Ruzious wrote:But offensively, what skills does Reddish really have? To me, he looks like a sloppy ball-handler, and his shooting stats are awful. Blaming his shooting on poor spacing is nonsensical. If he had any kind of jump shot, he should have made a high percentage. And it's not like that was something new - he was a bad percentage shooter in the Nike league he played in. He's a talented versatile defender, and that has value but at this point - that's all of his value - and he's not exactly known as a high energy guy. What he has going for him is that he looks the part and is a good athlete who can defend athletic players. He is not an all-around player, and I don't see any reason to expect that to change.
He shot a better percentage from FT in college than Bradley Beal did. He also shot a very similar percentage to Bradley Beal form 3. People don't blame his shooting percentages on poor spacing. We blame his low fg % on poor spacing because it makes it harder to finish at the rim. His low shooting percentage should be looked at in context. The dude shot 7.4 threes a game. How many of those were good shots and how many of those were bad shots? Also, that was a completely different role than he's been in his entire career. He played PG in high school. Does his ball-handling need improvement? Yes. But you're a Wizard fan. How much better were Beal's handles coming out of college than Reddish's?
I'll also point out that many people here are forming opinion on Cam solely from his time at Duke. Cam Reddish has been under the fixed lens of scouts since he entered high school. You take one year and look at it in isolation and you can come to these conclusions. https://www.aseaofblue.com/2017/6/29/15892288/john-calipari-cameron-reddish-pg-team-usa-basketball
I've read reports from scouts that go to Duke practices and they say that he has stretches where he looks like he's the best player on the floor. His low shooting percentages are concerning, but I put him in the Bradley Beal category tbh. Read his scouting report from The Athletic. They call him a potentially elite shooter. He's not going to stop being polarizing, but if you look at him in context, you'll understand why scouts love him. Not only does he project as a shooter, but he's also a solid playmaker and when he improves his handles (something that's easily improvable) he'll be a nightmare to guard defensively. Along with the potential to play great defense.
All these haters in here remind me of how the Bobcats cut Boris Diaw. Diaw then leaves and becomes a major cog on the Spurs championship team. Context for a basketball player is everything. Cam played a completely different role, on an offense that wasn't suited to him all while facing the fact that his ball handling simply was not good enough to get to the rim consistently. His ball handling can be improved and in the NBA he'll be playing a role much more beneficial for him. You can write off what I'm saying as potential, but the reality is that the great GM's and scouts look past a general notion of "potential" and to a realm of specifics. How does this player fit with our current personnel. How does this player fit into our team culture. How hard does this player work on his game. What does his coach say. What does his development year to year show.
If all you know of Cam is from his time at Duke, then you don't know Cam. Hopefully the Wiz are smart enough to draft him if players from the top tier are gone.
