Giannis v George

[paulpressey25]

Those that were thrust into the rotation during their rookie year struggled and didn't improve.

For this discussion, I keep going back to Glenn Robinson. Dunleavy and then Chris Ford played him 37, 39, 39 and 41 mpg his first four years. There was a lot of internal strife in the locker-room from guys on the team because Big Dog never got pulled nor was taught accountability.

Then Karl arrived in 98-99 and dialed his minutes back to 33mpg. Karl basically would give him the hook when he screwed up, and I think Big Dog became a better player because of it.

I think you guys are both right. Giannis does need minutes and they will help him. At the same time, he needs to be sat when he makes mistakes, bad fouls and turnovers.

[jtf150]

What ever happened to LRMAM? I know he left as a free agent, but did anyone pick him up?

[ReasonablySober]

I've never said that Giannis neads to get DNP-CD's. But there is no reason for him to be out there 20 minutes a night. Give him spot duty in blowouts or some time at end of the 1st and 3rd.

[randy84]

On my side we have the success of Ilyasova, Sanders, Harris and likely Henson. Also on my side is the lack of development, and eventual regression, from Jennings and LRMAM.

The guys who sat their first year developed into legit, productive basketball players. Those that were thrust into the rotation during their rookie year struggled and didn't improve.

What about guys like Glenn Robinson and Ray Allen. They logged 30 mins a game in their rookie years and turned out pretty well. Bogut was close to 30 mins.

Brandon Jennings actually improved from his rookie year all the way up until his third year.

Ersan is a bad example because he actually went overseas to get playing time.

[LUKE23]

It also depends on the prospect. Maybe Jennings pouts like a little girl if he doesn't get minutes right away and it impacts his development. I think a ton of it has to do with the players mentality. Jennings was/is a diva. Guys like Henson/Giannis seem to take things in stride. All this said, I want to see Giannis play.

[CanadaBucks]

What ever happened to LRMAM? I know he left as a free agent, but did anyone pick him up?

He actually got traded to Sacramento for two 2nd rounders. He had a bit of knee trouble early but he has now replaced fellow ex-Buck John Salmons as the starting SF. He is averaging 4.3/2.4/1.6 in 19.5 mpg.

[Ayt]

On my side we have the success of Ilyasova, Sanders, Harris and likely Henson. Also on my side is the lack of development, and eventual regression, from Jennings and LRMAM.

The guys who sat their first year developed into legit, productive basketball players. Those that were thrust into the rotation during their rookie year struggled and didn't improve.

Do you hold the same view for rookies in general, or just for the Bucks?

I know we are both enormous AD fans. Do you think he would have taken the major jump forward from year 1 to year 2 if he had sat on the bench last year and only played 500-800 or so minutes on the season (as a non-starter with plenty of garbage time, like Tobes and Henson)? Davis played 1846 (64 G, 60 GS last year).

[theFireBlanket]

On my side we have the success of Ilyasova, Sanders, Harris and likely Henson. Also on my side is the lack of development, and eventual regression, from Jennings and LRMAM.

The guys who sat their first year developed into legit, productive basketball players. Those that were thrust into the rotation during their rookie year struggled and didn't improve.

Jennings and LRMAM were arguably getting early burn in an inferior system, under a lesser coaching staff. And as PP pointed out in his response, they weren't really held accountable for their mistakes.

The equation can't be as simple as playing time vs watching from the bench determines player development. Ersan logged plenty of minutes in Europe; that's where he improved.

[El Duderino]

You're assuming players don't know their weaknesses without playing in actual games? Because I find that hard to believe.

I find it really hard to believe that you think more difficult competition doesn't encourage growth.

I think you are obviously wrong in assuming that players know their weaknesses against superior competition that they haven't faced. There is a big step up from inferior competition to the NBA. Go to moves that work against scrubs could very well get your nowhere in the NBA. The only way to learn is through competition.

Giannis was playing against 2nd tier Greek league talent. There are tons of things that work against those guys that will flat out not work in the NBA, and the only way he's really going to know what to remove, what to refine, and what he needs to add is by playing against NBA players.

This is the biggest factor for me.

Giannis isn't some guy who has spent his whole time growing up playing basketball, played then through high school, on AAU teams in summers, and finally played a year or two in college. He got a number of intriguing raw skills, but he's also not faced a lot of strong competition. So while i'd like to see him get 17-20 minutes per game, i can live without exactly that many minutes, but i don't like seeing him get lots of DNP's and mainly only garbage time minutes when he does get on the court.

Hopefully if the team just keep losing and losing, Hammond will tell Drew that Giannis has to get at the very least around 10 minutes a game. Not sit 3-4 games in a row and finally get on the court only during a blowout. As raw as he is, i'm not worried that minutes like that will lead to extra winning.

[ReasonablySober]

On my side we have the success of Ilyasova, Sanders, Harris and likely Henson. Also on my side is the lack of development, and eventual regression, from Jennings and LRMAM.

The guys who sat their first year developed into legit, productive basketball players. Those that were thrust into the rotation during their rookie year struggled and didn't improve.

Do you hold the same view for rookies in general, or just for the Bucks?

Nope, every player is different. But the Bucks have a history of taking young, underdeveloped guys in the draft. The ones that have succeeded are the ones that sat. Jennings and LRMAM bombed.

[ReasonablySober]

And again, I don't like seeing DNP-CD's. They should still be getting Giannis out there, but he doesn't have to log 1600 minutes this season either.

[Ayt]

On my side we have the success of Ilyasova, Sanders, Harris and likely Henson. Also on my side is the lack of development, and eventual regression, from Jennings and LRMAM.

The guys who sat their first year developed into legit, productive basketball players. Those that were thrust into the rotation during their rookie year struggled and didn't improve.

Do you hold the same view for rookies in general, or just for the Bucks?

Nope, every player is different. But the Bucks have a history of taking young, underdeveloped guys in the draft. The ones that have succeeded are the ones that sat. Jennings and LRMAM bombed.

So basically your view is based on a completely meaningless small sample.

[ekpecNurollduh]

Odds are against every unproven guy to be as good as George, so this was easy to answer "doubtful" even though I like him. The better question: What is the probability Giannis develops into a top 10 nba player at some point in his career? (0%, 10%, 20%, 30%, 40%, 50%, 60%, 70%, 80%, 90%, 100%)

[ReasonablySober]

So basically your view is based on a completely meaningless small sample.

I've qualified my position on this numerous times. Playing time over the course of a rookie season could be completely meaningless.

[Ayt]

You're assuming players don't know their weaknesses without playing in actual games? Because I find that hard to believe.

I find it really hard to believe that you think more difficult competition doesn't encourage growth.

I think you are obviously wrong in assuming that players know their weaknesses against superior competition that they haven't faced. There is a big step up from inferior competition to the NBA. Go to moves that work against scrubs could very well get your nowhere in the NBA. The only way to learn is through competition.

Giannis was playing against 2nd tier Greek league talent. There are tons of things that work against those guys that will flat out not work in the NBA, and the only way he's really going to know what to remove, what to refine, and what he needs to add is by playing against NBA players.

This is the biggest factor for me.

Giannis isn't some guy who has spent his whole time growing up playing basketball, played then through high school, on AAU teams in summers, and finally played a year or two in college. He got a number of intriguing raw skills, but he's also not faced a lot of strong competition. So while i'd like to see him get 17-20 minutes per game, i can live without exactly that many minutes, but i don't like seeing him get lots of DNP's and mainly only garbage time minutes when he does get on the court.

Hopefully if the team just keep losing and losing, Hammond will tell Drew that Giannis has to get at the very least around 10 minutes a game. Not sit 3-4 games in a row and finally get on the court only during a blowout. As raw as he is, i'm not worried that minutes like that will lead to extra winning.

I think garbage time minutes are potentially more detrimental than beneficial for a high quality young player. The level of play in an NBA game with, say, 4 minutes left with a team up 20 (or down, in our case) is very low. It is basically a pickup game where neither team gives a **** about the outcome. That is a terrible environment in which to gain experience. I'd rather Giannis not even play in those situations.

The best experience comes from minutes against NBA players who are actually competing because the game is in the balance. That can be early in the 1st or late in the 4th. All that I care about is that the minutes come when the game is very much still up in the air.

[El Duderino]

I've never said that Giannis neads to get DNP-CD's. But there is no reason for him to be out there 20 minutes a night. Give him spot duty in blowouts or some time at end of the 1st and 3rd.

There is no reason to not give him minutes every game.

For guys like Sanders, Henson, and Harris, at least those Bucks teams had enough decent players to delude themselves into thinking winning right now should be priority number one because they were likely to win around 35-40 games.

This team is 2-8 and bound to be lucky to reach just 25-27 wins. If Hammond had any sack to use his authority, he'd tell Drew that Giannis needs to get minutes every game, regardless if it's just 10-15 minutes.

If while getting those minutes, he looks so overmatched and it's affecting his confidence, then fine cut back the minutes. If not, there is zero reason for the kid to not get some burn nearly every game.

[Ayt]

So basically your view is based on a completely meaningless small sample.

I've qualified my position on this numerous times. Playing time over the course of a rookie season could be completely meaningless.

Right. But it is based on just a handful of players over a very short period of time. Look at the history of the league.

What happened with Baddy, Ersan, LRMAM, Sanders, etc. is irrelevant.

[theFireBlanket]

I think garbage time minutes are potentially more detrimental than beneficial for a high quality young player. The level of play in an NBA game with, say, 4 minutes left with a team up 20 (or down, in our case) is very low. It is basically a pickup game where neither team gives a **** about the outcome. That is a terrible environment in which to gain experience. I'd rather Giannis not even play in those situations.

The best experience comes from minutes against NBA players who are actually competing because the game is in the balance. That can be early in the 1st or late in the 4th. All that I care about is that the minutes come when the game is very much still up in the air.

Agreed. I'm glad Drew hasn't really put him in those situations so far.

[ReasonablySober]

Right. But it is based on just a handful of players over a very short period of time. Look at the history of the league.

****. Okay, last post.

Here is a list of rookies ages 18-19 to play 20 plus minutes a night.

Some success stories, right?

The list of players who never advanced or never amounted to anything more than bench fodder is a hell of a lot larger. That's the history of the league.

[El Duderino]

On my side we have the success of Ilyasova, Sanders, Harris and likely Henson. Also on my side is the lack of development, and eventual regression, from Jennings and LRMAM.

The guys who sat their first year developed into legit, productive basketball players. Those that were thrust into the rotation during their rookie year struggled and didn't improve.

Do you hold the same view for rookies in general, or just for the Bucks?

Nope, every player is different. But the Bucks have a history of taking young, underdeveloped guys in the draft. The ones that have succeeded are the ones that sat. Jennings and LRMAM bombed.

Moute didn't "bomb" as you put it. He was a second round pick with a pretty limited skillset that was very unlikely to ever expand much beyond where he's reached. Him sitting as a rookies wasn't going to make Luc develop a jump shot which he's spent six NBA seasons and offseasons trying to develop, but never has happened and never will happen.

As for Jennings, it's fairly rare to teach a PG how to have court vision, instincts, and high basketball IQ. More than any position, good NBA point guards are more born than developed. I just have a real hard time buying that after years of observing Jennings, that had he played limited minutes as a rookie instead of starting, that now he'd be a much different or better player. Brandon hasn't exactly ever shown himself to be a type of athlete who can be coached into being a different player than he is at his core.