Nate Wolters

[8305]

There are two guys who come to mind for Nate Wolters comps.

Goran Dragic, similar size and skill set, most notably passing skills, outside shot, balanced against a lack of lateral quickness that will likely create issues on defense.

George Hill, another player from the Summit League who dominated who dominated this competitive level.

I really like this guy for my Pacers. We will likely be in the market for a backup pg this offseason so the opportunity for minutes will be there. Since Wolters is a more natural pg he might eventually represent an upgrade over Hill. But, there will be no need to rush him. This model of find rotation minutes in year one followed by a more signifcant role thereafter worked very well with Granger, Hibbert and George.

Given the large number of posters citing Wolters as under rated I'm getting a little concerned that he won't be available when the Pacers pick at 23.

[teamjosh04]

He's a lot like Jeremy Lin. Not a great athlete and not even a guy who is a high volume outside shooter, but has a really high BBIQ. Great at attacking angles, running pick and roll, and passing the ball. Getting teammates involved too - unlike a lot of big time guards at a low level, Wolters and Lin both played as a team and very much insync with the offense. Both solid ball handlers, underdogs, and big time gym rats. Neither are much of a defender. Similar size/build. And they do a great job getting to the FT line even though they arent explosive.

[Nuntius]

Can he play D? I've heard that there are some question marks there.

[mccluskey]

Can he play D? I've heard that there are some question marks there.

he's never going to be a great defender - if he can become average on that side of the ball, that's probably his best case scenario.

but as far as I'm concerned defense is one of the last things I'm concerned with from the point guard position. The main things I would look for there are:
- a guy who can run an offense and get his team into good shots for each possession
- pick and roll instincts
- ability to see the floor and make the right pass
- ballhandling
- ability to hit pressure free throws
- leadership

after all that, if the guy can play defense too then that's a bonus, but it's really not something that imo should be a primary concern for a PG. I would rather have a guy with great offensive skill/instincts and average defense, instead of average offense/great defense, running my team any day. So from that POV, I think Wolters has a good shot to make the league as a backup point in an Eric Maynor/Steve Blake type of role for somebody.

[Nuntius]

but as far as I'm concerned defense is one of the last things I'm concerned with from the point guard position. .

Well, I disagree here.

Defense is my primary concern for a point guard (and most positions, actually).

[Colbinii]

I'm not comparing him to Steve Nash or saying he is going to even be a started in this league, but he does remind me of him. Wolters is a player who can control the tempo of the game, can hit the open shot, and do nearly everything else you would want your PG to do besides play defense.

[Johnlac1]

but as far as I'm concerned defense is one of the last things I'm concerned with from the point guard position. .

Well, I disagree here.

Defense is my primary concern for a point guard (and most positions, actually).

Depends. You have to look at the overall effect a player has on a team. Obviously, you don't want a sieve at any position. But even with weak defense, Nash's effect on Phoenix was overall quite positive. It's a plus minus thing, and that's how Wolters will be judged. Like Nash, I doubt he'll ever be more than adequate. But a good defensive frontcourt could negate a lot of his defensive failings.

[Golabki]

There are two guys who come to mind for Nate Wolters comps.

Goran Dragic, similar size and skill set, most notably passing skills, outside shot, balanced against a lack of lateral quickness that will likely create issues on defense.

George Hill, another player from the Summit League who dominated who dominated this competitive level.

I really like this guy for my Pacers. We will likely be in the market for a backup pg this offseason so the opportunity for minutes will be there. Since Wolters is a more natural pg he might eventually represent an upgrade over Hill. But, there will be no need to rush him. This model of find rotation minutes in year one followed by a more signifcant role thereafter worked very well with Granger, Hibbert and George.

Given the large number of posters citing Wolters as under rated I'm getting a little concerned that he won't be available when the Pacers pick at 23.

I think of Lester Hudson more than anyone. Nate is a bit taller and a bit more PGish.

[Nuntius]

but as far as I'm concerned defense is one of the last things I'm concerned with from the point guard position. .

Well, I disagree here.

Defense is my primary concern for a point guard (and most positions, actually).

Depends. You have to look at the overall effect a player has on a team. Obviously, you don't want a sieve at any position. But even with weak defense, Nash's effect on Phoenix was overall quite positive. It's a plus minus thing, and that's how Wolters will be judged. Like Nash, I doubt he'll ever be more than adequate. But a good defensive frontcourt could negate a lot of his defensive failings.

I agree that it depends. Allow me clarify what I meant a bit more.

The OP said that he liked Wolters for Indiana. As an Indiana fan, I wouldn't take a PG that cannot play D. We don't want or need our PGs to be able to create offense. We are a team that relies on post scoring and ball-handling wings. Our PGs initiate our sets but they are not the ones running the plays most of the time. They play off-ball most of the time.

Therefore, a good PG for Indiana is likely going to be a player that specialized in playing D that can also hit at a high clip from 3. Extra bonus if he has good size, wingspan and a nice BBIQ.

I certainly agree that Wolters would be a great fit for a team. But I just don't think that it fits the philosophy of the team that the OP mentioned.

[Ruzious]

Can he play D? I've heard that there are some question marks there.

he's never going to be a great defender - if he can become average on that side of the ball, that's probably his best case scenario.

but as far as I'm concerned defense is one of the last things I'm concerned with from the point guard position. The main things I would look for there are:
- a guy who can run an offense and get his team into good shots for each possession
- pick and roll instincts
- ability to see the floor and make the right pass
- ballhandling
- ability to hit pressure free throws
- leadership

after all that, if the guy can play defense too then that's a bonus, but it's really not something that imo should be a primary concern for a PG. I would rather have a guy with great offensive skill/instincts and average defense, instead of average offense/great defense, running my team any day. So from that POV, I think Wolters has a good shot to make the league as a backup point in an Eric Maynor/Steve Blake type of role for somebody.

A minimum requirement for a PG is the ability to get back on defense quickly, because the PG in general is supposed to be the 1st guy back to stop the opponent from fast breaking. If you can't do that, you can't play PG for most NBA teams. I don't know if he can do that. But I think he could be a Jeff Hornacek type player in the NBA.

[8305]

The OP said that he liked Wolters for Indiana. As an Indiana fan, I wouldn't take a PG that cannot play D. We don't want or need our PGs to be able to create offense. We are a team that relies on post scoring and ball-handling wings. Our PGs initiate our sets but they are not the ones running the plays most of the time. They play off-ball most of the time.

Therefore, a good PG for Indiana is likely going to be a player that specialized in playing D that can also hit at a high clip from 3. Extra bonus if he has good size, wingspan and a nice BBIQ.

I certainly agree that Wolters would be a great fit for a team. But I just don't think that it fits the philosophy of the team that the OP mentioned.

I don't think Indiana is opposed to having a point guard who can create offense, that's why DJ Augustine is the back up. Going in I think the feeling was Augustine could bring something to the table Hill couldn't. And, that's why I like Wolters. He's potentially a more instinctive point guard than Hill and there could be times when that is useful.

As to his defensive short comings, Indiana is a team better equiped to cover for a weak defender at point guard than most teams. They have several guys who can guard more than one position including point guard (Paul George, George Hill and Orlando Johnson). Wolters size makes this work easier in that he should be able to cover 2's better than a smallish point guard.

No getting around the fact that Indiana's calling card is defense. Maybe that demands that everyone in the rotation has to be an above average defender. But can you assemble enough defensive minded guys for all the positions without having the offense struggle? I'm not sure you can and the Pacers offensive results this year appear to bear that out.

[ExplosionsInDaSky]

If Jeff Hornacek was in this draft he'd go top 10. Thats a bold comparison for Wolters. Is he strictly a point guard?

[Ruzious]

If Jeff Hornacek was in this draft he'd go top 10. Thats a bold comparison for Wolters. Is he strictly a point guard?

Horacek coming out of college wouldn't go anywhere near top 10 - for the same reasons he was a 2nd round pick in the 80's.

[gw795]

I like Nate Wolters a lot. He's a really crafty guy who has shown very well against high-major opponents and at summer events. His D is a major concern, as he isn't the fastest guy on foot. His length and smarts might cover up some of his flaws, but the point guard position in the NBA is filled with great athletes at the moment. However, he did show up pretty nicely on D against Trey Burke in the NCAA tournament. He could be a nice pick-up in the 2nd round, but he needs to show in workouts that he can keep up with more athletic pg's.

[mccluskey]

Can he play D? I've heard that there are some question marks there.

he's never going to be a great defender - if he can become average on that side of the ball, that's probably his best case scenario.

but as far as I'm concerned defense is one of the last things I'm concerned with from the point guard position. The main things I would look for there are:
- a guy who can run an offense and get his team into good shots for each possession
- pick and roll instincts
- ability to see the floor and make the right pass
- ballhandling
- ability to hit pressure free throws
- leadership

after all that, if the guy can play defense too then that's a bonus, but it's really not something that imo should be a primary concern for a PG. I would rather have a guy with great offensive skill/instincts and average defense, instead of average offense/great defense, running my team any day. So from that POV, I think Wolters has a good shot to make the league as a backup point in an Eric Maynor/Steve Blake type of role for somebody.

A minimum requirement for a PG is the ability to get back on defense quickly, because the PG in general is supposed to be the 1st guy back to stop the opponent from fast breaking. If you can't do that, you can't play PG for most NBA teams. I don't know if he can do that. But I think he could be a Jeff Hornacek type player in the NBA.

that might be true for a team where the point only brings the ball up, dumps it off and camps out at the top of the key on offense, but teams where the PG initiates most offensive sets and runs a lot of pick and roll don't generally also ask him to be the first man back on D to stop breaks too. Wolters isn't going to be a good fit for the first type of team, but he will for the second type.

[Nuntius]

I don't think Indiana is opposed to having a point guard who can create offense, that's why DJ Augustine is the back up.

I just think that this is also why DJ Augustin has struggled in Indiana.

[Nuntius]

A minimum requirement for a PG is the ability to get back on defense quickly, because the PG in general is supposed to be the 1st guy back to stop the opponent from fast breaking. If you can't do that, you can't play PG for most NBA teams. I don't know if he can do that. But I think he could be a Jeff Hornacek type player in the NBA.

that might be true for a team where the point only brings the ball up, dumps it off and camps out at the top of the key on offense, but teams where the PG initiates most offensive sets and runs a lot of pick and roll don't generally also ask him to be the first man back on D to stop breaks too. Wolters isn't going to be a good fit for the first type of team, but he will for the second type.

Well, Indiana is the first type of team so I don't see him being a good fit there

[Dr Positivity]

Among lower level point guard prospects, who do you guys feel about Isaiah Canaan? Looks like he can shoot the 3 and he's smart/crafty. Enough to stick as a backup PG?

[reapaman]

Among lower level point guard prospects, who do you guys feel about Isaiah Canaan? Looks like he can shoot the 3 and he's smart/crafty. Enough to stick as a backup PG?

To me he is very similar to Raymond felton (almost a clone) but except with better work ethic and more nba ready. People had high hopes for Felton coming out of college but he's was too lazy and fat to reach his potential. Might sound crazy but I think Canaan could be what Felton was suppose to become.

At worst he a nice spark plug off the bench but him becoming a boarderline all-star or even an actual all-star in the right situation is very possible. Very underrated prospect.

[Dr Positivity]

Can't agree with the Felton comp, Canaan looks slower and less able to get to the basket, but with a more reliable scoring game outside of the paint. Similar to Nate fittingly for this thread

I like the chances of sticking for all of Curry, Wolters, Pressey, Kabongo, Smith, in addition to Caneen. The question is whether drafting a backup point is worth it with how easy it is to find one in FA, but it's better than nothing in the 2nd rd