Where would rookie Alonzo Mourning rank today?

[eminence]

It is very rare for a rookie to make a positive contribution, let alone a Top 5 type contribution. Even if he posted 20/10, they make a good amount of mistakes simply because it's their first year in the league. I would think he makes an All NBA team but upon closer analysis, you'll realize he has someways to go before making a superstar impact.

Think Magic historically is the only one who'd have a Top 5 effect, but really Magic had a unusual combination of talents/skillsets that the league hadn't seen up till that point (and wouldn't see up until LeBron).

Wait you think Magic is the only rookie who's been a top 5 player?

Yeah this is my bad. My history is pretty weak. There's Bird, Kareem or Russell as well. The earlier eras have more of these with Unseld and Baylor. There's also Robinson's rare case of starting at, what, 24? Otherwise, It's still typically reserved for a class of players that Mourning never reached in his career.

I think your point still stands. Rookies are very very rarely top 5 caliber players and it has become rarer as the league evolved. Duncan is the only one who even has an argument in my lifetime (1993 onwards).

[Chicago76]

Wait you think Magic is the only rookie who's been a top 5 player?

Yeah this is my bad. My history is pretty weak. There's Bird, Kareem or Russell as well. The earlier eras have more of these with Unseld and Baylor. There's also Robinson's rare case of starting at, what, 24? Otherwise, It's still typically reserved for a class of players that Mourning never reached in his career.

I think your point still stands. Rookies are very very rarely top 5 caliber players and it has become rarer as the league evolved. Duncan is the only one who even has an argument in my lifetime (1993 onwards).

Mourning is definitely not a top 5 impact type guy as a rookie at any point in the modern era. I do think the evolution of the league has much less to do with it than the nature of the college game though. Anyone with a hint of the potential for top 5 impact is gone after a year (two tops). This impacts not only how ready a rookie is to make an impact directly, but it also indirectly influences the quality of the experience they get in college. The competitive environment would look very different if Davis stayed at UK 4 years, Drummond at UConn for 4 years, Towns to Syracuse/Mich State rather than UK because Davis is still there...all going head to head in the tournament. 1993 happened to be when we began seeing the mass exodus of NCAA talent with early entry.

Rookies from the shot clock era who might have an argument based upon the rise and decline of top talent filling various roles over the last 6 seasons in the league.

Bigs: Duncan, Shaq, Robinson, Olajuwon. Much easier argument for these guys because the league has been consistently weak inside. They might not be top 5 impact guys immediately league wide, but they are a marked improvement over 4/5 play in the league today.

Do a bit of everything offensive guys at the 1-3 spots: Jordan, Bird, Magic. A tougher argument for last season based upon the emergence of Westbrook+current status of James and Curry. They would have legit top 5 claims if they were rookies in select years between Westbrook's rise and the declines of Wade/Bryant.

All of these guys were full season 28+mpg, 3+BPM, 20+PER guys. The only other rookies from the shot clock era meeting these criteria were Cummings, Webber, Paul, Griffin. All excellent rookies but a cut below the 7 above.

[KobesScarf]

Wait you think Magic is the only rookie who's been a top 5 player?

Yeah this is my bad. My history is pretty weak. There's Bird, Kareem or Russell as well. The earlier eras have more of these with Unseld and Baylor. There's also Robinson's rare case of starting at, what, 24? Otherwise, It's still typically reserved for a class of players that Mourning never reached in his career.

I think your point still stands. Rookies are very very rarely top 5 caliber players and it has become rarer as the league evolved. Duncan is the only one who even has an argument in my lifetime (1993 onwards).

It has nothing to do with evolution its simply players jump to the NBA earlier

[eminence]

Yeah this is my bad. My history is pretty weak. There's Bird, Kareem or Russell as well. The earlier eras have more of these with Unseld and Baylor. There's also Robinson's rare case of starting at, what, 24? Otherwise, It's still typically reserved for a class of players that Mourning never reached in his career.

I think your point still stands. Rookies are very very rarely top 5 caliber players and it has become rarer as the league evolved. Duncan is the only one who even has an argument in my lifetime (1993 onwards).

It has nothing to do with evolution its simply players jump to the NBA earlier

Players jumping to the NBA earlier is a great example of the league evolving...

[KobesScarf]

I think your point still stands. Rookies are very very rarely top 5 caliber players and it has become rarer as the league evolved. Duncan is the only one who even has an argument in my lifetime (1993 onwards).

It has nothing to do with evolution its simply players jump to the NBA earlier

Players jumping to the NBA earlier is a great example of the league evolving...

If any thing that is an example of devolving.

[eminence]

Mourning is definitely not a top 5 impact type guy as a rookie at any point in the modern era. I do think the evolution of the league has much less to do with it than the nature of the college game though. Anyone with a hint of the potential for top 5 impact is gone after a year (two tops). This impacts not only how ready a rookie is to make an impact directly, but it also indirectly influences the quality of the experience they get in college. The competitive environment would look very different if Davis stayed at UK 4 years, Drummond at UConn for 4 years, Towns to Syracuse/Mich State rather than UK because Davis is still there...all going head to head in the tournament. 1993 happened to be when we began seeing the mass exodus of NCAA talent with early entry.

Rookies from the shot clock era who might have an argument based upon the rise and decline of top talent filling various roles over the last 6 seasons in the league.

Bigs: Duncan, Shaq, Robinson, Olajuwon. Much easier argument for these guys because the league has been consistently weak inside. They might not be top 5 impact guys immediately league wide, but they are a marked improvement over 4/5 play in the league today.

Do a bit of everything offensive guys at the 1-3 spots: Jordan, Bird, Magic. A tougher argument for last season based upon the emergence of Westbrook+current status of James and Curry. They would have legit top 5 claims if they were rookies in select years between Westbrook's rise and the declines of Wade/Bryant.

All of these guys were full season 28+mpg, 3+BPM, 20+PER guys. The only other rookies from the shot clock era meeting these criteria were Cummings, Webber, Paul, Griffin. All excellent rookies but a cut below the 7 above.

I think you meant 3pt era (not shot clock), but yeah you've nailed the guys who'd have serious arguments, and even then only in select seasons for most of them.

[eminence]

It has nothing to do with evolution its simply players jump to the NBA earlier

Players jumping to the NBA earlier is a great example of the league evolving...

If any thing that is an example of devolving.

Evolution isn't really directional.

The word devolving has essentially no meaning. (apart from the break up into smaller parts bit)

[KobesScarf]

Players jumping to the NBA earlier is a great example of the league evolving...

If any thing that is an example of devolving.

Evolution isn't really directional.

The word devolving has essentially no meaning. (apart from the break up into smaller parts bit)

Either way rookies don't come in to the NBA as ready because they don't spend 4 years in college anymore. That is a direct cause and effect nothing to do with "evolution".