Nik Stauskas on the trading block?
There a is story on ESPN that Kings want to "dump" Nik. Kings is not the best situation for him (he is averaging less than 4 points a game) as he is not used to coming off the bench, and his minutes have remained low. I hope he lands at a place where he can start and gain his mojo back.
Link$$
January 15th, 2015 at 10:38 PM ^
January 15th, 2015 at 10:44 PM ^
I dont think he made the wrong choice, because he is making a fortune by paying the game he loves (even if he isnt "playing" it as much as he wouldve hoped). But I think a lot of guys would benefit a lot if they stayed in collebge another year. Trey, GR3, and McGray all wouldve benefitted (I know Mitch didnt have much of a choice, but in a perfect world he wouldnt be suspended for that season). I think most kids around the country would benefit from more college experience for these guys. And I think the teams and the level of play league wide would benefit as well. The NBA is in such a crappy state right now. So many bad teams tanking for non-contributors. Its really just a mess. I dont know the solution, but something needs to be done because regular season NBA basketball is awful.
January 15th, 2015 at 10:46 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
January 15th, 2015 at 10:49 PM ^
January 15th, 2015 at 10:57 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
January 15th, 2015 at 11:06 PM ^
Basically how I feel. Trey and Nik were right to leave because they got their paydays (which is really the most important thing on an individual level when entering the professional level of any field). Money aside, both of them wouldve benefitted from another year in school, but hey, this is the world we live in and this is how things work.
I think Hardaway was the only guy who was really ready for the jump. He has, as they say, a "professional game".
Trey Burke has nearly identical number from this year to last year, impressively identical. So he has been consistent and I think he stands to improve as he gains experience. I think he will end up being a good play in the league one day.
Dont know too much about the Kings, but it seems like Nik went to a crappy situation. I hope he gets dealt to a good system.
January 15th, 2015 at 11:12 PM ^
Do you really think Trey or Stauskas would have gotten better had they stayed another year? Those guys were near peak when they decided to head to the NBA.
January 16th, 2015 at 8:27 AM ^
January 16th, 2015 at 10:49 AM ^
January 15th, 2015 at 10:59 PM ^
You say they would benefit. Care to explain how or why?
I don't think anyone who has left early made a mistake...other than McGary but that's a different kind of mistake. McGary should have been one-and-done.
January 15th, 2015 at 11:57 PM ^
January 16th, 2015 at 8:11 AM ^
But you won't admit to being a troll. Smh
January 16th, 2015 at 8:39 AM ^
I think it can definitely be said that Robinson made a mistake. Being a second-rounder and averaging one point per game is probably not what he envisioned a year ago.
January 16th, 2015 at 9:59 AM ^
And that's not Captain Hindsight. He was basically relying on two teams (Spurs, OKC) to pick him and when that didn't work out, he was off to the second round, where NBA teams do not care much about the player. If you're not basically guaranteed as a first round pick, you should not come out early, esp if you don't need the money for your family and you have a chance to be the leader of a prominent team.
His current professional situation could not be worse: he literally has not scored one point this season in a game which the Timberwolves has won. Not a single one. That's b/c he's played in 1 game in which they won, and 16 games in which they have lost (average 1.4 per game).
The T-wolves haven't sent him down to the D-Leauge, where he could actually develop and show his skills to other teams, b/c Flip Saunders said they need bodies for practice.That's got to be very frustrating.
Hopefully he can get his release from there after the season and get on a team that actually needs him.
January 16th, 2015 at 12:40 PM ^
Going in the second round didnt harm much, as he signed a guaranteed contract, just like 1st rounders get (albeit his 2nd year is a team option). He is in a better place, arguably, than Josh Heustis, who was selected by OKC in 'his spot'.
If you are going to be an NBA all-pro you should come out early, even if it's in the 2nd round. Was Gilbert Arenas hurt by turning pro early -- no. Rashard Lewis? -- no.
The big advantage of going in the 1st round is you are guaranteed a 2-year contract. That matters in the short-term. But if you're an NBA player it doesn't matter in the long run. Shaving a year off your career earning does.
Arenas actually benefitted from it, because he hit free agency earlier. Lewis was certainly FAR better off. Both got wildly rich because they could play basketball but fell to the 2nd round. GR3 will be in the same boat if he gets his game up. If he turns into a legit commodity he will potentially earn more than Trey or Nik in the 2017-17 season, because he will be a free agent.
...
You might have a point about GR3 belonging in the D-league...you might not. GR3 isn't ready to contribute -- for any NBA team. He needs to work on his game and the best place for him to do that is probably the NBA, practicing against the best.
January 16th, 2015 at 10:53 AM ^
January 16th, 2015 at 12:25 PM ^
I think the issue was that he was playing out of position at the 4. He has a way to go for skills development to be an NBA 3, but he wasn't going to get it anymore at MIchigan. 2 years in, he probably got what he could out of Michigan.
That said -- don't seal his fate yet in the NBA. There's still a chance that 5 years from now he is a better player than anyone else that has graduated from Michigan. Burke may top out as a quality backup. Stauskas, right now, looks like a 50-50 proposition to avoid being a bust. Hardaway will probably hang around but needs his shooting to be more consistent. McGary we'll see, but the health questions keep lingering. Robinson is the best athlete and physical talent from the bunch. He needs to develop that 3 point shot (If Jason Kidd can do it, anyone can) and turn into a defensive force. GR3 is still very young and very raw.
January 16th, 2015 at 12:18 PM ^
I don't know why his rookie year production would be that significant. He is practicing, every day, with NBA-caliber players. (OK, it's the T-Wolves, so that is being generous, but they are still VASTLY superior to practicing against Donnal, Dawkins, etc.)
The guys is getting paid to play basketball while developing faster than he would at Michigan. So what did he lose?
January 16th, 2015 at 12:37 PM ^
That's what he lost.
There's only so much you can do in practice. Game speed/effort is where you see where you weaknesses are, and practice is where you improve upon them (generally speaking).
The season is half over, and he's essentially wasted away on the bench b/c the T-Wolves need practice bodies. I'd argue he'd have gotten better, instead, playing 30-35 min a game against top-level college competition while also learning from John Belein.
And while I suppose you can argue that, I would assume playing copious game min, as the leader of an NCAA-bound team (which UM surely would be if GRIII were in A2), would be a lot more fun. A great experience that you never can get back -- college ball only comes around once. So I would assert he lost that.
January 16th, 2015 at 12:55 PM ^
I guess I'm of the opinion that GR3 needs to learn mostly in practice. Playing time is important but he's so raw still that what he needs to do is get shots up in practice. The NBA allows him a lot more time to work on his skills.
Furthermore, I'm not even sure the minutes difference will be that huge when it's all said and done. The NBA plays a lot more games and he may play more as the TWolves fade into lottery-tanking oblivion.
But yeah -- he would probably benefit from at least a stint in the d-league.
Also, Flip Saunders is just a terrible coach and poor developer of talent.
...
The problem at Michigan was that he kind of did what he was going to do. Beilein wasn't going to move him to the 3 spot. The Beilein 4 is a funky spot and it's not really beneficial for GR3 to keep playing it. Two years seems just right in his case.
....
Fun is the best argument there is to stay in college. But that's a totally subjective issue. GR3 made his choice and I really doubt he regrets it. I think he was open about not being totally happy with his role at Michigan. Now he makes 500K to work on his skills full time and travel all over the country getting 1st class everything. He's probably not shedding any tears...
January 15th, 2015 at 11:06 PM ^
You really think the NBA is in a "crappy state"? Other than the 5 or so teams that are rebuilding and openly tanking like crazy to do so, there is a lot of good basketball beign played and legit superstars all over the place. Not to mention several teams that play some pretty awesome team offensive basketball (Spurs, Hawks, Raptors, Phoenix).
I'm a bigger basketbal fan / NBA fan than most, so maybe I'm bias, but I think "NBA sucks" is just the cool thing to say these days for people who don't really pay attention to the league.
January 15th, 2015 at 11:14 PM ^
The NBA is very good right now. There are some excellent star players. The selfish ISO game popularized in the 90s that people still bitch about is mostly gone due to changes in rules. There is tons of cool action off the ball these days. It's all been very Beilein-ized the last few years. More 3s, more stretch 4s, more pick and rolls.
Most of the young superstars are GREAT team players focused on winning.
Some people just want to hate the NBA for reasons that have nothing to do with basketball.
January 16th, 2015 at 10:37 AM ^
Lot of hating out there in re: the NBA
January 15th, 2015 at 11:15 PM ^
I have never been an NBA fan but the Warriors are so damn fun to watch.
January 15th, 2015 at 11:18 PM ^
Curry man...I got League Pass just to watch him play.
I'm lucky to live in DC so I can catch a lot of the Wizards (never thought I'd say THOSE words). Wall/Beal/Nene/ AND...the Polish Hammer make for a very entertaining core.
January 15th, 2015 at 11:21 PM ^
This is one really good thing about the NBA, is teams can go from shit to good in a matter of two or three years. There's a lot of turnover which puts pressure on everyone to get better.
January 15th, 2015 at 11:41 PM ^
I actually hate that about the NBA and I hate that it is becoming more and more of a fact in the NFL too. I want to see good teams built for sustained success. If your team sucks, you need to earn your way to the top. Too many rules are made to allow crappy, poorly run teams to gain advantages. Its really a shame
January 15th, 2015 at 11:49 PM ^
Yep because the Spurs and Patriots totally fit that view. Lol see what you want I guess.
January 16th, 2015 at 12:24 AM ^
the pats and spurs are the exception, not the rule
January 16th, 2015 at 12:41 AM ^
How have "crappy rules" helped Seattle, Indy, Green Bay, Pittsburgh, Baltimore? How about Golden State, Washington, Toronto, Indy again?
January 16th, 2015 at 10:44 AM ^
In the NFL the teams that tend to be good every year are usually pretty good orginizations that do a good job of drafting and player development.
January 16th, 2015 at 11:06 AM ^
well indy, for one, built their team around one guy, lost him, clearly had no other olan without him, tanked, got rewarded for their awful season, and ended up with the best QB prospect in decades due to their epic failure.
those NFL teams are solidly built, but every year there are just as many teams built based off of failure...detroit, arizona, indy, etc...
washington, golden state and toronto have all basically used a plan of failing and getting rewarded with top 5-10 picks year after year and then finally hit on a few players.
I think every league should go to a revolving draft system where your pick is predetermined and you cant impact it based on your play on the field/court. it gives team no incentive to lose games, which is the way it should be....one of the reasons i love college football. there is no reason to cheer for loses (unless, i guess if you want a coach fired..but that should be pretty rare).
January 16th, 2015 at 9:15 AM ^
Blazers, Griz, even the post Smith Pistons too - all awesome and fun to watch.
Smaller, faster, higher scoring, more movement off-ball, more versatile players. Tire fires in LA, Boston, NY, Phila show a distinct lack of evolution.
Yes the NBA sucks if you are a C's fan (ahem)...but there is some creative, great ball being played. The only thing that bothers me really are timeouts - they should cut them to 2 each team at the 2-minute mark. They should also eliminate back-to-back timeouts. And too many games. But those are off-court issues independent of the quality of play.
And anyone who says Trey would have benefitted by staying should watch the run to the Final again.
January 15th, 2015 at 11:19 PM ^
January 15th, 2015 at 11:29 PM ^
Come on man...take off your tin foil hat.
You don't think the reason that certain players get more whistles could be those players' ability to attack the basket and/or create contact on the post? James Harden, Lebron James, Russell Westbrook, etc. shoot a lot of free throws because they're superios athletes/players and gain leverage on their defenders that frequently leads to them being fouled as the defender tries to impede their drive or prevent an easy layup. Check this LINK out and tell me all of those guys aren't likely deserving of more free throws than other players.
January 15th, 2015 at 11:39 PM ^
Ill check out the link, but are you trying to tell me that Lebron James isnt receiving special treatment from the refs?
And I guess there is just something about a game that encourages its players to get fouled that I just dont find appealing. Its not just an NBA thing, I know that, but I really dont find it entertaining.
I mean, pass interference is a similar flag in football, but nobody is actively trying to get interfered with. No WR's are trying to "draw contact"...they are just trying to achieve the primary objective: catch a pass. Maybe Im just wrong, but I dont see as many players trying to draw fouls at lower levels of basketball. I just see guys trying to score. Part of that has to be the fact that there arent ticky-tack foul calls outside of the NBA, but it just makes NBA basketball unwatchable. Its a constant parade to the free throw line. Just like players constantly trying to walk in MLB baseball. Nobody is coming to watch players draw walks or shoot free throws. That isnt exciting action. I know it wins games, but its just plain boring.
Clear path fouls should be an ejection. That crap is just awful.
January 15th, 2015 at 11:49 PM ^
What?!
Free throws aren't some dirtly little secret, they're punishment for defenders who can't stay in front of their man and foul to prevent an easy basket. The "game' isn't encouraging anything except for players to take it to the rack (a universally good thing from a basketball point of view).
Do I think players get special attention? Look, it's impossible to know. Is is possible that some players, due to the fact that their speicifc type of offensive game puts them in areas where fouls tend to occur, end up getting some ticky tack fouls? Yes, it is. I would chalk that up to human refs being human trying to ref games that move quickly, not some edict from the NBA League Office that certain players should get calls. Some of these guys have done enough to get the benefit of the doubt from time to time.
As for your football analogy - you're just wrong. QBs throw at WRs that are being face guarded or who are being held (or who they think are being held) ALL THE TIME because they know it's more than likely they'll get a call. And if you don't think WRs create contact or embelish contact to get calls, I don't know what to tell you.
January 16th, 2015 at 12:15 AM ^
Punishing someone for not staying in front of their man is one thing, but actively attempting to draw contact and be rewards free throws is completely different. I totally understand the value in "taking it to the rack" and "drawing contact". Strategically, it clearly makes a ton of sense. Im just saying that from an entertainment perspective, it is mindnumbingly boring. Just like taking walks in baseball. Id rather see the rules geared toward action than non-action. In baseball, they should shrink the strike zone and force pitchers to throw more strikes, which would put more balls in play, and lead to more action. In basketball, some of the problem is just the fact that they need to return to a more physical style of play. Yes, that reduces scoring, but I would accept that if it resulted in less free throws and stoppages in the action. If that isnt a solution, then perpahs they could reduce the number of fouls player are allowed to commit. This would make playing defense more challenging and allow for more players to get to the rim rather than being fouled before they can make an actual basket, thus making for more exciting play.
Again, Im no basketball genius and I know I dont have all the answers, but I think there are ways to make basketball much, much more exciting.
January 16th, 2015 at 9:36 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
January 16th, 2015 at 10:35 AM ^
not at all. mlb pitchers have near pin-point accuracy. they would be just fine hitting a smaller target. not to mention the strike zone has been expanding the last few seasons due to new pitch f/x technology. right now, the ball is being put in play at the lowest rates in the history of the game. pitchers are striking out way more players than ever before. the zone needs to be shrunk, forcing pitchers to make better pitches, decreasing strikeouts, increasing solid contact (which could use an increase). walks might tick up very slighty if at all. pitchers wouldnt lose the zone competely, they would just be forced to make their strikes be better pitches to hit, which they should be anyway considering their strikes.
January 16th, 2015 at 2:22 AM ^
with the football part of this, that is different than trying to draw contact. if a WR is being held, sure throw the ball at him. if a small forward is being held, pass it to him. that isnt a good comparison.
the second part is flopping. again, not a what we were talking about. we are talking about running a route with the idea that you are trying to draw PI...nobody is doing that on a football field. players are playing the ball 99% of the time. basketball guys are trying to draw fouls all the time. "take it to the rack"..."draw contact"..."get to the line"....its crap. how about we just try to score points without going to the free throw line?
January 15th, 2015 at 11:55 PM ^
January 16th, 2015 at 12:06 AM ^
WR's dont try to draw nearly as many fouls as NBA players do. WR's are primarily trying to catch the football. Any coach who is running plays with the hopes of drawing a PI call is an idiot. Ive never really heard of that before. Id love to hear a few example of plays that draw PI calls.
And I didnt really mean NCAA when I said "lower levels". I meant younger kids, high school games. Obviously it still happens, Im not saying it doesnt. It just seems to happen a lot less.
January 16th, 2015 at 1:08 AM ^
January 16th, 2015 at 2:18 AM ^
WR's arent trying to draw fouls. They are trying to create seperation and can be called for fouls by doing too much hand fighting. And I would hardly call that designing plays that are meant to draw PI calls.
There is no WR out there who is running a route with the thought process of "well, im gonna draw a PI on this double move"....they are trying to get open and catch a football, especially in college football where PI isnt even a spot foul.
January 16th, 2015 at 9:32 AM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
January 16th, 2015 at 10:36 AM ^
thats not really designed to draw a PI call. ..its more like it could happen, but that is certainly not an expectation for that play call.
January 15th, 2015 at 11:45 PM ^
wait, your LINK was to the NBA league leaders in free throw attempts list? What does that prove? That Harden, Westbrook and LeBron shoot more free throws than just about every guy? That is what people were already saying.
i mean seriously, that list is just a bunch of superstar players and big men. the big men are strategically fouled and it makes sense that they should be at the top. the superstars at the top just proves everyones point.
January 15th, 2015 at 11:53 PM ^
You totally missed my point, and it's not worth arguing the point with someone who doesn't watch the NBA. If you understood and appreciated the offensive games of the players at the top of that list, you might conclude that it makes sense, since those players are the best slashers, drivers, post players in the league and consistently put defenders on their heels, frequently resulting in fouls as the defenders try to recover and prevent easy baskets.
January 16th, 2015 at 12:03 AM ^
No, I dont appreciate free throw shooting making up the majority of the "action" taking place on the court...sorry.
The big men on that list are not putting defenders on their heels. They are being forced to the foul line because they cant shoot....Its like watching pitchers hitting in baseball. A waste of time.
There is not nearly enough action in the NBA for all of the great athletes in the league.