Milli Moore is terrible!

[Cyclical]

I don't see how that's irrelevant. Davis has been scoring in the post consistently for us. Something Mikki doesn't know how to do. Very relevant. After Garnett and Powe there's no one else better.

What exactly are you smoking. Davis has a piss poor post game. Your just making up stuff.

Oh please, if you truly think Mikki is better in the post than Glen smoking alone can't be the only cause to your delusions. Again, this is a one-on-one comparison - we're not comparing Davis to Powe in the post, we're comparing him to an 11-year vet who cannot score near the basket unless he's guarded by no one, or when he's lucky, by the likes of Nick Collison. It's an are of the game where, sadly, Glen is better.

[GuyClinch]

I would hope that Mikki being an 11 year vet, that he would be able to do at least most of what a 2nd year developing player could do. It's a testament to Baby's development, imo, that we are even contemplating whether or not he's better than an 11 year vet who looks to be in optimum shape.

You put way to much stock in development. Guys don't develop much they just show what they could do when they get burn. The BBD you see now is likely the same guy you see five years from now. Go back and look at other young players and their career growth. As soon as they get minutes if they are any good - their numbers explode.

But as far as being actually better on a per minute basis - its not that common. Paul Pierce is a GREAT example of this..

His second year 19.9 ppg per 36 minutes. Now 19.4. Assist 3.1 now 3.5. And so on and so forth. Your sadly mistaken if you think BBD is going to do all this developing. Does he put up okay numbers when he gets burn. Of course he does - he is in the NBA. So does Mikki Moore.

I don't know who spread this growth myth but it needs to be corrected. How has Gerald Green been 'growing" lately?

http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... sgl01.html

Look at Glen's per 36 numbers. Years 1 and 2 are UNCANNILY close. There hasn't been any development he is just showing what he can do in extended minutes. Mikki's career numbers happen to be very close to BBD. With regards to things like assists, scoring and rebounding.

I am sure you have played hoops. Unless your the rare exception you know that your going to play much better as a starter getting extended minutes. You get time to get your groove going. You get the security of knowing your the starter. That's why Powe put up MONSTER numbers in his few starts this year..

Pete

[GuyClinch]

Oh please, if you truly think Mikki is better in the post than Glen smoking alone can't be the only cause to your delusions

I don't think you can chalk up one guy has having an "advantage" if both guys absolutely suck. That's like saying a Honda Civic is faster then a Toyota Corolla. Yeah sure but if you are on a race track with F1 cars no one really cares.

[humblebum]

This idea that players don't "develop" is patently absurd. Why don't we look at Kendrick Perkins? Rondo? Delonte West? Ryan Gomes? There are plenty of guys who add elements to their game and become better pro ball players. Your theory that players don't develop is possibly one of the dumbest and most assinine theories out there. Sure players play better when they play more minutes, but a player usually has to play well enough to earn those minutes. That's why young players often start off in small roles and as they "develop" they earn more minutes. If you suggested this theory to almost any basketball coach on the face of the planet they would laugh right in your face. Absurdity.

[GuyClinch]

This idea that players don't "develop" is patently absurd. Why don't we look at Kendrick Perkins? Rondo? Delonte West? Ryan Gomes? There are plenty of guys who add elements to their game and become better pro ball players. Your theory that players don't develop is possibly one of the dumbest and most assinine theories out there

Alot of vitrol with very little substance. Delonte West hasn't changed much..

In his second year he was putting up 11.8/4.6. Now he is putting up 11.5/3.6. In athletics guys develop their game in grade school and HS. You see that same game play out in the pros. D. West never developed that right hand. He never became a real PG. He was pretty good in his second year at 22. He is nearly exactly the same guy at 25.

Delonte West is a really bad example for you to use because he was lucky enough to get ALOT of minutes early in his career. When this happens to guys their faults and strengths are revealed.

Anyway I didn't claim that guys don't show ANY development. Just that the kind of development your expecting out of BBD is unprecedented. If you actually took the time to track some players you would understand this.

You might see guys add a little something to their games here and there but the basic character really doesn't change much. Stars are stars right away when given minutes. Late bloomers (J'Oneal) are guys who just didn't get any burn.

But sure call me theory "patently absurd" and use guys which directly counter your example. LMAO. Talk about being closed minded and intellectually lazy.. Point out some guys who when ADJUSTED FOR MINUTES become signifcantly more productive.. I don't think you can. And even if such a player exists he is the exception not the rule..

For every Gerald Wallace (that's a guy that might fit) there are many more Delonte Wests..

[MyInsatiableOne]

Pete, don't get into it with Pogue. The guy **** hates Ray Allen and thinks Baby is the 2nd coming, so it's pointless...

I think it's ridiculous to claim Moore is better than Davis but I also think it's ridiculous to think Davis is light years better than Moore. The difference between them is there, but it's slight...Moore certainly has better mobility and leaping ability and a better shooting form. If Davis could somehow transfer some of his girth to Moore, Moore would be better than BBD...

[humblebum]

OK, here are some specifics.

Ryan Gomes, came into the NBA with limited range, he's extended his range. Ditto for Glen Davis.

Perkins has improved every season he now possesses a series of offensive manuevers. Ask Clifford Ray if players develop.

Dwight Howard is much better now than he was when he first came into the league. Dwayne Wade has extended his range and become a better defender. Same for Lebron. How about Tony Parker? He's improved vastly since entering the league. And the same is true for basically every player in the NBA.

Is there a difference between getting 12 and 4 on a 20 win team and getting 11 and 3 on a 70 win team? Delonte would tell you he's a better player now.

Players develop. They gain consistency, they refine their skills, they learn how to perform better under pressure. If players don't develop why is it that veteran teams are more successful?

Players develop, it just so happens that stats don't always accurately reflect development gains. A lot of development has to do with being able to contribute to winning basketball. A lot of that has to do with knowing what you can and can't do at the NBA level. Realizing and developing your strengths and utilizing various tactics to lessen the impact of your weaknesses.

If players didn't develop then why would NBA teams hire coaches to develop players? Why would there be a "Developmental League"?

If your counter-argument is that Glen will never become a high flyer or dominant post player then no frickin kidding. But he'll definitely improve his efficiency and effectiveness inside as he develops a go to move, a counter, etc. That's the reality of sports man, players develop and become more effective.

[GuyClinch]

Ryan Gomes, came into the NBA with limited range, he's extended his range. Ditto for Glen Davis.

Psshaw. No real evidence as I expected. Where is the STATISTICAL growth I wanted to see? Even your anecedotal evidence is weak sauce. Those guys were hitting jumpers in college.. Guys might improve their J slightly - like hit some specific shots a bit better. But as I showed with Delonte West the net result is very modest.

Perkins has improved every season he now possesses a series of offensive manuevers. Ask Clifford Ray if players develop.

First Perkins skipped college. I would expect MORE development out of direct to HS guy. Big Baby is not such a player.

Also Perkins was able to score in HS very well. We don't have any college career to go on but he was very well liked on Rivals.com. So its not really fair to Perkins to claim that now he has moves. He always had them. He is probably your best case though. But its pretty weak throwing HS guys into the equation. What's next your counter me by using grade school kids?

We can argue about this all day but if BBD had any Barkleyesque star quality we would have already seen it. Dollars for doughnuts he will be the same guy 5 years from now you see right now. No I am not saying he won't improve at all but much like West that improvement will be pretty subtle. He will likely be a guy who if started would pull down 7-8 rebounds, score 10-12 points. You know kinda like Moore.

Powe projects as significantly superior player stat wise..16.2 points and 10 rebounders per 36. Now I can't see the future. Of course I could be wrong but my point is that it (substantial growth) HARDLY EVER HAPPENS. Guys who are stars are stars nearly right away. The key factor really is playing time. The only time a star can "hide" is if they barely play or they come out of HS (or both). Likewise roleplayers tend to play consistently at one level throughout their career.

Do I like Shane Battier? Heck Yeah.. Has he really grown since his college days. Heck no. You can live in your little "growth" dreamworld or look at the facts.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... ish01.html

Take a look at his career numbers. Those are the facts. I can pull up HUNDREDS of players with a similiar kind of "growth" pattern or lack thereof. If we are talking about college players the generally don't have much "upside."

Ainge sees it this way too. He uses young players as cost effective fill ins. "Growth" is badly overrated on this board..If a guy comes in and gets massive playing time and doesn't knock your socks off he never will..

Pete

[Cyclical]

^
Wow, you've written some off the wall stuff before man but are you really going to claim that a player cannot improve his outside shot from the age of 20 to the age of 25? Absolutely ludicrous. FG% alone doesn't tell the whole story since it doesn't reflect the percentage of outside shots from the paint. Players absolutely, positively can, and some do, improve their shot with time, as it is a fact that some also improve their range with time. KG wasn't reliable from the elbow in his first 3 years in the league - look at him now. This is not a wild theory but simply a fact of life -- you work hard at something and there's a good chance you may improve. Where do you come up with those kookie analogies?

[GuyClinch]

Wow, you've written some off the wall stuff before man but are you really going to claim that a player cannot improve his outside shot from the age of 20 to the age of 25? Absolutely ludicrous. FG% alone doesn't tell the whole story since it doesn't reflect the percentage of outside shots from the paint. Players absolutely, positively can, and some do, improve their shot with time, as it is a fact that some also improve their range with time. KG wasn't reliable from the elbow in his first 3 years in the league - look at him now. This is not a wild theory but simply a fact of life -- you work hard at something and there's a good chance you may improve. Where do you come up with those kookie analogies?

Where do you get your kookie reading comprehension? Where did I say a player could never improve his jumper? LMAO. I said guys might improve their J slightly but still tend to end up as the same overall player they were when they came into the league. That's my point. If you look at guys numbers adjusted for minutes growth is pretty darn rare.

You don't seriously think Rondo couldnt hit a jumper at all do you? He just didn't feel it was a percentage shot for him before. Any pro player can hit a wide open jumper with some degree of accuracy. Likewise by your own argument KG could hit those shots before he just became more "reliable."

And I freely admit I would expect HS players like KG, Dwight, Perkins to improve more then guys coming out of COLLEGE. I love how you guys keep using HS guys as a counter example. I am not disagreeing on this point.

Pete

[humblebum]

You really think that players are done developing in grade school and high school?

I mean why have skills coaches, trainers, and the like? Are teams simply wasting time and money on development when it really is just a myth?

Heck, why do players even practice their skills? They might as well just kick back drink a beer and play video games because "development" is a myth.