Shabazz is being under valued.

Apollo64 · Post #121 » by **Apollo64** » Tue Jun 25, 2013 10:02 pm

Ortho Stice wrote:I I think Shabazz should go first overall.

is this real life

Ortho Stice · Post #122 » by **Ortho Stice** » Wed Jun 26, 2013 5:56 am

GhostsOfGil wrote:
Ortho Stice wrote:I can't believe McLemore is such a lock to go before Shabazz. His main strength (shooting) is a strength of Shabazz's too, but Shabazz has a better NBA body, he's been described as the next Kobe all through high school, and he can slash to the hoop, a vital skill for a top draftee guard, and nearly every scout has said is something that McLemore literally can't do).

I think Shabazz should go first overall. I can see him as being a 25 PPG scorer in the NBA. If the Pistons steal him in the same way that they stole Drummond they might have a future dynasty

Sounds like you're still swimming in the wake of his high school hype. Mclemore was far more efficient from 2, from 3 and at the line. I only watch Bazz twice but this was something I read recently about his selfish tendencies:

He's praised for his ability to move without the ball, but it's always simply so he can put himself in position to shoot. I've often seen him make a cut in front of another open player, ruining a potential passing lane. His tunnel vision doesn't just extend to when he has the ball. I've noticed a number of plays like this defensively where he doesn't even bother to try to stop a driving player because it's not his man.

Wilt Chamberlain, Michael Jordan and Kobe Bryant were all notoriously selfish players too. It's good that Shabazz wants to be an elite go-to scorer. McLemore may be a better shooter, but Shabazz still fills the role of floor spacer, but can be a guy that slashes to the hoop to draw a foul. McLemore's ceiling is basically a really good role player, while Shabazz's is that of a franchise cornerstone. Championship teams need elite scorers -- people look at the Spurs and don't see a superstar scorer, but Tony Parker is one.

Basically I don't think college stats should be the overriding factor when it comes to drafting one player over another. I just see Shabazz's game as translating to the NBA better because of his NBA body and his inherent and unusual desire to succeed and dominate.

XtotheDeezy · Post #123 » by **XtotheDeezy** » Wed Jun 26, 2013 6:30 am

It's nuts how this guy went from consensus #1 pick to might drop to late first round in one year.

Collie · Post #124 » by **Collie** » Wed Jun 26, 2013 8:26 am

Is that 1 year really such a huge factor in his drop?

eastsideballer · Post #125 » by **eastsideballer** » Thu Jun 27, 2013 1:45 am

I really don't understand why certain draft sites have him slipping to almost 20 (I think he's clearly a top 10 pick this year). I think people just don't like the attitude he displayed during some of the UCLA games this season.

KennyDuwayne · Post #126 » by **KennyDuwayne** » Thu Jun 27, 2013 8:43 pm

Collie wrote:Is that 1 year really such a huge factor in his drop?

Yup. If LeBron was 19 instead of 18, he'd have been terrible as a rookie.

miltk · Post #127 » by **miltk** » Fri Jun 28, 2013 3:19 am

i dont thing bazz is a franchise or cornerstone player,,,but i'll bet he's in the top3 rookies with the best numbers.

GopherIt! · Post #128 » by **GopherIt!** » Fri Jun 28, 2013 10:30 am

Edit - Still hate the pick but I now have no choice but to welcome the opportunity to be proved wrong. His attitude is in a sense Kobesque, he wants to be great, but unlike Kobe his passion for the game and his willingness to put in the time/energy in to succeed at the NBA level both seem highly suspect.

Three or four years from now, Flip will either look like a flaming idiot or a total genius. There's no middle ground when you sha-bazz.

crgreen · Post #129 » by **crgreen** » Fri Jun 28, 2013 10:49 am

XtotheDeezy wrote:It's nuts how this guy went from consensus #1 pick to might drop to late first round in one year.

Especially when in that 1 year he was the leading freshman scorer in the nation, took a 19 win, 4th place team in Conference in 2012 (one that lost its starting PG, starting SG, starting SF, starting C, and a backup C and backup PF) - to 25 wins and a Conference title in 2013, leading the team in scoring, and 2nd in rebounding from a wing position. The Bruins played with only 3 returning scholarship players last season - the Wear Twins and reserve SG Norman Powell.

Post #130 » by **gswhoops** » Fri Jun 28, 2013 1:46 pm

I think the backlash against Shabazz being overrated has resulted in him becoming underrated by draft night. There definitely aren't 13 better players than him in this year's draft. Wolves got themselves a steal, IMO.

All his flaws are coachable. He still has the skills, body and mindset to be an elite scorer and he'll get a lot of good looks with Rubio distributing and Love spacing the floor.

wildvikeswolves · Post #131 » by **wildvikeswolves** » Sat Jun 29, 2013 5:45 am

GopherIt! wrote:
jazzfan1971 wrote:I think he's going to be terrible. A poor man's Micheal Beasley. Will be washed out of the NBA by the end of his rookie contract.

I'm definitely not seeing what you folks are seeing. I see a guy who is a low efficiency scorer, who can only dribble with one hand, and thinks he's open even with 5 guys guarding him.

I'd pass on him at #14 for just about anyone. Seems like the opposite of everything I'd be looking for in a player.

I toally agree. Flip Saunders kicked a lot of diehard TWolves fans in the nuts with this pick.

How? Flip made the best of a weird situation. No one saw the draft going like that

willywazza · Post #132 » by **willywazza** » Sat Jun 29, 2013 6:09 am

This guy is going to be a stud in the league.

I don't understand how people were saying he has sub par athleticism. I remember some analysts were criticising James Harden for not having enough leaping ability but he's still dunking just fine in the pros.

Watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_w8A_o8n_0

Really?

ManualRam · Post #133 » by **ManualRam** » Sat Jun 29, 2013 6:40 am

willywazza wrote:This guy is going to be a stud in the league.

I don't understand how people were saying he has sub par athleticism. I remember some analysts were criticising James Harden for not having enough leaping ability but he's still dunking just fine in the pros.

Watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_w8A_o8n_0

Really?

yes, really. he's not quick either in straight lines, laterally and he's not an explosive leaper. he struggles to get separation off the bounce, nor does he shoot well off the dribble.
his ball skills are not good, his floor game is not good and he's not a good defender either.

that being said. i think he went to the perfect situation for him to develop. he went to a team that runs motion offense that is filled with good, unselfish passers. he'll be put on the move, wont have to create his own offense or supply his own momentum and will be spoonfed scoring opportunities. hopefully some of that unselfishness and team play rub off on him. also, as a late lotto pick, there will be less pressure on him to fulfill the expectations coming out of HS. if he doesn't fight his limitations, try to "prove the doubters wrong," just plays within himself and the system i think he'll be fine. i don't think the'll be a star, but he can be a solid scorer. forget about his HS reputation. those days are over and the narrative of his game has changed. he's not a stud, likely won't be one but that doens't mean he can't be a valuable rotation player.

DatHomieYouHaTe · Post #134 » by **DatHomieYouHaTe** » Sat Jun 29, 2013 7:43 am

willywazza wrote:This guy is going to be a stud in the league.

I don't understand how people were saying he has sub par athleticism. I remember some analysts were criticising James Harden for not having enough leaping ability but he's still dunking just fine in the pros.

Watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_w8A_o8n_0

Really?

Ohhhh wow, you posted highlights of him dunking. This proves he's amazing.

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2

willywazza · Post #135 » by **willywazza** » Sat Jun 29, 2013 8:18 am

DatHomieYouHaTe wrote:
willywazza wrote:This guy is going to be a stud in the league.

I don't understand how people were saying he has sub par athleticism. I remember some analysts were criticising James Harden for not having enough leaping ability but he's still dunking just fine in the pros.

Watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_w8A_o8n_0

Really?

Ohhhh wow, you posted highlights of him dunking. This proves he's amazing.

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2

You know it.

KembaWalker · Post #136 » by **KembaWalker** » Sat Jun 29, 2013 11:15 am

Shabazz is the least impressive dunker in that video besides the chick lol. how did Goodwin not win that contest easily?

karkinos · Post #137 » by **karkinos** » Sat Jun 29, 2013 7:58 pm

i think for shabazz you have to go by his workouts
ben howland's system isn't going to flatter anyone's skills or their per game stats.

ManualRam · Post #138 » by **ManualRam** » Sat Jun 29, 2013 8:16 pm

cancer wrote:i think for shabazz you have to go by his workouts
ben howland's system isn't going to flatter anyone's skills or their per game stats.

people really need to stop using howland's system as an excuse. i've said repeatedly on this board that howland tweaked his system to accommodate his players this yr. they were a good offensive team this yr. he put his players in a position to succeed offensively, shabazz included. their problems as a team were defensively and a lack of depth.

the way he used shabazz BENEFITTED him. statistically, shabazz had a good yr from an offensive standpoint. what turned scouts off was the lack of different dimensions to his game, even offensively. when he was put in a position to showcase his ability to score, he was only successful in specific situations, those being when he didn't have to create on his own. they ran him off curls, they put him in motion, they used him to spread the floor, let him run the baseline, even posted him up. that (with the exception of when they posted him up, since he still had to create those shots) was when shabazz was successful. if he was in a more freelancing, talent based system that relied more on individual ability, i think he would've been exposed even more.

karkinos · Post #139 » by **karkinos** » Sat Jun 29, 2013 8:44 pm

he might have tailored the offense for shabazz this year, but he has his reputation for a reason. even when ucla was top 10 in offensive ratings in 2008, a prospect like westbrook had a pedestrian 12/4/4 statline. 2009 ucla ranked 3 in the country in offensive ratings, jrue had 8.5/3.7/3.7.

ucla prospects, even the best ones, don't always get to showcase their true potential.

ManualRam · Post #140 » by **ManualRam** » Sat Jun 29, 2013 9:00 pm

cancer wrote:yeah
their offense was so good this year, kenpom rated them 38th in offensive efficiency. unless you think that's good. i mean, if the years before you were ranked 72 and 78th, i guess 38th is quite the jump. but even when ucla was top 10 in offensive ratings in 2008, a prospect like westbrook had a pedestrian 12/4/4 statline. 2009 ucla ranked 3 in the country in offensive ratings, jrue had 8.5/3.7/3.7.

ucla prospects, even the best ones, don't always get to showcase their true potential.

this is not the yr to be complaining about howland's offensive system holding players back. he opened it up for them, allowed them to run out whenever they could looking for leak outs, pushing the tempo and early offense.
they could NOT be the typical slow-it-down, grind out it, possession by possession, tedious execution, defensive oriented howland team because their defensive personnel and chemistry absolutely sucked. their best shot this yr was to look to outrun and outscore their opponents. they won with their offense, not their defense. howland was not holding this UCLA team's players back on offense.