You could be right. But how many times have you seen him play? Just curious. I've been watching him play for over 3 years now, and I think he can be more than that. But its always a crap shoot. Let me put it this way. Last year I really liked Landry Fields, but didn't mention him much because I figured not many people had heard of him. I decided to stick with the more likely players to be drafted. However if you read my threads on college basketball in the NBA fourms I mentioned a lot of lesser known players.
The first time I touted Blake Griffin he was a freshman, and I kid you not, there were people on this fourm that said he was too short. He wasn't athletic. he wasn't explosive. Etc! I wondered to myself just who the hell they were watching. I believe I made the statement in defense of Griffin at the time, that he was a player that did just what was needed to be done. If he needed to be explosive, he was. But he didn't display it all the time. I was then told that if that was true, then he was lazy, or wasn't taking the game seriously all the time. I probably watched him play close to 40 times before he was drafted. Not once! Not twice! But 40 times. But I had people that just casually tuned into one of his games tellinig me how good he was going to be.
I had people that told me Earl Clark was going to be a great player. I thought he had bust written all over him. So far I'm right. Now don't get me wrong. Clark has talent, and maybe in the right situation he'll eventually realize his potential.
I'm not sayinig you can't be fooled one way or the other. And the last thing I ever want to do is put the stamp of finished product on a player when their young. Sometimes it just takes time for a player to realize that this is his one chance at the brass ring. Almost every player you come across has some sort of limitation or hole in his game. But if they excell in one aspect of the game. And I mean excell in ways that very few can, then you can more easily overlook the flaws that player has. When Michael Jordan came into the league he had no outside shot. Neither did LeBron. Wade still doesn't. Karl Monroe had no shot more than 5 feet away from the basket and he was a terrible freethrow shooter. But all these guys excelled in other areas. They could do things on a regular basis that no one else could. And, they eventually corrected the weaknesses in their games.
Now I grant you that you can't correct athleticism. You either have it or you don't. And I think the word athleticism gets somewhat skewed at times. By that, I mean, if someone can jump high, but isn't a fast runner, is he a bad athlete? If someone is quick, but not fast, is he a bad athlete? If someone is a hight jumper and is quick of foot, but lacks good lateral movement, is he a bad athlete? Athleticism comes in different degree's for different people. Their all good athletes, some are just more gifted than others. Timmy Hardaway wasn't the fastest guy up and down the court, but he had a crossover dribble that could freeze anyone. So he never had a problem getting his shot off. Larry Bird wasn't a fast runner and he didn't have great hops. But he was a good defender and rebounder. How the hell did that happen? He had smarts and technique. He made you unconfortable on defense, by making you go right when you wanted to go left. He made you shoot from spots on the floor you didn't want to shoot from. If you were going to be able to beat him off the dribble, he made sure you went the way he wanted you to go.
Players with an exceptional skill, that are determined and have a fire in their belly to be great, almost always succeed. Thats why I choose Casspi over Greene. There are do'ers in life and there are dreamers in life. One lives life through his own actions. The dreamer lives life through the actions of others. Or vicariously! I'm only interested in the do'ers.