This is a potentially a pretty good group of PGs. Rose is going to be very good. Whether he’s a star, just a solid PG or even some sort of star combo guard is still up for debate, but he should be pretty good. Beyond Rose, things get a little more iffy, but there are enough good prospects that I suspect 2 or 3 other good ones will emerge. The most interesting thing going on this year with the PGs is the number of small college sleepers. Very few small college players ever make it, but I’m guessing at least one of the players from the small college group this year will make an impact. I say that because there are just too many good ones for one of them to not hit.A quick refresher on the direction I started taking last year with this. I focus on the statistics that have been historically important for prospects to do well in. For PG that’s been getting a high number of assists, scoring a decent number of points with efficiency being more important than quantity, keeping the A/TO ratio above 1.7 and surpassing 6.5 in combined rebounds, steals and blocks or RSB40 as I’ll call it. Some leeway is given to freshmen and sophomores, as they usually will improve their games. Other factors, including injuries, team situations and schedule are also taken into account as much as possible.
First the numbers, raw and pace-adjusted:
|
Player |
fgpct | 3pct | P40 | A40 | TO40 | A/TO | fga/a | fta40 | pps | rsb40 |
| Lawson, Ty |
0.515 |
0.361 |
18.45 |
7.50 |
3.18 |
2.36 |
1.65 |
5.22 |
1.49 |
6.32 |
| Rose, Derrick |
0.477 |
0.337 |
19.42 |
6.15 |
3.48 |
1.77 |
2.31 |
6.67 |
1.37 |
7.94 |
| Lee, Tony |
0.507 |
0.313 |
18.73 |
8.78 |
5.95 |
1.48 |
1.60 |
5.02 |
1.33 |
13.10 |
| Singletary, Sean |
0.426 |
0.367 |
22.58 |
6.99 |
4.43 |
1.58 |
2.36 |
7.68 |
1.37 |
6.50 |
| Chalmers, Mario |
0.516 |
0.468 |
16.86 |
5.72 |
2.54 |
2.25 |
1.88 |
4.40 |
1.57 |
8.12 |
| Stoll, Paul |
0.486 |
0.475 |
17.29 |
8.82 |
4.29 |
2.06 |
0.99 |
6.34 |
1.98 |
6.46 |
| Augustine, DJ |
0.439 |
0.381 |
20.84 |
6.24 |
2.99 |
2.09 |
2.52 |
6.30 |
1.33 |
4.53 |
| Westbrook, Russ |
0.465 |
0.338 |
15.23 |
5.12 |
2.94 |
1.74 |
2.34 |
4.60 |
1.27 |
6.84 |
| Green, Mike |
0.431 |
0.371 |
18.42 |
6.37 |
3.71 |
1.72 |
1.90 |
8.90 |
1.52 |
9.93 |
| Hannah, Stefhon |
0.430 |
0.385 |
20.44 |
7.32 |
4.05 |
1.81 |
2.19 |
4.60 |
1.27 |
6.91 |
| Robinson, Rusell |
0.424 |
0.318 |
10.48 |
5.83 |
2.99 |
1.95 |
1.22 |
4.07 |
1.47 |
7.49 |
| Butler, Jamar |
0.430 |
0.384 |
17.19 |
6.79 |
3.07 |
2.21 |
1.95 |
2.70 |
1.29 |
4.93 |
| Richards, Jason |
0.412 |
0.319 |
14.75 |
9.46 |
3.36 |
2.82 |
1.27 |
4.03 |
1.23 |
5.29 |
| Neitzel, Drew |
0.405 |
0.398 |
17.98 |
5.20 |
1.83 |
2.84 |
2.81 |
3.09 |
1.23 |
4.56 |
| Abrams, AJ |
0.424 |
0.382 |
18.59 |
1.67 |
0.94 |
1.77 |
9.38 |
2.07 |
1.18 |
5.11 |
| Gaynor, Chris |
0.440 |
0.434 |
12.20 |
5.10 |
2.04 |
2.50 |
1.79 |
2.95 |
1.34 |
8.01 |
| Pargo, Jeremy |
0.497 |
0.265 |
14.07 |
7.04 |
3.92 |
1.79 |
1.51 |
4.07 |
1.33 |
6.26 |
Next numbers are something I started last year, comparing this group of players to past prospects and the averages of prospects who reached certain NBA levels. I find this interesting, but it does need a few tweaks here and there. I didn’t include the small college players in this part, because the averages are for major college players only.
| Freshmen PG Prospects | FG Pct. | 3 Pct. | P40 | A40 | A/TO | RSB40 | FTA40 |
| Derrick Rose |
.477 |
.337 |
19.4 |
6.2 |
1.8 |
7.9 |
6.7 |
| All-Stars |
.459 |
.353 |
17.8 |
6.1 |
1.5 |
7.8 |
5.5 |
| Rotation Regulars |
.412 |
.338 |
13.4 |
6.0 |
1.6 |
6.8 |
4.2 |
| Journeymen |
.418 |
.328 |
15.6 |
6.1 |
1.6 |
6.3 |
4.4 |
| Never Played |
.410 |
.358 |
14.0 |
5.3 |
1.5 |
5.9 |
4.5 |
| Sophomore PG Prospects | FG Pct. | 3 Pct. | P40 | A40 | A/TO | RSB40 | FTA40 |
| All-Stars |
.485 |
.399 |
19.4 |
7.0 |
1.9 |
8.1 |
4.9 |
| Ty Lawson |
.515 |
.361 |
18.5 |
7.5 |
2.4 |
6.3 |
5.2 |
| Rotation Regulars |
.440 |
.379 |
18.2 |
6.1 |
1.7 |
6.9 |
5.1 |
| DJ Augustin |
.439 |
.381 |
20.8 |
6.2 |
2.1 |
4.5 |
6.3 |
| Russell Westbrook |
.465 |
.338 |
15.2 |
5.1 |
1.7 |
6.8 |
4.6 |
| Journeymen |
.429 |
.358 |
17.3 |
5.8 |
1.7 |
6.6 |
4.7 |
| Never Played |
.428 |
.376 |
16.8 |
5.3 |
1.6 |
6.8 |
4.5 |
| Junior PG Prospects | FG Pct. | 3 Pct. | P40 | A40 | A/TO | RSB40 | FTA40 |
| All-Stars |
.485 |
.399 |
19.4 |
7.0 |
1.9 |
8.1 |
4.9 |
| Rotation Regulars |
.440 |
.379 |
18.2 |
6.1 |
1.7 |
6.9 |
5.1 |
| Mario Chalmers |
.516 |
.468 |
16.9 |
5.7 |
2.3 |
8.1 |
4.4 |
| Journeymen |
.429 |
.358 |
17.3 |
5.8 |
1.7 |
6.6 |
4.7 |
| Jeremy Pargo |
.497 |
.265 |
14.1 |
7.0 |
1.7 |
6.3 |
4.1 |
| AJ Abrams |
.424 |
.382 |
18.6 |
1.7 |
1.7 |
5.1 |
2.1 |
| Never Played |
.428 |
.376 |
16.8 |
5.3 |
1.6 |
6.8 |
4.5 |
| Senior PG Prospects | FG Pct. | 3 Pct. | P40 | A40 | A/TO | RSB40 | FTA40 |
| All-Stars |
.460 |
.370 |
20.7 |
5.9 |
1.6 |
7.5 |
5.2 |
| Rotation Regulars |
.452 |
.375 |
19.1 |
6.0 |
1.7 |
7.3 |
5.5 |
| Stefhon Hannah |
.430 |
.385 |
20.4 |
7.3 |
1.8 |
6.9 |
4.6 |
| Sean Singletary |
.426 |
.367 |
22.6 |
7.0 |
1.6 |
6.5 |
7.7 |
| Journeymen |
.435 |
.375 |
18.9 |
5.9 |
1.8 |
6.7 |
5.2 |
| Russell Robinson |
.424 |
.318 |
10.5 |
5.8 |
2.0 |
7.5 |
4.1 |
| Jamar Butler |
.430 |
.384 |
17.2 |
6.8 |
2.2 |
4.9 |
2.7 |
| Drew Neitzel |
.405 |
.398 |
18.0 |
5.2 |
2.8 |
4.6 |
3.1 |
| Never Played |
.426 |
.370 |
17.3 |
5.4 |
1.7 |
6.6 |
4.8 |
Now with that, the evaluations. These rankings are based on my subjective opinion of the players as prospects, all other factors being equal.
1. Derrick Rose, Memphis: With Rose one really doesn’t need stats to know he has a great chance to be a star. Just watch him play and see how he easily blows by defenders with LeBron-type speed. A player like Rose who dominates the tournament as a freshman and has the size/athleticism combo he possesses, is going to have a big impact. The question I have is how good a PG will he be at the next level? Will he be a floor leader who dominates a game, like Jason Kidd or Chris Paul? Or will he be more of a combo guard, who needs some help running the point? The best way I know to do this is to put his numbers up against the best. Here is Derrick Rose’s freshman year compared to those of the best PGs of the past 20 years or so:
| Player |
FG Pct. |
3 pt. pct. |
P40 |
A40 |
A/TO |
RSB40 |
| Chris Paul |
.496 |
.465 |
17.7 |
7.0 |
1.8 |
7.5 |
| Allen Iverson |
.390 |
.232 |
25.4 |
5.5 |
1.0 |
8.0 |
| Jason Kidd |
.463 |
.286 |
16.4 |
9.6 |
2.0 |
11.3 |
| Steve Nash |
.424 |
.408 |
13.6 |
3.6 |
1.1 |
5.9 |
| Gary Payton |
.459 |
.371 |
13.4 |
8.2 |
2.5 |
7.1 |
| John Stockton |
.578 |
n/a |
13.3 |
5.8 |
1.5 |
4.9 |
| Chauncey Billups |
.413 |
.354 |
20.2 |
6.2 |
1.2 |
9.2 |
| Penny Hardaway |
.433 |
.363 |
19.3 |
6.1 |
1.5 |
12.0 |
| Kenny Anderson |
.515 |
.410 |
21.8 |
8.6 |
2.1 |
8.3 |
| Terrell Brandon |
.474 |
.436 |
19.4 |
6.5 |
1.7 |
6.0 |
| Tim Hardaway |
.521 |
n/a |
16.4 |
6.0 |
1.9 |
5.7 |
| Mark Jackson |
.575 |
n/a |
8.2 |
5.1 |
1.4 |
4.0 |
| Rod Strickland |
.497 |
n/a |
16.4 |
6.0 |
1.9 |
6.0 |
| Mark Price |
.435 |
.440 |
22.3 |
3.6 |
1.0 |
6.4 |
| Baron Davis |
.529 |
.308 |
14.9 |
6.4 |
1.6 |
8.7 |
| Mike Bibby |
.445 |
.394 |
16.5 |
6.4 |
1.8 |
6.9 |
| Gilbert Arenas |
.453 |
.292 |
19.1 |
2.6 |
0.8 |
8.0 |
| Stephon Marbury |
.457 |
.370 |
20.2 |
4.8 |
1.4 |
5.4 |
| Andre Miller |
.533 |
.316 |
13.4 |
7.2 |
1.7 |
8.5 |
| Deron Williams |
.426 |
.354 |
9.3 |
6.7 |
2.5 |
6.7 |
| Derrick Rose |
.477 |
.337 |
19.4 |
6.2 |
1.8 |
7.9 |
Did Kenny Anderson’s career peak in his freshman season or what? If I was doing this back in 1990, I’d have called him potentially the greatest PG ever. But I digress. Rose matches up well with this bunch. He ranks in the top half in every important category. He lags a little on the 3-pointers, but with those it’s more important for PGs to hit at least .333 than anything. They just have to be good enough to keep the defense honest. The one common issue a few of these players had at this time in their careers was erratic passing skills and Rose doesn’t have that problem. He scores often and efficiently. The defensive numbers are strong. Going into this, I expected to nitpick a little on Rose. I expected that I would put him on the top of this group, but express some reservations about whether he would eventually develop into a great prospect. That I’d have quibbles about his low number of steals or his 3-point shooting. After looking at the big picture and weighing his strengths against his weaknesses, I can’t say that I find any real flaws with Derrick Rose as a player. This is a player who consistently came up huge in the big games. He outplayed any guard prospect he was matched up against. His size/athleticism numbers are off the charts. He compares favorably to the all-time greats statistically at this stage of his career. Derrick Rose is a potentially great player. Considering he plays a more important position than Beasley and Love, the other 2 players I would put in the “big impact/can’t miss” category, Derrick Rose is the top prospect available in the 2008 draft.
2. Ty Lawson, North Carolina: I have to be careful when evaluating Lawson. I’ve been on his bandwagon all season and last season, saying he’s either the best prospect or right behind Rose as the 2nd best. I’ve been pretty much alone in that assessment. Most mocks have the likes of Augustine, Collison and Westbrook ranked behind Rose and ahead of Lawson. What I have to avoid is losing my objectivity and not allow myself to get blinded to any of Lawson’s flaws. In other words, I just have to call it as I see it and not make Ty Lawson my guy. Now that I got that down, I have to say that Ty Lawson looks to me like a heck of a good PG prospect. From what I’ve found, there are 5 stats that seem of particular importance for success as a PG:
- FG pct. of at least .450.
- At least 18.0 points per 40 minutes
- At least 6 assists per 40 minutes
- An A/TO of at least 1.7
- Combined rebounds, steals and blocks per 40 minutes of at least 6.5
There are other things. Getting to the line more frequently is a good thing, as is an ability to hit the 3-pointer fairly consistently. There are 22 players I’ve found who have reached these 5 levels in at least one season at a major college: Kenny Anderson, Mike Bibby, Mookie Blaylock, Antonio Burks, Tyus Edney, Penny Hardaway, Tim Hardaway, Kirk Hinrich, Jason Kidd, Brevin Knight, Negele Knight, Andre Miller, Eric Murdock, Jameer Nelson, Doug Overton, Chris Paul, Gary Payton, Brent Price, Scott Skiles, John Stockton, Rod Strickland and Jason Williams. This list includes some of the best PGs of the recent era and some solid journeymen. It also includes Antonio Burks, Tyus Edney and Negele Knight. But no system is perfect, otherwise this process would be easy. It’s worth noting that both Edney and Knight had long, successful careers overseas after not making it in the NBA and Burks accomplished this at the age of 24. It’s also worth noting that some good and even great PGs never hit these 5 levels in the same season. The important thing is the majority of those who have went on to have a strong impact in the NBA. Lawson has not surpassed these numbers in any one season, but was on pace to do so this past year before the injury slowed him down.:
| Ty Lawson | FG Pct. | P40 | A40 | RSB40 | A/TO |
| Freshman |
.500 |
14.9 |
8.2 |
6.7 |
2.6 |
| Pre-injury |
.538 |
19.2 |
8.1 |
6.5 |
2.5 |
| Post-injury |
.465 |
17.2 |
6.2 |
5.9 |
2.1 |
Sometimes the fact that a player doesn’t hit these numbers can be explained away. Sometimes it’s not so easy. In general a low A/TO or FG pct. are always a bad sign. A low P40 is a little more excusable, as this is something that can be affected by the team situation. As a freshman Lawson played on a team that was loaded with talented scorers and met every important standard other than the scoring. For his soph season he was on pace to reach all the levels, but slowed down some after returning from an ankle injury and fell short in RSB40. The main thing to keep in mind with Lawson is he’s proven he can do all the important PG things well. He’s a pass-first player who can be a very efficient scorer when he needs to be. He plays strong defense and while he’s on the short side is clearly strong and athletic enough to make the jump to the NBA. He’s one of the fastest and quickest players in college and will be the same at the next level. With the league going in a quicker and smaller direction, a player like Lawson has a chance to thrive. No one is ever completely certain how players will turn out, because there are so many factors that are impossible to gauge. But Ty Lawson is one of the few players here who has shown he has all the necessary skills to be a top notch NBA PG.
3. Mario Chalmers, Kansas: The question with Chalmers is whether or not he became a legit PG this past season. Mario came to Kansas as one of the top HS PGs in the country. He struggled early at the point and was moved to SG, with Russell Robinson taking over at the point. This worked out well, as the Jayhawks were always one of the nation’s elite teams during Chalmers’ 3 seasons and there was no need to change. As a junior, Chalmers led the team in assists and ran the offense more often than Robinson. He still wasn’t the full-time PG but ran things enough and well enough that I think he’ll be OK. The best way to explain Chalmers is to look at his numbers during his 3 seasons:
| Mario Chalmers |
FG Pct. |
3 Pt. Pct. |
P40 |
A40 |
A/TO |
S40 |
PPS |
| Freshman |
.445 |
.375 |
16.9 |
5.7 |
1.4 |
4.0 |
1.39 |
| Sophomore |
.491 |
.404 |
16.3 |
4.3 |
1.4 |
3.4 |
1.43 |
| Junior |
.516 |
.468 |
16.9 |
5.7 |
2.3 |
3.3 |
1.57 |
This really was an incredible season by Chalmers. I’d like for the assists to be higher, but he did OK considering he shared the playmaking load with Robinson and Collins. He was a wildly efficient scorer and was one of the best defensive guards in the country. The only issue with Chalmers is he doesn’t score much. I could dismiss this and says it’s simply because he plays for a team with many scoring option in an offense that doesn’t feature any one player. But the only recent PG who wasn’t much of a scorer in college who made a big impact as a pro was Deron Williams. If we climb into the wayback machine and cruise back to the 80s, there are many more examples. Below are three lists of college PGs who, like Chalmers, scored less than 17 points per 40 minutes as a junior. I broke them down into groups of players who had a big, mild and almost no impact and compared Chalmers with each group. One comment is it’s probably not a great idea to buy too much into stats from the early 80s. This was before the shot clock came to college basketball, so some of these numbers could be seriously suppressed by a slow offense. That has to be kept in mind when looking at these numbers.
Big Impact:
| Player |
FG Pct. |
P40 |
A40 |
A/TO |
S40 |
RSB40 |
| John Stockton |
.518 |
14.5 |
7.1 |
1.9 |
2.6 |
6.3 |
| Mark Jackson |
.478 |
10.6 |
8.6 |
3.9 |
1.8 |
5.3 |
| Tim Hardaway |
.468 |
15.4 |
7.1 |
2.5 |
3.0 |
6.9 |
| Deron Williams |
.433 |
14.9 |
8.0 |
2.4 |
1.2 |
5.7 |
| Mario Chalmers |
.516 |
16.9 |
5.7 |
2.3 |
3.3 |
8.1 |
Mild impact:
| Player |
FG Pct. |
P40 |
A40 |
A/TO |
S40 |
RSB40 |
| Howard Eisley |
.443 |
14.7 |
5.3 |
1.6 |
1.3 |
5.1 |
| Brian Shaw |
.434 |
12.4 |
7.6 |
1.7 |
1.6 |
10.8 |
| Greg Anthony |
.457 |
15.0 |
10.0 |
2.4 |
3.7 |
8.2 |
| Jay Humphries |
.501 |
15.5 |
6.7 |
2.1 |
4.6 |
8.2 |
| Spud Webb |
.459 |
13.2 |
8.1 |
3.0 |
2.5 |
5.4 |
| Nate McMillian |
.454 |
10.4 |
7.0 |
2.0 |
2.4 |
11.6 |
| Muggsy Bogues |
.455 |
11.9 |
8.9 |
2.6 |
3.2 |
6.6 |
| Kenny Smith |
.516 |
14.7 |
7.6 |
2.2 |
1.9 |
4.7 |
| Pooh Richardson |
.470 |
13.5 |
8.1 |
2.3 |
2.1 |
8.2 |
| Lee Mayberry |
.484 |
16.5 |
6.9 |
3.0 |
3.3 |
7.6 |
| Eric Snow |
.514 |
8.8 |
8.6 |
2.5 |
2.3 |
7.0 |
| Charlie Ward |
.462 |
9.5 |
6.7 |
2.6 |
3.5 |
7.0 |
| Earl Watson |
.451 |
13.1 |
6.8 |
1.9 |
2.1 |
7.1 |
| Alvin Williams |
.454 |
13.5 |
6.6 |
2.2 |
1.7 |
6.7 |
| Chris Duhon |
.385 |
10.3 |
7.2 |
2.2 |
2.1 |
5.9 |
| Jamaal Tinsley |
.378 |
13.4 |
8.1 |
1.6 |
3.2 |
10.7 |
| Ray Felton |
.455 |
16.3 |
8.7 |
1.9 |
2.5 |
8.3 |
| Mario Chalmers |
.516 |
16.9 |
5.7 |
2.3 |
3.3 |
8.1 |
Little Impact:
| Player |
FG Pct. |
P40 |
A40 |
A/TO |
S40 |
RSB40 |
| Negele Knight |
.474 |
15.7 |
6.6 |
1.9 |
1.8 |
5.7 |
| Anthony Goldwire |
.444 |
15.4 |
6.1 |
3.0 |
3.7 |
7.2 |
| Danny Young |
.457 |
15.9 |
6.2 |
2.7 |
2.0 |
4.8 |
| Tony Smith |
.556 |
16.9 |
6.7 |
1.7 |
1.9 |
7.0 |
| Jacque Vaughn |
.482 |
14.2 |
8.5 |
2.4 |
1.7 |
6.0 |
| Chris Whitney |
.441 |
16.7 |
6.9 |
1.8 |
2.6 |
7.0 |
| Mateen Cleaves |
.406 |
15.0 |
9.3 |
1.9 |
2.3 |
4.5 |
| Rick Brunsun |
.370 |
12.6 |
4.7 |
2.2 |
2.7 |
7.0 |
| Mario Chalmers |
.516 |
16.9 |
5.7 |
2.3 |
3.3 |
8.1 |
Looking at the groups, Chalmers seems to fit somewhere between the first group or the upper part of the 2nd group. In general he doesn’t have the passing numbers of the big impact PGs, even though he bests them all in most other categories. He’s clearly superior to all the players who had little impact. I think he’ll be a pretty good player, considering the only weak number on his resume is the 16.9 P40 and all other indicators are that he’s an excellent scorer. I don’t know that he’s a future all-star who’s hidden on a talented team, but it is worth noting that he played well against other PG prospects. It’s also worth noting that great college teams usually produce at least one very good NBA player and Chalmers seems like the Jayhawk most likely to step up and be that player. Even if the low assist total is a sign he’ll struggle at the point, his ability to score and defend should make him a terrific combo guard.
4. Russell Westbrook, UCLA: Westbrook got his chance when Darren Collison injured himself at the start of the season and missed the first 6 games. Westbrook took advantage, playing a stellar PG for one of the country’s best teams. Collison, who had been considered one of the top returning PGs, was forced to take a backseat to Westbrook as the season progressed. Collison is now headed back to college and Westbrook is on his way to the pros. I will say that I feel Westbrook would have emerged as a star whether Collison had been injured or not. He’s just too good a player to be kept down. Ben Howland did a good job of letting the two players share the point and keeping them both somewhat happy and productive.
As far as the numbers go, it’s obvious that half of the PG position isn’t nearly as good as having it to yourself. Westbrook’s per 40 points and assists totals are both on the low side. In his situation I think this is something we can overlook. Collison still played a lot of PG and Wetbrook was never higher than the 3rd or 4th scoring option. I’ll even give him some credit for having a pass-first mentality. That being said, I would have preferred his efficiency to be better. Players like Lawson and Chalmers and even Collison, have excellent percentages that suggest their low scoring numbers are simply due to playing on a talented team. Westbrook’s efficiency is good enough, but hardly eye-popping. This is a big deal, because a PG needs to be able to score when asked. Westbrook has been OK at this, but not great. His 1.27 PPS looks more like that of a journeyman PG than anything. I could explain it away by pointing out that this was his first season with a major role and that would have some merit, but it still doesn’t suggest Westbrook will get the job done when the time comes. That would only be a guess based on the fact he has good size, athleticism and a softer learning curve because of his youth.
Westbrook is definitely a player to watch. I can’t put him on the level of Lawson and Chalmers, because they’ve both shown they can put the ball in the basket better than he can. They’re also better passers. Westbrook has the upside, because of his size. His numbers are solid enough that I wouldn’t call it silly or wishful to draft him in the top 15. I do have doubts that he’ll ever be more than a journeyman at this point though.
5. DJ Augustin, Texas: The important thing to remember about Augustin is he plays a lot of minutes. He averages 37.3 minutes per game and often is on the court for the entire game. This makes his per game numbers look a little more impressive than they really are. Looking at the table at the top, both Lawson and Chalmers best Augustin in some per minute categories and are much more efficient scorers. The biggest concern should be his low RSB number. Players with a number this low simply don’t have a great history. Here are some of the better players who posted a low RSB40 as a sophomore compared with Augustin:
| Player |
FG Pct. |
P40 |
A40 |
A/TO |
RSB40 |
| DJ Augustin |
.439 |
20.8 |
6.2 |
2.1 |
4.5 |
| Mark Jackson |
.564 |
12.0 |
7.3 |
2.0 |
4.9 |
| Mark Price |
.509 |
16.8 |
4.5 |
1.6 |
4.3 |
| Chucky Atkins |
.357 |
15.2 |
5.3 |
1.6 |
4.2 |
| Mahmoud Abdul-Rauf |
.461 |
29.6 |
3.4 |
0.9 |
4.5 |
| Steve Kerr |
.568 |
11.9 |
4.8 |
2.7 |
3.7 |
| Kenny Smith |
.518 |
13.2 |
7.0 |
2.3 |
4.7 |
| Scott Skiles |
.480 |
16.5 |
5.2 |
1.1 |
4.2 |
| Kiwane Garris |
.439 |
19.0 |
4.5 |
1.6 |
4.8 |
| DeJuan Wheat |
.487 |
20.1 |
3.9 |
1.7 |
4.9 |
| John Lucas |
.435 |
15.1 |
5.0 |
2.2 |
4.4 |
| Bobby Hurley |
.423 |
13.0 |
8.5 |
1.9 |
4.4 |
| LaBradford Smith |
.465 |
16.0 |
7.5 |
1.6 |
4.7 |
| Mike Iuzzolino |
.473 |
12.2 |
4.6 |
2.4 |
3.2 |
| Travis Mays |
.459 |
19.2 |
3.3 |
0.9 |
4.5 |
| Steve Henson |
.429 |
10.0 |
6.0 |
2.6 |
4.0 |
| Corey Gaines |
.490 |
9.8 |
5.9 |
1.4 |
4.3 |
| Michael Jackson |
.509 |
15.1 |
6.6 |
1.5 |
4.3 |
| Andre Turner |
.457 |
10.3 |
5.7 |
1.5 |
4.0 |
| Leon Wood |
.496 |
20.0 |
7.5 |
2.1 |
3.3 |
| Craig Neal |
.424 |
12.5 |
6.3 |
1.9 |
4.2 |
Players who had long, effective careers end at Skiles. One thing I notice is that in general the players who succeeded were more efficient scorers that the ones who didn’t. Atkins is the exception. The most similar player to Augustin at this point seems to be Kiwane Garris, for whatever that’s worth. One thing I find interesting is the players on the list who were top 15 draft picks are Abdul-Rauf, Kenny Smith, Hurley, Mays and Wood. All were all disappointments compared to the expectations they brought. Five of the seven successful players, Mark Jackson, Price, Atkins, Kerr and Skiles, were all drafted after the 20th pick and were all pleasant surprises. This is probably a bad sign for Augustin who is considered a top 15 pick. It’s also true that some players were able to improve the number by their senior seasons. Those would be Mays, Garris, Mark Jackson and Skiles. I’ll also point out that both Steve Nash and John Stockton posted unimpressive RSB40 numbers and unimpressive seasons in general as sophomores. Both improved significantly their final 2 seasons in college and went on to become top 10 all-time PGs.
The trend I see developing here is successful players who had some issues with their numbers as college sophomores, like Augustin has, were either late bloomers or players who weren’t considered great prospects to begin with. Augustin is neither. He was one of the nations’ top freshmen last year and finished 4th in voting for the Wooden award as a sophomore. He’s been consistently listed in the top 5-15 in most mocks around the web. This isn’t a player who might suddenly explode on the scene, as Nash and Stockton did later in their careers. DJ Augustin has exploded on the scene. The problem is the DJ Auguctin who exploded on the scene just isn’t all that great a prospect. For that reason I have serious doubts about DJ Augustin. He might be another Steve Nash or Mark Price, but he also could be another Bobby Hurley. Most of the numbers suggest it’s the latter. His scoring efficiency is only above average for a prospect, as are his passing numbers. The defensive numbers a terrible.
One more thing I want to point out is that Augustin had some terrible shooting games against teams with strong backcourts. He was 6-20 against Michigan State, 8-25 in 2 games with Kansas, 3-20 in two games with Baylor and 4-18 against Memphis in the regional final. His FG pct. was .416 for games from January on, which is when the competition was stronger.
Now before I close out in saying that DJ Augustin is overrated as a prospect and looks like he’ll be a disappointment, I want to mention something I wondered about when watching Eric Gordon play defense. I wonder if the Texas plan was for Augustin to rest on defense so he could be on the court for most of the game. I mean there’s a big difference between a player not playing hard on defense as part of an overall team strategy and the same player not playing defense because he’s simply not a very good defender. I’m not sure what Augustin’s situation was, but I thought I’d toss that out there. This doesn’t do a lot to change my opinion of Augustin though. The numbers say he simply isn’t at the same level as Rose, Chalmers and Lawson. I also prefer Westbrook based on his potential.
6. Jeremy Pargo, Gonzaga: With Pargo there are some things he does that I like and other things that aren’t so good. The good thing for Pargo is he does the 2 most important things very well. He hits a high percentage of his FG attempts, .486 last season and .497 this year. His A40 was 7.0, which easily places him in the top half of PGs. He doesn’t score much, only 14.0 P40. As mentioned in the Chalmers comment, this isn’t necessarily a deal-breaker. It’s great if a player can hit the 18.0 I set as a guideline for serious prospects, but players have succeeded and excelled after falling short of that number. A bigger concern is he’s a weak 3-point shooter. Right now I’d consider him a decent reserve. As I write this we’re on the eve of the 16th, which is the day prospects must decide whether to stay in the draft or return to school. There seems to be a good chance Pargo will be back at Gonzaga next year, so ignore this if that’s the case.
7. Stefhon Hannah, Missouri: I can’t help but feel that there’s a better player here that never emerged at Missouri. I’m not sure why I feel that way. It’s almost as if he seems ready for a breakout season in college, but has run out of eligibility. Between 2 years in JC and missing the last half of this season, I feel like he really didn’t get a shot to show his stuff. The fact that his season ended due to a brawl outside a nightclub won’t help his cause. I’m not saying he’s a bad prospect. He actually compares favorably to most of the PGs on this list. I’m just saying that he never put himself on the map as a prospect and his season ended before he got a chance to do so. The only negative in his numberss is the .430 FG pct, and that isn’t something so terrible it can’t be overcome. He’s well over 7 A40 and is one of the better ballhawks listed here. Hannah played well against the top competition, playing DJ Augustine to a draw in the Tigers’ upset of Texas and putting up 23 points on Kansas and 28 on Arkanasas. Playing 4 seasons at a major college is plenty of time for a prospect to show what type of player he is. Hannah played 1.5 seasons and that may not have been enough to properly showcase himself. It looks as if he’s not going to get drafted. He’d be a great player to take a free agent flyer on though.
8. Sean Singletary, Virginia: I’ve been watching him for a few years now and he never impressed me much as a prospect. I liked him as a college player. He was always a tough offensive player who would fire away without a conscience. His problem was he didn’t get enough assists for a PG and he was barely hitting 40% of his shots. As a senior he got hi numbers up to a slightly more acceptable 7.0 A40 and .426. Not great numbers, but good enough that I can move him from “no way” to “maybe” in terms of his chances. He also upped his steals to a very strong 1.8 SPG. Before he was a combo guard who was probably too short and not efficient enough of a scorer to make it. Now he’s a guy that teams will have to look at as a 3rd PG with the potential to grow into a bigger role.
9. Russell Robinson, Kansas: Robinson is one of those players who might be a decent prospect that was hidden on a great team. He was more of a supporting player in college and such players rarely make their way to the pros. His numbers are good enough that he does have a slight chance of making it, at least in a reserve capacity. Robinson does most of the important PG things very well. His A40 and A/TO numbers of 5.8 and 2.0 respectively are good enough considering his circumstance. He’s been a 3-year starter at a national power. He’s averaged over 2 SPG during his career at Kansas, despite playing less than 30 minutes per game. He gets to the line a lot for a player who was often the 5th option on his team. I’d like his shooting percentages to be better, but they’re not terrible and he’s been an efficient scorer because of his many trips to the foul stripe. Robinson won’t be drafted, as there are just too many good and potentially good PGs out there this year. He’s worth a look as a free agent though and could catch on as a reserve.
10. AJ Abrams, Texas: The numbers aren’t very good, at least as far as prospects go. He’s been in a tough situation though. Abrams came in when Daniel Gibson was the established starter at PG. They shared the job for one season before Gibson departed for the NBA. Then DJ Augustin came along and became the starting PG, pushing Abrams into a supporting role again. So right now we really don’t know whether he can play PG or not. We just know he’s been a second fiddle to s couple of players who both look like they’ll be spending significant time in the NBA. We do know that he’s been an important part of a very good team for 3 seasons now and that’s not a bad thing. Because he’s on the short side, proving he could run the point for a season would be a huge help in evaluating him. Especially considering he didn’t get to play that role much with a floor general like Augustin running the team. He didn’t hit a high percentage of his shots, but was mainly deployed as a gunner. The defensive numbers are also on the weak side. The one stat we might cling to he for hope is he did hit a strong .488 on his 2 pointers. That’s not much though. I’m not saying he can’t play PG in the NBA. But he’s never really played there in college and his size tells me that’s his position. The stats say he has a long way to go.
11. Jamar Butler, Ohio State: Butler started to emerge as a prospect during his sophomore season. His junior year he stepped into a supporting role and helped fab frosh Greg Oden and Mike Conley carry the Buckeyes to the title game. As a senior he stepped back up into a leading role and put up decent numbers while leading the Buckeyes into the NIT. The two things on his record to crow about are that he’s always been a solid shooter and a steady PG. What will hurt him is his defense. He’s at 4.9 RSB40. That’s pretty bad for a senior. I doubt he can make it. Unlike some other players with weak numbers, there’s not much here to suggest he’s something other than the stats say he is.
12. Drew Neitzel, Michigan State: Neitzel has had some success as both a PG and a scorer during his career. He’s posted an A/TO above 2.8 during his sophomore and senior seasons. As a junior he was more of a combo, pumping in 18.1 PPG, while hitting .412 on treys. The fact that he has shown he can both score and pass effectively is a good thing. His defense is going to be a problem. He averages less than a steal per game, which is poor for a smallish guard and his RSB40 of 4.6 is way too low. Like others in the lower echelon of this list, there’s simply not enough he does well to think he has a realistic chance.
13. Mike Green, Butler: Green has some very good numbers, but also has a few questions and a couple of red flags. We’ll start with the good things. As a senior he lifted his shooting percentages to career highs across the board. This was important, because this had been his biggest weakness during three previous seasons. He’s a good enough passer, gets enough steals and is a great rebounder for a PG. The best thing about Green is how often he gets to the line. He attempted 8.4 FTs per 40 minutes and averaged 0.73 per FG attempt. The red flags I mentioned are the fact that he’s from a small college and is a 5th-year senior who looks like a semi-serious prospect for the first time in his career as a senior. Most prospects show their mettle right away as freshmen. The fact that Green wasn’t a serious prospect until he was a 5th-year senior is a bad sign. His points are also on the low side, but not low enough that it would be scary. I see Green as an intriguing sleeper. He does all the important PG things well enough and some of them much better than the standard. In college he was the best player on a team that consistently overachieved and was ranked in the top 20 most of the season. He’s a longshot, but worth a look. He’s probably the best of the small college bunch I’m going to get into next.
14. Tony Lee, Robert Morris: Lee is what I might call a small college crazy stat guy. His positives are he’s a very efficient scorer, he gets a bunch of assists, rebounds like a forward and averages almost a steal every 10 minutes. On the minus his turnovers are too high, even next to the high assists and he can’t get his 3-point percentage over .333. I guess you could call him a point forward in a point guard’s body, as he’s only 6’.
In my system he grades out better than most, mainly because he does so well on both assists and RSB. But looking at his skills, I just don’t see where he’ll fit. Too many TOs to make me think he can be an effective PG. He’s kind of short for a SG and he doesn’t shoot the ball well enough to play a combo. He’s obviously a terrific athlete, so he may be able to latch on as a defensive specialist, with the hope he can improve his outside shot and PG play enough that he’ll eventually find a role.
15. Paul Stoll, Texas Pan-American: The most impressive thing about Stoll was how efficient a scorer he was. As a senior he averaged an eye-popping 1.98 points per shot. This is a number players simply don’t reach. Especially not 5’10” PGs. He did this after posting 1.60 as a junior, a number that’s pretty impressive in its own right. The 1.98 is the best PPS that I’ve found for a guard. The next closest is the 1.89 Travis Ford put up in 1993. I would go so far as to say that the 1.98 points per shot put up by Stoll was the single most impressive stat registered by a college basketball player in the 2007-08 season. Since I like lists so much here’s a list of the top 10 PPS totals for all players and then for just guards:
| Player |
College |
Year |
PPS |
Points/40 |
| Robert Archibald |
Illinois |
2002 |
2.09 |
18.9 |
| Steve Scheffler |
Purdue |
1990 |
2.03 |
17.7 |
| Christain Laettner |
Duke |
1989 |
2.01 |
18.4 |
| AC Green |
Oregon St. |
1984 |
2.00 |
16.8 |
| Steve Scheffler |
Purdue |
1988 |
1.99 |
14.4 |
| Alonzo Mourning |
Georgetown |
1992 |
1.99 |
22.7 |
| Paul Stoll |
Texas Pan-American |
2008 |
1.98 |
17.3 |
| Felton Spencer |
Louisville |
1989 |
1.92 |
16.2 |
| Jason Lawson |
Villanova |
1996 |
1.91 |
17.1 |
| Derek Strong |
Xavier |
1989 |
1.91 |
18.0 |
| Point Guard |
College |
Year |
PPS |
Points/40 |
Assists/40 |
A/TO |
| Paul Stoll |
Texas Pan-Ameican |
2008 |
1.98 |
17.3 |
8.8 |
2.1 |
| Travis Ford |
Kentucky |
1993 |
1.89 |
16.8 |
6.0 |
1.8 |
| Mike Iuzzolino |
St. Francis |
1991 |
1.84 |
23.1 |
3.8 |
1.6 |
| Jermaine Boyette |
Weber St. |
2003 |
1.80 |
25.6 |
4.1 |
1.4 |
| Mark Jackson |
St. Johns |
1985 |
1.78 |
10.5 |
6.4 |
3.1 |
| Steve Kerr |
Arizona |
1988 |
1.77 |
13.5 |
5.7 |
4.2 |
| Mke Iuzzolino |
St. Francis |
1990 |
1.76 |
20.5 |
4.6 |
2.2 |
| Chris Hernandez |
Stanford |
2004 |
1.70 |
13.1 |
5.7 |
1.9 |
| Chris Paul |
Wake Forest |
2004 |
1.69 |
17.7 |
7.0 |
1.8 |
| Steve Henson |
Kansas St. |
1988 |
1.69 |
8.8 |
5.2 |
2.6 |
A quick note before I comment is that these lists are probably incomplete. I have about 5500 player-seasons on file going back into the early 80s, but that list is hardly complete. It’s mainly players who were prospects from major college. It’s possible there are small college players out there who had better numbers in the past 20 years, but never got on anyone’s radar and their stats have been lost to the ages. The lists are pretty accurate though, so I feel comfortable in going with them. The leaders are mostly players who were effective put back artists and inside scorers at the college level. Laettner and Mourning are the only two who were able to translate this effectiveness to the pro game. As for the guards, 3 of the players had long careers and one other seems certain to do the same. Not all are pure PGs, like Stoll would be. Iuzzolino and Boyette were scorers and Kerr became more of a gunner as a pro. Hernandez and Henson were steady, mistake-free college PGs who didn’t have the athleticism to make it at the next level. Also keep in mind that Stoll numbers while impressive, were posted in a small conference. It’s a definite stretch to compare his season to those of major college players.
So what does this mean for Stoll’s chances? I guess it’s better than having posted a historically low PPS. The rest of his numbers are a mixed bag. He handed out 8.8 A40, which is great. It shows he’s a pass-first PG who can score when asked. He also stole the ball at a high rate, though overall his defensive numbers were low. He’s an undersized small college player and that’s always a huge hurdle to overcome. Obviously there’s some talent here, but it’s a big jump and I’d like his minimal chances a more if he scored and defended a little better.
16. Jason Richards, Davidson: I became intrigued with Richards after watching him blow by Sherron Collins of Kansas, a guy with a good rep as a defender, on consecutive possessions in the regional final. That sequence and a very high assist total are about all Richards has to offer as a prospect. The good thing for him is that if there’s one thing a PG needs to do well, assists are the most important statistic. Richards has that covered and the fact that his TOs are relatively low is also good. Unlike many small college players he’s had some stellar performances against the major conference teams. Otherwise he’s a poor prospect. His scoring numbers are low in both quantity and quality. Richards is a longshot at best. His steady floor skills may impress some team enough to bring him in as a reserve, but that’s his absolute ceiling.
17. Chris Gaynor, Winthrop: A small player, 5’10”, from a small college. Not a great prospect, because he’s never scored over 10 PPG. That’s a killer at the major college level, let alone Winthrop. There are some very good things here that make him worth a look though. The first is in 4 years as the starting PG his A/TO is a solid 2.64. The assists are low for a PG, but this shows he is a steady, mistake-free player. The next is he’s an excellent outside shooter, hitting .423 on treys over the last 3 seasons. Finally, he averaged 2.9 SPG as a senior. He’d almost certainly be overmatched as an NBA PG, but his numbers suggest that he’s a pesky defender who can shoot the lights out while playing low-mistake PG. That seems like a player who might be nice to have around. A longshot to be sure, but I felt he was worth a mention.