NBA Draft 2010: Scoring Shooting Guards

Unlike the last group of SGs, this bunch has no illusions of playing PG even on a part-time basis. These three players like to fire away and all scored in bunches this past year. In general I’ve been down on SGs as draft picks lately. My opinion is there are usually good ones available for a fairly reasonable price, which lowers the value of SGs as a group and should limit what any team should be paying for their SG. Look at how cheaply Milwaukee was able to get John Salmons and the success New Orleans had plugging Marcus Thornton into the lineup for a time this year. It just isn’t that difficult to find a usable SG and for that reason no team should be using an asset like a draft pick in the top 10 on a SG who isn’t an impact player. By impact, I mean another Jordan, Kobe or Wade, not another Reggie Miller, Michael Finley or Allan Houston. Assuming Evan Turner is more of a forward, the top 2 SGs available this year are Jordan Crawford and James Anderson. Both fall more into the Miller type of SGs than the Jordan type. While I like both players and expect them to have long NBA careers, I feel it would be crazy to draft either in the top 15-20, especially if doing so leaves a potential impact player like Hassan Whiteside on the board. The big danger in drafting and signing such a player is the sudden success they might have often leads to the owner lavishing them with a ridiculous contract that ruins the teams’ cap situation for years. Here are the numbers:

Player	2 pt pct	3 pt pct	P40	RSB40	S40	A/TO
James Anderson	.549	.341	26.2	9.2	1.6	1.0
Aubrey Coleman	.457	.317	26.9	10.7	2.8	1.1
Jordan Crawford	.501	.391	24.0	7.4	1.6	1.2

James Anderson, Oklahoma State: I’ve had Anderson ranked as the top perimeter player not named Wall or Turner since about mid-February when it was clear Dominique Jones’ scary good January was just a fluke. My last draft update had him at #7 overall. The reason for this is pretty simple. James Anderson has put up numbers that place him in some elite company as far as junior SGs are concerned. Here is a list of SGs who topped both 25.0 P40 and 9.0 RSB40 during their junior seasons as Anderson did this past year:

NCAA Junior SG	2 pt pct	3 pt pct	P40	RSB40	S40	A/TO
Michael Jordan	.551	n/a	26.5	10.8	2.2	1.0
Dwyane Wade	.519	.318	26.8	12.2	2.7	1.4
Hersey Hawkins	.592	.287	28.6	9.7	2.1	1.0
Ray Allen	.477	.466	26.9	10.1	2.0	1.4
Harold Miner	.472	.352	30.3	9.6	1.3	0.7
Donny Boyce	.431	.317	26.1	12.2	2.6	1.2
Reggie Freeman	.417	.322	25.3	10.5	1.6	1.0
James Anderson	.549	.341	26.2	9.2	1.6	1.0

The difference between the stars and flops is the stars hit well over 50% of their 2-point shots. The flops were well below 50%. Never mind Ray Allen’s number. As was mentioned in the last article, Allen posted a .548 and .515 while scoring 23.4 and 25.7 as a frosh and soph respectively. This was just a down year for him and his all-star NBA career confirms this. This was also a down shooting year for Harold Miner, but Miner has the low steals number and a low A/TO as a junior that should have been red flags. James Anderson sits well on the good side of 50%, at .549. This is why I have Anderson ranked so high. Of course this doesn’t tell the whole story. Anderson’s RSB40 is lower than the rest of this group and he doesn’t get the steals the others had. For me it is difficult to just rate a player as an all-star based on a few numbers. Especially in a case like this where if I arbitrarily moved the RSB40 qualifying line up to 9.5, he wouldn’t qualify.

I guess the big question here is whether James Anderson is a SG or SF. He’s a much better prospect as a SG. The official OSU athletic site and ESPN both have him as a guard. DraftExpress.com has him listed as a SG/SF and ranks him as a SF. On the court he played more on the perimeter than ever this past year. This is evidenced not only by a look at the PT given to players on the roster, but the fact that his passing numbers improved so much this year. As a sophomore he was the tallest player on the team of the top 5 in minutes played and likely played a lot of forward that year. A look at the numbers from his soph and junior seasons suggest a different player:

James Anderson	2 pt pct	3 pt pct	P40	A40	TO40	RSB40
Sophomore	.548	.408	21.8	1.6	2.4	9.0
Junior	.549	.341	26.2	2.9	2.8	9.2

The two big changes were the 3 pt pct and the assists. The 3 pt pct isn’t all that important, because it is something that can fluctuate from year to year. The fact he was over 40% at one time is good. The higher assists total in his junior year suggests a player who was likely in the backcourt more often. Looking at this I don’t see why James Anderson shouldn’t be listed as a SG when he had his greatest college success playing that position as a junior.

The next thing to look at is the low number of steals Anderson posted compared to the stars on the original list and whether or not this should be considered a concern. After looking at other junior SGs, I would say it isn’t a big problem for Anderson as a prospect, but it does mean he’s at least a few notches below the all-time SGs. It would be better if he were over 2.0 S40. But he still has a higher S40 than all-star SGs Michael Finley, Richard Hamilton, Michael Redd, Steve Smith, Reggie Miller, Allan Houston and Brandon Roy posted as juniors. With steals it seems more important to be over say, 1.3 or so, which Anderson is. While this might label him more of a Miller-type of SG than a Jordan-type, I’m not pushing him as anything but that.

There isn’t too much here that has tempered my enthusiasm for James Anderson as a prospect. As I mentioned at the top, I wouldn’t draft him in the top 10, simply because only the best SGs should be taken in the top 10, because of the supply and demand aspect of acquiring talent. There are enough decent SGs out there that unless a potential star is sitting there in round one, it just isn’t a good use of resources to waste a high draft pick on a SG. So for that reason I’ll knock Anderson down the list some. As a player I still feel he’s pretty impressive. I like that he was able to drag such a moderately-talented team into the tournament. I like that he improved his weaknesses this year while still becoming a better scorer. As for his career, I think he’ll stick around the NBA a fairly long time. He should reach the level of the Finleys, Houstons and Redds.

Jordan Crawford, Xavier: Crawford is listed as a sophomore, but missed a season because of transferring and will be 22 before the NBA season starts, so he’s older than most players at this stage. He didn’t really get a chance to shine until this year, having spent his freshman season at Indiana as part of the supporting cast for Eric Gordon and DJ White. When that situation was hit with scandal, Crawford transferred to Xavier, causing him to miss the 2009 season. Crawford became the lead scorer immediately at Xavier and excelled in that role. A breakdown of his numbers by month shows a player who really started to click in the 2^nd half of the season.

Jordan Crawford	2 pt pct	3 pt pct	P40	RSB40	S40	A/TO
Freshman	.478	.366	15.4	7.1	1.5	1.2
Nov-Dec	.472	.414	23.3	7.2	1.2	1.5
January	.429	.391	22.9	8.2	1.6	1.0
February	.556	.396	25.7	6.2	2.0	1.1
March	.575	.356	24.5	8.0	1.7	1.3

It is pretty obvious what happened here. Crawford came to his new team as the lead scorer. This was his first time in that role at this level. He came out firing, but the efficiency was a little low at first. As he played more he learned what he could and couldn’t do on the court and gained more confidence. His efficiency improved to the point where he was at a level only the best prospects get to and he is now a likely first round draft choice because of it. What I wanted to do here is compare Crawford to other sophs who scored this frequently. The list is college sophomore who scored over 24.0 P40:

NCAA Sophomore SG	2 pt pct	3 pt pct	P40	RSB40	S40	A/TO
Corey Benjamin	.639	.293	29.5	11.3	2.9	0.8
Allan Houston	.520	.429	26.6	5.2	1.2	1.0
Richard Hamilton	.463	.404	26.4	7.5	1.8	1.1
Harold Miner	.512	.337	26.0	7.6	1.2	1.0
Michael Jordan	.550	.447	25.9	10.9	2.8	0.7
Ronnie Henderson	.505	.321	25.8	7.9	1.4	0.8
Ray Allen	.515	.445	25.7	11.2	2.3	1.2
Cory Carr	.517	.391	25.4	7.2	0.9	1.2
Michael Finley	.525	.364	25.3	9.3	2.0	1.1
Jordan Crawford (2nd half)	.565	.378	25.1	7.9	1.9	1.2
Rashad McCants	.531	.408	24.9	8.7	2.2	0.9
Rodney Monroe	.515	.461	24.9	6.8	1.1	1.4
Voshon Lenard	.556	.367	24.5	7.9	2.3	1.4
Dwyane Wade	.505	.346	24.4	13.9	3.4	1.2
Joseph Forte	.476	.377	24.1	9.8	2.3	1.4
Kim Lewis	.520	.293	24.1	12.2	3.3	0.9
Jordan Crawford (season)	.501	.391	24.0	7.4	1.6	1.2

I broke this down into two Jordan Crawfords, one played the entire season, the other only the final 2 months. The players who scored over 25.0 P40 were a successful group as long as they got over 1.8 S40, could shoot the lights out like Allan Houston, or weren’t named Corey Benjamin. It seems the real thing to look for when looking for potential busts is signs that a SG prospect is really a forward. Things like a low numbers of steals or an inability to hit the 3-pointer. I don’t think there is a hard-and-fast rule here, we just have to look at stats and try to make the best call. In the case of Corey Benjamin, it would have been difficult to predict he’d be a bust, but the league was obviously on to him more than I would have been since he lasted until the 28^th pick. With Miner and Carr they seem like forwards in guards’ bodies with the low S40. I don’t have any questions about whether or not Crawford is a guard. The players below 25.0 were much less successful as a group. I really don’t have an answer as to why. Looking at the individuals, Monroe had the low numbers of steals and Forte the low 2-point pct. Lewis put up his numbers as a bench player with Tulane, missed the next season and never was the same after coming back for his final two years. I have no answer for the failure of McCants. The point I’m trying to make is looking at history it has been better for a player to be over 25.0 P40 at this point in his career. Crawford was this player during the 2^nd half of the season.

I think it is OK to say Crawford’s 2^nd half numbers are a better gauge of his real ability than the entire season numbers. The reasons for this are his efficiency improved dramatically in the 2^nd half and the fact that this was a new role for him and it is fairly normal to have an adjustment period where a player gets comfortable and settles in. Once Crawford settled in he became a dominant scorer. Where this leaves him as a prospect is probably somewhere between a Rip Hamilton and a Voshon Lenard. He doesn’t have the dominant defensive numbers to think he’s anything more than that. As a draft pick he seems like he’d be a bargain near the bottom of round one or early in round two where he is projected.

Aubrey Coleman, Houston: As I mentioned in the James Anderson piece, any player scoring over 25.0 P40 and 9.0 RSB40 as a junior might be worth watching. Aubrey Coleman accomplished this as a senior, but it just isn’t as big a deal when senior do it:

NCAA Senior SG	2 pt pct	3 pt pct	P40	RSB40	S40	A/TO
Hersey Hawkins	.581	.394	37.1	11.5	2.7	1.7
Dennis Hopson	.550	.419	33.1	12.4	2.5	1.3
Blue Edwards	.557	.490	31.3	10.8	1.9	1.0
Juan Dixon	.525	.397	28.6	10.3	3.6	1.2
Derek Anderson	.553	.404	28.0	9.7	3.1	2.1
Jeff Grayer	.545	.328	27.4	12.7	2.0	1.1
Tony Delk	.535	.443	27.0	9.7	2.8	1.0
Eric Piatkowski	.574	.366	26.6	10.5	1.9	1.1
Anthony Peeler	.475	.417	26.4	9.0	2.4	1.1
Chris Carr	.500	.396	26.4	11.1	1.9	0.7
Dell Curry	.529	n/a	25.9	10.8	2.8	1.3
Brandon Roy	.537	.402	25.5	9.9	1.8	1.8
Shea Seals	.480	.301	25.3	9.7	2.3	0.9
Aubrey Coleman	.457	.317	26.7	10.7	2.8	1.1

Players who don’t dominate statistically until their senior seasons simply aren’t the prospects that players who dominate before then have been. Not that this is a bad group here. Brandon Roy is an excellent player and most of these guys stuck around the league awhile. It is just that the better pros are typically at this level before their senior seasons. The real problem for Coleman is he really doesn’t match up with this group too well in efficiency. His .457 2-point pct is well below every other player listed and low enough that it would seriously affect his ability to get to the next level.

Before dismissing Aubrey Coleman as another college mad bomber I should mention his path to get to where he is. Coleman started playing organized basketball as a HS senior, but was too raw at the time to get much PT. He went to SW Mississippi JC, worked hard and got himself a scholarship to Houston. So he has come a long way in a relatively short time. This was the first season he was asked to shoot the 3-pointer and he hit .317. Not great, but not bad for a first effort with basically just one summer of seriously working on it. I think it is possible that with more work he could even become proficient. That would make Coleman a project and the problem he has there is he just doesn’t fit the mold of a project. Typically projects are younger and taller. With so many SGs available there is little need for teams to invest in a project at that position.

Coleman faces a long road. He has some positives in his great defensive stats, a low TO rate, a proven work ethic and an on-court attitude that lets him fire away. His efficiency is a big negative and in the crowded world of NBA SGs, it is something that would seem to prevent him from having much of a career.