Jaylen Clark was a defender… Peyton wasn’t. Why did you expect some massive jump? Watson wasn’t willing to play defense the way Cronin wanted and would have spent another year on the bench. How does that equate to a massive jump? Serious question this time 🙂
Peyton Watson was already a decent defender. If you read Watson’s draft notes from that year, the first thing they always note is his defensive potential, while noting he hasn’t shown enough on offense yet. So he was drafted based on his potential to play defense.
And he ended up being drafted in the FIRST ROUND. That alone told me that he would’ve made a huge jump if he stayed another year
PWat has solidified his role with the Nuggets by being a very good defender and shot blocker (which comes from his athleticism and hustle as opposed to size). His offensive game is still a work in progress at the NBA level. It is still puzzling to me how he couldn't get any playing time with Cronin.
I actually think it’s very comparable to the zach lavine story. Who many absolutely railed on Steve Alford for not giving him more minutes. Now the situation is very similar with Peyton, but the responses is that cronin just needed more time with Watson and they coddle cronin like he’s some world saving hero for some reason
There’s no way that you could ever support this argument. We are only talking about the results that were apparent during the time spent with cronin. You can’t just say if so and so had stayed another year then Cronin would have made them better… given the time he had with Watson, there was no visible evidence of improvement… give him more time they say… hogwash. That’s like saying if Watson had spent 40 more hours a week in shooting the ball he would have gotten better. It didn’t happen so all we have to go off of is the evidence at hand. The evidence at hand and the eye test during that season is that Watson didn’t improve, thus cronin failed. But whatever…
Another point of context, I could say the exact same thing thing about zach lavine. He certainly wasn’t a miss for Steve Alford because if he had just stayed one more year under Alford he would have made a significant jump. If zach had just stayed one more season at ucla I would’ve expected to see a massive jump in 3 pt percentage just like Bryce Alford! So by your logic, Zach lavine is a success under Steve Alford… do you see how far fetched that sounds?
Your calling Watson a success is no different than my fallacy above that zach lavine was a success under Alford… give them one more year! Cronin is the best coach ever! Sorry, but that’s just flat out wrong
Nope. If he had stayed another year, I would’ve expected to see a massive jump like Jaylen Clark.
Jaylen Clark was a defender… Peyton wasn’t. Why did you expect some massive jump? Watson wasn’t willing to play defense the way Cronin wanted and would have spent another year on the bench. How does that equate to a massive jump? Serious question this time 🙂
Peyton Watson was already a decent defender. If you read Watson’s draft notes from that year, the first thing they always note is his defensive potential, while noting he hasn’t shown enough on offense yet. So he was drafted based on his potential to play defense.
And he ended up being drafted in the FIRST ROUND. That alone told me that he would’ve made a huge jump if he stayed another year
PWat has solidified his role with the Nuggets by being a very good defender and shot blocker (which comes from his athleticism and hustle as opposed to size). His offensive game is still a work in progress at the NBA level. It is still puzzling to me how he couldn't get any playing time with Cronin.
I actually think it’s very comparable to the zach lavine story. Who many absolutely railed on Steve Alford for not giving him more minutes. Now the situation is very similar with Peyton, but the responses is that cronin just needed more time with Watson and they coddle cronin like he’s some world saving hero for some reason
I agree with that, tho we also hated that Zach was sitting on the bench because tiara was giving those minutes to his son.
Of course, Steve Alford made things worse by throwing nepotism into it… 😂😂
There’s no way that you could ever support this argument. We are only talking about the results that were apparent during the time spent with cronin. You can’t just say if so and so had stayed another year then Cronin would have made them better… given the time he had with Watson, there was no visible evidence of improvement… give him more time they say… hogwash. That’s like saying if Watson had spent 40 more hours a week in shooting the ball he would have gotten better. It didn’t happen so all we have to go off of is the evidence at hand. The evidence at hand and the eye test during that season is that Watson didn’t improve, thus cronin failed. But whatever…
Another point of context, I could say the exact same thing thing about zach lavine. He certainly wasn’t a miss for Steve Alford because if he had just stayed one more year under Alford he would have made a significant jump. If zach had just stayed one more season at ucla I would’ve expected to see a massive jump in 3 pt percentage just like Bryce Alford! So by your logic, Zach lavine is a success under Steve Alford… do you see how far fetched that sounds?
Your calling Watson a success is no different than my fallacy above that zach lavine was a success under Alford… give them one more year! Cronin is the best coach ever! Sorry, but that’s just flat out wrong