Potential - for and against...
So, there I am, minding my own business and reading (re-reading, actually) Dan Simmons novel, "A Winter Haunting" (if you haven't read Dan Simmons, you need to. Great writer and has written something in almost every genre) when Mr. Simmons references that great philosopher, Linus van Pelt, who made this observation:
via eclecticemily.files.wordpress.com
He (Dan Simmons, not Linus) then went on to state, "Potential... was a burden before it was realized, and a constant specter after it had been failed to be realized. And every day, every hour, every small decision made, eliminated the remaining set of potential until... that potential was fast dwindling toward zero."
The word potential is used fast and free around the NBA world (and probably most sports worlds) and has been appended in Blazerland in the last few years to such disparate players as Ha Seung-Jin, Sebastian Telfair, Joel Freeland, Martell Webster, Travis Outlaw and Sergio Rodriguez. It also has been applied to LaMarcus Aldridge and Brandon Roy.
The first definition in my dictionary of the word potential is "possible, as opposed to actual." In my own world, electricity, potential realized is not usually a good thing; in the NBA world it can be a very good thing. (Unless the sentence is something like, "Rasheed Wallace has more potential to blow up on court than any other player...")
I'm not certain where I am headed with all of this. I just know that I am truly tired of the word potential. We've been hearing for years about how much potential certain players have. Here's a fact, you can't eat potential. I don't know what that means, but it is undeniable. I want to see certain players fish or cut bait. I want these players to do their business or get off the pot. I want to see how many metaphors I can mix in one paragraph.
Dan Simmons went on later in the book to liken potential to an inverted cone. The more time that passes, the smaller the cone of potential becomes. I don't know how true that really is but it rings true for me. Here's what I know for sure: In the last couple of years, the Blazers have spent their lottery picks on players with more (apparent) reality than (presumed) potential. I like that trend. Maybe I can pare this down to one declarative sentence...
A lottery pick, especially a high lottery pick -say 1 through 7 - should not be spent on a player with more "potential" than proof.
OK, that sentence had potential but I think it fell short, maybe someone can do better?
0 recs |
13 comments
Comments
ok everyone
lets stop saying “potential”...let’s go with “upside” instead. lol
Just kidding…...I am in the same boat. I think the time has come to stop talking potential and start talking actual.
Homer: "Oh no!! A Bear is eating my father!." (On seeing Selma kissing Grampa)
by 92wastheyear on Jul 27, 2008 7:39 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
1990 Finals
The inverted cone could certainly be applied to the Drexler lead Blazer teams of the 90s. The late 80s had many talking potential and the trade for Buck Williams meant they were serious about winning right away. But, did making the Finals in his first year raise expectations too high and put too much pressure on that team to win in the next two years? Would their window have been open a bit longer if that first year had ended with Phoenix going to the Finals and the Blazers keeping a bit of the underdog label?
The same could be said for the 1985 Rockets team that made the Finals. Expectations were sky high for a team that was not ready for that kind of pressure. It took them almost 10 years to get back to that level with an entirely different roster except Hakeem.
PTB Liberation Day - 2/10/04
by tssbro on Jul 27, 2008 8:03 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I think that's what is happening
nowadays – at least with the Blazers. The high picks are known quantities, the 2nd rounders are wild guesses. That is, as much as a player can be a known quantity. Usually the drafts consist of two can’t miss guys and then rest of them. They all have potential, but what will it take to help them realize it? Some, simply by their work habits, will never even come close. Others work hard, but for other reasons don’t achieve what anyone expected.
I think that expectations is another word that needs to be thrown in. That comes from the outside – applied by fans and to a lesser extent by management. A player may have his own expectations, but they aren’t often tied to realistic potential (look at all the players who remained undrafted.)
But “proof” is also way too nebulous. All that has been proven is that a player has excelled with this coach and these teammates against this opposition. That does not guarantee success. It only indicates potential success. So there we are back to the beginning.
Its probably nit-picking, but I think Linus really meant the burden is high expectations. Or maybe “potential” was shorthand for “high expectations of reaching my potential.”
I dunno, I’m wandering around here. I think the inverted cone is a given – if potential is finite. And because there’s still so much to be learned about the body, we have to assume potential is finite. (And if it is possible to talk about “realizing” a potential then it is finite. Surely in electricity it is finite.) (Have I achieved a record by using “finite” this many times in one small paragraph?)
And maybe “potential” as a noun is just one of those buzz words that will go away (in other than scientific use.). As 92was pointed out “upside” is used to mean the very same thing.
So what was your point, Ken? Furthermore, what was mine????
You wanna delete this thread and start again? [insert very large grin here]
"We, as Blazer fans, are perhaps the luckiest fans in the league."-Idog1976, July 19.
by jorga on Jul 27, 2008 9:14 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I especially like...
your third paragraph. I know there are always exceptions, but I think that most every player who has more than 3 years of experience and suddenly explodes, let’s look at Steve Nash, does so because the circumstances have changed in his favor and not because he’s suddenly become a different player.
My point? I think it’s time to realize that certain players are not going to live up to the potential/expectations that we might once have had for them. Furthermore, throwing out phrases such as, ”...would only be a senior in college right now…” are not helpful.
Really, most of my ramblings are hindsight. I am grateful that we now have management who seem to be looking at reality rather than potential, especially as it relates to higher draft picks.
"I love this game!" -Moonbeam, from 'Rollerball' right before he was knocked into a permanent coma
by -ken on Jul 27, 2008 9:27 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That post has potential for good discussions
I especially like the concept that (unrealized) potential leads to less remaining potential over time. The inverted cone analogy is fitting. Mhm, ice cones… I’m drifting off.
For players coming into the NBA, the younger they are the less they have already proven themselves and the harder it becomes to extrapolate from their high school careers (often against inferior competition) and a few important college games how good they ultimately might become. So scouts, agents and managers like to use the “potential” or “upside” moniker to say that a player is good yet still has a lot of room for improvement. Potential broken down they e.g. have “an NBA body/frame”, “solid shot mechanics”, “a great motor” or “good work ethics” which are all indicators of future success. But none guarantees success. So either you take the player who is already a little older and thus has less “potential” to become way better than he is before reaching his prime in a few years, or you take a younger unproven one who shows traits of a greater development. And since the ultimate goal of drafting is finding the “gems” or “steals” before others do, teams will often go for a younger player with more “potential”. That’s just the nature of the game, trying to find great talents early in their career.
Coach, I promise I wasn't running hard ...
by Norsktroll on Jul 27, 2008 2:30 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
+1
for proper use of the word “disparate”
and +1 for one of the more cogent posts to appear here.
ALL those in the NBA and on the fringes have “potential”. BRoy was quite accomplished in college, but still had potential to become a better player … and still does. At the level at which these guys play, “potential” comes down to wanting it more than the next guy and being willing to work as hard as is necessary to win.
In general, the art of government consists in taking as much money as possible from one party of the citizens to give to the other.
by TTRocks on Jul 27, 2008 2:30 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
In my own world, electricity..
This makes you sound amazing. Like you’re not of this material plane or whatever.
"Well, Travis just showed us that we can go to Travis Outlaw." - Nate McMillan
by 12sharks on Jul 27, 2008 2:57 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I am amazing...
but what I meant was that my job in the real world deals with electricity.
"I love this game!" -Moonbeam, from 'Rollerball' right before he was knocked into a permanent coma
by -ken on Jul 27, 2008 3:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
superhero huh
that pay well?
Roy4Ever
by Sabonis4Ever on Jul 28, 2008 8:41 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah...
but the hours suck.
"I love this game!" -Moonbeam, from 'Rollerball' right before he was knocked into a permanent coma
by -ken on Jul 28, 2008 9:59 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
So does this:

Asked his specialty in the kitchen, Oden paused and said, "Hamburger Helper and tuna fish."
by MiledAnimal on Jul 29, 2008 2:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm sorry Ken
Just like in your previous fanpost saying THE TIME IS NOW, NO MORE POTENTIAL, you’re going to have to live with dealing with constant talk of potential and upside. Remember, this is the youngest team in the league.
Remember, Roy, our best player, is entering his 3rd year.
Remember, so is LMA.
Remember, Oden is hopefully our best player and is a ROOKIE.
Remember, so are Rudy and Bayless, who figure to be featured prominently.
Remember, Martell and Trout are both figuring out who they are.
Remember, this team overall is in their early 20’s.
How can you NOT focus on the potential and upside of the team when everyone is so young? I ain’t an excuse, it’s a cold hard fact. Like I said in your previous fanpost similar to this topic, now is not the time to say WIN NOW OR ELSE or ENOUGH POTENTIAL, MAKE WITH THE REAL. Maybe next year, or after we make the playoffs.
Yeah, we’ve been out of the playoffs for 5 years or so, but this CURRENT team has only been out of the playoffs for one season. It hasn’t been a long time coming for the Pritchard regime.
I want to win now and win a lot and I can’t imagine us not making the playoffs. Even still, I know this team is incredibly young, and teams much older than us won’t have near the expectations we have. We have to let everyone play for at least ONE year before we get impatient.
Not saying you’re impatient per se, but this is at least your 2nd fanpost bemoaning the general topic of potential, and wishing to have actual talent here and now. That is simply impossible to give you until we see how Oden is, and the rest of the kids.
Mortimer
by Mortimer on Jul 29, 2008 2:24 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
In all seriousness...
this post is really just my musings about the word potential. I read the Dan Simmons quote (you really do need to read him, he’s that good) and it got me going a bit. Just thinking out loud and using the Blazers as examples since we all know them best.
I do think our previous regime was too caught up in potential, though, and made some really poor draft picks because of it. The present group seems to look at everything and has done, I think, a much better job.
That said, these kids can grow up now, darnit!
"I love this game!" -Moonbeam, from 'Rollerball' right before he was knocked into a permanent coma
by -ken on Jul 29, 2008 7:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

























