DRob vs Stauskas - what's the difference?

Submitted by Scoman169 on December 10th, 2019 at 10:57 PM

Just curious...I'm not really into the NBA much anymore, but I tried to follow Stauslas hoping he'd have success.  So, what is the difference between Duncan Robinson and Stauskas?  I thought Stauskas had a quicker release.  Maybe he just couldn't shoot the NBA three?  Is it just luck of catching on with the right team? I don't watch the Heat, but DR looks like he has some shot creators around him, so he can feed off them.  Thoughts?

(I could've probably thrown this under the other thread, but thought it was worthy of it's own.)

Frank Chuck

December 11th, 2019 at 12:04 AM ^

Yes. It's actually a major part of the answer.

Nik's 3 point shooting didn't translate to the NBA. He's a career 35.3% 3 pt shooter as a role player (and a significant portion of his minutes came in garbage time). He doesn't even qualify as a 3-and-D player by 2019-2020 NBA standards.

Also, Duncan Robinson is an underrated defender. People forget how much better he became as a defender under Luke Yaklich. (Stauskas didn't get the benefit of learning defense from Yak because Beilein hadn't yet committed to making defense a priority.)

Finally, Robinson is taller and has good but not great length. He's not disruptive but he's adequate-to-very-good.

Ultimately, the NBA is a make or miss league with a premium placed on shot-making. Duncan makes his shots. Stauskas didn't.

stephenrjking

December 11th, 2019 at 10:08 AM ^

Steph Curry’s release isn’t exactly in the rafters and he shoots fine.

There’s no concrete reason to point to why Stauskas never shot well. My guess is that Stauskas would be more likely to try to create his own shot, like he did in college, leading to more contested 3s. That was part of his game in a way that it was never a part of Robinson’s. But I never watched him in the NBA to know for sure. 

TrueBlue2003

December 11th, 2019 at 1:50 PM ^

Obviously it's the answer but the question is essentially why isn't/wasn't Stauskas an elite shooter in the NBA while Duncan is?

Stauskas was a 44% college shooter on probably tougher shots (as a primary creator and ball handler) than Duncan took.  Duncan was a 42% college shooter.

Stauskas tanked to 35% in the pros, Duncan has maintained 42%.

First, we have to recognize that Duncan's 42% is on a relatively small sample size. He's taken fewer than 200 3s thus far in his NBA career.  I do think he'll be able to keep it over 40% though.

The answer to why Duncan has done that and Stauskas tanked is 100% mental. 

They both could probably hit 45/50 and have an epic game of horse in an empty gym.  But Stauskas couldn't be a 40% shooter on the biggest stage under the brightest lights, with the highest pressure (possibly weighed down by the expectations of being a lottery pick - could be a lot of factors).  It's a mental/confidence thing, though.

Shooting assisted jumpers in basketball is an interesting part of the game.  All you're doing is trying to execute something you've done 100s of thousands of times.  You have about a half second that feels like an eternity when the pass on its way and you have nothing but your thoughts racing through your head.  Those with zen-like butterflies and dandelions in their head will be alright.  Those that will be like "omg, omg, omg I gotta make this, I'm so open, my girlfriend/groupie is right over there how do i look, that guy is closing pretty fast is he gonna get close, i really don't want to come out if i miss this but i missed my last one so i gotta hit this, omg, omg, omg" will have a tougher time.  A lot of influences - team situation, personal situation, contract situation, stakes, etc - can bring you from the former to the latter and back, too.

And yes, Duncan is a (slightly) better, longer defender but they're both corner gunners on offense so comparing them on that end is mostly apples to apples. If Stauskas was a 40% three point shooter, he'd still be in the league even if his defense prevented him from playing as many minutes as Duncan.

MGlobules

December 11th, 2019 at 4:15 AM ^

Guess you missed the videos of Stauskas taking thousands of shots in the snow in his back yard. Stauskas got abused as a rookie and took a long time recovering. He also never found his way into a secure role on a team. Context is critical in the NBA. Not saying Duncan may not have been the better shooter--or, critically, better overall player--but timing, luck, and psychology play key roles, too.

Stringer Bell

December 10th, 2019 at 11:01 PM ^

Robinson is 6'10, a better catch and shoot guy, and a better defender.  Stauskas was at his best as the primary ballhandler and creator, which unfortunately he just never developed into that in the NBA.

Also yes, situation has a lot to do with it.  He spent the earliest parts of his career with the Kings and Sixers before they became good.  The Heat are a much better situation than either of those 2 were.

I Bleed Maize N Blue

December 10th, 2019 at 11:25 PM ^

Duncan is listed as 6'7", 215lbs. Nik is 6'6", 205, per Wikipedia.

Duncan being a little taller and beefier can play forward and guard, whereas Nik was more strictly a guard. In college I thought Nik was a better perimeter defender (which isn't saying much), but in the pros his lack of quickness at the position was more of an issue. Duncan being taller is a help at getting his shot off in the pros. Also being a better shooter.

Just my opinion. There are intangibles I can't really speak to. Other than Duncan's worked his way up from DIII.

The Denarding

December 11th, 2019 at 9:39 AM ^

Two things underweighted in statistical analysis of college to pro players is wing span and hand size.   We used to do analytical work for Sam Hinkie and others and I suspect Duncan’s wing span allows him to have a higher release point on his shot.   This also allows him to be a better off ball shooter.   Smaller wing spans usually force you to either be in a system that gets you open shots (two guard offense lots of screens) or require you to be THE primary ball handler or initiate the offense.   If you are a player with a small wing span who gets a ton of unassisted shots in college that usually translates poorly when the foot speed and size of the defender increases.  
 

We had Duncan analytically ranked as a low 1st/high second player - we didn’t have Nik rated in the top two rounds at all.   

allezbleu

December 10th, 2019 at 11:32 PM ^

Two biggest reasons imo:

1) Duncan developed into a good defender. He can guard NBA wings, which makes him much better suited to being a role player.

2) Being drafted by the Kings ruined Stauskas. Disaster of an organization that didn't properly develop him. Terrible coaches. Also, it's widely known that Boogie Cousins bullied the heck out of him. His confidence never recovered after that stint with the Kings.

The Pope

December 11th, 2019 at 3:02 AM ^

I heard the same thing about Boogie Cousins being a bully and destroying Nik’s confidence.

The Kings started their rise from the bottom of the league the second they traded away Boogie.  Terrible human being, who needs other alphas around him to keep him in check...Kings didn’t have that and let him do what he wanted.

1VaBlue1

December 11th, 2019 at 8:24 AM ^

Since I don't follow the NBA much, I googled this whole Cousins and Stauskas row to see what was up.  And I gotta tell you, man, NBA reporting/writing is complete shit.  The one story that promised to tell all had, maybe three sentences that said, essentially, 'Cousins didn't like Stuaskas and threatened to fight him'.  That's it.  Apparently, one time, Cousins snapped a photo of Stauskas taking a pic of a handful of cash.  Whatever...  

Not one good word was said about Cousins in the few stories I read, though.  So I suspect he is just a trash individual all around.

TrueBlue2003

December 11th, 2019 at 7:36 PM ^

Why do you think his skill development was worse at the Kings than it would have been in the NBA?  No one thinks NBA coaches are much better.  They necessarily can't be given the fluidity between the systems.  Half of Michigan's coaching staff this year was in the NBA last year and vice versa.  They're often the same guys.  Most people think NBA coaches are worse teachers and simply better ego managers.

What people do argue is that NBA players have much more time to receive instruction and work on skills which is absolutely true. They also have more specialist instructors due to more resources.  Shooting coaches, nutritionists, sports psychologists, etc.

The other side of the coin is that because of constraints being lifted (more time, far more money), the off-the-court stuff that requires maturity in the NBA can swallow guys as Trey admitted happened to him.

Streetchemist

December 10th, 2019 at 11:33 PM ^

Well one humongous difference is team and coaching. Nik got his start on the Kings and I think switched coaches 3 times in 1 season and none of them (team or coach) were any good.  Duncan has Spo who is a top 5, arguably top 3 coach in the NBA.  Also he’s got Butler who is fantastic, Adebayo who is arguably the most improved player this year, and couple of really good Rookies in Nunn and Herro.