PIF's Sheldon McClellan Thread

[fishercob]

Kid can play. Deserves to make the team. Deserves his own thread too.

Fish, you must have a crystal ball -- http://www.espn.com/blog/nba/rumors/post/_/id/39610/nba-rumor-central-sheldon-mcclellan-has-good-chance-to-stick-with-wizards

McClellan, House, AND Ochefu make the team. David Pick got some bad info from his source. If any of these rooks contribute and/or go on to decent careers with the Wiz, the sting of not having/using any draft picks will be significantly mitigated. Could be a good sign in the Wizards' shift in thinking.

[payitforward]

Not only did those guys make the team, but every player who attended Training Camp or played in SL or even if they just wanted to play in SL -- every single one of those guys got a trophy because it's important to make it clear that everyone counts.

[tontoz]

I am really shocked this guy is on the team. When was the last time an undrafted rookie made the roster?

Usually EG prefers a guy who has sucked for other teams. Once a guy has firmly established his sucktitude then EG swoops in with a multi-year guaranteed deal.

[payitforward]

Bumping this thread, as I'm surprised that the last post was in October! McClellan is playing more & playing well. Lets not miss this window! Who knows when it will close? Or the glass break?

This kid is playing extremely well. It's a very small sample size, etc. etc. etc. -- but, hey, he could be playing bad in a small sample size too! Right? Deserves some love....

McClellan was born in '92, so even though he's a rookie he's not a raw player. And, it's notable that he plays like an experienced guy. He doesn't turn the ball over, he doesn't foul, he gets a good number of steals, he gets assists, & he's an ok rebounder for a guard as well.

Sheldon is also tall enough, long enough & athletic enough that he defends one on one well -- though in truth I'm relying on the "eye test" for that statement. He looks good in team defense as well -- once again that's eyeball-based.

He's not a volume scorer, but he's not a low-frequency scorer either (scores a little more than Kelly Oubre, for example), & his scoring helps the team, because he's quite an efficient scorer. Despite only shooting 25% on 3-point shots (on only 20 shots overall, & it's going up as well), he has an outstanding TS% of 55.6%. Why? Because he's 89.5% from the line and 54.8% on 2-pointers. He's gotten to the line at a pretty good rate too (e.g. 50% more frequently than Oubre).

Small sample size, etc. etc. etc. But, so far at least, this is a pretty good NBA player! Lets see whether he can maintain his numbers as teams get used to seeing him.

[nate33]

Bumping this thread, as I'm surprised that the last post was in October! McClellan is playing more & playing well. Lets not miss this window! Who knows when it will close? Or the glass break?

This kid is playing extremely well. It's a very small sample size, etc. etc. etc. -- but, hey, he could be playing bad in a small sample size too! Right? Deserves some love....

McClellan was born in '92, so even though he's a rookie he's not a raw player. And, it's notable that he plays like an experienced guy. He doesn't turn the ball over, he doesn't foul, he gets a good number of steals, he gets assists, & he's an ok rebounder for a guard as well.

Sheldon is also tall enough, long enough & athletic enough that he defends one on one well -- though in truth I'm relying on the "eye test" for that statement. He looks good in team defense as well -- once again that's eyeball-based.

He's not a volume scorer, but he's not a low-frequency scorer either (scores a little more than Kelly Oubre, for example), & his scoring helps the team, because he's quite an efficient scorer. Despite only shooting 25% on 3-point shots (on only 20 shots overall, & it's going up as well), he has an outstanding TS% of 55.6%. Why? Because he's 89.5% from the line and 54.8% on 2-pointers. He's gotten to the line at a pretty good rate too (e.g. 50% more frequently than Oubre).

Small sample size, etc. etc. etc. But, so far at least, this is a pretty good NBA player! Lets see whether he can maintain his numbers as teams get used to seeing him.

At this point, there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to play Thornton over McClellan.

It's looking like we have our minimum salary backup SG for 2017/18. That's a big help for our depth. We desperately need players who are values on a production/cost basis. We have one in Oubre. McClellan should make 2. And if Jason Smith continues to play this well, he's a value contract too.

[Ruzious]

Might as well see what we have, but I'm not at the point that I believe McClellan is an answer to the #2 2 guard position. I'd like to see him get the time and touches to try to prove himself.

[payitforward]

@Ruz -- well, no, of course not. Still... so far so good, which is better than "so far so bad" -- i.e. burke/nicholson/thornton/smith (despite some improved play)/morris/satoransky/ochefu/house/mahinmi (b/c of injury). 9 of 15, wow...!

[DCZards]

No doubt that this thread deserves this timely bump...and that Sheldon get the minutes that had been going to Thornton. And I think PIF is spot on about the strengths that experienced college players bring with them to the NBA. I think that's why you see guys like Chicago's Valentine, Malcolm Brogan and a few others showing that they can be immediate contributors at the pro level.

I believe we'll start seeing more NBA team taking longer looks at some of the 4-year college players.

BTW, Smith or Morris belong on the "so bad" list, imo.

[Ruzious]

Kid can play. Deserves to make the team. Deserves his own thread too.

Fish, you must have a crystal ball -- http://www.espn.com/blog/nba/rumors/post/_/id/39610/nba-rumor-central-sheldon-mcclellan-has-good-chance-to-stick-with-wizards

McClellan, House, AND Ochefu make the team. David Pick got some bad info from his source. If any of these rooks contribute and/or go on to decent careers with the Wiz, the sting of not having/using any draft picks will be significantly mitigated. Could be a good sign in the Wizards' shift in thinking.

I'd cut House and pick up the best D League PG - Briante Weber. At least he's fun to watch because he's a maniac on defense. He will disrupt offenses and cause turnovers, and he can run, dribble, and pass. He can't shoot, but we're talking D Leaguers - you're not going to find players to build around there.

[pcbothwel]

No doubt that this thread deserves this timely bump...and that Sheldon get the minutes that had been going to Thornton. And I think PIF is spot on about the strengths that experienced college players bring with them to the NBA. I think that's why you see guys like Chicago's Valentine, Malcolm Brogan and a few others showing that they can be immediate contributors at the pro level.

I believe we'll start seeing more NBA team taking longer looks at some of the 4-year college players.

BTW, Smith or Morris belong on the "so bad" list, imo.

PIF, I dont want to call out CCJ or anyone else per se, but Valentine has been pretty bad by every single measurement and he is far from a raw/high ceiling player. SSS aside, Mclellan looks like a better player than Valentine.

[gambitx777]

Does any one else see the similarities between McCellans box scores and the box scores of Raja bell's first couple years in the league. McCellan could end up being Raja Bell part 2.

[payitforward]

PIF, I dont want to call out CCJ or anyone else per se, but Valentine has been pretty bad by every single measurement and he is far from a raw/high ceiling player. SSS aside, Mclellan looks like a better player than Valentine.

It takes a while to get a Valentine. We have to wait another month to know what he's got to give.

[payitforward]

McClellan has been waaaaaaay waaaaaay better than Denzel Valentine so far.

[AFM]

McClellan baby!!! The new Jarell Eddie!!!

[payitforward]

...BTW, Smith or Morris belong on the "so bad" list, imo.

Do you mean they do belong there? I.e. where I put them. Or that they don't belong there?

Morris has been awful, CCJ. He's averaging 7.6 boards per 40 minutes -- at the PF position. & he's shooting horribly as well. 31% on 3s, and a TS% that's way below an average big. Markieff Morris is just a terrible player.

Smith has improved the last bunch of games, no question. If he keeps it up, he'll be off the "so bad" list for sure. That would be great. All the same, on the season so far, that's right where he belongs.

[payitforward]

McClellan baby!!! The new Jarell Eddie!!!

No way. He's a much better player. Plus, Eddie had exactly one good outing.

Still... not predicting stardom for Sheldon McClellan! But it's nice to see him doing well.

[DCZards]

...BTW, Smith or Morris belong on the "so bad" list, imo.

Do you mean they do belong there? I.e. where I put them. Or that they don't belong there?

Morris has been awful, CCJ. He's averaging 7.6 boards per 40 minutes -- at the PF position. & he's shooting horribly as well. 31% on 3s, and a TS% that's way below an average big. Markieff Morris is just a terrible player.

Smith has improved the last bunch of games, no question. If he keeps it up, he'll be off the "so bad" list for sure. That would be great. All the same, on the season so far, that's right where he belongs.

Well, at least we agree that Kieff has played well recently. Over the last 5 games, he's averaging 16 pts., over 7 rebs and is shooting 47% from 3pt range. Maybe most importantly, he's made some clutch baskets in 2 or 3 games over the past couple of weeks.

[nate33]

...BTW, Smith or Morris belong on the "so bad" list, imo.

Do you mean they do belong there? I.e. where I put them. Or that they don't belong there?

Morris has been awful, CCJ. He's averaging 7.6 boards per 40 minutes -- at the PF position. & he's shooting horribly as well. 31% on 3s, and a TS% that's way below an average big. Markieff Morris is just a terrible player.

Smith has improved the last bunch of games, no question. If he keeps it up, he'll be off the "so bad" list for sure. That would be great. All the same, on the season so far, that's right where he belongs.

Well, at least we agree that Kieff has played well recently. Over the last 5 games, he's averaging 16 pts., over 7 rebs and is shooting 47% from 3pt range. Maybe most importantly, he's made some clutch baskets in 2 or 3 games over the past couple of weeks.

We're getting into small sample size theater though. In the last 5 games, he has made 8 of 17 3-pointers. Basically, one good game in which he hit 3 for 3 makes that whole 5-game stretch look good. If you look at the last 10 games, he has made 10 of 29 for a 3P% of .345.

Outside of his 3 point shooting, he's been the same old lackluster player. His rebounding stinks. His team defense is pretty poor. He doesn't block shots.

[DCZards]

Do you mean they do belong there? I.e. where I put them. Or that they don't belong there?

Morris has been awful, CCJ. He's averaging 7.6 boards per 40 minutes -- at the PF position. & he's shooting horribly as well. 31% on 3s, and a TS% that's way below an average big. Markieff Morris is just a terrible player.

Smith has improved the last bunch of games, no question. If he keeps it up, he'll be off the "so bad" list for sure. That would be great. All the same, on the season so far, that's right where he belongs.

Well, at least we agree that Kieff has played well recently. Over the last 5 games, he's averaging 16 pts., over 7 rebs and is shooting 47% from 3pt range. Maybe most importantly, he's made some clutch baskets in 2 or 3 games over the past couple of weeks.

We're getting into small sample size theater though. In the last 5 games, he has made 8 of 17 3-pointers. Basically, one good game in which he hit 3 for 3 makes that whole 5-game stretch look good. If you look at the last 10 games, he has made 10 of 29 for a 3P% of .345.

Outside of his 3 point shooting, he's been the same old lackluster player. His rebounding stinks. His team defense is pretty poor. He doesn't block shots.

But, despite his shortcomings, there's no doubt that Kieff has helped the Zards win games over this last month or so where the team has mostly played well, including winning 11 in row at home. Could Kieff be a better player? Absolutely. But he hasn't been bad for a fifth offensive option among the starters.

BTW, do we give Kieff any credit for the rebounds that Gortat or another teammate gets because Kief is blocking out? Posters here used to praise Nene for that. And I noticed you didn't say anything about Kieff's man-to-man defense. Does he get credit for being good at that?

My biggest problems with Kieff are his bad fouls and lack of effort on occasion. But the fact that he's not a top PF with an all-around game doesn't mean he's not contributing to the team's recent success. And that's my one and only point.

[Meliorus]

Well, at least we agree that Kieff has played well recently. Over the last 5 games, he's averaging 16 pts., over 7 rebs and is shooting 47% from 3pt range. Maybe most importantly, he's made some clutch baskets in 2 or 3 games over the past couple of weeks.

We're getting into small sample size theater though. In the last 5 games, he has made 8 of 17 3-pointers. Basically, one good game in which he hit 3 for 3 makes that whole 5-game stretch look good. If you look at the last 10 games, he has made 10 of 29 for a 3P% of .345.

Outside of his 3 point shooting, he's been the same old lackluster player. His rebounding stinks. His team defense is pretty poor. He doesn't block shots.

But, despite his shortcomings, there's no doubt that Kieff has helped the Zards win games over this last month or so where the team has mostly played well, including winning 11 in row at home. Could Kieff be a better player? Absolutely. But he hasn't been bad for a fifth offensive option among the starters.

BTW, do we give Kieff any credit for the rebounds that Gortat or another teammate gets because Kief is blocking out? Posters here used to praise Nene for that.

Morris has been mediocre. Does he make plays that help us win games? Definitely. Are we a better team when he's on the court? That's debatable, his RPM ranks 41st among power forwards and is actually a -0.21. The good things that Markieff Morris does on the basketball court are offset by the bad things. The result is a net negative.

He's a classic example of opportunity cost. Getting Morris means we lost the pick which could have drafted a promising young player on a dirt-cheap contract. Getting Morris means we didn't trade the pick for a better player. Getting Morris means the front office gets delusional and thinks our starting PF spot is covered, when in reality, we should have signed one in free agency.