Re: details on the Battier vs Richardson dunkfest

["j.hironaka" <j.hironaka@unesco.org>]

At 12:52 22/06/01 -0500, Mark Piotrowski wrote:
>>The one thing I really noticed between Richardson and Battier is
>>projectability. I see Richardson getting MUCH better than he already
>>is, and he is a great player NOW. I just don't know how much better
>>Shane can get. I might be wrong as hell on him, but this is just my
>>gut. When you looked out there on the court with the 6 guys, you saw
>>Battier stand out mainly due to his poise and even his leadership
>>abilities in a 3on3 drill.
>
>Everything i have read has pointed to the fact that Battier has maxed out 
>his BBall potential (which isn't bad considering he -- not Richardson, 
>Griffin, Johnson, et al -- was the player of the year. This is followed 
>with "player X" (richardson, griffin, johnson, et al) haven't and have 
>unlimited upside/potential/whatever.
>
>But every article also says that Battier has the leadership skills, 
>basketball smarts, poise, etc.
>
>my question is:  isn't this something that leaders exhibit early in their 
>careers and get better at, whereas players who don't display it yet don't 
>really ever develop it?

I got the same impression reading that post. You read the clip above and 
realize that a lot of these stereotypes are conditioned into people's 
thought process, based on some sort of public consensus. Sort of like 
saying "hey that Asian-American guy over there projects high in the math 
olympiad but may have already peaked in term of leadership ability, sense 
of humor etc.", you know what I mean?  Sorry to use an ethnic analogy.

Here again are the objective facts narrated in the story: Richardson, with 
his four-foot vertical and boundless energy, got out-dunked 71-62 (or 
whatever it was) by Battier. Meanwhile Battier is just 21 or 22 years old, 
and none of us question that basketball players won't reach their peak 
until 6 or 7 years after that.

Yet we look at the empirical evidence and say "see this again illustrates 
how Battier may have already peaked, while Richardson has unlimited 
upside".  And everyone reads it and kind of nods along going "yeah, that 
precisely confirms what I thought too."

In this sense I'm glad Chris Wallace is thinking outside the box with 
Kedrick Brown, and also on the question of drafting for talent over 
desperate need (but boy he's sure going to catch some heat from Peter May 
on the morning after draft day though). If it goes "Diop, Kedrick" in the 
draft, I'm sure every draft guru will give Boston a "B-" type of draft 
grade.  Who gives a damn, I say. Wallace and Papile have seen the players 
play and done the homework. It gratifies me no end to read that Chris 
Wallace has been camping out in Okaloosa this past year watching some 
totally unknown guy like Kedrick Brown play the game he loves out there. 
But wait until he hears from an incredulous and out-of-touch Peter May.

---