Oto Osenieks...next Robbie Hummel?

Donate To GopherHole

Plinnius said:
There wouldn't be much difference between Johnson the 23-year-old and Johnson the 25-year-old. He's already about as good as he's ever going to be.
Click to expand...

The better question is would you rather have the Damian Johnson of 18-22 or the Damian Johnson of 20-24? Clearly, you'd rather have the Johnson of 20-24. No one with a brain would argue differently. Yet, you seem to be saying Damian at 18 has more upside for a four-year program than the Damian of 20. Simply not the case.

Sure, if you were signing these guys to 10-year contracts, then grab them up at 18. But, if the most you'll get them on the floor in games is four years, then taking a guy at 20 is no disadvantage at all and there isn't a gap in the upside in any way. More of a benefit at 20 in most cases.
 

tjgopher said:
Yet, you seem to be saying Damian at 18 has more upside for a four-year program than the Damian of 20. Simply not the case.
Click to expand...

No, I'm saying that DJ would have more upside for a program if he was as good at 18 as he was at 20.

If Player A, who was 18, and Player B, who was 20, produced identical numbers against identical competition, I would take Player A, as he might have considerably more upside than Player B.
 


underground629 said:
You also thought Carter would be better than DJ this year because of his upside.
Click to expand...

I didn't say he would be better, I said he had the potential to be better. As I recall, you scoffed at his potential to increase his shooting %.

Also, what's your point?
 


I think his point...

...is that you're missing the point.

In terms of "upside" (an overused and inaccurately applied cliche, IMHO), a European player at 20 often is equivalent to an American kid at 17, simply by virtue of the relative lack of youth programs, coaching, competition, etc. And the point other posters have made--re: an older age being largely irrelevant in a four-year program--ought to be obvious to you.
 

I cant believe someone can be as thick headed as Plinnius.
 

What I recall is that you said our better unit by the end of the year would include Carter over DJ because he has more potential. I didn't make it clear, but my point was that you seem to put a little too much emphasis on potential.

I never scoffed at his potential to increase his shooting percentage. It's really not too hard to move up from 36%. It's also very helpful to have as many dunks as he had. Did I bring up his shooting percentage a lot when comparing him to DJ? Yes. Did I think he would shoot as high of a percentage this year as he did? No, but I also thought that he would get more minutes, which, let's be honest, if he had logged more minutes than he did, his percentages probably would've been lower.

With that said, I thought Carter deserved a lot more minutes than he got last year, and I was really looking forward to him replacing DJ on and off the court.




Plinnius said:
I didn't say he would be better, I said he had the potential to be better. As I recall, you scoffed at his potential to increase his shooting %.

Also, what's your point?
Click to expand...
 

Plinnius - What is upside to you? To me it's just looking at a player with raw physical skills, and projecting how far they can be refined. We haven't seen enough of Oto to really know even what his potential or raw skills are. So since we have no idea, would you rather have him closer to his peak or further away? The obvious answer is closer to his peak physical maturity. And it's also the right answer, sorry.
 




You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom