[ESPN] Why some NCAA Joes end up as better NBA Pros

J.R. · Jun 18, 2010

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/draft2010/insider/news/story?id=5296983

This article appears in the June 28 issue of ESPN The Magazine.

Daniel Orton averaged 3.4 points as a freshman for Kentucky last season, but that hasn't stopped some GMs from thinking the 19-year-old center might be worth a lottery slot in the upcoming draft. His stats and status may seem incompatible, but a team builder's job is to project what a player will do, not grade what he has already done. Anyone can see POY candidates like Kevin Durant or John Wall will do fine in the NBA. Tabbing a guy who turns out to be a way better pro than his college career would have led you to believe is the real draft-night coup.

Russell Westbrook averaged only 12.7 ppg as a UCLA sophomore shooting guard. Check him out now. As an NBA rookie in 2008-09, he averaged 15.3 ppg -- in fewer minutes -- at the point for the Thunder. By Year 2, he was among the league's top young guards.

Rajon Rondo was a pariah at Kentucky, scoring 9.6 ppg in his two-year career there, and he was mocked in some circles after leaving early to enter the 2006 draft. Who looks foolish now? These days he's the Celtics' linchpin and a triple-double waiting to happen. "Some players are great in college and only average in the NBA," says Pistons president Joe Dumars. "Some are average in college but great in the pros. It's because the pro game is so different. It lets guys like Rondo exploit their talents more."

And yet on draft night 20 players were chosen before Rondo. You'd think some of those teams had to have been in the market for an All-Star point guard. The fact is most of the GMs just didn't see Rondo coming. And so we ask: What does a player who will blossom at the next level look like?

Jazz GM Kevin O'Connor offers a useful starting point. "I always say scouts spend too much time telling me what a player can't do," he says. "I'd like to know what a guy can do at the next level. It's a harder question to answer."

Every prospect has warts -- and warts are hard to ignore. If you saw Steve Nash at Santa Clara, it was clear he lacked blow-by quickness. At Arizona, Gilbert Arenas looked like a classic tweener: a 2-guard trapped in a 1's body. Turns out, neither shortcoming mattered because each player has other attributes that override it. Nash is -- and was -- a lights-out shooter with a basketball IQ to match. Arenas' range and ability to attack off the bounce make him an unstoppable scoring force, wherever he plays. Scouts say it takes one elite tool to make it in the NBA. In the cases of Nash and Arenas, some of them missed the obvious because they were blinded by the negative.

A scout's view can also be blurred by the nature of the college game. Just as some systems inflate a player's value (see: Adam Morrison at Gonzaga), others prevent players from showcasing their skills. UCLA seems to specialize in hiding NBA talent. Over the past two NBA seasons, Westbrook, Darren Collison and Jrue Holiday all significantly exceeded expectations set by their so-so college stats. Ben Howland's grind-it-out game plan is largely to blame. Those three natural point guards are all blessed with great speed and attacking instincts, but Howland dialed them back to a plodding pace. He also mostly played Westbrook and Holiday off the ball (alongside Collison), which obscured their playmaking skills. Safely in the pros, the ex-Bruins benefited further from the NBA's tight hand-checking rules. "The college game can make the court feel really small," says Dumars. "In the NBA, the court is more spread out, and the rules encourage more individual play."

Those guys were hardly the only prospects whose college years were a system failure. Now that Deron Williams is an All-Star, it's easy to forget how much heat the Jazz took for snatching him third in 2005, ahead of Chris Paul, after he scored 12.5 ppg as an Illinois junior. He did that, though, as part of a three-guard, equal-opportunity lineup that cofeatured Dee Brown and Luther Head. With an offense all to his own he has thrived in a way few could have predicted.

Rondo's experience, though, speaks loudest in favor of not judging a book by its college cover. His clunky jumper and discomfort in the halfcourt clashed with Tubby Smith's style at Kentucky, leading scouts not only to knock his skills but also to label him "uncoachable." Turns out, he just needed a change of scenery.

"IT'S SO TOUGH TO BE GREAT IF YOU AREN'T A GREAT ATHLETE."

I witnessed that firsthand. Rondo was in Chicago prepping for the draft and not impressing anyone with his individual workouts. But when he walked across the court to play five-on-five with some other prospects, his whole future was transformed. He pushed the ball at a breakneck pace, changed direction on a dime and got to the basket at will. His huge hands gave him unusual ball control; three times, he dropped dimes that drew audible "ooohs" from spectators. A Celtics scout was in the gym that day, and a few weeks later they dealt for him on draft night after the Suns picked him 21st.

This year, Texas guard Avery Bradley, Kentucky guard Eric Bledsoe and Georgetown forward/center Greg Monroe may well follow in the footsteps of Westbrook, Williams and Rondo. Bradley's freshman impact and role was limited on a deep and talented Texas team. So he never got to show the stuff that persuaded ESPNU to rank him first in the prep class of 2009, ahead of Wall. Speaking of Wall, Bledsoe ran alongside him in Lexington, which means he didn't get to handle or create much. And Monroe played in a Princeton-style offense that highlights fundamentals, not one-on-one skills. Jeff Green and Roy Hibbert didn't put up big stats as Hoyas either, but they're already successful pros.

And then there's Orton. DeMarcus Cousins and Patrick Patterson hogged much of UK's inside game, leaving little room for Orton, a highly regarded prospect who was coming off knee surgery. Fact is, he has tremendous size and strength that should pay off in a league in which so many bigs float to the perimeter. And that highlights one final factor: Physical profiles, in particular elite athleticism, matter.

"It's so tough to be a great player if you aren't a great athlete," Blazers GM Kevin Pritchard says. "You can hide it in college because teams pack it in on defense and make you beat them on the perimeter. But in the NBA, teams primarily play man-to-man, and speed and quickness rise to the top."

There are countless examples of athletic players who didn't stay long enough in college to develop, only to thrive eventually in the NBA. Trevor Ariza comes to mind. Even guys who stick around awhile may not thrive until they hit the league. Richard Jefferson was a role player in three years at Arizona, but the NBA has been a better fit. Added space and a tighter whistle made his quickness and hops more valuable at both ends of the floor.

Through this lens, Wake Forest's Al-Farouq Aminu and UConn's Stanley Robinson look better and better. Neither forward lived up to his potential in college, but both possess first-tier skills.

When they -- and Orton too -- hear their names on draft night, they'll also hear a chorus of skepticism. What do they see in him?

The smarter question is: What are the critics missing?
Click to expand...

mickey_angelo · Jun 18, 2010

Thanks for posting. Good read.

smoothie · Jun 18, 2010

interesting read.

good point about not letting what you havent seen a guy do, take away from what you know he can do. nash is a perfect example of that. rondo is a good example as well.

but that philosophy only works if you know a player can already do something to contribute in the pro's. in orton's case, he didn't get a chance to show anything bad or good. scouts are judging his potential based on athleticism and size.

you can say he has all the tools to get better, but will he? he doesn't yet possess any elite skills to fall back on like nash. nash had shooting, passing, and IQ to rely on when he knew he would be outmatched physically. rondo had the ability to get to the rim, and was a ball hawk on defense when the scouts said he couldn't shoot.

so what does orton have to rely on? he's got an nba body... that's it. plenty of guys failed that had all the physical tools to succeed.

Commodore · Jun 18, 2010

A Celtics scout was in the gym that day, and a few weeks later they dealt for him on draft night after the Suns picked him 21st.
Click to expand...

Morey?

Old Man Rock · Jun 18, 2010

Larry Sanders... Huge hands, Huge Wingspan, 6'9"+ barefoot, runs like a gazelle and stuck in an offense that didn't utilize him and a coach who wanted him to stay at home with his man or keep his position in the zone rather than weakside shotblock. His vertical is average but he has done almost no lower body workouts. He will be a better pro.

Forums

[ESPN] Why some NCAA Joes end up as better NBA Pros

J.R. Member

mickey_angelo Member

smoothie Jabari Jungle

Commodore Member

Old Man Rock Contributing Member

Share This Page

About ClutchFans

Rockets Content

Support ClutchFans!