The only reason I'm talking about it is because you think Ben and Malachi out of the draft were similar prospects, sorry but that's not even close to being the case.
Nope, that's not what I said. I said McLemore's potential was a 3&D player. We're talking about what his potential was coming into the season. Why the hell does it matter what he was projected to be 3.5 years ago? Why are we ignoring 3.5 years worth of tape against NBA talent to help us reassess what his potential is? Come on now. You know better.
I'm changing goal posts? You contradicted yourself right there.3&D was not Ben's potential coming out of the draft! Most analysts even said he had all-star potential and was the prospect in the draft most likely to be an all-star or bust.
Nope, I'm not talking about who McLemore was projected to be 3.5 years ago. I'm talking about what he was projected to be this year because this year is what matters most. That's like saying Kwame Brown has all star potential 3.5 years after he's been in this league. It's not a wise stance to take. You watch him, reasses, and establish what you think his ceiling would be the more and more you learn about him.
If you think Richardson and Ben out of college (I'm not making the pre-draft comparison, you are) had similar expectations, I can't help you. One was being talked about as a top 5 pick and a potential all-star, the others were suppose to be late 1st round picks!
It's obvious you have no idea what I was trying to say as you continue to think that I give a rats a** about the player McLemore was projected to be 3.5 years ago.
I'm not avoiding your question, it's a lot closer than you would think between Ben and any of those players you think has way more value.
You really convinced me with your overwhelming evidence to back up this claim.
In all honesty I think WCS and Ben have pretty similar value at this point. It's not "far less" than those three. WCS and Ben are the same age, that's why college freshman are taken so early, they have the most potential to grow in most cases since they are so young.
You can "think" all you want, but you're wrong. If they had similar contract situations and McLemore has only displayed 1.5 years of no growth rather than 3.5 years of no growth, than I would agree. I don't care that he's 23. He's off the rookie scale next year and us regressed since his rookie/sophomore year. I find it odd that you're so willing diminish a sophomores value so rapidly yet hold on to so much hope for a guy who hasn't done anything for 3.5 years.
Just go on any NBA message board and gauge their value from other NBA fans. You're going to find that you're in a teeny tiny minority if not by yourself.
As far as the 3 rookies, they have slightly higher (I mean slightly, I mean not very much) than Ben does at this point. I think your love for the Kings blinding you into what the rookies potential is. Ben is 23! Not sure why it's too early to make absolutes and say he's done.
My love for the Kings blinds me? I don't think you understand me at all so please don't pretend.
When did I ever said McLemore is done? Please point that out to me. I never rule anyone out. That would be dealing in absolutes which I try to avoid as much as possible. Especially when you see Whiteside's journey. Nobody is ever done.
Having said that, you have to play the odds. What % of players who are one of the worst at their position for their first 3.5 years actually end up becoming a solid starter in this league? What % of players who struggle their first 1.5 years in the league actually end up becoming a solid starter in this league? What % of players who play little to no minutes their rookie season actually end up becoming a solid starter in this league?
With every passing year that a player is horrible, the odds that said player pans out goes down and down and down. That's where McLemore is at right. There's still hope for the other guys because they are more unknowns at this point. Would you rather have an unknown or some has been proven they are bad time and time again? The answer is pretty clear to me.
There's a reason Joerger is playing Ben so much rather than have Malachi or even Afflalo eat his minutes while WCS can barely get on the court while Tolliver plays in his minutes. Joerger sees something in Ben over other guys on the team, most likely in practice, to give him minutes! I'm going to trust Joerger's judgement since he has more basketball knowledge than both of us combined and sees Ben and the team practice/play games basically every single day.
Ah the ole "there's a reason..." argument. The funny thing about this argument is you can't come up with any reason for yourself so you put blind faith in something you can't explain.
I would hardly use Joerger's rotation decisions as a "reason" McLemore is "good" or has "value." He continues to play double C lineups, he continues to play Barnes ample minutes, he freezes out Casspi, and he doesn't start Temple. There's a lot of exceptions I take with his rotations so trying to use that as evidence is weak at best.
