Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part IV

[Nivek]

Here are names that show up in YODA as most similar to Muhammad:

- Michael Redd, SO
- Harold Miner, SO
- Joe Johnson, FR
- Andre Emmett, SO
- Tobias Harris, FR
- Nick Young, JR
- Harrison Barnes, SO

Still reasonably similar, but not as close as these guys are names like: Quincy Pondexter, SR; Jamaal Franklin, SO; Christian Watford, SO; Jarvis Hayes, SO.

A shade further down are guys like Courtney Alexander, Jordan Crawford and Cartier Martin.

[stevemcqueen1]

What special attributes does he have?

Remarkable inside-outside scoring ability.

You mentioned Harden earlier as a comparison. Harden shot 8% better from the field, 3% better from 3 as a freshman. I don't see anything remarkable about Shabazz's scoring. He is good at scoring, but hardly remarkable.

And he doesn't do anything else well.

You're comparing them entirely based on stats. Bazz is actually a more versatile scorer than Harden was at AZ State because he's got a post game. Bazz's scoring ability is remarkable because of how good his instincts and advanced his skills are. He's excellent at finding the space in the defense to score, excellent attacking multiple defenders off the dribble as he gets into the lane and scores, excellent with that mid range pull up, excellent at catching and shooting from range, particularly in the corners and from the FT line extended, excellent at getting into the paint and finishing, excellent at getting to the FT line, excellent at finishing through contact, and he's got the best post up game of any perimeter prospect in forever. He finishes in a variety of ways. For someone who has size concerns, he scores a ton of points in the paint and over much bigger defenders too. He is a born scorer.

[tontoz]

So why did he shoot only 46% from 2 point range?

[gesa2]

Remarkable inside-outside scoring ability.

You mentioned Harden earlier as a comparison. Harden shot 8% better from the field, 3% better from 3 as a freshman. I don't see anything remarkable about Shabazz's scoring. He is good at scoring, but hardly remarkable.

And he doesn't do anything else well.

You're comparing them entirely based on stats. Bazz is actually a more versatile scorer than Harden was at AZ State because he's got a post game. Bazz's scoring ability is remarkable because of how good his instincts and advanced his skills are. He's excellent at finding the space in the defense to score, excellent attacking multiple defenders off the dribble as he gets into the lane and scores, excellent with that mid range pull up, excellent at catching and shooting from range, particularly in the corners and from the FT line extended, excellent at getting into the paint and finishing, excellent at getting to the FT line, excellent at finishing through contact, and he's got the best post up game of any perimeter prospect in forever. He finishes in a variety of ways. For someone who has size concerns, he scores a ton of points in the paint and over much bigger defenders too. He is a born scorer.

If he's better at scoring inside, where shooting percentages are higher, why did he shoot 8% lower from the floor than Harden as a FR? I get that you think he passes the eye test for you, but that argument won't sway people that also watched him and disagree.

[montestewart]

Here are names that show up in YODA as most similar to Muhammad:

- Michael Redd, SO
- Harold Miner, SO
- Joe Johnson, FR
- Andre Emmett, SO
- Tobias Harris, FR
- Nick Young, JR
- Harrison Barnes, SO

Still reasonably similar, but not as close as these guys are names like: Quincy Pondexter, SR; Jamaal Franklin, SO; Christian Watford, SO; Jarvis Hayes, SO.

A shade further down are guys like Courtney Alexander, Jordan Crawford and Cartier Martin.

Maggette comes to mind in some ways. How do they compare?

[Nivek]

Harden was better at basically everything than Muhammad.

Code: Select all

PER40   Shabazz Harden  Harden
Class   FR      FR      SO
Min     30.8    34.1    35.8
efg     .487    .586    .553
2p%     .463    .576    .564
3p%     .377    .407    .356
FT%     .711    .754    .756
eOrtg   108     119     114
Usg     20.1    17.3    19.8
Reb     6.8     6.2     6.2
Ast     1.1     3.8     4.7
Stl     0.9     2.5     1.9
Blk     0.2     0.7     0.4
Tov     2.1     3.1     3.8
Pts     23.2    20.9    22.5


The YODA summary scores suggested Harden as being a guy to take in the top 5 and Muhammad as a guy not to take until late 1st or early 2nd round -- if higher rated players aren't still available. Even with his production level, Muhammad could move up if he turns out to be a well-above average athlete for his position. His low 2pt%, steals and blocks suggest that he may not be an elite-level athlete. His meh FT% calls into question the talk that he's a great shooter.

[Nivek]

Here are names that show up in YODA as most similar to Muhammad:

- Michael Redd, SO
- Harold Miner, SO
- Joe Johnson, FR
- Andre Emmett, SO
- Tobias Harris, FR
- Nick Young, JR
- Harrison Barnes, SO

Still reasonably similar, but not as close as these guys are names like: Quincy Pondexter, SR; Jamaal Franklin, SO; Christian Watford, SO; Jarvis Hayes, SO.

A shade further down are guys like Courtney Alexander, Jordan Crawford and Cartier Martin.

Maggette comes to mind in some ways. How do they compare?

Not very similar at all, according to my doppleganger machine. Muhammad was a full-time starter; Maggette a part-timer (30.8 mpg vs. 17.7). Per minute, Maggette got more than twice as many assists, steals and blocks. He got more rebounds and FTA; although he also committed more turnovers and fouls.

Maggette rated as the better prospect between the two.

[pcbothwel]

Bennett is having rotator cuff surgery on his left shoulder. That should definitely cause him to fall.

Tontoz, i wish this were the case I have stated Bennett is going to be a Melo/Larry Johnson type player. But I actually think this will raise his stock. Why?... Look at how he performed before the Wyoming game and look at the games after that (before tourney). This show that the shoulder really affected him and he played through it. I think GM's see this. If his shoulder turned out to be okay, then questions about his toughness and conditioning could be much more legitimate.

[Ruzious]

At 7'1", he boasts as much potential as any player in the 2013 NBA Draft, and is generally considered its second-best center prospect behind Noel. At his ceiling, Len projects as a center that can shut down an opponent's best post scorer, protect the rim, and score at will, either in the post, where his quickness and length will make him a matchup nightmare, or in the pick-and-roll, whether it's popping out for a jump shot or rolling to the rim for alley oops. Len also runs the floor very well for a player his size, which combined with his potential as a pick-and-roll partner makes him a perfect fit schematically alongside Wall.

The hyperbole is mindblowing here--there are currently about zero centers right now that can score at will in the paint. 0 chance that Len becomes the most dominant offensive center of the decade.

You'd think all that size and athleticism would have at least got his team to the tournament. His rebounding numbers are also kind of suspect.

This kid hasn't done anything on the floor to make him worth a lottery pick. Its all about his body.

Perhaps I should have quoted some of the more critical portions of the breakdown as well.

I think the reason they think he has the potential is that he did indeed show flashes of dominance, but was woefully inconsistent. When I watch these highlights, I see see a guy with the size, athleticism and skill to be a really good pro:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IknKniuYCic[/youtube]

But I understand that not only was this one game, it was the first game of the season -- and you don't tend to find highlight reels on youtube of guys fumbling passes, sleepwalking, etc.

I have no real sense for Len's defensive potential outside of his physical attributes. More than offense, defense is a team endeavor. It's about a coordinated effort to funnel the ball towards help, to get the offense to take bad and/or contested shots, and to secure the rebound. Defensive centers both act as traffic controllers and as last lines of defense. Being huge and quick is helpful, but being smart and fast-thinking is equally if not more important. Len has the physical attributes to be a dominant defensive center, even if he isn't a great shotblocker. The other stuff, I don't know.

He's quick for an enormous human being, but he's not quick for an NBA big. And he doesn't play smart - as witnessed by Coach Turgeon often getting frustrated with him and the fact that he plays too upright with little knee bend on defense. He was best on defense when players were funnelled into the lane - so he could get easy blocks. But there's a defensive 3 second rule in the NBA, so centers can't just lay back and wait. Without that rule, he could become a very effective defender.

[montestewart]

Here are names that show up in YODA as most similar to Muhammad:

- Michael Redd, SO
- Harold Miner, SO
- Joe Johnson, FR
- Andre Emmett, SO
- Tobias Harris, FR
- Nick Young, JR
- Harrison Barnes, SO

Still reasonably similar, but not as close as these guys are names like: Quincy Pondexter, SR; Jamaal Franklin, SO; Christian Watford, SO; Jarvis Hayes, SO.

A shade further down are guys like Courtney Alexander, Jordan Crawford and Cartier Martin.

Maggette comes to mind in some ways. How do they compare?

Not very similar at all, according to my doppleganger machine. Muhammad was a full-time starter; Maggette a part-timer (30.8 mpg vs. 17.7). Per minute, Maggette got more than twice as many assists, steals and blocks. He got more rebounds and FTA; although he also committed more turnovers and fouls.

Maggette rated as the better prospect between the two.

Maggette was pretty talented (I think he's still playing, but...), but he had a superstar's gimme-the-ball mentality, when he seemed more of a ball hogging stat padder than a star. Something like that would be a step back for the Wizards chemistry. A substantially lesser version of that doesn't seem too appealing.

If Muhammed was available with a lower pick, would he take that as a wake-up call to allow his game to evolve, or at least step it up (Arenas-style), or would he stew over the world not recognizing?ntially lesser version of that doesn't seem too appealing.

If Muhammed was available with a lower pick, would he take that as a wake-up call to allow his game to evolve, or at least step it up (Arenas-style), or would he stew over the world not recognizing?

[Dark Faze]

If Len has a bright future in the NBA, it will be because of his post game, which is still developing, but shows clear potential.

http://www.bulletsforever.com/2013/5/9/ ... t-alex-len

From the bullets forever scouting report.

That above quote is pretty scary to me in regards to Len. If his post offense is what is going to be relied upon for him to have a good NBA career, then all the writing on the wall so far shows that its one of his worst attributes.

Defensively the article stats that his rebounding and defense were merely good.

We reached out to SB Nation's Maryland Terrapins blog, Testudo Times, for help in breaking down Len's pro potential, and contributors Pete Volk and Dave Tucker were kind enough to offer their analysis:

Volk:


Alex Len will need at least a year before he can play in the NBA. If the Wizards, or whoever ends up with him, are smart, that will be in the D-League, but we've seen early picks thrust too early into the league before.

Huh. What big has come out of the D-League and been worthy of a lottery pick? This coming from a blog that specializes in watching Terps games.

His biggest problem remains on the offensive side of the ball - he has NO idea what to do with himself in the post - but that can be taught (and weight can be put on).

I respectfully disagree with the above. I can't think of a single NBA center who developed a solid post game while having virtually none before stepping into the league. Much like ball handling, making drastic improvements in this regard are usually minor at best.

[stevemcqueen1]

So why did he shoot only 46% from 2 point range?

Why is that the only thing that seems to matter to you? Do you disagree that he can score in all the ways I listed?

[nate33]

So why did he shoot only 46% from 2 point range?

Why is that the only thing that seems to matter to you? Do you disagree that he can score in all the ways I listed?

It matters a lot. Being "able to score in all ways" at a poor efficiency isn't a good thing. Really, what you are saying is that he is able to get shots up in many different ways. Lots of people can do that. It's putting those shots into the basket that's tricky.

[nate33]

Volk:

Alex Len will need at least a year before he can play in the NBA. If the Wizards, or whoever ends up with him, are smart, that will be in the D-League, but we've seen early picks thrust too early into the league before.

Huh. What big has come out of the D-League and been worthy of a lottery pick? This coming from a blog that specializes in watching Terps games.

His biggest problem remains on the offensive side of the ball - he has NO idea what to do with himself in the post - but that can be taught (and weight can be put on).

I respectfully disagree with the above. I can't think of a single NBA center who developed a solid post game while having virtually none before stepping into the league. Much like ball handling, making drastic improvements in this regard are usually minor at best.

Meh. I disagree with Volk in that he needs to go to the D-League. I think the D-League is helpful to get guys some experience (particularly with guards and wings) in game situations, but most development takes place in practice. Certainly, if Len's primary weakness is a post game, I'd rather have him here working with our coaches and practicing against guys like Okafor and Seraphin rather than playing against a bunch of unathletic scrubs in the D-League. Post work is some thing that can be worked on individually or with one other player. You don't need a D-League 5 on 5 setting.

[Dark Faze]

My main concern is that the opinion of two guys who do nothing but watch Terps games are having a really hard time putting together what Alex Len can do to help a team out now in the NBA.

Its less of a concern if he's coming out as a true freshmen, I mean he's had two years of college seasoning already. Praying that he'll make dramatic improvements in virtually every aspect of basketball seems like a silly way of drafting.

[fishercob]

If Len has a bright future in the NBA, it will be because of his post game, which is still developing, but shows clear potential.

http://www.bulletsforever.com/2013/5/9/ ... t-alex-len

From the bullets forever scouting report.

That above quote is pretty scary to me in regards to Len. If his post offense is what is going to be relied upon for him to have a good NBA career, then all the writing on the wall so far shows that its one of his worst attributes.

Defensively the article stats that his rebounding and defense were merely good.

We reached out to SB Nation's Maryland Terrapins blog, Testudo Times, for help in breaking down Len's pro potential, and contributors Pete Volk and Dave Tucker were kind enough to offer their analysis:

Volk:


Alex Len will need at least a year before he can play in the NBA. If the Wizards, or whoever ends up with him, are smart, that will be in the D-League, but we've seen early picks thrust too early into the league before.

Huh. What big has come out of the D-League and been worthy of a lottery pick? This coming from a blog that specializes in watching Terps games.

His biggest problem remains on the offensive side of the ball - he has NO idea what to do with himself in the post - but that can be taught (and weight can be put on).

I respectfully disagree with the above. I can't think of a single NBA center who developed a solid post game while having virtually none before stepping into the league. Much like ball handling, making drastic improvements in this regard are usually minor at best.

Dark Faze and Ruzious:

Just FYI, I'm not arguing that Len should be our pick. I'm really just asking questions and giving observations. I want the Wizards to take the best player no matter who it is, and don't have any sort of vested interest. I presented the BF report for comment, not as evidence of anything. Having looked at it a second time, I don't think it is all that well written, nor do I agree with some of their assessments/logic based on what I have seen of Len. I was particularly unimpressed with the MD bloggers.

The notion that Len's future is tied to his low post game doesn't make sense to me. What makes him interesting to me on offense, is that his game is pretty simple -- setting screens and then rolling or popping depending on the read the D gives him. If Len -- or anyone -- can be effective from the elbow and as a roll man, then they will be unstoppable when paired with John Wall. We saw a good deal of the high screen/roll with shooters in the corners and the opposite wing. It's very very tough to stop because of John.

But his his true potential is tied to defense. Can he be the primary defender on a top-5 defensive team? If he can, he's worth the pick to me, and almost any offense is a bonus. HIbbert had a bad offensive year (ORtg 101 TS 49%!) and yet he's the guy the Knicks are trying to figure out how to solve.

I have no idea how to measure or assess whether Len can be that guy.

The only thing I see is that Ken Pomeroy had Maryland as the #53 team in the nation in Pythagorean ranking. They ranked 38th in D and 81st in O. All that tells me is that relatively speaking their D was ahead of their O, but not much else. I'd want to watch a lot of film on Len and talk to MD's coaches to understand their schemes and see how well Len operated within them. I'd want to watch film with Len to see what he sees and understands. I''ll have to settle for the DX video breakdown whenever that comes out.

[stevemcqueen1]

You mentioned Harden earlier as a comparison. Harden shot 8% better from the field, 3% better from 3 as a freshman. I don't see anything remarkable about Shabazz's scoring. He is good at scoring, but hardly remarkable.

And he doesn't do anything else well.

You're comparing them entirely based on stats. Bazz is actually a more versatile scorer than Harden was at AZ State because he's got a post game. Bazz's scoring ability is remarkable because of how good his instincts and advanced his skills are. He's excellent at finding the space in the defense to score, excellent attacking multiple defenders off the dribble as he gets into the lane and scores, excellent with that mid range pull up, excellent at catching and shooting from range, particularly in the corners and from the FT line extended, excellent at getting into the paint and finishing, excellent at getting to the FT line, excellent at finishing through contact, and he's got the best post up game of any perimeter prospect in forever. He finishes in a variety of ways. For someone who has size concerns, he scores a ton of points in the paint and over much bigger defenders too. He is a born scorer.

If he's better at scoring inside, where shooting percentages are higher, why did he shoot 8% lower from the floor than Harden as a FR? I get that you think he passes the eye test for you, but that argument won't sway people that also watched him and disagree.

Why did James Harden's FG% drop almost 4% from freshman to sophomore year? Who knows? Stats are system and situation dependent, perhaps Harden got better looks as a freshman, the onus of creating his own space and his own looks wasn't as heavy on him as it was his Sophomore season. That's plausible, since that is exactly what happened in the NBA when he went from OKC to HOU.

Bazz takes and scores off of difficult shots where he creates his own space and shot (lots of contested shots in the paint, quick momentum shot pull ups, and tough back to basket hooks and fadeaways) or finishes off of difficult catch and shoot and one dribble pull up situations. That's probably why his FG% is a lot lower than many of the other wing prospects in this class, but he can also score in far more ways than any one else in this class can. He can score like an NBA star scorer does.

Yes Bazz does pass the eye test for me. I don't believe the people who argue against him on a purely statistical basis actually watched him or remember what they saw. Why else are their arguments so general? I have a great memory and saw him play several times and I myself have trouble remembering the impressions I took away. I have to periodically watch old cut ups and look over notes I took and posts I wrote for every player.

I don't expect people to take my word on these matters of opinion. I don't like trying to win arguments so I don't have to feel compelled to convince people. I think that agenda often gets in the way of truthful discussions anyway. Most of what I write are simply sincere personal observations and bits of analysis. I'm flexible, if you have a specific observation that contradicts mine, I will listen and try to see it for myself. But saying something totally general like, "X player isn't as good as Y player because his 2 pt FG% is Z% lower and he averaged N lower steals," has much less analytic value to me than a list of raw observations would.

[pancakes3]

Just FYI, I'm not arguing that Len should be our pick. I'm really just asking questions and giving observations. I want the Wizards to take the best player no matter who it is, and don't have any sort of vested interest.

I agree. Len has too much upside to be completely dismissed yet doesn't have enough consistency to deduce success with any sort of certainty. Basically, people shouldn't have strong opinions one way or another on him - at least that's the lesson I learned from Drummond. If Len busts next season I'm sure I'll be singing a different tune for the next 7 footer d'jour.

[stevemcqueen1]

So why did he shoot only 46% from 2 point range?

Why is that the only thing that seems to matter to you? Do you disagree that he can score in all the ways I listed?

It matters a lot. Being "able to score in all ways" at a poor efficiency isn't a good thing. Really, what you are saying is that he is able to get shots up in many different ways. Lots of people can do that. It's putting those shots into the basket that's tricky.

Sure, but stats are heavily situation dependent. Using them as a sole proof of anything in projections is weak. UCLA and Ben Howland and the NCAA aren't coming with Shabazz if we draft him.

We drafted Beal 3rd overall despite posting worse numbers than Shabazz and he's been terrific, looks like a home run. If you were to look just at Beal's averages and percentages at Florida, you would think he couldn't shoot and that he was a bad shot chucker, both of which couldn't be farther from the truth.

But if you isolate out just the scoring tools he demonstrated without caring about the numbers, you'd have seen a picture perfect jump shot with awesome range, tremendous shot selection and IQ, a nice little floater game, smooth dribbles and athletic straight line drives with physical finishing ability--i.e. all of the tools to be a big time scorer in the NBA. Remember all of the incredulity about all of the Dwyane Wade and Ray Allen comparisons Beal drew? He was getting them from all over. There were people who saw the similarities in the tools and people who couldn't see it because what they were thinking about were the numbers.

The tools are what the prospect actually brings with him. Muhammad has outstanding scoring tools. Better than Beal's for that matter. Better than a lot of players', including any other perimeter player in this class.

[Nivek]

Why did James Harden's FG% drop almost 4% from freshman to sophomore year? Who knows? Stats are system and situation dependent, perhaps Harden got better looks as a freshman, the onus of creating his own space and his own looks wasn't as heavy on him as it was his Sophomore season. That's plausible, since that is exactly what happened in the NBA when he went from OKC to HOU.

Or, perhaps there was no basic change in shooting proficiency from freshman to sophomore year for Harden. The difference in shooting percentages between the two seasons amounts to 3.5 made 2pt field goals and and 8.3 made 3pt FGs. In other words, an extra made 2pt shot every 10 games and an additional made 3pt shot every 4th game. His FT%, which is a better measure of base shooting ability was virtually identical.

And, saying stats are "system and situation dependent" is saying nothing at all. Everything is system and situation dependent. Stats can be an objective measure of what a player does to help his team win. There's lots of good research available on what stats contribute to winning.

Bazz takes and scores off of difficult shots where he creates his own space and shot (lots of contested shots in the paint, quick momentum shot pull ups, and tough back to basket hooks and fadeaways) or finishes off of difficult catch and shoot and one dribble pull up situations. That's probably why his FG% is a lot lower than many of the other wing prospects in this class, but he can also score in far more ways than any one else in this class can. He can score like an NBA star scorer does.

Creating missed shots is no skill. Anyone can miss shots. Anyone can miss difficult shots. A team doesn't have to pick a guy in the top 10 to create missed shots for them.

Yes Bazz does pass the eye test for me. I don't believe the people who argue against him on a purely statistical basis actually watched him or remember what they saw. Why else are their arguments so general? I have a great memory and saw him play several times and I myself have trouble remembering the impressions I took away. I have to periodically watch old cut ups and look over notes I took and posts I wrote for every player.

I don't expect people to take my word on these matters of opinion. I don't like trying to win arguments so I don't have to feel compelled to convince people. I think that agenda often gets in the way of truthful discussions anyway. Most of what I write are simply sincere personal observations and bits of analysis. I'm flexible, if you have a specific observation that contradicts mine, I will listen and try to see it for myself. But saying something totally general like, "X player isn't as good as Y player because his 2 pt FG% is Z% lower and he averaged N lower steals," has much less analytic value to me than a list of raw observations would.

Given the research available on memory and on what people actually observe versus what actually happens, I'd lean toward statistical measures. You could be right about Muhammad, but players who have posted statistics like his have not typically become stars in the pros. Maybe Muhammad will be an exception. Maybe he's an overwhelming athlete who will put it all together in the pros. It's possible.