College/Overseas : the big difference between Doug and Niko

[veji1]

I just wanted to underline a big difference between the 2 players, which my sound self evident, but is a sign of a strong trend for the last 10/15 years or so : the growing difference between collegiate basketball and european basketball in terms of level of play, professionalism, and therefore growing environment for players.

To attribute Doug's struggles and Niko's early success to that element only would be foulish of course, but I do believe that the stagnation of collegiate basketball, if not decline, in terms of level fo play compared to the strong development several leagues in europe have experienced is now a concerning and important feature.

I think that it is becoming harder and harder for good college basketball players to succeed fast in the NBA, in comparison with slightly more experienced international players, partly because of higher level of play in Europe, which means that the level difference between an adriatic league, Lega or Liga ACB game and an NBA game is far smaller than between a college game and an NBA game.

Another element is the "europeanization" of the game in the NBA in the last years, represented by the Spurs's success last year. For a long time the biggest difference between the NBA and Europe was, to make it short, that the game in the NBA was more predicated in maxing out usage of the very best individual talents, while in Europe where the talent was lesser and more homogeneous, team basketball, ball movement, extra passing was emphasised. In the NBA the best players would play 40 minutes with massive usage (80% of a game), in Europe the best players played 28minutes (more like 70% of shorter games) with smaller usage.

But now the NBA seems to follow the footsteps of Europe : mpg for stars have been going down tendancially, passing game has become the new fad (just a few years ago it was the "PG dominant league" fad).

To go back to my original point, this has made the NBA game somewhat easier to apprehend for european based players. Nowadays a very good greek or serbian player would recognise many elements of the game being played offensively, and would be able to hide his relative athletic deficit in defense a lot better than in the past with the new collective defensive systems inspired by Thibs and others.

In the meantime, the college game, even if it still has seen its own tactical development, is still a game where the talent disparity between players remains very big and therefore the "star gets the ball" game remains prevalent. In a sense this was great preparation for future NBA players in the past, but not nowadays.

I guess my overall point is that these developments could become worrying in the future, because the tactical and technical maturity required to play on both ends of the floor in the NBA is going up, while the college game can't provide polished enough players to deliver fast enough (except for the very top talents). I can imagine that for a young american player in 5 years, the leap between the college game and the NBA could be way too big to handle, whereas going to play 2 years in Europe to learn and improve might be better.

Draft and stash in Europe of young US players, could that be a trend in a few years ?

[MrSparkle]

Well, the ratio of successful Euro players in the NBA is rising but still low.

I mean, almost every player in the ASG was a college guy.

[Tetlak]

You could also tack on the fact that a lot of college players only stay for a year or 2, so the average 4 year college player isn't facing off against good players with experience anymore. Meanwhile in Europe, these guys go pro in their teens and play professionally for years. Nikola was playing against more experienced players, and got the chance to learn and grow with a team over multiple seasons while doing it. Doug on the other hand was going against inexperienced kids, who didn't stay in college long enough to acquire seasoning and experience.

[veji1]

You could also tack on the fact that a lot of college players only stay for a year or 2, so the average 4 year college player isn't facing off against good players with experience anymore. Meanwhile in Europe, these guys go pro in their teens and play professionally for years. Nikola was playing against more experienced players, and got the chance to learn and grow with a team over multiple seasons while doing it. Doug on the other hand was going against inexperienced kids, who didn't stay in college long enough to acquire seasoning and experience.

Yeah, that's partly what I meant by stagnation of the college game. good enough players leave early, only the average ones (or the very committed to the college institution like McDermott) stay. Level of play cannot rise in that context.

[musiqsoulchild]

I was thinking about this earlier yesterday; I think there is a missing dynamic here that we need to look into:

An international rookie is NOT a professional novice. They have been through the grind of travelling, dirty lockerroms, cheap hotels, bad bus rides and playing for money and family.

College is still about playing for pride, for your college and for your own fame.

In that regard, an international player can step right in and navigate some of the tougher aspects of the NBA life pretty easily. No learning curve at all.

To apply this to our situation, I expect Nikola to have a "slump" when teams adjust to his style of play and his tendencies. Its not that he'd be "slumping"; its more that the scouting would have caught on.

[Lexluthor]

You could also tack on the fact that a lot of college players only stay for a year or 2, so the average 4 year college player isn't facing off against good players with experience anymore. Meanwhile in Europe, these guys go pro in their teens and play professionally for years. Nikola was playing against more experienced players, and got the chance to learn and grow with a team over multiple seasons while doing it. Doug on the other hand was going against inexperienced kids, who didn't stay in college long enough to acquire seasoning and experience.

If Schools had the opportunity to keep their players for 6-7 years they would dominated Europlayers . Look at the Talent that Kentucky has produced the past 5-6 years . Wall, Anthony Davis , Bledsoe, Cousins , Randolph . They would dominated the Euroleague if the they played together Talent still beats Experience . The Majority of All stars are still American Players .

[veji1]

I was thinking about this earlier yesterday; I think there is a missing dynamic here that we need to look into:

An international rookie is NOT a professional novice. They have been through the grind of travelling, dirty lockerroms, cheap hotels, bad bus rides and playing for money and family.

College is still about playing for pride, for your college and for your own fame.

In that regard, an international player can step right in and navigate some of the tougher aspects of the NBA life pretty easily. No learning curve at all.

To apply this to our situation, I expect Nikola to have a "slump" when teams adjust to his style of play and his tendencies. Its not that he'd be "slumping"; its more that the scouting would have caught on.

One aspect also is that the world has gotten smaller with internet. Even 10 or 15 years ago, lots of very good international players didn't know much english nor had more than a very very basic understanding of what life in the US could be. The shock was massive for a Kukoc or a Nowitski. But nowadays, players like Mirotic have been scouted by US coaches for 5 years or more, have met with lots of international / US journalists, agents, trainers, have had to function in english, have travelled to the US quite a few times already for camps/training sessions etc, before being drafted and playing their first game.

There remains a big adjustment to be made, but the leap between Europe and the US has gotten smaller in a sense.

[TheSuzerain]

You could also tack on the fact that a lot of college players only stay for a year or 2, so the average 4 year college player isn't facing off against good players with experience anymore. Meanwhile in Europe, these guys go pro in their teens and play professionally for years. Nikola was playing against more experienced players, and got the chance to learn and grow with a team over multiple seasons while doing it. Doug on the other hand was going against inexperienced kids, who didn't stay in college long enough to acquire seasoning and experience.

If Schools had the opportunity to keep their players for 6-7 years they would dominated Europlayers . Look at the Talent that Kentucky has produced the past 5-6 years . Wall, Anthony Davis , Bledsoe, Cousins , Randolph . They would dominated the Euroleague if the they played together Talent still beats Experience . The Majority of All stars are still American Players .

Completely irrelevant to what is being discussed.

[unknownnewbie]

There has to be more to it besides the simple college vs European pro ball angle, because there are lots of players who have struggled coming from European leagues to the NBA and there are lots of college players who step right into the NBA with little problem, no matter how long they were in school. For example, take Ricky Rubio vs Anthony Davis or Michael Carter-Williams. Rubio struggled for much of his rookie season (and his 2nd season, IMO) despite having played in Spain professionally since he was 16, while Davis and Carter-Williams both had excellent rookie seasons and look to have improved in their 2nd seasons despite having played just one and two years, respectively, in college.

In theory, playing pro ball in Europe, at least if you play in one of the top leagues, should give someone an advantage in terms of being NBA-ready over someone who plays college ball. But I don't know if that theory holds up. To me, it comes down to a player-by-player basis -- I don't think we can conclude that McDermott's and Mirotic's current situations would necessarily be reversed if Niko had been the one to play 4 yrs at Creighton and Doug the one to play several yrs of pro ball overseas.

[musiqsoulchild]

You could also tack on the fact that a lot of college players only stay for a year or 2, so the average 4 year college player isn't facing off against good players with experience anymore. Meanwhile in Europe, these guys go pro in their teens and play professionally for years. Nikola was playing against more experienced players, and got the chance to learn and grow with a team over multiple seasons while doing it. Doug on the other hand was going against inexperienced kids, who didn't stay in college long enough to acquire seasoning and experience.

If Schools had the opportunity to keep their players for 6-7 years they would dominated Europlayers . Look at the Talent that Kentucky has produced the past 5-6 years . Wall, Anthony Davis , Bledsoe, Cousins , Randolph . They would dominated the Euroleague if the they played together Talent still beats Experience . The Majority of All stars are still American Players .

I am pretty certain Veiji1 isnt trying to say that European players are better than College players. Or vice versa.

He's simply saying that the adjustment gap from non-US pro basketball to NBA is decreasing at a faster pace than the gap between college basketball and NBA.

[veji1]

There has to be more to it besides the simple college vs European pro ball angle, because there are lots of players who have struggled coming from European leagues to the NBA and there are lots of college players who step right into the NBA with little problem, no matter how long they were in school. For example, take Ricky Rubio vs Anthony Davis or Michael Carter-Williams. Rubio struggled for much of his rookie season (and his 2nd season, IMO) despite having played in Spain professionally since he was 16, while Davis and Carter-Williams both had excellent rookie seasons and look to have improved in their 2nd seasons despite having played just one and two years, respectively, in college.

In theory, playing pro ball in Europe, at least if you play in one of the top leagues, should give someone an advantage in terms of being NBA-ready over someone who plays college ball. But I don't know if that theory holds up. To me, it comes down to a player-by-player basis -- I don't think we can conclude that McDermott's and Mirotic's current situations would necessarily be reversed if Niko had been the one to play 4 yrs at Creighton and Doug the one to play several yrs of pro ball overseas.

Of course, in the end talent is the big determinant, and of course drawing conclusions would be foulish, but to me clearly a player like McDermott would have gained a lot by facing pro competition for a couple of years, having to execute crisp systems in a more competitive game than the college one, before arriving in the NBA.

But I hear you, I didn't mean that this was THE big and only difference, the one explaining everything. More that it was an important factor in both players trajectories so far, but far from being the only.

[veji1]

I am pretty certain Veiji1 isnt trying to say that European players are better than College players. Or vice versa.

He's simply saying that the adjustment gap from non-US pro basketball to NBA is decreasing at a faster pace than the gap between college basketball and NBA.

Even worse, I would posit that the gap between college basketball and the NBA is growing whereas between it is decreasing between the NBA and the best other pro leagues (ie in Europe).

[musiqsoulchild]

I am pretty certain Veiji1 isnt trying to say that European players are better than College players. Or vice versa.

He's simply saying that the adjustment gap from non-US pro basketball to NBA is decreasing at a faster pace than the gap between college basketball and NBA.

Even worse, I would posit that the gap between college basketball and the NBA is growing whereas between it is decreasing between the NBA and the best other pro leagues (ie in Europe).

Fair enough. Unfortunately, I cant comment on that because my knowledge of college hoops is rather puny.

So, I'll defer to other experts in that field.

I tried to comment on the two things I am most familiar with NBA and non-NBA pro basketball.

[Dieselbound&Down]

I am pretty certain Veiji1 isnt trying to say that European players are better than College players. Or vice versa.

He's simply saying that the adjustment gap from non-US pro basketball to NBA is decreasing at a faster pace than the gap between college basketball and NBA.

Even worse, I would posit that the gap between college basketball and the NBA is growing whereas between it is decreasing between the NBA and the best other pro leagues (ie in Europe).

The gap is much bigger now than the 1980s. Top players plan to leave after one year. College is a very short term stepping stone. Rarely do they have to come in and have to win playing time against players who are talented and a few years older. Anyone that is truly talented likely left.

If there is a gap, it may be more at the 16-18 y/o level. For development purposes, it makes sense to get rid of the high school system for the best players. A high school season is only about 25 games and too many of those games are against teams with poor relative talent. This could be improved greatly if the goal is to best develop basketball players. And if that development happens outside of the high school system, there isn't a great reason to make players quit that system at age 18-19.

[DJHill]

This is extremely fascinating. Regarding McDermott, I was going to go onto basketballreference and look up rookie stats for four year college players and compare them to rookie stats of freshmen players (which I was 95% sure would come out favoring the four year guys) to prove that McDermott wouldn't struggle out of the gate but looks like it's too late for that one!

What I take from this though is that FIBA >> NCAA in terms of competition/talent basically.

[Tetlak]

You could also tack on the fact that a lot of college players only stay for a year or 2, so the average 4 year college player isn't facing off against good players with experience anymore. Meanwhile in Europe, these guys go pro in their teens and play professionally for years. Nikola was playing against more experienced players, and got the chance to learn and grow with a team over multiple seasons while doing it. Doug on the other hand was going against inexperienced kids, who didn't stay in college long enough to acquire seasoning and experience.

If Schools had the opportunity to keep their players for 6-7 years they would dominated Europlayers . Look at the Talent that Kentucky has produced the past 5-6 years . Wall, Anthony Davis , Bledsoe, Cousins , Randolph . They would dominated the Euroleague if the they played together Talent still beats Experience . The Majority of All stars are still American Players .

Nobody said anything about the talent level. We are talking about experience and learning how to play at a high level as a rookie.

[sco]

Given the increasing import of the 3pt shot. I think having a consistent 3pt arc across all 3 would help make transitions easier. Guys develop range and rhythm with particular spots. I think changing is harder than it looks.

[veji1]

Given the increasing import of the 3pt shot. I think having a consistent 3pt arc across all 3 would help make transitions easier. Guys develop range and rhythm with particular spots. I think changing is harder than it looks.

Well in Europe the line is like in College. To me the biggest difference is that NBA game has been looking more and more like the classic yougo/greek game (albeit faster and with bigger, stronger, more talented guys) : less dribbling, the ball moves without the player and the player moves without the ball, etc... There has been a convergence of sorts.

[kyrv]

Given the increasing import of the 3pt shot. I think having a consistent 3pt arc across all 3 would help make transitions easier. Guys develop range and rhythm with particular spots. I think changing is harder than it looks.

Just to add, I agree, I really wish international/college/NBA all would use the same three point arc, I think the international one is the median 'compromise'.

OP, I mean we knew this going in, Niko has a lot of professional experience, Dougie is a true rookie.

[kyrv]

Given the increasing import of the 3pt shot. I think having a consistent 3pt arc across all 3 would help make transitions easier. Guys develop range and rhythm with particular spots. I think changing is harder than it looks.

Well in Europe the line is like in College. To me the biggest difference is that NBA game has been looking more and more like the classic yougo/greek game (albeit faster and with bigger, stronger, more talented guys) : less dribbling, the ball moves without the player and the player moves without the ball, etc... There has been a convergence of sorts.

Oops, I thought college was shorter. College line is pretty short. If that's the international line, I retract my suggestion to use that one. Although now that I think about it, the college length is good for the college game. So, never mind I guess.