« Reply #131 on: March 19, 2018, 11:33:58 AM »
I don't think it makes me an apologist to say he's not good but shows the potential to get better.
That's the point, he doesn't. He's slow, gangly, doesn't have great handles, has the slowest release ever, and (as evidenced by last night) buckles spectacularly under pressure.
He's also 24, which in NBA terms means he's close to a finished product. Let's cut the positive psychology nonsense and call a spade a spade.
Not really. He didn't get minutes in college until he was a junior/senior, so he's "young" in terms of basketball experience. One year in the D League. Most guys peak at around 28. Some guys are late bloomers.
I don't know that he'll get better, but I trust the judgement of Stevens and Ainge, who see him every in practice and have a far better idea of whether he's improving or not.
Yes, really. At that age, your body type isn't going to change drastically, and things like basic skills and muscle memory aren't mysteriously going to materialize just because you missed on the time when you should have been developing him.
What you're saying is simply not true. Lots of players improve after they're 24.
Manu Ginobili was a 25 year old rookie who averaged 7.6 ppg and made big improvements in the 2 yeas after. Steve Nash wasn't a full time starter until he was 26 and didn't have his best season until he was 31. Victor Oladipo looks like a different player from last season (when he was 24) to this season. Gordon Hayward improved his efficiency numbers across the board from his age 25 season to his age 26 season. Those are just a few examples off the top of my head.
Players develop at different rates and different ages. This is not to say that Nader will definitely get better, only that there is no reason to dismiss him after just 36 NBA games. Your assertion that player don't get better after 24 years old has no basis.
Logged
1957, 1959, 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1965, 1966, 1968, 1969, 1974, 1976, 1981, 1984, 1986, 2008