8 common profiles of a NBA bust!

[-Young Buck-]

I saw this article, it was a good read.

http://www.draftexpress.com/viewarticle.php?a=2116

I would also talk about teams drafting for need rather then best talent. Remember Portland passing on Jordan for Sam Bowie because they didnt need a SG with Drextler? Remember Detroit passing on Wade and Mello to take darko milicic. Dont draft for need, draft for best talent available.

[kevC]

I absolutely agree with drafting the best player available. If you need a point guard and you draft a point guard but that point guard sucks, guess what? You still need a point guard! If you draft a good player he can always be moved or even play along side your stud, learning a thing or two.

[maes]

Yeah i read that last week and found it slightly humorous but not at all useful. Great, Nick Skita was a bust...thanks for the news?? It doesn't talk at all about why he was a bust, it just lists a bunch of players who couldn't compete at the next level.

My own theories:

1. 82 Games, not 30
Anybody remember Ralph Samson? He was basically a 7' 4" PF who was so athletic, so agile, so fluid Hakeem Olajuwon played Center instead of him. Magic Johnson said Ralph made HIM look good (all-star game). Ralph's body couldn't take the rigors of 82 games + hundreds of practices every year. I think a lot of college stars who fail fall into this category, especially bigs.

2. Money or Love of the Game?
Is this kid gonna give up on basketball as soon as he becomes a multi millionaire? How many guys look like all-stars in their last contract year, and then cruise control for the next 5 years (*cough Larry Hughes*).

I think most people would be surprised how few players enjoy playing in the NBA because we all consider it a dream job. Gerald Green's blog is a good one to read about this.

As Dirk said in one of his songs, he gets paid millions to play a child's game.

3. Position Shift
This one i agree w/ the article, lots of busts and lots of hidden gems happen because teams incorrectly assume what position a player will play. Dunleavy would have been a very good outside shooter for a PF...except he can't play PF. As a SF, his shooting is very average if not worse. Actual scouting quote: "He can shoot it, and think it, and he's probably the best passing big in the draft...Draft Outlook: Top 5 pick"

Another example, McGrady went #9 instead of top 3 because scouts assumed he's be a SF/PF, based on what he played in high school and his stats (15 rpg 9 bpg). Quote: "In comparing him to the other recent high school seniors who've made the NBA, McGrady compares most closely to Jermaine O'Neal. Physically, he probably approaches Garnett, but he doesn't have Garnett's size or feel for the game." Bzzzz...wrong, and that probably cost some teams that could have drafted him.

[Matt]

i like darius miles scouting report.....it says he can take players off the drizzy

[Laxation]

I saw this article, it was a good read.

http://www.draftexpress.com/viewarticle.php?a=2116

I would also talk about teams drafting for need rather then best talent. Remember Portland passing on Jordan for Sam Bowie because they didnt need a SG with Drextler? Remember Detroit passing on Wade and Mello to take darko milicic. Dont draft for need, draft for best talent available.

Darko was the consensus BPA
But lets not go there

This was an awesome article, I loved reading it

[Andrew]

Yeah i read that last week and found it slightly humorous but not at all useful. Great, Nick Skita was a bust...thanks for the news?? It doesn't talk at all about why he was a bust, it just lists a bunch of players who couldn't compete at the next level.

I agree that it categorises busts with a few generalisations more than it examines specific reasons why players failed but I believe the reasons are implied in each category, such as the implication of the "Clones" category that the listed players were all touted as being the next whoever through some vague comparison and ultimately failed because they were nothing like the players they were compared to or nowhere near as skilled.