A league comparison of Hawes and Thompson:

[bajaden]

I decided to do a sampling of the rest of the league. I took centers and power forwards first three years in the league and did a comparison with Hawes and Thompson. Of course Thompson is only in his second year. NO! I didn't do a per 48 minutes. I just took the actual numbers that were recorded. So bear in mind that some players played more minutes than others. Which could be for various reasons. Such as they weren't good enough to play more. Or, they were playing behind a better player that was taking their minutes. Some played with a good point guard, and some didn't. All those things are the breaks of the game. The truth is that there are a lot of intangibles that can enter into a players career and I simply don't have time to do a history lesson on each player.

So look at the numbers and make your own judgement.

Jason Thompson:
1st year: 11.1 PPG - 49.7% - 7.4 RPG - 0.7 BPG
2nd year: 12.5 PPG - 46.2% - 8.5 RPG -1.0 BPG

Antonio McDyess:
1st year: 13.4 PPG - 48.5% - 7.5 RPG - 1.5 BPG
2nd year: 18.3 PPG - 46.3% - 7.3 RPG - 1.7 BPG
3rd year: 15.1 PPG - 53.6% - 7.6 RPG - 1.7 BPG

Kenyon Martin:
1st year: 12.0 PPG - 44.5% - 7.4 RPG - 1.7 BPG
2nd year: 14.9 PPG - 46.3% - 5.3 RPG - 1.7 BPG
3rd year: 16.7 PPG - 47.0% - 8.3 RPG - 0.9 BPG

Al Jefferson:
1st year: 6.7 PPG - 52.9% - 4.4 RPG - 0.8 BPG
2nd year: 7.9 PPG - 49.9% - 5.1 RPG - o.8 BPG
3rd year: 16.0 PPG - 51.4% - 11.0 RPG - 1.5 BPG

Nene Hilario:
1st year: 10.5 PPG - 51.9% - 6.1 RPG - 0.8 BPG
2nd year: 11.8 PPG - 53.0% - 6.5 RPG - 0.5 BPG
3rd year: 9.6 PPG - 50.3% - 5.9 RPG - 0.9 BPG

Rasheed Wallace:
1st year: 10.1 PPG - 48.7%- 4.7 RPG - 0.8 BPG
2nd year: 15.1 PPG - 55.8% - 6.8 RPG - 1.0 BPG
3rd year: 14.6 PPG - 51.3% - 6.2 RPG - 1.1 BPG

Tyrus Thomas:
1st year: 5.2 PPG - 47.5% - 3.7 RPG - 1.1 BPG
2nd year: 6.8 PPG - 42.3% - 4.9 RPG - 1.0 BPG
3rd year: 10.9 PPG - 45.1% - 6.4 RPG - 1.9 BPG

Chris Bosh:
1st year: 11.5 PPG - 45.9% - 7.4 RPG - 1.4 BPG
2nd year: 16.8 PPG - 47.1% - 8.9 RPG - 1.3 BPG
3rd year: 22.5 PPG - 50.5% - 9.2 RPG - 1.1 BPG

Udonis Haslem:
1st year: 7.3 PPG - 45.9% - 6.3 RPG - 0.4 BPG
2nd year: 10.9 PPG - 54.0% - 9.1 RPG - 0.5 BPG
3rd year: 9.4 PPG - 50.8% - 7.8 RPG - 0.2 BPG

Lamarcus Aldrich:
1st year: 9.0 PPG - 50.3% - 5.0 RPG - 1.2 BPG
2nd year: 17.8 PPG - 48.4% - 7.6 RPG - 1.2 BPG
3rd year: 18.2 PPG - 48.4% - 7.5 RPG - 1.0 BPG

I have more, but I'll switch to centers now.

Spencer Hawes:
1st year: 4.7 PPG - 45.9% - 3.2 RPG - 0.6 BPG
2nd year: 11.4 PPG - 46.6% - 7.1 RPG - 1.2 BPG
3rd year: 10.1 PPG - 47.4% - 6.1 RPG - 1.0 BPG

Tyson Chandler:
1st year: 6.1 PPG - 49.7% - 4.8 RPG - 1.3 BPG
2nd year: 9.2 PPG - 53.1% - 6.9 RPG - 1.4 BPG
3rd year: 6.1 PPG - 42.4% - 7.7 RPG - 1.2 BPG

Kendrick Perkins:
1st year: 2.2 PPG - 53.3% - 1.4 RPG - 0.2 BPG
2nd year: 2.5 PPG - 47.1% - 2.9 RPG - 0.6 BPG
3rd year: 5.2 PPG - 51.5% - 5.9 RPG - 1.5 BPG

Brandan Haywood:
1st year: 5.1 PPG - 49.3% - 5.2 RPG - 1.4 BPG
2nd year: 6.2 PPG - 51.0% - 5.0 RPG - 1.4 BPG
3rd year: 7.0 PPG - 51.5% - 5.0 RPG - 1.2 BPG

Chris Kaman:
1st year: 6.1 PPG - 46.0% - 5.6 RPG - 0.8 BPG
2nd year: 9.1 PPG - 49.7% - 6.7 RPG - 1.1 BPG
3rd year: 11.9 PPG - 52.3% - 9.6 RPG - 1.4 BPG

Andrew Bogut:
1st year: 9.4 PPG - 53.3% - 7.0 RPG - 0.8 BPG
2nd year: 12.3 PPG - 55.3% - 8.8 RPG - 0.5 BPG
3rd year: 14.3 PPG - 51.1% - 9.8 RPG - 1.7 BPG

Andrea Bargnani:
1st year: 11.6 PPG - 42.7% - 3.9 RPG - 0.8 BPG
2nd year: 10.2 PPG - 38.6% - 3.7 RPG - 0.4 BPG
3rd year: 15.4 PPG - 45.0% - 5.3 RPG - 1.2 BPG

Joakim Noah:
1st year: 6.6 PPG - 48.2% - 5.6 RPG - 0.9 BPG
2nd year: 6.7 PPG - 55.7% - 7.6 RPG - 1.4 BPG
3rd year: 10.7 PPG - 49.4% - 11.4 RPG - 1.6 BPG

I don't want to bore you with any more. As I said this isn't an exact reflection of a true comparison because of too many intangibles. For instance if you compare Thompson's second year with Aldrich's second year, Aldrich is out scoring Thompson 17.8 PPG to 12.5 PPG. But then Aldrich averaged 15.7 attempts per game to Thompson's 10.6 attempts per game. Now that doesn't mean that Thompson would score as many points as Aldrich with the same amount of attempts. It does mean that Aldrich is more the focus of the offense though.

From my point of view, Thompson, despite his stumble in the middle of the year is still within the curve. Hawes is definitely behind the curve. One common denominator among the centers is that by and large, unless they're Shaq, or the equivilent, they can struggle for a while. It took Kaman over 6 years to figure it out.

Whats interesting is sometimes its the players that sat on the bench and played limited minutes for a couple of years that turned into good players. I say sometimes, because there are players that started out on the bench and 7 years later, they're still coming off the bench. My point is that maybe it would have been better for Thompson to come off the bench behind an established PF. Unfortunately, we didn't have one. Mike Moore doesn't count.

 

[DeMoN]

I agree that we need to give them more time, but not together. I think getting Landry was awsome because it will take pressure off JT and Hawes. It's just a matter of if Hawes or JT will start at center. I'd rather have JT because i think hes a ton better and i like him more as a player.

But Hawes is a natural center..

 

[kingsnation]

Chris Kaman:
1st year: 6.1 PPG - 46.0% - 5.6 RPG - 0.8 BPG
2nd year: 9.1 PPG - 49.7% - 6.7 RPG - 1.1 BPG
3rd year: 11.9 PPG - 52.3% - 9.6 RPG - 1.4 BPG



...It took Kaman over 6 years to figure it out.

I like your post, but would disagree with this one statement.. Kaman was pretty good by year 3 even though he didn't become an "elite," (determine what that means in your own mind these days) center until last year or better yet this year.

 

[Tetsujin]

I like your post, but would disagree with this one statement.. Kaman was pretty good by year 3 even though he didn't become an "elite," (determine what that means in your own mind these days) center until last year or better yet this year.

But at the same time, Kaman had Brand (in his prime) to take all the pressure off of his development, whereas we had Mikki Moore followed by JT. Since we've acquired Landry, I've noticed a general improvement in Hawes effort and production (sometimes) on the court. I don't think this is a coincidence.

 

[Kings Faithful]

I really do think Hawes has a good chance of turning out good. Thompson could easily as well... BUT Thompson absolutely needs to up his basketball IQ. He just doesn't look smart on the court and is relying on pure energy to get by. Usually players like that end up as career role players at best.

 

[kingsnation]

But at the same time, Kaman had Brand (in his prime) to take all the pressure off of his development, whereas we had Mikki Moore followed by JT. Since we've acquired Landry, I've noticed a general improvement in Hawes effort and production (sometimes) on the court. I don't think this is a coincidence.

Yeah I agree. To be fair though, Hawes did have a burnt-out Brad Miller as a mentor for a year and a half. ... ...

If I had one wish, it'd be that Spencer and JT could've been rookies on our 03-04 team with Vlade, Webb AND a very good young Brad. Wow, what a trio to help you learn how to play basketball at the bigs positions.

 

[Aenadin]

Yeah I agree. To be fair though, Hawes did have a burnt-out Brad Miller as a mentor for a year and a half. ... ...

If I had one wish, it'd be that Spencer and JT could've been rookies on our 03-04 team with Vlade, Webb AND a very good young Brad. Wow, what a trio to help you learn how to play basketball at the bigs positions.

not to mention a fading reef.. mikki, and KT

 

[Tetsujin]

not to mention a fading reef.. mikki, and KT

And three idiots who really shouldn't have been on the court as head coaches.

 

[sactownfan]

Hawes numbers are actually not that bad... But the numbers don't show his wide open missed dunks. All the times he gets rejected around the rim, guys destroying him on defense, or any other aspect of his soft game. As maybe a few of u have noticed, I'm not a huge fan of Hawes soft style. He's Got a lot of talent tho... And that's why I get so upset with him. If he just maned up and played like he does after he gets benched I'd actually be a big fan of his. But he's unable or willing to play tough like that each and every game right now...

I believe in Hawes though

time is on his side, and all he has to do is man up. He can do it.. I do believe in him

sane goes with JT sorta... Just different things holding him back

 

[Sptsjunkie]

I
From my point of view, Thompson, despite his stumble in the middle of the year is still within the curve. Hawes is definitely behind the curve. One common denominator among the centers is that by and large, unless they're Shaq, or the equivilent, they can struggle for a while. It took Kaman over 6 years to figure it out.

I disagree with Hawes being behind the curve here, because I think you absolutely have to factor in age. The three centers whose 3rd year production outshines Hawes' are Bogut, Noah and Kaman - all of whom were older than Hawes (by approximately 2 years) in their third seasons. They all had more college experience and more physical development by their 3rd NBA seasons. Meanwhile, Perkins and Chandler both have worse numbers than Hawes, although they were both 1 year younger having come straight out of HS. For his age and experience, he seems to fall right along the normal curve.

 

[jcassio]

There's so much that these stats don't tell us, and yet they do suggest that we are expecting - perhaps - too much from our young bigs. It could be that neither are destined to become all-star caliber players, which doesn't spell DOOM for the Kings (as some on this board would suggest). But it could also be that either/both of them will reach that level after another 2-3 years. If we are going to watch these two young bigs evolve for another 2-3 years, at least having an already-mature and effective player like Landry takes away some of the pain.

 

[Entity]

I think our biggest problem is that we always compare our PF's and C's to Webber and Divac. Its quite unfair to them actually. Its just human nature of us I guess. Until we get a surefire superstar at either position this is the way it will be.

 

[pshn80]

I think our biggest problem is that we always compare our PF's and C's to Webber and Divac. Its quite unfair to them actually. Its just human nature of us I guess. Until we get a surefire superstar at either position this is the way it will be.

I think our biggest problem is that we have had to play two young players too many minutes before they were ready. They are not ready now but they are improving. I'm not yet confident either one will do it. Maybe their best is a back-up role. It's a shame we haven't had other options. Landry, of course, fills that role for one now but we still need another for the best growing experience for Hawes and Thompson. The stats don't really show that Hawes is too shaky/intimidated by pressure and Thompson is too reckless/clumsy/hell-bent-for-whatever under pressure. Neither show signs that they are capable of the Landry effective/cool under pressure.

 

[bajaden]

I disagree with Hawes being behind the curve here, because I think you absolutely have to factor in age. The three centers whose 3rd year production outshines Hawes' are Bogut, Noah and Kaman - all of whom were older than Hawes (by approximately 2 years) in their third seasons. They all had more college experience and more physical development by their 3rd NBA seasons. Meanwhile, Perkins and Chandler both have worse numbers than Hawes, although they were both 1 year younger having come straight out of HS. For his age and experience, he seems to fall right along the normal curve.

As I tried to point out, there are a lot of intangibles that can factor into a players development, and also how you might look at a player. Those that you bring up have merit. But if you remove those intangibles and just go on the simple results, then on paper Hawes is behind the curve. That doesn't mean that he's a total wash.

I do think that both Hawes and Thompson would have benefited from playing behind more experienced players at their given positions. Especially when you consider the constant change in coaching and the decisions on how they're going to be used. It's only the rare players that can come in at a young age and start, and be instantly successful. Thats what makes Tyreke so special.

 

[bajaden]

I like your post, but would disagree with this one statement.. Kaman was pretty good by year 3 even though he didn't become an "elite," (determine what that means in your own mind these days) center until last year or better yet this year.

His numbers through his first four years were average numbers being put up by an average center. In his fourth year his numbers actually went down a little with 10.1 PPG, 7.8 RPG, and the 1.6 BPG being the only stat that went up. Aside from the blocks, the rest of the numbers were nothing to write home about. But in his fifth year he put up 15.7 PPG, 12.7 RPG, and 2.8 BPG. Now those are numbers to write home about.

So if your in love with the numbers the first four years, then I think Hawes can match most of those with the exception of the blocks per. And those numbers are OK on a team, if you surround that player with a lot of other talented players. But put that player on a team full of young inexperienced players and then you have, well, the Kings.

 

[bajaden]

There's so much that these stats don't tell us, and yet they do suggest that we are expecting - perhaps - too much from our young bigs. It could be that neither are destined to become all-star caliber players, which doesn't spell DOOM for the Kings (as some on this board would suggest). But it could also be that either/both of them will reach that level after another 2-3 years. If we are going to watch these two young bigs evolve for another 2-3 years, at least having an already-mature and effective player like Landry takes away some of the pain.

Ahhh, you have struck on one of the problems with fans. Expectations! When you draft a Thompson or a Hawes, what are your expectations, and how soon do you expect them to come to fruition. And is that realistic. Is the critiria for a player, superstar or bust? Star or bust? Or simply a good role player or bust?

On a personal level, I think that anytime you draft a player out of the top ten and you get a good role player, whether that means starting or coming off the bench, then you've had a successful pick. If that pick ends up being a star, then you were damm lucky.

Out of college, my expectations for Thompson were somewhere around 15 and 10 with 1 block. I thought if he could average that by his third year the Kings would have a valuable player. On the outside I thought it was possible that he might reach 20 points a game in time, but that it was unlikely unless he became more of the focus of the offense.

With Hawes I thought that eventually he could average around 18 points a game because of his offensive abilities. I never saw him any better than 8 boards a game, because he plays away from the basket too much. Defensively, he was a gray area for me. I thought he had the length and enough athletic ability to be a decent to good defender, but I wasn't sure about his desire to be a good defender.. Because of his youth, I thought it might take him four years to reach my expectations. So from my personal point of view, he's behind what I expected from him. My biggest problem right now with Hawes is that he's consistantly inconsistant.

 

[bajaden]

I think our biggest problem is that we have had to play two young players too many minutes before they were ready. They are not ready now but they are improving. I'm not yet confident either one will do it. Maybe their best is a back-up role. It's a shame we haven't had other options. Landry, of course, fills that role for one now but we still need another for the best growing experience for Hawes and Thompson. The stats don't really show that Hawes is too shaky/intimidated by pressure and Thompson is too reckless/clumsy/hell-bent-for-whatever under pressure. Neither show signs that they are capable of the Landry effective/cool under pressure.

Yeah, I think this is the biggest problem in their development. Its always easier to come off the bench when your young and inexperienced. First off you get to sit and watch for a while and see how the other team is playing. And hopefully learn from that. Secondly, most of the time when you do go into the game, your going in against the other teams second unit. Because your probably playing less minutes, fouls don't enter into the equation as much as when your starting.
Thirdly, in most cases your playing behind an experienced vet that you get to practice against every day. Think how much a player like Thompson could learn if he had to practice against the likes of a Karl Malone or even a Chris Bosh everyday. I mean, who are you going to face in a real game thats tougher to guard.

But it is what it is. Hopefully Thompson can learn some patience in the post from Landry. I don't know whose going to help Hawes.

 

[cstorm]

Yeah, I think this is the biggest problem in their development. Its always easier to come off the bench when your young and inexperienced. First off you get to sit and watch for a while and see how the other team is playing. And hopefully learn from that. Secondly, most of the time when you do go into the game, your going in against the other teams second unit. Because your probably playing less minutes, fouls don't enter into the equation as much as when your starting.
Thirdly, in most cases your playing behind an experienced vet that you get to practice against every day. Think how much a player like Thompson could learn if he had to practice against the likes of a Karl Malone or even a Chris Bosh everyday. I mean, who are you going to face in a real game thats tougher to guard.

But it is what it is. Hopefully Thompson can learn some patience in the post from Landry. I don't know whose going to help Hawes.

THAT is my big worry. In a perfect world we find a veteran center that meets our needs so Hawes can learn off the bench. But if we draft a rookie center, is Hawes going to want to take a leadership role with him?

 

[bajaden]

THAT is my big worry. In a perfect world we find a veteran center that meets our needs so Hawes can learn off the bench. But if we draft a rookie center, is Hawes going to want to take a leadership role with him?

Thats a good question.. Going against Hawes in practice might be a confidence builder though...

 

[FaStRmAn]

I disagree with Hawes being behind the curve here, because I think you absolutely have to factor in age. The three centers whose 3rd year production outshines Hawes' are Bogut, Noah and Kaman - all of whom were older than Hawes (by approximately 2 years) in their third seasons. They all had more college experience and more physical development by their 3rd NBA seasons. Meanwhile, Perkins and Chandler both have worse numbers than Hawes, although they were both 1 year younger having come straight out of HS. For his age and experience, he seems to fall right along the normal curve.

At some point, age needs to stop being an excuse for Hawes. He has had 3 years to bulk up to play center in the NBA, and he did little or nothing in the off season those 3 years to get bigger and stronger. That speaks to his dedication and commitment to becoming a better player. There are a few things that players have control over, and effort is one of them. Hawes has just not shown the effort you would like out of a center. I do not know if Hawes is ever going to make it in the NBA, but I do know that Center is Priority in the upcoming draft for the Kings. Also in free agency. So they are not high on Hawes and are looking for ways to replace him. He has been given ample opportunity to improve and evolve, but he just hasn't taken that next step to improve. This is the end of his 3rd season. Most NBA analysts agree that the 3rd year is a make or break year for young players. I don't see this as a make good year for Hawes. He is no better than he was last year or his rookie year.

 

[ElRey]

Bajaden, I appreciate the work you put in this. But we have to keep in mind that Hawes and JT's numbers are as STARTERS, whereas many of those guys in the comparison were just coming off the bench as first and second yr players. I think if they were our backups, people wouldn't be complaining very much. The fact that they are our STARTING frontcourt makes many of us cringe.

Upgrading the frontcourt is still our number 1 priority this offseason.

 

[bajaden]

Bajaden, I appreciate the work you put in this. But we have to keep in mind that Hawes and JT's numbers are as STARTERS, whereas many of those guys in the comparison were just coming off the bench as first and second yr players. I think if they were our backups, people wouldn't be complaining very much. The fact that they are our STARTING frontcourt makes many of us cringe.

Upgrading the frontcourt is still our number 1 priority this offseason.

I think I pointed out up front that there were a lot of different things that you had to take into consideration when you look at any players first three years. Were they playing behind an already established player. How good a point guard did they have on the team? How well coached were they? Were they on an experienced team (aka Kevin martin ) or a very young and inexperienced team? What were the expectations for them coming out of college? And were they realistic?

Thats why a player can sometimes wallow in obscurity on one team, and suddenly look like an entirely different player on another. Ryan Hollins who is finally getting his chance is showing that he belongs. Look at the difference in Hedo from last year to this year. Is he suddenly a bad player, or is he just a bad fit on that team? Probably a bad fit.

Lets look at Hawes, Thompson and Greene. Hawes, once Miller was gone was handed the starting job. Thompson once the great Mikki Moore was gone was handed the starting job. Greene on the other hand wasn't handed anything. Now one can argue that both Hawes and Thompson have improved to some degree. But I think one can safely say that Greene has made the biggest improvement.

I think young players need to get as many minutes as you can afford, and as they are able to earn, as they can. But if they come off the bench on an experienced team, you can try to put them in favorable situations to succeed and develop. I'm sure that players like Greene, Hawes, and Thompson can't wait for the chance to go up against the likes of Dwight Howard, Boozer, or Kobe. But those ideas always play out better as dreams than they do in reality. There's no doubt that you can learn by being thrown into the fire. But you can also get burn't. Sometimes it almost a kin to taking a promising dragstrip racer and putting him into an Indy car at the Indy 500 and saying, Enjoy!

 

[VF21]

Nice work, bajaden.

I tend to get very frustrated with both Jason and Spencer, much like the way Cisco used to drive me nuts on a regular basis. I think it's a matter of them settling into their roles with consistency around them and fewer musical chair teammates.

 

[Sptsjunkie]

As I tried to point out, there are a lot of intangibles that can factor into a players development, and also how you might look at a player. Those that you bring up have merit. But if you remove those intangibles and just go on the simple results, then on paper Hawes is behind the curve. That doesn't mean that he's a total wash.

I do think that both Hawes and Thompson would have benefited from playing behind more experienced players at their given positions. Especially when you consider the constant change in coaching and the decisions on how they're going to be used. It's only the rare players that can come in at a young age and start, and be instantly successful. Thats what makes Tyreke so special.

I agree on the intangibles, veteran mentoring and Tyreke. I would just be very curious to see a comparison of players similar to Hawes. Which is why at the very least I thought it was interesting to find in the numbers you posted that he appeared to be ahead of the curve when compared to 3rd year players 1 year younger and behind the curve with 3rd year players 1 year older. Unfortunately, it's probably hard and time consuming to find a batch of 3rd year centers his age and see how he fits in.

 

[Sptsjunkie]

At some point, age needs to stop being an excuse for Hawes. He has had 3 years to bulk up to play center in the NBA, and he did little or nothing in the off season those 3 years to get bigger and stronger. That speaks to his dedication and commitment to becoming a better player. There are a few things that players have control over, and effort is one of them. Hawes has just not shown the effort you would like out of a center. I do not know if Hawes is ever going to make it in the NBA, but I do know that Center is Priority in the upcoming draft for the Kings. Also in free agency. So they are not high on Hawes and are looking for ways to replace him. He has been given ample opportunity to improve and evolve, but he just hasn't taken that next step to improve. This is the end of his 3rd season. Most NBA analysts agree that the 3rd year is a make or break year for young players. I don't see this as a make good year for Hawes. He is no better than he was last year or his rookie year.

At some point it will be. However, right there in Baja's post you can see the 3rd year players younger than Hawes (Perkins and Chandler) had worse numbers. It's not as if we are comparing Hawes to other 21/22 year old centers and making excuses for him. The simple truth is that age matters in the NBA, especially in the post, unless you have a truly transcendent player. As much as I still think Hawes can become a very good player in this league, he is not transcendent and will never be a superstar.

As for his improvement, I do disagree there. While he may not look bigger, he is not getting pushed around nearly as much in the post this year as last year. I remember watching a lot of games last year, where opposing teams would continuously post up centers with low offensive game, but any bulk and score on Hawes at will (see: Dampier, Okafor, Gooden). This year, Hawes' strength does seem to have improved. We will see how much he grows.

 

[Sptsjunkie]

Bajaden, I appreciate the work you put in this. But we have to keep in mind that Hawes and JT's numbers are as STARTERS, whereas many of those guys in the comparison were just coming off the bench as first and second yr players. I think if they were our backups, people wouldn't be complaining very much. The fact that they are our STARTING frontcourt makes many of us cringe.

Upgrading the frontcourt is still our number 1 priority this offseason.

Take another look at that list. Many of those players were starting by their second seasons and definitely their third.

I am pretty sure that McDyess, Martin, Jefferson, Wallace, Bosh, and Aldrich were starting as 2/3 year players out of the PFs (with Haslem and Thomas on the bench).

Of the Centers, I believe all of them but Chandler were starting by year 3 at the very least if not sooner.

 

[Amory]

Good post!

I think one of the major problems that most people have is that last year both Hawes and Thompson looked like they were going to be the future of the Kings.

Now, they look worse this year then last. Most people couldn't care less if both of them got traded.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

Take another look at that list. Many of those players were starting by their second seasons and definitely their third.

I am pretty sure that McDyess, Martin, Jefferson, Wallace, Bosh, and Aldrich were starting as 2/3 year players out of the PFs (with Haslem and Thomas on the bench).

Haslem started every game but two out of his career from his second year until just this season.

 

[bajaden]

I agree on the intangibles, veteran mentoring and Tyreke. I would just be very curious to see a comparison of players similar to Hawes. Which is why at the very least I thought it was interesting to find in the numbers you posted that he appeared to be ahead of the curve when compared to 3rd year players 1 year younger and behind the curve with 3rd year players 1 year older. Unfortunately, it's probably hard and time consuming to find a batch of 3rd year centers his age and see how he fits in.

There were a few, but they had literaly gotten little or no playing time so I didn't think it would be a fair comparison. Bogut would be one example that was listed. Bargnani would be another.

 

[bajaden]

Good post!

I think one of the major problems that most people have is that last year both Hawes and Thompson looked like they were going to be the future of the Kings.

Now, they look worse this year then last. Most people couldn't care less if both of them got traded.

Your absolutely right. But if you look at some of the players listed, some of them had worse numbers in their third year, or in their second year. Nene for instance had 11.8 ppg and 6.5 rpg in his second year, but came back in his third year and posted 9.6 ppg and 5.9 rpg. Rasheed Wallace had 15.1 ppg and 6.8 rpg in his second year and 14.6 ppg and 6.2 rpg in his third year. Neither are major reductions, but then if you look at Hawes numbers, their very close to the same amount of reduction.

Marcus Camby started out with a bang posting 14.8 PPG, 6.3 RPG and 2.1 BPG in his first year and then had his number decrease every year. In his third year he posted 7.2 PPG, 5.5 RPG and 1.6 BPG. But finally in his fifth year he bounced back and posted 12.1 PPG, 11.5 RPG, and 2.2 BPG. He never looked back after that.

So It may not be the norm, but its not unusual for a player to take a step back in his second or third year.