I’m doing something a little different this year with the SFs. I’m splitting them into two categories. There will be the SFs, who are the more traditional small forward types who might be more like guards. Then there will be the combo forwards. These are the bigger players who might play either forward position depending on the matchup. The reason for this is these are different types of player and rating them against each other just didn’t seem like the best way of evaluating. I thought about this last year when I was comparing Corey Brewer to Al Thornton. They were two completely different players. Brewer could play some backcourt and Thornton could play some PF. It was silly to use the same rating system to compare these two players. They’re different players who fill different roles on teams. They should be evaluated differently. That’s what this split is an attempt to do.
One thing to know about this year’s SFs is most of the best ones stayed in college. Austin Daye, Tyler Smith, Robbie Hummel, Geoff McDermott and Kyle Singler just might have been my top 5 had they decided to come out this year. All returned to college, along with decent prospects Chase Budinger and Lee Cummard, who returned after flirting with the NBA until the deadline. SF should become the hot NCAA position in 2009. This year there are still a few worth talking about. I ended up going with Donte Greene and his potential as my top guy. The statistics I’m going to focus on start with scoring at least 18.0 points per 40 minutes. This is an important stat for any player at any position. Then there’s adjusted FG pct., which takes into account both 2 and 3 pointers. It seems to be important for SFs to be able to either hit both shots at a decent rate. I haven’t really focused in on the right level yet, but .570 seems like a good one. Next is ASB40, or combined assists, steals and blocks per 40 minutes. The most important thing for SFs other than scoring often and efficiently enough is that they have at least one other solid skill. Usually passing is that skill, but defense is also important. An ASB40 over 5.0 does an excellent job of identifying such players. I also look at rebounds per 40 minutes and A/TO, but I don’t weigh those two as heavily. As with other non-PG positions, the A/TO isn’t a big deal unless it’s too low, and then it’s a negative thing.
|
Player |
fgpct | 3pct | 2 pct | adjpct. | P40 | R40 | A40 | TO40 | A/TO | ASB40 |
| Claxton, Geary |
0.495 |
0.362 |
0.546 |
0.595 |
23.54 |
11.27 |
3.20 |
3.53 |
0.90 |
5.38 |
| Greene, Donte |
0.418 |
0.345 |
0.492 |
0.591 |
18.60 |
7.53 |
2.13 |
2.73 |
0.78 |
5.19 |
| Williams, Reggie |
0.528 |
0.279 |
0.637 |
0.613 |
28.81 |
10.03 |
4.02 |
3.15 |
1.28 |
7.01 |
| Hairston, Malik |
0.525 |
0.433 |
0.577 |
0.681 |
20.90 |
6.21 |
2.73 |
2.28 |
1.20 |
4.59 |
| Walker, Bill |
0.465 |
0.307 |
0.531 |
0.555 |
22.13 |
8.71 |
2.62 |
3.60 |
0.73 |
4.58 |
| Weems, Sonny |
0.479 |
0.398 |
0.522 |
0.617 |
19.50 |
5.91 |
3.56 |
3.77 |
0.95 |
5.70 |
| Prowell, Quan |
0.544 |
0.411 |
0.620 |
0.693 |
18.77 |
7.93 |
1.91 |
2.36 |
0.81 |
4.06 |
| Daniels, Will |
0.501 |
0.360 |
0.555 |
0.600 |
25.10 |
8.81 |
1.47 |
3.26 |
0.45 |
4.04 |
| Forbes, Gary |
0.407 |
0.292 |
0.467 |
0.507 |
21.62 |
8.36 |
3.38 |
3.50 |
0.96 |
5.42 |
| Alexander, Joe |
0.462 |
0.268 |
0.480 |
0.485 |
21.35 |
8.09 |
3.10 |
2.81 |
1.10 |
5.91 |
| Jefferson, Davon |
0.575 |
0.500 |
0.578 |
0.592 |
17.79 |
9.22 |
1.12 |
3.50 |
0.32 |
3.75 |
| NCAA Freshman SF prospect | Adj FG Pct. | P40 | R40 | A/TO | ASB40 |
| All-Star |
.556 |
20.1 |
9.0 |
0.9 |
6.0 |
| Donte Greene |
.591 |
18.6 |
7.5 |
0.8 |
5.2 |
| Rotation Regular |
.546 |
17.9 |
9.0 |
0.7 |
5.1 |
| Bill Walker |
.555 |
22.1 |
8.7 |
0.7 |
4.6 |
| Journeyman |
.548 |
16.9 |
8.2 |
0.7 |
5.2 |
| Davon Jefferson |
.592 |
17.8 |
9.2 |
0.3 |
3.8 |
| Never made it |
.541 |
16.7 |
8.9 |
0.9 |
5.0 |
| NCAA Junior SF prospect | Adj FG Pct. | P40 | R40 | A/TO | ASB40 |
| All-Star |
.625 |
22.4 |
8.5 |
1.0 |
6.0 |
| Rotation Regular |
.588 |
21.1 |
8.9 |
0.9 |
5.8 |
| Joe Alexander |
.485 |
21.4 |
8.1 |
1.1 |
5.9 |
| Journeyman |
.555 |
19.9 |
9.1 |
0.8 |
5.1 |
| Never made it |
.573 |
19.9 |
8.8 |
0.8 |
4.7 |
| NCAA Senior SF prospect | Adj FG Pct. | P40 | R40 | A/TO | ASB40 |
| All-Star |
.622 |
23.5 |
9.1 |
1.0 |
6.4 |
| Geary Claxton |
.595 |
23.5 |
11.3 |
0.9 |
5.4 |
| Rotation Regular |
.585 |
22.0 |
9.0 |
0.9 |
5.7 |
| Malik Hairston |
.681 |
20.9 |
6.2 |
1.2 |
4.6 |
| Sonny Weems |
.617 |
19.5 |
5.9 |
1.0 |
5.7 |
| Will Daniels |
.600 |
25.1 |
8.8 |
0.5 |
4.0 |
| Journeyman |
.555 |
21.0 |
9.2 |
0.8 |
4.9 |
| Gary Forbes |
.507 |
21.6 |
8.4 |
1.0 |
5.4 |
| Quan Prowell |
.693 |
18.8 |
7.9 |
0.8 |
4.1 |
| Never made it |
.563 |
19.8 |
8.7 |
0.9 |
4.9 |
Subjective rankings based on which players I like best all things being equal.
1. Donte Greene, Syracuse: I originally had Greene listed as a combo forward, but a look at his stats and his game suggests he’s strictly a SF, despite his height and general largeness. I wasn’t a big fan of Greene going into this process. I had assumed I would rip him for taking too many treys and not playing a game more suited to his size. His numbers were weak for a prospect at either SF or PF. But breaking down his numbers a little more, I have to concede that there could be a pretty decent player hiding here. I see enough potential that I have to put him at the top of a weak group. Greene’s numbers were killed by a terrible month of February. During this time the Orange lost 4 of 6 games and basically punched their ticket to the NIT. Here’s his monthly breakdown:
| Donte Greene |
2 Pct. |
3 Pct. |
AFG pct. |
P40 |
R40 |
SB40 |
ASB40 |
| Nov.-Dec. |
.538 |
.393 |
.661 |
20.3 |
8.8 |
3.8 |
5.8 |
| January |
.443 |
.371 |
.593 |
20.0 |
7.4 |
2.7 |
4.5 |
| February |
.429 |
.200 |
.412 |
12.7 |
6.6 |
2.3 |
4.3 |
| March |
.515 |
.382 |
.628 |
20.1 |
6.4 |
3.0 |
5.7 |
The biggest problem in Feb. was he couldn’t hit a 3-pointer. That he continued to huck up 8 per game instead of using his height inside is puzzling, but I guess a mad bomber has to keep firing away. But shot-selection aside, there is some promise in these numbers. In the pre-season and March he looked like a pretty darn good SF prospect. Greene posted an AFG over .600, 20 P40, and an ASB40 over 5.0 as a freshman for two of the four months of the season. Greene did that for two of four months. He was decent enough in January also. Not that a slump is OK, but that sort of thing happens to freshmen. The fact that he was a pretty good prospect for stretches impresses me enough that I can put him at the top of this group.
One concern with Greene would be his size. He’s listed at 6’11” 226. Since he’s a freshman, we can probably figure he’ll add another 15-20 lbs before he’s full grown. That will make him a good-size SF. I don’t know if there will be quickness problems because of this. That’s not enough to knock him out of the top spot though. Greene did enough things well as a freshman, that I believe he has the best chance of any player here to make a big impact.
2. Danilo Gallinari, Armani Jeans: Foreign players have gone through some phases as prospects. A few years ago, Peja Stojakovic, Dirk Nowitzki and Pau Gasol all came into the league as bargains for where they were drafted. This sent GMs on a search for more of this talent and led to the likes of Darko Milicic, Nic Tsikivili, Andrea Bargnini and Yaroslav Korolov getting drafted well before their ability deserved. Perhaps now the league can find a comfortable middle on foreign players. They’ll draft the best players regardless of home country, rather than taking a crazy flier on some obscure player who is rumoured to be the next Nowitzki.
Gallinari looks like a decent prospect, though hardly the next Nowitzki. At 19 his most impressive numbers were 17.5 PPG and .405 on treys. His other numbers are OK. With foreign players the best ones have dominated in the lower levels and put up a solid stat line at the top level. Gallinari hasn’t been a dominant player and his non-scoring numbers are OK, but not great. For that reason I don’t see him as a great prospect. I do like the fact that he was a strong scorer at such a young age though. This is a weak group of SFs, so the fact that he has shown some good skills at 19 is enough for me to put Gallinari near the top of this list.
3. Nicolas Batum, LeMans Sarthe Basket: Batum doesn’t score like Gallinari, but his other numbers are a little more impressive. What really caught my eye was his 4.1 A40, which is a very high total for a European forward. He also piles up blocks and steals at a rate that would put him near the top of any prospect list. He’s not much of a scorer, averaging only 8.5 PPG and hitting less than .300 on treys. This doesn’t seem to be a huge deal for European prospects, so I won’t penalize him like I might an American collegian for not scoring enough. Sometimes in Europe a young player like Batum will be used more as a role player and not given the opportunity to score more. It would be nice if he were a little more efficient though. As is the case with Gallinari, I’m willing to take a leap of faith and rank Batum ahead of a mediocre NCAA crowd, even though my knowledge about foreign players is based on mostly anecdotal evidence. This simply isn’t a great field of SFs coming out this year. Every player has some flaws in his game that need to be corrected before he’ll be able to step up. Batum looks like he has the potential to become a solid role player. He’ll be that much better if he can work on his scoring skills. To me that seems like a better gamble than hoping one of the NCAA guys will develop an acceptable defensive or passing game.
4. Bill Walker, Kansas State: Walker wasn’t a wildly efficient player, but he did score frequently. Even with Michael Beasley getting most of the opportunities, Walker still managed to pump in 22.1 P40. Here are other recent freshmen SFs who scored over 20 P40.
| Player |
Adj FG Pct. |
P40 |
R40 |
A/TO |
ASB40 |
| Carmelo Anthony |
.544 |
24.4 |
11.0 |
1.0 |
5.1 |
| Kevin Durant |
.600 |
27.3 |
11.8 |
0.5 |
5.4 |
| Glenn Robinson |
.536 |
26.8 |
10.2 |
0.5 |
5.5 |
| Jalen Rose |
.571 |
21.9 |
5.4 |
1.2 |
6.6 |
| Corey Maggette |
.636 |
24.0 |
8.7 |
0.7 |
6.0 |
| Tim Thomas |
.563 |
21.6 |
7.7 |
0.7 |
6.2 |
| Ricky Davis |
.542 |
22.5 |
7.2 |
0.7 |
5.9 |
| Quentin Richardson |
.581 |
22.5 |
12.6 |
0.5 |
2.5 |
| Adam Morrison |
.598 |
22.2 |
8.3 |
1.2 |
4.1 |
| Rodney White |
.573 |
24.2 |
8.4 |
0.5 |
4.4 |
| Jess Settles |
.632 |
22.5 |
11.0 |
0.7 |
5.7 |
| Scott Thurman |
.647 |
24.3 |
6.1 |
1.3 |
5.6 |
| Carlos Williams |
.508 |
22.5 |
9.3 |
0.6 |
4.8 |
| Bill Walker |
.555 |
22.1 |
8.7 |
0.7 |
4.6 |
Freshmen are always a tougher group to figure than seniors. For every player with some upside, there’s a Jess Settles who peaked as a college freshman. The trend here seems to be that it’s best to have a skill other than scoring. Other than Richardson, all successful SFs were over 5.0 ASB40 as freshmen and some were excellent rebounders. Players who didn’t make it had a weaker overall ASB40. So it would appear Walker needs to step up his passing and defense some. As a top HS star, I would think he has the ability to do just that. He’s a player coming off knee surgery and being another year removed from that should help his game some. Right now I’d call him a little iffy as a prospect due to the low ASB40. But he’s a player who potentially offers a big payoff and that’s why I have him this high.
5. Reggie Williams, VMI: It’s easy to dismiss Williams as another one of those high-scoring small college players. They have a poor history of success. They’re usually smallish for their positions and piled up big numbers dominating weak competition. We rarely hear from these players after their college years are done. But there have been a few who succeeded. Here’s a list of high-scoring small college players. Some made an impact, other didn’t:
| Player |
FG pct. |
3 Pct. |
P40 |
A/TO |
PPS |
ASB40 |
| Blue Edwards |
.551 |
.490 |
27.4 |
1.0 |
1.43 |
5.6 |
| Willie Green |
.490 |
.374 |
26.6 |
1.1 |
1.36 |
5.0 |
| Kevin Martin |
.474 |
.336 |
31.9 |
0.6 |
1.53 |
5.0 |
| Wally Szczerbiak |
.522 |
.356 |
26.3 |
0.9 |
1.50 |
5.6 |
| Bonzi Wells |
.490 |
.373 |
31.4 |
1.0 |
1.36 |
10.3 |
| Roberto Bergeson |
.480 |
.397 |
25.4 |
0.9 |
1.38 |
5.2 |
| Henry Domercant |
.458 |
.424 |
33.1 |
1.2 |
1.47 |
5.6 |
| Kyle Hill |
.473 |
.432 |
28.3 |
1.4 |
1.39 |
7.5 |
| Leon Rodgers |
.508 |
.446 |
25.9 |
0.8 |
1.55 |
4.3 |
| Shea Seals |
.394 |
.301 |
25.3 |
0.9 |
1.20 |
6.0 |
| Omar Thomas |
.515 |
.433 |
25.5 |
0.9 |
1.50 |
4.2 |
| Bubba Wells |
.520 |
.423 |
35.2 |
0.7 |
1.44 |
4.6 |
| Reggie Williams |
.528 |
.279 |
28.8 |
1.3 |
1.37 |
7.0 |
The top 5 have been successful, the next 7, not so much. There aren’t many trends I can see here. It looks like a good thing to have a FG pct. over .490 and an ASB40 over 5.0. Williams has both those numbers beat easily. The concern for me would be his inability to hit the 3-pointer. This has been a career-long issue with him, as he’s attempted over 600 treys over 4 years at VMI and has hit only .302 with very little improvement. I’m guessing this will be the key for Williams. The small college thing is a tough one to beat, but Williams looks as capable of doing so as any player. He’s every bit the player Green, Martin and Szczerbiak were at this point in their careers. If he can learn to shoot the ball better, I think he can have a decent career.
6. Joe Alexander, West Virginia: In the lead up to a draft sometimes there’s one guy who the scouts go unexpectedly ga-ga over. There’s a player who for reasons not found in his stats and play during the season is suddenly tearing up the pre-draft camps, wowing GMs with his athleticism, charming the press with his maturity and is thrust into the top 10 on all the mocks. Two years ago it was Randy Foye. Last year Nick Young got a little more hype than he deserved. This year that player appears to be Joe Alexander. Alexander’s season was made during a 5-game run in early March where he averaged almost 30 PPG and shot 53%. That would have been a great finish, but the season wasn’t quite done yet. In the final 4 games of the season he averaged 16.5 PPG and shot 35%. Looking at his splits, there just isn’t much evidence that this is a player who developed into a serious prospect during the season:
| Joe Alexander |
FG Pct. |
Adj FG Pct. |
P40 |
R40 |
A/TO |
PPS |
ASB40 |
| Nov.-Dec. |
.480 |
.513 |
21.4 |
8.1 |
1.1 |
1.28 |
6.9 |
| January |
.456 |
.471 |
17.3 |
5.1 |
0.8 |
1.38 |
5.1 |
| February |
.444 |
.478 |
18.7 |
8.4 |
1.4 |
1.19 |
6.8 |
| March |
.458 |
.470 |
25.7 |
8.7 |
0.8 |
1.30 |
4.8 |
There is a trend of improvement during the year, but the Joe Alexander from March isn’t a huge upgrade on the Joe Alexander from December. His March numbers were boosted by a hot streak, but were just as quickly deflated when he went cold in the tournament. The number that scares me the most is the adjusted FG pct. It was at a low of .470 in March when he couldn’t hit a thing from behind the arc. The overall number of .485 is also low. SF prospects with an AFG pct. below .500 just don’t have a great history of NBA success. Here are players who finished below .500 in their junior years while scoring at least 18.0 P40:
| Player |
AFG pct. |
P40 |
R40 |
A/TO |
ASB40 |
| Alando Tucker |
.488 |
22.8 |
6.9 |
0.8 |
3.1 |
| Cedric Henderson |
.473 |
18.6 |
7.6 |
0.4 |
5.1 |
| Keith Booth |
.463 |
19.2 |
9.8 |
0.8 |
5.7 |
| Chris Porter |
.491 |
22.2 |
12.0 |
0.5 |
5.2 |
| Tim James |
.496 |
21.1 |
11.8 |
0.1 |
4.4 |
| Joe Alexander |
.485 |
21.4 |
8.1 |
1.1 |
5.9 |
Not the best bunch for any prospect to be grouped with. One could make the case that Alexander is slightly superior to any of these players, considering he’s both the best passer and defender of the bunch. But that hardly makes him the next Larry Bird. College prospects must prove they can score efficiently. Joe Alexander has yet to do this and can’t be considered a serious prospect until he does.
7. Malik Hairston, Oregon: Hairston has been an excellent scorer for a couple of seasons now, topping .500 and .400 in FG and 3-point percentage respectively. His .681 Adj. FG Pct. is the number that really catches my eye. Few SFs reach a level this high. Here’s player who have topped .650 during their junior or senior seasons:
| Player |
AFG Pct. |
P40 |
R40 |
A/TO |
ASB40 |
| Shane Battier |
.704 |
22.8 |
8.4 |
1.8 |
7.1 |
| Vince Carter |
.707 |
20.0 |
6.6 |
1.9 |
5.2 |
| Mike Dunleavy |
.678 |
21.3 |
8.9 |
1.2 |
6.2 |
| Kyle Korver |
.798 |
22.3 |
8.0 |
1.5 |
6.5 |
| Antoine Wright |
.686 |
21.0 |
7.0 |
0.9 |
4.8 |
| Jason Kapono |
.685 |
18.5 |
5.9 |
1.1 |
3.2 |
| Scott Thurman |
.684 |
19.3 |
4.9 |
1.1 |
4.6 |
| Eric Eberz |
.713 |
19.5 |
5.4 |
0.9 |
3.7 |
| Jawad Williams |
.663 |
21.8 |
6.7 |
0.9 |
4.3 |
| David Noel |
.663 |
15.3 |
8.1 |
1.1 |
6.3 |
| Steve Novak |
.810 |
20.7 |
7.0 |
1.2 |
2.4 |
| Malik Hairston |
.681 |
20.9 |
6.2 |
1.2 |
4.6 |
This seems pretty simple. Successful players also post an ASB40 over 5.0 and score over 20 P40. There are some exceptions, but generally that has been the case. They’re also better passers and rebounders. Hairston has the scoring part down, but comes up short in the other areas. When a player is in this situation as a freshman or sophomore, we can give them a break. With a senior that’s a hard thing to do, as there just isn’t that much upside. He might latch on as a gunner like Kapono has, but the odds seem stacked against him.
8. Gary Forbes, Massachusetts: Sometimes a prospect’s statistics contain what might be called a fatal flaw. A statistic that’s just so historically weak that there’s no way I’d think this player could make it. Gary Forbes and his .407 FG pct. is one of these situations. It’s not that a poor FG pct. is necessarily a killer for a prospect. Michael Finley shot .379, Brian Cardinal .411 and Luke Walton .420 as seniors. The difference between them and Forbes, is they were all above .450 in previous seasons. Forbes posted a high of .466 as a sophomore, but that was while scoring only 9.4 PPG. He’s shown only minimal ability to hit the trey and he’s a 5th-year senior to boot. His non-scoring skills are pretty strong. He’s a good rebounder and defender, along with being a willing and able passer. His problem is he’s such an inefficient scorer that I can’t imagine the other parts of his game will be able to carry this. With his size, he’d probably make a good perimeter defender and he might even become a better scorer if he’s the 4th or 5th option, as he would be on an NBA team. Something I might call the Linus Klieza effect if I ever find out it indeed exists. But that’s a reach. Players who score this inefficiently as seniors typically don’t make it.
9. Davon Jefferson, USC: A 21 year-old freshman. Jefferson’s most impressive statistic is his .575 FG pct. This is a great number and an important stat for any prospect to excel in. Since his other numbers aren’t very special, I thought it best to compare Jefferson with other SFs who had posted a FG pct. over .550. I didn’t limit this exercise by class. With Jefferson being older than the normal freshman, I decided to open this up to all ages:
| Player |
FG pct. |
Adj FG pct. |
P40 |
R40 |
A/TO |
ASB40 |
| Grant Hill |
.611 |
.611 |
18.5 |
7.5 |
1.7 |
8.0 |
| Vince Carter |
.591 |
.707 |
20.0 |
6.6 |
1.9 |
5.2 |
| James Posey |
.556 |
.628 |
21.3 |
11.7 |
0.6 |
5.5 |
| Morris Peterson |
.554 |
.618 |
22.8 |
9.5 |
0.6 |
4.1 |
| Ryan Bowen |
.603 |
.632 |
21.0 |
12.7 |
1.1 |
5.6 |
| Maceo Baston |
.682 |
.682 |
19.1 |
10.8 |
0.3 |
3.9 |
| Richard Scott |
.639 |
.639 |
21.5 |
9.9 |
0.3 |
4.0 |
| Terrence Morris |
.551 |
.627 |
20.9 |
9.7 |
0.8 |
7.3 |
| Eric Daniels |
.581 |
.601 |
19.4 |
8.1 |
1.4 |
5.9 |
| Davon Jefferson |
.575 |
.592 |
17.8 |
9.2 |
0.3 |
3.8 |
As has been the case for much of this SF discussion, an ASB of 5.0 seems to be something of a success/failure harbinger. The only sub-5.0 player who was successful is Mo Peterson. Peterson had the advantage of being one of the better gunners in the league, so he had more to offer a NBA employer than some of the others here. A couple other tangents: I still can’t figure out what to do with Ryan Bowen’s senior season at Iowa. It’s statistically one of the best seasons a college SF ever had, but Bowen became no more than a journeyman. I have no idea what happened to Terrence Morris after his sophomore season. Those musings aside, Jefferson looks a lot like Maceo Baston and Richard Scott. Both players were basically undersized PFs trying to sell themselves as SFs. Daniels would also fit that description, though he was a little bit more talented. Based on this Jefferson’s chances don’t look so good to me. He hasn’t shown he can do anything other than finish. For successful SFs, the ability to score has been a given, but an ability to pass or defend separates them from the rest. Jefferson has yet to show any ability to pass or defend and this makes his chances minimal at best.
10. Will Daniels, Rhode Island: A good scorer from both inside and out, but he does little else well. Poor passing is the biggest issue with Daniels. His A/TO is below 0.5, and that’s always been a tough number for a senior SF prospect to overcome. I believe Chuck Person was the only player to overcome such a low number. I’ll give him a little bit of a break, because he was a better passer earlier in his career, posting a 0.9 and 0.7 as a sophomore and junior respectively. He has good size and really has been a terrific scorer. He’s fighting history though. In addition t the low A/TO number he also posted an ASB of 4.0. That’s 2 important numbers that are just too low to think he can make any sort of impact.
11. Geary Claxton, Penn State: Claxton was having his best season before it ended with an injury in the 1/15 game against Wisconsin. It was a tough break for a senior who seemed to be stepping up to the point where his play might get some notice. It’s hard to say if Claxton could have kept up the same pace in the Big 10 that he had going while beating up on the likes of Princeton and Lehigh. He’s only 6’5” and there’s very little in his numbers to suggest he might be able to play SG. I mention him, because the numbers he put up in half a season were excellent. Any player who can do that is worth a look. His negatives and the injury will probably sink his chances, or at least put them off until he’s able to work his way through the minors.
12. Sonny Weems, Auburn: As a scorer, all his percentages are solid, but his efficiency has been hurt some by an inability to get to the line. He’s a decent passer, but his defensive numbers aren’t all that impressive. A positive for Weems is he looks like he might have the ability to play some SG. The best thing about Weems is his passing and that has always been a good thing for a prospective SF to do. For that reason, he could make it. More likely his below-average defense and scoring efficiency will keep him out.
13. Quan Prowell, Auburn: Prowell is a 5th-year senior who came on enough this year to get a little notice. His season and prospect status was made with a run starting in late January when he topped 20 points in 7 of 9 games. After that his game tailed off. His strength is scoring efficiency. In both his sophomore and senior years, Prowell hit over .500 on all shots and over .400 on 3-pointers. I thought he was worth a mention, even though most of his stats are substandard for a prospect. He has shown potential as a scorer and that should get him a look.