Polished Spur: San Antonio's 1999 pick Ginobili is the talk of Indianapolis

Wait a minute...I thought you didn't follow college basketball, how do you know how good the ACC was? I'd still like to know Duncan's FG% and how good his team was. PPG needs to be put into context.

The draft was stronger when Duncan was that age. I'm not saying he would've been drafted highly then, I'm speculating that he may have been drafted higher in Griffin's draft, were he a freshman.

To be honest I'm not sure why we're spending so much time comparing Duncan and Griffin as freshmen. I guess I may have started it, but I'm not sure what it proves.

10 years ago, the Chandlers and Curry's would've gone to college for at least a couple of years before entering the draft. How could that NOT make those drafts better than they are now? The reason the drafts are weaker now is that players aren't staying in school, thus lessening the number of immediate impact players. This is the reason the foreigners are in the mix. If the US guys were staying in school, the foreign guys wouldn't be getting drafted as much or as highly.

The players that come into the league now are not as NBA-ready as they were in the past, therefore the NBA is having to develop their own players before they can contribute. What's better about that?

 

I actually agree with MrSpur on something concerning the spurs for once, I don't think Ming or Griffin has flashed Duncan potential , but the jury is way way out on Ming, it hasn't even convened yet.

 

For what it's worth, Griffin i think was projected to be a top 3 pick, until he punched his teammate... that's the reason he slipped to #7.

As far as Griffin becomin better than Ducan, I think it's not likely, because it IS hard to become a top 3 player in the entire NBA, but i agree with heyp that Griff has a good chance at becomin the better defensive player. I think his shotblockin skills are much better, especially considerin he's smaller than Duncan (tho his long arms might make up for it) We'll see how he does this year with added bulk.

 

I disagree-I think it's a change in how teams are always looking for potential, potential, potential.

No way does Kobe Bryant get taken #13 if he comes several years after McGrady. Does Lebron James really have the potential to be a lot better than Kobe? Teams see their success and try to emulate. That's why your Miles, Chandlers and Kwame Browns went so high-teams saw KG, a 6-11 lanky, ultra-athletic HSer, and saw that potential ability maybe in others.

Pau Gasol doesn't go #3 without Nowitzki. If Nowitzki came out today, exactly the same as he did a few years ago, he probably goes top 3, not #9.

Griffin was projected #1 in some "insider" mock drafts as early as the day before. Look over the reports-the primary concerns were off the court issue, and Griffin has been about as quiet and mild-mannered as it gets.

PS to our resident Spurs fan-Garnett over Duncan. Garnett is just crazy good. It's a close call, not much different than Steve vs. Baron.

 

TheFreak,

first off, you're right; we are talking about nothing. Secondly, I never said I didn't watch college back then; hell, I went to most all Rice games. I stopped cold turkey when I got NBA season tickets. Duncan shot very well, all his career. High 50s all years. He was a stud, but Joe Smith was considered the better prospect.

<blockQUOTE>Originally posted by TheFreak
The players that come into the league now are not as NBA-ready as they were in the past, therefore the NBA is having to develop their own players before they can contribute. What's better about that? </blockQUOTE>My belief is this is the way it should be, just like baseball. I think it makes the league better for them to get hold of the stud prospects at earlier and earlier ages. That does not make the drafts weaker...just makes for less "SURE THINGS" like a 4yr Duncan vs a 2yr Joe Smith.

 

I don't think that teams emulating what works is a new concept though. What ALWAYS works is taking the best players when they're available. The problem is the players in the draft aren't that good anymore, and it's more of a crapshoot. Teams have always tried to copy what works, that's not new.

Teams are looking for potential more now because that's all there is. When the draft is full of underclassmen, high schoolers, and foreigners, it's ALL potential. There are very few proven commodities to choose from. Teams have no choice.

Okay, but if teams are just looking for potential, potential, potential, why would the off-the-court stuff matter? Does anyone think that if Shaq had punched a teammate, he would've fallen to the 7th pick? Hell no. Same with Duncan, Akeem, whoever. The thing is Griffin was in such a weak draft, and he wasn't the clear-cut best player in the draft, so stupid stuff may have made him drop. However, had he been clearly better than the first six, it wouldn't have mattered.

 

Cool. College ain't that bad, I'm starting to get into it a little. Of course it would be better if all the good players didn't skip it.

But it DOES make the drafts weaker. You need college to weed out the weaklings, and to make the good ones more polished. This is what makes a good draft. I don't see how you can say that guys skipping college actually makes a draft BETTER. Huh? How? How does it make the league better to get these guys earlier? How can you say the league wouldn't be better if these SAME guys got a little seasoning before coming into the league, thus being able to contribute right away, instead of languishing on the bench or learning ON THE COURT? How does that make the league BETTER to have guys learning the game on the job, rather than already knowing how to play?

Good discussion guys, by the way.

 

Gino only got to the rim once? He scored atleast 4-5 times on drives where a man was right with him as he was near the basket. And one time Ben Wallace, the defensive player of the year was right on him and Gino switched hands and scored right in his face. I guess cause hes 25, can't shoot, and is younger than Pierce, he will be a cheaper version of Derek Anderson huh? Give the man a little credit, his jumper is weak, but he proved he can drive against solid NBA players..like when he hung in the air and scored on finley underneath the basket in the first quarter...how about that one?

Look Manu isn't any Kobe, but give the man credit for being able to drive on NBA defenders....and where was Pierce at the end of the game? He did not do much accept for those desperation 3 pointers that meant nothing in the end. Why even compare Pierce with Manu? No one is claming Manu to be KOBE, but he seems like a solid player who will only improve with Duncan and the Spurs. And as of now I say he is still a better prospect at 25 years old then Nachbar.

 

According to Reuters, Ginobili injured his right leg in the first half of the semi-final against Germany. Didn't say how badly, but said he might miss the final. He had 9pts. in 15 minutes. www.reuters.com