Rookies on losing teams..

[AboveLegit]

Does it effect their development at all? The majority of the top draft picks end up on losing teams for the first year or two of their career, but there's always that "lucky" player that ends up in a good position ala Derrick Rose, Michael Jordan, Rajon Rondo, etc. Do these aforementioned players have a leg up on the competition by playing on these playoff bound teams, or does it not matter at all when it comes to their development and potential?

 

I remember Gilbert Arenas talking about John Wall's situation in DC after he was traded..

 

"Hopefully, [the Wizards make] the right decisions by building with veterans around him, like they did with Rondo, like they did Derrick Rose. You've got to put veterans so he can learn how to play winning basketball. If he stays with all these young guys, they are just going to learn how to lose and be okay with it."

 

Is there any legitimacy regarding Gilbert's point? Will rookies develop bad habits if he's playing with inferior talent, or is it something the average fan shouldn't worry about?

[Newman]

Well, by joining a winning team, most of the time you are not the focus of the team and hence, in order for the rookie to gain playing time, he has to know his role and blend in the system rather than the system changing for him. Other than that, I don't think playing on a losing team matter at all, unless the rookie develop a habit to not care about the games any more and stop playing to the full 100%.

[Dash]

It depends on the player.

 

Kevin Durant came into poor situation with the lack of attendance and reason for optimism in Seattle and the team moving down to Oklahoma City the season after. The Thunder/Supersonics virtually had no veterans too.

 

Washington was the laughingstock of the NBA last year and as far as I can tell John Wall is doing a tremendous job down there and has turned the ship around almost by himself.

 

Prospects weak mentally are going to need a veteran and winning presence in order grow though.

[ChosenOne]

The same can be said with Blake Griffin and the Clippers. He has not done anything close to what Kevin Durant has done with the Thunder but he has made the Clipper franchise a much more disirable place for the free agents to head towards and has lifted heads of probably all fans.

[Buckets!]

Yes, I think Gilbert Arenas might be on to something. But you need to mix with the youth and veterans.

[?QuestionMark?]

Not at all. Best way to get better is by playing. On a losing team, young guys usually get minutes and have more freedom to make mistakes than learn from them.

 

On a veteran team, younger players usually just ride the pine and have a shorter leash on them. You can argue that playing for veteran teams can stunt their development. See Darko for example.

[*Swish*]

I think it helps their development A LOT!

 

quick example:

 

if you would put Samardo Samuel with the Lakers, he wouldn't develop AT ALL!

Edited April 3, 2011 by *Swish*

[Oliver P]

but there's always that "lucky" player that ends up in a good position ala Derrick Rose, Michael Jordan, Rajon Rondo, etc.

 

Jordan didn't end up in a winning team. As a matter of fact when he arrived in Chicago the Bulls were nothing. It's thanks to Jordan's impact that the Bulls became a playoffs team. The only player who wanted to win as much as Jordan at the beginning of his career was Oak who arrived in Jordan's second season which is why Oak is still to this day one of Mike's best friend. Other than that they had players like Corzine or Woolridge who were decent but no more than that, the rest of the team was just a bunch of scrubs. Jordan changed the entire team by himself.

 

When he arrived in Chicago he said that the Bulls wouldn't miss the playoffs for as long as he would be here and that's exactly what he did. Even during his second season, he got injured and came back at the end to make his team a playoffs team once again. Jordan proved that he was a franchise player and then the Bulls built the team around him.

 

It depends on the player.

 

Kevin Durant came into poor situation with the lack of attendance and reason for optimism in Seattle and the team moving down to Oklahoma City the season after. The Thunder/Supersonics virtually had no veterans too.

 

Washington was the laughingstock of the NBA last year and as far as I can tell John Wall is doing a tremendous job down there and has turned the ship around almost by himself.

 

Prospects weak mentally are going to need a veteran and winning presence in order grow though.

 

I definitely agree with what you said here. It totally depends on the player. I would go even further, I think that, even if a veteran or winning presence can have an impact on a player to some extent, being a winner or loser is not something that you can be taught. Either you are one, either you ain't. Jordan was a true winner and he would do anything to do to make his team wins, no matter who his teammates are. On the other hand you have players like DC (Derrick Coleman), players who are amazingly talented (could have been easily one of the best PFs ever) but sadly only care for the money and don't want to do the extra effort to make their team wins. No matter who their teammates are.

 

It's definitely all about the player's mentality.