Is the dleague really the best way to progress rookies?

playing in the actual NBA is definitely better for players who are close but not there yet...the guys who are further back the DL works better for.

 

I actually hear a lot of praise about our use of the D-League. If a rookie is ready to contribute, great put him in there. but if they're not it's better that they be practicing instead of travelling with the team. I don't think McHale has shown any hesitation to play rookies who have proved they can play. Patterson, Smith and Beverly all played in the D-League and now play meaningful minutes. Besides, even Anthony Davis had his minutes limited and has been relagated to bench duty behind Anderson. Imagine that, a team that is probably headed to the lotto still uses the combinations the coach thinks gives him the best chance to win.

 

Look, when you come into the NBA as a rookie, you are going to fit in one of these categories-


Tier 1- Superstar High Upside prospect- elite enough talent to beat out role players on an roster from day 1, but still far from a finished product. We are talking about athetes like Lebron, Griffin type of talent.

Tier 2 - Potential All-star prospect- Has the physical tools & shown raw talent at other levels to be potentially elite in a few years of development at the next level.

Tier 3- Ready made NBA players W low upside- Players that have shown productive results at their level with the physical tools, and skill to be productive role players at an NBA level, but with limited upside. Lots of late 1st rounders, and some second round picks.

Tier 3.5- Nice Suprises- You are looking at players disguised as a Tier 3 player, that uncovers Tier 2 level talent at the next level. Think Chander Parsons, Kenneth Faried here. Sometimes the scouts just get it wrong here.

Tier 4 - Shot in the dark prospects- Players with raw talents & abilities that have neither skills to contribute right away, or have shown the abilitie to perform at a high level in the past.

......................................................................................................

So what the D-League can and can't do is pretty simple.

What it Can't do is make a tier 2 to tier 4 prospect into a tier 1 prospect. It just doesn't happen. You are talking about God given talents and abilities here.

What the D-League CAN do is to take a Tier 2 level player that could end up being an NBA casualty, and give those players the ability to sharpen up their games enough to get playing time at the next level. This is step 1 to even getting a chance at growing as a professional. Maybe a few years after that, those players blossom into the all-star conversation with an expanded role.

Those players are not talented enough to earn playing time right away, so they need to become better NBA players first in order to give themselves a chance to grow into their potential. Marcus Morris is the perfect example of this. While he may never live up to his potential as an all-star SF, the D-League still gave him the ability to work on other aspects of his game as to become a solid all around player first and foremost instead of potentially becoming a throw away prospect who is in and out of the league in 3 years.

-Another ability that the D-league has is to give Tier 4 players a place to prove themselves as an NBA level talent, and as someone their team can groom in the future to be a role player more than likely.


So the argument from the OP is not valid by any stretch. The D-League has nothing to do with where those players were from the beginning. I like Carl's metaphor about the special needs children blaming the special ed class for being special needs in the first place.

The truth is the D-League is a big reason why players like Morris, Landry, Brooks, etc. got a chance to get NBA minutes in the first place. First you need NBA skills to get NBA minutes, and then from that point on, your ceiling will be realized. The problem is with the fans perception in what tier they really think they are being sold. Marcus Morris, Carl Landry, Patrick Patterson, etc. were never supposed to be Tier 1 players to begin with hence why they were never good enough to get PT from day 1, and alot of them weren't tier 3 players were they had an NBA role right from day 1 that made them valuable needing them for that role they could fill right away.

 

We simply drafted too many PF's - the best position for DMO/Morris/White/TJ is not 3 or 5, but 4.

 

From your definition, shouldn't tier 3.5 be called tier 2.5?

 

Notice not one of the proponents of the OP is touching Carl Herrera's Markief vs Marcus argument. LOLs. Where is Markief. Markief!!

Fact is: The Rockets have now proven that Markief was fool's gold development last year, and their development of Marcus was more sound and is paying off.

 

As Sweet Lou said earlier, the Rockets have one the best track records in the entire history of the NBA at developing talent...including recently.

How people don't see this is beyond me. It's like you cherry pick other rookies each year in attempt to prove some bogus theory using Chicken and Egg circular logic.

Claiming Parsons, Brooks and Landry are not bonafide examples of NBA ready talent, but was forced upon the coach to play ... fails to examine the other rookie examples in the league that you guys bring up.

Quit trying so hard to win an argument, and just accept the facts, dudes. And try studying the other rookies and why they got rookie minutes.

 

BUT YET A 2ND ROUND PLAYER WAS IN OUR STARTING LINE UP AS A ROOKIE

boom. case closed. you lose.

if the player is worthy of the minutes, he will get them on this team.

 

I wasn't aware that Mchale was coaching the team when Brooks and Landry were rookies. Did I miss something?

 

Is this just about McHale? Did I miss something?

If so, then McHale has proven all y'all wrong with his player management of Parsons and Marcus vs Markief.

quit trying so hard to argue against these two facts.

 

This whole thing started once Mchale took over. Patterson spent some early Dleague time put play for a majority of the season. Mchale hasn't played Morris, DMo or Jones.

How about you answer a question I asked earlier. What non rookie option did Mchale have to play the backup 3 besides the head case that was TWill?

 

the only way to get ready for nba mins is to actually get NBA MINS!!!

McHale is a nice dude but he needs to get his head out of his a**. Just play the damn rooks already

 

That was NOT said in the OP. McHale's name is not even mentioned. Just because you say this thread is all about McHale, doesn't me we have to agree.

regarding Morris. What? What are you talking about? McHale has clearly developed him better than Phoenix has his twin brother. How can you deny that?

So, because McHale used the D-League on Marcus and Phoenix didn't on Markief, then that means you can use Marcus as an example of McHale's failure to develop rookies, when, in fact, his method worked in the long term.

Oh, Christ. We played Courtney Lee at the 3 a lot, and you know it. Besides, had McHale actually played TWill as the backup, which many people yelled at him for not doing (many people), you'd be making this same argument "Who did McHale have to develop as backup 3 besides TWill, because none of us would have guessed a 2nd round pick was NBA Ready.

Fact: McHale got Parsons PT when he could have used Courtney Lee, Lowry and Dragic as the front court when Budinger rested. Your argument that he was forced to play Parsons, so was lucky, is just plain hogwash and a self-fulfilling argument of yours. It is very weak.

So, now I answered your question. You answer mine.

From that list of 10 rookies last year who made the Rookie Challenge (which Parsons did not), you tell me who their Coach has as an option. You answer your own question now, but with regard to the other Rookies, and not Parsons.

 

Right...let's just simply not develop our 2nd and 3rd year bigs (Asik, PPat, Morris and Smith), and bench them for the two rookie PFs.

That's right...McHale is playing four (FOUR) 2nd and 3rd year bigs. Plus he's playing thee other rookie or 2nd year front court players (Parsons, Lin and Beverly).

 

"See, these guys were ready!" Is just as much as cherry picking isn't it?
Every time some one brings up Parsons it sounds like Cherry picking to me. I can easily just say that these guys benefit from actually playing in the NBA rather than going down to the dleague....

This is about the NBDL and the impact it has on development of rookies, I think it has little impact on them.
Are they playing in the same system? Yes they are, but they are not playing with the same players so when they come back they still look lost. They still have to adjust...isn't practice there to get chemistry with your teammates and actually playing with them?

The only thing it's good for is to keep these guys in basketball shape and keep them fresh rather than rot on the bench.

As for Marcus vs Markieff...are we really bragging here? Marcus has been as inconsistent as any other rookie because that's practically what he is. He's supposed to be better than his brother and I'd say he barely is at this point.

 

lol...see, I predicted you'd make the Chicken or Egg circular argument.

so predictable. Everything I say you can reverse to fit your argument, and everything you say I can as well.

Let's just stick to the facts. Parsons was a rookie starter. Marcus is now better than his twin brother, so NBDL route proved better than Markief's trial by fire (fool's gold inflated stats) approach.

Those are facts.

Parsons, Asik, Lin, Patterson, Marcus, Smith and Beverly ... those are all 1st, 2nd or 3rd year players. Will you just stop with this "We don't develop young players" crap. This is a VERY stupid season to be making that argument vs other teams.

 

He used the 2011 draft as his reference point which is when Mchale took over and only mentioned guys from that draft. Maybe I assumed to much but I think its pretty generally accepted that the not playing of rookies thing started with Mchale.

This thread is about rookies and McHale did not play Morris his rookie year.

Marcus Morris has played slightly better than his brother in the pros just like he played slightly better than him in college. Why is that trend continuing from college to the pros proof of anything?

I don't know that about Lee. He is way too light to be holding SFs at only 200 lbs. Parsons got solid minutes from pretty much the start.

I'm confused by what you are saying there and why wouldn't we think second round picks can play? Landry and Brooks both came in and his rookies just a few years before.

I disagree. Courtney Lee is not big enough to hold SFs.

Sorry I don't understand your question. You must have made some typos.

 

gmoney411,

Love ya man, but this thread is about using the NBDL. So, the Marcus development using the NBDL is very much on topic here.

 

Ignore Brooks. I always get confused about him being late first or early second.

 

But he developed a better player in to a better player. I honestly don't see how pointing to Marcus being better in the pros when he was better in college is proof of much and especially when he is only slightly better. IMO that is a weak argument. Not trying to be a dick about it.