RealGM

Magic, Ralph Sampson, Ewing, David Robinson, Shaq, Webber, Duncan, Lebron, Bogut, Oden, Rose, Wall, Wiggins, Wemby...

In the last 50 years their has only been 13 times the media and experts have called a prospected so talented that they can change a franchise before even playing an NBA game.

Are Boozer, Peterson, and/or Dybantsa a legit gen talent like Shaq and Lebron, or just very good prospect like Blake Griffin, Flagg, or Larry Johnson?

None of these guys even approach Cooper as far as I can tell. It's more like a typical draft such as 2021 or 2022. I mean there ain't no obvious guy like Coop, Wemby, etc.

Peterson is franchise changing prospect. Not sure I would call him generational tho. Unfortunately he won't really have opportunities to showcase this due to injury but also the Kansas system holding him back. But he's gonna be an MVP caliber player by year 4 is my prediction

No. I consider a generational prospect to be one of the best prospects of a decade and I don't see anyone in this draft better than Wemby/Flagg/Zion.

I think some of these prospects are in the Edwards, Cade, Scoot, Miller tier though. If they hit their 90%+ outcomes then they can be All-NBA players.

Peterson is skilled but hes pretty overhyped when making statements like best guard prospect since Kobe Bryant. Brandon Roy 2.0?

Dybantsa plays exactly like Rj Barrett except hes slightly taller longer and uses bigger strides attacking the basket. He has less ball skills than Ace Bailey.

Cam Boozer i believe will be productive nba player. Skilled big with good nose for the ball. High floor but not sure exactly what his nba ceiling is. Kevin love is a pretty good barometer.

No. If Cam was 7 foot or had Flagg’s athleticism, then I would say yes. But I think there are just too many questions about his fit in the NBA (which is why he’s not even really being discussed as a possible #1 pick, most view him at 3).

Peterson and AJ are guys you’d see at the top of a good draft. But no I wouldn’t view them close to generational prospects

peZt wrote:Peterson is franchise changing prospect. Not sure I would call him generational tho. Unfortunately he won't really have opportunities to showcase this due to injury but also the Kansas system holding him back. But he's gonna be an MVP caliber player by year 4 is my prediction

If you are an MVP, then you are a gen talent.

peZt wrote:Peterson is franchise changing prospect. Not sure I would call him generational tho. Unfortunately he won't really have opportunities to showcase this due to injury but also the Kansas system holding him back. But he's gonna be an MVP caliber player by year 4 is my prediction

When he plays he’s averaging 21/3/3 how is the system holding him back?

atlantabbq99 wrote:

peZt wrote:Peterson is franchise changing prospect. Not sure I would call him generational tho. Unfortunately he won't really have opportunities to showcase this due to injury but also the Kansas system holding him back. But he's gonna be an MVP caliber player by year 4 is my prediction

If you are an MVP, then you are a gen talent.

Then we have completely different takes on what generational talent means. By definition, those should only come around once everey 10 years or so. Otherwise no sense in calling them generational talent

peZt wrote:

atlantabbq99 wrote:

peZt wrote:Peterson is franchise changing prospect. Not sure I would call him generational tho. Unfortunately he won't really have opportunities to showcase this due to injury but also the Kansas system holding him back. But he's gonna be an MVP caliber player by year 4 is my prediction

If you are an MVP, then you are a gen talent.

Then we have completely different takes on what generational talent means. By definition, those should only come around once everey 10 years or so. Otherwise no sense in calling them generational talent

Which MVP's are coming around every draft cycle? Is there a Harden or Russ in every Draft? Because AFAICT those are the worst MVPs in the last few decades and they were pretty good. Maybe DRose is the least generational but he was cut down by injury so who knows.

By the definition of one guy on average per decade, then the only generational players would be Jokic/Steph/LeBron since 2000? Is that the bar here?

Of course nobody saw Steph or Jokic as "Generational Prospects" or even potential MVPs.

In the last decade 7 players have won MVP (SGA, Jokic, Embiid, Giannis, Harden, Westbrook, Curry), in the last 20 years you can add Durant, LeBron, Rose, Bryant, Dirk, and Nash. So, every decade, 6-7 players win MVP awards. Maybe a generational player is simply someone who wins multiple? So that would take out Embiid, Harden, Westbrook, Durant, Kobe, SGA (with the caveat that he seems pretty likely to get another) and Dirk? So, our generational players would be maybe SGA, Jokic, Giannis, Curry, Lebron, and Nash (+ add Duncan). Interestingly, only two of those guys went first (LeBron, Duncan) and no multi-time MVP has gone first since 2003.

I would consider generational prospects to be players we can reasonably expect are *more likely than not* to win an MVP in their career. To me, that basically narrows us down to (since 2000) LeBron, Durant, Oden, Luka <I know people will argue "no," but there were a lot of us who thought he was this level of prospect>, Zion, Wemby. There are some players you might also argue belong - Yao, Rose, Davis, and Flagg being the major ones, IMO. Of course, not all of those players have won MVPs (assuming Luka and Wemby do a little over half of my list of 'generational prospects' will have).

EvanZ wrote:By the definition of one guy on average per decade, then the only generational players would be Jokic/Steph/LeBron since 2000? Is that the bar here?

Of course nobody saw Steph or Jokic as "Generational Prospects" or even potential MVPs.

Yeah, Curry and even Jokic aren't generational players.

A generational player happens once a generation. Once every 20 to 30 years. Maybe generations are a little smaller in the NBA, like 15 years, but in any case, there have been less than ten in NBA history.

George Mikan
Wilt Chamberlain / Bill Russell (depending how you want to call it)
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
Michael Jordan
LeBron James
Victor Wembanyama / Cooper Flagg (still have to see how this story ends)

babyjax13 wrote:I would consider generational prospects to be players we can reasonably expect are *more likely than not* to win an MVP in their career. To me, that basically narrows us down to (since 2000) LeBron, Durant, Oden, Luka <I know people will argue "no," but there were a lot of us who thought he was this level of prospect>, Zion, Wemby. There are some players you might also argue belong - Yao, Rose, Davis, and Flagg being the major ones, IMO. Of course, not all of those players have won MVPs (assuming Luka and Wemby do a little over half of my list of 'generational prospects' will have).

Cooper Flagg wasn't actually generational. Zion wasn't generational.

Wemby is in their own generation and outclassed them both.

Durant wasn't generational. LeBron was in his own generation.

The only reason to switch it around is because we want to be able to see generational more, but the word has a meaning.

A better word for the type of prospect you're deciding is the "quinquennial talent". A prospect with upside that only comes along every five years.

Some people use generational even more liberally, when they should talk about the "annual talent".

Caneman786 wrote:

EvanZ wrote:By the definition of one guy on average per decade, then the only generational players would be Jokic/Steph/LeBron since 2000? Is that the bar here?

Of course nobody saw Steph or Jokic as "Generational Prospects" or even potential MVPs.

Yeah, Curry and even Jokic aren't generational players.

A generational player happens once a generation. Once every 20 to 30 years. Maybe generations are a little smaller in the NBA, like 15 years, but in any case, there have been less than ten in NBA history.

George Mikan
Wilt Chamberlain / Bill Russell (depending how you want to call it)
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
Michael Jordan
LeBron James
Victor Wembanyama / Cooper Flagg (still have to see how this story ends)

Bro if you don't think Steph and Jokic are generational players I am not sure we're watching the same sport.

Honestly, you can be the dude that takes "generational" as literally once every 20 years, but that's insane in my opinion. But whatever, it's a dumb debate. Steph and Jokic are clearly better than Mikan, Kareem, Bill Russell and Wemby.

Caneman786 wrote:

EvanZ wrote:By the definition of one guy on average per decade, then the only generational players would be Jokic/Steph/LeBron since 2000? Is that the bar here?

Of course nobody saw Steph or Jokic as "Generational Prospects" or even potential MVPs.

Yeah, Curry and even Jokic aren't generational players.

A generational player happens once a generation. Once every 20 to 30 years. Maybe generations are a little smaller in the NBA, like 15 years, but in any case, there have been less than ten in NBA history.

George Mikan
Wilt Chamberlain / Bill Russell (depending how you want to call it)
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
Michael Jordan
LeBron James
Victor Wembanyama / Cooper Flagg (still have to see how this story ends)

babyjax13 wrote:I would consider generational prospects to be players we can reasonably expect are *more likely than not* to win an MVP in their career. To me, that basically narrows us down to (since 2000) LeBron, Durant, Oden, Luka <I know people will argue "no," but there were a lot of us who thought he was this level of prospect>, Zion, Wemby. There are some players you might also argue belong - Yao, Rose, Davis, and Flagg being the major ones, IMO. Of course, not all of those players have won MVPs (assuming Luka and Wemby do a little over half of my list of 'generational prospects' will have).

Cooper Flagg wasn't actually generational. Zion wasn't generational.

Wemby is in their own generation and outclassed them both.

Durant wasn't generational. LeBron was in his own generation.

The only reason to switch it around is because we want to be able to see generational more, but the word has a meaning.

A better word for the type of prospect you're deciding is the "quinquennial talent". A prospect with upside that only comes along every five years.

Some people use generational even more liberally, when they should talk about the "annual talent".

so much slop it's hard to know where to start tbh

I'm taking generational to means once in a generation. A generational prospect is someone like LBJ or Wemby. Maybe you can stretch it to include someone like Luka. A no bull MVP candidate.

Peterson is great but he doesn't even clear Cooper Flagg.

Still worth being excited about this class. Peterson is a more exciting prospect to me than Tatum, Cade, easily Risacher, Anthony Edwards. I'm not thrilled about Dybantsa but I still see him as a potential all-star. Same with Boozer.

No, but I think there are a handful of guys in that tier below.

Also, Yao was a much bigger prospect than a handful of the guys you listed. Certainly more generational than Bogut.

atlantabbq99 wrote:Magic, Ralph Sampson, Ewing, David Robinson, Shaq, Webber, Duncan, Lebron, Bogut, Oden, Rose, Wall, Wiggins, Wemby...

In the last 50 years their has only been 13 times the media and experts have called a prospected so talented that they can change a franchise before even playing an NBA game.

Are Boozer, Peterson, and/or Dybantsa a legit gen talent like Shaq and Lebron, or just very good prospect like Blake Griffin, Flagg, or Larry Johnson?

Flagg wasn't a generational prospect. He was just hyped alot because of his marketability to US audiences. There's a distinction between who the media hypes the most, and who the respected analysts think is a rock solid franchise level prospect.

For instance, KD was seen as a generational/franchise talent. He went second, and was less hyped, because Oden was even more hyped. Luka was seen as a generational talent by pundits who knew what they were talking about, much more than Flagg, but because the first 2 teams were run by morons he was drafted #3. It wss surreal to see it unfold in real time, one of the few instances where the average pundit was smarter than 2 front offices. The analysts I respect were much more excited by Luka than Flagg.

Conversely, some of those guys you named were not that hyped by either the media or analysts, e.g. Bogut.

I would say the most hyped prospects since 97 were Duncan, Lebron, AD, Zion, Luka, KD, Oden, Embiid (before his injury issues were revealed), and Wemby. Flagg had media hype of a similar level to some of these guys, but not from analysts who had doubts about him being an MVP type of player (even though they loved him). Other guys analysts loved included Towns, Rose, and Dwight.

Wiggins was hyped leading into his college season, but he showed so many flaws that people had cooled on him by the draft. He and Jabari were seen as distant 2 & 3 behind Embiid, until Embiid's injury news. Wall was pretty hyped though.

Before 97, the most hyped guys were Shaq, Kareem, Magic, Hakeem, Sampson, Ewing, D.Rob, Webber, etc. Zo actually had alot of hype too. In non-Shaq years he'd have had a good chance of going #1.

One_and_Done wrote:

atlantabbq99 wrote:Magic, Ralph Sampson, Ewing, David Robinson, Shaq, Webber, Duncan, Lebron, Bogut, Oden, Rose, Wall, Wiggins, Wemby...

In the last 50 years their has only been 13 times the media and experts have called a prospected so talented that they can change a franchise before even playing an NBA game.

Are Boozer, Peterson, and/or Dybantsa a legit gen talent like Shaq and Lebron, or just very good prospect like Blake Griffin, Flagg, or Larry Johnson?

Flagg wasn't a generational prospect. He was just hyped alot because of his marketability to US audiences. There's a distinction between who the media hypes the most, and who the respected analysts think is a rock solid franchise level prospect.

For instance, KD was seen as a generational/franchise talent. He went second, and was less hyped, because Oden was even more hyped. Luka was seen as a generational talent by pundits who knew what they were talking about, much more than Flagg, but because the first 2 teams were run by morons he was drafted #3. It wss surreal to see it unfold in real time, one of the few instances where the average pundit was smarter than 2 front offices. The analysts I respect were much more excited by Luka than Flagg.

Conversely, some of those guys you named were not that hyped by either the media or analysts, e.g. Bogut.

I would say the most hyped prospects since 97 were Duncan, Lebron, AD, Zion, Luka, KD, Oden, Embiid (before his injury issues were revealed), and Wemby. Flagg had media hype of a similar level to some of these guys, but not from analysts who had doubts about him being an MVP type of player (even though they loved him). Other guys analysts loved included Towns, Rose, and Dwight.

Wiggins was hyped leading into his college season, but he showed so many flaws that people had cooled on him by the draft. He and Jabari were seen as distant 2 & 3 behind Embiid, until Embiid's injury news. Wall was pretty hyped though.

Before 97, the most hyped guys were Shaq, Kareem, Magic, Hakeem, Sampson, Ewing, D.Rob, Webber, etc. Zo actually had alot of hype too. In non-Shaq years he'd have had a good chance of going #1.

This is misremembering history or not knowing. Embiid was virtually unknown before he got to Kansas. He just outshone Wiggins who had the actual hype that you're talking about.

Flagg had hype going back to like age 14 or 15. The dude was known by the draft community for literally years before he got to Duke. So, I don't know man, brush up.

Yea, saying Embiid is one of the most hyped prospects since 97 is completely inaccurate. The most hype he had was when he went nuts during a filmed workout before his foot injury. I wouldn't say he was in the top 5 most hype of the past 5 years much less since 97.