Here are their stats from their Sophomore through Senior seasons, when their minutes were almost identical - making for fair comparison of raw stats. Player X 33.4 minutes 46.1% FG 40.5% 3PT 88.4% FT 22.6 PPG 3.2 RPG 4.4 APG 1.4 SPG 1.44 PPS <hr width="150" align="left"> Player Y 35.1 minutes 43.4% FG 40.8% 3PT 91.1% FT 21.5 PPG 2.8 RPG 2.3 APG 1.1 SPG 1.47 PPS
Spot on. These people that are ripping Jimmer today for being a ball hog and horrible on defense are starting to bug me. Yes, he is not a good defender but its obvious that in college he hasn't given 100% effort on defense because he plays the entire game and has to do sooooo much offensively for his team to win. In the NBA it will be totally different. He will be able to give much more effort on defense, although I'm sure he will still be a defensive liability, but more effort will be there. As far as being a ball hog, his team depends on him sooooo much to score. He had to force shots. In the NBA he won't have to do that. He'll be able to create for others and hit open shots and won't have to force it so much.
How convenient that you went ahead and averaged statistics over a 3-yr period... clearly spiking Jimmer's 3P% (.440 junior year), FG% (.480 sophomore year), & PPS. Statistically, Jimmer did have the more impressive junior campaign, but he hoisted over 750 shots this year, had a piss-poor AST/TO ratio for a starting PG, and saw dips in his FG% and 3P% (plummeted to a sub .400 mark). Redick, on the other hand, jumped from a FG% of .408 to .470 after attempting 150 more shots in his senior season. He showed steady improvement in his 3PT #s (people are claiming that Jimmer's a chucker and that he forces too many long-range bombs, but Redick actually threw up 27 more 3s than Jimmer in his last yea at Duke, and still managed to shoot .421 from beyond the arc). So, Redick shot more 3s than Jimmer, and did so at a more efficient rate. Not to mention, he accomplished this feat in the toughest conference in the nation at the time.
Iverson is a loser, a ball hog, a chucker. Jimmer is the same. That is similar enough to me. Same with Marbury. I didn't mean they were the exact same player. I meant they are insane ball hogs and losers. Jimmer might be a little closer to a rich man's Matt Maloney in his game skills (which is a good thing) and with more athletic talent, but he plays like Iverson style wise. That is what I mean. He plays like a stupid, ball hogging, idiot just like Iverson. And I see no comparison of Iverson to Walker either. Walker is much more of a team player than Iverson.
It's pretty clear why Fredette has to be a "ballhog", much like how AI had to be within certain teams. AI had more trouble snapping out of that style, but Fredette is hardly a finished product. The NBA is a different game, so it doesn't make sense to compare them based on a style when they're at two different levels. There's a ton of college kids who were "ball hogs" in high school and weren't the same in college. It does sound like you have a bigger issue here against these players. I guess AI can be considered a "loser" based on his career, but Fredette? Kind of early to label him a loser, stupid, and an idiot. If youre going to consider how Redick got his stats (being in a tougher conference) then you have to consider how Fredette got his, as the focal point int he offense and the focal point of the other teams' defense. He also had to create more of his own offense, while Redick was more of a spot up shooter who used picks. Having more threats like Shelden Williams, Duhon, Deng, and Ewing on his team also helped Redick's offense. Both are exceptional shooters. The difference is, shooting aside, Redick's numbers were mainly due the environment around him, while Fredette's had to do a lot on his own. Maybe that gave Redick the edge in numbers in college, but as far as individual skills go, Fredette has him beat. I think that's more relevant to the discussion because it's individual skills that go with you to the NBA, not a coach, teammates, etc..
Fredette's strength is creating shots for himself (and converting them at an acceptable rate). I simply cannot imagine any scenario in which that would be his role once he gets to the NBA. And I think it's fair to say that he lacks the tools to be even an average defender at PG, and lacks the size to guard the 2. I also don't see the type of court vision or passing skills that would suggest that he's anywhere near the level of even an average NBA distributor. Redick's skillset made the transition to his current role much smoother than Fredette's will be, and it still took him a while to establish himself. If this draft weren't so bad, I'd say that taking Jimmer before the 20th pick or so would represent a big risk. Given the quality of the draft, I don't think it really matters, but I still wouldn't take him in the lottery.
I don't see what skillset Redick had that Fredette doesn't already have or can't duplicate. Again, as individuals i think Fredette is better, but i realize that may not be saying much because Redick has to be an NBA SG and Fredette is almost surely going to have to play point. Looking at their respective position int he NBA, i think both will have similar defensive issues (size, mainly height and speed). However, Fredette seems likely to be able to counter that with more current and potential strength and bulk. Offensively, Fredette will never be a one man show, but surely his ball handling and one on one skills will make him more versatile offensively. With time he can learn to use picks and spot up like Redick, which i think is easier to learn and more realistic improvement than Redick becoming a better ball handler and one on one scorer. Fredette also seems capable of learning to run an offense, which will definitely help. He won't be as one dimensional offensively as redick. I agree he's not a top pick, but i can see why a team would use a late lottery pick 13-15 on him based on potential. Brooks is an example of how you can be succesful starting, while being a poor defender. As long as you're not one dimensional offensively, it can work. Brooks had the drive and shot. Jimmer will definitely have the shot and i think he can develop a solid ability to drive and run an offense.
Of course he is a better scorer than Redick is. That still does not change the fact that he is a ridiculous ball hog with a super ego. It sounds to me like you are just making excuses with this kid with all the talk about how he had to shoot all the time because of his teammates. He is NOT a team player and he is NOT a point guard.
I agree on, that Iverson may have underachieved in his career. But I wouldn't call him a "loser", specially after winning an MVP and taking his team to the finals as a "ball hog". I mean did you see the roster that those Philly teams had? Iverson had to be a "ball hogger", they had him surrounded with a bunch of scrubs. Iverson, once he got on better teams, struggled to break the habit of "ball hogging", which lead to the downfall of his career. But in his prime the guy was a beast, and easily a top 5 player in the NBA. What I'm taking about in how Jimmer doesn't compare to Iverson is in physical talent. Iverson could create space(something rare in the NBA now a days) with the best of them. His step back and cross over were killer. I just don't think Jimmer will be able score like he does in college in the NBA, with longer and FASTER defenders on him. The Walker comparison to Iverson, is for their ability to score, both score in a similar fashion through crossovers and step backs, as well as attacking the rim with their quick first step. However, I do agree on that I don't think Walker will develop the mental "ball hogging" habits, that Iverson had to early in his career.
You called him a loser, stupid, and an idiot. Meanwhile i'm using basketball to explain why he can possibly succeed by adjusting his game at the next level. If anyone is "just making excuses" with this kid, it's you.
But Fredette cannot play point, at least not in the NBA. Where's the ballhandling ability? He's below average even in college. Where's the passing? I didn't see him make any in the tournament unless it was to reset the play (so he could get the ball back essentially). Where's the court vision? He has none. You might as well call Nolan Smith a point guard. They're both around the same size, Fredette is stronger and Smith is faster, Fredette shoots better and Smith has better handles and a finishing touch at the rim. But here's the difference: Fredette has hype, Smith doesn't. Smith will be appropriately drafted in the 20's and Fredette will be drafted by Utah in the lottery.
I didn't think his ball handling was below average. Maybe it appears that way because he dribbles on the safe side. could just be smart on his part. I'm not sure if you're exaggerating about his passing, but he definitely made some passes. I believe in just that ast game he made a few nices one. As for his court vision, can you really say someone doesn't have any when they're not really looking to pass? Even AI could spot guys well when he tried to play that way. Jimmer may not have it or maybe he just hasn't been trying to play that way. I dont think we really disagree here though when it comes to his NBA career. i don't expect anything great from him and can see him going anywhere past 12. I just dont think he's had to use other areas of his game much, since he could score easier than most. How can we, or even he, know that he can't pass more and have better vision until he actually makes a consistent effort over time to play that way? I'm not sure you can say he's failed at it at this point. He just seems to be really focused on scoring.
I didn't pick the stats apart to support an agenda like you just did. I took the 3 seasons where the two players got the same amount of time (opportunities) to produce. Seems fair to me. If you want to include Fredette's first season, go ahead, but it doesn't reflect how his talent compares to Redick's as an NBA prospect - so what would be the point? I will say one thing in direct response to your last point, and that's the fact that it's generally easier to shoot a higher percentage when you're having shots created for you, as opposed to creating for yourself the entire game. It would also have quite an effect on A/T ratio, so that should be considered as well. Oh, and I think Redick had just a little more talent around him to help offset playing in a tougher conference. Just a little though...
True Clutchfans 'analysis'. (Let me be clear that I don't expect Jimmer to have a great NBA career. I just want to caution against hearing someone else call him a chucker and automatically agreeing. Which has happened multiple times in this thread already.) He shot terrible against Florida, therefore we can ignore his career and label him chucker and such. Nope. Sounds eerily familiar to the way some people analyze the Rockets, where you're as good as your last game. You guys may not be familiar with the caliber of BYU players outside of Jimmer and Davies. Not one BYU fan feels bad for his teammates. Did he have a bad game against Florida? Yeah. They roughed him up pretty good. Handled him very well. Props to them. BYU's offense this entire tournament was reduced to outside shooting. Jimmer is an above-average passer no questions asked - specifically at making decisions while in the air. He never commits too far to his moves and seems to make heady plays. Does he make mistakes? Absolutely. The Florida game was lost on mistakes (many, many mistakes. Among other things). Now watch when those usually great passes find their way into the hands of his teammates - a whole lot of nothing gets accomplished. I swear Abouo is great for about 3 20 point nights per year, but is usually a non-factor; Hartsock is wannabe Peja Stojakovic playing PF; Collinsworth is Trevor Ariza without the dunking. Yeah. No options. It's frustrating as hell when one guy is forced to shoulder the load when you know one guy isn't going to be enough to get it done (see: BYU-Florida 2011). Labeling Jimmer a chucker (especially if it's based on the Florida game) isn't fair. And I'll be the first to admit that he played one of his worst games that night.
And where does one start with you. Are you a Utah fan? Gonzaga fan? Going to BYU I've encountered Jimmer a few times and I would dare to say (you seem like you'd beg to differ) that I am much more familiar with Jimmer 'the person' than you are. Calling him a 'super ego' is like calling Kyle Lowry a super ego. He makes that 'damn straight I'm serious' face, but that's about the extent of it. I'm not sure how to approach the rest of your 'opinion'. Why on earth would you write off the fact that his teammates are mediocre? Do you think a BYU team who relies on Collinsworth and Emery is a 3rd round-bound team? I give you the "doesn't seem to be a point guard" thing. What's up with the 'he's not a team player'? Bizarre claim. Your analysis seems to be built on strong foundations, like yesterday's sportscenter highlights and Ute internet posters.
His NBA prospect probably depends a LOT on fit with the team. Matt Maloney was the starting PG of the Houston Rockets on a team feature Olajuwon, Drexler and Barkley.
Are you saying it isn't fair to call him a chucker because his teammates suck and he has to shoot that often for them to have a chance to win?
