Generational Prospects

[fpliii]

Which guys were hyped, prior to being drafted, as once-in-a-generation talents? By the strictest definition possible, I'd say (whatever that might be for you). Remember, this is based strictly on sentiment at the time/hype, not looking at guys in retrospect.

Here's the current list:

Generational Prospects


1950
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959 - Wilt Chamberlain (agreed upon in 1955)
1960 - Oscar Robertson
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965 - Bill Bradley (?)
1966
1967
1968
1969 - Lew Alcindor
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974 - Bill Walton
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979 - Magic Johnson (?)
1980
1981
1982
1983 - Ralph Sampson
1984 - Hakeem Olajuwon (?)
1985 - Patrick Ewing
1986
1987 - David Robinson
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992 - Shaquille O’Neal
1993 - Chris Webber (?)
1994
1995
1996
1997 - Tim Duncan
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003 - LeBron James
2004
2005
2006
2007 - Greg Oden ; Kevin Durant (?)
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012 - Anthony Davis (?)
2013
2014
2015

Other Players Named:


1950
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
1958 - Elgin Baylor (?) (first drafted in 1956)
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964 - Connie Hawkins (?)
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970 - Pete Maravich (?)
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975 - David Thompson (?)
1976
1977
1978 - Larry Bird (?)
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988 - Danny Manning (?) ; Len Bias (?)
1989
1990 - Derrick Coleman (?)
1991 - Kenny Anderson (?)
1992
1993 - Penny Haradaway (?)
1994 - Glenn Robinson (?) ; Jason Kidd (?) ; Grant Hill (?)
1995 - Kevin Garnett (?)
1996
1997
1998
1999 - Lamar Odom (?)
2000
2001
2002 - Yao Ming (?) ; Jay Williams (?)
2003 - Darko Milicic (?) ; Carmelo Anthony (?)
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008 - Derrick Rose (?) ; Michael Beasley (?) ; OJ Mayo (?)
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013 - Andrew Wiggins (?) ; Joel Embiid (?)
2014
2015 - Karl-Anthony Towns (?)

[RightToCensor]

I'd say Joel Embiid, but the back problem coming out of Kansas hurt his hype. He did start getting mad praise after one workout where she showcased his limberness, jumpshot, and footwork. That praise again died down when he had surgery on his foot.

[RightToCensor]

Yao Ming is one guy you have missing

http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/233818/Ford-Ranks-Top-25-Prospects-Between-2000-2014

[fpliii]

Yao Ming is one guy you have missing

http://basketball.realgm.com/wiretap/233818/Ford-Ranks-Top-25-Prospects-Between-2000-2014
That's a good list. I'll add him.

I'll also add KD provisionally.

[RightToCensor]

I'd add Magic Johnson and Chris Webber

[fpliii]

I'd add Magic Johnson and Chris Webber
My issue with Magic, is that I've seen it said before that they didn't expect him to turn the franchise around (I saw the quote in Zander Hollander's annual pre-season guide). I can add him provisionally.

Webber? I can't answer honestly since that draft was very early in my days following the league. I'll add him provisionally too.

[Levity]

KAT?

a mobile big man, that can score in the paint, stretch the floor, beautifully find the open man (either face up or back to the basket), and anchor the D.

EDIT: actually, maybe he doesnt qualify, since he wasnt all that hyped til the end of the college season. However, talent wise, i think he should be considered

[Cleverness]

All 6'10"+ players except LeBron

Maybe add Jason Kidd to that list? He was pretty hyped, but not sure anyone called him once-in-a-generation

[FKAri]

Hakeem?

[JimmyMcAdocious]

There's a difference between potential franchise player and getting that generational tag.

LeBron was hyped as a generational prospect. Oden was. Yao was. Durant was. Want to say Davis, too. Other than those guys, not sure I would consider anyone else in the new millennium. Perhaps Darko and/or Melo? Maybe Jay Williams. I would put those three above Beasley, Embiid, Rose, etc.

[outbreak]

If you want to look at it in a strict sense you can only pick one player for each generation. So you can't have things like Davis and Embiid because they are the same generation. Also lots of drafts seem to have hyped big men. I'd pick Davis for this era though because the hype on him was that he wasn't your traditional big.

[outbreak]

There's a difference between potential franchise player and getting that generational tag.

LeBron was hyped as a generational prospect. Oden was. Yao was. Durant was. Want to say Davis, too. Other than those guys, not sure I would consider anyone else in the new millennium. Perhaps Darko and/or Melo? Maybe Jay Williams. I would put those three above Beasley, Embiid, Rose, etc.

Agree with this, some people are taking generational in a different way to what i would. I'd maybe add Shaq and Ewing.

[WillC]

Joel Embiid? No. No way. Sure, people were excited about him, but if you're going to include him then you may as well include Kwame Brown and dozens of other players. Likewise, I wouldn't include Michael Beasley. And no, I'm not just saying this with the benefit of hindsight. After all, I love your inclusion of Ralph Sampson, who I came here to suggest.

I'd remove Kevin Durant. People like to think that the Blazers made a bad choice taking Oden over him, but I bet 99% of GMs would have done the same. Oden was far superior in terms of hype/expectations at the time.

The other player I'd probably remove is Yao Ming. There were so many question marks about him. Then again, there was a lot of hype. But I'd say that Darko Milicic had just as much hype as Ming. Both were huge uncertainties.

I see no problem whatsoever with Magic's inclusion. Sadly, although Bird was highly rated, many thought he'd struggle due to lack of athleticism. How wrong they were.

Likewise, no need for a question mark next to David Robinson. He was a generational prospect.

Finally, I'd add Oscar Robertson. No question about it.

[Milbuck]

KAT?

a mobile big man, that can score in the paint, stretch the floor, beautifully find the open man (either face up or back to the basket), and anchor the D.

EDIT: actually, maybe he doesnt qualify, since he wasnt all that hyped til the end of the college season. However, talent wise, i think he should be considered
KAT to me is one of those typical "hype him up for the sake of hyping him up" type prospects that we see every other year, with guys like Chad Ford talking up their "unique skill-sets" and how "we've never seen something quite like this". He's a tremendous prospect but I don't think he's on the level of truly elite big man prospects like Davis, Embiid, Oden, etc. He's clearly a level below imo. Even in hindsight, not counting draft-time hype, I really don't see what makes him such a crazy prospect. He can handle it and shoot it, and he's pretty athletic, but none of those skills are at the level where it really screams all-time great...a la Dirk as a shooter, D-Rob as an athlete, KG with his guard-like skills, etc. And also he looks kinda awkward pretty often and doesn't have the same fluidity/natural feel in the post that made prospects like Embiid so intriguing.

This draft in general to me wasn't anything super special, but it got an unsual amount of hype.

[JimmyMcAdocious]

Maybe Kenny Anderson? He's pretty easily one of the most hyped high school players of all time, great career at GT, drafted #2. Not sure what scouts were thinking about him around draft time tho. But I know in high school he's up there with the LeBron, Big O, Ewing, McMillen, KG and Oden in terms of potential and expectations.

[WillC]

The opening list has become far too cluttered and full of players who were never regarded as generational prospects.

I regard such a player to be someone who was expected to be the 1st pick for at least a year leading up to the draft.

Players like Jason Kidd, Kevin Durant, Jay Williams and Joel Embiid weren't even number one picks. Sure, they were great players, but not transcendent like a Chamberlain, Alcindor, LeBron or Shaq.

And Karl Anthony Towns certainly doesn't belong on the list. He only became the unanimous number 1 pick a few months before the draft. Okafor was number 1 for much of the season. So Towns was hardly regarded as a generational talent.

[ClipperRevival]

Maybe Kenny Anderson? He's pretty easily one of the most hyped high school players of all time, great career at GT, drafted #2. Not sure what scouts were thinking about him around draft time tho. But I know in high school he's up there with the LeBron, Big O, Ewing, McMillen, KG and Oden in terms of potential and expectations.

Dude was incredibly hyped and was seen as a can't miss.

[WillC]

Dude was incredibly hyped and was seen as a can't miss.

He was indeed. But he wasn't hyped any more than, say, Iverson or Marbury. All were regarded as stars in the making. But not quite on a generational level.

[ClipperRevival]

Way too many names on that list. Once in a generation type prospect is exactly that, someone so special, they come along every 10 years or so. I would add for recent years, Davis, Blake, Rose and Lebron for the last 15 years. Maybe I am missing a few.

But on top of my head, guys that stood out were Shaq, Ewing, Hakeem, Robinson, Hill, etc.

[ClipperRevival]

He was indeed. But he wasn't hyped any more than, say, Iverson or Marbury. All were regarded as stars in the making. But not quite on a generational level.

Yup. Difference between can't miss and once in a generation type talent.

[fpliii]

The opening list has become far too cluttered and full of players who were never regarded as generational prospects.

I regard such a player to be someone who was expected to be the 1st pick for at least a year leading up to the draft.

Players like Jason Kidd, Kevin Durant, Jay Williams and Joel Embiid weren't even number one picks. Sure, they were great players, but not transcendent like a Chamberlain, Alcindor, LeBron or Shaq.

And Karl Anthony Towns certainly doesn't belong on the list. He only became the unanimous number 1 pick a few months before the draft. Okafor was number 1 for much of the season. So Towns was hardly regarded as a generational talent.
Okay, I cleaned it up a bit. I think there is still some debate about Webber/Yao/Durant in this thread. Do you think the rest of the guys on the top list are fine for inclusion?

[WillC]

Way too many names on that list. Once in a generation type prospect is exactly that, someone so special, they come along every 10 years or so. I would add for recent years, Davis, Blake, Rose and Lebron for the last 15 years. Maybe I am missing a few.

But on top of my head, guys that stood out were Shaq, Ewing, Hakeem, Robinson, Hill, etc.

I agree with your logic....

...And then you defy logic by suggesting Hill. He was regarded as a likely future All-Star... but the Bucks still passed on him to select the Big Dog. So hardly a generational talent.

[ClipperRevival]

I agree with your logic....

...And then you defy logic by suggesting Hill. He was regarded as a likely future All-Star... but the Bucks still passed on him to select the Big Dog. So hardly a generational talent.

Yeah, Hill doesn't belong. He was just hyped big time as the next MJ once he got to the league though.

[WillC]

Okay, I cleaned it up a bit. I think there is still some debate about Webber/Yao/Durant in this thread. Do you think the rest of the guys on the top list are fine for inclusion?

I'd be semi-tempted to include Webber. He had a fine college career and was a lock for the top pick that year.

Ming was such an unknown quantity. I remember people thought the Rockets could be making a huge mistake taking him over a proven player such as Jay Williams. Those niggling doubts about Ming make me reluctant to tag him as a generational talent.

Likewise, I just can't see a strong argument for Durant. Everyone knew he'd be a great player - a likely All-Star - but he's exceeded people's wildest expectations.

[TonyMontana]

A generational prospet can't be given out easily. There is a difference between the type and a generation prospect vs a guy who is just a lock to go #1 overall.

I wouldn't even say Anthony Davis was one. He was just the given #1 overall pick in his draft.

The last one was probably LeBron. Before that Duncan. Then Shaq. 3 in the last 25 years.

[ClipperRevival]

A generational prospet can't be given out easily. There is a difference between the type and a generation prospect vs a guy who is just a lock to go #1 overall.

I wouldn't even say Anthony Davis was one. He was just the given #1 overall pick in his draft.

The last one was probably LeBron. Before that Duncan. Then Shaq. 3 in the last 25 years.

Nah, Davis deserves that tag. Just because you have several genrational prospects in a few years doesn't mean they don't warant it. For example, Ewing, Olajuwon and Robinson all came out within 5 years. Greatness is greatness.

[WillC]

A generational prospet can't be given out easily. There is a difference between the type and a generation prospect vs a guy who is just a lock to go #1 overall.

I wouldn't even say Anthony Davis was one. He was just the given #1 overall pick in his draft.

The last one was probably LeBron. Before that Duncan. Then Shaq. 3 in the last 25 years.

I actually agree with you about Anthony Davis.

I think the closest thing we've had to a generational prospect since LeBron was probably Greg Oden. He flat out dominated High School and then went onto the NCAA championship game as a freshman, confirming and justifying the hype. He was compared to Bill Russell, Patrick Ewing, David Robinson, etc.

My definition of a 'generational prospect' is someone who was hyped as an unwavering future #1 pick from a young age, e.g. from High School perhaps.

Oden fits the bill.

[fpliii]

I actually agree with you about Anthony Davis.

I think the closest thing we've had to a generational prospect since LeBron was probably Greg Oden. He flat out dominated High School and then went onto the NCAA championship game as a freshman, confirming and justifying the hype. He was compared to Bill Russell, Patrick Ewing, David Robinson, etc.

My definition of a 'generational prospect' is someone who was hyped as an unwavering future #1 pick from a young age, e.g. from High School perhaps.

Oden fits the bill.
Does anyone warrant inclusion prior to Wilt in your opinion? Also, should Walton have a question mark, or do you think it should be removed?

[JimmyMcAdocious]

I don't completely buy that you have to go #1 to have been considered a generational talent. Sure in most cases it will go that way, but all it takes is 1 out of the 30 teams (or however many there were in that draft year) to have a differing opinion/need with a high draft pick. Especially in drafts where there were potentially two regarded as that level of prospect or in the older drafts where scouting wasn't as meticulous as it is now.

[ClipperRevival]

I don't completely buy that you have to go #1 to have been considered a generational talent. Sure in most cases it will go that way, but all it takes is 1 out of the 30 teams (or however many there were in that draft year) to have a differing opinion/need with a high draft pick. Especially in drafts where there were potentially two regarded as that level of prospect or in the older drafts where scouting wasn't as meticulous as it is now.

Nah, going #1 has to be a criteria.

[ImmortalNemesis]

Just throwing a name out there.

What about Len Bias? Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Daugherty picked over him solely because he was a big man?

[fpliii]

The Durant question is interesting, because he was actually the reason behind this list. Someone had asked in which other drafts he would not be a top two pick.

I was lurking a few weeks ago and also saw this:

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=381634

I don't follow hockey too closely, but with Connor McDavid being viewed as a generational talent, and Jake Eichel as a clear top pick guy in any other year.

So on one hand, perhaps Durant shouldn't be included.

On the other hand, between 1983-1987 there were three surefire guys considered generational talents (and another guy Hakeem, who got some hype). If two of those guys were in the same draft, would we consider them both to be once in a generation prospects?

[JimmyMcAdocious]

There were those who thought Jordan was the best player in 84, in a draft with Hakeem (who I think we can all agree was a generational prospect) and yet, the Portland people have stated in the past that Jordan wasn't even their Plan-B. I think Barkley was after Hakeem and Bowie. They didn't need a wing, thus there was no way they were drafting one.

btw, I wouldn't put MJ on the list. Just saying, big man (always) > perimeter player, and a lot of teams will put need above talent. Even immense talent.

[ClipperRevival]

Has a once in a generation prospect ever flopped? On top of my head, i say no, at least from 1980 on. You only get that tag if you separate yourself so much from the rest of the class that it's just so apparent you will be special even at the NBA level.

[FireDavidKahn]

Karl-Anthony Towns:bowdown:

[Big_Dogg]

What, no KG?

[hawksdogsbraves]

Has a once in a generation prospect ever flopped? On top of my head, i say no, at least from 1980 on. You only get that tag if you separate yourself so much from the rest of the class that it's just so apparent you will be special even at the NBA level.

Oden was absolutely considered a generational prospect, though idk if you want to count his injuries as 'flopping'.

Also lol at anyone considering KAT a 'generational prospect', he wasn't close to considered that his freshman year and isn't one heading into his rookie year.

And Davis is one I think. He was considered the number one prospect as a high schooler, dominated his only year in college and was the number one prospect all the way through that season and has proven his worth ever since.

[Fire Colangelo]

Wiggins was pretttty hyped last year...

[hawksdogsbraves]

Wiggins was pretttty hyped last year...

Wiggins was super touted in high school but he disappointed pretty majorly in college and would not have gone first overall if Embiid had been healthy. It's debatable.

[ClipperRevival]

Oden was absolutely considered a generational prospect, though idk if you want to count his injuries as 'flopping'.

Also lol at anyone considering KAT a 'generational prospect', he wasn't close to considered that his freshman year and isn't one heading into his rookie year.

And Davis is one I think. He was considered the number one prospect as a high schooler, dominated his only year in college and was the number one prospect all the way through that season and has proven his worth ever since.

Yeah, injuries don't count. But don't know if Oden was considered a once in a generation type prospect. I see several guys saying so but he just never stood out like some of the others.

[Fire Colangelo]

Wiggins was super touted in high school but he disappointed pretty majorly in college and would not have gone first overall if Embiid had been healthy. It's debatable.

Well, he was hyped as hell in HS. If we don't have this one year college rule he'd definitely be considered as a generational prospect, no?

[ClipperRevival]

Wiggins was super touted in high school but he disappointed pretty majorly in college and would not have gone first overall if Embiid had been healthy. It's debatable.

Yeah, heading into college, he had that Bron type buzz but his athleticism just wasn't on par with a Bron or Rose so he wasn't able to just impose his will on the college game with his athleticism. I mean he's very athletic, just not eye popping athletic like his teammate Lavine. He has quick feet and can explode off the floor when he plants but he isn't as fluid as he could be.

[ClipperRevival]

Well, he was hyped as hell in HS. If we don't have this one year college rule he'd definitely be considered as a generational prospect, no?

I don't know about once in a generation but he would've definitely been viewed as can't miss. What separated Bron from Wiggins was Bron's man sized body as a HS player. He was just naturaly blessed with a freakish body. So there were less questions about Bron's ability to adjust to the NBA because he had that NBA body right out of HS along with the elite athleticism. Wiggins was wiry thin.

[hawksdogsbraves]

Well, he was hyped as hell in HS. If we don't have this one year college rule he'd definitely be considered as a generational prospect, no?

Yeah probably but we do have a one year college rule so I don't think he is.

I mean dude averaged what, 17/6 on 45% shooting at Kansas and 'led' the team to a second round exit?

Durant averaged 26/11 on better percentages and people in here still are iffy on whether he was a generational prospect. And Wiggins, despite the fact that I think he'll be a very good pro, ain't no Durant.

[Akrazotile]

Bassy Telfair :lol

[WillC]

The Durant question is interesting, because he was actually the reason behind this list. Someone had asked in which other drafts he would not be a top two pick.

I was lurking a few weeks ago and also saw this:

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=381634

I don't follow hockey too closely, but with Connor McDavid being viewed as a generational talent, and Jake Eichel as a clear top pick guy in any other year.

So on one hand, perhaps Durant shouldn't be included.

On the other hand, between 1983-1987 there were three surefire guys considered generational talents (and another guy Hakeem, who got some hype). If two of those guys were in the same draft, would we consider them both to be once in a generation prospects?

I see what you're saying.

However, Durant had no greater level of hype than, say, Carmelo Anthony.

[BoutPractice]

Could it conceivably be narrowed down to

Wilt
Kareem
Sampson
Ewing (not sure)
Shaq
LeBron
Oden (depends when… by the time of the draft, he may no longer have been in that "special" category, given how there was an argument between him and Durant)
?

[RightToCensor]

I'm in for Embiid after thinking about it. The hype of being the next Hakeem was so big half way through his season at Kansas that it's hard to acknowledge him as a generational prospect.

There were people who thought Embiid would come into the league with some of the best footwork in the league while being able to block shots and run the floor like a gazelle.

[WillC]

[QUOTE=BoutPractice]Could it conceivably be narrowed down to

Wilt
Kareem
Sampson
Ewing (not sure)
Shaq
LeBron
Oden (depends when

[GIF REACTION]

Embiid doesn't belong. Just the new age of kids and the social media aspect. It's one big hype up every year now. Same shit with KAT this year. A lot of it is "Potential". Generational talents are the ones that not only have the "potential", but they produce at a super star level at the college game.

[fpliii]

I see what you're saying.

However, Durant had no greater level of hype than, say, Carmelo Anthony.
Understood. Thanks for your input in this thread so far (and thanks to everyone else as well).

The ultimate goal for me is to produce a two-tiered list. First being the generational guys, second being the "can't miss" prospects (inclusive of the first group), with the goal being the answer to the question of "how many franchise players" there are in a given draft, or "how many players deep" it is (since we'll hear often, teams are tanking for a top X pick as the season closes out).