Put 19 year old kids in a losing atmosphere after all they have done their entire lives is dominate the competition, and you're doing severe damage to their confidence and psyche. The only stars they have out of all those picks were never assocuated with that culture. Embiid recuped for two years and a half and didn't lose and Simmons was noehere near losing last year. man that losing thay Durant and Westbrook suffered really messed them up. Most of the great players are on losing teams when they start out. That is what happens when you get drafted to bad teams. Winning or losing at the start makes no real difference long term. It is all on the player.
Except for Covington, I can't see where they developed anyone. Embiid was a monster in college. Simmons is as good now as he was in college. Saric is as good now as he was overseas. Noel, Okafor and MCW were never developed.
I disagree with this assessment. Some players have the opportunity to transcend a terrible organization and lift it temporarily out of the mire, but most players aren't capable of doing that. The difference is not necessarily ability, or talent, or athleticism (although those can help).
Compare it to a regular job. Some employees might be great in any situation. Great companies are able to make great employees, not just attract them.
Westbrook and Durant were able to be good, but they were definitely unique players. Lebron James was another. These are what people call "transcendent talent."
What about Andrew Wiggins? He had a lot of ability, but learned a lot of really bad habits playing for a losing team? What about Okafor? What about Noel? What about MCW? What about Russell? Hezonja? WCS? Gordon? Randle? Payton? Lavine? Len? Oladipo (pre-pacers)? Bennett? McLemore? Bender?
It's one of the reasons I'm worried that Devin Booker might not be everything he could be. He has learned a lot of bad habits on both sides of the ball that might hold his team back from winning.
Some of those players I listed admittedly aren't as talented as others who have succeeded, but why did Olynyk, McCullom, and Adams get big second contracts while Bennet, KCP, McLemore, Noel, Len, and MCW struggle to find NBA teams or get long-term money? There is a common denominator, and it's not primarily talent level when they came into the league. It's that they team they played for was lousy and failed to develop them properly. There may be other factors, but that is foundation of it all.
This is not a victim game. The players are still responsible for themselves and their development. I'm just saying that not all situations are equal, and that some situations actually work against a player's long-term development -- the worst of those situations is the team that let's the talented young player put up empty stats while they are losing, without any accountability to playing the game the right way.