Official '14 NCAA Tournament Thread

[Thomas-Panda-Saxby]

Good bye kansas!!#

 

[elcheato]

March Madness shows that Andrew Wiggins & Jabari Parker are destined to fail. MY COLUMN:

 

[Mexi]

College is so bad lel

 

[elcheato]

Apparently I was only half kidding when I said Dayton would make the final 4.

 

[Teagz]

That half of the South region was bound to get busted.

 

[jonathanlambert33]

It's like people haven't been watching Wiggins. "He made some good moves but he couldn't finish at the rim."

That's been Wiggins all year. He's still going to be a great player, but he's a project.

 

[Mexi]

What 19 year old isnt a project?

 

[jonathanlambert33]

What 19 year old isnt a project?

That's not what I meant. Every season in the draft fans or experts want to put labels on guys. This player is NBA ready, this player is a project, and maybe there are guys that are 50/50. He isn't NBA ready yet. He will struggle early in his career, and I mean really struggle I think. He'll probably still average like 15 a game, and people like you will probably fall head over heels for him because of his highlights, but he won't help his team win games right away. But by the time he gets that second contract he'll be a stud in the league, the skill and technique is there but he's got a ton of work to do, but the work he needs to put in are on skills that he will improve.

 

[Giantmetfan07]

It's like people haven't been watching Wiggins. "He made some good moves but he couldn't finish at the rim."

That's been Wiggins all year. He's still going to be a great player, but he's a project.

 
the people who don't watch but "listen" to the experts who say these kids can impact in the NBA right away. 

 

[elcheato]

This talk of the younger players making the NBA worse bothers me. Derek Fisher at 39 makes the NBA worse, not younger players

 

[elcheato]

Chad Ford is a dope

 

[jonathanlambert33]

the people who don't watch but "listen" to the experts who say these kids can impact in the NBA right away.

I'm not sure how to word it, but these experts are all over the place.

For example, in Chad Ford's player evaluations he says Wiggins has an "excellent jump shot and that he has an aggressive scoring mentality." In another article, he goes in the opposite direction stating that Wiggins has a "solid jump shot," then mentions that Wiggins is only shooting 35% on his jumpers. So which is it? Is he excellent, or solid? Where does 35% fit in there? And does he have an aggressive scoring mentality? I think we saw today that's not the case either.

 

[elcheato]

Chad Ford's most popular articles right now are his "Tank Rank" series articles. Naturally, there is no point to have a Tank Rank series if the draft isn't considered to be great. He has to talk it up to a level that it may not be at. This is the problem with "experts", their evaluations and conflicts of interest.
 
National experts don't watch as many games as say a blogger would either. That's where you'll find the most accurate evaluations.

 

[elcheato]

https://twitter.com/DanWoikeSports/status/447811174352969729
 
Also, this is what I ALWAYS preach, in every sport. You're not going to develop better in college than you would in the NBA. College coaches don't care about your progression. Who other than Damian Lillard has developed and become a star as an upperclassman in college recently?

 

[jonathanlambert33]

Chad Ford's most popular articles right now are his "Tank Rank" series articles. Naturally, there is no point to have a Tank Rank series if the draft isn't considered to be great. He has to talk it up to a level that it may not be at. This is the problem with "experts", their evaluations and conflicts of interest.
 
National experts don't watch as many games as say a blogger would either. That's where you'll find the most accurate evaluations.

Agreed 100%. These "experts" are nothing more than puppets. Problem is, who gets read? People buy into these experts from ESPN and other huge national sports companies more than anyone else. I mean I hate to sound like I'm shitting on Wiggins, because I still think he'll be a stud and a multiple time All-Star, but he'll never be a LeBron or Durant, and that's what some people seem to think he is. More of a Paul George/Luol Deng type of SF.

 

[jonathanlambert33]

https://twitter.com/DanWoikeSports/status/447811174352969729
 
Also, this is what I ALWAYS preach, in every sport. You're not going to develop better in college than you would in the NBA. College coaches don't care about your progression. Who other than Damian Lillard has developed and become a star as an upperclassman in college recently?

I've disagreed with you on this a number of times, but after watching as much as of Wiggins as I have, I now agree with you. He's made improvements on his natural skills, but the coachable things, like coming off screens, he's still doing it the same way he did when he first got to Kansas. You will start to see improvement there by the NBA All-Star break next season.

 

[Mexi]

Hopefully he has a more consistent jumper than paul

 

[jonathanlambert33]

Hopefully he has a more consistent jumper than paul

George shot 33% from mid-range his 2nd season in the NBA (I say second season because he only took one midrange shot a game his rookie year and hit them at 50%), I'd actually be pretty surprised if Wiggins shot much better than that.

 

[elcheato]

I've disagreed with you on this a number of times, but after watching as much as of Wiggins as I have, I now agree with you. He's made improvements on his natural skills, but the coachable things, like coming off screens, he's still doing it the same way he did when he first got to Kansas. You will start to see improvement there by the NBA All-Star break next season.

I understand why so many immediately believe that staying in college will help your game, and progress. People love to say it on national TV. But when you look deeper, it becomes pretty clear. The coaching in the NBA is far superior, there are more assistants, sometimes even coaches specifically attached to a player to improve parts of his game. College coaches are worried about winning above all else. They aren't worried about developing weaknesses of a top prospect, because they're already good enough to impact a game with their strengths. Short season, limited practice time available in college, etc.. If you want to improve as a player, it's more likely to happen with an NBA team who just risked their future on you.

 

[jonathanlambert33]

It just comes down to the fact that you have these "one and done" guys that go to these big storied universities, and their coaches have to win to keep their jobs. It's not like that in the NBA, where it's known that these coaches job is to develop the young talent on the team.

My Pelicans are a good example. Pelicans may not have lived up to expectations, but Anthony Davis is averaging something like 28 and 12 in the month of March, and Monty Williams will keep his job. If you gave the Pelicans the exact same record, but Anthony Davs was struggling do you think Monty would still be guaranteed his job? Doubt it.

It's also why I think you have these small schools who have these highly sought after coaches who don't want to leave. They want to actually coach and teach there players, not have guys come in for one season and leave. If an NBA team offered Shaka Smart a job, and he felt comfortable with that team, I think he'd take it.