Brazdeikis Goes Home
Looks like he is leaving the NBA and heading back to play professionally in Lithuania.
Wish he would have stayed another year at Michigan.
He moved to Lithuania as a very small child. Canada is home for him.
No, he was born in Lithuania. Moved to the US and then Canada as a small child,
Yep. From the article:
Brazdeikis, 23, was born in Kaunas. Most all of his extended family is Lithuanian. His parents, seeking better job opportunities, moved the family to Chicago when he was 3 and to Ontario, Canada, a couple of years later.
....you spelled Kansas wrong.
Kaunas is the coolest trip I've ever taken.
Яock, chalk, Jayhawk.
It's always good practice to read the article before commenting on it.
When you correct people and you are wrong!
In fairness to you, perhaps you meant to say "he moved from Lithuania when he was a very small child..." because that would make your whole comment correct as I'm sure he considers Canada "home".
I too wish he had stayed at Michigan. If he had, it would have been great.
Totes malotes
He got a decent amount of playing time in the NBA, especially in 2020 on the Magic. If he wasn't going to develop into a role player there, he wasn't going to a Michigan either...
Iggy made $3M+ in the NBA. People will look at this as an example of "he should've stayed another year at Michigan", when in reality if he did he may not have had as much developmental "up-side" a year later and may not have been drafted.
A valid point that is seldom considered.
These kids are totally doing what's best for them and I think they should. It just makes college basketball worse. I'm glad Iggy got paid, but I would have liked to have seen him play 3-4 years at Michigan and have some more epic shots and games to remember. Oh well. It's cool that he's playing for Lithuiania where he'll get some of that college-like fandom.
Yes. Would have been a very good to great college player, but for three years, he was paid to only do basketball. If he couldn’t secure a solid deal from that, staying at Michigan wasn’t going to help. Remember he was an over-aged freshman as well.
He made a few million, gave it a shot.... he'll be a stud in whatever Euro league he ends up in and will make good money doing it. Agreed, would have been great for him to stick around another season in A2, could have made a difference, but he's done pretty well for himself.
Completely agree with you on everything except the perception many people have. There is a 0% chance any player will improve more by playing college ball than going to the NBA. It would not have made a difference at all, and if anything staying another year would have more than likely cost him millions.
SEASON TEAM SALARY
2021/22Orlando Magic $462,629 ($462,629*)
2020/21Orlando Magic $168,334 ($177,409*)
2020/21Philadelphia 76ers $1,517,981 ($1,599,822*)
2019/20New York Knicks $898,310 ($952,855*)
Total$3,047,254 ($3,192,715*)
Subtract taxes and agent fees and it's probably a little less than that. I still wouldn't blame him for wanting to get paid.
There is a 0% chance any player will improve more by playing college ball than going to the NBA. It would not have made a difference at all, and if anything staying another year would have more than likely cost him millions.
This is one of those sweeping Sports Talk Radio / Stephen A statements that are so popular now and I really wish people would get out of the habit of doing. 0% chance? Seriously? You're saying that no basketball player in the history of ever, or moving forward, has ever or will ever improve their game and therefore draft standing by returning to college.
Pardon my measured and rationed out take that wouldn't do well being screamed at Mad Dog, but it's just not true. And saying it in a definitive, no room for dispute manner, does nothing for the actual point.
Honestly, you don't have to look very far to see easy examples, just Big Ten players this past year who improved their stock and draft position by coming back to school for one year: Jaden Ivey, EJ Liddell, Johnny Davis.
Maybe staying a year makes sense. Maybe coming out makes sense. Like life, it's a case by case situation. And a "gamble" for some guys that they really struggle with. I don't envy the stress (although the reward of millions to play a sport seems nice).
That said, the idea that there's no chance a player can improve their game, or their draft position (and improve their bank account as a result) is kinda bonkers.
Another year in college might have improved his draft stock but how would it improve his overall development as a basketball player? Now, after this summer semester taking a quantitative research class, saying 0% isn’t right. The odds of him becoming a better basketball player by staying another year in college rather than going pro in the NBA would be very low, statistically speaking.
Let's take Jaden as an example. Jaden Ivey was a mid late first round prospect in 2021. In 2022 he was the 5th pick overall, considered by some analysts to be the 3rd best player in the draft.
The argument here is that Jaden Ivey didn't improve his game, and that he's the same player he was 15 months ago? Basically he just had another year to let scouts see his game and that's what caused him to move up 20 spots in the draft?
This seems logical to you?
Yes he improved his game in 15 months. If he didn't he shouldn't be drafted at all. Now, the underlying point that I THINK you're trying to make here is that the skillset of an NBA hooper and a college hooper (and the overall game) are miles different. It's how a player like Hunter can be a dominant college cager and have a low pro prognosis. That's fine and it's true. And that even if a college player gets better performance on the college court it may mean little at the NBA draft. That is true as well. If random player X averages 11 points as a soph at random college, and then averages 18 as a junior, that may have 0 effect on his draft status. But that's not the point here.
Jaden Ivey didn't get faster. I don't think he got taller (id have to look). But he definitely got better at playmaking and shooting (10% increase on 3s). It didn't happen in a vacuum. The idea that coming back to college, playing 30 competitive games, working a year on that game with highly respected coach like Matt Painter, has no effect on him becoming a better basketball player is bonkers.
Ivey did improve his draft stock to move up into a lottery pick. Were his 21-22 season numbers better than 20-21? I imagine they would have been to move up like that but the real question we're addressing here is would his game have improved more if he spent all of last year just focusing on basketball? We do not know that answer but most would logically say someone would get better training as a professional rather than being in college.
I was surprised to see how young Iggy is. It is crazy to think that somehow if Iggy would have stayed at Michigan for a second year then he somehow would have become a better professional player. He had several years in the pros and it did not fully workout for him but he managed to make about 3 million dollars.
People confuse coming back and being drafted higher the following year as "they're now a better player for the league" and I get that as fans. We want to see those players play for our team. Maybe a second year at Michigan would have gotten him a hire draft spot but it wasn't going to keep him in the NBA longer.
Quite simple, and something Harbaugh would say: one improves by playing in games, not being on a bench.
Keegan Murray went from 7.2 points a game to 23.5 points a game. You are telling us that he didn't improve his game by playing and that somehow his scoring and his 10% three point FG% increase was just an anomaly?
It's absolutely ridiculous to believe that decades and decades of players in college didn't improve IN COLLEGE and that they may not have done so by sitting on a bench and being manhandled by bigger, stronger vets who did not want to lose their jobs to a kid with some athletic potential.
How ridiculously unscientific a statement: "The odds of him becoming a better basketball player by staying another year in college rather than going pro in the NBA would be very low, statistically speaking." You have no data to suggest this. None. Anecdotes are not data; for every Ja Morant there is a Kwame Brown and Mitch McGary and Trey Burke.
Shoot, everybody's favorite Robinson wouldn't have signed a big contract if he hadn't developed as much as he did under Coach B. Miami would not have given him the time of day or tried to develop him further if they hadn't seen how much he grew at UM over the years.
If the NBA were the sole place to develop as a player they wouldn't have needed to create a developmental league, scout Europe, or draft upperclassmen. And proven talented 7-footers who rule the B1G would actually get drafted because teams would believe they could develop his talent better than Juwan.
The reason so many NBA teams are perennially bad: they absolutely suck at player development. The only way those teams improve is by hitting on enough of the right guys (luck), not some innate "proven" course of player development. The NBA is not filled with coaches with great teaching skills, even 20 years after shifting from drafting good college players to drafting young high-level athletes with potential as the status quo.
I like your enthusiasm, but there's no way to rationally say that someone is going to develop better by spending less time practicing and playing fewer games against lesser competition. Focusing 100% of your time on basketball is the best way to improve.
This statement (0% and otherwise) seems to make the assumption that the only way to improve one's basketball skill is more time and practice on those skills (the NBA provides that). It seems the argument is that they're only focused on that one thing and doing it at the highest level. Generally, this will play out as true more often than not, I think.
I think what it leaves out are players who needed time to mature and tutelage from a specific coach or in a specific environment. Intangibles like confidence, maturity, and leadership may be the biggest barriers to a players development. I think there are times when those will be better and more quickly unlocked in college or by a particular college coach (though, many college coaches suck at that).
You're saying that no basketball player in the history of ever, or moving forward, has ever or will ever improve their game and therefore draft standing by returning to college.
I mean, that's not what he said. The opinion that a year in the NBA will always provide more growth and development than a year in college ball is not the same thing as saying no college player has ever improved their game.
Are you intentionally misreading in order to knock down a strawman?
No. I am absolutely not trying to build up the straw man. In fact, I probably re-read him 3 or 4 times just to make sure that I wasn't misunderstanding the point. I'm not really interested in making an argument against myself, and based on other people's comments here, I'm not the only one reading it in the "plain english interpretation." Again, with the sweeping definitive statement, he left no doubt with his point.
There is a 0% chance any player will improve more by playing college ball than going to the NBA. It would not have made a difference at all.
Now, the way YOU SEEM to read this is that he's saying (although completely unstated here btw) that a "in a lab" situation where a player spends a year training in an NBA program, versus spending a year in a College program, there would be more growth and development in the NBA situation for playing in the NBA.
Fine, but one he didn't say that, maybe he's thinking it. And two, I don't think that's entirely true either. All situations aren't equal. There is no "lab". And pro scouts look at actual game film, it's not just combine scores and wingspan. Meaning, improvement doesn't only happen on a practice court.
Certainly the idea that there's a 0% chance any player will improve more by going back to college versus going to the NBA is 0% correct.
That said, I understand the basics of your point. Most people (and I don't know or care if you fall into this category) I've heard that make this point are NBA Advanced Stat "heads" who love the NBA a lot. Many hate college and hate watching the game (they certainly are dissimilar). It's a weird theoretical argument that can't be proven.
I have no clue how you are positioning your interpretation as the plain English reading. He said:
There is a 0% chance any player will improve more by playing college ball than going to the NBA.
You replied:
You're saying that no basketball player in the history of ever, or moving forward, has ever or will ever improve their game and therefore draft standing by returning to college.
These things are not the same.
Again: saying players improve more in one year in the NBA than the equivalent year in college ball is not saying that no returning college player has ever improved their game. That's literally what you said, I just quoted it above.
Yep, and then I spent a whole post clarifying the point and make it into something actually worth discussing. But if the point is to completely ignore that and micro focus on this point then.
Again: saying players improve more in one year in the NBA than the equivalent year in college ball is not saying that no returning college player has ever improved their game.
This isn't what he said. He said that there is a 0% chance that a player could improve more in a year in college, than a year in the NBA. Thats it. You're going way out of your way to soften his point off of the 0% and adding in "equivalent" as well. The who point of the post was the fact that it's hot take definitive.
Or, I am capable of recognizing the appropriate use of hyperbole to emphasize one's point, and don't intentionally give others' arguments the least charitable reading in order to strengthen my own position.
99% of the time, you cannot be correct by saying 100% or 0% of the time......statistically
and if you'll notice.... I said "could" have made a difference, there is simply no way to dispute that.
“There is a 0% chance any player will improve more by playing college ball than going to the NBA.”
Then the whole basis of the college coaching profession is a fraud.
User name checks out. Does he see it as a bad decision? Or just internet message boarders? Because at the end of the day, whether it was bad or good is inherently subjective to the individual, not objective fact. No need to be a dick, dastardly
I wish my bad decisions earned me a few million dollars and I was still able to play the game professionally
Best of luck to Iggy Stardust. Hope he tears it up in Europe.
I'm sure that in the Euroleague he will be a star, man.
Iggy + NIL would've been a good combo in Ann Arbor.
That being said, I hope he becomes a Lithuanian pro hoops legend. And who knows...maybe another chance at the NBA in a few years.
Iggy + NIL would've been a good combo in Ann Arbor.
Except that he was an international student?
Oh, shit. You're right.
How about "Hypothetical dual-citizen Iggy + NIL..."
"It would have been great if he had stayed"
People always jump out and assume this is an argument about the player's draft stock/career path.
The reality is that when a lot of people say this, they mean that it would have been great for the success of the Michigan team and for their enjoyment as fans. If Iggy had stayed at Michigan another year, it would have been good for Michigan's basketball team and most fans would have enjoyed seeing him play another year in maize and blue. It's tough to argue with that.
Here is my take on should a player stay or go. Surprised no one brought up the case study of Franz Wagner. I would argue both are right and its situational.
If you are a real NBA prospect but incomplete, it makes sense to remain in college. It is for two reasons. One, you delay signing a rookie contract until you have completed your skill set. Two, you get better by playing and being the alpha dog in meaningful situations. You can't do that riding the NBA bench or being in the G league. Pressure turns coal into diamonds. A great example is Franz Wagner. He showed in his 2nd year he was a complete player. All those missed 3pt shots in college in game time situations helped him figure out what he needed to work on. He is a better player and made a lot more money by staying at Michigan a year.
If you are a player and you know you are a borderline talent, it might make sense to go sooner rather than later. The NBA is all about potential. Caleb Houstan is more valuable as a NBA prospect than Issiah Livers because Houstan is 3 years younger and his agreed upon talent level is not set even though I would argue that it is clear Livers is a better all-around player. But we know what Livers NBA game is, ergo less valuable. Just like you can get your price for your house because you only need one fool, Houstan only needs one foolish GM to bet higher. If Houstan realizes his NBA potential is capped, better to declare early while a fool takes a reach. Houstan could make more money coming out early because if he remains in college, he becomes a known commodity. Then his value would drop like it did for Livers.
I thought Franz Wagner made a mistake coming back. Obviously I'm glad he came back, but I thought his talent was so obvious that the NBA was going to notice, and that he was going to develop here or there. I say that, but I probably should add that I always thought Jared Uthoff (a friend of a friend) was a similar (though lesser) talent.
Trey Burke seems like a better example to me. He really shouldn't have been drafted as high as he was, but he was so ridiculously good his last year in Ann Arbor that I can understand why someone in the NBA would see him differently. I can't imagine he would have been drafted that high if he had left a year earlier, and I don't think extra time in the NBA would have helped Trey much.
Was hoping he'd catch on with the Magic, some encouraging things happening there (the michiganification of the roster for example). Sounds like a great next step regardless
Also from the article:
DeVante’ Jones, Michigan’s starting point guard last season, signed with a French team on Monday, while former four-year standout Muhammad-Ali Abdur-Rahkman moved from Poland to Italy last week.
I don't think one had to be an NBA scout to see Iggy was not close to being ready after his freshman year. And I highly doubt Beilein would have suggested he go.
As a 3rd generation Lithuanian-American, I am happy for Iggy. He gets to play a game he loves in his birth country.