Austin Rivers - NBA Rookie Struggles

[TheDukeCreed]

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/page/5-on-5-130116/nba-debating-best-worst-2012-13-rookie-class

I like to support former Duke players no matter what they do but someone should have told this guy he wasn't ready. I guess some people preferred to see the back of this guy.

[Matches]

He was a lottery pick. Readiness doesn't really enter into it.

He's getting dogpiled on somewhat unfairly IMO. He's on a bad team so he's getting more minutes than he might otherwise, and his weaknesses are being exposed more clearly. There are lots of 1st rounders who would put up terrible numbers if they were on the court a lot - but they aren't thrown to the wolves because there are other competent players on their teams.

AR's minutes are dropping right now - I expect to see him refocus and start to dig out of that proverbial hole. He's what, 19 years old? People are acting like what he is now is the only thing he will ever be.

[tommy]

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/page/5-on-5-130116/nba-debating-best-worst-2012-13-rookie-class

I like to support former Duke players no matter what they do but someone should have told this guy he wasn't ready. I guess some people preferred to see the back of this guy.

I'm quite confident that he and his father had many long discussions about the issue, laying out all of the pros and cons. Ultimately, of course, it's the kids decision. I'm sure the son of Doc Rivers had all of the information available, and his decision to leave was not the result of "some people" wanting to see his back.

[BigWayne]

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/page/5-on-5-130116/nba-debating-best-worst-2012-13-rookie-class

I like to support former Duke players no matter what they do but someone should have told this guy he wasn't ready. I guess some people preferred to see the back of this guy.
Who knows what went into his decision to go, but if making a big NBA impact the first year was the goal, he shouldn't have gone. Most people he would have talked to would have told him that, so the decision was probably based on other factors, such as long term development and/or financial desires.

[dukedoc]

http://espn.go.com/nba/story/_/page/5-on-5-130116/nba-debating-best-worst-2012-13-rookie-class

I guess some people preferred to see the back of this guy.

Inflammatory. Anything in particular that leads you to make this conjecture?

[sporthenry]

It is early and he doesn't really get treated fairly mainly b/c the stats guy are in love with the record performance. It takes a confluence of issues to be this bad mainly continuing to get PT when you are this bad. But only one of them mentions Kendall Marshall who while he hasn't been as bad, he hasn't shown much positive either. Additionally, Jeremy Lamb isn't really making a name for himself. Of course, he is on OKC so he can't get PT but it remains to be seen if he can play. If Austin wasn't getting PT like the other guys, it wouldn't be as big of a story and White would overshadow the rest of them. Going forward, I suspect this will be the case assuming AR isn't in the record books for PER performance.

The best thing for him would probably be the D-league and just working on his game. But luckily for him, he is young and don't forget, he still has 2 years on guys like Marshall who looks to be a bust of equal caliber.

[theAlaskanBear]

It is early and he doesn't really get treated fairly mainly b/c the stats guy are in love with the record performance. It takes a confluence of issues to be this bad mainly continuing to get PT when you are this bad. But only one of them mentions Kendall Marshall who while he hasn't been as bad, he hasn't shown much positive either. Additionally, Jeremy Lamb isn't really making a name for himself. Of course, he is on OKC so he can't get PT but it remains to be seen if he can play. If Austin wasn't getting PT like the other guys, it wouldn't be as big of a story and White would overshadow the rest of them. Going forward, I suspect this will be the case assuming AR isn't in the record books for PER performance.

The best thing for him would probably be the D-league and just working on his game. But luckily for him, he is young and don't forget, he still has 2 years on guys like Marshall who looks to be a bust of equal caliber.

Last night he played 22 minutes, had 8 points on 50% shooting and beat his father's Celtics team. You are right, and I bet he is pretty happy with his decision to go pro -- he gets regular PT, is getting paid millions, and is on a rising New Orleans franchise. No one is arguing that he has struggled at times, but how much would another year in college have prepared him for the NBA game? He is going to grow more this year experiencing the adversity, the brutal travel schedule, the strength of players in the NBA game than he would with another year at Duke. He is going to grow his body in the next couple of years, learn to finish with contact, bring his shooting % up, and all of this hand-wringing and glee over his struggles will be forgotten.

Honestly I don't think the D-League will help him much as long as he is getting PT with the Hornets.

[CDu]

He obviously wasn't ready for the NBA. But that's kind of moot. Most one-and-dones aren't ready. I mean, the overall #1 pick - the guy that everyone said was "can't miss" - is averaging 12.9 points and 7.8 rebounds, shooting only 50.4% from the field (for a post player that's mediocre). Here is what the picks ahead of Rivers are doing:

1. Davis (FR): 29.5 mpg, 12.9 ppg, 7.8 rpb, 1.8 bpg, 50.4 FG%
2. Kidd-Gilcrhist (FR): 27.4 mpg, 10.6 ppg, 6.5 rpg, 48.3 FG% (33.3 3pt%)
3. Beal (FR): 31.7 mpg, 13.7 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 2.7 apg, 38.4 FG% (35.4 3pt%)
4. Waiters (SO): 30.3 mpg, 14.5 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 3.1 apg, 38.0 FG% (32.6 3pt%)
5. Robinson (JR): 15.8 mpg, 4.7 ppg, 4.4 rpg, 43.8 FG%
6. Lillard (R-JR): 38.4 mpg, 18.1 ppg, 6.5 apg, 3.5 rpg, 42.0 FG% (36.0 3pt%)
7. Barnes (SO): 25.5 mpg, 9.5 ppg, 4.4 rpg, 43.4 FG% (38.8 3pt%)
8. Ross (FR): 17.1 mpg, 6.6 ppg, 2.2 rpg, 40.0 FG% (32.1 3pt%)
9. Drummond (FR): 19.7 mpg, 7.1 ppg, 7.3 rpg, 1.6 bpg, 59.7 FG%
10: Rivers (FR): 24.7 mpg, 6.2 ppg, 2.1 rpg, 2.3 apg, 33.2 FG% (33.3 3pt%)

Several of those guys are playing poorly as well.

Rivers was definitely not ready. He had one fantastic skill (ability to shake the man guarding him) and was solid in some other areas (3pt shooting, defense) but had poor court awareness, questionable decision-making skills (especially in what to do when help defense arrives), no ability/willingness to play off the ball, and he struggled to finish around the rim. At the college level, Rivers could sometimes get away with this on his natural scoring ability. But he was clearly less effective in college, and the limitations are only accentuated at the pro level.

The question with Rivers will be whether or not he can develop a better understanding of team offense, whether he can improve his court vision, and whether he can figure out how to handle help defense when he's driving to the basket. I suspect that with time he'll eventually improve his finishing skills off the dribble. But the court awareness and understanding of team office (which his deficiencies manifest in the form of poor off-ball play) are harder skills to develop. We'll see if he is able to develop those areas as well.

But I agree with those who say it's probably not fair to blast him for struggling in the pros. He was a lottery pick, so clearly the NBA was ready for him. It's just a matter of how well he develops at the NBA level over the next few years.

[roywhite]

Could Austin have improved by staying at least one year additionally at Duke? Yes

Can Austin improve as much or more by playing and practicing in the NBA? I think so.
Just consider the time aspect -- he no longer has NCAA restrictions about practice time and time spent with his coaches; he doesn't have school; he plays basketball and can work on his game with high level coaching, competition, and facilities.

There are plenty of very good NBA players who don't accomplish much statistically their first year. We could say Austin hasn't had a great season or not made much impact, but it's way too early to say he's a bust or made the wrong decision by coming out.

[sporthenry]

Honestly I don't think the D-League will help him much as long as he is getting PT with the Hornets.

I agree but I was saying the D-league in reference to the games in which he was getting 4-5 minutes. If he gets regular PT, I can understand him staying. I do disagree a bit with the idea of the NBA being a great place to get in practice. I think we touched on this in previous threads but the NBA doesn't really practice much and practices are for walkthroughs and not for improving one's game much. Now NO is fairly young so perhaps they do a bit more at practice than the Heat or the Celtics but I doubt "practicing" against NBA players really amounts to much. Now access to coaching could be pivotal.

I don't disagree that coming back to Duke might have been better for his psyche and overall game but I think he left at his peak draft position so I can't really blame him much.

[miramar]

I would say that two things were pretty obvious last year: 1) Austin was determined to get to the NBA as quickly as possible and 2) he really wasn't ready.

I wish him well and I hope he will work through his problems, but I think that he could have helped himself by trying to fix the holes in his game while at Duke. The curious thing about him for me is that he seems to be the opposite of the typical coach's son. These guys are often a step slow and not the most talented guy on the team, but they make a solid contribution through their court sense and dedication to team play. Austin seems to have turned this norm on its head.

[SupaDave]

Careful what you wish for...

[JNort]

He obviously wasn't ready for the NBA. But that's kind of moot. Most one-and-dones aren't ready. I mean, the overall #1 pick - the guy that everyone said was "can't miss" - is averaging 12.9 points and 7.8 rebounds, shooting only 50.4% from the field (for a post player that's mediocre). Here is what the picks ahead of Rivers are doing:

1. Davis (FR): 29.5 mpg, 12.9 ppg, 7.8 rpb, 1.8 bpg, 50.4 FG%
2. Kidd-Gilcrhist (FR): 27.4 mpg, 10.6 ppg, 6.5 rpg, 48.3 FG% (33.3 3pt%)
3. Beal (FR): 31.7 mpg, 13.7 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 2.7 apg, 38.4 FG% (35.4 3pt%)
4. Waiters (SO): 30.3 mpg, 14.5 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 3.1 apg, 38.0 FG% (32.6 3pt%)
5. Robinson (JR): 15.8 mpg, 4.7 ppg, 4.4 rpg, 43.8 FG%
6. Lillard (R-JR): 38.4 mpg, 18.1 ppg, 6.5 apg, 3.5 rpg, 42.0 FG% (36.0 3pt%)
7. Barnes (SO): 25.5 mpg, 9.5 ppg, 4.4 rpg, 43.4 FG% (38.8 3pt%)
8. Ross (FR): 17.1 mpg, 6.6 ppg, 2.2 rpg, 40.0 FG% (32.1 3pt%)
9. Drummond (FR): 19.7 mpg, 7.1 ppg, 7.3 rpg, 1.6 bpg, 59.7 FG%
10: Rivers (FR): 24.7 mpg, 6.2 ppg, 2.1 rpg, 2.3 apg, 33.2 FG% (33.3 3pt%)

Several of those guys are playing poorly as well.

Rivers was definitely not ready. He had one fantastic skill (ability to shake the man guarding him) and was solid in some other areas (3pt shooting, defense) but had poor court awareness, questionable decision-making skills (especially in what to do when help defense arrives), no ability/willingness to play off the ball, and he struggled to finish around the rim. At the college level, Rivers could sometimes get away with this on his natural scoring ability. But he was clearly less effective in college, and the limitations are only accentuated at the pro level.

The question with Rivers will be whether or not he can develop a better understanding of team offense, whether he can improve his court vision, and whether he can figure out how to handle help defense when he's driving to the basket. I suspect that with time he'll eventually improve his finishing skills off the dribble. But the court awareness and understanding of team office (which his deficiencies manifest in the form of poor off-ball play) are harder skills to develop. We'll see if he is able to develop those areas as well.

But I agree with those who say it's probably not fair to blast him for struggling in the pros. He was a lottery pick, so clearly the NBA was ready for him. It's just a matter of how well he develops at the NBA level over the next few years.

What?!?! That isn't mediocre at all. On the contrary he has been a stud and even though he has missed a good bit of time this year you can tell he was most certainly a "can't miss". Most post players don't even play much the first few years and AD is getting good PT and performing well!

[CameronBornAndBred]

Austin said before he ever signed up with Duke that he wanted to be a one and done. He came to Duke with the attitude of being a one and done. His plan never included a year 2. I do hope that others coming in to Duke, or any school for that matter, pay attention to the successes and the less than successes of those that have gone before them.

[rsvman]

"Ugly" or not, I don't see how you pick Austin Rivers over Kendall Marshall as the biggest disappointment. KM isn't even doing well in the D-league.

[CDu]

What?!?! That isn't mediocre at all. On the contrary he has been a stud and even though he has missed a good bit of time this year you can tell he was most certainly a "can't miss". Most post players don't even play much the first few years and AD is getting good PT and performing well!

Well, first of all, if that's your complaint about my post then you completely missed the point. Your last sentence is EXACTLY the point I was trying to make.

As for Davis, I think he's going to be a terrific player in the NBA. But 12.9 ppg and 7.8 rpg is far from "stud" category. Davis' per-48 minute averages would put him outside the top 80 in scoring, outside the top 40 in rebounds, and on the fringe of the top-20 in blocks. There are only 30 teams in the league, so I'd say that's decidedly mediocre. And his numbers are some of the BEST (along with Lillard) of the rookie class so far.

Only Lillard has played decidedly well regardless of rookie status. Davis has played very solidly for a rookie. But in terms of overall comparison to the league, he's been pretty mediocre. If in 3 years, he's still averaging around 13, 8, and 2, that'll be a pretty big disappointment for a can't miss #1 pick. Now, I don't think he'll still be at 13, 8, and 2 in 3 years, but that's sort of my whole point.

My point was to illustrate that most rookies struggle - especially those only one or two years removed from high school. Rivers is struggling more than most, but it's not like his struggles are way out of line with those of guys like Beal and Waiters.

[theAlaskanBear]

Well, first of all, if that's your complaint about my post then you completely missed the point. Your last sentence is EXACTLY the point I was trying to make.

As for Davis, I think he's going to be a terrific player in the NBA. But 12.9 ppg and 7.8 rpg is far from "stud" category. Davis' per-48 minute averages would put him outside the top 80 in scoring, outside the top 40 in rebounds, and on the fringe of the top-20 in blocks. There are only 30 teams in the league, so I'd say that's decidedly mediocre. And his numbers are some of the BEST (along with Lillard) of the rookie class so far.

Only Lillard has played decidedly well regardless of rookie status. Davis has played very solidly for a rookie. But in terms of overall comparison to the league, he's been pretty mediocre. If in 3 years, he's still averaging around 13, 8, and 2, that'll be a pretty big disappointment for a can't miss #1 pick. Now, I don't think he'll still be at 13, 8, and 2 in 3 years, but that's sort of my whole point.

My point was to illustrate that most rookies struggle - especially those only one or two years removed from high school. Rivers is struggling more than most, but it's not like his struggles are way out of line with those of guys like Beal and Waiters.

Yes, and you bring up an important point. These rookie struggles may become the "new normal" as one-and-done kids get the high draft picks. Too good to not be in the NBA, but not quite ready to perform. More evidence for a 2-3 year college commitment rule?

[Matches]

Yes, and you bring up an important point. These rookie struggles may become the "new normal" as one-and-done kids get the high draft picks. Too good to not be in the NBA, but not quite ready to perform. More evidence for a 2-3 year college commitment rule?

Could be, but I think to some extent it's just a matter of everyone developing at their own pace.

Lots of people labeled J.J. Redick a "bust" during his first few years in the League. One could argue he wasn't ready. Years pass, he gets better, now he's a very solid NBA player. And he played four years in college.

[SupaDave]

Yes, and you bring up an important point. These rookie struggles may become the "new normal" as one-and-done kids get the high draft picks. Too good to not be in the NBA, but not quite ready to perform. More evidence for a 2-3 year college commitment rule?

Wait - rookies aren't supposed to struggle? :)


During his rookie season, Bryant mostly came off the bench behind guards Eddie Jones and Nick Van Exel. At the time he became the youngest player ever to play in an NBA game (a record since broken by Jermaine O'Neal and Andrew Bynum), and also became the youngest NBA starter ever. Initially, Bryant played limited minutes, but as the season continued, he began to see some more playing time. By the end of the season, he averaged 15.5 minutes a game.

Oh how standards have changed it seems...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Srlsef6U8zM

[CDu]

Could be, but I think to some extent it's just a matter of everyone developing at their own pace.

Lots of people labeled J.J. Redick a "bust" during his first few years in the League. One could argue he wasn't ready. Years pass, he gets better, now he's a very solid NBA player. And he played four years in college.

Yup. Conversely, LeBron James was pretty good right out of the gate with no college experience (of course, he only got better).

[sporthenry]

Well, first of all, if that's your complaint about my post then you completely missed the point. Your last sentence is EXACTLY the point I was trying to make.

As for Davis, I think he's going to be a terrific player in the NBA. But 12.9 ppg and 7.8 rpg is far from "stud" category. Davis' per-48 minute averages would put him outside the top 80 in scoring, outside the top 40 in rebounds, and on the fringe of the top-20 in blocks. There are only 30 teams in the league, so I'd say that's decidedly mediocre. And his numbers are some of the BEST (along with Lillard) of the rookie class so far.

Only Lillard has played decidedly well regardless of rookie status. Davis has played very solidly for a rookie. But in terms of overall comparison to the league, he's been pretty mediocre. If in 3 years, he's still averaging around 13, 8, and 2, that'll be a pretty big disappointment for a can't miss #1 pick. Now, I don't think he'll still be at 13, 8, and 2 in 3 years, but that's sort of my whole point.

My point was to illustrate that most rookies struggle - especially those only one or two years removed from high school. Rivers is struggling more than most, but it's not like his struggles are way out of line with those of guys like Beal and Waiters.

Have to disagree. Davis is #31 in PER. That puts him one spot behind David Lee and a couple spots ahead of Paul Pierce among others. Is he a top 10 PF? Would he not start on most NBA teams? I think that is playing decidedly well. I guess we are getting into semantics here but Davis might not be in the "stud" category almost no rookies ever are but he is already an above average NBA player.

[mr. synellinden]

Well, first of all, if that's your complaint about my post then you completely missed the point. Your last sentence is EXACTLY the point I was trying to make.

As for Davis, I think he's going to be a terrific player in the NBA. But 12.9 ppg and 7.8 rpg is far from "stud" category. Davis' per-48 minute averages would put him outside the top 80 in scoring, outside the top 40 in rebounds, and on the fringe of the top-20 in blocks. There are only 30 teams in the league, so I'd say that's decidedly mediocre. And his numbers are some of the BEST (along with Lillard) of the rookie class so far.

Only Lillard has played decidedly well regardless of rookie status. Davis has played very solidly for a rookie. But in terms of overall comparison to the league, he's been pretty mediocre. If in 3 years, he's still averaging around 13, 8, and 2, that'll be a pretty big disappointment for a can't miss #1 pick. Now, I don't think he'll still be at 13, 8, and 2 in 3 years, but that's sort of my whole point.

My point was to illustrate that most rookies struggle - especially those only one or two years removed from high school. Rivers is struggling more than most, but it's not like his struggles are way out of line with those of guys like Beal and Waiters.

Here is some basis for comparison:


Marcus Camby averaged 14.8 ppg and 6.3 RPG as a rookie
Dirk Nowitzki averaged 8.2 PPG and 3.4 RPG as a rookie
Kevin Garnett averaged 10.4 PPG and 6.3 RPG as a rookie
Amare Stoudamire averaged 13.5 PPG and 8.8 RPG as a rookie
Robert Parish averaged 9.1 PPG and 7.1 RPG as a rookie
James Worthy averaged 13.4 PPG and 5.2 RPG as a rookie

[wilko]

Historically Ugly?
Thats kinda harsh. I'm sure some girl would have said he was cute at least once.. even out of pity.

[CDu]

Here is some basis for comparison:


Marcus Camby averaged 14.8 ppg and 6.3 RPG as a rookie
Dirk Nowitzki averaged 8.2 PPG and 3.4 RPG as a rookie
Kevin Garnett averaged 10.4 PPG and 6.3 RPG as a rookie
Amare Stoudamire averaged 13.5 PPG and 8.8 RPG as a rookie
Robert Parish averaged 9.1 PPG and 7.1 RPG as a rookie
James Worthy averaged 13.4 PPG and 5.2 RPG as a rookie

Right. That's my point - rookies usually struggle in their first year in the league. Some get better with time, some don't.

[johnb]

Austin is a former Duke player who has not gotten into fights, plagiarized, or had someone else take his SAT. He didn't take fictitious classes or repeatedly discuss his sorrow over the death of his fictitious girlfriend. He won a Carolina game. We cheered him. He's our guy. It's fine to root for the legendary alums like Shane and Grant, but it seems like part of the code should be that we also root for our guys when other web sites are undercutting them. There's obviously room for differences of opinion, and there are transgressions that are beyond the pale, but as far as I know, all he's done is not play at the level that he--more than anyone--would hope for. He can handle the harshness, but why should he get it here?

[MartyClark]

[QUOTE=johnb;618547]Austin is a former Duke player who has not gotten into fights, plagiarized, or had someone else take his SAT. He didn't take fictitious classes or repeatedly discuss his sorrow over the death of his fictitious girlfriend. He won a Carolina game. We cheered him. He's our guy. It's fine to root for the legendary alums like Shane and Grant, but it seems like part of the code should be that we also root for our guys when other web sites are undercutting them. There's obviously room for differences of opinion, and there are transgressions that are beyond the pale, but as far as I know, all he's done is not play at the level that he--more than anyone--would hope for. He can handle the harshness, but why should he get it here?

I like the kid and wish him well. He was an imperfect player on a decidedly imperfect team. I will never forget the game winning shot against Carolina. That moment alone puts him in my Duke hall of fame.

[Mabdul Doobakus]

There are some things I admire about Austin Rivers. He's a great athlete, who, at least in college, could get to the basket at will. He has seemingly unshakable confidence and courage. And that Carolina shot will always be a big part of Duke basketball history.

But...I argued when he declared for the draft that I didn't think he'd ever be an above average NBA player and I didn't think he should be drafted in the first round. Maybe late first round at best. And still...I can't believe he's been THIS bad. He'll improve because he almost has to. But the problem with his game is he's a score first mentality who does not finish well around the basket and is an OK outside shooter at best. His shooting percentage in college was 43%, which I felt was alarmingly low. How could you reasonably expect him to hit even 40% in the NBA? He will improve his ability to finish at the basket, but enough to be a good NBA player? I highly doubt it. I think it's pretty rare you see guys make huge strides in that department, and I think it's equally unlikely he's going to be able to develop the mentality he needs to find his niche in the NBA (whatever that might possibly be). I just don't see where he fits in. I continue to hope he'll prove me wrong.

[SupaDave]

There are some things I admire about Austin Rivers. He's a great athlete, who, at least in college, could get to the basket at will. He has seemingly unshakable confidence and courage. And that Carolina shot will always be a big part of Duke basketball history.

But...I argued when he declared for the draft that I didn't think he'd ever be an above average NBA player and I didn't think he should be drafted in the first round. Maybe late first round at best. And still...I can't believe he's been THIS bad. He'll improve because he almost has to. But the problem with his game is he's a score first mentality who does not finish well around the basket and is an OK outside shooter at best. His shooting percentage in college was 43%, which I felt was alarmingly low. How could you reasonably expect him to hit even 40% in the NBA? He will improve his ability to finish at the basket, but enough to be a good NBA player? I highly doubt it. I think it's pretty rare you see guys make huge strides in that department, and I think it's equally unlikely he's going to be able to develop the mentality he needs to find his niche in the NBA (whatever that might possibly be). I just don't see where he fits in. I continue to hope he'll prove me wrong.

To reiterate what other posters have said - he's not having a bad year. He's not headed to the D-League. He's getting typical rookie bumps and bruises. He's gonna have to WORK. No matter what you think - he's IN the NBA. There's a VERY short list of those that have come in and set the league on fire no matter how ready people thought they were. Go look at what Hakeem did to Shaq as a rookie and maybe you'll understand a little better.

[Mabdul Doobakus]

To reiterate what other posters have said - he's not having a bad year. He's not headed to the D-League. He's getting typical rookie bumps and bruises. He's gonna have to WORK. No matter what you think - he's IN the NBA. There's a VERY short list of those that have come in and set the league on fire no matter how ready people thought they were. Go look at what Hakeem did to Shaq as a rookie and maybe you'll understand a little better.

Well, I respect your support for Austin, but I completely disagree with your argument. He's in the NBA, but that doesn't mean he doesn't belong in the D league. There was that article* in late December on ESPN Insider that suggested statistically he was having the worst season of ALL TIME (of any NBA player, in any season, ever), and since then he's done nothing but shoot 20% in January, and has had his minutes reduced drastically. What he's going through is not typical. I would say that is not my opinion, but a statistical fact.


*-I don't want to nitpick this article. It was based on a made up stat called Wins Above Replacement Player, and Austin was on pace to have the worst number ever. That's probably not the case any more because his minutes are down. I only bring this article to underscore that his struggles are not "typical", not to say that I completely agree with it.

[JNort]

Well, first of all, if that's your complaint about my post then you completely missed the point. Your last sentence is EXACTLY the point I was trying to make.

As for Davis, I think he's going to be a terrific player in the NBA. But 12.9 ppg and 7.8 rpg is far from "stud" category. Davis' per-48 minute averages would put him outside the top 80 in scoring, outside the top 40 in rebounds, and on the fringe of the top-20 in blocks. There are only 30 teams in the league, so I'd say that's decidedly mediocre. And his numbers are some of the BEST (along with Lillard) of the rookie class so far.

Only Lillard has played decidedly well regardless of rookie status. Davis has played very solidly for a rookie. But in terms of overall comparison to the league, he's been pretty mediocre. If in 3 years, he's still averaging around 13, 8, and 2, that'll be a pretty big disappointment for a can't miss #1 pick. Now, I don't think he'll still be at 13, 8, and 2 in 3 years, but that's sort of my whole point.

My point was to illustrate that most rookies struggle - especially those only one or two years removed from high school. Rivers is struggling more than most, but it's not like his struggles are way out of line with those of guys like Beal and Waiters.

I think I am just getting confused or something cause I still don't get it. You shouldn't compare him to established NBA players but to other rookies or past rookies (See the quote below). He has not even come close to filling out his body for one, he will get stronger. Post players usually don't put up his type of numbers so soon. He looks great and better than expected tbh, people expected ok defense but not this much offense.

True if he still averages that later in his career it is a disappointment but right now he is as advertised! Right now ROTY comes down to Lillard, Davis, and Drummond (Lillard is the leader I think). While he has been mentioned Drummond looks like I thought he would which is that he looks like a franchise player as well. Really wanted the Bobcats to get him... O well


Have to disagree. Davis is #31 in PER. That puts him one spot behind David Lee and a couple spots ahead of Paul Pierce among others. Is he a top 10 PF? Would he not start on most NBA teams? I think that is playing decidedly well. I guess we are getting into semantics here but Davis might not be in the "stud" category almost no rookies ever are but he is already an above average NBA player.


Here is some basis for comparison:


Marcus Camby averaged 14.8 ppg and 6.3 RPG as a rookie
Dirk Nowitzki averaged 8.2 PPG and 3.4 RPG as a rookie
Kevin Garnett averaged 10.4 PPG and 6.3 RPG as a rookie
Amare Stoudamire averaged 13.5 PPG and 8.8 RPG as a rookie
Robert Parish averaged 9.1 PPG and 7.1 RPG as a rookie
James Worthy averaged 13.4 PPG and 5.2 RPG as a rookie

[SupaDave]

Since 1985 the NBA has routinely let in at least 40 plus new players. Just based on the number 40 alone, that's at least 1,320 rookies.

And in that time - only the following have made the NBA All-Star game...

1985 Michael Jordan Chicago Bulls Yes 27.4 P
1985 Hakeem Olajuwon Houston Rockets No 20.7 P
1986 Patrick Ewing New York Knicks No 20.9 P 9.2 R
1990 David Robinson San Antonio Spurs No 23.2 P 11.8 R
1992 Dikembe Mutombo Denver Nuggets No 19.1 P 13.3 R
1993 Shaquille O'Neal Orlando Magic Yes 24.0 P 14.3 R
1995 Grant Hill Detroit Pistons Yes 18.4 P 5.1 R
1998 Tim Duncan San Antonio Spurs No 18.2 P 11.5 R
2003 Yao Ming Houston Rockets Yes 13.0 P 8.1 R
2011 Blake Griffin

Please make a note that there are no one and dones on the list (and the closest thing to it - Blake Griffin - was/IS far from a finished product but was "physically" ready for the NBA). Also notice the lack of guards on the list - the hardest position in the league to adjust to.

We never got to see a second year from J Dub but I'd argue that his rookie year with the Bulls was a phenomenal disappointment replete with locker room blow-ups and player dissension (Jamal Crawford).

I've seen a lot of historically bad rookie seasons - from Charles Shackleford, Greg Oden, Darko, Kwame and Rodney Monroe to Leon Smith.

Just like JJ - I think Austin will be fine.

[Jderf]

Just like JJ - I think Austin will be fine.

I've always been a big Austin supporter, and I agree completely that he will be a very successful NBA player. I'm not sure why, but he just seems to be one of those guys who draws out criticism from every possible direction. You can almost feel a sense of glee whenever people get a chance to rip on him -- sometimes fairly, other times not so much. He's a big kid though. He'll be fine.

I even wonder occasionally if this adversity might actually be a good thing for him. It's going to drive him to work on diversifying his game and becoming a better player. Also, when he inevitably finds that success, he's not going to take it for granted.

It's clear that he's got that competitive "umph" -- he just has to hone it. And I suspect that the incessant criticism is going to drive him to do just that.

[CameronBornAndBred]

I've seen a lot of historically bad rookie seasons - from Charles Shackleford, Greg Oden, Darko, Kwame and Rodney Monroe to Leon Smith.

Just like JJ - I think Austin will be fine.
Wasn't Oden injured his rookie season? He's still a bust, but I think mostly due to injury.
I wish people would take JJ and other 3 to 4 year players out of this discussion. JJ definitely had his roadbumps, but he went into his rookie year after 4 years of school...he no longer was making a choice.
The question here (to me at least) is would Austin or the other one and doners improved their rookie years by staying around. I think Austin's answer would be yes, at least he would have developed some needed maturity.

[JNort]

Since 1985 the NBA has routinely let in at least 40 plus new players. Just based on the number 40 alone, that's at least 1,320 rookies.

And in that time - only the following have made the NBA All-Star game...

1985 Michael Jordan Chicago Bulls Yes 27.4 P
1985 Hakeem Olajuwon Houston Rockets No 20.7 P
1986 Patrick Ewing New York Knicks No 20.9 P 9.2 R
1990 David Robinson San Antonio Spurs No 23.2 P 11.8 R
1992 Dikembe Mutombo Denver Nuggets No 19.1 P 13.3 R
1993 Shaquille O'Neal Orlando Magic Yes 24.0 P 14.3 R
1995 Grant Hill Detroit Pistons Yes 18.4 P 5.1 R
1998 Tim Duncan San Antonio Spurs No 18.2 P 11.5 R
2003 Yao Ming Houston Rockets Yes 13.0 P 8.1 R
2011 Blake Griffin

Please make a note that there are no one and dones on the list (and the closest thing to it - Blake Griffin - was/IS far from a finished product but was "physically" ready for the NBA). Also notice the lack of guards on the list - the hardest position in the league to adjust to.

We never got to see a second year from J Dub but I'd argue that his rookie year with the Bulls was a phenomenal disappointment replete with locker room blow-ups and player dissension (Jamal Crawford).

I've seen a lot of historically bad rookie seasons - from Charles Shackleford, Greg Oden, Darko, Kwame and Rodney Monroe to Leon Smith.

Just like JJ - I think Austin will be fine.

True but one and done was not a big deal in those times because well you couldn't be... Besides that's what 27 years and only 10 players? Isn't All Star voting is a popularity contest so those guys had lots of college exposure after being in college 3+ years. Now with one year in college these guys take an extra year or two to get the popularity and respect in the NBA that wasn't as necessary back then. Although cases could be made for Melo and Durants rookie years. Blake didn't deserve it he was just flashy and flashy is what most people like

[JNort]

Wasn't Oden injured his rookie season? He's still a bust, but I think mostly due to injury.
I wish people would take JJ and other 3 to 4 year players out of this discussion. JJ definitely had his roadbumps, but he went into his rookie year after 4 years of school...he no longer was making a choice.
The question here (to me at least) is would Austin or the other one and doners improved their rookie years by staying around. I think Austin's answer would be yes, at least he would have developed some needed maturity.

Yeah I don't like categorizing Oden as a bust. He had the talent and for all we know could be an incredible player but never will know. Injuries don't feel like bust to me... just what if's.

As for the bolded.. not a fan of this idea. Why stay in college to improve your skills where you have limited time? Go to the NBA and get practice against better competition, better coaching for your career, more time to study and improve your game, and more focus on your game. College could help if you need a better mental aspect on basketball to help build your psyche or your draft prospects. If you can go in the lottery, you take it. Would he have a better rookie year? Yeah most likely, but there is always injuries and falling draft stock to worry about so go when you can

[throatybeard]

I changed the thread title because it made Austin sound aesthetically displeasing.

[Newton_14]

Yeah I don't like categorizing Oden as a bust. He had the talent and for all we know could be an incredible player but never will know. Injuries don't feel like bust to me... just what if's.

As for the bolded.. not a fan of this idea. Why stay in college to improve your skills where you have limited time? Go to the NBA and get practice against better competition, better coaching for your career, more time to study and improve your game, and more focus on your game. College could help if you need a better mental aspect on basketball to help build your psyche or your draft prospects. If you can go in the lottery, you take it. Would he have a better rookie year? Yeah most likely, but there is always injuries and falling draft stock to worry about so go when you can


I agree with CB&B. Players who spend 3 to 4 years in college are much better prepared for the NBA than 1 and dones. People always point to the exceptions like Lebron rather than the rule. For every Lebron there are hundreds of guys who go early and end up as busts like Will Avery. Worse yet, are the numerous early entries each year, literally 30 to 40+ kids a year that give up that college career, don't get drafted, and don't catch on as Free Agents. College career forfeited, and dead, traded in for journeyman Pro in Turkey, Russia, etc. The bulk of fundamental development happens in college. Once you get to the NBA you are expected to have a certain base of fundamentals. Development after a player is in the NBA is mostly achieved with guys working their tails off in the off-season working on their own games themselves.

Once training camp ends and the NBA season begins "practice" mostly takes place in hotel ballrooms as walk through.

The NBA transcended to a "kiddie league" as Brad Daughtery once called it, compared to how it was in the 80's and early 90's. Some one and dones work through the challenges faster than others and turn into good and even great players, many more however, bomb out and end up in the foreign leagues.

Austin is certainly a player that would have benefited from spending at least 2 to 3 years at Duke before jumping to the league, even though his skill set is more suited to the NBA game. It would have given him time to develop his body, mature as a person and a player, and expand his game developing better passing and defensive skills, and learning how to play without the ball in his hands.

I hate to see he is struggling, but he has enough talent to work through it and become a good player. Just not very likely to turn into a NBA All Star.

[gep]

Some comments (with all due respect to the posters)...


As for the bolded.. not a fan of this idea. Why stay in college to improve your skills where you have limited time? Go to the NBA and get practice against better competition, better coaching for your career, more time to study and improve your game, and more focus on your game. College could help if you need a better mental aspect on basketball to help build your psyche or your draft prospects. If you can go in the lottery, you take it. Would he have a better rookie year? Yeah most likely, but there is always injuries and falling draft stock to worry about so go when you can

Well, maybe go to the NBA, but maybe not really improve skills. Not ready? Bumped down to the D-League. Then, maybe can't break back into the NBA again... then... what/where :confused:


I agree with CB&B. Players who spend 3 to 4 years in college are much better prepared for the NBA than 1 and dones. People always point to the exceptions like Lebron rather than the rule. For every Lebron there are hundreds of guys who go early and end up as busts like Will Avery. Worse yet, are the numerous early entries each year, literally 30 to 40+ kids a year that give up that college career, don't get drafted, and don't catch on as Free Agents. College career forfeited, and dead, traded in for journeyman Pro in Turkey, Russia, etc. The bulk of fundamental development happens in college. Once you get to the NBA you are expected to have a certain base of fundamentals. Development after a player is in the NBA is mostly achieved with guys working their tails off in the off-season working on their own games themselves.


Unfortunately, the money (Austin in the lottery, for example) makes this unlikely. [long for the "good old days]

[toooskies]

I wonder how dreams of playing in the NBA will turn out for all these draft picks being shuttled back and forth to the D-league.

[moonpie23]

it's unfortunate that the D-League has such a negative connotation. I stil think the NBA is missing a huge opportunity for increased revenue as well as much needed development for a lot of the kids coming out of college and high school.


Imagine all the best one and doners, as well as the college grads, high school grads, and international players wanting to make the NBA ALL traveling around to non NBA arenas playing each other. Much like the And 1, but it would truly be the farm for the NBA. Having some "stars" on the D-League teams would certainly change the stigma of having to be "sent down".

They could up the players salaries and introduce the new players to what it's like in "the league". Benefits of this development would help the NBA put a better product on the floor..

I'd go see these games if they came to the RBC (or whatever it's called this week)....

[Newton_14]

Some comments (with all due respect to the posters)...



Well, maybe go to the NBA, but maybe not really improve skills. Not ready? Bumped down to the D-League. Then, maybe can't break back into the NBA again... then... what/where :confused:



Unfortunately, the money (Austin in the lottery, for example) makes this unlikely. [long for the "good old days]

Totally agree with you there. Kids that are going to be drafted in the lottery, or even late first round, are going to go more often than not due to the money. It's just a fact of life in this era.

[miramar]

From the CBS Sports "Scouting Title Contenders" article:


On improved chemistry:

"You can tell it's much better without Andre Dawkins and Austin Rivers. Rivers didn't want to guard. I'd much rather play last year's team than this year's. It's not even close."

"They've got tough-minded kids and I think Rivers screwed them up some. I don't think he ever bought in. This year everyone has bought in and that's part of the reason why they've been so good. It's not like they have such a dominating team in terms of talent."

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/story/21570168/scouting-title-contenders-duke-blue-devils

[jv001]

From the CBS Sports "Scouting Title Contenders" article:


On improved chemistry:

"You can tell it's much better without Andre Dawkins and Austin Rivers. Rivers didn't want to guard. I'd much rather play last year's team than this year's. It's not even close."

"They've got tough-minded kids and I think Rivers screwed them up some. I don't think he ever bought in. This year everyone has bought in and that's part of the reason why they've been so good. It's not like they have such a dominating team in terms of talent."

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/story/21570168/scouting-title-contenders-duke-blue-devils

While Austin will not go down as one of my all time favorite Blue Devils, I thought that he was our best on the ball defender last year. He improved dramatically as the year went on. GoDuke!

[davekay1971]

I despise this thread.

Whatever Rivers brought to our team last year (and many 18 and 19 year olds bring a combination of good and bad), he is part of the Duke family, played with effort and intensity every game, and gave us one spectacular memory. I hope he makes the adjustment to the NBA and has great success there.

[arnie]

I despise this thread.

Whatever Rivers brought to our team last year (and many 18 and 19 year olds bring a combination of good and bad), he is part of the Duke family, played with effort and intensity every game, and gave us one spectacular memory. I hope he makes the adjustment to the NBA and has great success there.

He beat the Heels at the Deandump. I'll never forget that game or shot - matches or exceeds the Robbie West shot. Can't agree with the all the Rivers negativity.

[vick]

From the CBS Sports "Scouting Title Contenders" article:


On improved chemistry:

"You can tell it's much better without Andre Dawkins and Austin Rivers. Rivers didn't want to guard. I'd much rather play last year's team than this year's. It's not even close."

"They've got tough-minded kids and I think Rivers screwed them up some. I don't think he ever bought in. This year everyone has bought in and that's part of the reason why they've been so good. It's not like they have such a dominating team in terms of talent."

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/story/21570168/scouting-title-contenders-duke-blue-devils

This is an example of why I think discussions about Rivers tend to generate more heat than light. While I don't think he was our best player last year--and I think the statistics (http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/duke/2012.html) strongly bear that out (he was our sixth-most efficient scorer and still had the highest usage rate, which is not a particularly good sign for someone whose primary role is as a scorer)--it's silly to attribute our better performance so far to Rivers' absence, when a healthy Cook, Sulaimon's early-season performance, and a more assertive Mason are almost certainly more important factors when you put them together. I think Rivers made our team better than it would have been last year, and even apart from the game in Chapel Hill last year I'm glad he was here. All that said...

There is a counter-argument running through this thread that his NBA struggles are basically normal. And I'm sorry, but that's just not true. I mean, come on--looking at what Shaq did against Hakeem as a comparison? Using Basketball Reference's Win Shares, which is a pretty good measure of efficiency, here is (http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/psl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=single&type=totals&per_minute_base=36&lg_id=NBA&is_playoffs=N&year_min=&year_max=&franch_id=&season_start=1&season_end=1&age_min=0&age_max=99&height_min=0&height_max=99&birth_country_is=Y&birth_country=&is_active=&is_hof=&is_as=&as_comp=gt&as_val=&pos_is_g=Y&pos_is_gf=Y&qual=&c1stat=mp&c1comp=gt&c1val=500&c2stat=ws_per_48&c2comp=lt&c2val=-0.04&c3stat=&c3comp=gt&c3val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&c5stat=&c5comp=gt&c6mult=1.0&c6stat=&order_by=ws_per_48&order_by_asc=Y) the list of guards (or guard/forwards) who played at least 500 minutes and were even close to as ineffective as Rivers has been. There are certainly signs of hope--Jim Jackson and Jamal Crawford have gone on to long careers, though neither one would be classified as a great player (and both are significantly bigger than Rivers). But by and large, it's a list of fairly undistinguished players. Pick another advanced metric if you want, Hollinger's PER, whatever, and you are going to find something similar.

The brutal reality is that there isn't a place in the NBA for a marginally undersized shooting guard who is undistinguished as a passer and a simply ineffective scorer. An eFG% of 37.2% as of this date is simply nowhere near where you need to be to be a regular rotation player in the NBA if your primary role is as a scorer. Both based on what I have seen and the shooting charts (http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/r/riverau01/shooting/2013/), he has continued to struggle to be an effective scorer with his left hand.

I'm not saying it's hopeless. And I certainly don't want him to fail. Even apart from being a Duke player, he's always struck me as a decent guy, and I like his mentality even if not necessarily a lot of his game. But he really, really needs to improve by a lot, because he is simply not close to being an effective NBA player. I hope he does, and he might. But his struggles are quite real.

[SupaDave]

He beat the Heels at the Deandump. I'll never forget that game or shot - matches or exceeds the Robbie West shot. Can't agree with the all the Rivers negativity.

Austin saved our tail in a number of ways last year and did what K asked him to do which is all the endorsement I need. I've been thinking of starting a thread on what Austin meant to the team in terms of simply bringing his talent to town.

This is a bit of a ramble but I've been thinking about it all season. Most don't realize it but Austin is our Shaun Livingston that actually came to school. Shaun not coming in made Paulus the starter. Paulus was originally intended to be Tyler Thornton but instead Paulus had to play right away after losing Daniel Ewing, Demarcus gettting injured, and Dockery being inconsistent. With Thornton we get to see how Paulus would have been an absolute beast as a spot up shooter but of course those were JJ's duties then.

Austin helped make up for the loss of 3 draft picks and allowed Quinn to develop for a year without huge expectations. Enter this year and Quinn is ready after having gotten to play with Austin, Kyrie, AND Nolan. Thornton is ready to produce at a high level off the bench. Austin's absence allows playing time for Rasheed and ball movement for Curry. Austin helped carry a team with just one senior and it made this year's seniors embrace leadership. When you look at the big picture - Austin helped us bridge a period of developing talent without much drop off. He wasn't Kevin Durant or Kyrie but so what - who IS?

[MartyClark]

Austin saved our tail in a number of ways last year and did what K asked him to do which is all the endorsement I need. I've been thinking of starting a thread on what Austin meant to the team in terms of simply bringing his talent to town.

This is a bit of a ramble but I've been thinking about it all season. Most don't realize it but Austin is our Shaun Livingston that actually came to school. Shaun not coming in made Paulus the starter. Paulus was originally intended to be Tyler Thornton but instead Paulus had to play right away after losing Daniel Ewing, Demarcus gettting injured, and Dockery being inconsistent. With Thornton we get to see how Paulus would have been an absolute beast as a spot up shooter but of course those were JJ's duties then.

Austin helped make up for the loss of 3 draft picks and allowed Quinn to develop for a year without huge expectations. Enter this year and Quinn is ready after having gotten to play with Austin, Kyrie, AND Nolan. Thornton is ready to produce at a high level off the bench. Austin's absence allows playing time for Rasheed and ball movement for Curry. Austin helped carry a team with just one senior and it made this year's seniors embrace leadership. When you look at the big picture - Austin helped us bridge a period of developing talent without much drop off. He wasn't Kevin Durant or Kyrie but so what - who IS?



Good points SupaDave.

[Kdogg]

And I'm sorry, but that's just not true. I mean, come on--looking at what Shaq did against Hakeem as a comparison?

Really? You are using Shaq as a reference point for Austin. Kid can't win for trying. A lot of players struggle during their rookie (and sophmore) season(s) and go on to have long NBA careers. I don't know if Austin will be a star. I don't know if he will wash out of the NBA. I do know he is a Blue Devil and I will be pulling for him.

[wk2109]

This is a bit of a ramble but I've been thinking about it all season. Most don't realize it but Austin is our Shaun Livingston that actually came to school. Shaun not coming in made Paulus the starter. Paulus was originally intended to be Tyler Thornton but instead Paulus had to play right away after losing Daniel Ewing, Demarcus gettting injured, and Dockery being inconsistent. With Thornton we get to see how Paulus would have been an absolute beast as a spot up shooter but of course those were JJ's duties then.

Is this completely accurate? First of all, Livingston was HS c/o 2004 and Paulus was HS c/o 2005, so had he attended college, Livingston would have been a sophomore when Paulus was a freshman. Considering he was a none-and-done, it's kind of a stretch to think about a scenario in which Livingston would have stayed for his sophomore year. Also, I don't know if Greg was projected to be a starter from game one (or game two as it was), but he was ranked MUCH higher than Tyler was (#13 RSCI vs. unranked RSCI).


Austin helped make up for the loss of 3 draft picks and allowed Quinn to develop for a year without huge expectations. Enter this year and Quinn is ready after having gotten to play with Austin, Kyrie, AND Nolan. Thornton is ready to produce at a high level off the bench. Austin's absence allows playing time for Rasheed and ball movement for Curry. Austin helped carry a team with just one senior and it made this year's seniors embrace leadership. When you look at the big picture - Austin helped us bridge a period of developing talent without much drop off. He wasn't Kevin Durant or Kyrie but so what - who IS?

A minor inaccuracy: Quinn came in AFTER Nolan and Kyrie left.

All that being said, I see your point about Austin helping Duke stay afloat. However, I'm curious as to how good last year's team would have been without him. I'd imagine that Mason would have been challenged during the offseason between his sophomore and junior years to become the man and to play as big an offensive role as he's played this year. I'm guessing he wouldn't have been a leading NPOY candidate (especially since Quinn wasn't ready to be the full-time starting PG last year), but I think K could have used a system with Seth, Andre, Ryan, and Tyler spreading the floor around Mason/Miles and Duke still could have been among the most efficient offenses in the country. Of course, the defense likely wouldn't have been any better than it actually was last year.

[vick]

Really? You are using Shaq as a reference point for Austin. Kid can't win for trying. A lot of players struggle during their rookie (and sophmore) season(s) and go on to have long NBA careers. I don't know if Austin will be a star. I don't know if he will wash out of the NBA. I do know he is a Blue Devil and I will be pulling for him.

No, you misunderstand, or maybe I wasn't clear. Someone else said that Rivers "isn't having a bad year" and is "getting typical rookie bumps and bruises" and that people who disagree should "look at what Hakeem did to Shaq as a rookie and maybe you'll understand a little better." I'm not holding him up to the Shaq standard, because he's not close to that.

I agree players often struggle during their rookie years and go on to long careers--I pointed out two of them myself. And I am pulling for him too, and neither I, nor I believe anyone else here, believe he absolutely can't turn it around and/or want him to fail. But, there is a difference between pulling for someone and pretending they are better than they are. And, by pretty much any objective measure, Rivers is a poor player by the exceptionally high standards of the NBA for a rookie or for anyone else. By Basketball-Reference's Win Shares (http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/psl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=single&type=totals&per_minute_base=36&lg_id=NBA&is_playoffs=N&year_min=2013&year_max=2013&franch_id=&season_start=1&season_end=-1&age_min=0&age_max=99&height_min=0&height_max=99&birth_country_is=Y&birth_country=&is_active=&is_hof=&is_as=&as_comp=gt&as_val=&pos_is_g=Y&pos_is_gf=Y&pos_is_f=Y&pos_is_fg=Y&pos_is_fc=Y&pos_is_c=Y&pos_is_cf=Y&qual=&c1stat=&c1comp=gt&c1val=&c2stat=&c2comp=gt&c2val=&c3stat=&c3comp=gt&c3val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&c5stat=&c5comp=gt&c6mult=1.0&c6stat=&order_by=ws&order_by_asc=Y), second worst. By Hollinger's PER (http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/psl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=single&type=totals&per_minute_base=36&lg_id=NBA&is_playoffs=N&year_min=2013&year_max=2013&franch_id=&season_start=1&season_end=-1&age_min=0&age_max=99&height_min=0&height_max=99&birth_country_is=Y&birth_country=&is_active=&is_hof=&is_as=&as_comp=gt&as_val=&pos_is_g=Y&pos_is_gf=Y&pos_is_f=Y&pos_is_fg=Y&pos_is_fc=Y&pos_is_c=Y&pos_is_cf=Y&qual=&c1stat=mp&c1comp=gt&c1val=500&c2stat=&c2comp=gt&c2val=&c3stat=&c3comp=gt&c3val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&c5stat=&c5comp=gt&c6mult=1.0&c6stat=&order_by=per&order_by_asc=Y), second worst (among players with 500 MP since this is a per-minute metric). By advanced statistical plus-minus (http://godismyjudgeok.com/DStats/2012/nba-stats/aspm-notes-and-viz-update/), the worst. By Dave Berri's Wins Produced (http://www.thenbageek.com/players?single_page=1) (which I'm not personally a fan of but some are), fourth worst. Again, I don't want him to struggle. But he is struggling, much worse than JJ Redick for example, who had an eFG of 50.8% as a rookie. That is an absolutely enormous difference between his performance and Rivers' to date.

[Kdogg]

No, you misunderstand, or maybe I wasn't clear. Someone else said that Rivers "isn't having a bad year" and is "getting typical rookie bumps and bruises" and that people who disagree should "look at what Hakeem did to Shaq as a rookie and maybe you'll understand a little better." I'm not holding him up to the Shaq standard, because he's not close to that.

I agree players often struggle during their rookie years and go on to long careers--I pointed out two of them myself. And I am pulling for him too, and neither I, nor I believe anyone else here, believe he absolutely can't turn it around and/or want him to fail. But, there is a difference between pulling for someone and pretending they are better than they are. And, by pretty much any objective measure, Rivers is a poor player by the exceptionally high standards of the NBA for a rookie or for anyone else. By Basketball-Reference's Win Shares (http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/psl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=single&type=totals&per_minute_base=36&lg_id=NBA&is_playoffs=N&year_min=2013&year_max=2013&franch_id=&season_start=1&season_end=-1&age_min=0&age_max=99&height_min=0&height_max=99&birth_country_is=Y&birth_country=&is_active=&is_hof=&is_as=&as_comp=gt&as_val=&pos_is_g=Y&pos_is_gf=Y&pos_is_f=Y&pos_is_fg=Y&pos_is_fc=Y&pos_is_c=Y&pos_is_cf=Y&qual=&c1stat=&c1comp=gt&c1val=&c2stat=&c2comp=gt&c2val=&c3stat=&c3comp=gt&c3val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&c5stat=&c5comp=gt&c6mult=1.0&c6stat=&order_by=ws&order_by_asc=Y), second worst. By Hollinger's PER (http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/psl_finder.cgi?request=1&match=single&type=totals&per_minute_base=36&lg_id=NBA&is_playoffs=N&year_min=2013&year_max=2013&franch_id=&season_start=1&season_end=-1&age_min=0&age_max=99&height_min=0&height_max=99&birth_country_is=Y&birth_country=&is_active=&is_hof=&is_as=&as_comp=gt&as_val=&pos_is_g=Y&pos_is_gf=Y&pos_is_f=Y&pos_is_fg=Y&pos_is_fc=Y&pos_is_c=Y&pos_is_cf=Y&qual=&c1stat=mp&c1comp=gt&c1val=500&c2stat=&c2comp=gt&c2val=&c3stat=&c3comp=gt&c3val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&c5stat=&c5comp=gt&c6mult=1.0&c6stat=&order_by=per&order_by_asc=Y), second worst (among players with 500 MP since this is a per-minute metric). By advanced statistical plus-minus (http://godismyjudgeok.com/DStats/2012/nba-stats/aspm-notes-and-viz-update/), the worst. By Dave Berri's Wins Produced (http://www.thenbageek.com/players?single_page=1) (which I'm not personally a fan of but some are), fourth worst. Again, I don't want him to struggle. But he is struggling, much worse than JJ Redick for example, who had an eFG of 50.8% as a rookie. That is an absolutely enormous difference between his performance and Rivers' to date.

I did misunderstand the context. Thanks for the clearification. I agree he is having a bad year but as you pointed out it can be over come.

[SupaDave]

Is this completely accurate? First of all, Livingston was HS c/o 2004 and Paulus was HS c/o 2005, so had he attended college, Livingston would have been a sophomore when Paulus was a freshman. Considering he was a none-and-done, it's kind of a stretch to think about a scenario in which Livingston would have stayed for his sophomore year. Also, I don't know if Greg was projected to be a starter from game one (or game two as it was), but he was ranked MUCH higher than Tyler was (#13 RSCI vs. unranked RSCI).

A minor inaccuracy: Quinn came in AFTER Nolan and Kyrie left.

All that being said, I see your point about Austin helping Duke stay afloat. However, I'm curious as to how good last year's team would have been without him. I'd imagine that Mason would have been challenged during the offseason between his sophomore and junior years to become the man and to play as big an offensive role as he's played this year. I'm guessing he wouldn't have been a leading NPOY candidate (especially since Quinn wasn't ready to be the full-time starting PG last year), but I think K could have used a system with Seth, Andre, Ryan, and Tyler spreading the floor around Mason/Miles and Duke still could have been among the most efficient offenses in the country. Of course, the defense likely wouldn't have been any better than it actually was last year.

First, Quinn has been playing with Nolan his whole life and then in the off season this past year. Quinn's improvement is rooted in his health, practice, and a great off-season.

And yes, Livingston was 2004 and Paulus was 2005. Paulus had already committed (http://www.dukechronicle.com/article/paulus-commits-duke) - and coincidently the article hints at the "major" talent in the pipeline. At the time (2003), Livingston wasn't considered to be an early entry - a one and done maybe but he went and got drafted in the first round in 2004. Ewing and Dockery shared the point guard duties in 2004 with JJ off the ball. However, in 2005, Duke had a "LOADED" class and could not go out and get another point guard after Livingston went pro in 2004 and thusly, Coach K went with what he had in 2004 and 2005.

Rankings have nothing to do with plans. Thornton came highly regarded for his leadership, toughness and basketball acumen, was one of the best in his area, and consistently shut down a player that was coming to his rival school (Marshall). Thornton is pretty much a Paulus clone and also coincidently, Thornton committed early.

And as far as an efficient offense without Austin, I'm not so sure about that b/c Mason would be reduced to rebounds from a bunch of spot of shooters (and Miles picked up quite a few rebounds in his own right last year). Our half-court offense was at times painful to watch when Austin wasn't in the game last year. It would have been a frustrating year.

[wk2109]

First, Quinn has been playing with Nolan his whole life and then in the off season this past year. Quinn's improvement is rooted in his health, practice, and a great off-season.

And yes, Livingston was 2004 and Paulus was 2005. Paulus had already committed (http://www.dukechronicle.com/article/paulus-commits-duke) - and coincidently the article hints at the "major" talent in the pipeline. At the time (2003), Livingston wasn't considered to be an early entry - a one and done maybe but he went and got drafted in the first round in 2004. Ewing and Dockery shared the point guard duties in 2004 with JJ off the ball. However, in 2005, Duke had a "LOADED" class and could not go out and get another point guard after Livingston went pro in 2004 and thusly, Coach K went with what he had in 2004 and 2005.

Rankings have nothing to do with plans. Thornton came highly regarded for his leadership, toughness and basketball acumen, was one of the best in his area, and consistently shut down a player that was coming to his rival school (Marshall). Thornton is pretty much a Paulus clone and also coincidently, Thornton committed early.

And as far as an efficient offense without Austin, I'm not so sure about that b/c Mason would be reduced to rebounds from a bunch of spot of shooters (and Miles picked up quite a few rebounds in his own right last year). Our half-court offense was at times painful to watch when Austin wasn't in the game last year. It would have been a frustrating year.

I know that Quinn and Nolan have known each other for a long time and that they trained together this past summer, but it's a bit of a stretch to say that Quinn played with Nolan for his whole life when they were four grades apart and never played on the same team in HS, AAU, or college.

I don't see how Thornton can be seen as a Paulus clone in any meaningful way. Tyler's calling card has been his defense, toughness and hustle plays, while Greg was never seen as a good defender and his best attribute was his shooting and distributing skills.

I don't think you can look at the offense when Austin wasn't in the game last year and definitively state that's what Duke's offense would have looked like for the entire season had Austin not come to Duke. The game plan from the offseason was built largely around Austin. Without Austin, K likely would have built the offense around Mason/Ryan/Seth (and he might have talked Mason up in the media and in private to boost his confidence) and with a whole year's worth of practice, the offensive efficiency would have been fine (in my opinion). But it's rather fruitless to hypothesize because we'll never really know for sure. I just don't think it's fair to say that because Duke's offense looked ugly for the 6-7 minutes Austin was on the bench, the offense would have been just as ugly if Austin wasn't on the team.

Re: Austin in the NBA, I think a year or two of really struggling will benefit someone with Austin's competitive personality. During high school, he dominated the competition and even though he didn't dominate at the all-star games, he still psychologically had his top-3 ranking to hang his hat on. At Duke, even though the flaws in his game became more apparent, he could still hang his hat on his high draft projection, his shot at UNC, the All-ACC first-team honors, the first-freshman-scoring-leader-at-Duke-in-20-years distinction, and whatever other accolades he earned during college and high school.

After a couple of years of constant media scrutiny/criticism, Austin won't be able to hang his hat on anything -- that's going to drive him crazy. Any complacency he felt because of his past accomplishments will be completely gone, he's going to work on fixing his flaws like a madman, and he'll eventually max out his athletic ability and talent. I don't think he has the athletic ability (or the pure skill to make up for his lack of athletic ability) to be a superstar, but I think he can be a serviceable 6th man combo-guard for a while. I think it'll be a few years before he reaches that point though.

[SupaDave]

I know that Quinn and Nolan have known each other for a long time and that they trained together this past summer, but it's a bit of a stretch to say that Quinn played with Nolan for his whole life when they were four grades apart and never played on the same team in HS, AAU, or college.

I don't see how Thornton can be seen as a Paulus clone in any meaningful way. Tyler's calling card has been his defense, toughness and hustle plays, while Greg was never seen as a good defender and his best attribute was his shooting and distributing skills.

I don't think you can look at the offense when Austin wasn't in the game last year and definitively state that's what Duke's offense would have looked like for the entire season had Austin not come to Duke. The game plan from the offseason was built largely around Austin. Without Austin, K likely would have built the offense around Mason/Ryan/Seth (and he might have talked Mason up in the media and in private to boost his confidence) and with a whole year's worth of practice, the offensive efficiency would have been fine (in my opinion). But it's rather fruitless to hypothesize because we'll never really know for sure. I just don't think it's fair to say that because Duke's offense looked ugly for the 6-7 minutes Austin was on the bench, the offense would have been just as ugly if Austin wasn't on the team.

Re: Austin in the NBA, I think a year or two of really struggling will benefit someone with Austin's competitive personality. During high school, he dominated the competition and even though he didn't dominate at the all-star games, he still psychologically had his top-3 ranking to hang his hat on. At Duke, even though the flaws in his game became more apparent, he could still hang his hat on his high draft projection, his shot at UNC, the All-ACC first-team honors, the first-freshman-scoring-leader-at-Duke-in-20-years distinction, and whatever other accolades he earned during college and high school.

After a couple of years of constant media scrutiny/criticism, Austin won't be able to hang his hat on anything -- that's going to drive him crazy. Any complacency he felt because of his past accomplishments will be completely gone, he's going to work on fixing his flaws like a madman, and he'll eventually max out his athletic ability and talent. I don't think he has the athletic ability (or the pure skill to make up for his lack of athletic ability) to be a superstar, but I think he can be a serviceable 6th man combo-guard for a while. I think it'll be a few years before he reaches that point though.

For the record, I agree with all you say about Austin. It's also been said that Thornton is the best shooter on the team - by the team.

But as far as Quinn goes (off track I know) but he's surely been playing with Nolan his whole life having been in the same AAU program - trust me on this. But my point was his improvement...


"We've had a lot of time this year where me and him were just playing one-on-one in the gym," Smith said. "When I was down at Duke early in the summer working out, I was playing one-on-one with him and making sure he was more efficient with his moves. Being quicker and more effective when he had the ball. Keep him looking to make plays. He was working on his body, things like that, he's going to do those things. But his all-around game, he's just a complete player. I seen him every single day, waking up, working hard and doing extra things just to get better. He never takes days off and he always wants to compete and give the best to be the best."
"I know for a fact that I wouldn't be at the level I'm at without him," Cook said.

Read More: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/rob_dauster/08/10/Nolan-Smith-Quinn-Cook-Duke/index.html#ixzz2IWwW8MdV

[wk2109]

For the record, I agree with all you say about Austin. It's also been said that Thornton is the best shooter on the team - by the team.

But as far as Quinn goes (off track I know) but he's surely been playing with Nolan his whole life having been in the same AAU program - trust me on this. But my point was his improvement...



Read More: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/rob_dauster/08/10/Nolan-Smith-Quinn-Cook-Duke/index.html#ixzz2IWwW8MdV

I've never heard that about Tyler. I'm not sure I agree that Tyler's the best shooter on the team, but I'll take your word for it that that's what the team said.

I'm sure that Nolan has helped Quinn with his game immensely. I'd bet too that Nolan has played as big a role in Quinn's improvement as anyone has. My definition of "played with" had more to do with them being teammates than just playing basketball and training together. But like I said, I don't disagree about Nolan helping Quinn with his game.

[_Gary]

It's also been said that Thornton is the best shooter on the team - by the team.


I find it almost impossible to believe that the team thinks Tyler is a better shooter than Seth. If so, someone needs to check the water cooler for an illegal substance. :D

[xblade]

I find it almost impossible to believe that the team thinks Tyler is a better shooter than Seth. If so, someone needs to check the water cooler for an illegal substance. :D

If he were the best shooter on the team, he wouldn't be shooting 36%. People making this argument are the same ones arguing that Austin isn't really having a bad year despite it being one of the worst for a lottery pick ever. Yes, he is a former Dukie, and yes, he made a killer shot against UNC that most fans will never forget. None of that changes the fact that he's having an absolutely horrible season by any objective measure. He can't even make free throws, which is the one thing he should be able to do if nothing else, yet he can't even do that. That's not a good sign. Hope he works it out, but I wouldn't count on it. On the bright side, he'll be allowed to stick around longer than most because of who he is.