How is it obvious he was the best big man though? The only thing that's obvious is that there are three+ big men in this past year's draft class who have been having better years than Favors. Yes, he was taken before every other big man and most GMs didn't blink when he was taken -- but that doesn't mean they were right.
some players take several years to find themselves, and favors is still too young. i don't judge his career until he's in his year 3. new jersey isn't a good situation for him b/c of brook lopez, and they're just a bad team.
Doesn't mean they were wrong either. You cant tell much based on the year he's had. He's still where he started. He could still be an all-star or not. He's got the physical tools you can't acquire. He's just got to keep learning and improving his game. At 19, he's got a good 3-4 years to do it before he can be considered a bust.
Kobe wasn't too special his rookie year. Neither was Deron Williams. KG wasn't spectacular either. Sometimes players just need a few years to develop their game.
Okafor was selected for ROY, while DHoward was not. Many fans believed Howard would be the better player though. Okafor, 22, was just putting up bigger numbers, because he was older and more developed.
relax he'll be a 18/10 guy in 2 years...He's similar to Otis Thorpe more than Dwight Howard.....I like him but I admit the pre-draft comparisons made me think he was gonna be a complete and utter MONSTA
Right, but how does that factor into this scenario? Favors isn't flashing any more potential than Cousins, Griffin, Monroe, etc. like Dwight was vs. Okafor. I don't think this is a situation of more experienced players getting the stats while the younger star is momentarily out-shined. I just don't see the same potential in Favors as I do with Cousins, for example. Do you?
I agree with the OP. Favoris is a 6-10 PF, not a 7 food center like thabeet. I see a 10p-10r-1b stats at his prime.
I certainly do. He's putting up similiar or better as other teen big men in their rookie year. Al Jefferson Zach Randolph Bynum Perkins Garnett Chandler If you go a year older: Nowitzki Aldridge He is making shots at a very high%.
Oh sorry my bad - not Favours I meant Cousins. My post shouls read - Its obvious Favours was the best big from the last draft. Monroe and Davis are playing better than Favours for now. Udoh is having quite an impact for the Warriors as well. But I think in another 2 years Favours will outshine the latter 3.
Many scouts say that you have to give bigs until they are 23-23-25 even... I agree with your post. He needs time...
FAIL X 2. Dang! My post should read - Its obvious Cousins was the best big from the last draft. Monroe and Davis are playing better than Favours for now. Udoh is having quite an impact for the Warriors as well. But I think in another 2 years Favours will outshine the latter 3 Can I please have the rights to edit my posts?
An impressive list, no doubt, but couldn't you also make one of big men who put up similar stats and failed to develop into anything? I think my main beef with the "he's still young, have patience" argument is that guys like DeMarcus Cousins are producing NOW. If big men only get better as they get used to the league (year three argument), shouldn't the guys currently ahead of Favors only get better as well? The rationale from the pro-Favors crowd seems to be that he will leapfrog the guys currently outperforming him. While it's certainly a possibility, I think it's far from a given -- I just don't think he's shown the same potential as some other guys in his draft class have. His best game so far appears to be the 14/8 he threw up against DEN in late November. Cousins is undoubtedly the best big men from last year's draft and I don't think it's close.
You're seeing this now after half a season of Favors riding the bench and Cousins having some very good games....but as of draft time it wasn't that clear. Remember Cousins could have gone as high as #2, some even questioned if he should go #1, but he dropped because of his weight and attitude. Their draft position had more to do with their mentality than potential. He's already averaging 6, 5, and 0.7 in 20 mins of play. He'd come pretty close to matching that with 5 more mins of playing time, as of now too. He's only putting up 4 shots a game. We all know Vujacic jacks it up when he can and so do a few of their players. Can't really even say his FG % is poor or would be with more minutes, it's at 50% now.
Co-sign about Favors, he's got potential sure but so have dozens of lottery picks that wound up having disappointing careers. For a player like Melo, I would want a DH or Rose type of rookie.
Not really. Shawn Kemp and Garnett had the weakest averages of the players mentioned but were better players by their 3rd-4th year than the others with better averages.
-Yeah, I REALLY liked Cousins coming out of this draft. I was extremely high on him. I remember some long "discussions" this summer with certain volume posters about trading up to get him. Many people didn't want to trade "a sure thing" (Budinger) for an "unknown" (Cousins). DeMarcus should have been the #2 overall pick.. maybe #3, as Turner was a great college player. Favors was decent in college, but mostly lived off the hype/potential. -Favors is getting 6/5 in 20 minutes. He needs a lot more than 5 minutes to get to 10/10. If you doubled his minutes, and assumed his production stayed the same, he'd be 12/10 in 40 minutes. I don't know what you're saying not really to, but surely you can acknowledge the possibility that Favors could bust? Your list was filled with all-star players, but I bet you could easily field a similar list of players who faded out. There's no guarantee that he's the next Shawn Kemp/KG, just like there's no guarantee he's the next Marcus Fizer. This is a premature discussion, but what's the fun in not discussing future possibilities? Besides, I may forget to make a thread bashing Favors in another year or two.
Producing now and produced in college. This is why I argued for taking production over "potential" based on athletic ability(but disappointing production) predraft. If he wasn't dominating in college, what makes anyone think he would against grown men? Here's the rule: If you dominated in college, there is no guarantee that you will dominate in the NBA. If you didn't dominate in college, you can pretty much guarantee you won't in the NBA. Therefore, take the ones that dominated over the ones who didn't. Simple. BetterThanEver should have learned that by now, being $20 poorer.
Favors would be fouled out before 40 minutes, and his team would lose by 20 every game. For the other people who were wondering, that's why he plays 20 minutes a game.
