Stuckey vs Young

[princeofpalace]

So the question of Stuckey vs Young came up in the Wizards-Pistons bench debate which gave me the idea for this poll. These guards were drafted right after eachother Stuckey at 15 for Detroit and Young at 16 for the Wizards.

Stuckey is a 6'5 PG- who is as strong as he is fast, he is developing a quality midrange J but cant hit a 3 to save his life. He relies more on both his speed and strength to get into the paint at will and convert than on his jumpshot; as a result, he averages around 2.6 trips to the FT line a game. Stuckey is a good defender especially for a rookie guard and has the ability to take over games, which is impressive considering his youth.

Nick Young is a 6'7 SG with an explosive first step and a crazy vertical. Nick Young has a great looking jumpshot with range out to the 3 point line. He relies more on jumpshooting than driving to the basket because that is is biggest strength. But when he does get into the paint it is usually very pretty because of his amazing vertical leap of around 40inches. Young has shown that he can get it done on the big stage with good performances against teams like the Lakers and Suns.

Rodney Stuckey
18.7 mpg 7.5ppg 41%FG 18%3 80%FT 1.7RPG 2.8APG .9SPG


Nick Young
15.2 mpg 7.4ppg 44%FG 40%3PT 80%FT 1.6RPG .8APG .5SPG

Which rookie do you think had the better season and has more potential to be the better player?

[ponder276]

So the question of Stuckey vs Young came up in the Wizards-Pistons bench debate which gave me the idea for this poll. These guards were drafted right after eachother Stuckey at 15 for Detroit and Young at 16 for the Wizards.

Stuckey is a 6'5 PG- who is as strong as he is fast, he is developing a quality midrange J but cant hit a 3 to save his life. He relies more on both his speed and strength to get into the paint at will and convert than on his jumpshot; as a result, he averages around 6.5 trips to the FT line a game. Stuckey is a good defender especially for a rookie guard and has the ability to take over games, which is impressive considering his youth.

Nick Young is a 6'7 SG with an explosive first step and a crazy vertical. Nick Young has a great looking jumpshot with range out to the 3 point line. He relies more on jumpshooting than driving to the basket because that is is biggest strength. But when he does get into the paint it is usually very pretty because of his amazing vertical leap of around 40inches. Young has shown that he can get it done on the big stage with good performances against teams like the Lakers and Suns.

Rodney Stuckey
18.7 mpg 7.5ppg 41%FG 18%3 80%FT 1.7RPG 2.8APG .9SPG


Nick Young
15.2 mpg 7.4ppg 44%FG 40%3PT 80%FT 1.6RPG .8APG .5SPG

Which rookie do you think had the better season and has more potential to be the better player?

Not that stats actually mean a lot for rookies, especially when they are this close, but if you adjust for minutes, the stats look like:

Rodney Stuckey (18.7 mpg)
7.5PPG, .409 / .188 / .800, 1.7RPG, 2.8APG, 0.9SPG

Nick Young (adjusted to from 15.2 to 18.7 mpg)
9.1PPG, .439 / .404 / .811, 2.0RPG, 1.0APG, 0.6SPG


They had very similar season, but I like Nick Young's potential more. To me, Young just looks like more of a special player when he plays. He scores with a similar style to Kobe, and that style of scoring is proven to translate well at the NBA level for SGs. I see Nick Young being a 20 ppg scorer in this league, and I don't see that in Stuckey at all. Stuckey scores with power in the paint like a SF or even PF, but that's always gonna be a tough way for a small guy to get a lot of points, even if he is pretty strong. I haven't seen enough of them to really comment on their defense.

Also, Stuckey averages 2.6 FTA/G, not the 6.5 you listed. That is a HUGE difference. Nick Young averages 1.7 FTA/G (after you adjust him up to Stuckey's minutes), which is a fair bit less, but he still gets to the line a decent amount.

[fugop]

This is an interesting comparison, as many Wizards fans were hoping that Stuckey would be available at our pick, and had him ranked over Young. The thought was that he would be a better complement to Arenas in the backcourt, sharing ball handling duties and exploiting lanes opened up by the Wizards' spacing, while Young, as more of a pure scorer, would probably struggle to get the touches he deserves playing with three other top level scorers.

I think most Wizards fans have been pleasantly surprised with Young, though. He is a pure scorer, but he's a much better one than we thought he would be. He has incredible range, he's a solid finisher inside, and he's got unworldly athleticism. There's not much more you can ask for from a non-lottery pick.

He still makes stupid decisions -- twice last night, he held the ball until too late in the shot clock, then passed to a teammate. But he's improved remarkably over the course of the season, and the coaching staff seems to be taking the right course with him. He also doesn't rebound as well as a guy with his athleticism should, and he turns the ball over too much.

Comparing the two, the first number that stands out is that Young's eFG is way higher. Young's eFG is 45% on jumpers, Stuckey 36%. On inside shots, Stuckey shoots 48%, Young 58%. Almost twice as many of Stuckey's shots are inside, though, so the total eFG difference is 41.4% v. 48%.

The next number is turnovers. Young has way too many for what he does -- and they are almost all ball handling turnovers. Stuckey turns the ball over at a fairly high rate as well, but his are generally off passes, something you'd expect from a guy playing point. Young's to rate is really just inexcusable.

Their draw foul rates and rebound rates are close, though Stuckey's better on both. I haven't seen Stuckey play enough to actually know how he is as a defender, but there isn't much differentiation in any of the statistical measures.

Basically, if you want a scorer, I'd go Young, a more rounded player, Stuckey.

[princeofpalace]

^
I somehow confused FGA with FTA but yeah Stuck gets 2.63 to Youngs 1.64

I disagree that Stuckey is going to have trouble scoring in this league though. Its not like he is backing his man down in the post to score, he is scoring off his speed. He does have the ability to post up considering that he is bigger than the average point and that is something that I cant wait to see more of. But he scores mostly because of his speed, he can split double teams, and beat his man off the dribble once he is in the lane his strengh helps his body control and allows him to convert off of contact. I really value his ability to get into the paint at will but maybe that is because nobody else on Detroits team has that same ability. Also- he does have a solid jumpshot although it is a very ugly jumpshot but defenders respect it which makes him getting into the pain even easier.

When Stuckey first got back from his injury (missing 25 games due to 3 broken bones in his hand) I was less than impressed and didnt think he would make an impact on the team this season I figured he would probably start to impact the team next season. Stuckey really has impressed me with is ability to adjust so quickly to one of the hardest positions to learn in the NBA. I think that is what makes his season so special that fact that he was able to come in as a rookie who missed a good 3 months of the season and have such an impact on the team.

Also- in regards to scoring, naturally Stuckey and Youngs respective roles will be different as Stuckey is a PG whereas Young is a SG. In any case, I think that both these guys will be good and if the draft were re orderd they would both go higher than 15 and 16

[ponder276]

Isn't Stuckey more of a combo guard than a true PG? I don't see that many Detroit games, so obviously you would know better. I agree that Stuckey is a very nice player, and I'm sure Detroit was happy to get a player of his quality at 15th overall (although early on it seems like the top 20 or so picks of the 07 draft are going to produce a ton of solid players, so I'm not sure Stuckey or Young should have gone too much higher). And re: Stuckey's scoring, I could definitely see him averaging 15-16 ppg in the future, I just don't see him scoring as much as someone like Nick Young, who in my mind has the game as scoring touch to average 20 ppg, maybe more.

[Scalabrine]

I had no clue that Young was 6"7, is that really true?

If so the Wizards made a nice pickup for there fututre SG.

[a-rod]

Stuckey is a rising star who has already shown great versatility and the rare ability to play both ends of the floor, young is too One dimensional.......

i take Stuckey.

[bill curley II]

I really wanted Nick Young for the Warriors but he was taken 2 spots too early. I know Young doesn't do anything except shoot now, but he has that special ability to get open off the dribble and get off a good shot at anytime. I doubt he'll ever be a good playmaker for his teammates, but I think he should be able to improve upon his rebounding and steals, which should round out other areas of his game and not make him too one dimensional.

[fugop]

Young is 6'5" w/o shoes, Stuckey is 6'3.75". Young has five inches wingspan on him, but they have the same standing reach. Young has a much better vertical.

[likwitdesi]

I really wanted Nick Young for the Warriors but he was taken 2 spots too early. I know Young doesn't do anything except shoot now, but he has that special ability to get open off the dribble and get off a good shot at anytime. I doubt he'll ever be a good playmaker for his teammates, but I think he should be able to improve upon his rebounding and steals, which should round out other areas of his game and not make him too one dimensional.

Exactly. Nick has the athleticism and length to make improvements in those areas.