Quote:
Originally Posted by luther
A lot of those guys are people who are better than him now, but that doesn't make them better NBA prospects than him. Obviously, several of them have already failed in the NBA. That they have failed in the NBA--or chosen not to come to the NBA--and done well in Europe doesn't really say anything at all about Fernandez's prospects.
|
You are completely looking at it from the American NBA view. Any of those players can easily play in the NBA (some American players that are judged on what they were YEARS ago and are much better now). Mike Batiste is an example he is probably 10 times the player now than he was when he first came to Europe from the NBA. Then you have players like Macijuaskus or Spanoulis that are without question NBA level. Spanoulis is better than the big majority of NBA point guards. The issue like I am trying to explain is IF a coach benches an American rookie he may look at it as "I just have to wait" BUT if he does that to a guy that's a superstar in Europe - then that player will pout, get mad, and be gone just like that.
It's not even remotely the same circumstance or world for the Euro players. Americans just don't freaking get it. it's why I bring up Scola, Fernandez has way more physical ability than Scola but right now his NBA prospects are WAY LOWER because Scola came to the NBA when he was clearly a top 3 player in Europe. Fernandez would be coming to the NBA nowhere near that level. And you can throw around this upside and NBA failure argument all day and it still doesn't change the fact that you are wrong.
Even if Fernandez was 10 times better than he is there's a chance an NBA coach simply will not play him, he will then be called "an NBA failure" by American fans. There is a bias against the Euro players that exists. Even the Spurs didn't think Scola was good enough to play in the NBA.
The truth is if players in Europe would wait like Scola did, maybe like Siskauskus is doing then when they come to the NBA it's to a team that WILL play them. It's not this same old "he has to earn minutes" "he's just like any other rookie" etc.
Steve Nash or Jermaine O'Neal can be "failures" and ride a bench all they want but that is because they look at the NBA as their only option. A guy that looks at the NBA as nothing more than something he might want to experience is not sticking around when he rides the bench.
Look at Navarro, as of yet Rudy is not at the level Navarro was in Europe and Navarro is coming at age 27. Coaches can use that excuse of young rookie players with these guys. But the moment that get a young Euro player they want to bench the guy right off. Popovich had to be told by his GM to play Manu. Think about that, "Manu is an NBA failure".
Bottom line is there is a myth that how good you are in the NBA decides how good you are, as if Europe doesn't even count. Pure fantasy. How good Rudy is in Europe is directly related to how good he actually is. Which is why this idea is in hype. EVERY NBA forum was saying Jasekivicius was the best Euro player ever. But it was not true, it was a lie. Rudy is what he is, a very good prospect. he is nothing more than that at this point. And even talking about upside just shows how much hype there is. Even in Spanish league you can argue Rubio, Gasol, Splitter have more upside than him. But every basketball forum has this guy rated the "best player in Europe".
A little secret, it was the SAME Spanish fans that told everyone Jasekivicius was the greatest European player ever that are ranking Rudy now.