We are in an unfortunate situation

[Moranis]

Sure (and also because I love Tyreke Evans, particularly rookie year 'Reke), but we're looking for his opposite, right? The Matthew Dellavedova of an NBA career, rather than just a Finals series.

It is pretty clear, for example, that if McGrady had been able to stay healthy we'd be arguing about who was better: Kobe or T-Mac. Vince Carter has dealt with a reputation of being an underachiever for his entire career exactly because his ceiling/potential/physical gifts were so obvious.

Ideally, we're looking for the guy that took what was his widely recognized 'ceiling' and blew it out of the water for an entire career. Maybe Gilbert Arenas (a second-round pick) if he stays healthy, but he didn't. Tony Parker, but he was just as much a victim of the failures of international scouting, rather than any underestimation of his abilities. Etc.

the other a lot of those guys were straight out of high school.  Much less scouting.  Sullinger, Olynyk, and Smart all played multiple seasons in college and thus were more developed entering the league.  That has to play into the analysis as well.

Michael Redd seems to be the guy that most closely resembles those guys.  Big time player in college but fell to the 2nd round because of athleticism concerns.  Unlike the Celtics though, Redd barely played as a rookie and played only about 20 minutes a game his 2nd year.  3rd year takes a nice jump up and by his 4th year is a 20 point per game scorer and an all star.  Ends up with a pretty darn respectable career, though just that one all star game (and that might not have been his best season).  Not a HOF type guy, but certainly had a pretty solid career that was certainly derailed by injuries and even with his prime getting cut short e still had 6 straight seasons of over 20 ppg. 

Redd came out of nowhere, but again he is more of an exception than the rule.

[LGC88]

Sure (and also because I love Tyreke Evans, particularly rookie year 'Reke), but we're looking for his opposite, right? The Matthew Dellavedova of an NBA career, rather than just a Finals series.

It is pretty clear, for example, that if McGrady had been able to stay healthy we'd be arguing about who was better: Kobe or T-Mac. Vince Carter has dealt with a reputation of being an underachiever for his entire career exactly because his ceiling/potential/physical gifts were so obvious.

Ideally, we're looking for the guy that took what was his widely recognized 'ceiling' and blew it out of the water for an entire career. Maybe Gilbert Arenas (a second-round pick) if he stays healthy, but he didn't. Tony Parker, but he was just as much a victim of the failures of international scouting, rather than any underestimation of his abilities. Etc.

I think the international scouting did their job on Tony Parker. I remember that time, there were 4 french players that could be drafted in nba :
- Tony Parker
- Boris Diaw
- Mickael Pietrus
- Florent Pietrus
Florent Pietrus was the most gifted of all 4. Diaw was the complete guy with the best defense and Mickael the best 3pts shooter with great athletism. But Parker was very raw. The only indication we got was his explosive first step. The rest was mediocre at best and needed to be developed.

[LooseCannon]

Ideally, we're looking for the guy that took what was his widely recognized 'ceiling' and blew it out of the water for an entire career.

My guess is that you're probably looking for a guy who was projected as a reserve due to not having the desired size and athleticism (probably a tweener forward or guard with no obvious position) but who turned out to be a high quality starter.

[D.o.s.]

Ideally, we're looking for the guy that took what was his widely recognized 'ceiling' and blew it out of the water for an entire career.

My guess is that you're probably looking for a guy who was projected as a reserve due to not having the desired size and athleticism (probably a tweener forward or guard with no obvious position) but who turned out to be a high quality starter.

Correct: which is why Ben Wallace is such a good example.

[fairweatherfan]

I don't know if Ben Wallace ever had a "widely recognized" ceiling, so may not fit here.. but I'd say he blew expectations out of the water. Maybe the Mailman, too? David West? Can't think of many..

John Stockton backed up Rickey Green for like 3 years.  Didn't crack 8 ppg in any of em. 

[Boris Badenov]

Steve Nash isn't a bad example.

[AngryAndIrritable]

Ideally, we're looking for the guy that took what was his widely recognized 'ceiling' and blew it out of the water for an entire career.

My guess is that you're probably looking for a guy who was projected as a reserve due to not having the desired size and athleticism (probably a tweener forward or guard with no obvious position) but who turned out to be a high quality starter.

Surprised nobody has mentioned Dennis Rodman yet?

[D.o.s.]

Rodman is another good example.

[LilRip]

To the OP, i think we've got something special in Marcus Smart. As for Olynyk and the rest though, I agree with you that they're pretty much just role players.

[Celtics18]

That's not what I said, though.

between who was going to/had the capacity to be great and players that could fairly obviously pan out as role players.

Kobe always had the capacity to be an all-time great player. Same with T-Mac. To pluck an example from nowhere in particular, Avery Bradley surprised a lot of people with his improvement, but no one seriously thought he had Hall of Fame potential.

So even removed from hindsight, I would say, that, for example, Andrew Wiggins has the potential to be a Great Player. Aaron Gordon does not.

I remember rookie T-Mac.  He was a good athlete, who was long, made plays defensively, and could run the floor and finish.

the advanced ball handling and shooting skills to go along with that weren't developed until later in his career.

[Celtics18]

That's not what I said, though.

between who was going to/had the capacity to be great and players that could fairly obviously pan out as role players.

Kobe always had the capacity to be an all-time great player. Same with T-Mac. To pluck an example from nowhere in particular, Avery Bradley surprised a lot of people with his improvement, but no one seriously thought he had Hall of Fame potential.

So even removed from hindsight, I would say, that, for example, Andrew Wiggins has the potential to be a Great Player. Aaron Gordon does not.

Wait, wait

Moranis said that nobody on our team had the potential to be an all star or to be better than the fourth best starter on a contender.

You agreed 110%.

Now we are talking about being an all time great in the vein of Kobe Bryant or Tracy McGrady?

It's a classic CelticsBlog's argument:

I say I think Kelly Olynyk and Marcus Smart have the potential to be all stars.

You respond, "no, neither will ever be as good as Kobe Bryant or Tracy McGrady."

Goal posts moved.

[D.o.s.]

I responded with exactly what I wrote. It's not my fault it took you three tries to read it properly.

And, actually, you still haven't yet, I'm just giving you credit for getting halfway there.

[Celtics18]

I responded with exactly what I wrote. It's not my fault it took you three tries to read it properly.

And, actually, you still haven't yet, I'm just giving you credit for getting halfway there.

Just curious:

What part of Moranis' claim did you agree 110% with?

Sorry for being dense.

[D.o.s.]

The post he made. You can read it, I assume.

To wit, what he said was:

I think if you actually started looking at the starters on true legit contenders and then looked at their rookie years, I think you would be surprised at how much potential they showed.  Obviously they aren't nearly as good or as consistent as rookies, but you saw it.

I could totally see Smart, Sullinger and Olynyk as being a 4th or 5th starter on a real contender.  I've seen enough to know they have that sort of potential, but none of them have shown me enough for me to believe they could be all star level or better players.

And I agree with that. I then detailed how rare it was for a player to completely defy expectations and blossom into one of the 10 best players at his position (which is, nominally, what an All Star level player is) without anyone seeing anything before hand.

So far, we have listed three? Four? I am fairly positive that the collective hive mind of CB has watched a lot of basketball, and those are the only examples being given of players who really exploded out of nowhere -- and not just in the "no one watched him his rookie year" way.

You responded to the T-Mac thing, and in a lot of ways you hit the nail on the head: T-Mac's potential was always visible. The fact that he reached it (by improving on his handle and his shot) is an underscore to that fact, not a "but wait this thing" moment.

[Ilikesports17]

The post he made. You can read it, I assume.

To wit, what he said was:

I think if you actually started looking at the starters on true legit contenders and then looked at their rookie years, I think you would be surprised at how much potential they showed.  Obviously they aren't nearly as good or as consistent as rookies, but you saw it.

I could totally see Smart, Sullinger and Olynyk as being a 4th or 5th starter on a real contender.  I've seen enough to know they have that sort of potential, but none of them have shown me enough for me to believe they could be all star level or better players.

And I agree with that. I then detailed how rare it was for a player to completely defy expectations and blossom into one of the 10 best players at his position (which is, nominally, what an All Star level player is) without anyone seeing anything before hand.

So far, we have listed three? Four? I am fairly positive that the collective hive mind of CB has watched a lot of basketball, and those are the only examples being given of players who really exploded out of nowhere -- and not just in the "no one watched him his rookie year" way.

You responded to the T-Mac thing, and in a lot of ways you hit the nail on the head: T-Mac's potential was always visible. The fact that he reached it (by improving on his handle and his shot) is an underscore to that fact, not a "but wait this thing" moment.

To be fair if Sully or KO or even Smart make an all-star game you could reasonably say "oh they showed that potential as rookies.

In their rookie years Sully(playing for the notoriously anti-rookie doc rivers) had per 36 numbers of 11. His second year those per 36 numbers jumped to 17 and 11, which is pretty much where they were this year.

If he gets in shape and is able to play 36 mpg there is no real reason he cant put up those numbers and make an all star team.

As a rookie Kellys per 36 numbers were 16 and 9.

I looked through this years all star game lineups to find players with statistically underwelming rookie years

Kyle Lowry
Paul Milsapp
Kyle Korver
Al Horford
Chris Bosh (his was bordelrline)
Jeff Teague
Jimmy Butler
Lamarcus Aldridge
James Harden
Klay Thompson (borderline)
Dirk Nowtizki
Demarcus Cousins

Smart, KO, and Sullys rookie years matchup with most of these guys. Sullys especially when you consider he was on a veteran team coached by doc rivers.