Which aspect do you think is more important when gaging a players potential, his age or the amount of years he is been in the league.
Example, a 25-27 year old rookie or a 23-25 year old, 3 year NBA vet.
Age vs Years in the League, when measuring potential.
Moderators: Clyde Frazier, Doctor MJ, trex_8063, penbeast0, PaulieWal
Age vs Years in the League, when measuring potential.
-
T-Spot
- Veteran
- Posts: 2,604
- And1: 1
- Joined: Jan 30, 2008
Re: Age vs Years in the League, when measuring potential.
-
shawngoat23
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 4,622
- And1: 287
- Joined: Apr 17, 2008
Re: Age vs Years in the League, when measuring potential.
They're equally important. Of course, one should consider other aspects such as athleticism and skillset, as well as when players began basketball (as in Hakeem's case). However, in general, I like to consider Age + Years in League, thereby pretty much weighing them equally.
If I had to go with one, I'll say years in the league because the jump from rookie year to the second year might be especially pronounced.
If I had to go with one, I'll say years in the league because the jump from rookie year to the second year might be especially pronounced.
penbeast0 wrote:Yes, he did. And as a mod, I can't even put him on ignore . . . sigh.
Re: Age vs Years in the League, when measuring potential.
-
Wade3Iverson
- Head Coach
- Posts: 6,816
- And1: 2
- Joined: Dec 13, 2005
Re: Age vs Years in the League, when measuring potential.
TrueLA did some sort of analysis which was very good, which (I believe) concluded that a players career more strongly follows time on the court as opposed to age.
The best engine in the world is the vagina -- started with one finger, self-lubricating, takes any size piston and changes it's own oil every month. Pitty it's so temperamental