Greatest player who didn't meet pre draft expectations?

[Jasen777]

Ricky Rubio had a lot of hype, thought to be next pistol pete

Pistol Pete? I did have him as the next Jason Kidd.

But he's obviously not the answer to the OP.

[jmnvcavs]

I’d say Blade Griffin gotta be up there

[jmnvcavs]

Blake griffin is up there I’d say

[LakerLegend]

Was Ewing expected to be as good as Olajuwon or Shaq?

Ewing was on a much higher trajectory (look at his 1990 season) than where he ended up, but he had bad knees.

[bonita_the_frog]

You're welcome, and I'm glad it was fun!

I think your assessment of Ewing, Embiid & Hakeem being something of a linear scale of some sort makes sense...but yeah, Embiid's ref-baiting falls (while we all know his body has severe injury tendency) puts him in an entirely different category as a watch.

Re: best scoring seasons. Well, thing there is that Hakeem's separation is about those playoff performances - and this looms large in other comparisons with other rivals (Robinson, Malone, Barkley, etc.).

Re: average PPG. So I'm going to emphasize a thing here that's a more general thing:

Even before the 3-happy 21st century, PPG generally overrated the value added by a traditional big. The thing that's just always there there as a cost is the entry pass, and that cost goes up the more the defense is focused on disrupting the ability for the offense to complete the entry to the big's sweet spot.

There is also typically a cost to volume post scoring where it tends to disactivate the post scorer's teammates unless he's someone adept at attacking in the post and attacking with the pass at the same time.

This then to say, that actually I think both of these guys probably should have lower career PPG than they do - as in, they'd have been more valuable outside of their prime if they could have a more, say, Mutombo-esque role.

I agree, powerful big men should play the Mutombo role, because it keeps them close to the basket where they can use their strength...
Shaq seemed to be in the the Mutombo role a lot, always standing close to the basket and hardly ever shooting mid-range shots, and Shaq turned out to be the most unstoppable ever!

You can read the details if you're interested but I would say the most interesting wrinkle in our conversation is that their (the 3 active NBA coaches who were architects of the rule) reasons for doing this sure didn't seem to be because they wanted to induce interior volume scoring...but soon enough, NBA coaches started looking to manipulate the defense in a way to allow long (slow) post one-on-one's.

And others might disagree with me, but I'd generally say those coaches were definitely not known for being volume post prone in their strategy, and the fact that by 1987 all 3 were out as coaches and waited at least a season before getting another gig I think hammers home that this was certainly not a case where those coming up with the plan had a secret vision for how to exploit it.

(By contrast, owner Jerry Colangelo architected the signature rule change of the 21st century NBA (mostly kill Illegal Defense) in 2001 with the idea of forcing teams to play faster, and then (with son Bryan as active GM of the Suns) brought in Mike D'Antoni in as an assistant in 2002, promoted him to head in 2003, and then put the entire focus of the 2004 off-season acquiring Nash, which then resulted in the birth of the Pace & Space era in '04-05. Only thing wrong with portraying Jerry as something of an insider trader on this is that he essentially went out to prove that teams who literally did what he said they'd be incentivized to do, would be rewarded.)

2. Michael F-ing Jordan shifted the basketball fan's paradigm (back) toward individual performers. This has been something of an oscillating pendulum in basketball's history. Elite college ball prior to Hank Luisetti (late 30s), and top tier pro ball prior to George Mikan (late 40s), was more about team play than anything that could be recorded in an individual's box score, because teams that spread out their scoring were the ones that dominated.

Julius Erving scored about 29ppg during his 5 seasons in the ABA, including 31.9ppg in his 2nd season, so wasn't he the same as Michael Jordan?
If Erving had begun his career in the NBA, i guess he'd be the reason why individual scoring became a big deal

3. I think NBA coaches are generally more comfortable with trying to optimize everything around their chosen star than college coaches traditionally are, and for understandable reasons: The long-term success of traditional college programs involved a culture propagated from class to class, and teammate to teammate, so a strong foundation of basketball principles can be built with the expectation that will outlast any player. In the pros, the expectation was that you had a player for a decade plus, so if you're not building around his talents as well as you possibly can, what exactly are you doing?

I have to note the important modern exception of the Calipari-style college coach who just tries each year to recruit all the best guys, and then tries to figure out a way to make it all work. I would say though that this archetype basically did not exist until the One & Done rule came in (2006), and Calipari's first mega-talented One & Done Kentucky team was in '09-10.

And if an NBA coach tried to coach like Calipari they'd probably cause problems and the star player would demand a trade or want to become a free agent so they can get the ball more and dominate... even in Indiana that could be true, if a coach stopped Siakam from scoring 20ppg...

[LakerLegend]

Greg Oden should be in this conversation. He showed flashes of brilliance when he was healthy.

[LakerLegend]

This one is a bet of an exception, but Len Bias also.

[TheAlchemist]

Andrew Wiggins was supposed to be what Shai is.

Greg Oden but damn his injuries.

Anthony Davis did meet something, not sure what it was but some sort of requirement.

[FuShengTHEGreat]

Maybe McDyess. In his 6 seasons before his injury he was good though only made an All Star and All NBA once. Then he got hurt and was nowhere close to the same. Alot of these players that come to mind usually got hurt, like Webber, Wall etc.

In Webbers case he hurt his teams even with things unrelated to his physical condition with his poor leadership and attitude.

Right after his rookie season he threw a hissy fit and decided he wasn't going to play for GS anymore due to Nellie, despite having a ridiculously promising talented cast alongside him.

Then in Washington he ran afoul of Wes Unseld as well. The last straw was him getting arrested driving under the influence of Marijuana.

[Uncle Mxy]

I’d say Blade Griffin gotta be up there

What were your expectations for him? He wasn't projected as the second coming of Basketball Jesus like LeBron. If you'd told me in 2009 that Blake Griffin would be a 6-time All-Star and likely HOFer, I wouldn't have thought that was a crazy over/under-estimation.

[Godymas]

Ben Simmons

his issue was always shooting, and somehow he let his inability to shoot break him mentally

it's both the saddest and most hilarious thing to happen in modern history

multiple talking heads said Ben Simmons could be the next LeBron James, how he had the perfect size, athleticism, passing, defense. All he had to do was fix his shooting and offense.

Then in a playoff series he experiences a massive mental breakdown as Trae Young is guarding him at the rim.

I still can't get over it, this guy let Trae Young's defense get into his head

Ever since that pass he has never been the same, it's the funniest and saddest **** in modern history, he's just some dude now that gets passed around

[Bernman]

Derrick Coleman. #1 pick. He was extremely skilled, smooth, & put up some pretty big #'s for a period. But still less than he was capable of, couldn't sustain, & would just coast for periods.

Watch on YouTube

[lambchop]

I still can't get over it, this guy let Trae Young's defense get into his head

Same thing happened to LBJ against Barea. The true issue is not being able to get out of that mental downward spiral.

His confidence was compromised forever, while other players usually bounce back.

[kcktiny]

Maybe the "Big Dog" Glenn Robinson? Was one of the best college players ever and basically held the Bucks hostage for a 10 year contract. Only made a couple of All-Star games and rode the Duncan Spurs to a ring late in his career.

This. Big Dog was supposed to have the career Paul Pierce had and he never got close.

He too was my first thought. First overall pick that held out for what was back then an absurdly large rookie contract, then proceeded to do nothing in the NBA even remotely close to what he did in college. His shooting efficiency, foul drawing, rebounding, even his rates for steals and blocks were all much worse than what he did in college.

Funny, because his first 8 seasons (1994-95 to 2001-02) in the NBA he actually scored the 4th most points among all players (12010, 21.1 pts/g, only Malone, Shaq, and Payton scored more). But during that time Milwaukee won as many as 50 games in a season just once, actually had a sub .500 record (291-333), with Big Dog playing by far the most minutes on the team. Those 8 years the Bucks were the 7th worst defensive team in the league (106.3 pts/100poss allowed), due in large part to Robinson's poor defense.

[Grinditout]

So the question basically is, out of all the players who didn't meet their hype, which is the best talent/had the best career? Probably Ewing or Davis, depending on who you think is better.

[God Squad]

I’d say Blade Griffin gotta be up there

[dc]

Maybe the "Big Dog" Glenn Robinson? Was one of the best college players ever and basically held the Bucks hostage for a 10 year contract. Only made a couple of All-Star games and rode the Duncan Spurs to a ring late in his career.

This. Big Dog was supposed to have the career Paul Pierce had and he never got close.

He too was my first thought. First overall pick that held out for what was back then an absurdly large rookie contract, then proceeded to do nothing in the NBA even remotely close to what he did in college. His shooting efficiency, foul drawing, rebounding, even his rates for steals and blocks were all much worse than what he did in college.

Funny, because his first 8 seasons (1994-95 to 2001-02) in the NBA he scored the 4th most points among all players (12010, 21.1 pts/g, only Malone, Shaq, and Payton scored more). But during that time Milwaukee won as many as 50 games in a season just once, actually had a sub .500 record (291-333), with Big Dog playing by far the most minutes on the team. Those 8 years the Bucks were the 7th worst defensive team in the league (106.3 pts/100poss allowed), due in large part to Robinson's poor defense.

Big Dog was a good example of a guy who was physically dominant in college as a PF but had to transition to SF in the pros. He was still able to score, but not nearly as efficiently and he had the play further away from the basket in the pros. He wasn't able to dominate in the same manner that he did in college.

[NZB2323]

Maybe the "Big Dog" Glenn Robinson? Was one of the best college players ever and basically held the Bucks hostage for a 10 year contract. Only made a couple of All-Star games and rode the Duncan Spurs to a ring late in his career.

This. Big Dog was supposed to have the career Paul Pierce had and he never got close.

He too was my first thought. First overall pick that held out for what was back then an absurdly large rookie contract, then proceeded to do nothing in the NBA even remotely close to what he did in college. His shooting efficiency, foul drawing, rebounding, even his rates for steals and blocks were all much worse than what he did in college.

Funny, because his first 8 seasons (1994-95 to 2001-02) in the NBA he scored the 4th most points among all players (12010, 21.1 pts/g, only Malone, Shaq, and Payton scored more). But during that time Milwaukee won as many as 50 games in a season just once, actually had a sub .500 record (291-333), with Big Dog playing by far the most minutes on the team. Those 8 years the Bucks were the 7th worst defensive team in the league (106.3 pts/100poss allowed), due in large part to Robinson's poor defense.

Big Dog was a good example of a guy who was physically dominant in college as a PF but had to transition to SF in the pros. He was still able to score, but not nearly as efficiently and he had the play further away from the basket in the pros. He wasn't able to dominate in the same manner that he did in college.

He also didn’t try on defense 99% of the time, and Bucks fans would be surprised when he made a good defensive play and treated it like a Halley’s Comet sighting.

“You have to check out this defensive highlight! Big Dog made a good play on defense!”

“Big Dog? On defense? I gotta check that out.”

For this thread I’d say:

Ewing
Webber
Iverson
Melo
Anthony Davis

[AbeVigodaLive]

Maybe the "Big Dog" Glenn Robinson? Was one of the best college players ever and basically held the Bucks hostage for a 10 year contract. Only made a couple of All-Star games and rode the Duncan Spurs to a ring late in his career.

This. Big Dog was supposed to have the career Paul Pierce had and he never got close.

He too was my first thought. First overall pick that held out for what was back then an absurdly large rookie contract, then proceeded to do nothing in the NBA even remotely close to what he did in college. His shooting efficiency, foul drawing, rebounding, even his rates for steals and blocks were all much worse than what he did in college.

Funny, because his first 8 seasons (1994-95 to 2001-02) in the NBA he scored the 4th most points among all players (12010, 21.1 pts/g, only Malone, Shaq, and Payton scored more). But during that time Milwaukee won as many as 50 games in a season just once, actually had a sub .500 record (291-333), with Big Dog playing by far the most minutes on the team. Those 8 years the Bucks were the 7th worst defensive team in the league (106.3 pts/100poss allowed), due in large part to Robinson's poor defense.

Big Dog was a good example of a guy who was physically dominant in college as a PF but had to transition to SF in the pros. He was still able to score, but not nearly as efficiently and he had the play further away from the basket in the pros. He wasn't able to dominate in the same manner that he did in college.

Glenn Robinson... just didn't seem to improve. He was a decent player when he started, and was essentially that same guy. Always. Was it because he got the last big (and long) rookie contract (10 ys/$68M) and didn't feel the need to be pushed? Or, was that his legit ceiling?

Year 1:
21.9 ppg
6.4 reb
2.5 ast
53.8% TS

Year 6:
20.8 ppg
6.0 reb
2.4 ast
53.4% TS

Year 9:
20.8 ppg
6.6 reb
3.0 ast
51.9% TS
53.8% TS%

Career:
20.7 ppg
6.1 reb
2.7 ast
52.9% TS

[Drygon]

Vince Carter. at a point in 2001 he was considered on par with Kobe.

He's probably the answer for early NBA expectations (first three years or so), but pre draft? He was picked 5th in a draft with a comparatively weak top 4. Were his expectations at draft time that high?

Vince's injuries derailed his trajectory to replicate his 2000-01 season, which wasa clearly his peak. He was coming into the 1998 Draft as a worse prospect than his college teammate Antwan Jamison who was the best player for Tar Heel.

One could say Vince overachieved whereas Antwan Jamison underachieved in comparison. GSW lost the trade vs Raptors by a huge margin lol.