This is more like a rant, but there's nothing much to post these days so I might as well post some **** and explain a little bit the way I've been seing things right now, especially becuase my view/perspective changed a little bit the past few weeks. Weaver is still very imcompetent at what he is doing
Xatticus wrote:You can call yourself whatever you want to. Does anyone throw a tizzy when someone introduces themselves as a grandmaster of funk?
For what it's worth, FIBA is older than the NBA. The NBA is an entertainment company with its own rules that happens to employ basketball players. It's a cartel of rich dudes that use a mutated version of an internationally recognized sport in an attempt to carve out a place in the US (and world) market(s) for professional sports entertainment. It exists independently of all basketball governing bodies (including US basketball), so it doesn't have a legitimate claim to anything beyond its limited scope.
That is one of my all time favorite posts in RealGM. That guy is so correct. NBA Basketball and Fiba Basketball are very different, they're pretty much different games.
I am quoting that, to explain why there are a lot of good basketball players, who don't make it in the NBA (imo). There are a lot of good/great spanish basketball players for example, and they only play a few seasons in the NBA and they play most of their career in Europe, but they have a lot of international success, including beating USA National team.
The best players in the world play in the NBA, but the NBA does not have the best 450 ( or 510) players in the world. A lot of good European/South American/Asian/Australian/etc players could be in the NBA, they're better than 3rd stringers or 2 way players, however, they kinda learned how to play a different game while North America players, learn how to play NBA Basketball since they're little kids (at least the vast majority of them), so it makes more sense to pay guys who do not need to adapt too much to play if they're needed, and/or can develop easier than foreign players, who would have to adapt to a different game and a different culture, so the chance of failure is a lot higher.
Garuba is a Spanish player, whom learn how to play the game in Real Madrid lower categories. Hell, he was a soccer player, and because he was a tall kid he started playing Basketball.
If you ever watched him play, you know he is a good basketball player. He is not super talented/skilled, but he is a smart kid who understand the game, and do all the little things to help your team win. Despite of being only 21 yo, he is a starter and a important piece for the World Champions National Team, Spain.
However, he still have work to do to learn how to play in the NBA, and his ceiling is not that high, he is a NBA caliber player tho, and if he decide to stay in the NBA he will have a long career (imo). He is a good defender and rebounder, he is just not a gifted offensive player, but he can do the basics.
So, no, he was never OKC's 18th best player, and he would never be Detroit's 15th best player. He will be someone's 3rd-4th big in a year or 2. There is a 90%+ chance he will be a better player than Wiseman and Bagley. Those guys have a much higher ceiling, becuase they're much more physically gifted and skilled than Garuba, however, they do not understand the game the way Garuba does.
I understand why Weaver is trying to gamble on guys like Wiseman/Bagley/Josh Jackson/Diallo etc etc etc. We are too young, and we're not going anywhere, so guys like Garuba and Livers (fwiw), are not super important for us, they're more important for a team trying to win and needing cheap high bbiq depth.
I was listening to something a few days ago (I don't remember what), and one thing got to me. In 5 years, our guys will be entering their primes, they'll be 26-27-28 yo. holy ****, 5 years. I went to check the top 30 RPM WIN list (a way to see how impactful a player is in terms of helping his team to win games, it's not perfect,but for a quick research it is good enough), and only 2 guys are young and inexperienced, Franz Wagner and Evan Mobley. There are a few other young guys in that list, but they've been in the league for a while (5-6 seasons, like Luka or Tatum for example).
So, we're still a couple of years away from being a couple of years away. We are going to be bad for a while. So to add a guy like Wiseman, whom probably will be in China in a couple of years, might make more sense than add a guy like Garuba, whom, 90% will have a much better basketball career than Wiseman, but he will not make much of a difference right now. But that 0.001% chance of Wiseman being an all star, is more important than a guy who would help us win 3-5 more (meaningless) games right now.
However, I do think Garuba and Stew could be an excellent bench duo in a couple of years and we should give Garuba a shot instead of Wiseman and Bagley, but like I said, I understand why we are not going to give him a shot.
