I read an article earlier this season that somewhat verifies what you suggest. It was a moderate approach saying age is still an evaluation factor but not weighed as heavily as in the past. It probably depends on the GM and how it has or hasn't worked for him in the past.
If u still have that article, please share.I read an article earlier this season that somewhat verifies what you suggest. It was a moderate approach saying age is still an evaluation factor but not weighed as heavily as in the past. It probably depends on the GM and how it has or hasn't worked for him in the past.
They'd be really dumb if they did.
Dumb as an absolute.
Smart as a right case scenario.
In other words, it depends, or no?
Usually is the key word.Usually, if a player has the talent to have a real impact in the NBA they show it by their freshman or sophomore year. Then it's a question of whether they have the competitive drive and work ethic to reach their potential.
If u still have that article, please share.
In practice, all it needs is one team to take the "risk" on the older player, but the complexity of the whole issue is so large...
If age isn't a reliable predictor on future performance and upside, what does that mean about how much student athletes improve in the NCAA and how much they improve in NBA environments? Are there specific schools that actually excel at preparing future NBA players, while others dont? Are there personality traits that are measurable that predict whether someone has the necessary level of maturity and work ethic to prosper in the NBA and which personalities can benefit from the college environment in turn? I could continue this for a while.
“The only way to get smarter is by playing a smarter opponent.”
—Fundamentals of Chess 1883