dan2314 wrote:I disagree, dude is a very solid shooter, and can even do so off the dribble decently well.
He shot a combine 37% from 3 and 76% from the line the last two seasons (throwing out the first two, didn't play much, clearly made strides after year 2). Those two number are right around NBA average (NBA average 3P% is ~36% this year IIRC). Thus mediocre. Don't forget that he's shooting that % from the shorter college line, and could easily see that % drop in the NBA.
dan2314 wrote:His ball handling is suspect, which may limit his ability to win in iso situations, but that is something that can easily be worked on when you make it to the NBA.
It's taken him 4 years just to get to 'bad', how long until he's 'okay' or even 'good'? I would not expect him to become a competent ball handler.
dan2314 wrote:He's 6'4 which really isn't terribly small.
He's the 2nd shortest SG in this draft at 6'3.5" in shoes. Also second shortest without shoes. Everyone was wowed by how short Gary Harris is, and it's actually hurt his draft stock. Brown is shorter than Harris.
dan2314 wrote:His athletiscm is enough to get you 4-6 points in transition, aswell as the 1,2 or 3 threes he can make.
It's true that he's a good sprinter and leaper, but I wouldn't really say that makes him good for 4-6 transition points a game- that would require him actually pushing things into transition, by say, playing great defense and forcing his man to take a long, contested shot, generating a long rebound, or by picking his man's pocket. And getting 3 3's would require him to take quite a few shots (like 8 or 9), and I doubt he'll be able to stay on the floor long enough to get those shots. It sounds reasonable in your head when you say it like that, but actually getting that production on the court is a different story. What you're suggesting is that as is he could get to 15ppg, probably coming off the bench.
In addition, I'd like to note that he had the worst lane agility time of all the SGs at the combine, and the 3rd worst of all of the participants-even some real stiffs at center.
dan2314 wrote:He also showed with Smart out last year that he is plenty capable of being a solid passer, don't know where you got that from.
I didn't say that he couldn't pass at all, just that he isn't particularly good at it. I watched those games, and I didn't really come away that impressed by Brown.
dan2314 wrote:At #38, you aren't looking for someone who has it all. Most of them won't even play regular rotation minutes in their whole career. The way i see it is, that you either want a big who can come in and rebound and clog up space for 10 mins a game, or you want a microwave wing who can just come in for 10-15 and see how many points he can put up, regardless of his defense.. That's your best chance of hitting on a second round pick. Leave it to the starters to be a complete package.
I hate getting this same little paragraph in the response to every criticism I make of a player.
If I think that the chances of a guy panning out are low enough, I wouldn't bother drafting him unless there really were not any better options. However, this is a deep draft. Starting caliber, or even just rotation caliber players (6th/7th/8th man) come out of the 2nd round every year. Pistons fans should be aware of this, we've landed a number of real contributors in the 2nd round. Kris Middleton, Kyle Singler, Jonas Jerebko (pre-injury at least), Amir Johnson, Mehmet Okur, and Denis Rodman are all examples.
We don't have to settle for some scrub (not to say Brown is a complete scrub, I'm just talking generally) who has poor chances of panning out just because "he can shoot and why bother aiming higher". You can pick up guys off the street who can shoot decently and not contribute anything else. I'd like to also mention that 3P% is something that translates worse than a lot of other stats- guys who shot well in college regularly fail to make the adjustment to the NBA 3 point line, or can't get their shot off against longer, faster competition. If we're drafting a guy primarily to be a shooter, we should either go for a real sniper, or pick a guy who could at least really contribute elsewhere if the shooting doesn't translate.
There are a number of guys projected to go in the 2nd round or undrafted who could be solid players, bench players or starters, and we shouldn't settle for picking a guy who can shoot simply because we lack shooters. Go for the BPA! BPA>need.
Now, as negative as this whole post is, I'm not saying that we shouldn't draft him at all. It really depends on who's been picked ahead of him. I'm just saying that I would not go out of my way to target him.
