Luftgekuehlt67
Well-Known Member
Like any public/anonymous message board, HN is a mixed bag - some goofy takes. To be expected; part of the fun, even.
But I swear this board leads them all in terms of underinformed NBA-related hot takes. It's almost astounding.
The NBA draft order is HEAVILY weighted towards potential. Teams, generally, are not looking for matured, developed, and experienced players who can slot into a role day 1. I'm not saying that doesn't happen, I'm just saying generally what teams are doing is trying to nab guys, based on pure potential, before any other teams do. Then, from the player perspective, once you hit a roster as a 18 or 19 year old, your clock starts ticking to show you've got the stuff to stick around. Once you hit that 22-23 age range, unless there are some kind of extenuating factors (such as maybe injuries or physical stature that's just too good to give up on), you better be producing or you'll be out the door so the team can try again with another 18-19 year old.
A four year college player making it in the NBA is, at this point, a feel good underdog story. No, really, I'm not pulling your chain. I'm a big Nuggets fan, I watch every game. Monte Morris is considered an amazing story, "wow, can you imagine a guy this good being left to ROT in college for 4 years?!?" That's the vibe, plain and simple. A lot of NBA guys today have what are relatively only 1 or 2 years of relatively modest college numbers. Depending on the program they came out of, it's not even all that unusual for them to not have even have been full time starters.
And we're not even talking about stars/starters here. This is just The Way Things Are Done. Take PJ Dozier. He is a solid reserve for the Nuggets but, unless you are a Nuggets fan or a really intense follower of the NBA in general, you've never even heard that name. Well, whether you've heard of him or not, he makes a shit ton of money playing professional basketball for a few minutes every other night or so. Look at his college resume. Two years. Look at his best year, his sophomore year. Meh, I mean, ok, I guess. But look at the slope from year 1 to year 2:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PJ_Dozier
OKC said, "ok, let's get this kid into a G-League uni and see what happens." Guess what? G-League All-Star. This one worked. A lot of guys from that draft class didn't (or haven't yet). Very, very typical NBA story I'm showing you here.
To bring this back to Keegan, if you want to think like an NBA personnel guy, you gotta make yourself a little mental graph. Where was Keegan last year? A mid-major project player who needed an extra year of finishing school that Fran was an absolute moron (per a segment of the fanbase) for even considering. OK, there's your first plot point. The next plot point then is Keegan showing he was easily the most talented freshman on the Iowa roster (by a long shot) and near the top of the best freshman in the entire Big Ten. A vital role player (sometimes starter) on a top 5 team. OK, now, connect those dots - what does the slope look like? Yeah, if you're a GM, although we're not in one-and-done territory, you are certainly wondering who else might be noticing this guy. If Keegan shows even modest growth in year 2, I absolutely believe he could be NBA bound.
But I swear this board leads them all in terms of underinformed NBA-related hot takes. It's almost astounding.
The NBA draft order is HEAVILY weighted towards potential. Teams, generally, are not looking for matured, developed, and experienced players who can slot into a role day 1. I'm not saying that doesn't happen, I'm just saying generally what teams are doing is trying to nab guys, based on pure potential, before any other teams do. Then, from the player perspective, once you hit a roster as a 18 or 19 year old, your clock starts ticking to show you've got the stuff to stick around. Once you hit that 22-23 age range, unless there are some kind of extenuating factors (such as maybe injuries or physical stature that's just too good to give up on), you better be producing or you'll be out the door so the team can try again with another 18-19 year old.
A four year college player making it in the NBA is, at this point, a feel good underdog story. No, really, I'm not pulling your chain. I'm a big Nuggets fan, I watch every game. Monte Morris is considered an amazing story, "wow, can you imagine a guy this good being left to ROT in college for 4 years?!?" That's the vibe, plain and simple. A lot of NBA guys today have what are relatively only 1 or 2 years of relatively modest college numbers. Depending on the program they came out of, it's not even all that unusual for them to not have even have been full time starters.
And we're not even talking about stars/starters here. This is just The Way Things Are Done. Take PJ Dozier. He is a solid reserve for the Nuggets but, unless you are a Nuggets fan or a really intense follower of the NBA in general, you've never even heard that name. Well, whether you've heard of him or not, he makes a shit ton of money playing professional basketball for a few minutes every other night or so. Look at his college resume. Two years. Look at his best year, his sophomore year. Meh, I mean, ok, I guess. But look at the slope from year 1 to year 2:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PJ_Dozier
OKC said, "ok, let's get this kid into a G-League uni and see what happens." Guess what? G-League All-Star. This one worked. A lot of guys from that draft class didn't (or haven't yet). Very, very typical NBA story I'm showing you here.
To bring this back to Keegan, if you want to think like an NBA personnel guy, you gotta make yourself a little mental graph. Where was Keegan last year? A mid-major project player who needed an extra year of finishing school that Fran was an absolute moron (per a segment of the fanbase) for even considering. OK, there's your first plot point. The next plot point then is Keegan showing he was easily the most talented freshman on the Iowa roster (by a long shot) and near the top of the best freshman in the entire Big Ten. A vital role player (sometimes starter) on a top 5 team. OK, now, connect those dots - what does the slope look like? Yeah, if you're a GM, although we're not in one-and-done territory, you are certainly wondering who else might be noticing this guy. If Keegan shows even modest growth in year 2, I absolutely believe he could be NBA bound.
