Hey guys, i know a lot of us here know a ton about basketball. weve all been preaching that we knew LaMarcus Aldridge would be soft, passive, not a rebounder, and just not worthy of a top 3 pick. yet teams like portland go out of their way to get him. then in the first few rounds of summer league, he proves yet to be what we all saw every week on cbs ncaa basketball. what im wondering is how can these scouts dedicate so much time, and not know squat about basketball. other than the spurs, and mavs scouting, it seems like everyone is so clueless. i think the problem is they scout body weight, hand size, fat %, height, and ect ect all while forgetting to scout heart, desire, and intensity. what do you guys think?
I see where you're coming from, and I'm not defending LaMarcus, but there was a soft label on Tim Duncan coming from some quarters as well -- and never was the chorus louder than when Tim was dominated by Greg Ostertag in the 1997 summer league. Not saying there is any correlation, but let's at least give him a little while before we judge him. Like, the first week of the season, like some gave Yao.
It can never be an exact science, because some people respond better to different environments. Some coaches are more able/willing to teach young guys, some treat them like idiots. Some teams have a system that works for a guy, others don't. It's why you see certain players look like a joke at first, then soar in another city (Diop, Diaw, Jermaine O'Neal) or vice versa (Kenyon Martin, Mo Taylor, etc). Also, a player's willingness to improve is hard to measure beforehand. Eddy Curry figured he was good enough already and refused to work on his game/conditioning. It's hard to see that coming. But a lot of teams today do run prospects through a bunch of psychological tests to try and guage their personality (heart, work ethic, aptitude, etc). Danny Ainge is nutty about it. The Bulls were one of the first to get serious about it in their evaluations. In short, it's there, but in the end a lot of it is up to the player. Teams can get a good feel for potential, and that's often the biggest thing. Take Rudy Gay - he could be Caron Butler or he could be something really special. It's never a sure thing. Evan
People can let others talk them out of things. I scouted Diop at a high school camp in 2000, and he looked awful. He was usually the worst player on the floor. But anyone with half a brain could figure out that, in half a decade and with some good coaching, he could develop into something sturdy. NBA-level sturdy. Then, after watching four seasons of him slog around, out of shape and in Cleveland, I let go of that notion. Not because I had seen anything different from what I saw in 2000, or any regression from year to year -- I just let the party line regarding Diop (only in it for the money, a project that will never pan out) influence me. When Cuban signed him last year, I lambasted it -- even though it was a cheapo deal with great potential. Now look. He's exactly what I thought he could be, and yet, I let what everyone else thought about him influence my own individual beliefs on the guy.
thats a great point, i think we all lost faith in diop at this point in time. but youre right hes turned out to be a solid contributer who even gave duncan fits at times. i wonder if thatll be the case for their other lottery pick dujuan wagner, he was labled the next iverson but with more strength.
I find it kind of arrogant to assume that we, the common fan, know as much about basketball ("a ton" as you so eloquently put it) as people who do it as their job. If they were so bad at it, and you were so good at it, don't you think they would be fired and you would be the head scout of the NBA? Yes it's nice to think or imagine that if given the opportunity, we would be able to find the next Lebron/Dirk/MJ/Magic/DWade/Kobe/etc in every draft...but truth is there's a lot more to it than what we see. When you're dealing with an inexact science like scouting people (with all the intangibles and variables that people bring to the mix), it's hard to pinpoint an exact criteria of who the next star is going to be. And I don't see how you're going to jump on LaMarcus BEFORE THE REGULAR SEASON STARTS. People said Channing Frye was soft last year...he had a pretty bad start to it in the summer leagues too, IIRC. Jermaine O'Neal took a few years to blossom, Ben Wallace bounced around the league before becoming a star, Chauncey Billups was labeled a "bust" before becoming a Finals MVP...I'd say you have to wait at least 5 years before you can definitively say that a player is a bust.
Scouting (in the sense of discerning) college talent doesn't seem that hard. Judging how these young guys will react to the NBA grind and to guaranteed NBA contracts is nearly impossible. I've wavered a lot on LA. His talent is undeniable! He can be special. He seems to be a player who is dedicated to improving his skillset. But the heart he will show out on the floor against NBA competition is the question. I turned against him right before the draft. LA may end up being a new version of Joe Barry Carroll, who I saw a lot in college and who was the exact same player in the NBA he was in college. He never adjusted to the size, strength and aggressiveness of pro competition but his talent was still enough to make up for his passivity. Joe Barry was a very good pro who could have been great. I think LA will fall into the same category if he keeps developing. I don't see him becoming a franchise player.
I remember thinking that Diop would be a complete bust when he was drafted. Remember he was labled as Baby Shaq? Also, recently on a radio show, Avery said that LA had the most upside of any player drafted in his opinion. I completely disagree with Avery but he is talking upside I guess.
LaMarcus Aldridge is from Dallas. Avery Johnson wants the fans in Dallas on his side. I'm sure he wasn't outright lying - he probably does have a high opinion of Aldridge - but it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if he laid it on a little thick for the locals.
ok so lets say youre the orlando magic gm/scout and you go ahead and draft fran vasquez before even asking him if he wants to play in the NBA. my 4 year old brother wouldve had the brains to double check. stromile, darius miles, fizer, demarr johnson, dooling, jerome moiso all top 10 picks of the 2000 draft. give me a break. im saying 70% of the scouts out there dont know what the heck to look for. 30% do.
letting the season start is what im affraid of. ive seen him get bullied in college for the past 2 years. what makes you think the transition to the NBA will get easier? ok so your perception is he sucked in college and he sucks in summer league, we should all give him a break cause when the season starts and hes playing against KG, and Amare things will get easier. great.
theres a big difference though, yao and timmy dominated everywhere they played before that. yao was dropping 35 and 15 in china, while timmy was the college player of the year. they rightfully deserved the draft hype. Aldridge hasnt done ANYTHING for any kind of hype at all.
In defense of the drafting of those guys, it's hard to pick a group of players from that draft that are better than the guys you pointed out. Hedo, Desmond Mason, Q-Rich maybe, that's about it. Why Fizer can't get a gig is beyond me, you guys hate Stromile but I think he could contribute at a 30-minute a night clip ... that was just a horrid draft. It's not as if Dalibor Bagaric at #21 was much better.
Aldridge didn't put up great numbers in college, and he has that "soft" label, but I agree that we shouldn't be too quick to judge what kind of career he'll end up having. He's still very young, and he could end up developing a very potent offensive game and turn into a fine defensive player. I wouldn't count on him ever becoming a great rebounder, however.
Scouts sit at the press table sometimes, and it's amazing to see the sheer amount of paperwork they go through. I take a lot of shorthand notes, but these guys go nuts -- and that doesn't take into account the DVD/Video aspect of it.
