SB Nation - Ty Lawson

Ask The Enemy: Texas vs North Carolina

Peter Bean — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 02:50:26 -0000

More photos » by Michael Thomas - AP

He is big. He is sexy. Dexter Pittman is Big Sexy.

Texas faces by far their stiffest of the season on Saturday when they travel to Jerryworld to battle North Carolina on the hardwood (1:00 CT, ESPN). I asked Carolina March to help prep us on the Tar Heels. Our Q&A is below.

We'll get to the game momentarily, but first: In 2007-08, had no one defected early to the NBA, Texas could have sent out the following starting line up:

PG: DJ Augustin (Sophomore)
SG: Daniel Gibson (Senior)
G/F: Kevin Durant (Sophomore)
F: PJ Tucker (Senior)
C: LaMarcus Aldridge (Senior)

I'm certain early attrition has prevented North Carolina from fielding an equally jaw-dropping line up. Give us the Tar Heels' equivalent (from the last 10 years or so), and give us your take on the match up with our Dream Team.

Carolina March: One of the keys to UNC's success the past couple of year's is that they've kept players for three to four years, so the ideal, nobody-defects teams aren't that much different from what you actually saw on the court. So yeah, a 2006 team that kept the core of the previous year's national championship squad (Sean May, Rashad McCants, Raymond Felton and Marvin Williams) and added Tyler Hansbrough, Danny Green and Marcus Ginyard would be pretty awesome. As would the 2007 and 2008 squads, which would take Hansbrough, Green, Ginyard and Williams and add Brandan Wright, Ty Lawson, and Wayne Ellington. If nobody graduates, there's a solid three years where UNC fields a team with six or more NBA players.

But Carolina fans have also lived through seasons like 1993-1994, where a championship team returned everybody but George Lynch and then added freshmen Jerry Stackhouse, Rasheed Wallace, and Jeff McInnis, only to have the team deliver the earliest NCAA tournament exit in fifteen-plus years. So I'll take what we got, two national championships in five years and a host of good performances in between.

UNC has played three Top 40 teams already, defeating Ohio State (77-73) and Michigan State (89-82), while dropping a pair to Syracuse (87-71) and Kentucky (68-66). The Longhorns, meanwhile, haven't even played a Top 50 team yet. Two related questions, then: First, it has appeared to me that UNC has been improving along the way -- is that fair to say? And second, do you expect the tougher competition (and improvement along the way) to be a meaningful advantage for UNC?

Carolina March: The team has definitely improved, and I do think the level of competition has played a big part in that. With a team as young as this one – at least five freshman get significant playing time – I don't think sheltering them for the first half of the season with a diet of cupcakes would have been very helpful. How it will help them over the entire season is debatable; it may only gain them a couple of early wins in the ACC as they're more up to speed, or it may have no effect whatsoever. Even if it's the latter, I'd still prefer this type of scheduling, as games against Kentucky and Texas are much more fun to watch as a fan than having the team be undefeated and higher ranked at the end of December.

How this scheduling will help against Texas is less clear. I'd like to think that the Longhorns inexperience coupled with Carolina's scheduling gives them a great opportunity to come out strong, put Texas on their heels and watch them self-destruct as they've failed to encounter serious competition so far this season. But I thought the same thing about Kentucky, and they handled an early UNC barrage without batting an eye, and went on to win. Rick Barnes seems pretty good at keeping his players focused.

How good is Ed Davis? Like, does his badassage make you snicker a little when you think about other teams not having Ed Davis? And most importantly, is he as Sexy as Dexter Pittman? Thoughts on this match up? Does he have the strength at 225 to deal with Big Sexy?

Carolina March: First of all, please never use the words "Big" and "Sexy" in conjunction in an e-mail to me again. [No deal. --ed] Now, the baddassage of Ed Davis has for the most part been hidden under a bushel this season. He's played well, but there's an expectation that he'll completely take over a game, and so far that hasn't been the case. Some of that's due to the fact that the current system makes it difficult to put everything in the hands of one big man, and there's also the fact that in following Tyler Hansborough, the fans' expectations may be a little to high for any sophomore to live up to. Either way, it feels like he's on the cusp of truly destroying a big-name opponent, and everyone's on the edge of their seats waiting for that to happen, rather than just enjoying the moment.

The interesting thing about matching up with Pittman is that it probably won't be Ed Davis on him most of the time. Deon Thompson is the bigger body, and there's a string of players 6'10" and taller coming off the bench, all with different strengths. I'd expect the Heels to keep throwing different bodies at Pittman on both ends of the court to keep him off guard and hopefully push him into foul trouble early.

We know that UNC plays fast, but at the moment it seems to be coming at the expense of a pretty poor turnover rate. Tell us about UNC's tempo and style of play, and the turnovers issue?

Carolina March: Rapid play has always lead to more turnovers, and it's a trade-off for the most part that Roy Willams has been willing to expect. An errant pass on a fast break is no worse than failing to get an offensive rebound on a set play, and as long as it doesn't lead to fast break in the opposite direction, there's little harm done. That being said, UNC has given up more steals than I would like, which was particularly deadly against Syracuse and Kentucky. They're a young team still working out some kinks, but a good defensive team can take advantage of that pretty easily.

There's no question that the Tar Heels have more than enough speed and athleticism to play with Texas, but I wonder about whether they're prepared for Texas' exceptionally physical style of play. We're not talking Big East Brute-icism here, but the Longhorns don't mind banging and play intense, physical defense. Does UNC neutralize that with their speed? How did you think they fared against a similarly physical and defensive-minded Kentucky squad?

Carolina March: I don't think the speed really does neutralize anything, especially since Carolina likes to run off of defensive rebounds. If Texs beats them up enough inside that they can't get those rebounds, the Heels are in trouble. What you may be underestimating is the sheer number of players Carolina can rotate into the post. They've got six players who can legitimately play center (Thompson, Davis, Zeller, Henson, and the two Wear brothers) and although many of them are young and not all that muscular - Henson in particular could use a couple hundred sandwiches - their height and fresh legs could draw the Texas big men into serious foul trouble. Don't forget, Rick Barnes once had to finish a game against UNC with only four players on the court the foul situation was so dire.

[You're absolutely right that I underestimated the Tar Heels size (and by a lot), although equally to blame was writing questions for UNC and MSU at the same time, during which I completely mixed up the size of UNC. In any case, it makes all the difference in the world for how UNC can, and perhaps should, play Texas. --ed]

Give us four signs -- two positive, two negative -- that, upon seeing them develop in the game, will make you cackle with delight / cringe in fear about the outcome.

Carolina March: Early frustration on the faces of Texas players will be the most promising sign, whether by denying them rebounds, dragging them into foul trouble early, or just altering shots with height the Longhorns aren't used to seeing. Couple that with good outside shooting early to prevent Texas from collapsing on the inside on defense, and I'll be thrilled right off the bat. On the other hand, if UNC can't get the ball inside without putting in the opposing teams' hands, I'll begin to cringe. And if they go into full-out panic mode, with rushed shots, poor ball movement, and the stretches of play that killed them against Syracuse and Kentucky, well, I'll be hiding my head under a pillow by the second half.

North Carolina Tar Heels @ Kentucky Wildcats: Pre-game analysis

Truzenzuzex — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 23:17:30 -0000

More photos » by Ed Reinke - AP

We hope to see a lot of this out of the Big Cuz tomorrow.

Browse more photos »

Obviously, the UNC contest at Rupp Arena tomorrow is a big, big game for the team, but even more so for the fans, who are very tired of losing to our neighbor to the east.

The Tar Heels are young, but not nearly as young as Kentucky is. The Tar Heels start two seniors, a junior and two sophomores.

North Carolina is perhaps the only team in America that is taller and longer than the Wildcats are. The Heels go 6'10", 6'9" and 6'6" across the front line, and have four reserves 6'10" or taller. UK is taller across the starting lineup, but the 'Cats do not have quite as much height on the bench.

UNC is 7-1, their only loss coming in convincing fashion at Madison Square Garden versus Syracuse. That game was over with about 3 minutes still left to play, but the men in powder blue came back and beat a highly ranked Michigan State team in Chapel Hill just a few nights ago in the ACC-Big Ten challenge. In that game, the Tar Heels played extremely well at times, and that game tap has provided some sobering images for the UK staff and players.

What we will be doing today is presenting you with an extremely high-tech visualization of the comparative statistics of this game. This service has been provided by A Sea of Blue member Sylvar, and it is gobsmackingly awesome. I think no other blog can match this new style of graphical stats delivery, and I'm sure you will enjoy it. But remember, this was Sylvar's work, not mine, so be sure to thank him.

Also, for the Carolina perspective, be sure to visit SB Nation's excellent North Carolina Tar Heels blog, Carolina March.

More after the jump.

Four Factors Analysis

First off, I want to point out that this display is interactive. If you move the sliders just under the trend graph, you can zoom in on various slices of the series to see how they have done in smaller segments. The dials on the right indicate ranges from red (worse) to yellow (okay) to green (good) based on the average values of the top ten teams from last year.

As you can see by the offensive efficiency trends on the top chart, Kentucky has been trending better than the Tar Heels since about the fourth game of the season. In the last game vs. UNC-Ashville, UK's OE was at it's peak so far this season, but still just a bit below the peak UNC achieved vs. Valparaiso.

Defensively, you have to keep in mind that lower is better. UK's DE has been much worse than UNC's through the first four games. From game five (Cleveland St.) on, UK's DE has been improving, and the two team's efficiencies on defense have effectively merged. But you can see that UNC's peak DE has been much better than the best UK has put out there so far. This is largely a function of having more experienced players, most likely.

Moving down to the Four Factors, you can see that these two teams are almost dead even statistically. The green bar is the average statistic for the top ten teams from last year, just to have something to compare with. You will note that neither UK nor UNC are at top ten efficiency yet.

Another interesting thing is that UNC turns the ball over almost as much as UK does. That's partially a function of how many possessions they have per game as a function of their high tempo, but it is a bit surprising to see that a more experienced team like UNC is having as many problems with turnovers as a mostly-freshman UK.

Moving on to the defense, we see that UNC is the better team right now, but UK seems to be forcing a few more turnovers and doing a better job on the defensive glass. UK's free throw rate is very high, and that could be a major factor in the game as time goes on.

In the miscellaneous cateory, we see that both teams shoot a similar 3-point FG%, but UNC takes more 3-point shots per field goal attempt.

Next, we'll look at the players for the Tar Heels, and their stats:

North Carolina Tar Heels Basketball Roster

	#	Pos.	Comments	W	H	College
Marc Campbell	2	G	-	175	6-0	senior
Ed Davis	32	F	Starter	225	6-10	sophomore
Larry Drew II	11	G	Starter	180	6-2	sophomore
James Gallagher	35	F	-	185	6-4	senior
Marcus Ginyard	1	G	Starter	210	6-5	senior
Will Graves	13	F	Starter	240	6-6	junior
John Henson	31	F	-	195	6-10	freshman
Leslie McDonald	15	G	-	215	6-4	freshman
Terrence Petree	14	G	-	165	6-1	senior
Dexter Strickland	5	G	-	180	6-3	freshman
Deon Thompson	21	F	Starter	245	6-9	senior
Thomas Thornton	30	G	-	180	6-3	senior
Justin Watts	24	G	-	210	6-4	sophomore
David Wear	34	F	-	225	6-10	freshman
Travis Wear	43	F	-	235	6-10	freshman
Tyler Zeller	44	F	-	240	7-0	sophomore

North Carolina Statistics

			FG			3PT			FT			Rebounds			Misc
	G	M	M	A	Pct	M	A	Pct	M	A	Pct	Off	Def	Tot	Ast	TO	Stl	Blk	PF	PPG
Deon Thompson	8	27.4	6.4	11.8	54.3	0.0	0.1	0.0	4.5	5.6	80.0	3.6	4.6	8.3	1.4	2.8	1.0	0.6	1.6	17.3
Ed Davis	8	25.4	5.3	7.5	70.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	3.4	5.3	64.3	2.9	6.5	9.4	1.5	2.1	0.5	2.4	1.6	13.9
Marcus Ginyard	8	30.9	4.3	7.6	55.7	1.3	2.6	47.6	1.4	2.4	57.9	1.4	2.3	3.6	4.5	2.5	2.0	0.1	0.8	11.1
Tyler Zeller	8	15.8	3.8	6.5	57.7	0.0	0.0	0.0	2.1	2.9	73.9	1.5	2.5	4.0	0.4	0.8	0.4	1.0	1.9	9.6
Larry Drew II	8	25.5	3.0	5.4	55.8	1.1	2.4	47.4	1.9	2.8	68.2	0.1	2.1	2.3	6.6	3.0	0.9	0.0	2.4	9.0
Will Graves	8	18.4	2.5	6.6	37.7	1.0	3.4	29.6	1.0	1.3	80.0	1.1	2.6	3.8	0.8	0.8	0.9	0.1	1.0	7.0
Travis Wear	8	9.0	1.4	2.8	50.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.9	1.0	87.5	1.1	1.0	2.1	0.1	0.6	0.3	0.0	0.8	3.6
John Henson	8	10.6	1.4	3.0	45.8	0.1	0.6	20.0	0.5	1.3	40.0	0.6	2.0	2.6	1.3	0.4	0.6	1.3	0.5	3.4
Dexter Strickland	8	13.4	1.3	3.1	40.0	0.3	1.1	22.2	0.5	1.1	44.4	0.3	0.6	0.9	1.8	1.6	0.4	0.3	1.5	3.3
Justin Watts	8	6.8	1.1	2.0	56.3	0.4	0.5	75.0	0.3	0.6	40.0	0.4	0.4	0.8	1.4	0.9	0.1	0.1	0.9	2.9
David Wear	8	9.4	0.8	2.1	35.3	0.1	0.3	50.0	0.1	0.5	25.0	0.1	1.0	1.1	0.8	0.6	0.3	0.1	0.4	1.8
Leslie McDonald	6	6.7	0.7	2.3	28.6	0.2	1.0	16.7	0.2	1.0	16.7	0.0	1.3	1.3	0.7	0.5	0.3	0.2	0.5	1.7
Thomas Thornton	3	1.7	0.3	0.7	50.0	0.3	0.7	50.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.7	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0
James Gallagher	3	1.7	0.0	0.3	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.3	0.3	0.7	0.3	0.0	0.3	0.0	0.0	0.0
Terrence Petree	3	1.7	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.7	0.0	0.0	0.7	0.7	0.3	0.3	0.0	0.0	0.3	0.0
Marc Campbell	3	1.7	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	1.0	0.3	0.0	0.0	0.0

Position Analysis: Point guard

The starting point guard for the Tar Heels is Larry Drew II, son of a former NBA player. Drew assumes the starting point guard spot from the now-graduated Ty Lawson. Drew is a solid point guard and is doing a good job of learning the spot this year. He had one year behind Lawson and is now familiar with Roy Williams style.

The strength of Drew, though not so much this year up until the last game, is his 3-point shooting. He is shooting a fine percentage, but has been a relatively reluctant shooter so far this year, preferring to get the ball to teammates in scoring position, which is the job of a point guard. His assist/turnover ratio is 2-1, which is the gold standard for point guard play.

The knock on Drew has always been his footspeed and athleticism. Unlike Lawson or Wall, Drew is not a blur getting up and down the court. Drew is a competent but not flashy ballhandler, and he isn't going to blow by people like Lawson before him, or Wall does now. But what Drew does have is NCAA championship experience, and a year under his belt. That is worth a lot.

For Kentucky, the point guard is John Wall. We all know what John Wall is capable of, that is, at least to the level he has currently played. Wall and Drew could not be less similar -- Wall is an athletic freak and a slasher, as well as a flashy ballhandler and passer, but an average 3-point shooter. Drew will need help with Wall, as Wall is not only quicker, faster and a better athlete, but he is also four inches taller.

Advantage: Kentucky

Position Analysis: Shooting guard

Marcus Ginyard is the starter at shooting guard for the Tar Heels. Ginyard is a strong, athletic player with good size at 6'5". Ginyard was injured back in 2008, and was granted a medical redshirt.

Ginyard brings senior leadership to the Tar Heels backcourt, and does the little things that help his team win. He is not a big scorer, averaging 11 points/game, but he is a good rebounder and fine passer. He is athletic but not extraordinarily so, and has a good understanding of the North Carolina system. Ginyard is a polished defender, leading the team in steals.

Eric Bledsoe will be the starter at the off guard for Kentucky, and even though he is significantly more athletic and just as strong as Ginyard, he is far less experienced. Blesdsoe is much quicker off the dribble than most any player of his quality that North Carolina has faced so far this year, so Ginyard will have to deal with a quickness disadvantage.

But Ginyard has the advantage in virtually every other area, especially in experience.

Advantage: North Carolina

Position Analysis: Small Forward

Will Graves is the Tar Heel's starter at small forward. Graves is the least touted of all the North Carolina starters, grading out as only #105 in Rivals' class of 2006. Graves is a hard worker, good team player and has loads of experience coming off the bench during North Carolina's most recent run of success. He is not a particularly good three-point shooter, although he can make it. He is a decent but not outstanding rebounder. What he does do particularly well is defend.

Graves is an experienced player who adds experience to the team, as well as bulk and strength inside.

Graves will be going up against Darius Miller. Miller has the advantage of height, quickness and athleticism over Graves, but Graves is much heavier and stronger than Miller, which could provide UNC some opportunities with Graves posting Miller up. If Miller decides to assert himself (a big "if"), he could give Graves great difficulty due to his superior skills, speed, and athleticism.

Advantage: Draw

Position analysis: Power Forward

Ed Davis is the power forward for North Carolina, and the young sophomore is extremely talented. Davis is strong in the low post and quick off the floor. He doesn't have great range, but he is a good finisher and has a strong lower body. Davis runs the floor very well and will dunk on you if you are slow getting back. He is a solid defensive player with long arms and good footwork.

Davis is not strong in the upper body, though, and has narrow shoulders, which makes it harder for him against more physical power forwards. Davis is a good shot blocker with long arms and good timing.

I am going to assume that Patrick Patterson will be guarding Davis, because I think he is just too quick for DeMarcus Cousins. Offensively, Patterson is a much more versatile and powerful player than Davis. Davis is highly skilled, but Patterson is capable of shooting with range and will probably try to take Davis away from the basket.

Defensively, Patterson is stronger than Davis in every respect. He should be able to keep him far enough off the low block to force him into spin moves or short, challenged jumpers. Pattrerson runs the floor just as well as Davis, so there is really no part of the game in which Davis is superior to Patrick Patterson.

Advantage: Kentucky

Position Analysis: Center

Deon Thompson will play the post for the Tar Heels, and Thompson is a senior with all kinds of great skills. Thompson can face up from 15 feet, bury you on the block, rebound, block shots, you name it. He is the Tar Heels' leading scorer and overall best player.

The knock against Thompson has been that he sometimes doesn't work that hard, but this year he seems to have solidified his work ethic. Thompson is big, strong, reasonably quick and has great hands -- he will catch everything thrown in his direction.

DeMarcus Cousins will likely get the assignment on Thomson. Offensively, Cousins and Thompson are very similar players, with the main difference being that Thompson is a better face-up player. Cousins is longer and even heavier than Thompson, so a determined effort by Cousins will force Thompson farther away from the basket than he has been most of this year. Cousins also has the unusual habit of keeping his feet on the head fake, and using his very long arms to bother shots. That will serve him very well against Thompson if he continues to do that.

Offensively, Cousins is capable of pushing Thompson around in the post, and his greater length and soft hands make him a big challenge for Thompson defensively. What works against Cousins are two things -- Thompson is a senior, and has all the experience in the world. Cousins is an excitable freshman, prone to fouls, and a poor foul shooter. Overall, the balance of the equities goes to Thompson.

Advantage: North Carolina

Bench Analysis

The Tar Heels are huge on the bench, having four bench players at 6'10" or taller. UK is deep along the front line as well, but unlike the Heels, Kentucky has better depth at the guard position. It would be much better if DeAndre Liggins were available, but we won't know about that until game time.

Kentucky has been the much higher scoring team so far, but North Carolina gets a greater percentage of points from their bench. That is something the Wildcats will have to keep an eye on.

Carolina's depth is actually better than UK's at critical positions. They could, for example, execute a "Hack-a-Shaq" game against Cousins if Cousins is able to dominate in the post, and force him to the line. They could literally expend 24 fouls guarding Cousins and still field a great team.

Advantage: North Carolina

Overall analysis

This game is going to be a track meet, so it is important for both coaches to manage their players carefully. Loafing up and down the floor will likely produce dunks on the other end, and I expect to see a ton of dunks in this game.

These two teams are both extremely big and long, and you can expect a lot of shots blocked by both sides. If the officials call this game close, it will be to the advantage of the Tar Heels in a big way. If they don't, that advantage is minimized.

The higher the pace, the more advantage to Kentucky. That's because UNC has so many big men, and relatively few guards and swing players.

UK must strongly guard the three against UNC, because they can shoot it. They don't shoot it that much because they would rather get layups and dunks, just like UK, but UNC is the more dangerous team from the perimeter. If UK doesn't put on some strong perimeter defense, the Heels can burn the 'Cats there.

I think this game will ultimately come down to which coach manages his player's minutes better. Both are going to be tired at the end, and I would be surprised if the winning margin is more than ten points. Kentucky has the home court advantage, which will be big, but not huge, in this game.

Projected score: Kentucky 93, North Carolina 88.

The College Brand vs the NBA's

Evan Pfaff — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 17:48:42 -0000

More photos » by Chuck Burton - AP

Is it more fun to see DeMarre Carroll take it to the rack as a student-athlete or a pro? (AP Photo/Chuck Burton)

Browse more photos »

I split Denver Nuggets season tickets with a few friends and two weeks ago we held our lottery to see which games we were going to this year. High on my list were the two Memphis Grizzlies games, and for those knowledgeable with my Mizzou infatuation, you will understand the reason: former Mizzou standout, and current NBA rookie, DeMarre Carroll.

So this past Sunday I went to the Nuggets-Grizzlies game, which turned out to be a defensive-minded 133-123 slugfest.

Having these Nuggets season tickets, and being a season ticket holder before, I have seen a good amount of NBA games despite not growing up liking or caring about the pro style.

I grew up in a college town (Columbus, OH) and went to school in a state without pro basketball, so naturally the NBA was not a high priority on my watch list. Even while my Chicago-raised college friends were watching Jordan win 6 NBA titles, I didn't pay much attention.

That changed when I moved to Denver and started following the then-lowly Nuggets. I started watching them because nobody else was. They would win less that 20 games per season when I moved to town and I could get front row seats from scalpers for $10 or $15 a ticket. At that time I wouldn't miss it when the Clippers visited to catch Keyon Dooling.

Fast forward nearly 10 years, and you can catch me watching the Nuggets through most of their 82 games.

During the fall and winter months, if I am watching sports, the only thing that supersedes the Nuggets would be when Mizzou is on (thanks to the Full Court package I haven't missed a Mizzou game in years).

So with that as a background, I can say with good accuracy that I now know both the NBA and college games. How they operate and the difference between the two.

For my money, I would take a game between student-athletes over a one played by millionaires.

I feel the innocence of the college game makes it the better spectator sport. Sure you will have corruption with some of the kids, agents and money grabbers lurking in the background, but that happens only to a limited number of college kids. For the most part, the superstar on a college program may have someone with malice intension giving them direction, but, for the most part, the other 4 on the floor and all those coming off the bench are playing for the pure love of the sport, and a free education.

In the pros you have businessmen. These people are individual corporations. The league MINIMUM for a rookie this year is over $450,000. Which means if you have never played an NBA game and make a roster, you are guaranteed nearly a half a million dollars to suit up and ride the pine.

So let's take a look at the typical last man off the bench who might fit this bill in both pros and college.

The last man off the bench in college is generally a walk-on, or former walk-on now on scholarship. When they get in the crowd is behind them, chanting their name (think Rudy) and their teammates do whatever they can to get the kid an open shot.

Conversely in the pros, the last man off the bench is fighting to stay in the league. If they are a rookie, making nearly half a million dollars, they know they need stats to keep them on the payroll. Consequently when they do get into the game, generally during blowouts, they are more likely to do things to get in the scorebook. Jacking shots and being selfish. Their teammates are generally in the same boat as them, and are also looking to jack shots, get in the books and keep their jobs.

NBA apologists like ESPN's Colin Cowherd will say that the athleticism, speed and size of the NBA makes it a better sell than the college version. And he, and others who make this argument, are right. The NBA is bigger, faster and more athletic. But that doesn't make it better... does it?

To quote my buddy Gus in the midst of the Nuggets-Grizzlies game, "In college DeMarre would regularly be the tallest guy on the court." Now the 6-8, 225 pounder is playing small forward and matching up against the first week NBA MVP in Carmelo Anthony.

So what? Does the JYD's reduced size make him less of a player? Or make that brand of hoops any better? I don't see how you can argue that.

If proportionally everyone is taller in the NBA than college, what is the difference? In college you might have a 6-8 center and 6-0 guard. In pros it will be a 6-4 guard and 7-0 center. Proportions remain the same. No advantage.

On Sunday you could also look across the bench at fellow rookie, and former North Carolina Tar Heel, Denver Nugget Ty Lawson and compare speed.

Last year Lawson was sprinting up and down the floor, leading Carolina to the national championship. This year he is one of the fastest guys on the court, but not necessarily the fastest guy out there. Defensive players are getting back and can now front him.

Does this make it better? For my money, I would like to see a guy sprint down the floor and go in for a two handed jam, than to see him pull up at the free throw line and attempt a shot. And for those claiming this makes the NBA better, besides the excitement of a dunk, if it is your team, which would you rather have your guy shoot? A high percentage lay-up/dunk with a possibility of an And One or a pull up 15 footer?

And as for excitement. What is better? March Madness or the NBA playoffs?

Another way to ask this question, three weeks of knock-out basketball or a playoff series that takes three weeks to complete.

What do you think?

And while this argument is based solely that college is better, that doesn't discredit the NBA. It is still FANtastic, but in comparing the 2, it sink to the bottom.

As an aside, if you are interested in following the Denver Nuggets, check out our SB Nation friends over at Denver Stiffs. They put on a good show.

Poll

Which is your cup of tea?

College basketball

32 votes

NBA basketball

13 votes

45 votes | Poll has closed

Minnesota Drafts Wayne Ellington, Promises to Keep Him

T.H. — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 02:24:59 -0000

They just can't get enough of Carolina guards, no matter how they try to quit them. After trading Rashad McCants at the start of the season and picking up Ty Lawson solely on Denver's behalf, the Timberwolves spent their 28th pick on Wayne Ellington. Having already drafted Ricky Rubio and Johnny Flynn earlier in the evening, Minnesota must have been absolutely guard-starved before today, right?

Ty Lawson Drafted by Minnesota, Headed to Denver

T.H. — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 01:56:05 -0000

With the eighteenth pick in the draft, Minnesota picked their third straight point guard, as a proxy for the Nuggets, who picked him up in exchange for a draft pick down the road. Lawson appears to have been selected to be the anti-Chauncey Billups, to spell him and run an entirely different style of offense. If the Nuggets can run both Billups' deliberate half-court style and Lawson's faster, Carolina pace, they'll be a tough team to counter.

Also, George Karl finally got somebody to help him make fun of Dahntay Jones come March. Good for you, George.

The Big Blue Daily Mail -- Is Rajon Rondo a Problem Child?

Truzenzuzex — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 13:41:10 -0000

More photos » by Nam Y. Huh - AP

"Grow up, Rajon!"

Browse more photos »

Before I get started with this, I will answer my lede question -- no, not by the measure of "problem children" we have seen in the past in the NBA, Rajon Rondo definitely is not a problem child. But he is also not a man, not yet.

During the time Rajon Rondo was at Kentucky, it was utterly impossible for any basketball fan not to see his extraordinary talent and physical gifts. From his huge hands to his giant wingspan to the way he seemed to be thinking one step ahead of his opponents, Rondo was always destined to be an NBA player, and a good one. His physical gifts alone all but ensured that.

But comes now all this trade talk, which, given Rondo's mostly stellar on-the-court performance makes one wonder just what in the name of Heaven is going on in Danny Ainge's mind. Well, we got a bit of insight into that yesterday from Ainge himself:

During the interview, Ainge commented that Rondo has "got to grow up,’’ and added, "his presence hurt us’’ against Orlando in the Eastern Conference semifinals, that Rondo wasn’t a "max contract player,’’ and acknowledged Rondo was fined for being tardy to postseason games.

Hmm. So there is some trouble in Paradise, it seems. The fact of the matter is, Rajon Rondo does have to grow up. At only 23 years old and while certainly an adult technically, we have seen many players both past and present who were little more than boys trying to be men at this point in their career, and at this tender age. The problem is, at 23 years old, Rajon Rondo is the starting point guard on one of the NBA's most prized properties -- the Boston Celtics. I know the guys at Memphis and Charlotte don't want to hear this, but a lot more people care who starts for the Lakers and the Celtics than who starts for your teams. Ainge gets this intuitively. Rondo, if these comments are to be taken at face value, does not.

Celticsblog weighs in on on these remarks from Danny Ainge thus:

However, I also think that things like this have the potential to sour a relationship quickly. The last thing you want is a public war of words between your front office and your starting point guard. Not only would that lower Rondo's potential trade value, but most importantly, it could easily lead to resentment. If Rondo really is stubborn and really does have problems hiding his anger / frustration, then calling him out in public potentially doesn't help that.

He's right on both counts. So why would Ainge fire this cannon shot across Rajon Rondo's bow? Well, usually when you call a player out in public like this, it is to draw his full attention to the problem and force a response. Certainly, the method and intensity of Rondo's reaction could help bring to pass just what Celticsblog fears. If Rondo reacts with impudence and/or irrational anger, it will have the effect of validating Ainge's comment and potentially lowering Rondo's trade value as well as damaging his relationship with the Celtics if they decide to keep him.

But it also has the effect of cutting through the bovine excrement. Candor like this must be answered with one of three things: Equal candor, outright anger or contrition. The way that Rondo responds will give Ainge, in large part, the answer to his problem -- does he deal Rondo and let somebody else mature him, messing up the Celtics chemistry and forcing at least a minor rebuilding, or does he hang on to Rondo and deal with the maturation process himself? It is also quite possible that Rondo was unaware of the gravity of his situation until just now, and the shock of that could do much to motivate him to grab an oar and begin rowing the same way as everyone else.

Bill Burt of the Eagle-Tribune in Massachusetts takes Rondo's alleged immaturity head on:

Starting point guard for the Boston Celtics. World Champion. Reebok commercials. Triple-doubles galore. Recognition as the next "great" point guard.

All by age 23.

This is the same Rajon Rondo who, on draft day in 2006, drew this comment from ESPN college basketball expert Jay Bilas, "The problem is he can't shoot."

Rondo still can't shoot, but he can run an offense.

Now comes the dirt.

He's pig-headed. He's not a leader. He's been tardy too many times to games, including a playoff tilt. And, maybe worst of all, he wants to be among the richest players in pro basketball.

And lest I forget, he still can't hit the open jump shot.

Ouch. There is some candor for you. Rondo, as good as he has been, could be a lot better in any number of ways, and some of his shortcomings will become glaring if they aren't addressed. His shooting has been a problem since he was in high school, and although he has made some progress, it is clearly not up to the standards of a star NBA point guard right now, and is not improving as quickly as most players do.

But the lack of a jump shot is not a fatal flaw for a player like Rondo, but a bad attitude absolutely can be. You don't get yours until you deliver the goods, and if this article is accurate, Rajon Rondo is demanding his money before he delivers the goods. If that sticks, he is looking at a one-way ticket to a small-market team, and even if he gets to the all-star game every year, the likelihood of winding up on a truly championship-caliber team tends to decrease when you are perceived as a problem child. That isn't always true, of course -- Rasheed Wallace, Dennis Rodman and others have proven it is possible, but the list of difficult players with NBA rings is a pretty short one.

Lets hope it all works out for Rajon and the Celtics. Now for the news:

UK Basketball News

Jody Demling talks about the "Fab Frosh Camp" at UK
Elite forward set to visit Kentucky
Chris Fisher blogs on Mychal Parker.
Jody Demling on Dominique Ferguson
Former Cat Gerald Fitch is Player of the Year in Turkey
Great find by BSB. Congrats, Gerald, you were one of my faves.
John Clay's thoughts on the Seth Davis article
"In my more idealistic youth, I saw such practices as failing to renew a player’s scholarship as outlandish behavior. I’ve softened my hard-lance stance over the years, and while Calipari’s spring cleaning makes me a bit uncomfortable, I’m far from outraged."
Seth Davis: Isiah Thomas, John Calipari hurting players in scholarship game
Some thoughtful comments from Straitpinkie on the subject I blogged about yesterday. I think most UK fans see this "waiving" of players as a problem, but only if it happens outside the confines of a coaching change. I know some who read this blog don't agree, and that's fine, but I think most people are offended by the practice and would like to see it stopped.
Seth Davis Criticizes John Calipari and Others
Just as BSB says, it is what it is.
A mock version of a mock draft
5. Minnesota -- Tyreke Evans: Evans' stellar rookie season will be interrupted when it's revealed that not only are his SAT results dubious, but he was never even enrolled at Memphis. When reached for comment, John Calipari says, "I don't know what you're talking about. I've been coaching Kentucky for the last 10 years." It's okay to laugh at this one. :-)
Deadspin - And It's Erin Calipari To The Rescue Again...
Offered without comment.
NBA Draft promises long night for fans | KentuckySports.com
"With Jodie Meeks in the mix, Big Blue Nation might actually turn off John Calipari's tweets and turn on Thursday night's NBA Draft, live from Madison Square Garden."
Meeks to the Lakers?
What do you think?

UK Football News

Locke's knee injury tested his mental toughness
Knee injuries truly suck. Kudos to Derrick Locke for his determination. I pray he is as good as new when he hits the field this year.
"Rumble at the River" to be Televised by ESPNU
The UK vs. Miami of Ohio game will be picked up by ESPNU.

Other UK Sports News

None today.

NCAA Sports News

With stars returning Horn, USC have a chance for big seasonw
The SEC East is going to be tough next year.
Some guys are easier to replace than others
I think UNC will have a devil of a time replacing Ty Lawson.

Other News of Interest

Ex-Scott County Basketball Star Mackey Indicted
This kid just can't stay out of trouble. I foresee gloomy prospects ahead for his life if he can't turn it around. Very sad.
Feldhaus medalist for 74th Chippeways Invitational after firing 69
Deron Feldhaus has game -- golf game, that is.

The Daily Schadenfreude

Chris Diggs asks a very good question
My guess is, the answer is no. Coach Krzyzewski is off-limits for criticism by most of the media unless he makes enough a a jerk of himself, in public, to garner criticism.
Commentary: Florida coach Billy Donovan's level of comfort still high
"We all know the success that you had when you recruited Joakim Noah and Corey Brewer and the rest of that group," said a booster who rose with microphone in hand. "Why can't you do that again?" Bwahhahaa! Yeah, Billy, why not? Oh, I love it when Donovan gets slapped around by a Florida fan.

2009 NBA Draft Q&A: Aran Smith of NBADraft.net (Part 3 of 3)

Atma Brother ONE — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 17:00:19 -0000

Don't forget to check out Part 1 and Part 2 of this trilogy with Aran Smith from NBADraft.net.

How high would AR go in this draft? [via www.nba.com]

We get right down to business in this part. Do the same by J-U-M-P-ing!

Atma Brother #1 (Golden State of Mind): Anthony Randolph is coming off a very intriguing rookie season with the Warriors. How does he stack up against this draft class? Where would you project him to go in this draft?

Aran Smith (NBADraft.net): If the Randolph that played this year for the Warriors somehow was thrown back into the draft, he'd be the #2 pick. I think Randolph has a lot of upside and really liked that pick since he was the player with the most upside of anyone at 14. No sense in taking safe picks when you can pick up those types of players in free agency.

Atma Brother #1 (Golden State of Mind): With names like Ricky Rubio, Brandon Jennings, Stephen Curry, Jonny Flynn, Tyreke Evans, Ty Lawson, Jeff Teague, Patrick Mills, and Jrue Holiday this draft seems like it has plenty of point guard options to help the Warriors shore up their biggest glaring weakness. Is there a big difference between them in terms of talent and upside? Do you see any All-Star appearances out of this group?

Aran Smith (NBADraft.net): There likely will be a few all star appearances from one or two of these guys. As far as difference in talent, yes there are a few tiers. Rubio and Jennings have the most upside. Flynn is a guy who combines solid potential with current ability. Teague might actually have even more upside than Flynn, but he's got a ways to go. Evans is not a true point guard in my book, and I'm also not sure why people haven't caught onto the fact that the big point guard is a failed experiment. The rest of those guys are late first round types.

Atma Brother #1 (Golden State of Mind): With the 7th pick in the 2009 NBA Draft the Golden State Warriors SHOULD select... Why?

Aran Smith (NBADraft.net): The Warriors should take the best player available. I would take Jennings if he's there. He makes the most sense long term for them and goes along with the swing for the fences approach that brought them Randolph last year. DeRozan has a lot of upside and would make for an interesting pick. I also like Hill, but if they take him, we may never find out how good Wright is until he gets a fresh start with a new
team.

Atma Brother #1 (Golden State of Mind): With the 7th pick in the 2009 NBA Draft the Golden State Warriors WILL select... Why?

Aran Smith (NBADraft.net): Nellie wants to win now so I anticipate they will go with the most NBA ready PG at their pick: Jonny Flynn. Flynn isn't a bad pick, but there will be other guys available with more upside. That would mean taking a risk and rolling the dice on a player for the future, so that may not be in the cards.

**********

All of us at GSoM wanted to thank Aran for taking the time to field these questions. NBADraft.net has long remained one of my favorite hoops destinations. It's ridiculously easy to lose hours on the site just flipping back through the draft archives (which is exactly what I did when I wrote this piece: Golden State Warriors 1st Round Draft History and Just My Imagination) and reading up about players that won't even be drafted till 2010!

Poll

Would Golden State Warriors sophomore forward Anthony Randolph go #2 overall in the 2009 NBA Draft?

YES: No Doubt

406 votes

NO-a: Definite lottery pick though

267 votes

NO-b: Post-lotto 1st round pick

18 votes

NO-c: 2nd round pick (I don't know hoops)

6 votes

NO-d: Undrafted (I'm just being silly)

7 votes

704 votes | Poll has closed

With the 21st Pick...

atthehive — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 01:07:27 -0000

Slightly longish post ahead, but it should be worth it. As outlined in yesterday's post, there is some solid statistical backing for the "Blair or Bust" line of thinking. There simply is not a big worth the guaranteed dollars at 21 overall. Unless Blair falls to the level, the Hornets have to be looking elsewhere. But who?

The Candidates

Eric Maynor because... a good percentage of mocks have us taking him. He gained national attention by knocking off Duke that one time and almost knocking off UCLA this year.

Marcus Thornton because... Hornets fans seem to have fallen in love with the guy, and he's a New Orleans product. He gained national attention by winning the Southeastern Conference Player of the Year Award.

Sam Young because... he's 6'6", is athletic, shoots the three, and projects as a plus defender. He gained national attention by averaging 23 points per game in this year's Tournament.

Austin Daye because... he's super long, deep range. He hasn't really gained much national attention yet.

Danny Green because... John Hollinger loves him, and Hollinger usually nails two or three sleepers every year that nobody else is high on. He's gained no national attention despite playing for NC.

Jeff Teague because... he fills a need, he's (ostensibly) friends with Chris Paul. He gained national attention during Wake Forest's rise to #1.

Ty Lawson because... statistically, he may be the best overall player in the draft. He gained national attention by being the PG of North Carolina.

These seven guys comprise my final list, to be culled down to the best option(s). I think I have pretty good reasons for leaving other guys out, some documented towards the end. Definitely leave comments on other prospects, and we can discuss.

						3PT			FT			Rebounds			Misc
	Height	Weight	Wingspan	Vertical	FG%	M	A	Pct	M	A	Pct	Off	Def	Tot	Ast	TO	Stl	Blk	PF	PPG
2008 - Eric Maynor	6'2"	164	6'2"	31.5	46.3	1.9	5.4	36.1	5.8	7.1	81.5	0.5	3.1	3.6	6.2	3.0	1.7	0.2	2.4	22.4

Draft Express says: 8th best PG in draft
Hollinger says: 21st best player in draft
Points/Possession: 1.17
FTA/Posession: 0.37
Ast/Possession: 0.32
TO/Possession: 0.16
Usage%: 28.6%
eFG%: 52%
TS%: 58%

Most people are viewing Maynor as a point guard in this draft, but there are many shooting guard aspects to his game. While he lacks range (36% from the college three isn't terribly inspiring), he took on a large role of his team's offense, accounting for almost 29% of possessions. His solid floor percentages are more due to shots in the ilk of floaters and runners than jumpers. As his career at VCU unfolded, he became more and more of a scorer. So while his 32% assist rate still seems solid, he posted a 49% rate in his first year as starter. There are many aspects of Jannero Pargo's style of play to Maynor's game; a case could be made that Maynor is Pargo with less range. That in mind, the Hornets' decision on Maynor may very well depend on their plans with Pargo. The earliest they can sign Pargo would be July 11th, more than two weeks after the conclusion of the draft. If Maynor is indeed the pick, the writing may be on the wall for Jannero.

Verdict: Maynor has a solid skill set, but his statistics simply don't compare with two point guards (who both played "purer" points in college) who may still be available. Couple that with questions about his conference, and I don't know. It'd be a solid pick, but one with minimal upside.

						3PT			FT			Rebounds			Misc
	Height	Weight	Wingspan	Vertical	FG%	M	A	Pct	M	A	Pct	Off	Def	Tot	Ast	TO	Stl	Blk	PF	PPG
2008 - Marcus Thornton	6'3"	194	6'5"	33	47.2	2.2	5.7	38.8	4.3	5.7	74.5	2.0	3.5	5.5	2.1	1.8	1.6	0.4	2.1	21.1

Draft Express says: 5th best SG in draft
Hollinger says: Not in Top 31
Points/Possession: 1.24
FTA/Posession: 0.33
Ast/Possession: 0.13
TO/Possession: 0.11
Usage%: 25.0%
eFG%: 54%
TS%: 58%

Southeastern Conference Player of the Year usually doesn't mean much, because the SEC produces 1 or 2 great NBA prospects a year, max. But there's a lot to like with Marcus Thornton. Physically, he's got good tools. The 6'3" measurement is an immediate red flag for a guy that plays exclusively shooting guard, but I love his release on his shot. He gets it off quite surreptitiously, and the 6'5" wingspan aids with that. On top of that, he generally makes the most of his 33 inch vertical in terms of his jumpers- something he has to do, but something a lot of prospects don't make a habit of.

While his 38-39% three point shooting doesn't look other worldly, a lot of those looks did come under heavy pressure. I like his range overall, and I wouldn't be surprised if he could maintain a 35%-40% stroke in the NBA. He isn't the fastest guy in the world, but the Hornets wouldn't be drafting him to be a Jason Terry/Jannero Pargo-like speed option (even though that's Draft Express' comparison). Rather, they'd be drafting him to fill up the scoreboard in a hurry, mostly through sets. Thornton's 1.24 points/possession is an impressive stat indeed; he's a creative scorer. The one odd thing is, though he's more of a scoring threat (efficiency-wise) than Maynor, he used substantially fewer possessions than Maynor. Maybe this will amount to nothing, but his 25% rate is lower than a lot of the top scorers in the NCAA's. It's something of a red flag in terms of how much "volume" he could actually provide as a volume scorer.

The final stat that intrigues me is the 11% turnover rate. As much as he handles the ball, it's very impressive. Observationally, I don't think he has nearly the vision to play point guard though. His low assist rate of 13% back that up, as does his pure point ratio of -1.36 (positive indicating "purer"). So while the turnover rate may come in handy, I don't think it'd help much in terms of him getting point guard minutes. At 6'3", and with his skill set, Thornton would step in as a "pure shooting guard," a position that's disappeared a little bit in recent years, in favor of swingmen and guys that can rotate between the 2 and 3.

Verdict: Like Maynor, there are a lot of "safe" aspects to a Thornton pick. He's a very efficient scorer, he has a well set position, he doesn't turn the ball over. But again, the cost of that safety is minimal upside. Who he is today is likely very similar to who he'll be in three years.

						3PT			FT			Rebounds			Misc
	Height	Weight	Wingspan	Vertical	FG%	M	A	Pct	M	A	Pct	Off	Def	Tot	Ast	TO	Stl	Blk	PF	PPG
2008 - Sam Young	6'6"	223	6'11"	33	50.2	1.6	4.2	37.3	3.2	4.3	74.0	1.9	4.3	6.3	1.1	2.4	1.0	0.8	1.7	19.2

Draft Express says: 3rd best SF in draft
Hollinger says: 52
Points/Possession: 1.17
FTA/Posession: 0.26
Ast/Possession: 0.07
TO/Possession: 0.15
Usage%: 24.4%
eFG%: 55%
TS%: 58%

Sam Young really made a name for himself this year, averaging almost 20 a night for the season, then performing even better in the Tournament. It's interesting how split analysts are on Young. There's one crowd that believes he can step in and contribute minutes to virtually any team in the league at this point. The other viewpoint is that he's an old prospect who may have been vastly overvalued by the 2008-2009 campaign.

Physically, the tools are all there. He's 6'6", athletic, has a very long wingspan at 6'11" and a decent vertical for his size. His frame could easily be more bulked up if that's what a team needs, and he's already at a good weight right now anyways. The problem is, despite the gaudy scoring averages, the underlying statistics give me reason to pause. A 15% turnover rate from a small forward who didn't do too much ball-handling (LeVance Fields was one of the top point guards in the country) is a flag. A 7% assist rate indicates that he virtually never set up teammates for anything. It's a serious flag for a wing player, as even well-reputed ballhogs often create opportunities for their teammates, via double teams. His 26% free throws per possession is more about 10% lower than either Maynor or Thornton. It makes me seriously wonder how he'll adapt to the contact game of the NBA. And if that wasn't enough, his 24.4% usage rate doesn't do much to increase his value.

Looking specifically at the Hornets, Young is a Julian Wright clone in many ways. Similar height, long wingspans, questionable ball control skills. Young clearly has the better stroke and better strange, but would it be worth using the 21st pick to get Julian Wright with a better jump shot (maybe)? And the age issue is not to be overlooked. Young is already 24 years old, way, way older than most other rookies.

Verdict: Very little upside. This is who he'll be in the NBA. His peripheral statistics are somewhat alarming, he's been overhyped a little due to Pitt's run, and he could very well be a redundant player on our roster. I'm taking Maynor and Thornton over him.

			FG			3PT			FT			Rebounds			Misc
	Height	Weight	Wingspan	Vertical	FG%	M	A	Pct	M	A	Pct	Off	Def	Tot	Ast	TO	Stl	Blk	PF	PPG
2008 - Austin Daye	6'11"	192	7'3"	28	47.7	1.1	2.5	42.9	2.3	3.2	70.6	1.1	5.8	6.8	1.1	2.1	0.7	2.1	2.9	12.7

Draft Express says: 2nd best SF in draft
Hollinger says: 4th best Player in draft
Points/Possession: 1.09
FTA/Posession: 0.28
Ast/Possession: 0.09
TO/Possession: 0.18
Usage%: 16.8%
eFG%: 53%
TS%: 56%

After a freshman campaign that left Zags fans drooling, Daye's game took something of a dive this year. His points/possession went down, his assist rate went down, his turnover rate stayed poor, he drew fewer fouls. Of course, analysts are all mostly in love with the guy now. Go figure.

Statistically, Daye leaves much to be desired. His points/possession of 1.09 is far lower than any of the other guys on this list; he was simply not very efficient on offense. For his size, he doesn't get to the line very often (more than Young, but less than either Maynor or Thornton). He showed zero ability as a passing big man, averaging 9 assists every 100 possessions. Unfortunately, he did turn the ball over a ton, almost double as often as he assisted on baskets. His usage rate was quite low, as Gonzaga relied on a variety of other players to make their Tournament run.

As you might have guessed, there's a large school of people that feel statistics won't tell the whole story on Daye. I am one of those people. As poor as his stats have been, the guy is 6'11" with small forward skills. He has a 7'3" wingspan. He has a standing reach of over nine feet. Add in a 28 inch vertical, and Daye's hands will be somewhere around eleven feet and a half in the air when he jumps. His pace-adjusted block statistics aren't noteworthy, but from the four or five times I've seen him play, I've found him to be more of a "Tyson Chandler shot blocker"- he'll challenge and alter a lot more shots than the box score credits him for.

On top of that, he has range. NBA range. He shot 41.3% from three last year and 42.9% from three this year. In two years, he's averaged taking around 4 threes per game. He can shoot off the dribble, has good ball handling skills for his size, can create shots, has excellent coordination, and though is a terrible offensive rebounder, he's as good a defensive rebounder as Greg Oden and Paul Millsap were in college. He turned 21 a couple weeks ago. Does he have flaws? Absolutely. But if Daye could pass and score more efficiently, he'd be a lottery pick. Those two issues mean he's almost guaranteed to be available at 21. I'd take Thornton over him probably, but if Pargo is in our future plans, I'd take him over Maynor. Over Young, I'd take him without thinking.

Verdict: Major, major, major upside. Major crash and burn potential. The clincher for me is that John Hollinger's draft analyzer loves him. Every year, it pinpoints a couple guys that could vastly outperform their stock, and Daye looks like the pick this year. He doesn't fit an immediate need, but I wouldn't be terribly depressed if he was the pick.

						3PT			FT			Rebounds			Misc
	Height	Weight	Wingspan	Vertical	FG%	M	A	Pct	M	A	Pct	Off	Def	Tot	Ast	TO	Stl	Blk	PF	PPG
2008 - Danny Green	6'5"	208	6'10"	33	47.1	2.0	4.7	43.0	1.4	1.6	85.2	1.8	2.8	4.7	2.7	1.7	1.8	1.3	2.2	13.1

Draft Express says: 9th best SF in draft
Hollinger says: 8th best Player in draft
Points/Possession: 1.20
FTA/Posession: 0.15
Ast/Possession: 0.25
TO/Possession: 0.15
Usage%: 14.3%
eFG%: 57%
TS%: 59%

This is another one of Hollinger's favorites, the only reason he's on this list. I figure if I included Hollinger's take on Daye, I had to include Green. However, I don't agree with Hollinger that Green is going to be great. The Draft Rater has him as the 3rd best wing, behind Tyreke Evans and Daye.

His efficiency numbers are all excellent, but the reason behind it is very clear- he's primarily a shooter, a very good shooter. The majority of his looks come on jumpers, often set up by his very good teammates at North Carolina. He doesn't draw fouls, and based on my observations of him, he probably won't be making many contact filled forays to the hole in the NBA. Another factor is his low usage rate of 14.3%. Essentially, Green was a very good role player at the college level. That simply isn't the player the Hornets should be targeting in this draft. Green could end up being a very good fit for a team looking to add depth (Utah? L.A.?), but he doesn't have the off-the-dribble ability of Maynor/Thornton, or the superstar potential of Daye.

Verdict: I'd take him 7th among the 7 players on this list.

						3PT			FT			Rebounds			Misc
	Height	Weight	Wingspan	Vertical	FG%	M	A	Pct	M	A	Pct	Off	Def	Tot	Ast	TO	Stl	Blk	PF	PPG
2008 - Jeff Teague	6'0"	175	6'8"	37	48.5	1.5	3.3	44.1	5.8	7.1	81.4	0.5	2.8	3.3	3.5	3.4	1.9	0.6	2.2	18.9

Draft Express says: 4th best SG in draft
Hollinger says: 14th best Player in draft
Points/Possession: 1.15
FTA/Posession: 0.43 (!!!!)
Ast/Possession: 0.22
TO/Possession: 0.20
Usage%: 21.9%
eFG%: 55%
TS%: 62%

A 6 foot point guard, weighing 175 pounds, with a 38 inch vertical, a lane agility of 11.1, and a 3 quarter court sprint time of 3.2 seconds, hailing from Wake Forest University. Even if Jeff Teague was absolutely terrible, Hornets fans would've stood up and taken notice, because those were exactly the draft measurements of one Chris Paul. But Teague doesn't suck at all- far from it. According to the latest estimations, it's unlikely he falls to 21, but it's worth going over him anyway to see where he should be on our draft board.

A lot of places have Teague listed as a shooting guard, and for good reason. In two years, he posted pure point ratios of -3.04 and -3.17. He posted the measley assist rates of 19% and 22% while posting 79% and 73% FGA/possession. He's decidedly a shoot first guard, to an extreme relative to the college level. His turnover levels were 19% and 20% (better than Chris Paul in college for what it's worth). But he doesn't carry nearly the assist:turnover ratio Paul did.

In essence, Teague played shooting guard from the point guard position, inflating his PG stats tremendously. That doesn't mean he can't score at all. He certainly has some great tools. He shot 44% from three last year, displaying good range. His most promising statistic is 43% FTA/possession. That's not just promising; it's amazing. The ability to get to the free throw line is a great indicator of NBA success for college players (it's probably the definitive statistic that set Chris Paul way apart from Deron Williams in college).

So I'm not saying Teague is all hype. What I am contending is that he isn't too much of a "combo" guard like many reports suggest. I think he lacks the point guard element of the combo guard to enough of an extent that he'd struggle if played at PG without another PG on the floor. In the long run, that means he won't be an Antonio Daniels replacement. Is it worth using a draft pick on that?

Verdict: He's a legitimate scorer. If we're drafting for a combo guard, Maynor is the better option. If we're drafting for a creative scorer at the 2, Teague is a better option than Thornton, but Thornton's 3 inch advantage on Teague makes me think he'd be more successful at getting minutes and translating his game to the NBA. Overall, there's only a 1% chance we'd need to make a decision on Teague, since one of the 20 preceding teams is guaranteed to be tricked into thinking he's a full time point guard.

						3PT			FT			Rebounds			Misc
	Height	Weight	Wingspan	Vertical	FG%	M	A	Pct	M	A	Pct	Off	Def	Tot	Ast	TO	Stl	Blk	PF	PPG
2008 - Ty Lawson	6'0"	197	6'1"	37	53.2	1.5	3.1	47.2	4.7	5.9	79.8	0.7	2.3	3.0	6.6	1.9	2.1	0.1	1.7	16.6

Draft Express says: 7th best PG in draft
Hollinger says: 1st best Player in draft (!!!!)
Points/Possession: 1.30 (!!!!)
FTA/Posession: 0.47 (!!!!)(!!!!)
Ast/Possession: 0.51
TO/Possession: 0.15
Usage%: 16.8%
eFG%: 61% (!!!!)
TS%: 66%

Take note of all those exclamations. Ty Lawson posted some truly off the wall statistics in 2008-2009. The contention is that there was some tremendous statistical inflation going on due to North Carolina's ridiculously fast system. But a closer look shows that Lawson actually was very, very good.

Let's start with something nobody is questioning: Lawson's shot. He has maybe the best range of any guard prospect, shooting a wacky 47% from three this year. If his three point shot doesn't translate to the NBA level, I will be absolutely stunned. Nothing's a guarantee obviously, but this is as close as it gets. I love his form, and the way he gets into position off a dribble. On top of his long range abilities, Lawson is also one of the top finishers in college basketball. So his very high eFG% is not only a reflection of his deep ball talent, but also of his skill close to the hoop. And nobody's questioning his ability to draw contact. His 47% FTA/possession rate is simply amazing, and as much as you want to talk about system inflation, it certainly points to some serious underlying talent.

The one statistic I accept may be somewhat inflated is the assist ratio. Lawson averaged a 51% rate last year (actually down from his freshman rate of 59%). Pace adjusting can simply level the possession playing field, but it can't take into account the fact that Lawson absolutely dominated the fast break. There certainly wasn't a better fast break field general in America. Will he get that many fast break opportunities in the NBA? Obviously not. The defenders are more athletic, will get back faster, and will cut off passing lanes with ease. But to point out only the inflation of assists and to ignore the turnover rate is a serious error. Lawson's 15% turnover rate, in a fast break environment requiring rapid decision making, is yet another impressive attribute.

At best, Lawson could be one of the most talented point guard prospects in a long while. At worst, his assist numbers are somewhat inflated, and he's not as good a passer as people thought. So? The shot is for real. The decision making is for real. His driving ability is real. His defense is real.

Verdict: I know I said yesterday that I'd take DeJuan Blair over any guard/wing prospects... but I don't know. If he's available, I'd take Lawson in a heartbeat out of these 7.

Who Didn't Make This List?

Chase Budinger: Great stats, but workouts have revealed that he'd much rather stand and shoot than drive and force the action. A stand-still shooter with questionable defense is the last thing the Hornets should look to add this summer.

Terrence Williams: He's primarily a defensive stopper with highly questionable offensive skills and the inability to create a shot (though he is an awesome passer). With Posey and Wright aboard, that seems redundant.

Jodie Meeks: Meeks is a terrific, undervalued scorer. I think apprehensions about his lack of athleticism will prove misguided because he has amazing range, took on a huge scoring responsibility with ease, drew a lot of fouls, and was one of the most efficient scorers in the country. But I don't think his stock is high enough for the Hornets to even think about taking him at 21. Is that undeserved? Absolutely. That's just how the draft goes some times.

Tyler Hansbrough: Very poor rebounding numbers. As much as his "toughness" has been touted, I (and the numbers) simply don't see it. See yesterday's Blair or Bust post if you're not convinced.

So Who's the Pick?

I'd put the board in this order:

DeJuan Blair
Ty Lawson
Marcus Thornton
Eric Maynor
Austin Daye
Jeff Teague
Jodie Meeks
Sam Young
Chase Budinger
Danny Green

Blair and Lawson have to be considered nearly equivalent in terms of talent, but the larger need at frontcourt puts Blair over the top. Whether or not Pargo comes back could really influence things too. If Pargo is in the Hornets' plans (as in, they know for sure they'll sign him on July 11th), I would push Daye over Maynor for sure. I've got Teague only at 6 because I consider Maynor a better version of him, more or less. Teague showed terrific scoring skills in college, but at 6'0", he won't have nearly the same scoring role or chances in the NBA. Basically, his most valuable skill set will be underutilized, and Maynor's previously shown passing ability will be given more opportunity to resurface in the NBA. So Maynor is the better combo guard in my eyes. If Blair, Lawson, Thornton, and Daye are off the board by #21, that's when I'd consider trading the pick. That would seem to be the line at which the pick ceases to have too much value to the Hornets, but could still be valuable for other teams.

If we get #1 or 2 on that list, I'll be extraordinarily happy. #3 through 6 would evoke a sound "meh" although Austin Daye is intriguing. #7 and below or any non-Blair big men could be filed into the Summer of 2008 disaster cabinet. This will truly be a difficult draft to navigate.

Ty Lawson's NBA Chances

T.H. — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 23:29:04 -0000

More photos » by Paul Sancya - AP

Browse more photos »

Both Dave Berri and apparently John Hollinger (I don't get ESPN insider, this is via Matt Yglesias) are speaking highly of Ty Lawson's chances in NBA; Hollinger has him as he best player in the draft behind consensus top pick Blake Griffin, and Berri's numbers list him as the best point guard in the draft and third overall, behind Griffin and DeJuan Blair. The number-crunchers are pro-Lawson, the more holistic folks, like Chad Ford, put him in the bottom third of the first round.

The biggest knocks against Lawson seem to be a) his size, and b) that his stats are inflated by playing amongst the talent at UNC at the speed they run at. The first is somewhat valid, but doesn't explain the draft watchers' love of Johnny Flynn, who is also 6'0", and posted significantly worse numbers for the Orangemen this year as a sophomore. The second objection, to anyone who watched a lot of UNC games this year, is pretty ridiculous. Playing with the offensive threats he did may have inflated his shooting percentage and added the occasional assist, but where Lawson really draws attention to himself is his lack of turnovers. His ridiculously low number compared to other point guards on that score came despite the breakneck pace he and the Tar Heels were running at, a tempo that would lead you to expect more turnovers, as they have less of a deleterious effect on your team's chances. That, factored in with Lawson's speed and strength, makes him a better prospect than a lot of people are considering at this point, and definitely more likely to succeed than similarly sized guards like Flynn and Darren Collison.

Mockmongling- 6/20/09

Seth — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 14:01:59 -0000

I understand that mock drafts are pretty much futile at this point, since we're likely to see a dizzying number of draft night trades. The Knicks could very well end up with Hasheem Thabeet, three KFC franchises, and the first 6 picks of the 2048 interplanetary draft when it's all said and done. But hey, mock drafts are fun/terrifying, so let's take a look at what the best ones are predicting for our Knicks, shall we? Refer to the first installation of this feature to get a better sense of the changing draft landscape. I'll try to hit the same mocks, but might add and omit certain ones depending on how recently they were updated.

Ridiculous Upside: Jrue Holiday (Disclosure: I made this pick. Jroops.)

DraftExpress: Jrue Holiday

NBADraft.net: Brandon Jennings

CollegeHoops.net: Ty Lawson

HoopsHype: Jrue Holiday

InsideHoops: Jonny Flynn

Ian Thomsen: Stephen Curry

HoopsWorld: Jordan Hill, Jordan Hill, Jonny Flynn, Jrue Holiday (Four separate writers.)

DimeMag: Stephen Curry

RotoTimes: Jonny Flynn (But they predict a trade for Curry)

Chicago Daily Herald: Jonny Flynn

MyNBADraft.com: Stephen Curry

Fox Sports: Brandon Jennings

Ziller at the Fanhouse: Stephen Curry

NBC Sports: Tyreke Evans

And there it is. Curry's rising stock has actually made for less of a consensus as the 25th draws near. If there's anything that can be gleaned from this mess, it's that almost nobody really buys the "Donnie Walsh is so hard for Jordan Hill! We're totally drafting a big man!" vibes thrust upon us by certain media. The upshot is that this draft is going to be a god-forsaken circus. Outside of Griffin, each of these prospects is either the basketball messiah or a drooling, overgrown toddler, depending on where you look. Like I said, with so much upheaval expected, mock drafts aren't too informative. It's reassuring, though, to see that the experts are as mixed up about this as we are.

SB Nation - Ty Lawson

Ask The Enemy: Texas vs North Carolina

North Carolina Tar Heels @ Kentucky Wildcats: Pre-game analysis

Four Factors Analysis

North Carolina Tar Heels Basketball Roster

North Carolina Statistics

Position Analysis: Point guard

Position Analysis: Shooting guard

Position Analysis: Small Forward

Position analysis: Power Forward

Position Analysis: Center

Bench Analysis

Overall analysis

The College Brand vs the NBA's

Which is your cup of tea?

College basketball

NBA basketball

Minnesota Drafts Wayne Ellington, Promises to Keep Him

Ty Lawson Drafted by Minnesota, Headed to Denver

The Big Blue Daily Mail -- Is Rajon Rondo a Problem Child?

UK Basketball News

UK Football News

Other UK Sports News

NCAA Sports News

Other News of Interest

The Daily Schadenfreude

2009 NBA Draft Q&A: Aran Smith of NBADraft.net (Part 3 of 3)

Would Golden State Warriors sophomore forward Anthony Randolph go #2 overall in the 2009 NBA Draft?

YES: No Doubt

NO-a: Definite lottery pick though

NO-b: Post-lotto 1st round pick

NO-c: 2nd round pick (I don't know hoops)

NO-d: Undrafted (I'm just being silly)

With the 21st Pick...

The Candidates

2008 - Eric Maynor

2008 - Marcus Thornton

2008 - Sam Young

2008 - Austin Daye

2008 - Danny Green

2008 - Jeff Teague

2008 - Ty Lawson

Who Didn't Make This List?

So Who's the Pick?

Ty Lawson's NBA Chances

Mockmongling- 6/20/09