Gunk wrote:

As far the whole "not getting the coaching he needed" comments, my opinion is any player that pulls that card is looking for an excuse for poor performance. Sorry. If he was so distraught with the coaching at BYU, why didn't he transfer? I'll tell you why, because at BYU and in the MWC he's a big fish in a small pond. If he transfered to another school in a "power" conference he wouldn't have stood out.

I don't think he ever tried to pull the bad coaching card, but in another thread there is a link to an assessment of Trent at some camp that he went to. One of the trainers kinda bashes the lack of coaching Trent received at BYU so that's where the coaching thing is coming from.

craigoscarson,

My main point is that even if Trent came back for his senior year I think it would have been very unlikely that he would have gone in the first round. In order for him to go in the first round he would have had to put up probably 20 pts and 10 rebounds a game, be named MVP of the league, and won a game or two in the tourney. I don't think all of those things would have happened. He already got his name out there when he played against UNC and Vitale was praising him so highly, so why not go now? Do you really think Trent would have had a good shot at being taken in the first round if he would have come back for his senior year?

No one wanted Staley because he was damaged goods so that is a bad comparison. He had a huge list of past injuries. Staley had to come out when he did. How do you know already that no one wants Trent? I still don't get you man. You say he should have come back so he could have improved his draft status and then you say no one wants him. Very interesting.

Can anybody say ..... "John Walsh" ?? I'm afraid Trent thinks that he is better than he really is. While a solid D-1 player, NBA talent at this time is only a dream for Trent.

deaner wrote:

I don't get this neccessity for a big man guru on the coaching staff. If anything I think the best thing a big guy gets out of a good school is their athletic trainers and facilities; BYU is top notch there. My guess is that Trent didnt' take much advantage of having a guy like Jay Omer there at his disposal.

Very rarely does a basketball coach make a guy a better pro prospect; especially true if you consider the majority of top picks are freshmen and sophs; many guys become better pros than they were college players (ex: vince carter, michael jordan, dwayne wade, etc.) Does this mean that they weren't properly coached in college? (No)
So lets' take that leap about worrying about recruiting....What school has a lock on producing great big men? Do you honestly think that Michael Beasley went to Kstate because of their great history with big men?
Since when did Ohio State become the place that Greg Oden was going to become a great big?
Why would anyone attend Duke if you were basing your decision on the type of pros they produce? Aside from Boozer and Brand, (and possibly Deng) nearly every all american from Duke has been a bust in the league. J Williams, Reddick, Laettner, Ferry, Duhon, Langdon, (don't even get me started on Chris Burgess) etc. etc. etc.
While you're at it, name me a big man that Roy Williams,Bobby Knight or Dean Smith made good pros. Eric Montross anyone? Brendon Haywood? Greg Ostertag? (Honestly the only 2 guys I can think of off the top of my head that consistently produced solid NBA worthy big men are John Thompson Sr. and Rick Majerus)

Stanford has produced big man after big man, (Madsen, Borchardt, Collins twins, now the Lopez boys) and being family friends with their asst. coach Nick Robinson, I can tell you that they don't have a big man guru.

Great players are born, not coached and carved out of stone. They either get the most out of less by working their tails off (like a Steve Nash) or have developed enormous skill to go with their fabulous genetics (Kevin Garnett). Very rarely does a nobody come to school (especially a 7 foot nobody) and leave school a somebody. There is too much AAU and spring, summer hoops. The coaches know who the players are long before they end up at school. Some fall through the cracks (Nick Fazekas, Stephen Curry, Paul Milsap, JC Carrol, etc.) but that's extremely rare. Usually you know a future NBAer from day 1. They only improve or digress from that point. The great Utes of the last 15 years were great the day they stepped foot on campus (Van Horn, Bogut, etc.) The great Cougars have been the same (Ainge, Durrant, Smith). I'm sorry but coaching NCAA hoops is not about producing better pros, it's about building good college hoops teams.

To me, this sounds like Trent ducking the responsibility for not improving because in actuality: #1 not loving the game of basketball (if you dont' love it why spend 8 hours a day practicing on your own) #2 just being plain stupid and unteachable (the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over the same way but expecting different results) #3 Being lazy - (You' re 6'11", you don't shoot outside so you have 3 college years to beef up, get up to 255-260 lbs and become a glass eater yet fail to get there- there is no room in the NBA for 6'11" guys that tap dance in the block) #4 Having terrible advisors that think he's much better than the rest of the world.

Those that think that he'll get more teaching and attention at the next level are absolutely dense. It's a business there, guys are not coddled like they are in college; they're expected to be pros and act like pros-which means improving on your own. The lack of serious effort in the weight room and on his own in a dark quiet gym with no one cheering him on are his problem; I don't see how that's going to change; especially if he's going to try to blame the coaching staff for his lack of improvement.

Can you imagine someone like Larry Bird blaming his lack of success because he wasn't coached up enough?

I couldn't agree with you more!

I couldn't disagree more.

1. Sorry, I have never considered Bobby Knight to be a great coach. Loud and obnoxious? Yes. Great coach? No.

2. Sure it's easy to name several NBA superstars and claim that coaching had little to do with their ability since it can be neither proved or disproved. You might expect us to believe that MJ was "born" that way but if so, why wasn't it apparent at UNC or in high school? Sorry to disabuse you of the notion but, for the vast majority of players, basketball success is the result of winning the genetic lottery, a lot of dedicated hard work, AND good coaching. You can't do it with only two of the three.

3. The amount of time or effort in the weight room does not necessarily equate to success for big men. Do you think Shaq became the size he is just because he put in "serious effort in the weight room"? Sorry, don't buy that for a minute. How about Bill Walton? He put more effort into mixing his Tuti Fruitis than lifting weights. For some tall skinny, underweight players, the weight room is necessary so they can hold their own. For many others, their genetics didn't include skinny or underweight.

4. I've seen many average NBA players that have improved substantially from what they showed in college and in their first couple of years in the NBA. So does that mean the "average" collegiate player was "born" that way or was he "born again" as his game became better in the NBA?

5. Sure some Frosh or Sophs opt for the NBA draft every year. Some become very successful, but many have significant holes in their game and actually benefit from the current NBA style of play which in recent years has moved away from traditional basketball and more towards the inner city playground style and numerous rule changes that encourage that style.

6. I also disagree with your discounting the ability of a good coach to help a collegiate level player improve his game. Any coach worth his salt should be able to help a player improve and perhaps quit doing the "same thing over and over" if it's not being done correctly. Why have coaches otherwise?

7. Did you read the report on Trent at that camp he's been attending? Your comments seem to indicate either you didn't read it or you think the report is inaccurate.

8. I've watched players both at BYU and in the NBA become better through good coaching. For example, Fred Roberts improved tremendously while at BYU. So did Alan Taylor. In the NBA I watched Portland and Seattle mainly and observed many players as their game improved with good coaching. Terry Porter is a prime example. For every "born" with it big man there are others that learned the game thanks to good coaching, such as George Mikan, Hakeem Olajuwon, Kermit Washington, Bill Lambeer, etc.

9. You proved my point about some good coaches not being good big man coaches. Others such as John Wooden, Ray Meyer, John Thompson have been very successful in that regard. And then you have the most skilled big man coach of all, Pete Newell.

I'm not sure where you get your information about how players are treated at the next level, but I guarantee they are "coddled" in every way imaginable. Why do you think Portland kept around crooks like Isaih Rider, Rasheed Wallace, Bonzi Wells, Damon Staudamire, and Reuben Patterson?

craigoscarson wrote:

I try to root for guys that leave BYU and move on to the pros, but I just can't root for Trent. To me, his leaving early was on the bone-headed level of a ... Luke Staley.

This analysis tho off subject for this thread really doesn't hold water. Staley got the Doak Walker award and was drafted. He got hurt in pre-season and as I recall was doing well. His injury by our standards ended his career, not lack of ability.

Conosticator wrote:

deaner wrote:

I don't get this neccessity for a big man guru on the coaching staff. If anything I think the best thing a big guy gets out of a good school is their athletic trainers and facilities; BYU is top notch there. My guess is that Trent didnt' take much advantage of having a guy like Jay Omer there at his disposal.

Very rarely does a basketball coach make a guy a better pro prospect; especially true if you consider the majority of top picks are freshmen and sophs; many guys become better pros than they were college players (ex: vince carter, michael jordan, dwayne wade, etc.) Does this mean that they weren't properly coached in college? (No)
So lets' take that leap about worrying about recruiting....What school has a lock on producing great big men? Do you honestly think that Michael Beasley went to Kstate because of their great history with big men?
Since when did Ohio State become the place that Greg Oden was going to become a great big?
Why would anyone attend Duke if you were basing your decision on the type of pros they produce? Aside from Boozer and Brand, (and possibly Deng) nearly every all american from Duke has been a bust in the league. J Williams, Reddick, Laettner, Ferry, Duhon, Langdon, (don't even get me started on Chris Burgess) etc. etc. etc.
While you're at it, name me a big man that Roy Williams,Bobby Knight or Dean Smith made good pros. Eric Montross anyone? Brendon Haywood? Greg Ostertag? (Honestly the only 2 guys I can think of off the top of my head that consistently produced solid NBA worthy big men are John Thompson Sr. and Rick Majerus)

Stanford has produced big man after big man, (Madsen, Borchardt, Collins twins, now the Lopez boys) and being family friends with their asst. coach Nick Robinson, I can tell you that they don't have a big man guru.

Great players are born, not coached and carved out of stone. They either get the most out of less by working their tails off (like a Steve Nash) or have developed enormous skill to go with their fabulous genetics (Kevin Garnett). Very rarely does a nobody come to school (especially a 7 foot nobody) and leave school a somebody. There is too much AAU and spring, summer hoops. The coaches know who the players are long before they end up at school. Some fall through the cracks (Nick Fazekas, Stephen Curry, Paul Milsap, JC Carrol, etc.) but that's extremely rare. Usually you know a future NBAer from day 1. They only improve or digress from that point. The great Utes of the last 15 years were great the day they stepped foot on campus (Van Horn, Bogut, etc.) The great Cougars have been the same (Ainge, Durrant, Smith). I'm sorry but coaching NCAA hoops is not about producing better pros, it's about building good college hoops teams.

To me, this sounds like Trent ducking the responsibility for not improving because in actuality: #1 not loving the game of basketball (if you dont' love it why spend 8 hours a day practicing on your own) #2 just being plain stupid and unteachable (the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over the same way but expecting different results) #3 Being lazy - (You' re 6'11", you don't shoot outside so you have 3 college years to beef up, get up to 255-260 lbs and become a glass eater yet fail to get there- there is no room in the NBA for 6'11" guys that tap dance in the block) #4 Having terrible advisors that think he's much better than the rest of the world.

Those that think that he'll get more teaching and attention at the next level are absolutely dense. It's a business there, guys are not coddled like they are in college; they're expected to be pros and act like pros-which means improving on your own. The lack of serious effort in the weight room and on his own in a dark quiet gym with no one cheering him on are his problem; I don't see how that's going to change; especially if he's going to try to blame the coaching staff for his lack of improvement.

Can you imagine someone like Larry Bird blaming his lack of success because he wasn't coached up enough?

I couldn't agree with you more!

I couldn't disagree more.

1. Sorry, I have never considered Bobby Knight to be a great coach. Loud and obnoxious? Yes. Great coach? No.

2. Sure it's easy to name several NBA superstars and claim that coaching had little to do with their ability since it can be neither proved or disproved. You might expect us to believe that MJ was "born" that way but if so, why wasn't it apparent at UNC or in high school? Sorry to disabuse you of the notion but, for the vast majority of players, basketball success is the result of winning the genetic lottery, a lot of dedicated hard work, AND good coaching. You can't do it with only two of the three.

3. The amount of time or effort in the weight room does not necessarily equate to success for big men. Do you think Shaq became the size he is just because he put in "serious effort in the weight room"? Sorry, don't buy that for a minute. How about Bill Walton? He put more effort into mixing his Tuti Fruitis than lifting weights. For some tall skinny, underweight players, the weight room is necessary so they can hold their own. For many others, their genetics didn't include skinny or underweight.

4. I've seen many average NBA players that have improved substantially from what they showed in college and in their first couple of years in the NBA. So does that mean the "average" collegiate player was "born" that way or was he "born again" as his game became better in the NBA?

5. Sure some Frosh or Sophs opt for the NBA draft every year. Some become very successful, but many have significant holes in their game and actually benefit from the current NBA style of play which in recent years has moved away from traditional basketball and more towards the inner city playground style and numerous rule changes that encourage that style.

6. I also disagree with your discounting the ability of a good coach to help a collegiate level player improve his game. Any coach worth his salt should be able to help a player improve and perhaps quit doing the "same thing over and over" if it's not being done correctly. Why have coaches otherwise?

7. Did you read the report on Trent at that camp he's been attending? Your comments seem to indicate either you didn't read it or you think the report is inaccurate.

8. I've watched players both at BYU and in the NBA become better through good coaching. For example, Fred Roberts improved tremendously while at BYU. So did Alan Taylor. In the NBA I watched Portland and Seattle mainly and observed many players as their game improved with good coaching. Terry Porter is a prime example. For every "born" with it big man there are others that learned the game thanks to good coaching, such as George Mikan, Hakeem Olajuwon, Kermit Washington, Bill Lambeer, etc.

9. You proved my point about some good coaches not being good big man coaches. Others such as John Wooden, Ray Meyer, John Thompson have been very successful in that regard. And then you have the most skilled big man coach of all, Pete Newell.

I'm not sure where you get your information about how players are treated at the next level, but I guarantee they are "coddled" in every way imaginable. Why do you think Portland kept around crooks like Isaih Rider, Rasheed Wallace, Bonzi Wells, Damon Staudamire, and Reuben Patterson?

I want to respond to a couple of things, not that I necessarily disagree with you completely, but I think I should point a few things out.

First off, MJ was very good in college. There was a reason he was the number 2 draft pick.

Second of all the NBA is a completely different game from the college game so some of the differences in success you see between the pro and collegiate levels can definitely be attributed to that.

Third of all, much like the NFL, success in the NBA also has a lot to do with your teammates and being in a system that fits your skill set. There are some players that are so dominant that this doesn't always apply to, but I think for Trent, for example, to be successful he will need to wind up with a system that fits what he does well and a coach that knows how to work with him.

4th I do think a lot of Shaq's size is because he works hard in the weight room. Sure some of it's genetics, but the guy is a hard worker. He comes across as pretty easy going but you can tell by looking at him that he works hard in the gym. He didn't become one of the most dominant centers in NBA history by sitting on his but. It's not just his size either, he has a lot of moves under the basket that he has been able to develop. You've got me on the free throw thing, I don't really get that either, but the guy is not lazy (and neither was bill walton for that matter).