The Official Washington Basketball Thread: Wizards, Mystics etc

[Duckus]

Someone should do something clever on photoshop to this:

Edited November 16, 2012 by Duckus

[Hersh]

The one and done rule has not done a damn thing with NBA development.

Talent is talent. Some players are talented, some are not. David Aldridge had a great article over the summer where he actually analyzed HS, One and Done, 2 and done, 3 years, and 4 year players since KG entered the NBA in '95. The better NBA players actually come from the HS and one and done types.

The real problem with the Wizards, and a lot of teams, is that there are not that many great-franchise changing players in each draft. If you do not have a pick in the top 4, then you are messed up most years.

---------- Post added November-15th-2012 at 10:10 PM ----------

another 2 years of college would not make Kyrie Irving or Kevin Durant a better player, just like another year would not make Tyreke Evans or Demar Derozean better players.

Nick Young went to USC for 3 years, look at him.

I'm not talking about the superstars going 1st or 2nd every year. That's easy. I'm talking about the ones lower down in the lottery. Nick Young is a great example. The Wizards knew exactly what they were getting.

You're right though. Clearly, the more 19 and 20 year old players in the league now is really helping the quality of basketball out there. Giving major deals to 23 and 24 year old players, locking up cap room, that's been great for the league and all the teams stuck in lottery hell.

[Going Commando]

another 2 years of college would not make Kyrie Irving or Kevin Durant a better player, just like another year would not make Tyreke Evans or Demar Derozean better players.

Nick Young went to USC for 3 years, look at him.

I think Kyrie could absolutely have used a couple more years in college. He played what, 9 games at Duke? It was clear he had talent. But it's also clear he had no clue how to pass or play defense before getting to the NBA.

He could have gotten to the NBA a multidimensional player already if he'd had more time in college.

I think the one and done rule (or no rule prior to its instillation in 2006) has absolutely hurt the entire NBA and you see the problem in how awful the NBA is at developing its young talent.

It's a joke. The NBA has guaranteed contracts and it's got nowhere near the injury problem football does, but the sport does an abysmal job actualizing its talent. Busts are the norm, maybe two all stars come out of the average class, and only a small handful of players even make it long term. So many players never get better than what they were in college. Gems shine through and the cream rises to the top as always in anything. But the reason there are soooo few franchise players in BBall is, in part, because the league does an abominable job developing them.

LKB talked about it a while back. You don't get a chance to develop young talent like you do in other sports. It's a few short weeks of camp, then the season is underway and most of the practice time and coaching attention goes to the starters and game prep rather than teaching and development. You do your developing on your own in the summer. Even good vet players don't usually experiment with new things during the season.

Wall could have definitely used more time in college. He's the same player he was as a freshman at Kentucky.

---------- Post added November-15th-2012 at 10:54 PM ----------

http://i46.tinypic.com/34629fo.png

http://i49.tinypic.com/347tqnq.png

:ols:

Well done sir!

:notworthy

[RonArtest15]

Look at all the teams running in place in this league. Teams are forced to have to pick between 19-20 year-old players that are so raw and they have a short window to develop them before having to decide whether to lock up huge amounts of cap room. The Wizards have had this problem when drafting over the last several years when not drafting #1. I'm actually a big supporter of Beal, advocated drafting him over everyone else and I won't give up in him any time soon. In fact, I think given his age, the criticisms of him in this thread have been comical. I just think it would be better for teams to know more about players than 30 games in college.

As far as Wall goes, he is a good player, but still can't shoot and still has a lot to prove. Yet, I think after this season he's up for his extension already. Is he a max player?

John Wall is up for an extension in 2 years. That being said, I'm more interested in how he runs a team over his shooting %. Of course he has a lot to prove, but he's been a damn good player for us considering the circumstances. His #'s after 2 seasons are really good in comparison to other PGs around the league. Not saying you, but there are a lot of Wizards "fans" who don't appreciate how good he actually is. I had a rant a few pages back and one of those fans I mentioned said that Wall's body language on the bench was a tell-tale sign that he won't amount to much in the league. This is where we are as a fanbase and these are the type of arm-chair morons that think they know the game.

Now, as far as the one and done players, Asiatic hit the nail on the head. Talent is talent. If you are NBA-ready, you can improve your deficiencies w/ on the job training through practices and games. Kyrie Irving, John Wall, Derrick Rose, Kevin Durant, Mike Beasley, etc. had NOTHING to prove after their lone seasons at their respective schools. They were that good.

[AsiaticSkinsFan]

I'm not talking about the superstars going 1st or 2nd every year. That's easy. I'm talking about the ones lower down in the lottery. Nick Young is a great example. The Wizards knew exactly what they were getting.

You're right though. Clearly, the more 19 and 20 year old players in the league now is really helping the quality of basketball out there. Giving major deals to 23 and 24 year old players, locking up cap room, that's been great for the league and all the teams stuck in lottery hell.

an great scorer, thats what they thought they were getting. Instead, dude is an efficient chucker.

And the quality of basketball is actually quite good, better than its been since the 80s, so I will say yes thanks.

College basketball isnt, and hasnt been, a place to develop players since the 80s, and I am starting to believe it never has been about that because all that happened in the old days is that guys didnt leave when they should have..

If the Toronto Raptors want to bid against themselves and give Demar Derozan a ridiculously big contract for little production, thats on them. Not on the players. Same is true for Ernie giving Blatche that ridiculous contract based off 2 months of inefficient play.

Fans love blaming players for general managers giving bad contracts.

I think Kyrie could absolutely have used a couple more years in college. He played what, 9 games at Duke? It was clear he had talent. But it's also clear he had no clue how to pass or play defense before getting to the NBA.

He could have gotten to the NBA a multidimensional player already if he'd had more time in college.

so you believe Kyrie was going to learn how to play defense against sorry players at Duke? By learning how to take charges and flop? Hell to nah, no chance. He didnt need to play a game in college to be the player he is right now and becoming. If anything, he risked his career by playing that season at Duke because he also got that foot which people feared could have ended his career.

Allen Iverson won DPOY at Georgetown in the Big East. Iverson was never a good NBA defender. Steve Francis also won the award at UMD in the ACC. Francis was never a good defender. Nolan Smith is a garbage NBA defender despite spending 4 years at Duke (he not a good NBAplayer period). Its something that ESPN and NCAA coaches have propagated forever and its bunk.

I think the one and done rule (or no rule prior to its instillation in 2006) has absolutely hurt the entire NBA and you see the problem in how awful the NBA is at developing its young talent.

It's a joke. The NBA has guaranteed contracts and it's got nowhere near the injury problem football does, but the sport does an abysmal job actualizing its talent. Busts are the norm, maybe two all stars come out of the average class, and only a small handful of players even make it long term. So many players never get better than what they were in college. Gems shine through and the cream rises to the top as always in anything. But the reason there are soooo few franchise players in BBall is, in part, because the league does an abominable job developing them.

LKB talked about it a while back. You don't get a chance to develop young talent like you do in other sports. It's a few short weeks of camp, then the season is underway and most of the practice time and coaching attention goes to the starters and game prep rather than teaching and development. You do your developing on your own in the summer. Even good vet players don't usually experiment with new things during the season.

Wall could have definitely used more time in college. He's the same player he was as a freshman at Kentucky.

here is the Aldridge article on one and done, etc. Its not the problem.

http://www.nba.com/2012/news/features/david_aldridge/04/09/morning-tip-nba-draft-age-limit-debate/index.html

Now there is a real problem in this country in basketball talent development and coaching. Its why the rest of the world really are catching up to his in bball. The problem is at a period well before the NBA. The college game is about winning, most of those coaches dont care about player development at all. It starts back before HS with youth coaches, and then it goes on with these AAU and travelling teams. IF you want to know why John Wall plays the same way he has since he was a freshman at UK, its because he has played that way all of his life and gotten away with it. Same with Russy, Rose, and the other combo guards out there in the NBA, its how they always played. Same is true with guys like Kobe, Durant, and Bron. Same is true for a guy like Blake Griffin, and many others as well. The link is broken well before college and thats why we are stuck with big men who dont have post games, guards who cant shoot and dribble with their heads down, or guards who cant dribble the ball at all. Thats the real problem. Until the coaching and development between 12-18 is fixed, players can stay 1 one year or 4 years in college, they gonna be what they are technically.

Edited November 16, 2012 by AsiaticSkinsFan

[Hersh]

John Wall is up for an extension in 2 years. That being said, I'm more interested in how he runs a team over his shooting %. Of course he has a lot to prove, but he's been a damn good player for us considering the circumstances. His #'s after 2 seasons are really good in comparison to other PGs around the league. Not saying you, but there are a lot of Wizards "fans" who don't appreciate how good he actually is. I had a rant a few pages back and one of those fans I mentioned said that Wall's body language on the bench was a tell-tale sign that he won't amount to much in the league. This is where we are as a fanbase and these are the type of arm-chair morons that think they know the game.

Now, as far as the one and done players, Asiatic hit the nail on the head. Talent is talent. If you are NBA-ready, you can improve your deficiencies w/ on the job training through practices and games. Kyrie Irving, John Wall, Derrick Rose, Kevin Durant, Mike Beasley, etc. had NOTHING to prove after their lone seasons at their respective schools. They were that good.

James Harden and Blake Griffin signed their extensions this off-season and they were drafted in 2009 while Wall was drafted in 2010. In July 2013, Wall is eligible for an extension unless something changed regarding contracts.

Again, you are saying that the guys that went 1st or 2nd in the draft are NBA ready. Some would disagree especially when it comes to how well rounded this players are on the court and their maturity off the court, but after the 1st and 2nd players in the draft, how many are NBA ready after one year in college. Yet, those are the players coming out and littering the league.

[AsiaticSkinsFan]

James Harden and Blake Griffin signed their extensions this off-season and they were drafted in 2009 while Wall was drafted in 2010. In July 2013, Wall is eligible for an extension unless something changed regarding contracts.

Again, you are saying that the guys that went 1st or 2nd in the draft are NBA ready. Some would disagree especially when it comes to how well rounded this players are on the court and their maturity off the court, but after the 1st and 2nd players in the draft, how many are NBA ready after one year in college. Yet, those are the players coming out and littering the league.

again, here is the Aldridge article on that

http://www.nba.com/2012/news/features/david_aldridge/04/09/morning-tip-nba-draft-age-limit-debate/index.html

its not the one and dones.

---------- Post added November-15th-2012 at 11:34 PM ----------

also, Wall is eligible for RFA in 2014. He can sign an extension next summer (which I expect) or he could say nah imma goto FA and the Wizards can match a contract offer for him in 2014.

[Hersh]

an great scorer, thats what they thought they were getting. Instead, dude is an efficient chucker.

And the quality of basketball is actually quite good, better than its been since the 80s, so I will say yes thanks.

College basketball isnt, and hasnt been, a place to develop players since the 80s, and I am starting to believe it never has been about that because all that happened in the old days is that guys didnt leave when they should have..

If the Toronto Raptors want to bid against themselves and give Demar Derozan a ridiculously big contract for little production, thats on them. Not on the players. Same is true for Ernie giving Blatche that ridiculous contract based off 2 months of inefficient play.

Fans love blaming players for general managers giving bad contracts.

Nick Young was not expected to come in and be some great shooting guard for the Wizards but the main reason we disagree is our views regarding the quality of basketball in the NBA these days. I don't think the quality of play in the NBA is very good at all.

---------- Post added November-16th-2012 at 05:14 AM ----------

again, here is the Aldridge article on that

http://www.nba.com/2012/news/features/david_aldridge/04/09/morning-tip-nba-draft-age-limit-debate/index.html

its not the one and dones.

---------- Post added November-15th-2012 at 11:34 PM ----------

also, Wall is eligible for RFA in 2014. He can sign an extension next summer (which I expect) or he could say nah imma goto FA and the Wizards can match a contract offer for him in 2014.

Thanks for the info on Wall's contract.

As far as DA's article: Look at the guys he considers "professionals" or "stars." Most of the professionals we couldn't wait to get rid of when they were on the Wizards cause they sucked and the stars, while some put up stats on bad teams and others have earned big contracts, who has won anything on that list? Two guys really and neither were huge post season contributors when they won titles. Does Blatche add to the quality of the NBA?

[Going Commando]

Asiatic, I don't think it's just about a lack of skills like dribbling and post up offense that's the problem--although that certainly is a problem. I think it's also a lack of knowledge of the game being developed before players arrive in the NBA. Players are so much worse at playing off the ball now than they used to be. They just don't have familiarity with a very structured and coached game like they used to.

I think learning to move off the ball and learning to play team defense are definitely things you can pick up in college with a good coach and enough time.

It's basically a crash course in learning to run legit set plays on offense and defense for a lot of young players who aren't getting that good background before the college level (and truthfully, I doubt there are enough good coaches out there to develop players properly prior to college).

Things obviously change once you get to the NBA, college defense is fundamentally different just in the prevalence of zone. It's more about learning the fundamental concepts of the game and then putting them into practice in an environment you can build some confidence with.

I think Kyrie was hurt from playing so few college games in that regard. I think it's the biggest reason why his defense was so bad last year. He came in with pure talent and skills that he already had but hadn't begun to learn the game and so he had to start from square one against NBA competition.

And I don't think you can learn much about the game in just one year either. As LKB said a while back, what can even John Calipari teach you in 6 months?

I think guys like Magic and Jordan and Bird benefited from playing several years in college in how they were able to come into the league immediately as multi-dimensional players that just "got it." Duncan too, he stayed all four years.

Now it's like you come in and your just immediately in the fryer and good luck kid, you have to learn on the fly. The productive guys either have NBA ready skills they can go to in the mean time or they have some freak physical attributes they can produce off of until they learn to play. Only the really really smart ones who get good coaching get it figured out real quick.

Also, meant to say it before, I don't think it's fair to say that DRose, Kobe, Durant, and LeBron are the same players they've always been. I think they're examples of elite players who grew their games a lot throughout their careers. DRose learned to shoot. Kobe's added all kinds of eclectic pieces to his game. Durant is learning to pass and facilitate. LeBron learned to shoot and then learned a pretty tremendous inside game. These are the very best and smartest players of the league, so they're going to be outliers. They basically do it all on their own time though, hire their own coaches, no help from the NBA. They also train together and share notes with each other, teach each other the game. But it's like, sucks for you if you're not in that fraternity.

Edited November 16, 2012 by stevemcqueen1

[SuperBash]

Imagine if Duncan went straight from HS to the NBA. He'd have a 20 year career in the NBA if his skills developed the same as it did in college.

[Sticksboi05]

Shooting is the easiest thing to improve. Repetition in the gym. Wall should be further a long by now. Just shoot, over, and over, and over.

[pjfootballer]

John Wall is up for an extension in 2 years. That being said, I'm more interested in how he runs a team over his shooting %. Of course he has a lot to prove, but he's been a damn good player for us considering the circumstances. His #'s after 2 seasons are really good in comparison to other PGs around the league.

In a point guard driven league, your PG better damn well learn to shoot the ball. With that said, yes, he's done a damn good job running the team, but you can't dribble penetrate on every possession. Wall HAS to learn to shoot the ball better. So yeah, I'm interested in his shooting percentage getting better.

[pjfootballer]

Now there is a real problem in this country in basketball talent development and coaching. Its why the rest of the world really are catching up to his in bball. The problem is at a period well before the NBA. The college game is about winning, most of those coaches dont care about player development at all. It starts back before HS with youth coaches, and then it goes on with these AAU and travelling teams. IF you want to know why John Wall plays the same way he has since he was a freshman at UK, its because he has played that way all of his life and gotten away with it. Same with Russy, Rose, and the other combo guards out there in the NBA, its how they always played. Same is true with guys like Kobe, Durant, and Bron. Same is true for a guy like Blake Griffin, and many others as well. The link is broken well before college and thats why we are stuck with big men who dont have post games, guards who cant shoot and dribble with their heads down, or guards who cant dribble the ball at all. Thats the real problem. Until the coaching and development between 12-18 is fixed, players can stay 1 one year or 4 years in college, they gonna be what they are technically.

Hoosiers the movie? Remember when he told them to put the ball away and concentrated on the little things in the game. Then, he wouldn't let them shoot? I'd love to see a coach do that, but the kids are also wired to not believe in doing things like that. It would be interesting if a coach could do that.

---------- Post added November-16th-2012 at 11:12 AM ----------

Nick Young was not expected to come in and be some great shooting guard for the Wizards but the main reason we disagree is our views regarding the quality of basketball in the NBA these days. I don't think the quality of play in the NBA is very good at all.

I got blasted in the NBA thread for saying that the players today lacked fundamentals. Everyone made comments like I was talking about a set-shooting Bob Cousey. I agree with you that the quality of play is not very good in the NBA today. Having a cross over dribble and being able to dunk with a 40 inch verticle to me is not good basketball. It just means that you have some exceptional athletic ability. I wish more players were like Tim Duncan.

[SuperBash]

In a point guard driven league, your PG better damn well learn to shoot the ball. With that said, yes, he's done a damn good job running the team, but you can't dribble penetrate on every possession. Wall HAS to learn to shoot the ball better. So yeah, I'm interested in his shooting percentage getting better.

IMO, this is what will either make us a playoff team or a failure.

[AsiaticSkinsFan]

Asiatic, I don't think it's just about a lack of skills like dribbling and post up offense that's the problem--although that certainly is a problem. I think it's also a lack of knowledge of the game being developed before players arrive in the NBA. Players are so much worse at playing off the ball now than they used to be. They just don't have familiarity with a very structured and coached game like they used to.

the lack of knowledge of the game is not being in learned in college. Javale McGee went to college for 2 years, and is still one of the stupidest players to ever play in the NBA. Conversely, Tyson Chandler didnt play a lick of college ball and is one of the smartest players in the NBA.

You could make an argument for both.

The stuff about structure and coaching isnt learned in college ball. I cannot say this enough. That stuff comes before college. Thats where things are broken, not in college.

That doesnt mean that there should be no college ball and that some players dont improve, but a lot of players really dont need it. Kyrie Irving clearly didnt need one year of college, and neither did John Wall.

I think learning to move off the ball and learning to play team defense are definitely things you can pick up in college with a good coach and enough time.

So many player already have that ability by the time they hit college. THe best thing you can say is that college refines their skill, but it doesnt add much. College ball is about winning, just like the pro game. And they also have the academic distraction which takes away time from working on their craft.

It's basically a crash course in learning to run legit set plays on offense and defense for a lot of young players who aren't getting that good background before the college level (and truthfully, I doubt there are enough good coaches out there to develop players properly prior to college).

and I also doubt there are enough good coaches in college to develop players properly before hitting the NBA, especially in today's college ball.

Look at a program like Syracuse under Boheim. None of those guys can defend when they come into the NBA, and outside of Melo and Derrick Coleman, they have some great busts. Boeheim coaches players to his system and his style, which leads to a lot of incomplete players. Boeheim's players usually stay 2-3 years too. Boeheim is who many people would consider a great coach, and I agree. But his NBA player track record is sketchy as hell.

Things obviously change once you get to the NBA, college defense is fundamentally different just in the prevalence of zone. It's more about learning the fundamental concepts of the game and then putting them into practice in an environment you can build some confidence with.

I cant say this enough, but you dont learn fundamental concepts of the game in college. That is stuff that you learn before and during college.

I do agree about the confidence portion to an extent, especially with big men. The problem with big men in college is that the game is so perimeter oriented that they cant learn that much more there.

I think Kyrie was hurt from playing so few college games in that regard. I think it's the biggest reason why his defense was so bad last year. He came in with pure talent and skills that he already had but hadn't begun to learn the game and so he had to start from square one against NBA competition.

So by Kyrie taking charges at Duke, that would improve his defense?

Outside of Battier, name a Duke player that became a good-great defender in the NBA? And even with Battier, I would argue the film work and statistical analysis he does is what helped him more than what Coach K ever taught him.

And I don't think you can learn much about the game in just one year either. As LKB said a while back, what can even John Calipari teach you in 6 months?

here is the one thing I will give college coaches some credit for, especially a guy like Calipari. He makes his players unselfish and selfless. Anthony Davis was the best college player last year and he barely took 10 shots a game. UK didnt even run plays for him, and he was told to stay in the post.

He gets in the NBA, and you see he has a really good 18 footer, very good handles, and actually has some nice post moves. In college, he was told to sacrifice that for the good of the team, and he did. That is something that could def be learned in college, and I feel that was all Cal.

And there is a reason why Calipari keeps getting point guards into the NBA draft's first round each year. He and Rod Strickland da gawd, know what they are doing.

I think guys like Magic and Jordan and Bird benefited from playing several years in college in how they were able to come into the league immediately as multi-dimensional players that just "got it." Duncan too, he stayed all four years.

Bird was always that player tho. And tbh, did Bird learn from being a garbage man for the year he was away from college?

I would say Jordan learned selflessness at UNC, but then he came into the NBA and was seen as a selfish player for the early part of his career.

And that era, the Jordan/Bird/Magic era, guys learned a lot of basic stuff in HS from coaches and beforehand. Its completely different today. Thats why I keep saying there is a problem with American coaching.

Now it's like you come in and your just immediately in the fryer and good luck kid, you have to learn on the fly. The productive guys either have NBA ready skills they can go to in the mean time or they have some freak physical attributes they can produce off of until they learn to play. Only the really really smart ones who get good coaching get it figured out real quick.

thats how its always been tho. That doesnt matter if its straight from middle school, or you stayed in school for 5 years, that is how its always been.

Also, meant to say it before, I don't think it's fair to say that DRose, Kobe, Durant, and LeBron are the same players they've always been. I think they're examples of elite players who grew their games a lot throughout their careers. DRose learned to shoot. Kobe's added all kinds of eclectic pieces to his game. Durant is learning to pass and facilitate. LeBron learned to shoot and then learned a pretty tremendous inside game. These are the very best and smartest players of the league, so they're going to be outliers. They basically do it all on their own time though, hire their own coaches, no help from the NBA. They also train together and share notes with each other, teach each other the game. But it's like, sucks for you if you're not in that fraternity.

I watched Tim Duncan in college. Tim Duncan was the same player he was from his sophomore year to today, minus the loss of athleticism.

The player that Kevin Garnett became, is how he was as a rookie.

DRose learned to shoot his junior or senior year in college (2nd, 3rd year in the NBA). Great, so he got paid and learned how to shoot.

My real point is that I dont believe that fundamental understanding is something a player picks up in college. It comes from learning the game, to HS. If they are in college and dont understand concepts and plays, then its going to be hard for them to learn it in college where its every bit as much of a winning culture as is the NBA.

The problems with the American player has more to do with what happens between 12-18, than it does between 18-22.

---------- Post added November-16th-2012 at 11:44 AM ----------

Nick Young was not expected to come in and be some great shooting guard for the Wizards but the main reason we disagree is our views regarding the quality of basketball in the NBA these days. I don't think the quality of play in the NBA is very good at all.

Well I didnt say great two guard, I said great scorer. He is not a great scorer.

And I think the quality of play has improved dramatically from the 90s and early 2000s. A lot more ball movement now than before. But I do think that the game will never be what it once was until we get some great post players. The game is lacking that, and thats why it wont be what it was.

Thanks for the info on Wall's contract.

As far as DA's article: Look at the guys he considers "professionals" or "stars." Most of the professionals we couldn't wait to get rid of when they were on the Wizards cause they sucked and the stars, while some put up stats on bad teams and others have earned big contracts, who has won anything on that list? Two guys really and neither were huge post season contributors when they won titles. Does Blatche add to the quality of the NBA?

what does that have to do with how good the players are?

And DeShawn Stevenson may be annoying, but he was a vital player to the Mavericks winning an NBA title. Maybe the problem is the Wizards organization, not these players.

Hoosiers the movie? Remember when he told them to put the ball away and concentrated on the little things in the game. Then, he wouldn't let them shoot? I'd love to see a coach do that, but the kids are also wired to not believe in doing things like that. It would be interesting if a coach could do that.

well tbf, its a movie. I dont know how many coaches were actually doing that back then either.

But then again John Wooden used to teach players how to put on their socks and tie their shoes properly before each season.

I refuse to just blame kids for these things though. Its the easy way out, many of these coaches just flat out suck, the system in this country is broken with regards to basketball development.

I got blasted in the NBA thread for saying that the players today lacked fundamentals. Everyone made comments like I was talking about a set-shooting Bob Cousey. I agree with you that the quality of play is not very good in the NBA today. Having a cross over dribble and being able to dunk with a 40 inch verticle to me is not good basketball. It just means that you have some exceptional athletic ability. I wish more players were like Tim Duncan.

Tim Duncan was one of the greatest athletes to ever play the PF position.

Karl Malone is another guy, despite being one of the most limited offensive players ever, he finished 2nd on the scoring list.

Its not all just on the players, and sometimes we romanticize the past too much. For instance, the stuff with how players dribble the ball today started in the Magic/Bird/Jordan age. Those guys palmed the ball when they dribbled, but the refs let it slide. If you look at how West, Robertson, Frazier and other guys from the 60s and 70s handled the ball, its completely different for a reason.

Personally, I believe Magic Johnson is the biggest reason why we dont have great American big men anymore.

---------- Post added November-16th-2012 at 11:48 AM ----------

and the Prison Industrial Complex based on nonviolent offenders being thrown into prison, particularly crack/cocaine disparity in the law and mandatory/minimum sentences.

Edited November 16, 2012 by AsiaticSkinsFan

[pjfootballer]

And I think the quality of play has improved dramatically from the 90s and early 2000s. A lot more ball movement now than before. But I do think that the game will never be what it once was until we get some great post players. The game is lacking that, and thats why it wont be what it was.

well tbf, its a movie. I dont know how many coaches were actually doing that back then either.

But then again John Wooden used to teach players how to put on their socks and tie their shoes properly before each season.

Tim Duncan was one of the greatest athletes to ever play the PF position.

Karl Malone is another guy, despite being one of the most limited offensive players ever, he finished 2nd on the scoring list.

Its not all just on the players, and sometimes we romanticize the past too much. For instance, the stuff with how players dribble the ball today started in the Magic/Bird/Jordan age. Those guys palmed the ball when they dribbled, but the refs let it slide. If you look at how West, Robertson, Frazier and other guys from the 60s and 70s handled the ball, its completely different for a reason.

Personally, I believe Magic Johnson is the biggest reason why we dont have great American big men anymore.

Agree with you about the ball movement, but only in the half court game. With the change of rules and the institution of the zone, you have to have good perimeter ball movement. Back in the days of Magic and Bird, you had to have good ball movement up and down the court. But yeah, the half court ball movement is better today, only because back then, you could go with a 2 man game or 1 on 1 more often.

Yeah, I know it was just a movie and it was probably romanticized more than it should have, but it did come from a true story about how the little school would be able to compete with the bigger schools at the time.

Well, I personally witnessed the 80s and yes, it does get imbellished by us "old" guys, but the NBA wasn't very popular and let's just say, they let them get away with "palming" and such for the good of the game. And the game has changed in just about every decade since the 40s. I just think the players back in the 80s had better all around games then most of the players in todays game. Some of that is due to training/coaching and some of that is due to the way the game has evolved. I just don't find this brand of basketball very entertaining, but maybe it's because the Wizards have jaded me into not liking basketball anymore because of the losing.

[AsiaticSkinsFan]

Agree with you about the ball movement, but only in the half court game. With the change of rules and the institution of the zone, you have to have good perimeter ball movement. Back in the days of Magic and Bird, you had to have good ball movement up and down the court. But yeah, the half court ball movement is better today, only because back then, you could go with a 2 man game or 1 on 1 more often.

Yeah, I know it was just a movie and it was probably romanticized more than it should have, but it did come from a true story about how the little school would be able to compete with the bigger schools at the time.

Well, I personally witnessed the 80s and yes, it does get imbellished by us "old" guys, but the NBA wasn't very popular and let's just say, they let them get away with "palming" and such for the good of the game. And the game has changed in just about every decade since the 40s. I just think the players back in the 80s had better all around games then most of the players in todays game. Some of that is due to training/coaching and some of that is due to the way the game has evolved. I just don't find this brand of basketball very entertaining, but maybe it's because the Wizards have jaded me into not liking basketball anymore because of the losing.

I love NBA history, so I look at old games when I can.

I also grew up watching the 90s NBA. I think that may have been a real nadir for basketball, but it gets romanticized a lot. It was the first time coaches actually taught team defending, and there were a lot of limited players who looked like all stars because of the dearth of talent in the NBA back then. There were drafts of busts from like 86-91, and the game slowed down dramatically because the game got over coached. I loved it because it was all I knew, but then I started seeing games from the 60s, 70s, and 80s and it opened my eyes up. The 90s were a terrible period for quality of play in the NBA, so that is why I keep saying its better today than it was back then, but I can totally understand if someone who grew up on 70s and 80s ball say it sucks today. I get it.

[pjfootballer]

I love NBA history, so I look at old games when I can.

I also grew up watching the 90s NBA. I think that may have been a real nadir for basketball, but it gets romanticized a lot. It was the first time coaches actually taught team defending, and there were a lot of limited players who looked like all stars because of the dearth of talent in the NBA back then. There were drafts of busts from like 86-91, and the game slowed down dramatically because the game got over coached. I loved it because it was all I knew, but then I started seeing games from the 60s, 70s, and 80s and it opened my eyes up. The 90s were a terrible period for quality of play in the NBA, so that is why I keep saying its better today than it was back then, but I can totally understand if someone who grew up on 70s and 80s ball say it sucks today. I get it.

And I get you about the 90s. Yes, the play is better now then in the 90s. The Pistons "bad boys" hack a Shaq and beat everyone into submission ball really slowed the development of the game down in the 90s. Watching teams win 74-70 every night was not very entertaining, not to mention the fighting and brawling. The 90s were just a very poor time in the NBA with the exceptions of a few stars.

[StillUnknown]

Kinda sad more joy can be found in reading some of these posts than watching a Wizards game.

[Hersh]

Well I didnt say great two guard, I said great scorer. He is not a great scorer.

And I think the quality of play has improved dramatically from the 90s and early 2000s. A lot more ball movement now than before. But I do think that the game will never be what it once was until we get some great post players. The game is lacking that, and thats why it wont be what it was.

what does that have to do with how good the players are?

And DeShawn Stevenson may be annoying, but he was a vital player to the Mavericks winning an NBA title. Maybe the problem is the Wizards organization, not these players.

How can the game be better now than in the 90's and early 2000's and at the same time not be as good as when there were great centers playing? The 90's had some great centers.

So one key argument for one and done not being the problem is that they become role players in the NBA. That's fine if that's their objective. Seriously though, DA's article said Kendrick Perkins was a star. In what world is that player a star?

---------- Post added November-16th-2012 at 06:24 PM ----------

Kinda sad more joy can be found in reading some of these posts than watching a Wizards game.

It really is especially with 6 months of the basketball season to be played but it's either these decisions or we can just cut and paste the same posts after every game about how much the Wizards suck and EG sucks and Ted sucking as the Wizards owner.

[AsiaticSkinsFan]

How can the game be better now than in the 90's and early 2000's and at the same time not be as good as when there were great centers playing? The 90's had some great centers.

So one key argument for one and done not being the problem is that they become role players in the NBA. That's fine if that's their objective. Seriously though, DA's article said Kendrick Perkins was a star. In what world is that player a star?

It really is especially with 6 months of the basketball season to be played but it's either these decisions or we can just cut and paste the same posts after every game about how much the Wizards suck and EG sucks and Ted sucking as the Wizards owner.

Well i feel its one reason why, the lack of great low post players.

In the 90s, you had a lot of teams who felt their best offense and defense was to run the clock down (Mike Fratello) mixed with a drop in talent and 6 teams entering the league in an 8 year stretch.

I think the NBA only started to recover from that in the mid noughties.

It was a bad stretch of basketball. A lot of isolation, not much scoring, and games got too physical.

You did have great big men, but it was hard to overcome some of the crap that was happening around the league.

I feel great big men are what is missing from today's game to make it great again as the league is not in as much dire straits.

If the Wizards had Georghe Muresan at 24 years old today, they would be a legit playoff team and he would be the best center in the east.

Edited November 16, 2012 by AsiaticSkinsFan

[RonArtest15]

In a point guard driven league, your PG better damn well learn to shoot the ball. With that said, yes, he's done a damn good job running the team, but you can't dribble penetrate on every possession. Wall HAS to learn to shoot the ball better. So yeah, I'm interested in his shooting percentage getting better.

And there was an improvement between his rookie season and year two. I'm more interested in him being able to control his pace and break down a defense to get easy buckets close to the hoop. This is what Rondo does masterfully. Wall can get there. Perimeter shooting is something he'll have to work on, but that's the least of my concerns when discussing Wall's game.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

A. I think the NBA is better now than it has been at any point since the glory years of '84 to '94.

B. Having said that, there are some things missing. And I think the problem actually starts at the high school level. And the problem at the high school level is AAU. In the old days, you had one high school coach - who if you were good enough recruited you and maybe paid you. You stuck with that coach for four years. If you were good enough, you were in a junior high program that answered to that coach. So you spent six years in a "System" that was completely coach-driven and designed to teach you the basics of basketball. College ball was basically finishing school.

I mean, do you think the guys under Morgan Wooten needed to learn all that much when they got to college?

Isiah Thomas got most of his basketball IQ from that prick coach in Hoop Dreams and Bobby Knight just put the finishing touches on it the two years he had him.

Now, elite players are constantly moving between high schools and AAU clubs. Their world is player driven and a lot of what they do is just a slightly better version of And-1 basketball.

There is an upside to this however. The player of today are playing a lot MORE basketball and playing against better competition. So, their skills get better but their understanding of the game gets stagnant.

If Magic and Bird came along today, they would probably have been teammates on some kind of midwest 16 and under club. They may have chosen to go to school together.

What's ironic is that the exact opposite thing is happening in high school football. I think the reason that all these rookies come into the NFL ready to play is because they have been running sophisticated offenses since Junior High.

My high school football team was really good and sent a number of players to D-1. We recently had a reunion of the team that won a state title my junior year. We were watching game tape and were amazed at the caveman offense we were running. And it was sophisticated compared to the offenses our opponent's were running. The same high school has a mediocre team today, but they are running a spread attack with read option elements. Our QB had to make one decision on most plays - keep it or pitch it. The school's QB today has to make 8 or 9 decisions at the line.

In Texas, the offenses in high school would confuse Bill Walsh. The good teams run no-huddle and call everything at the line. These QBs get to college and are ready to run these sci-fi offenses. See: Johnny Football. I don't know if he will have the natural physical ability to succeed in the NFL, but after two or three more years in that A&M offense, an NFL offense will seem childish.

Edited November 16, 2012 by Lombardi's_kid_brother

[Destino]

And there was an improvement between his rookie season and year two. I'm more interested in him being able to control his pace and break down a defense to get easy buckets close to the hoop. This is what Rondo does masterfully. Wall can get there. Perimeter shooting is something he'll have to work on, but that's the least of my concerns when discussing Wall's game.

What do you think improved in year two? I'm curious because I didn't see any improvement.

[Going Commando]

And there was an improvement between his rookie season and year two. I'm more interested in him being able to control his pace and break down a defense to get easy buckets close to the hoop. This is what Rondo does masterfully. Wall can get there. Perimeter shooting is something he'll have to work on, but that's the least of my concerns when discussing Wall's game.

I'm in agreement. I'll add that my other big concern is his half court defense. He needs to become that elite on ball defender his potential says he can become. He's a great transition defender already. Some of the stuff he does there is amazing and that's just all pure instincts and improvising, not a set thing. That's how he's like LeBron or Wade. What he needs to do next is become like those two are in the halfcourt defense. And if people remember, LeBron wasn't really a good defender when he came in. It took LeBron several years to become who he is now.

If he improves his defense and his game management, it won't even matter that much whether he can shoot or not. We'll be getting outstanding PG play already. Become Rondo first Wall. You can worry about becoming Rose or Westbrook and shooting later.

---------- Post added November-16th-2012 at 03:13 PM ----------

What do you think improved in year two? I'm curious because I didn't see any improvement.

Getting to the line.