Carter-Willams as a prospect is the opposite of the other top PG prospect this year, Trey Burke. Burke is 6’0”, which is small even by PG standards. Carter-Williams is tall for a PG, listed at 6’6”. Burke is a good offensive player who is limited defensively. Carter-Williams is dominant defensively and erratic on offense. Burke could probably step right in and play decent NBA PG right now, but has little upside because of his size and weak defense. Carter-Williams is very much a developmental project, but his upside is much higher than Burke’s. When the two squared off in the national semifinal Burke’s Wolverines won, but both players had their worst games of the tournament.
Carter-Williams had his issues with scoring efficiency this year, but he also posted some very impressive numbers in defense and passing. He finished with an 8.3 A40 and a 9.1 RSB40. These are totals few players have ever put together in the same season. Here’s a look at other NCAA major college PGs who posted an A40 over 8.0 along with an RSB40 over 9.0:
|
2PP |
3PP |
P40 |
A40 |
S40 |
A/TO |
RSB40 |
|
| Gary Payton |
569 |
333 |
27.3 |
8.6 |
3.7 |
2.2 |
9.1 |
| Jason Kidd (Frosh) |
537 |
286 |
16.4 |
9.6 |
4.8 |
2.0 |
11.3 |
| Jason Kidd (Soph) |
545 |
362 |
19.0 |
10.3 |
3.6 |
2.1 |
11.8 |
| Andre Miller |
519 |
286 |
13.3 |
8.3 |
2.4 |
2.1 |
9.3 |
| Jamaal Tinsley |
404 |
242 |
13.4 |
8.1 |
3.2 |
1.6 |
10.7 |
| Michael Carter-Williams |
441 |
297 |
13.5 |
8.3 |
3.1 |
2.2 |
9.1 |
Payton’s numbers were posted in his senior season, Tinsley’s his junior, Miller’s his sophomore. This is some pretty fast company Carter-Williams finds himself with. We have a couple of top 10 all-time PGs. Also there’s Andre Miller, who is still going strong at 36 and Jamaal Tinsley, a solid player who the league just doesn’t know how to quit. Even if I were to lower the standard to 8.0 RSB40 along with the 8.0 A40, the players added to the list—Rod Strickland, Randy Brown, Ray Felton, Kenny Anderson, Brevin Knight, Greg Anthony and Pooh Richardson—are all players who went on to long NBA careers.
The good thing for Carter-Williams here is all PGs who have shown the ability to pass and defend this well, have had some level of long-term NBA success regardless of how impressive or poor their offensive numbers were. Tinsley, Brown, Felton, Knight and Richardson all fell short of the .500 2-point percentage benchmark in college ball, but still went on to long careers because of their extraordinary defense/passing combination. To repeat, any player who posted 8+ A40 and RSB40 in a season playing for a major college has gone on to play a long NBA career. That Carter-Williams is part of this club makes him an excellent long term NBA prospect.
This isn’t to say his inefficient scoring isn’t a problem. Carter-Williams scored only 13.5 P40 with percentages of .441 and .297. Those are very poor prospect numbers. No team wants to use a lottery pick on the next Randy Brown or Brevin Knight. Likewise no team wants to draft a player who will sit on their bench for 3 years then watch him develop into a star elsewhere. Here are the numbers of a couple of other big PGs in their sophomore seasons who developed their games significantly in subsequent years:
|
2PP |
3PP |
P40 |
A40 |
S40 |
A/TO |
RSB40 |
|
| Gary Payton |
514 |
397 |
15.3 |
7.8 |
2.4 |
2.2 |
6.3 |
| Chauncey Billups |
425 |
401 |
23.4 |
5.9 |
2.6 |
1.7 |
8.7 |
| Michael Carter-Williams |
441 |
297 |
13.5 |
8.3 |
3.1 |
2.2 |
9.1 |
Both Payton and Billups were better scorers at this point in their careers and Carter-Williams has yet to show consistent 3-point ability. I post this comp not to suggest that Carter-Williams is a future HOFer just waiting to bust out, though that is a far high end possibility. But it is important to know that players aren’t always complete as college sophs and there is a history of big PGs developing their games quite a bit after their sophomore seasons.
Another thing to note is that Carter-Williams’ scoring skills are probably a little better than they appear in the cumulative stats. Here are his monthly breakdowns from this year compared with his freshman year:
|
Michael Carter-Williams |
2PP |
3PP |
P40 |
A40 |
S40 |
A/TO |
RSB40 |
| Freshman |
450 |
389 |
10.4 |
8.0 |
3.0 |
3.4 |
9.8 |
| Nov-Dec |
455 |
256 |
15.1 |
12.5 |
3.9 |
2.5 |
10.8 |
| January |
339 |
313 |
13.4 |
6.7 |
2.6 |
1.8 |
7.9 |
| February |
481 |
304 |
14.0 |
6.1 |
3.2 |
2.2 |
8.7 |
| March |
473 |
350 |
11.6 |
6.5 |
2.6 |
2.0 |
8.4 |
His freshman season was only 269 minutes, the majority of which were logged in November and December when the schedule is always easier. He also topped 8.0 A40 and 9.0 RSB40 as a freshman, which is impressive. There was a lot of variance during his sophomore year. He started off as a dominator, before a brutal shooting slump in January really brought his efficiency down. The good part here is that he adjusted and improved his efficiency from both inside and outside the arc during the season. A 2-point percentage in the 47-48% range in February and March, when the schedule is much more difficult isn’t a huge negative. That he improved while maintaining solid passing and defensive numbers is actually pretty impressive. The bad part is even at his best the P40 remained low.
In Michael Carter-Williams we have a player who is almost certain to have a long NBA career based on his stats. His raw skills give him an outside chance to eventually become one of the top PGs in the league and a perennial all-star, which is something that can be said about only a few prospects each year. That makes him an intriguing prospect. Right now his arc is somewhere between journeyman and perennial all-star. Because I generally prefer upside in prospects I would have to rank him as the top PG available in the 2013 draft. The only reason to draft Trey Burke ahead of him would be if it were for a team that absolutely needed immediate help at PG and the draft was the only place they could fill this need.
That isn’t to say there’s no risk in drafting such a player. Any team taking Carter-Williams has to realize that he’s a developmental pick with who won’t have much immediate impact and may never reach his full potential. I certainly understand why a team would pass on such a player. In 1997 the Celtics drafted future great PG Chauncey Billups with the 3rd overall pick. Billups was traded in February of his rookie year for veteran Kenny Anderson who gave the Celtics 3 so-so years. That’s not much of a payoff for the 3rd overall pick. Billups’ early career is why, despite the upside, drafting Michael Carter-Williams too high in the lottery could become a similar draft day disaster.