So you are telling me the data supports there is a long list of superstars that have dominated in the Gleague to become superstars? News to me.
If there's one thing that Morey learned and ingrained in our scouting department was getting rid of confirmation bias. Our front office will take the best player available and ignore any other BS comparisons that could cloud their analysis. That's why Mobley will be the pick.
You keep building these straw men. Why? Let's be clear, what I am saying is make use of ALL OBJECTIVE INFO AVAILABLE, not the narrow-minded, change averse approach you espouse. Clinging to an outmoded college bias serves absolutely no positive purpose if the objective is to draft the best talent available. Sorry (not really) if you find that doesn't particularly support your argument for Mobley.
Where was my approach change averse bro? I simply said that it wouldn't be wise treating the Gleague as some measuring stick, clearly, because guys dominate the gleague all the time and get called up to warm benches. That's an objective fact. If anyone is creating a strawman it's you, I'm just against this idea that the Gleague is somehow a better barometer than the NCAA, there is no 'data' that supports that. If so, you'll have no issues presenting it to me I suppose. All I said was why wouldn't there be an NCAA bias when we know...for decades now...that it's capable of producing all-word talent? Your reply is to say I'm change averse when I'm really asking what reason should we buy into these changes you're proposing?
But that applies moreso to the NCAA.... we've been through this.... a fraction of D1 NCAA players make it to any proleague and a fraction of that ends up in the NBA. How many top ten draft picks that only played in the NCAA ended up busts? In some aspects it is and some aspects it isn't. It's clearly much better to see how a prospect will play under NBA rules and against the CLOSEST thing to NBA speed and strength.
What I am arguing is that Mobley playing in the NCAA should not be a knock against him, in any way. It shouldn't even be a data-point and it should not hurt him in any way. If you look at the top scorers or best players in the gleague, look at the MVP lists, the all-star lists, whatever...you'll find it's a list of mainly nobodies (and I say that respectfully, I'm well aware these dudes would dominate a pickup game at the Rucker) outside of a few people that broke out from there...like C.Wood, Shake Milton, a few success stories. C.Wood might, to this point at least and on track to be, the main go-to success story if he can make an all-star team because he legit spent years in the gleague growing his game. If you look at a list of NCAA top players, conference award winners, Naismith poty, you'll find a lot more success. Is it 100%? Of course not...but it has had a better track record than the Gleague. Like just compare the list of Naismith winners to Gleague MVPs https://www.basketball-reference.com/awards/naismith.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NBA_G_League_Most_Valuable_Player_Award Tell me which list is more impressive? If those guys on the MVP list had NBA careers I'd get the argument... Here's a list of all-gleague teams... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All-NBA_G_League_Team How many of these guys go on to do anything in the NBA? Most of them even the most hardcore of bball fans would know or name unless they went to their favorite school or something. My argument is that it's not close enough to NBA speed to matter. It's great that Green scored efficiently there, no knock against him, I wouldn't be an inch mad if we picked him. EDIT: To contrast...here are the All America NCAA teams... https://www.basketball-reference.com/awards/all_america.html So yall tell me, which league is producing quality talent and has a history of doing so?
If you can't see how overtly self-defeating your whole argument has become then I'm not sure I can be of much help. More than that, if you are going to argue that "why not just stick with what has worked in the past" isn't a change averse position then any further discussion is moot anyway. We disagree and that's okay. I do appreciate your willingness to at least admit the bias.
Jalen Green was a higher ranked prospect in high school. #1 actually to Cade being #2. Cade picked a one and done route in college and Green decided to become a pro. In reality Green could have wasted a year by impressing NCAA and Memphis fans and solidifying his position in the draft, but instead he decided it was time to test his skills against professionals since his chosen craft was basketball and not a degree in communications. If they even go back to school to finish their education. Most people trying to pump up NCAA bball against some of the pro leagues around the world is actually just showing their fanatacism for the amateurs and student athletes. Contextually NOTHING prepares players to become pros quite like playing against other pro's and not kids who will be moving on to the "real world" and their respective careers and post degree studies.
It's only change averse if you give a good reason as to why it should change and I still refuse to change. You can't just suggest a change then call someone change averse for not going along with it.
It wouldn't except the NBA is increasingly getting talent from non NCAA areas, mostly international. We have to compare strengths and weaknesses against different leagues, conferences, divisions, etc.. Comparing a NCAA prospect vs a G League prospect is kind of a new thing, no? All you are doing is showing me that the NCAA has been the dominant pipeline for the best prospects but that does nothing to demonstrate the overall quality of the NCAA. Would you say the PAC 12 would beat the G League? The G League is becoming more competitive every year because the NBA has been pushing it to do so because they view it as their minor league. I am just using the G League to see how players go up against the closest thing to NBA players and rules. On average, professional players who professionally work on their bodies would be stronger and faster than an average younger, non-professionals. How is that wrong? No doubt the NCAA plays a more winning style of basketball with greater stakes, albeit with younger, slower, non professionals.
Mobley is not ready to do anything right now in the NBA, but give him two or three years then watch what he will be doing. EVERYTHING!
Green making the direct leap from high school to a more pro style regimen and league was impressive. His attitude is impressive. His marketability (which will probably matter to Tilman) is impressive. His ability to score from all 3 levels with the leap from high school to G League is impressive.
I’m mostly excited that Mobley and Green both have such tantalizing talent. The pro groups for both is great… I get people have favorites, but im hoping that management goes through the interview and analysis, and get a star that will get them to the zenith of the NBA again.
I just don't get why people would still take a big man soo high in the draft. All the huge busts have always been the big getting picked over the wing or guards. Oden over Durant. Bowie over Jordan. Everyone of those scrubs over Kobe. Millicic over Anthony and Wade. Ayton over Trae and Luka. TBD... Bogut and Williams over CP3. I get the love and fascination for Mobley. He will probably be a very solid player. I see a lot of Anthony Davis comparisons. But let's say he reaches his full potential of Anthony Davis. What good does that do us? Anthony Davis couldn't win anything until he was paired up with the greatest player in his generation. In fact he couldn't even get his team to the playoffs. Is that what we want? Draft Mobley and hope he turns into AD and somehow luck into the next Lebron? Its a perimeter oriented league. Take the guard or the wing any day and live with it. Just last year I bet the Warriors wished they took Lamelo Ball over scrub Wiseman.
That the gleague is getting better is not something I would deny, but we are making the pick in the now and right now I know that the NCAA is a surer producer of star talent than the Gleague. I think that's what those lists prove, you can barely find an NBA starter on a list of all-gleague teams outside of KPJ and C.Wood and KPJ is barely a gleaguer and was just sent down there almost for rehab. It might be 10 more years before the gleague becomes the main pipeline, after the NBA accepts 18 year olds again and after draft prospects prove that performing in the gleague can produce results. If Green for example busts then it's not going to help, if he goes on to become the next Kobe then other elite prospects will follow that route. Until that point, the NCAA is the main pipeline though and so much so that international prospects come to the NCAA...which is even a bigger deal because they are often leaving situations in which they are paid to play. One thing you cannot deny and is rather important is NCAA undoubtedly has better coaches. Do you think there isn't a benefit to being coached by Coach K or Roy Williams? I think it should be pointed out that this wasn't the usual gleague season. No travel, a bubble season. We saw a guy like TJ Warren average 30 points in the bubble...let's not even talk about Herro the 'bubble boy' and the Heat in general. There just wasn't the travel and distractions that a pro player will have and it was only a month, 11 gleague teams opted out of the bubble and he played 16 games. Can you see why someone might not factor that heavily into their drafting decision?
A few things here... Rockets also took Hakeem over Jordan, I guess he was a big man bust? Kobe was a high schooler that only wanted to play for the Lakers. And lastly...Anthony Davis has taken his team to the playoffs...and even further than Luka...
Lets be honest, you can make exact same argument for Mobley. The NBA, like the G League, employs much more spacing which maximizes offense and ergo, offensive production.
And more importantly, no SG has lead his team to a championship in the last decade. Cavs led by Lebron/Kyrie, GSW led by Curry/Durant, Raptors led by Kawhi, Lakers led by Lebron/AD.
