Jalen Hood-Schifino

[EvanZ]

Cason is a very different player with a different value proposition. The STL% is very important in this case because you're projecting a much higher level defender than JHS. His A:T is also better. I have my doubts about Cason as well though, and it's certainly fair to point out these concerns. Overall Cason's 8.0 BPM vs JHS 1.0 probably says a lot though.

[The Moose]

I’ll say right now I’ve barely watched JHS outside of clips this season, but his stat profile is so bad it suggests he’s at long odds of even being a 4 year+ nba career guy

We’ll see how high he ends up on draft night , he seems to have a big push from guys like Givony at the moment , but I doubt I would rate him as a 1st rounder

Really? What about his profile is so bad?

He is 6-6 point guard shooting over 35% from three, 77% from FT and averaging 4 assists per game. His overall fg% isn't great but if you watch IU play the spacing sucks, they play 2 real bigs all the time and that forces JHS to take a lot of runners and midrange shots. That and the only other guy that really creates his own shot on perimeter has been hurt for last 15 games or so. Meaning he has to take a ton of tough shots against shot clock.

I don't know about top 10, but I think he is a top 20 guy.

For me its a few things

-Negative BPM
its not a perfect stat by any means, but for draft prospects it seems to be a decent indicator, especially for the prospects who show up on the low end of it. Guys drafted who had a season of sub 1 BPM, generally speaking, have struggled to stick around.

-3 Dunks, 1.6 oreb rate, 0.4 blk rate for a 6'6 player
These numbers are really low for a player this size.
Its alarming for overall athleticism and physicality. If you look at the last 15 drafts, theres only 1 guy drafted who was 6'6 or taller, had less than 5 dunks, sub 2% OREB rate and sub 0.5 BLK rate, and that was Jon Diebler.
Drop it down to 6'5 you get 3 more guys, Ty Jerome, Andrew Nembhard and Sam Merrill.

- Sub 7 3pt/100, sub 20 FTR, 55% ATR
So he's a low volume 3pt shooter, but he also doesn't get to the line at all, and he's not a great finisher at the rim nor is he able to get there often. We're talking about a guy who relies heavily on mid range shot creating to provide the majority of his scoring, but he doesn't have elite shooting indicators either.
Only 3 guys I can see who were sub 7 3pt/100, sub 20 ftr, and sub 60% ATR, Avery Bradley, TyTy Washington and Marial Shayok

So when I add all these together, and throw in the poor steal rate, its just not a guy I would be interested in taking high

[EMG518]

I’ll say right now I’ve barely watched JHS outside of clips this season, but his stat profile is so bad it suggests he’s at long odds of even being a 4 year+ nba career guy

We’ll see how high he ends up on draft night , he seems to have a big push from guys like Givony at the moment , but I doubt I would rate him as a 1st rounder

Really? What about his profile is so bad?

He is 6-6 point guard shooting over 35% from three, 77% from FT and averaging 4 assists per game. His overall fg% isn't great but if you watch IU play the spacing sucks, they play 2 real bigs all the time and that forces JHS to take a lot of runners and midrange shots. That and the only other guy that really creates his own shot on perimeter has been hurt for last 15 games or so. Meaning he has to take a ton of tough shots against shot clock.

I don't know about top 10, but I think he is a top 20 guy.

For me its a few things

-Negative BPM
its not a perfect stat by any means, but for draft prospects it seems to be a decent indicator, especially for the prospects who show up on the low end of it. Guys drafted who had a season of sub 1 BPM, generally speaking, have struggled to stick around.

-3 Dunks, 1.6 oreb rate, 0.4 blk rate for a 6'6 player
These numbers are really low for a player this size.
Its alarming for overall athleticism and physicality. If you look at the last 15 drafts, theres only 1 guy drafted who was 6'6 or taller, had less than 5 dunks, sub 2% OREB rate and sub 0.5 BLK rate, and that was Jon Diebler.
Drop it down to 6'5 you get 3 more guys, Ty Jerome, Andrew Nembhard and Sam Merrill.

- Sub 7 3pt/100, sub 20 FTR, 55% ATR
So he's a low volume 3pt shooter, but he also doesn't get to the line at all, and he's not a great finisher at the rim nor is he able to get there often. We're talking about a guy who relies heavily on mid range shot creating to provide the majority of his scoring, but he doesn't have elite shooting indicators either.
Only 3 guys I can see who were sub 7 3pt/100, sub 20 ftr, and sub 60% ATR, Avery Bradley, TyTy Washington and Marial Shayok

So when I add all these together, and throw in the poor steal rate, its just not a guy I would be interested in taking high

I highly doubt he measures 6'6" and why would you not just compare him to people of his position. His physicality doesn't need to be compared to anyone other than his position and he plays physical and defends well. I don't know what the numbers are if you do it by position but seems silly to lump him in with a bunch of people that he wouldn't even be comparable too just because of him being a certain height.

Just looking at numbers gives no context at all either for the team dynamics or players he is playing with.

How is a low volume 3pt shooter even a thing, he literally just needs to make the decision to shoot more and that would likely be brought on by his coaching staff. He is a freshman.

He isn't ever going to be one of the attacking the rim type of athletes, he might get to the rim more if he had spacing to work with and wasn't playing in college.

Basically just a bunch of numbers without watching the player and no context for the team construct. Team would be terrible without him.

[EMG518]

The main thing is low 3pt volume. You really want his archetype shooting a lot more 3s. He also doesn't get to the rack nearly enough with a FTR < 0.2. That's really bad for someone who is supposedly a creator at the next level. If you don't shoot 3s at high volume and you don't get to the rack at high volume, that spells creation death at the next level. On top of that his STL% is super low for a wing.

Should I go on?

The main thing is low 3pt volume, so the main problem can be solved by shooting more. Seems difficult to fix. Have you watched him play, he is solid defensively, above average regardless of what his stl % is. Does he get to the rim enough, no, will he ever be high level there, probably not, but spacing with his team and playing a college certainly doesn't help either.

[EMG518]

Im not even saying I am for sure right, but the arguments I am hearing do not convince me of anything.

[clyde21]

Im not even saying I am for sure right, but the arguments I am hearing do not convince me of anything.

that works the other way too - what's the argument for JHS? if he was 6-3 instead of 6-6 would we be having any of these convos? he's a mediocre athlete at best, doesn't have any outlier ball or shooting skills, defensively he hasn't really been that good, and he's not setting college bball ablaze (sub 50% TS, 13 PER, 1 BPM, negative net rating, etc.)

i just don't know what archetype he fills for me other than MAYBE on-ball guard but I don't trust his creation juice at all as a primary playmaker for my team, so where does that leave him?

not saying he's a non-prospect but he's far from a confirmed 1st rounder either.

[EvanZ]

The main thing is low 3pt volume. You really want his archetype shooting a lot more 3s. He also doesn't get to the rack nearly enough with a FTR < 0.2. That's really bad for someone who is supposedly a creator at the next level. If you don't shoot 3s at high volume and you don't get to the rack at high volume, that spells creation death at the next level. On top of that his STL% is super low for a wing.

Should I go on?

The main thing is low 3pt volume, so the main problem can be solved by shooting more. Seems difficult to fix .

You do realize if he could shoot more, he would shoot more right? That's how this works. The reason some guys shoot more than others is generally being better shooters with quicker releases, more ability to shoot off movement and off the bounce.

I mean you do realize that not everyone can shoot as much as Steph or Klay just by "wanting" it right? Sheesh. I hope you realize that.

[Capn'O]

The positive archetype I see is SGA though I don't think he's as good

- big
- can get to his spots with deceptive quickness (SGAs quickness was supposedly a weakness)
- crafty finisher
- good midrange
- leadership qualities
- seems to put in the work to reach his highest potential
- slow long ball but you do need to respect it
- good but not elite passer

Where it falls short is he's not as good at getting to the cup and not as efficient across the board. But that's the archetype for success.

[clyde21]

The positive archetype I see is SGA though I don't think he's as good

- big
- can get to his spots with deceptive quickness (SGAs quickness was supposedly a weakness)
- crafty finisher
- good midrange
- leadership qualities
- seems to put in the work to reach his highest potential
- slow long ball but you do need to respect it
- good but not elite passer

Where it falls short is he's not as good at getting to the cup and not as efficient across the board. But that's the archetype for success.

interesting comp but i'd say he's closer to SGA's cousin NAW than he is to SGA, SGA was just better across the board, a better athlete who had a lot of room to grow still in terms of his body, had a much better A/TO ratio coming out and shot the ball better too, also had almost 4x the FT rate that JHS has.

[The-Power]

Yeah, FTr is key here. People talk about Harden and Embiid as relying on FTs but SGA without the ability to draw fouls at an obscene rate just isn't SGA. He'd immediately go from great efficiency to below average efficiency as a scorer and that changes everything.

[Capn'O]

The positive archetype I see is SGA though I don't think he's as good

- big
- can get to his spots with deceptive quickness (SGAs quickness was supposedly a weakness)
- crafty finisher
- good midrange
- leadership qualities
- seems to put in the work to reach his highest potential
- slow long ball but you do need to respect it
- good but not elite passer

Where it falls short is he's not as good at getting to the cup and not as efficient across the board. But that's the archetype for success.

interesting comp but i'd say he's closer to SGA's cousin NAW than he is to SGA, SGA was just better across the board, a better athlete who had a lot of room to grow still in terms of his body, had a much better A/TO ratio coming out and shot the ball better too, also had almost 4x the FT rate that JHS has.

Absolutely, SGA was just a flat out better prospect but he was somewhat underrated as a prospect as well because his strengths weren't as eye popping as some other guys. That's the comp. JHS has a shiftiness about him... plays with good pace at his size... that I think gets lost in the shuffle. I see a path to him becoming a good pro.

I LOVED SGA. I like JHS.

[mattao313]

Denzel Valentine

Sent from my SM-A528B using RealGM mobile app

[EMG518]

The main thing is low 3pt volume. You really want his archetype shooting a lot more 3s. He also doesn't get to the rack nearly enough with a FTR < 0.2. That's really bad for someone who is supposedly a creator at the next level. If you don't shoot 3s at high volume and you don't get to the rack at high volume, that spells creation death at the next level. On top of that his STL% is super low for a wing.

Should I go on?

The main thing is low 3pt volume, so the main problem can be solved by shooting more. Seems difficult to fix .

You do realize if he could shoot more, he would shoot more right? That's how this works. The reason some guys shoot more than others is generally being better shooters with quicker releases, more ability to shoot off movement and off the bounce.

I mean you do realize that not everyone can shoot as much as Steph or Klay just by "wanting" it right? Sheesh. I hope you realize that.

You do realize if he could shoot more, doesn't mean he would shoot more. That's how that works.

He doesn't have to be Steph or Klay to get off more shots, Sheesh. I hope you realize that.

Insane thing to actually think he literally can't get off more shots. It has nothing to do with his role and being a freshman PG.

[EMG518]

Im not even saying I am for sure right, but the arguments I am hearing do not convince me of anything.

that works the other way too - what's the argument for JHS? if he was 6-3 instead of 6-6 would we be having any of these convos? he's a mediocre athlete at best, doesn't have any outlier ball or shooting skills, defensively he hasn't really been that good, and he's not setting college bball ablaze (sub 50% TS, 13 PER, 1 BPM, negative net rating, etc.)

i just don't know what archetype he fills for me other than MAYBE on-ball guard but I don't trust his creation juice at all as a primary playmaker for my team, so where does that leave him?

not saying he's a non-prospect but he's far from a confirmed 1st rounder either.

I don't really get why people keep bringing up his height in the conversation.

We are having the conversation about him as he is, not if he was a different sized person.

Mediocre athlete based off of what?
He can defend better than average and stays in front of his man.
He has quick feet and can change speeds pretty well and is able to get to his spots.

So he is mediocre because he isn't bouncy? There are alot of really good guards that aren't jump out of the gym athletes in the NBA if you hadn't noticed. Some of the best ones actually.

Not setting college basketball ablaze, most freshman don't but within his role on his team, he is vaulting this team into a much better position. They would be terrible without him.

I personally really like his shot and his ability to get his shot off over players, his ability to pull up in stride and have control to get his shot off, has enough quickness and ball control to get to his spots and take those shots and I like his passing although he makes some careless one at times.

His shot will get better, his decision making will improve, his body will improve.

I don't see him going outside the lottery personally but we will see.

[Hal14]

Agreed with a lot of the points made on this page by EvanZ and The Moose.

I've got JHS in the 1st round but late in the 1st round. The low BPM, low FTr, low 3 pt volume, the low number of dunks, lots of red flags. He's 27th on my board at the moment. Good player, though.

[JMAC3]

He is a hard guy to evaluate, because IU plays such a prehistoric offense.

I could see him coming back to college next year and being a top 5 player in the country next year. For a freshman he is very poised, he has really good lift on his shot and he has shown the ability to shoot it at a high level with 3 games with 5+ threes made this year.

He has a grown mans body as a freshman, I think he could be a very good combo guard that is a plus shooter and plus defender in the league.

[clyde21]

Im not even saying I am for sure right, but the arguments I am hearing do not convince me of anything.

that works the other way too - what's the argument for JHS? if he was 6-3 instead of 6-6 would we be having any of these convos? he's a mediocre athlete at best, doesn't have any outlier ball or shooting skills, defensively he hasn't really been that good, and he's not setting college bball ablaze (sub 50% TS, 13 PER, 1 BPM, negative net rating, etc.)

i just don't know what archetype he fills for me other than MAYBE on-ball guard but I don't trust his creation juice at all as a primary playmaker for my team, so where does that leave him?

not saying he's a non-prospect but he's far from a confirmed 1st rounder either.

I don't really get why people keep bringing up his height in the conversation.

We are having the conversation about him as he is, not if he was a different sized person.

Mediocre athlete based off of what?
He can defend better than average and stays in front of his man.
He has quick feet and can change speeds pretty well and is able to get to his spots.

So he is mediocre because he isn't bouncy? There are alot of really good guards that aren't jump out of the gym athletes in the NBA if you hadn't noticed. Some of the best ones actually.

Not setting college basketball ablaze, most freshman don't but within his role on his team, he is vaulting this team into a much better position. They would be terrible without him.

I personally really like his shot and his ability to get his shot off over players, his ability to pull up in stride and have control to get his shot off, has enough quickness and ball control to get to his spots and take those shots and I like his passing although he makes some careless one at times.

His shot will get better, his decision making will improve, his body will improve.

I don't see him going outside the lottery personally but we will see.

he's a mediocre athlete because he's a mediocre athlete, what do you mean based off what? based on watching him play. he's not really fast or quick twitch, doesn't have great stop-go, isn't paricularly explosive or strong, has issues consistently pressuring the rim, not a vertical threat, etc.

and he can stay in front of SOME but not all, also he hasn't displayed any tangible team defense prowess which is even more important in today's NBA than perimeter defense (and he's not even necessarily shut down in the case), so yea i'm not sure where this idea that he's good defender is coming from.

your entire argument is just "this and that and the other thing all will improve"...which is fine if you see a lot of room for improvement and want to make that bet but you can't expect everyone else to jump in and also make that bet in the lotto.

and again, at the end of the day the performance on the court kinda speaks for itself if the eye test isn't convincing and we're still talking about a guard with a sub 50% TS and seemingly bad impact metrics across the board.

[Hal14]

He is a hard guy to evaluate, because IU plays such a prehistoric offense.

I could see him coming back to college next year and being a top 5 player in the country next year. For a freshman he is very poised, he has really good lift on his shot and he has shown the ability to shoot it at a high level with 3 games with 5+ threes made this year.

He has a grown mans body as a freshman, I think he could be a very good combo guard that is a plus shooter and plus defender in the league.

Plenty of his HS games from last year are on youtube. And he was on the best HS basketball team on the planet.

It was a similar story then as well. Low 3 pt volume, didn't get to the rim a lot, relied a lot on middies off the dribble. Played with good pace, would push the ball up the floor but lacked burst to get by his man, lacked good athleticism to finish above the rim, not much wiggle. Defense was good but not great.

With that being said, he was a very good player last season at Montverde and he's been a good player at IU as a freshman. I think we all agree he's a 1st round pick. Question is, how high do you take him? Again, I have him at 27 at the moment..

[EvanZ]

The main thing is low 3pt volume, so the main problem can be solved by shooting more. Seems difficult to fix .

You do realize if he could shoot more, he would shoot more right? That's how this works. The reason some guys shoot more than others is generally being better shooters with quicker releases, more ability to shoot off movement and off the bounce.

I mean you do realize that not everyone can shoot as much as Steph or Klay just by "wanting" it right? Sheesh. I hope you realize that.

You do realize if he could shoot more, doesn't mean he would shoot more. That's how that works.

He doesn't have to be Steph or Klay to get off more shots, Sheesh. I hope you realize that.

Insane thing to actually think he literally can't get off more shots. It has nothing to do with his role and being a freshman PG.

Your logic is so bad. If he could take more 3s and was good at it, why in the world wouldn't he? How do you not get how stupid that sounds? It's like people who thought Tyson Chandler could get 30% usage if he wanted to. He just chose not to. If Kyle Korver could get 30% usage why didn't he? I mean he was an incredible shooter wasn't he? Hmm.

[EvanZ]

The positive archetype I see is SGA though I don't think he's as good

- big
- can get to his spots with deceptive quickness (SGAs quickness was supposedly a weakness)
- crafty finisher
- good midrange
- leadership qualities
- seems to put in the work to reach his highest potential
- slow long ball but you do need to respect it
- good but not elite passer

Where it falls short is he's not as good at getting to the cup and not as efficient across the board. But that's the archetype for success.

Yeah I mean you can't be SGA if you're not incredible at getting to the rim. That's literally his entire game. It's like saying someone's archetype is Klay if they could shoot better. It just doesn't work this way folks. You all are way too hopeful.