
There's really nothing I can do to wake you guys up from this dream state of extreme optimism for our players. So I'll just do what I've always done, which is the "wait-and-see approach" and let their game do the talking. I simply won't set the bar high for players who aren't THAT likely to become stars. That's just me being realistic.
That is a valid point, but the rest of the others here... they are proclaiming Lamb as the next great.
Well most are saying he'll be better than Parsons. Since you put a lot of stock into the draft then you should believe the same thing, since Lamb was projected and went higher than Parsons ever could.
Except Parsons has proven he is a player, this is my point. Lamb has not proven anything. He could easily suck during the NBA season, yet some people believe this is not possible (why?). What irks me the most is how everyone seems to think there's no chance he'll suck. Is that rational thinking? Tell me. Another thing that irks me is how people don't want to give him up for Dwight. Think about that for a second. For freaking Dwight Howard. An unproven rookie.
Parsons has shown that he can cover even the toughest of matchups. How many players in the NBA can check KD? Not many, and Parsons has that ability, and is still a second year player. I'll take the known commodity
They are two completely different players, different styles, different positions. Keep 'em both. Can't really be compared
