Wiggins "average" in practices - How good will Wiggins be?

[Mikeylikesit]

We don't know if players are the next George or the next Beasley. I also think using them in an argument proves nothing because there are MANY players whose career path has resembled both (I do think Beasley's problems are more mental than physical).

I think, right now, it's a pretty big gamble to take a guy #1 (assuming we have that chance) who has the biggest upside over guys that are dominating now and still haven't reached their ceiling either. I will say that I think Kansas has more talent but in no way should Wiggins be disappearing as much as he is. Now, maybe as he matures he develops the alpha male personality like George but it is a gamble.

It's early but Wiggins surely hasn't lived up to the hype. That cannot be argued with.

[GHOSTofSIKMA]

It's early but Wiggins surely hasn't lived up to the hype. That cannot be argued with.

this is it in a nutshell.

if by the end of the year, wiggins is still todays wiggins, and everybody else is posting the performances they have been..... then hes 4th on my draft list behind parker, randle, and smart in no particular order. exum i simply have not watched enough of to determine anything about him.

smart i like the most of those guys as a player, and for us..... but id be lying to say id pick him over parker and randle. id be super torn seeing how nasty those 2 guys are with the upside they both have (smart has less i'll admit)

but as far as wiggins goes.... hes looked like a solid college basketball player against weak competition and nothing more. at this point all the hype is just hype. it counts for nothing. we get one shot at a difference maker and i dont want the guy that may have a marginally better ceiling, that hasnt shown up yet.

[Wooderson]

What's with the obsession of production over projected NBA impact? Wiggins is in a system where he's not asked to be a go-to scorer every time down the court. Wiggins also has more untapped potential and isn't as far along on his developmental curve.

Rose wasn't dominating at Memphis yet it was pretty obvious to me that he was going to be a much better NBA player than Beasley because of their respective tools (and Beasely was putting up dominant college numbers).

This also reminds me of people saying Anthony Davis was going to be a Marcus Camby/Tyson Chandler type player with limited offensive ability simple because he wasn't asked to do much in the way of scoring on a loaded Kentucky team. Anyone who watched Davis in high school knew he was an extremely gifted offensive player.

[GHOSTofSIKMA]

i do have an obsession with production over projection..... if all else seems relatively equal.

beasely is a nutcase. none of the guys were talking about fit that persona whatsoever. and id be ecstatic with wiggins as our draft choice if thats who it happens to be. were talking about a comparison of 5 guys who ALL project as bigtime nba stars. what better way to project them then to look at the actual production they have in college basketball games over the course of an entire season. i thought that was where some separation was supposed to occur and so far it looks absolutely like it is.

this argument that kansas is this "amazing system with all this talent" and that duke or kentucky isnt is ridiculous. if we happened to get the #1 pick then why in the world would you become an apologist for a guys production and gamble on his marginally higher ceiling. this is the argument used for a ton more guys that didnt do much in the league then the guys that did.

it makes no sense to open yourself up for a greater possibility of drafting "a sidekick" in a draft where we absolutely have to draft "the man". which guy looks most like "the man"..... thats the guy i want.

[El Pooch Grande]

i do have an obsession with production over projection..... if all else seems relatively equal.

beasely is a nutcase. none of the guys were talking about fit that persona whatsoever. and id be ecstatic with wiggins as our draft choice if thats who it happens to be. were talking about a comparison of 5 guys who ALL project as bigtime nba stars. what better way to project them then to look at the actual production they have in college basketball games over the course of an entire season. i thought that was where some separation was supposed to occur and so far it looks absolutely like it is.

this argument that kansas is this "amazing system with all this talent" and that duke or kentucky isnt is ridiculous. if we happened to get the #1 pick then why in the world would you become an apologist for a guys production and gamble on his marginally higher ceiling. this is the argument used for a ton more guys that didnt do much in the league then the guys that did.

it makes no sense to open yourself up for a greater possibility of drafting "a sidekick" in a draft where we absolutely have to draft "the man". which guy looks most like "the man"..... thats the guy i want.

Amen to this. It's why Jabari is #1 on my board and why I like Smart over Exum.

No more projects in Milwaukee please.

[Wooderson]

Wiggins is already a significantly better defender, so the actual gap in impact on the floor is much exaggerated due the nature of raw statistics not capturing defense. Basically, I would much rather have a 20 ppg scorer who is also a dominant defender than a 25 ppg scorer in the mold of Melo. Well-rounded players tend to have a bigger impact on the game.

Also, I should adjust my phrasing in terms of team impact, from stacked talent to the system that is run. Parker plays in a system that allows for tons iso's whereas ball movement dominates Kansas's offense. Sure Wiggins could be more aggressive within the system, but he's still a freshman and there's no reason to believe he won't take on a bigger offensive load as he and his game mature (unless he can't handle it skill and talent wise, which is what we should be looking at).

Some players are further along on their developmental curve than others.

[paulpressey25]

. Well-rounded players tend to have a bigger impact on the game.

This is why I think Eddie Jones was a better player than Glenn Robinson.

[Wooderson]

. Well-rounded players tend to have a bigger impact on the game.

This is why I think Eddie Jones was a better player than Glenn Robinson.

Jones wasn't a playmaker nor stud scorer but yeah that's what I'm driving at. He became a great defensive player. Probably similar, if not higher impact, releative to GRob.

Kidd and Hill certainly had better all-around games though, in college and the pros.

[paulpressey25]

Jones had an all-around game?

I'm not saying we should have drafted him #1. But he was a better pro than Robinson.

People sleep on this guy all the time because he didn't have "PPGZZZZ"

http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... sed02.html

Three time All-Star

All NBA one time (third time)

Three time All Defensive (second team)

Led league in Steals in 1999-2000

81 career playoff games

[Wooderson]

I'm not saying we should have drafted him #1. But he was a better pro than Robinson.

People sleep on this guy all the time because he didn't have "PPGZZZZ"

http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... sed02.html

Three time All-Star

All NBA one time (third time)

Three time All Defensive (second team)

Led league in Steals in 1999-2000

81 career playoff games

Yeah I agree with you and edited my post as such. At first I thought it was a sarcastic quip about projecting potential. In college it would have been difficult to project Jones turning into a great wing defender. With Wiggins, though it's pretty evident.

So it looks like we're in the same boat

[GHOSTofSIKMA]

i can see already that the wiggins apologists noise for the next freaking year is not to forget that hes this super duper awesome defender and somehow that jabari parker just cares about scoring and doesnt care about defense.

gimme a break.

[paulpressey25]

Yeah I agree with you and edited my post as such.

Understandable, because again Eddie wasn't a points guy, so everyone forgets about him. He did though get a max deal from Pat Riley.

The reason I bring him up is that during Glenn's third year, around December of 1996, the Lakers offered the Bucks Eddie Jones and Elden Campbell for Glenn and we declined. That would have been a really good trade for us, but people were terrified that Jerry West would pull out Robinson's full potential and we'd regret it for the next ten years.

So, I look at Wiggins worst case as an Eddie Jones type player. He's going to be an all-star and help you win games. The question is whether he'll be a first team all-NBA guy.

[Ron Swanson]

it makes no sense to open yourself up for a greater possibility of drafting "a sidekick" in a draft where we absolutely have to draft "the man". which guy looks most like "the man"..... thats the guy i want.

Not to discredit the rest of your post, but I keep seeing this brought up as a justification for preferring Parker and Randle over Wiggins. I think it's kind of ridiculous to use it in comparing 18 year old freshman to one another. What does "being the man" entail exactly? An improved perimeter game? Demanding the ball in iso situations every time down the court as opposed to running the play that the coach drew up?

It's one thing to think that Wiggins doesn't have that cliched "Killer Instinct", but people seem to imply that even if he doesn't, that he'll somehow never "get it". Was Paul George "the man" his freshman year? Was Kobe Bryant "the man" his first two years in the league? It's fine to judge players on certain criteria, but when that criteria is completely subjective and has no real basis in anything other than opinion, I think it's just blind speculation with no real analysis.

Saying that Andrew Wiggins doesn't have the drive or motivation to be elite is a lazy argument. He has a different personality than Parker, everyone talks about how humble the kid is, and even Bill Self said that he's busting his butt in practice. Being less vocal and taking a back seat to other elite players on your team isn't necessarily a sign of weakness, it's a sign that the guy knows how to play within a team atmosphere and isn't concerned about "getting his". This isn't an indictment against Parker, both are great prospects, but Wiggins is an entirely different animal athletically, and his potential is too great to fool yourself into believing that having a polished perimeter game and offensive skills outweighs the prospect of getting a two-way "once in a generation" type player.

[paulpressey25]

One other important metric in this discussion.

I'd like to have a team of orthopaedic doctors look at all of these guys to tell me about bone/muscle/knee structures. Sharp guys can tell what types of bodies will hold up and what types are going to be susceptible to injuries.

If someone tells me that Jabari's knee structure isn't sound, meanwhile Wiggins muscles and joints look textbook, that would have an impact on who I pick.

[GHOSTofSIKMA]

Saying that Andrew Wiggins doesn't have the drive or motivation to be elite is a lazy argument.

questioning wiggins killer instinct, heart, and drive to be a superstar at the next level...... has been at the crux of every draft writeup ive seen of this kid for over a year now. its not a lazy argument. it was basically the sole concern about this kid coming into the season and now that his career at kansas is well under way its clear that hes done nothing to dispel it.

i am not saying he "doesnt have it". its way to soon to make that statement. what isnt to soon to say is that hes "never shown it".

we got about another 20-25 games to watch these kids and make a pretty big decision. id like to see him step up before id draft him with the 1st overall pick.

[bizarro]

Yeah I agree with you and edited my post as such.

Understandable, because again Eddie wasn't a points guy, so everyone forgets about him. He did though get a max deal from Pat Riley.

The reason I bring him up is that during Glenn's third year, around December of 1996, the Lakers offered the Bucks Eddie Jones and Elden Campbell for Glenn and we declined. That would have been a really good trade for us, but people were terrified that Jerry West would pull out Robinson's full potential and we'd regret it for the next ten years.

So, I look at Wiggins worst case as an Eddie Jones type player. He's going to be an all-star and help you win games. The question is whether he'll be a first team all-NBA guy.

Man, I loved Eddie's game. And, PP, I'd like to challenge the notion he wasn't a points guy. If I recall, he had several seasons in the 17-20 ppg. I remembered him consistently getting his 18-20 ppg around the 1999-2003 period? If Eddie Jones is Wiggins' floor count me in.

[bizarro]

I mean, people forget about Iceman. The Lakers are so spoiled: Jones for 5 years...Kobe emerges. Wow.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmOGCEulKEw[/youtube]

[jokeboy86]

I mean, people forget about Iceman. The Lakers are so spoiled: Jones for 5 years...Kobe emerges. Wow.

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SmOGCEulKEw[/youtube]

Holy S***. In the words of Joe Buck "That was a disgusting act"

[breakchains]

It's funny, while most are worried about Wiggins' supposed lack of killer instinct, to me, it is actually intriguing. The type of player that bothers me the most are hero-ball types who deep in their heart believe they should be taking every shot. If we can get a guy who has the talent to be an elite scorer, but does not feel that he needs to be taking every shot, that can be ideal IMO.

Now if he's actually *scared* to shoot, or withers when the going gets tough, that is a different issue. To me, those two things are not the same.

[Sherman Douglas]

I'm really starting to think he will be closer to Richard Jefferson than Scottie Pippen, which is why I expect us to end up with him.