Maybe so but Ainge has drafted flawed US guys like Glen Davis over Euros in the past.   He has drafted mediocre guys like Gabe Pruitt and flat out bad guys with potential like Melo.  See a pattern?   Note no Euros or foriegn players other than Melo who played his ball here.

I don't think he likes Euro ball given his past history.

I hope they take the Croatian Kid Saric. Looks like a great shooter with amazing court vision.  The kind of guy that will elevate the game of others around him.

Quote from: nickagneta on May 11, 2013, 08:48:31 AM

I would love to see your breakdown of how you rank these Euro players and then compare them to American players taken at the same position in the draft. I'm not sure Euros pan out at any greater a rate than American players chosen in the same area.

The economics would suggest that they would somewhat outperform their slots relative to domestics, but only because they are riskier on average. This is a standard tradeoff in any asset market. Tech stocks should outperform Treasury bonds. And Euro centers should outperform Jeff Withey. But with Withey you know the downside is lower.

My guess is that Euros used to be more high-risk, high-reward choices (like taking guys straight out of HS). Now, I would imagine, the scouting is better and the quality of play in Europe is higher, so that wedge would be smaller.

Another issue is that the financial cost of bringing a Euro over can be substantial, which will also lead them to "outperform" their position ignoring those costs. (Think Nik Pekovic, who had to be drafted in the second round for contract reasons).

I would lay dollars to doughnuts that sports economists have quantified this. But anyway, what I am saying is that a small-sample result of "outperformance" doesn't settle the question completely because of these other issues.

I agree that the issue is more complex, its just that when blanket statement like this are made, I want more proof than. Gallo is a 4 star and Monteijunas is a three star, etc.

Give me the comprehensive on the whole. Because for every Gallo, who I am not sure I would classify as a 4 star prospect, there is a Jan Veseley. For every Pekovic there is a Victor Claver. Looking over the last 8-10 drafts, I just don't see where it is any more of a sure bet to take a Euro than an American player.

And I am very very suspect on Dario. I heard all the same things about Jan Veseley. What I think is the man is a SG that got stuck in a PF's body. He will struggle mightily trying to rebound in this league. I don't care if he got 14 rebounds in some Nike Summit a year or so ago. I am worried he won't be able to stand the physical beating that the NBA can dish out.

I guess we will see.

Quote from: Boris Badenov on May 11, 2013, 09:26:46 AM

Quote from: nickagneta on May 11, 2013, 08:48:31 AM

I would love to see your breakdown of how you rank these Euro players and then compare them to American players taken at the same position in the draft. I'm not sure Euros pan out at any greater a rate than American players chosen in the same area.

The economics would suggest that they would somewhat outperform their slots relative to domestics, but only because they are riskier on average. This is a standard tradeoff in any asset market. Tech stocks should outperform Treasury bonds. And Euro centers should outperform Jeff Withey. But with Withey you know the downside is lower.

My guess is that Euros used to be more high-risk, high-reward choices (like taking guys straight out of HS). Now, I would imagine, the scouting is better and the quality of play in Europe is higher, so that wedge would be smaller.

Another issue is that the financial cost of bringing a Euro over can be substantial, which will also lead them to "outperform" their position ignoring those costs. (Think Nik Pekovic, who had to be drafted in the second round for contract reasons).

I would lay dollars to doughnuts that sports economists have quantified this. But anyway, what I am saying is that a small-sample result of "outperformance" doesn't settle the question completely because of these other issues.

I agree that the issue is more complex, its just that when blanket statement like this are made, I want more proof than. Gallo is a 4 star and Monteijunas is a three star, etc.

Give me the comprehensive on the whole. Because for every Gallo, who I am not sure I would classify as a 4 star prospect, there is a Jan Veseley. For every Pekovic there is a Victor Claver. Looking over the last 8-10 drafts, I just don't see where it is any more of a sure bet to take a Euro than an American player.

And I am very very suspect on Dario. I heard all the same things about Jan Veseley. What I think is the man is a SG that got stuck in a PF's body. He will struggle mightily trying to rebound in this league. I don't care if he got 14 rebounds in some Nike Summit a year or so ago. I am worried he won't be able to stand the physical beating that the NBA can dish out.

I guess we will see.

Yeah. I was saying (in my own long-winded way) that my instincts agree with yours.

I suppose it's possible that Euros could eventually end up being the safer picks. A lot of them play at a higher level, and have several years of pro experience by the time they're 20. They may be better coached too.

But I'm with you, we haven't seen any real evidence yet.

Quote from: nickagneta on May 11, 2013, 09:45:19 AM

Quote from: Boris Badenov on May 11, 2013, 09:26:46 AM

Quote from: nickagneta on May 11, 2013, 08:48:31 AM

I would love to see your breakdown of how you rank these Euro players and then compare them to American players taken at the same position in the draft. I'm not sure Euros pan out at any greater a rate than American players chosen in the same area.

The economics would suggest that they would somewhat outperform their slots relative to domestics, but only because they are riskier on average. This is a standard tradeoff in any asset market. Tech stocks should outperform Treasury bonds. And Euro centers should outperform Jeff Withey. But with Withey you know the downside is lower.

My guess is that Euros used to be more high-risk, high-reward choices (like taking guys straight out of HS). Now, I would imagine, the scouting is better and the quality of play in Europe is higher, so that wedge would be smaller.

Another issue is that the financial cost of bringing a Euro over can be substantial, which will also lead them to "outperform" their position ignoring those costs. (Think Nik Pekovic, who had to be drafted in the second round for contract reasons).

I would lay dollars to doughnuts that sports economists have quantified this. But anyway, what I am saying is that a small-sample result of "outperformance" doesn't settle the question completely because of these other issues.

I agree that the issue is more complex, its just that when blanket statement like this are made, I want more proof than. Gallo is a 4 star and Monteijunas is a three star, etc.

Give me the comprehensive on the whole. Because for every Gallo, who I am not sure I would classify as a 4 star prospect, there is a Jan Veseley. For every Pekovic there is a Victor Claver. Looking over the last 8-10 drafts, I just don't see where it is any more of a sure bet to take a Euro than an American player.

And I am very very suspect on Dario. I heard all the same things about Jan Veseley. What I think is the man is a SG that got stuck in a PF's body. He will struggle mightily trying to rebound in this league. I don't care if he got 14 rebounds in some Nike Summit a year or so ago. I am worried he won't be able to stand the physical beating that the NBA can dish out.

I guess we will see.

Yeah. I was saying (in my own long-winded way) that my instincts agree with yours.

I suppose it's possible that Euros could eventually end up being the safer picks. A lot of them play at a higher level, and have several years of pro experience by the time they're 20. They may be better coached too.

But I'm with you, we haven't seen any real evidence yet.

I wonder if being a pro at 17 and 18 in Euro really prepares a European kid for NBA basketball as well as the best prep schools and division 1 universities and colleges do?

Could some of these pro teams in Europe even beat Louisville in a seven game series? Some D1 schools play rough schedules and after the NCAA tourney have played a 40 games schedule over basically 4 months. The travel, schedule, practice schedule and need to be accessible to the media has to be just as great and preparatory as any pro experience a European kid could get.

Heck, I know a kid like Nerlens Noel went to and played a nasty, national prep schedule, then went and played BABC summer ball, then went to Kentucky and played their schedule and if he hadn't got hurt probably would have gone to the tourney and gotten that experience. He's been playing against the best of the best kids his age or older for two straight years. Most kids he has played against in prep league and summer ball he saw again in college and will see again in the pros.

That's some high quality preparation being a high school star in the USA going through college and then to the pros gets. Is European preparation of kids really any better? Or do they simply make no pretense about getting these kids an education and just start paying them to learn basketball?

Quote from: nickagneta on May 11, 2013, 09:45:19 AM

Quote from: Boris Badenov on May 11, 2013, 09:26:46 AM

Quote from: nickagneta on May 11, 2013, 08:48:31 AM

I would love to see your breakdown of how you rank these Euro players and then compare them to American players taken at the same position in the draft. I'm not sure Euros pan out at any greater a rate than American players chosen in the same area.

The economics would suggest that they would somewhat outperform their slots relative to domestics, but only because they are riskier on average. This is a standard tradeoff in any asset market. Tech stocks should outperform Treasury bonds. And Euro centers should outperform Jeff Withey. But with Withey you know the downside is lower.

My guess is that Euros used to be more high-risk, high-reward choices (like taking guys straight out of HS). Now, I would imagine, the scouting is better and the quality of play in Europe is higher, so that wedge would be smaller.

Another issue is that the financial cost of bringing a Euro over can be substantial, which will also lead them to "outperform" their position ignoring those costs. (Think Nik Pekovic, who had to be drafted in the second round for contract reasons).

I would lay dollars to doughnuts that sports economists have quantified this. But anyway, what I am saying is that a small-sample result of "outperformance" doesn't settle the question completely because of these other issues.

I agree that the issue is more complex, its just that when blanket statement like this are made, I want more proof than. Gallo is a 4 star and Monteijunas is a three star, etc.

Give me the comprehensive on the whole. Because for every Gallo, who I am not sure I would classify as a 4 star prospect, there is a Jan Veseley. For every Pekovic there is a Victor Claver. Looking over the last 8-10 drafts, I just don't see where it is any more of a sure bet to take a Euro than an American player.

And I am very very suspect on Dario. I heard all the same things about Jan Veseley. What I think is the man is a SG that got stuck in a PF's body. He will struggle mightily trying to rebound in this league. I don't care if he got 14 rebounds in some Nike Summit a year or so ago. I am worried he won't be able to stand the physical beating that the NBA can dish out.

I guess we will see.

Yeah. I was saying (in my own long-winded way) that my instincts agree with yours.

I suppose it's possible that Euros could eventually end up being the safer picks. A lot of them play at a higher level, and have several years of pro experience by the time they're 20. They may be better coached too.

But I'm with you, we haven't seen any real evidence yet.

My point is that now we are starting to see this evidence. The league has cycled with its euro influence. Early on only the best of the best came over ( sabonis, kuko, etc) then after dirk every team is looking for the best big euro player. That lead to the darko and other over rated euro bigs. Now we are seeing teams pick really well scouted players and my point is there are fare less busts than in the past.

There is some serious under estimation of euro teams going on here.  Top Euro pro teams are way better than the NCAA let alone high school teams.  They consist of adults who play basketball professionally not kids going to school as guys like Jennings and Tyler found out.  Drafting guys who are successful there is probably a safer bet to succeed in the NBA than guys who are successful in the NCAA.

Top 20 players in the league according to ESPN's NBA player ranking for 2012:

LeBron
Durant
Howard
Paul
Rose
Kobe
Love
Wade
Westbrook
D Williams
Dirk
Rondo
Bynum
Griffin
P Gasol
Parker
Melo
Bosh
Nash
Aldridge

That's fairly subjective but a pretty good list. 3 Euros 17 products of American high schools and colleges. I just don't see where its a safer bet to select players from a Euro team. First off, only the best of the best Euros can even think of making it over in the NBA. Also, the "men" playing in Europe are not the ones being drafted, the Euro kids are. The Euro "men" are players that decided to stay home and play or knew they weren't good enough to play in the NBA or tried and failed playing in the NBA, for the most part.

So it comes down to where is the talent and are they properly prepared. As the above list shows, the talent is in the USA, for the most part. And the colleges and prep schools don't seem to have a problem creating professional basketball players out of that talent for the NBA, they have been doing it for 60 years.

So until I see a statistical study telling me its safer to choose a Euro than a American kid, I will just refuse to believe that. Then again, I am not sure of the connotation of safer here. Does that mean they are less likely to not make it in the league? Does that mean they are more likely to meet pre-draft scouting expectations? Does that mean they have a higher incidence of eventual success as compared to their piers chosen in the same spots in the draft? And will this study reflect that many Euro draft selections are not based solely on talent but have a lot to do with affordability and availability of these players because of the contracts they have already signed in Europe?