We're about to start seeing a lot more Pascal Siakam's- NBA player development thread

[Goo Punch 4275]

Giannis, Jokic, Siakam, Bledsoe, Gobert, Brogdon, Harrell, Capela, Bogdanovic, Dinwiddie, et al- the league is full of young players, from bench guys, to starters, to all stars, who were anything but known commodities when entering the league. Historically basketball has been the one sport where, from as early as middle school going forward, the best players are the best players and they stay that way, with majority of stud hoopers coming from the top 5-10% of the rankings. Up until now it's been relatively rare that a player drafted outside of the lottery goes on to be a solid-great NBA player. But that's all changing right before our eyes.

For me it comes down to two key things- first, the globalization of the game of basketball, led by former commissioner David Stern, and buoyed by the 1992 Dream Team's performance in Barcelona. They put basketball on the world stage, and the sport has grown tremendously because of it. Look no further than basketball-crazy Canada to see the effects. Vince Carter shows up in Toronto in the late 90's, and 20 years later we have more Canadian basketball talent in the greater Toronto area than the entire country had combined prior to VC's arrival, and by a huge margin at that. The entire world now plays basketball, and the talent pool has only gotten bigger.

The other key factor in this are the modern advancements in sports science and technology. As many of you know I mentor a kid who is currently a big time HS recruit, and not only do he and his teammates train like pros, they have access to everything that's available to these pros as well. Just today I saw my guy using cryotherapy and those big-ass bag things they put around the guy's' legs to recover from their intense, pro-style workouts. So not only has the talent pool gotten bigger, but the players are all much, much more advanced at an early age than they ever have been before.

Which leads me to the thread title- we are entering the age where the draft picks from outside of the lottery will increasingly become regular starters, or even all stars and hall of famers, because they still have so much room to grow when they enter the league. Look at our own Jaxson Hayes and how far he's come in such a short amount of time. The teams who have an eye for acquiring young talent that's being misused elsewhere, and those who can adequately develop and coach up their own young talent will be able to have a competitive advantage that they've never had before. Player development is going to be just as big for NBA teams as it is for NCAA teams, which is a far cry from the NBA we've always known and followed. We are at the dawn of a new golden age in this league, and we are going to see more parity, more stars spread throughout the league, and we are going to see more and more guys like Pascal Siakam, who one minute are an unknown late draft pick, and who the next minute are dropping 20 a night in the NBA Finals. I cannot wait to see what this league looks like in 5, 10 years, and going forward in perpetuity. The development of the G League, the forthcoming African league, getting rid of the one-and-done rule...it's all coming together to make the future of the NBA very, very exciting. 

[Catdaddyhorn 3467]

I have nothing substantive to contribute. I just wanted to add that I think  Siakam played his high school ball in Ft. Worth. 

[SilasCoade 2622]

Exposure to extreme training and technology at a young age would reinforce the best at a young age staying the best and limit the degree of further improvement possible. It's the Katy High School phenomenon. Max out kids early so you dominate that age level, but none of them are ever worth a shit after that because they don't have any room to improve.

Finding undeveloped kids in all parts of the world and then feeding them a diet of good food and intense training is how you get these surprise stars.

[Goo Punch 4275]

sure, but some guys who get all of the great training and advantages here in America still become unearthed gems because they are either late developers, or guys whose ceiling was actually higher than what they had shown as kids/teenagers. I'm talking about guys like Brogdon and van Vleet here. You think you know what their ceiling is on draft night, but then they just keep getting better and better until they become legit studs. 

Edited June 22, 2019 by Goo Punch

[Catdaddyhorn 3467]

1 hour ago, Llogg said:

Exposure to extreme training and technology at a young age would reinforce the best at a young age staying the best and limit the degree of further improvement possible. It's the Katy High School phenomenon. Max out kids early so you dominate that age level, but none of them are ever worth a shit after that because they don't have any room to improve.

Finding undeveloped kids in all parts of the world and then feeding them a diet of good food and intense training is how you get these surprise stars.

That's true of football where raw ability rather than skill refinement is the premium factor. In basketball skill is becoming more and more the be all end all. So continuously refining those skills and starting from an early age can only be a plus in my eyes. 

[Mole 4339]

 

 

1

7 hours ago, Goo Punch said:

Up until now it's been relatively rare that a player drafted outside of the lottery goes on to be a solid-great NBA player. 

I agree with the premise that the game is changing in a lot of exciting ways as far as player development and the number of great players (I think the game is the best that it's ever been), but I'm not sure I agree with this part here. I don't have hard data, but just a quick scan of basketball-reference drafts sorting by career win shares shows a pretty healthy mix of good to great players from most drafts coming from all parts of the draft. Of course, the better players tend to come from higher picks, but I suspect that will continue to be the case. Many drafts (I scanned back to 1980) have studs that everyone passed on and most drafts' best player were high picks. I suspect this will still be the case in the future. Some drafts also just suck.

The ever-increasing internationalization of the NBA over the past 25+ years and the one-and-done issue will add some more variability in projecting player development, but it's always been a bit of a crapshoot. Remember, Todd Fuller was drafted before Kobe and Steve Nash.

[Goo Punch 4275]

19 minutes ago, Mole said:

I agree with the premise that the game is changing in a lot of exciting ways as far as player development and the number of great players (I think the game is the best that it's ever been), but I'm not sure I agree with this part here. I don't have hard data, but just a quick scan of basketball-reference drafts sorting by career win shares shows a pretty healthy mix of good to great players from most drafts coming from all parts of the draft. Of course, the better players tend to come from higher picks, but I suspect that will continue to be the case. Many drafts (I scanned back to 1980) have studs that everyone passed on and most drafts' best player were high picks. I suspect this will still be the case in the future. Some drafts also just suck.

The ever-increasing internationalization of the NBA over the past 25+ years and the one-and-done issue will add some more variability in projecting player development, but it's always been a bit of a crapshoot. Remember, Todd Fuller was drafted before Kobe and Steve Nash.

i'll put it to you this way: if you go look up historical NBA drafts on wikipedia, the player's names are listed with a white background, unless that player has reached certain achievements, such as making an all star team or an all-nba team. i haven't perused them super recently, but as i recall probably 80 - 90% of the names with colored backgrounds (no racist) in almost all of the drafts were well towards the top of the draft, and became more and more infrequent the further down the most you go. 

Edited June 22, 2019 by Goo Punch