Will everyone leave Childress alone

[CBAreject]

Quote:

---

Over the age of 20...

Ha. Good one.

That's almost impossible now because "superstar potential" do not spend three years in college any more.

---

That hasn't been the trend for long. There are PLENTY of players who go to college 2 years or more even now. BESIDES, most of the players who have truly become superstars in years past were drafted in the era in which players went to college (Jordan, Barkley, Malone, Ewing, Olaj....etc., etc.) Don't act like you don't have a large sample set to draw from. Going into the draft from high school has only been very common since the Kwame/Chandler/Curry draft. Other years it was only 1 or 2 notable players each year. AND if Chills did have 'superstar potential', then why did he spend three years in college? Don't get me wrong, I'm a fan of Chill, but I don't see how what you're arguing here convinces anyone that Chill may, indeed, have superstar potential.

Quote:

---

There is to say, that there is no age defined learning curve in basketball.

---

I think I know what you're saying (it depends on PT, not on age), but I disagree whole-heartedly. PT is very important, for sure, but all PT equal, age is a huge factor. A player who has 4 years of college is MUCH more likely to be closer to his peak in his rookie year given 25+ mpg than a HSer. That's why the ceiling for Dwight Howard is higher than the rookie of the year, Emeka Okafor. That's why Joe Smith, who showed such promise never really got much better. The same goes for KMart.

I don't see how you can argue that age doesn't matter for 'learning curve' or how well a player's current performance projects his future performance.

Quote:

---

Some guys who are now Superstars who were 20 in their Rookie year and didn't average over 8 ppg...

1. Baron Davis.

2. Stephen Jackson

3. Richard Jefferson

4. Josh Howard

5. Sam Cassell

6. Doug Christie

7. Scottie Pippen

8. Jason Terry

---

YOU have to be kidding me. I just volunteered that Jefferson scored 9.4 ppg in his rookie year, but you turn right around and list him as a player who scored less than 8? Truth is, I think Jefferson is a good counter-example to my argument, but he still doesn't meet the criteria. Jason Terry isn't a superstar, and he still doesn't meet the criteria (over 8 ppg in his rookie year).

You do have 2 players who meet the standards even if we define superstar loosely: Scottie Pippen and Baron Davis, and good work finding those.

So, there you have it. It's tough to find many players who went on to have big careers after having bad first seasons as a 20+ player. When you do find one, he's probably not truly a superstar.

I never said it was impossible...I even hinted that Childress *might* reach Jefferson's heights. The point here is that the ODDS are not in his favor. I hope that he becomes a HOFer, but I wouldn't try to build my offense/franchise around him, because he hasn't shown us enough yet.

[Diesel]

Quote:

---

hat hasn't been the trend for long. There are PLENTY of players who go to college 2 years or more even now. BESIDES, most of the players who have truly become superstars in years past were drafted in the era in which players went to college (Jordan, Barkley, Malone, Ewing, Olaj....etc., etc.) Don't act like you don't have a large sample set to draw from.

---

Oh, I did have a large set to draw from, but I didn't. In fact, if you want to go through Basketball history, for a while, it was unheard of for a first year player to get PT period... Especially if he went to a playoff calibre team with an old school coach. I picked players playing now for the youngens here... But you make my point...

There is an error change and had this been 15 yrs ago, nobody would question Chillz ability...

But we live in a time where it has become acceptable and expected for a ROOKIE to Have playing time and we become so impatient with a rookie who doesn't flourish in 1/2 of a season of playing off the bench... While, if we go back just 15 yrs, this was the norm...

[Plainview1981]

Quote:

---

how can you say he hasn't shown potential? Do you even watch the games? And no he's not going to be a kobe bryant caliber player, but who is? Maybe you should lower your standsrds, if you think picking in the lottery gurantees a superstar every year.

---

I don't mean having a good game once every 7 or 8 games.

From a physical side he hasn't shown alot. He will hit

some open shots and get stick backs. My point about Kobe

is that you could tell he would be really good as a rookie

by some of the plays he made. I simply don't see Chill

having the talents above that of a Doug Christie like role player.

[Diesel]

Again..

There's a relationship to playing better and playing time... Right.

[Plainview1981]

On the stat sheet given the minutes it doesn't look

terrible. It's simply that watching him I don't get

a feel that he will be that great. Even when he has

the 18 point game every now and then he just doesn't

seem to give me the feeling that he will be an impact

player. It might turn out that he will have to start

and get 30MPG to truely figure out if he can be the

16/7/3.5 that he probably should be. Judging by what

I saw in the short clips and such I'd think that would

be about what he could do.

[Weez]

isn't that what you want alongside a superstar? the occassional great game but in general consistnecy (say he improves that to avg. 15 ppg) in terms of defnese, ball handling, and assists?

a team must be built...and even if JSmoove is the superstar to build it aorund...what's wrong with holding onto some potentially 'great' complimentary players in the process of finding and or developing that superstar...if you don't, yo'ull lose at least one season of that 'superstar's career' while acquiring the proper personnell to play around him

(though it blew up bc of Carter's injury, see what Toronto did after the 2000 season with all their signings).