Not disagreeing, but he did average nearly 26 ppg at Oakland. It could be argued that GMs wanted to see how he competed against more-likely-to-be pro talent in G league before signing a contract. In that case, it's not development he needed: https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/kendrick-nunn-1.htmlKendrick Nunn
I am not trying to argue, I just thought you meant players stayed in college too long and it cost them a chance in the NBA.What does that matter? If the career goal is the NBA, then lots of NCAA players have had that goal die while playing in the NCAA. Are you actually trying to argue otherwise?
I'm friends with a part owner of a G-League franchise, who's been able to see for a few years just how many players have "graduated" to the NBA. Short answer: not many. Most G-League players are simply hoping for a 10 day contract, so they can make the NBA minimum for 10 days. Also, the quality of play isn't as great as you'd think and if you're looking for players with proper mechanics, team play & decent defense, look elsewhere. All this means is: The G-League isn't very good at being a Developmental League. JOMO.Is there any evidence that the G league is better at developing talent? Certainly up to now, most elite kids have chosen college despite the lack of pay.
I am sure that does happen at least a little bit but why would that be relevant if you are trying to compare the developmental value of NCAA vs. G League?I am not trying to argue, I just thought you meant players stayed in college too long and it cost them a chance in the NBA.
Melo Trimble comes to mind.I am not trying to argue, I just thought you meant players stayed in college too long and it cost them a chance in the NBA.