PDA

View Full Version : NBA analogue for Jon Scheyer



Orange&BlackSheep
04-07-2010, 10:48 AM
Would Steve Blake be the model for what Jon might become? Other than the fact that Jon is clearly the better shooter, they seem fairly close in all other areas. I don't watch Steve Blake play at all so I don't have a good sense of how the two compare as ball handlers. What think y'all?

Rudy
04-07-2010, 10:54 AM
Blake is smaller and probably faster. He's a good shooter, just as good as Jon from 3. But Jon is bigger, can go to the hoop and score or draw fouls, and is a much better defender. Blake is a liability on defense.

theAlaskanBear
04-07-2010, 10:56 AM
Would Steve Blake be the model for what Jon might become? Other than the fact that Jon is clearly the better shooter, they seem fairly close in all other areas. I don't watch Steve Blake play at all so I don't have a good sense of how the two compare as ball handlers. What think y'all?

Blake is an elite passer, and is quick enough to break players down on occasion. I dont think its a great comparison. Jon's strength is in taking care of the ball, shooting, and making smart decisions.

BigZ
04-07-2010, 11:03 AM
What makes Scheyer a good prospect is that he is tall enough he could play the two guard in the NBA as well as the point. Blake is a PG, Scheyer could play either.

superdave
04-07-2010, 11:16 AM
I think Jon will have a few shortfalls leading up to the draft. I'd expect his athleticism will be seen as a liability in the bench price, vertical leap and lateral quickness drills. Also, scouts do not like the side spin he has on his jumper. If can pull a Tim Tebow and address that leading up to the draft, his stock should improve.

But he should compete well when paired against other draftees. He's so crafty that he will get the best of better athletes some. Remember that a lot of draftees have head to head workouts.

I'd expect him to go in the 2nd round and make a team.

Bluedog
04-07-2010, 11:21 AM
Speaking of the NBA Draft, Zoubek has made his way into the late second round on some NBA mock drafts. Draft Express has him going 28th in the second round (i.e. third to last pick). I'd love to see him get a chance!

http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-mock-draft/2010/

They actually don't even have Scheyer getting drafted at all...Which seems puzzling. I think somebody will take a chance on him...

Genedoc
04-07-2010, 11:23 AM
As much as I love John, he's simply not an NBA prospect. He'll get some looks, and he may catch on with a team as a practice player or a spot up shooter. IMO, his ceiling is Steve Kerr - a bench shooter who average 6-8 ppg, tops, against the other team's second unit or on a team with a dominant post presence as a spot up shooter.

JohnGalt
04-07-2010, 11:38 AM
IMO, his ceiling is Steve Kerr - a bench shooter who average 6-8 ppg, tops, against the other team's second unit or on a team with a dominant post presence as a spot up shooter.

...who also hit a Finals Winning shot in 1997. I'd take that career in a heartbeat.

gw67
04-07-2010, 11:53 AM
I agree with JohnGalt. Kerr had a long NBA career and was, arguably, one of the greatest long range shooters in NBA and college history.

Scheyer may not be quick enough to play the point or "athletic" enough to play the off guard but he is a very good basketball player. If Blake, Duhon and the kid from Georgia Tech, Morrow, can play in the NBA (examples off the top of my head), so can Scheyer. It all depends on the team the drafts or picks him up.

gw67

BigZ
04-07-2010, 12:14 PM
I actually think Jon is a much better ball handler than he is shooter. He is much better at putting the ball on the floor than JJ but not nearly the shooter. I would use him as a point but let him play some off the ball but he needs to be a ball handler not spot up shooter.

Zeb
04-07-2010, 12:18 PM
Everytime there is a good white college guard whose NBA prospects are questionable, people bring up Steve Kerr. This always bugs me, for two reasons: 1) the similarities always seem to boil down to the fact both players were white and both were guards, and 2) people think its somehow easy to replicate Kerr's career.

Couple of facts:
1) We have 3pt stats only from Kerr's senior year in college. He hit 57% of 3pt FGs in that season.
2) In the NBA he hit 45% of his 3pt FGs for HIS CAREER.

Jon did not break 40% for 3pts this season.

Jon Scheyer has a lot of strengths as a basketball player, some that Kerr did not posess. But he is not going to have Kerr's NBA career. Kerr was an amazing 3pt shooting specialist. Jon isn't. Jon may have a solid NBA career, but it won't look like Kerr's.

meowmix911
04-07-2010, 12:20 PM
Poor man's Jeff Hornacek (I hope!) :)

Spam Filter
04-07-2010, 12:20 PM
I've always compared Scheyer's game to Delonte West in the NBA.

meowmix911
04-07-2010, 12:21 PM
He's got more of a knack of finishing plays that you thought would never have a chance, than Steve Kerr... That said, Kerr was one of the best spot up shooters to play in the league during his time... Agree that he won't be like Steve Kerr at all.

meowmix911
04-07-2010, 12:22 PM
I've always compared Scheyer's game to Delonte West in the NBA.
West is lightning and can finish at the rim...

Underdog5
04-07-2010, 12:35 PM
I think he's as good if not better than Earl Watson who is currently getting 29 MPG in Indiana. Can also do the same work that Anthony Carter has put in for 10 years. He's a solid back up point IMHO and I think it will show even better when he's playing with NBA level players.

BlueintheFace
04-07-2010, 12:38 PM
Somebody will take a flyer on Jon and draft him as a backup combo guard who can run the second team without turning the ball over. He will be expected to distribute the ball to the scorers, reset the offense when needed, and hit the open three.

Zeb
04-07-2010, 12:48 PM
Somebody will take a flyer on Jon and draft him as a backup combo guard who can run the second team without turning the ball over. He will be expected to distribute the ball to the scorers, reset the offense when needed, and hit the open three.

I think this is a reasonable scenario, though its far from guaranteed it will work out. Remember that Ty Lawson absolutely killed Duke while he was in college. Yet he has been far from dominant and has had to battle unremarkable journeyman Anthony Carter for minutes this season (doing basically the same role as you describe above). Over time I bet that Lawson will have a good NBA career, but his example shows how players who are extraordinary at the college level can still find it difficult to make a mark in the NBA.

MChambers
04-07-2010, 12:57 PM
Everytime there is a good white college guard whose NBA prospects are questionable, people bring up Steve Kerr. This always bugs me, for two reasons: 1) the similarities always seem to boil down to the fact both players were white and both were guards, and 2) people think its somehow easy to replicate Kerr's career.

Couple of facts:
1) We have 3pt stats only from Kerr's senior year in college. He hit 57% of 3pt FGs in that season.
2) In the NBA he hit 45% of his 3pt FGs for HIS CAREER.

Jon did not break 40% for 3pts this season.

Jon Scheyer has a lot of strengths as a basketball player, some that Kerr did not posess. But he is not going to have Kerr's NBA career. Kerr was an amazing 3pt shooting specialist. Jon isn't. Jon may have a solid NBA career, but it won't look like Kerr's.

Your points are very good. I'll just point out that Kerr, like Scheyer, valued the ball, and had about a 3 to 1 A/To ratio.

Scheyer's a lot bigger than Kerr, so that also is a significant difference, and one that is in Jon's favor.

I have no idea if Jon will make it in the NBA.

greybeard
04-07-2010, 12:58 PM
Roger Mason. Mason is stronger, but the difference in strength is of marginal importance. They're the same guy only Roger didn't win no National Championship. ;)

Exiled_Devil
04-07-2010, 01:24 PM
I think Jon will have a few shortfalls leading up to the draft. I'd expect his athleticism will be seen as a liability in the bench price, vertical leap and lateral quickness drills.


People also thought that Battier was unathletic going into the draft.

Not saying that Jon will be another Shane, but for Duke players, 'unathletic' is a label that generally outlasts the truth.

gumbomoop
04-07-2010, 01:41 PM
He's got more of a knack of finishing plays that you thought would never have a chance, than Steve Kerr... That said, Kerr was one of the best spot up shooters to play in the league during his time... Agree that he won't be like Steve Kerr at all.

Amen to knack for finishing. JS's combo of court-sense-court-location, hand-foot-eye, and not-super-but-surprising athleticism gets him to spots on the court at a time the opponent doesn't think possible.

As for comparisons, is JS to JJ a stretch? JJ much the better shooter, but as it turns out, JJ finally got more PT in Orlando despite mediocre 3-pt shooting, because SVG finally realized that JJ had made himself into a good defender, excellent passer [better than anyone on Magic getting it inside to Howard], smart court sense.

JJ needs better handle, as does JS, but Jon's handle is better than JJ's. JJ made himself into more than a shooter at Duke; JS has been lots more than a shooter for 4 years. Neither player is quick; both are very smart, court sense a plus for JJ, double-plus for JS.

Seems to me that they're comparable. But JJ had that one super-strength coming out of college. JS has a super-strength, too, but it's intangible, not tangible. I guess he'll probably have to get to some camp, or several, and hope to prove his worth.

Genedoc
04-07-2010, 02:03 PM
Everytime there is a good white college guard whose NBA prospects are questionable, people bring up Steve Kerr. This always bugs me, for two reasons: 1) the similarities always seem to boil down to the fact both players were white and both were guards, and 2) people think its somehow easy to replicate Kerr's career.

Couple of facts:
1) We have 3pt stats only from Kerr's senior year in college. He hit 57% of 3pt FGs in that season.
2) In the NBA he hit 45% of his 3pt FGs for HIS CAREER.

Jon did not break 40% for 3pts this season.

Jon Scheyer has a lot of strengths as a basketball player, some that Kerr did not posess. But he is not going to have Kerr's NBA career. Kerr was an amazing 3pt shooting specialist. Jon isn't. Jon may have a solid NBA career, but it won't look like Kerr's.

And please note that I never said John "would have Kerr's NBA career". I phrased my comments quite specifically, stating that IMO, John's ceiling was Kerr in precisely the right circumstances. Maybe I'm more of a semantic stickler than most, but saying that there is a ceiling for something is a pretty far cry from "will look like". Duke's ceiling next year is an undefeated season. That's not remotely the same thing as saying they'll go undefeated. I too doubt that John will be Steve Kerr. I'm saying that IMO, if all of the chips fall just right and he turns out to be the best he can possibly be, I think he could be a Kerr like role player who averages 6-8 ppg. That's not to say it will happen, nor is it stating he can or ever will shoot like Steve Kerr. It's stating that IMO, the best he'll be in he NBA is a bench player. My opinion and $2 will get you a small coffee.

Huh?
04-07-2010, 02:09 PM
John Paxson.

yancem
04-07-2010, 02:19 PM
I think this is a reasonable scenario, though its far from guaranteed it will work out. Remember that Ty Lawson absolutely killed Duke while he was in college. Yet he has been far from dominant and has had to battle unremarkable journeyman Anthony Carter for minutes this season (doing basically the same role as you describe above). Over time I bet that Lawson will have a good NBA career, but his example shows how players who are extraordinary at the college level can still find it difficult to make a mark in the NBA.

The problem with the Lawson analogy is that distributing the ball to the scorers (in the half court offense), resetting the offense when needed, and hitting the open three were never Lawson's strengths. He's a get out on the fast break, drive to the hole kind of player. This isn't usually the best role for a backup pg because the other bench players aren't always geared to that style of game.

I haven't watched Lawson since early in the season but I would be that he is much more effective with the starters where his talents can get highlighted than he is with the second team.

UrinalCake
04-07-2010, 02:46 PM
What about Manu Ginobli? Not an elite athlete but does a little of everything. Crafty with the ball and can take it into the paint and somehow get it through the hoop.

Zeb
04-07-2010, 05:51 PM
The problem with the Lawson analogy is that distributing the ball to the scorers (in the half court offense), resetting the offense when needed, and hitting the open three were never Lawson's strengths. He's a get out on the fast break, drive to the hole kind of player. This isn't usually the best role for a backup pg because the other bench players aren't always geared to that style of game.

I haven't watched Lawson since early in the season but I would be that he is much more effective with the starters where his talents can get highlighted than he is with the second team.

You're right. He is not a reset the offense kind of guy, and he definitely is not a hit an open 3 guy. Besides the fact that he is a backup point guard, what you envision for Jon and what Lawson is doing for the Nugs are pretty different.

He fits in ok with the Nuggets second team however as Andersen is a big man who can run and JR Smith is a good three point threat for Ty to kick out to.

NovaScotian
04-07-2010, 07:05 PM
I agree with JohnGalt. Kerr had a long NBA career and was, arguably, one of the greatest long range shooters in NBA and college history.

Scheyer may not be quick enough to play the point or "athletic" enough to play the off guard but he is a very good basketball player. If Blake, Duhon and the kid from Georgia Tech, Morrow, can play in the NBA (examples off the top of my head), so can Scheyer. It all depends on the team the drafts or picks him up.

gw67

the difference is that those guys, while mediocre overall have definable skills that teams know how to use. blake and duhon can't score, but are good (and as a knick's fan i use the term good loosely) point guards who are established.
morrow is an awesome shooter and scorer who has found a perfect fit w/ nellieball.

scheyer is athletic, scheyer is an ok shooter, scheyer is an above average ball handler, and scheyer is a proven winner. the first three may not make any nba gm's go crazy, but putting the whole picture together might make some sense for some team in the second round.

two possible nba analogues come to mind for me - best case scenario is kirk hinrich - he's a combo guard (kind of), but at this point in his career was a better passer and a better scorer.
worst case scenario - daniel ewing. i've always thought scheyer and ewing were very similar, both coming in as smart 2-guards who were forced to play the point by their senior years. daniel was at the end of the clipper's bench and made a huge mental mistake against the suns in the playoff's one year and found himself in russia not soon after (which isn't really a bad thing, just saying).

dgoore97
04-07-2010, 08:17 PM
brent barry

Welcome2DaSlopes
04-07-2010, 08:18 PM
brent barry

He was a dead on shooter, I don't really see Jon like that, but I respect your opinion nonetheless

NovaScotian
04-07-2010, 08:26 PM
He was a dead on shooter, I don't really see Jon like that, but I respect your opinion nonetheless

brent barry was also considerably taller, waaay more athletic and played a different position.

theAlaskanBear
04-07-2010, 08:32 PM
What about Manu Ginobli? Not an elite athlete but does a little of everything. Crafty with the ball and can take it into the paint and somehow get it through the hoop.

Dude, Manu is an INCREDIBLE athlete. He is one of the best athletes in the game. He has great agility and quickness, and surprising strength.

COYS
04-07-2010, 10:07 PM
Dude, Manu is an INCREDIBLE athlete. He is one of the best athletes in the game. He has great agility and quickness, and surprising strength.

I think there are some similarities in style. Both Jon and Manu thrive on deception, misdirection, and craftiness. Both can play the point and play it well, can run the break, but are even better in the half court, are streaky shooters who can get hot and put a team away from three, and who can attack the rim and get to the line when nothing else is working. In some ways, Jon had a Manu-like season. Both players are extremely efficient on offense and score in unconventional ways.

That being said, the difference in size (6-7 vs. 6-5 for Jon) and athleticism is great. Manu happens to be one of my favorite NBA players. I would take a healthy Manu in his prime over any SG in the NBA . . . even Kobe . . . if I were starting a team from scratch and could choose from active players. If Jon even approached Manu's production, I would be ecstatic for Jon and, quite frankly, surprised. I do think that if Jon's head were on Manu's body (strange image), you'd have a player that is similar to the current Manu.

dgoore97
04-11-2010, 11:31 AM
brent barry was also considerably taller, waaay more athletic and played a different position.

barry is a 6'6' 185lb guard
scheyer is listed as 6'5 190.

i don't think it's that far off, tho barry was more athletic as i recall. both are shooting guards who have responsibility for distributing the ball on their respective teams.

any other thots on barry as a comparison?

dcdevil2009
04-11-2010, 12:05 PM
I think this is a reasonable scenario, though its far from guaranteed it will work out. Remember that Ty Lawson absolutely killed Duke while he was in college. Yet he has been far from dominant and has had to battle unremarkable journeyman Anthony Carter for minutes this season (doing basically the same role as you describe above). Over time I bet that Lawson will have a good NBA career, but his example shows how players who are extraordinary at the college level can still find it difficult to make a mark in the NBA.

I'd be surprised if Ty Lawson doesn't make at least one all star team. The reason he's battling "unremarkable journeyman Anthony Carter" is partially because he's had some injury problems and partially because he's still a rookie competing against someone who's been playing basketball full time for the last decade or so. Because of guys like Durant, James, Melo, and the other superstars who contributed immediately in the last few years, it seems like people are setting unrealistic expectations for rookies. Imagine how much better Lawson will be when he's playing basketball every day instead of balancing it with classes.

But back to Scheyer. I don't see any reason why he can't make a roster and have a decent career in the league as 10th or 11th man. He brings a lot of "intangibles" and seems to have a high basketball IQ. It's true that he doesn't have a ton of lateral quickness, but his got tremendous stamina and will run defenders ragged on offense. Give him a few years in the league and his shooting should go up, making him a huge asset in crunch time as a spot up shooter and lights out free throw shooter.

hotbutteredseoul
04-11-2010, 12:09 PM
barry is a 6'6' 185lb guard
scheyer is listed as 6'5 190.

i don't think it's that far off, tho barry was more athletic as i recall. both are shooting guards who have responsibility for distributing the ball on their respective teams.

any other thots on barry as a comparison?

Brent Barry won a dunk contest dunking from the free throw line. I love Jon's game, but we aren't going to see him dunking from the free throw line anytime soon.


I think there are some similarities in style. Both Jon and Manu thrive on deception, misdirection, and craftiness. Both can play the point and play it well, can run the break, but are even better in the half court, are streaky shooters who can get hot and put a team away from three, and who can attack the rim and get to the line when nothing else is working. In some ways, Jon had a Manu-like season. Both players are extremely efficient on offense and score in unconventional ways.

That being said, the difference in size (6-7 vs. 6-5 for Jon) and athleticism is great. Manu happens to be one of my favorite NBA players. I would take a healthy Manu in his prime over any SG in the NBA . . . even Kobe . . . if I were starting a team from scratch and could choose from active players. If Jon even approached Manu's production, I would be ecstatic for Jon and, quite frankly, surprised. I do think that if Jon's head were on Manu's body (strange image), you'd have a player that is similar to the current Manu.

Manu is one of the best cross-up ball-handlers in the NBA. The reason he gets to the rim so often is that he creates really strange angles on his defenders by dribbling in unexpectedly brilliant ways. Off the pick and roll he's especially adept at splitting the defenders in just ridiculous ways. Scheyer is a good ball-handler in that he protects the ball well, but how many times have we seen him shake a guy with a misdirection dribble? I don't see Manu as a good comparison at all.

I've never liked all this comparison business. Scheyer is a very unique talent. He's probably not going to get drafted, but I firmly believe he will get a Summer league shot. His game is well designed to impress in those games, where a steady hand who can control the game will stand out among all the crazy guys who are just trying to run and gun themselves onto a roster. Let's not try to force the comparisons, though.

devildownunder
04-11-2010, 11:47 PM
Would Steve Blake be the model for what Jon might become? Other than the fact that Jon is clearly the better shooter, they seem fairly close in all other areas. I don't watch Steve Blake play at all so I don't have a good sense of how the two compare as ball handlers. What think y'all?

Blake is significantly quicker with the ball but not as tall. Not sure what Blake is shooting these days but Jon is a streaky shooter, not a great one. He is a better scorer than Blake was in college and a better positional defender. Blake was a better on-the-ball defender in college.

Not sure how Blake has developed in the NBA.

devildownunder
04-11-2010, 11:52 PM
barry is a 6'6' 185lb guard
scheyer is listed as 6'5 190.

i don't think it's that far off, tho barry was more athletic as i recall. both are shooting guards who have responsibility for distributing the ball on their respective teams.

any other thots on barry as a comparison?

Barry's a lot quicker and generally more "athletic".


I think Jon really needs to make his shot deadly to have a real chance in the nba because -- by nba standards -- he does many things pretty good but not much great.

That's only by nba standards. Many parts of his game are awesome by college standards. And, of course, none of this takes into account the little things that don't go into a box score. One thing that I think helps him is his size. He's not other one of these 6'2" college guards. He has nba height.

devildownunder
04-11-2010, 11:53 PM
Dude, Manu is an INCREDIBLE athlete. He is one of the best athletes in the game. He has great agility and quickness, and surprising strength.

yep. his strength is greatly underrated. He gets to the hole with power-dribble moves, among other things, not exactly jon's game.

COYS
04-12-2010, 01:18 AM
Brent Barry won a dunk contest dunking from the free throw line. I love Jon's game, but we aren't going to see him dunking from the free throw line anytime soon.



Manu is one of the best cross-up ball-handlers in the NBA. The reason he gets to the rim so often is that he creates really strange angles on his defenders by dribbling in unexpectedly brilliant ways. Off the pick and roll he's especially adept at splitting the defenders in just ridiculous ways. Scheyer is a good ball-handler in that he protects the ball well, but how many times have we seen him shake a guy with a misdirection dribble? I don't see Manu as a good comparison at all.

I've never liked all this comparison business. Scheyer is a very unique talent. He's probably not going to get drafted, but I firmly believe he will get a Summer league shot. His game is well designed to impress in those games, where a steady hand who can control the game will stand out among all the crazy guys who are just trying to run and gun themselves onto a roster. Let's not try to force the comparisons, though.

I think you pretty much made the same argument I made comparing the two. They both use odd angles to their advantage to score, but Manu is a much more explosive player, better ball handler, stronger, and has the athleticism to beat his defender when he misdirects him. John did occasionally put defenders off balance with some cool dribbles, but he didn't have the speed to blow by them. He often used odd angles to get his shot up in the lane, though, which is similar to Manu. As I said, I think if you put Jon's head on Manu's body with Manu's athletic abilities, I think the player would actually be pretty similar to what Manu is now.

theAlaskanBear
04-12-2010, 01:24 AM
I think you pretty much made the same argument I made comparing the two. They both use odd angles to their advantage to score, but Manu is a much more explosive player, better ball handler, stronger, and has the athleticism to beat his defender when he misdirects him. John did occasionally put defenders off balance with some cool dribbles, but he didn't have the speed to blow by them. He often used odd angles to get his shot up in the lane, though, which is similar to Manu. As I said, I think if you put Jon's head on Manu's body with Manu's athletic abilities, I think the player would actually be pretty similar to what Manu is now.

I dont think anyone will argue that Jon and Manu are both smart & crafty player. Though Manu has way more experience and is way more aggressive.

The problem is Jon has to play with HIS body, not Manu's. You cant compare them.