Well, duh.

Well, one has to adjust for expectations when considering an organization’s ability to develop talent, right? If a higher “perceived talent” underperforms expectations, and a lower perceived talent outperforms, then it could be luck, it could point to the individual player’s makeup, It could point to having coaches…

But one of the main criticisms against the Sixers was fostering a “losing culture” that would have repercussions on player development.

Did someone say horrible bicycle crashes?

Yeah, especially weird because I heave heard nothing blaming the players on the Suns, only about how the GM/owner have been kicking their own dicks into a concave pit for years.

One thing that I think contributes is that there not enough talent to go around, both on the player and coach side. On sheer numbers alone, every team can’t create an ideal developmental system—exacerbated by the gender wall that is only juuuuuust barely being tested, and only then by organizations that have had…

Again, completely in agreement, especially the “[x] is the right path to success.” mantra, which oversimplifies the core issue: professional sports are really, really hard, and the translation from “amateur” to pros is almost negligible, especially considering the situations you might be walking into.

No fighting in front of the kids! Oh, but there are none here today.

I heard Kim Jong-Un scored a double hat trick, only limited because he was pulled after 17 minutes.

I’ve said elsewhere no one should be considered a bust after pick 5, and I think the organization should bear that blame, perhaps more than they do (although GMs get fired and FOs reorg’ed after runs of incompetence). And there are reasons, but personal to the player and organizational, that contribute to that. I…

I totally agree; I think this entire premise—predicated by Draymond’s false binary—is oversimplifying complicated dynamics, not only in personal/professional development, but also in how organizations make draft decisions, and in how “blame/consequence” is adjudicated after the fact.

Ditto, right? I think he’s just speaking on behalf of 1) playersi n general, which tight; 2) Chriss, specifically, which, cool teammate!; and 3) boosting his organization, which isn’t even as much a “carry water” move as it is he sees how his own career might have languished on a worse squad. Which seems oddly defeatis…

As a Sixers fan, I can assure you Evan Turner is a bust.

At #2, “a pretty decent player that you can build around” is a bust, more or less depending on the quality of the class, because it refers to expectations. And Darko wasn’t even that, whether it was for skill or for desire, or organization failure, or who knows why.

Yeah, because they are good and not busts. Other players are bad and busts. Many players are kind of in the middle. The Sixers were “bad at developing young players” because they somehow failed Okafor. Yet, Robert Covington emerged into a valuable role.

There is truth in there not being “lasting consequences” for the teams. But Draymond is absolutely, unequivocally wrong that “no one talks about the organizations. It’s always just the player, player, ...No Phoenix writer is going to bash the Phoenix Suns.” Maybe “straw man” is the wrong term , but it is absolutely a…

But don’t those examples kind of form a natural counterpoint? If the thesis from the article is that this Suns team—and teams in similar bad organizational dynamics—are unable to properly develop talent*, the Nuggets and Cavs were in similarly dire straits as franchises. But Melo and Lebron were good enough to lift…

This is the first I’m hearing that the media doesn’t blame shitty teams (Suns, Knicks, 76ers, Hornets) for being shitty at drafting and development, or even managing veterans, or organizational rot.

Me reading paragraph 1: What else could it possibly be?

“If you can’t handle me at my worst, you don’t deserve me at my best. But I’m actually more Gigi Hadad than Marilyn Monroe!”