Thread Tools

Display Modes

tradetheo · 08-06-2006, 07:28 PM

people are saying aldridge has more potential then morrison, why? I don't get that, is it just because aldridge is 19 or 20 and morrison is what, 22. how does that mean aldridge has more potential. when you get to the nba, you have a clean slate and everything you did before means nothing. this is the nba, not just another league. it's how hard you work and how bad you want it. you think larry bird was born with tons of athletic ability. that guy was the goofiest thing is shorts. but he worked harder then anybody on the court and new what to do. that is the key. not being able to jump out of the gym or run faster then a train, but being smart and playing the right way. it also doesn't hurt to have a nice jumper like bird had.

**bball2223** · 08-06-2006, 07:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tradetheo

people are saying aldridge has more potential then morrison, why? I don't get that, is it just because aldridge is 19 or 20 and morrison is what, 22. how does that mean aldridge has more potential. when you get to the nba, you have a clean slate and everything you did before means nothing. this is the nba, not just another league. it's how hard you work and how bad you want it. you think larry bird was born with tons of athletic ability. that guy was the goofiest thing is shorts. but he worked harder then anybody on the court and new what to do. that is the key. not being able to jump out of the gym or run faster then a train, but being smart and playing the right way. it also doesn't hurt to have a nice jumper like bird had.

Aldridge if he works hard has the potential to be a better player than Morrison. Aldridge's body still might have a little more peaking to do and his athletic ability and size is why his potential is so much greater than Morrison's. Thats what they mean by potential by being taller, more athletic, ETC.. Morrison could be pretty good but is limited to an extent by his athletic ability. He is no Larry Bird and I'm not sure why people make those comparisons. He will never be what Larry Legend once was. That's what they mean by potential, in the sense that Aldridge if he works as hard as Morrison should end up better.

baller213 · 08-06-2006, 10:16 PM

IF you spend 4 years in college (such as Reddick) or come out of high school or after your freshman year (lebron, carmelo) potential is a huge issue.
Those few years are really important imo to see if a players developing the skills and has the talent to be someone specical or just a good player. You look at reddick and he was one of the best players in college, but his game isn't going to take a huge leap skill wise, it is what it is and will stay that way.
But you consider someone young, like Oden, we don't know what he's going to do, but with his talent and size, we can imagine he has a huge potential upside.

barfo · 08-06-2006, 10:25 PM

I am very concerned by the logophobia word, myself. I can barely bear to type it.

barfo

**qross1fan** · 08-06-2006, 10:39 PM

Potential . . . . the one word Clipper fans are finally happy to stop hearing

Post 5,400

tradetheo · 08-06-2006, 10:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by qrich1fan

Potential . . . . the one word Clipper fans are finally happy to stop hearing

Post 5,400

exactly. everybody in the nba has potential. they need to move from potential to actually proving themselves.

Public Defender · 08-07-2006, 12:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tradetheo

exactly. everybody in the nba has potential. they need to move from potential to actually proving themselves.

Hmm... I would argue that there are some players in the NBA that have pretty much fully realized their potential and are only going down. Shaquille O'Neal, for example. Tim Duncan has pretty much peaked, as well. There are lots of others, on the downside of their careers (Theo Ratliff, Gary Payton, Jason Kidd, Chris Webber, etc.).

"Potential" generally applies to the younger set, and is a very important consideration. Being tired of the word doesn't diminish its importance, unfortunately.

tradetheo · 08-07-2006, 12:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Public Defender

Hmm... I would argue that there are some players in the NBA that have pretty much fully realized their potential and are only going down. Shaquille O'Neal, for example. Tim Duncan has pretty much peaked, as well. There are lots of others, on the downside of their careers (Theo Ratliff, Gary Payton, Jason Kidd, Chris Webber, etc.).

"Potential" generally applies to the younger set, and is a very important consideration. Being tired of the word doesn't diminish its importance, unfortunately.

looks like chris webber has one of his best years in the league. he played in 75 games, played 38.6 minutes a game while scoring 20.1 a game. not bad for someone on the downside of their career.

**Tince** · 08-07-2006, 12:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tradetheo

looks like chris webber has one of his best years in the league. he played in 75 games, played 38.6 minutes a game while scoring 20.1 a game. not bad for someone on the downside of their career.

His Brick Index (which measures how much you hurt your teams offense while on the court) is 2nd worst in the NBA and only no-namers are in the top 10. Webbers numbers may have been decent, but I'm not sure he had a great year.

BigDtoPDX · 08-07-2006, 01:16 AM

Age has NOTHING to do with Aldridge v. Morrison.

Aldridge, was expected to go to the NBA out of HS, he has great size and length (not necessarily bulk), has a sweet shot and can block shots very well and pull down some boards. BUT...he IS definitely weak, young, timid, etc. Therefore he HASNT reached his potential yet b/c he can grow, learn the post game a lot better, etc. Just the sheer fact that he is 6ft10-11, has a sweet jumper, turnaround, finesse game, blocks, rebs, etc. make his potential exciting.

Morrison, as many say, has nearly reached his limit. He will not grow anymore, sure he could gain some weight, but it wont matter much for a 3 who doesnt play defense. His offensive game is awesome and is here to stay. He is fierce, competitive and can score from really anywhere on the court RIGHT NOW...therefore his potential is ALREADY here. Whether that is good or bad is up to the individual.

I think Morrison is going to be a fine NBA-er, his offensive game is already here and you know what you're getting from him.

But, Aldridge is already pretty damn good and STILL has SOOOO much room to get better (gain muscle, stength, experience, savvy, etc.) Therefore his potential has the POTENTIAL to be amazing...superstar status.

And that, is the essence of the duality of drafting or investing hope in a young, raw, yet super-talented young player. Aldridge's skills are pretty much here, BUT can he adapt to the NBA game, which includes gainging some weight, intensity, maturity, etc.?

el_Diablo · 08-07-2006, 04:46 AM

this thread has tremendous upside potential.

mediocre man · 08-07-2006, 07:04 AM

I think the fact that he is 6'11", can shoot, defend, pass, block shots, and run like a gazelle is part of the reason people say he has more potential than Morrison. The other reason is that Morrisonis far more ready to contribute this year than Aldridge. Aldridge is skinny, but assuming he puts on weight and works as hard as morrison he will most likely be the better player because he has more all around skill and he's almost a 1/2 a foot taller.

tlong · 08-07-2006, 08:28 AM

The word "potential" is certainly overused. Many posters claimed Telfair had more potential than Jack. I have no idea why.

Thread Tools Display Modes

Thread Tools

Display Modes