Doug McDermott

[shangrila]

Babbitt was 6-9, 218 with a 6-11 wingspan and a 38 inch vertical. Athletically he tested pretty good. Sure it has nothing to do with race?

Yes. As I said, I don't care enough about him to remember stuff like his combine measurements. I remember, vaguely, scouting reports during the season talking about his athleticism being a worry, same as Doug.

[greenandgold]

McDermott's a fascinating draft prospect. It's true that his incredible shooting numbers indicate he's going to be a solid NBA player at the very worst. It's also true that no player with such a low steals rate has ever become a credible NBA player.

Biggest offensive/defense disparity for a player I've ever seen. (Before you bring up Kyle Korver or Steve Novak or someone like that please look up their steals/blocks numbers in college. Far better than McDermott's numbers.)

[Catchall]

I think McDermott is skilled and crafty enough to carve out a niche in the league. His athleticism isn't great, but I don't think it's awful either. He's primarily a floor-spacer, but you look at what Boris Diaw is doing, and you have to think McDermott can do the same things. He would do well to pattern his game after Chris Mullen and learn some subtle hesitation moves off. He should use his shooting threat to develop a bit of a dribble-drive game.

[ManualRam]

mcdermott himself is down to depaul 29-27 at the end of the first half.
good thing he has teammates to score some points too.

[Novocaine]

did i say anything about him being a #2? no. i said complementary player

he could be a bad lotto pick because why? because he has the type of game that'll make scorers' jobs easier while still getting buckets within the flow of the offense as opposed to someone who forces his own offense and sucks at it?

explain

Seems pretty self-explanatory to me.

You see McDermott as a complimentary scorer (which I fully agree, especially if he plays as a wing). As a 3rd/4th option in a team. Spot on - as pretty much any other player with his size/athleticism who can't create off the dribble.

The problem is that McDermott's non-scoring contributions are somewhere between barely okay and flat out terrible.

So you're drafting a scorer in the top 10 to be merely a scoring role-player with bad defense. It's like picking Kawhi Leonard (another fantastic cutter) with putrid defense instead of elite defense. Or giving Leonard Matt Bonner's defense, rebounding and athleticism to go along his other scoring skills and smarts.

It doesn't make much sense to pick an elite scoring role-player with bad defense in the lottery because those guys aren't much more expensive in the free-market anyway. They're hard to find because few teams want a 3rd/4th option with bad defense.

[ManualRam]

did i say anything about him being a #2? no. i said complementary player

he could be a bad lotto pick because why? because he has the type of game that'll make scorers' jobs easier while still getting buckets within the flow of the offense as opposed to someone who forces his own offense and sucks at it?

explain

Seems pretty self-explanatory to me.

You see McDermott as a complimentary scorer (which I fully agree, especially if he plays as a wing). As a 3rd/4th option in a team. Spot on - as pretty much any other player with his size/athleticism who can't create off the dribble.

The problem is that McDermott's non-scoring contributions are somewhere between barely okay and flat out terrible.

So you're drafting a scorer in the top 10 to be merely a scoring role-player with bad defense. It's like picking Kawhi Leonard (another fantastic cutter) with putrid defense instead of elite defense. Or giving Leonard Matt Bonner's defense, rebounding and athleticism to go along his other scoring skills and smarts.

It doesn't make much sense to pick an elite scoring role-player with bad defense in the lottery because those guys aren't much more expensive in the free-market anyway. They're hard to find because few teams want a 3rd/4th option with bad defense.

that post wasn't directed to you so you didn't have to explain. the guy responded to my post that detailed the difference b/t mcdermott and a.morrison. he inferred that because mcdermott was less like morrison, he is less worthy of a lotto pick. then he didn't explain any further. a scorer who has a much more efficient, translatable offensive game is less worthy of a lotto pick?

and don't kid yourself. not every lotto pick, let alone every top 10 pick is taken because of their 2 way play or 2 way potential. mcdermott has a translatable offensive game, with a high floor and IMO a high probability of reaching his projection. he might always be a sieve in terms of man defense, but he's no boozer defensively. the effort, iq and awareness are there. at the very least he will be a player who makes the proper, timely rotations while playing with effort.

[Leslie Forman]

It doesn't make much sense to pick an elite scoring role-player with bad defense in the lottery because those guys aren't much more expensive in the free-market anyway. They're hard to find because few teams want a 3rd/4th option with bad defense.

Yeah, this is what people are completely overlooking. The NBA does not like guys who are good but not great at offense and a liability on defense. If this wasn't true, Trajan Langdon would have had a nice long career in the NBA, and Jimmer Fredette would not basically be having Trajan Langdon's career right now.

Kyle Korver can at least be just kinda bad at defense, and not a complete and utter liability. McDermott projects to be that kind of a liability. When you throw in his general tweener-ness (a thing the NBA also isn't exactly big on), the guy is really just a terrible prospect.

[No-Man]

Trajan Langdon was an amazing defender.

[FecesOfDeath]

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/creighton/2014.html#per_game::18

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/creighton/2014.html#per_game::19

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/creighton/2014.html#team_stats::none

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/creighton/2014.html#team_stats_conf::none

All of these links indicate the kind of defensive philosophy Greg McDermott has for Creighton. Stay in front of your man, don't take risks, keep your hands up, and gang rebound. IMO, Doug's defensive fantasy league stats are more of a product of the Creighton system than it is of a lack of defensive ability.

While it's true that a truly great defensive player would probably have high steal/block numbers in such a conservative system like Creighton's, I don't think Doug's low numbers can imply that he's a terrible defender.

[Leslie Forman]

While it's true that a truly great defensive player would probably have high steal/block numbers in such a conservative system like Creighton's, I don't think Doug's low numbers can imply that he's a terrible defender.

The only players on his own team with a worse steal % all play less than 5 minutes a game. When it comes to block %, it's three of those five guys plus three guys who are 6'0", 6'1", and 6'2".

It doesn't matter what the context is, his defense projects to be utterly horrendous at the NBA level.

[Novocaine]

did i say anything about him being a #2? no. i said complementary player

he could be a bad lotto pick because why? because he has the type of game that'll make scorers' jobs easier while still getting buckets within the flow of the offense as opposed to someone who forces his own offense and sucks at it?

explain

Seems pretty self-explanatory to me.

You see McDermott as a complimentary scorer (which I fully agree, especially if he plays as a wing). As a 3rd/4th option in a team. Spot on - as pretty much any other player with his size/athleticism who can't create off the dribble.

The problem is that McDermott's non-scoring contributions are somewhere between barely okay and flat out terrible.

So you're drafting a scorer in the top 10 to be merely a scoring role-player with bad defense. It's like picking Kawhi Leonard (another fantastic cutter) with putrid defense instead of elite defense. Or giving Leonard Matt Bonner's defense, rebounding and athleticism to go along his other scoring skills and smarts.

It doesn't make much sense to pick an elite scoring role-player with bad defense in the lottery because those guys aren't much more expensive in the free-market anyway. They're hard to find because few teams want a 3rd/4th option with bad defense.

that post wasn't directed to you so you didn't have to explain. the guy responded to my post that detailed the difference b/t mcdermott and a.morrison. he inferred that because mcdermott was less like morrison, he is less worthy of a lotto pick. then he didn't explain any further. a scorer who has a much more efficient, translatable offensive game is less worthy of a lotto pick?

and don't kid yourself. not every lotto pick, let alone every top 10 pick is taken because of their 2 way play or 2 way potential. mcdermott has a translatable offensive game, with a high floor and IMO a high probability of reaching his projection. he might always be a sieve in terms of man defense, but he's no boozer defensively. the effort, iq and awareness are there. at the very least he will be a player who makes the proper, timely rotations while playing with effort.

I didn't have to explain, I wanted to. If you don't want people to comment on your posts, perhaps you shouldn't publish them on a public message board.

I never said that "every top 10 pick is taken because of their 2 way play" so I'm not why you brought that up. Instead of addressing my post you used a strawman - because you cant' defend your own position.

You're the one who projected McDermott as a complimentary scorer, a 3rd option at best. Fact is that 3rd scoring options with bad defense aren't that valuable. There's a disconnect between your own evaluation of McDermott and your own projection on where he should be drafted.

[Novocaine]

Trajan Langdon was an amazing defender.

That's quite an overstatement. He was solid, good even, after playing for Messina. Before that he was pretty mediocre. And he was good within the context he was playing - in the NBA he'd have instantly regressed due to the size disparity.

All of these links indicate the kind of defensive philosophy Greg McDermott has for Creighton. Stay in front of your man, don't take risks, keep your hands up, and gang rebound. IMO, Doug's defensive fantasy league stats are more of a product of the Creighton system than it is of a lack of defensive ability.

While it's true that a truly great defensive player would probably have high steal/block numbers in such a conservative system like Creighton's, I don't think Doug's low numbers can imply that he's a terrible defender.

I actually don't care much about numbers. He's simply too slow to guard NBA wings.

[jakenc]

I like the idea of my Bobcats taking McDermott with Detroit's pick should we get it. I feel like a shooter of his caliber could be extremely beneficial to MKG and Kemba, but I'm not sure if his faults in other areas are worth it. I imagine McDermott could play a Korver shooting guard style on offense and on defense MKG could handle the opposing team's best wing player.

[ManualRam]

Seems pretty self-explanatory to me.

You see McDermott as a complimentary scorer (which I fully agree, especially if he plays as a wing). As a 3rd/4th option in a team. Spot on - as pretty much any other player with his size/athleticism who can't create off the dribble.

The problem is that McDermott's non-scoring contributions are somewhere between barely okay and flat out terrible.

So you're drafting a scorer in the top 10 to be merely a scoring role-player with bad defense. It's like picking Kawhi Leonard (another fantastic cutter) with putrid defense instead of elite defense. Or giving Leonard Matt Bonner's defense, rebounding and athleticism to go along his other scoring skills and smarts.

It doesn't make much sense to pick an elite scoring role-player with bad defense in the lottery because those guys aren't much more expensive in the free-market anyway. They're hard to find because few teams want a 3rd/4th option with bad defense.

that post wasn't directed to you so you didn't have to explain. the guy responded to my post that detailed the difference b/t mcdermott and a.morrison. he inferred that because mcdermott was less like morrison, he is less worthy of a lotto pick. then he didn't explain any further. a scorer who has a much more efficient, translatable offensive game is less worthy of a lotto pick?

and don't kid yourself. not every lotto pick, let alone every top 10 pick is taken because of their 2 way play or 2 way potential. mcdermott has a translatable offensive game, with a high floor and IMO a high probability of reaching his projection. he might always be a sieve in terms of man defense, but he's no boozer defensively. the effort, iq and awareness are there. at the very least he will be a player who makes the proper, timely rotations while playing with effort.

I didn't have to explain, I wanted to. If you don't want people to comment on your posts, perhaps you shouldn't publish them on a public message board.

I never said that "every top 10 pick is taken because of their 2 way play" so I'm not why you brought that up. Instead of addressing my post you used a strawman - because you cant' defend your own position.

You're the one who projected McDermott as a complimentary scorer, a 3rd option at best. Fact is that 3rd scoring options with bad defense aren't that valuable. There's a disconnect between your own evaluation of McDermott and your own projection on where he should be drafted.

no, you were right the first time. you didn't have to explain. that post wasn't directed towards you. you weren't part of the conversation. i asked him specifically why the difference b/t mcdermott and morrison offensively makes doug less worthy of a lotto pick. then you come in with your own reasons which had nothing to do with the initial point-counterpoint. you could've just posted your own thoughts without even quoting me.

if a team isn't drafting a potential star, of which there are 1-2, maybe 3 per typical draft, the team would be looking for a role player of varying degrees, but still a role player nonetheless. players aren't only taken for potential, but the likelihood of that player reaching his potential is taken into consideration too. it's a conservative approach to drafting, but an approach that has been taken plenty of times, often times working out. like i said, imo, the likelihood of mcdermott reaching his potential, of being able to play a beneficial role and his baseline as a player are greater than a number of players projected to be around the same range. conversely, there are players with more potential around that range, but there is more risk involved with them when you consider their baselines as players as well as their bust potential. players who "only" project to be 1 way, complementary scorers can, have and will be taken in the lotto whether you think they should be or not. look no further than last yr's #1 overall pick. you can only hope that a guy like bennett ever becomes a 3rd option scorer... and as a 6'7 PF he wasn't exactly taken for his defensive potential. similar sentiments could be said about kelly olynyk, cj mccollum and shabazz who were all taken in the lotto as well.

[LloydFree]

I like the idea of my Bobcats taking McDermott with Detroit's pick should we get it. I feel like a shooter of his caliber could be extremely beneficial to MKG and Kemba, but I'm not sure if his faults in other areas are worth it. I imagine McDermott could play a Korver shooting guard style on offense and on defense MKG could handle the opposing team's best wing player.

If the Detroit pick owed to the Bobcats is before the 76ers' pick, I would also love to see the Bobcats select McDermott. It would get him off the board. And It would help push some potential starting NBA talent down the board to teams that need potential starters.

[DashGlobal]

I like the idea of my Bobcats taking McDermott with Detroit's pick should we get it. I feel like a shooter of his caliber could be extremely beneficial to MKG and Kemba, but I'm not sure if his faults in other areas are worth it. I imagine McDermott could play a Korver shooting guard style on offense and on defense MKG could handle the opposing team's best wing player.

If the Detroit pick owed to the Bobcats is before the 76ers' pick, I would also love to see the Bobcats select McDermott. It would get him off the board. And It would help push some potential starting NBA talent down the board to teams that need potential starters.

Bobcats are taking a SG if they have the Det pick.

[jmnvcavs]

Basically some people are just seeing another white American in the first round, assuming he'll bust because many others with that trait have in the past, then trying to rationalize that those players compare in a more significant way rather than that trivial one.

Ugh, no. My comparison had nothing to do with race. They have, as I said, similar numbers in college. I'll admit that's about as far as I looked, since I never really cared about Babbitt, but I wouldn't have really cared what "colour" they were. Two prospects known for shooting high percentages, rebounding well but lacking NBA athleticism? Well, crap, must be their race that makes them similar!

Babbitt was 6-9, 218 with a 6-11 wingspan and a 38 inch vertical. Athletically he tested pretty good. Sure it has nothing to do with race?

Also at Nevada he played nowhere near as good as Doug.

If Babbitt stayed till his Senior year he would of been putting up crazy numbers. As a sophomore he put up 22/9/2

Which is pretty similar to Mcdermotts sophmore year.

[Slartibartfast]

Ugh, no. My comparison had nothing to do with race. They have, as I said, similar numbers in college. I'll admit that's about as far as I looked, since I never really cared about Babbitt, but I wouldn't have really cared what "colour" they were. Two prospects known for shooting high percentages, rebounding well but lacking NBA athleticism? Well, crap, must be their race that makes them similar!

Babbitt was 6-9, 218 with a 6-11 wingspan and a 38 inch vertical. Athletically he tested pretty good. Sure it has nothing to do with race?

Also at Nevada he played nowhere near as good as Doug.

If Babbitt stayed till his Senior year he would of been putting up crazy numbers. As a sophomore he put up 22/9/2

Which is pretty similar to Mcdermotts sophmore year.

Except McDermott shot a full 10% better from the field (60% vs. 50%). And out-produced him per minute as a scorer too.

If we're going to keep this in the unathletic white guy realm, Babbitt compares better to Morrison. He was an iso-heavy player in college who created most of his own looks and has struggled to adjust to a lesser, off-ball role in the pros.

Dougie's a great bet to be a better pro than Babbs. He's far more proven as an off-ball threat and a better shooter from deep.

[Dr Positivity]

Ryan Anderson, seriously? I've never seen Anderson display half of McDermott's versatility. Dougie might not ever become as valuable a player as Anderson if he fails to transition well, but they are nothing alike in terms of style.

While McDermott may have a more rounded skillset right now, one has to project NBA teams/systems will use him. And that's probably as a guy who stands at the 3 point line and shoots open shots. McDermott will not be posting up power forwards in the NBA. Which is a case to play him at the 3, but that takes away some of the advantages compared to a 4 as good at shooting as McDermott

[Tave]

Ryan Anderson, seriously? I've never seen Anderson display half of McDermott's versatility. Dougie might not ever become as valuable a player as Anderson if he fails to transition well, but they are nothing alike in terms of style.

While McDermott may have a more rounded skillset right now, one has to project NBA teams/systems will use him. And that's probably as a guy who stands at the 3 point line and shoots open shots. McDermott will not be posting up power forwards in the NBA. Which is a case to play him at the 3, but that takes away some of the advantages compared to a 4 as good at shooting as McDermott

Ultimately it's up to the other team who they choose to guard you. I think you'll see Doug moving a lot more off the ball than Ryan Anderson. Like I said, will he ever be as good? Who knows...I just think people are selling his talent really short.