:applause:
Printable View
:applause:
[url]http://nbadraft.net/players/tyler-ennis[/url]
good player....i say he goes just outside the top 10.
also Go Canada!
Late lotto-top 20 pick
Good PG, but not elite potential coming out of college. Would be really good under Horni and the Phoenix Suns.
The Canadian Rondo
[QUOTE=RightToCensor]Late lotto-top 20 pick
Good PG, but not elite potential coming out of college. Would be really good under Horni and the Phoenix Suns.[/QUOTE]
One GM said he take Ennis over Irving....not sure who it was because they're scared to attach their name to something so bold.
The kid has great poise under pressure and didn't turn the ball over much.
I see Steph Curry w/o his elite jumpshot as his ceiling.
[QUOTE=Clyde]One GM said he take Ennis over Irving....not sure who it was because they're scared to attach their name to something so bold.
The kid has great poise under pressure and didn't turn the ball over much.[/QUOTE]
That GM should probably be fired then
just another syracuse scrub
[QUOTE=cranincu]just another syracuse scrub[/QUOTE]
say whaaaaat?
[QUOTE=Clyde]say whaaaaat?[/QUOTE]
More like Tyler Pennis.
He's basically another Cory Joseph.
[QUOTE=midatlantic09]He's basically another Cory Joseph.[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.nbadraft.net/players/cory-joseph[/url]
vs.
[url]http://nbadraft.net/players/tyler-ennis[/url]
[QUOTE=Clyde]good player....i say he goes just outside the top 10.
also Go Canada![/QUOTE]
Aren't you one of these that wants players to have a post graduate degree before entering the NBA? You should be hating this decision by him, and not worrying about where he goes.
He won't be a star but he looks to me like one of those guaranteed contributors that will have a long career as a starter on a poor team or a good bench piece people want.
If orlando don't end up with a guard with our first pick I'd love to have him around with the second first rounder.
This is already a Point Guard heavy league, he's going to struggle.
[QUOTE=Sarcastic]Aren't you one of these that wants players to have a post graduate degree before entering the NBA? You should be hating this decision by him, and not worrying about where he goes.[/QUOTE]
My argument is that it would be more beneficial to the players progression and the NBA if they stayed in school for more then a year.
I understand your side of the argument about the risk of injury effecting draft position , but I was never arguing that point.
Do I believe Tyler Ennis would be better prepared day 1 of his NBA career if he stayed in school an extra year? Absolutely.
I enjoy seeing the Canadian kids in the draft because i utter detest hockey, and glad to see my countries efforts to develop basketball players is paying off.
Frankly the next CBA will put an end to discussions like this as players will be staying in school for a minimum of 2 years, or the age of 20. ( thats my guess anyhow.)
Also I'd like to point out that the general consensus is that most rookies (1 and done) aren't ready physically to play an 82 game schedule, especially big men.
Maturity is other thing...these KIDS are 18-19 years old, and are being paid multi-million dollars a year. The high draft pick are expected in most cases to lead their team, something I don't think you can be mentally prepared for after only 1 year of college.
anyhow you have your opinion and I have mine.
I'm just not sure how you come to the conclusion that staying is better for development. The HS to pros and one & dones have done better than the kids that stayed for 2 years or more.
Look at guys like Kyrie, Rose, Durant, etc who are superstars. The 2and dones have taken much longer to develop like Derrick Williams and Johnny Flynn who I am not even sure if he's still playing.
[QUOTE=Sarcastic]I'm just not sure how you come to the conclusion that staying is better for development. The HS to pros and one & dones have done better than the kids that stayed for 2 years or more.
Look at guys like Kyrie, Rose, Durant, etc who are superstars. The 2and dones have taken much longer to develop like Derrick Williams and Johnny Flynn who I am not even sure if he's still playing.[/QUOTE]
For everyone that works out there is one that didn't.
Ill get back to this thread after the madness is over tonight.
[QUOTE=RightToCensor]LaVine is a less polished version of Westbrook. He is pretty much a smaller Gerald Green right now.
Ennis is able to create for his teammates because he is one of the more patient PGs in the draft. That is a lost art in my opinion; look how some of the best passing point guards play. Rubio, Paul, Rondo, Wall, and Lawson all play patently and look to create for their teammates before scoring themselves unlike Westbrook, Irving, and Jennings (who all would/has struggled when they were the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd option).
Ennis has that trait and if he can live up to his potential, he can be a very good PG in the future.[/QUOTE]
Posted this in another thread why Ennis > LaVine and why he has the potential to be an very good PG in the NBA.
I don't get the hype. Most of the attention he got was because he hit clutch shots on an undefeated team. Well they faltered, his stats are still average, and he stopped making clutch baskets.
I don't even see how he's better than Trey Burke from last year's draft.
[QUOTE=JimmyMcAdocious]I don't get the hype. Most of the attention he got was because he hit clutch shots on an undefeated team. Well they faltered, his stats are still average, and he stopped making clutch baskets.
I don't even see how he's better than Trey Burke from last year's draft.[/QUOTE]
Trey Burke is actually a decent PG, his season really took a halt from missing the beginning of the season and everyone having their eyes on MCW and Oladipo.
Burke is a bit undersized, but makes up for by his ability to score.
Ennis on the other hand is a pass-first PG with a nice ability to get in the paint.
[QUOTE=Le Shaqtus]This is already a Point Guard heavy league, he's going to struggle.[/QUOTE]
Mario Chalmers and Kendall Marshall play serious minutes in this league. The thought that PG is stacked is so overblown
[QUOTE=KyrieTheFuture]Mario Chalmers and Kendall Marshall play serious minutes in this league. The thought that PG is stacked is so overblown[/QUOTE]
Marshall is an excellent Point Guard, his defense is lacking but as a play maker he is exceptional.
Chalmers is needed to shoot 3's because their real point is LeBron, so yeah he's pretty shit as a point guard on any other team.
I've never been so sure about a college point guard. He will be at least a solid contributor for his career. I see a lot of Kirk Hinrich in his game. Love this guy.
[QUOTE=Clyde]For everyone that works out there is one that didn't.
Ill get back to this thread after the madness is over tonight.[/QUOTE]
Of course some will be busts. No player has ever been a 100% lock guarantee. But there is no proof at all that shows staying longer helps development. All it does it take away potential years of earnings for the players, and allows the teams to pay less for development.
[QUOTE=RightToCensor]Trey Burke is actually a decent PG, his season really took a halt from missing the beginning of the season and everyone having their eyes on MCW and Oladipo.
Burke is a bit undersized, but makes up for by his ability to score.
Ennis on the other hand is a pass-first PG with a nice ability to get in the paint.[/QUOTE]
My post wasn't meant to put down Burke. What I meant was, Burke likely won't be CP3 or GOATbrook, or Dragic or Wall, or maybe not even Isaiah Thomas. A good PG overall, however the top quality of PGs is too high right now. There was post a couple weeks back asking where Lawson ranks in the NBA among PGs. People were saying outside the top 10 and he's an 18/9/3.5 player...
Ennis may be good overall, but what is good in this era of PGs? You take your chance on someone like Exum because his upside might break you away from that clutter of merely "good" PGs. Otherwise, I'll would rather take my chance on a... Well let's see. Ennis is projected 14th on DraftExpress. I would rather draft Gary Harris (15), Stauskas (17), Hairston (22), and McDaniels (23) of other first round picks behind him. Then you have PGs like Russ, Napier, Cotton, and Kane all projected in the 2nd or undrafted. I'm not convinced Ennis is so much more superior to any of those guys.
I mean if you need a PG then take him. I think he's a safe pick. I just wouldn't use a lottery pick on him and the safety/lack of upside (imo) maybe doesn't outweigh the lower floor/higher ceiling of other players behind him in this draft.
[QUOTE=Sarcastic]I'm just not sure how you come to the conclusion that staying is better for development. The HS to pros and one & dones have done better than the kids that stayed for 2 years or more.
Look at guys like Kyrie, Rose, Durant, etc who are superstars. The 2and dones have taken much longer to develop like Derrick Williams and Johnny Flynn who I am not even sure if he's still playing.[/QUOTE]
Those players are one and dones because they are very talented, John Wall was more talented than Johnny Flynn.
They get more physically and mentally ready from staying 2 years, their level of play in their rookie year would EVEN BETTER than what you have seen as a one and done.
The one thing you hear about most of the one and dones, especially big men, is that they need to put on muscle and fill out their frames.
It would make the general level of play in the NBA better, there's no doubt about it.
I'd love to see the Magic draft him with their second pick
Smart move for him if it looks like he'll be a lottery pick. Even if it's "just" being picked in the 10-15 range, there's no point in risking another year at school.
[QUOTE=ZenMaster]Those players are one and dones because they are very talented, John Wall was more talented than Johnny Flynn.
They get more physically and mentally ready from staying 2 years, their level of play in their rookie year would EVEN BETTER than what you have seen as a one and done.
The one thing you hear about most of the one and dones, especially big men, is that they need to put on muscle and fill out their frames.
It would make the general level of play in the NBA better, there's no doubt about it.[/QUOTE]
Of course a more mature player will be better than himself at a younger age, but there is zero proof that college can do a better job of development than the pros can.
And just because the NBA might feel the level of play is better, does not mean they can break the law, and discriminate against age, unless it is collectively bargained.
[QUOTE=Sarcastic]Of course a more mature player will be better than himself at a younger age, but there is zero proof that college can do a better job of development than the pros can.
And just because the NBA might feel the level of play is better, does not mean they can break the law, and discriminate against age, unless it is collectively bargained.[/QUOTE]
Off topic....the next cba will be a total shit show......lock out city
[QUOTE=ZenMaster]Those players are one and dones because they are very talented, John Wall was more talented than Johnny Flynn.
They get more physically and mentally ready from staying 2 years, their level of play in their rookie year would EVEN BETTER than what you have seen as a one and done.
The one thing you hear about most of the one and dones, especially big men, is that they need to put on muscle and fill out their frames.
It would make the general level of play in the NBA better, there's no doubt about it.[/QUOTE]
It would be dumb for them to return if they can be a lottery pick unless they have #1 overall ability but for some reason have inexplicably slipped to a late lottery projection, but that very rarely happens as even underachieving high talents are taken high for their potential.
If they return they risk injury and ruining their NBA career...not to mention you waste a year where you could have been earning a NBA salary that you never get back...and father time isn't gonna give them an extra year to make up for the burned year.
Also a player improves more in the NBA playing against NBA players then they do in college playing against inferior players in a totally different style of play. Plus in the NBA you train all day long while in college there are practice time limits.
[QUOTE=Sarcastic]Of course a more mature player will be better than himself at a younger age, but there is zero proof that college can do a better job of development than the pros can.
And just because the NBA might feel the level of play is better, does not mean they can break the law, and discriminate against age, unless it is collectively bargained.[/QUOTE]
I'm not saying the development is better in college, everything just gets pushed back a year and these players would still get their development AND they'd contribute more to actual wins because they'd be physically better prepared for their first 82 game season.
NBA owners don't want to pay for their development if they can push it a year.
NBA is worried about the level of play in the league, they're not worried about teenagers becoming millionaires a year earlier or later in their life.
If the NFL can discriminate against age so can the NBA, it's a private company and all it has to is be collectively bargained, which it probably will be per Adam Silver.
[QUOTE]It would be dumb for them to return if they can be a lottery pick unless they have #1 overall ability but for some reason have inexplicably slipped to a late lottery projection, but that very rarely happens as even underachieving high talents are taken high for their potential.
If they return they risk injury and ruining their NBA career...not to mention you waste a year where you could have been earning a NBA salary that you never get back...and father time isn't gonna give them an extra year to make up for the burned year.
Also a player improves more in the NBA playing against NBA players then they do in college playing against inferior players in a totally different style of play. Plus in the NBA you train all day long while in college there are practice time limits.[/QUOTE]
If it was the rule that they had to stay in college a 2nd year then it's not "a dumb decision", it's just something they have to do. The potentially dumb decision would be staying the 3rd year.
Yeah teenagers lose a year where they could get injured, NBA owners don't care about that. If they play in the NBA there's just as big or bigger chance that they get hurt there, and if they don't play they instead do most of their development on the bench which NBA owners don't want to pay for.
Like I said, NBA owners don't care if a kid that age becomes a millionare a year earlier or later in their life, and quite frankly neither do I, I just want to watch better NBA basketball.
In the NBA they don't train all day long? Do you realize just how many games 82 is and how much travel it takes to get through those 82 games?
If the NBA doesn't want to pay for development, how about they also stop paying for decline years. What if they only want to pay for prime years. To be in the NBA, you have be between 24-34. Why should guys like Kobe, or Nash, be eating up huge chunks of salary cap space, when it is clear as day they can no longer contribute meaningfully anymore. Would you be ok with that?
I mean if you're ok with restricting an 18 or 19 year old from making a living, then you should be ok with restricting a 34+ year old from making a living as well, considering he is FAR better off, and has made his millions already.
[QUOTE=Sarcastic]If the NBA doesn't want to pay for development, how about they also stop paying for decline years. What if they only want to pay for prime years. To be in the NBA, you have be between 24-34. Why should guys like Kobe, or Nash, be eating up huge chunks of salary cap space, when it is clear as day they can no longer contribute meaningfully anymore. Would you be ok with that?
I mean if you're ok with restricting an 18 or 19 year old from making a living, then you should be ok with restricting a 34+ year old from making a living as well, considering he is FAR better off, and has made his millions already.[/QUOTE]
But the NBA doesn't only want to pay for prime years 24-34, it's not worth discussing something that has no point and wouldn't happen. What they do want though is a 20 year old age limit. The NFL has set a precedence for this so it's not uncommon.
You must agree with this then: If NBA teams should pay for players development then why only after they turn 19? Why risk having players getting injured before that? Why even let them go play in college or high school? Why shouldn't they pay for their development from age 14 or 15 or even younger?
Why risk poor development or injury for a player out of the NBA environment at all, I mean NBA teams develops players better than any high school or college could right?
[QUOTE=ZenMaster]But the NBA doesn't only want to pay for prime years 24-34, it's not worth discussing something that has no point and wouldn't happen. What they do want though is a 20 year old age limit. The NFL has set a precedence for this so it's not uncommon.
You must agree with this then: If NBA teams should pay for players development then why only after they turn 19? Why risk having players getting injured before that? Why even let them go play in college or high school? Why shouldn't they pay for their development from age 14 or 15 or even younger?
Why risk poor development or injury for a player out of the NBA environment at all, I mean NBA teams develops players better than any high school or college could right?[/QUOTE]
Because there are actually laws in this country with regards to the legal age to work. 18 happens to be that age. It is illegal to discriminate against people on the basis of age. It is entirely legal to discriminate against minors though.
[QUOTE=Sarcastic]Because there are actually laws in this country with regards to the legal age to work. 18 happens to be that age. It is illegal to discriminate against people on the basis of age. It is entirely legal to discriminate against minors though.[/QUOTE]
I don't think the NBA is concerned with the age limit of working, they're more concerned with optimizing the level of the NBA product.
Doesn't matter how many times you say "they can't do that", they can and they probably will.
The NBA and NFL are two very different leagues as well, with highly different levels of contact, so the age restriction for the NFL is warranted, as people don't want to see young kids getting destroyed by grown men.
The NHL, and MLB both allow 18 year olds to enter, so there is precedence for keeping the age at 18 also. And as a matter of fact, most teams in those leagues prefer to get 18 year olds into their systems, so that they can develop them better.