Seth Davis Column On NBA Scouts Opinions On Irving, Singler, Smith, et al.

[Atlanta Duke]

This column from Seth Davis (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/seth_davis/02/14/nba.scouting.finch/index.html?eref=sihp) on SI.com today rating NBA prospects based upon conversations with 5 NBA scouts - interesting notes on Duke and UNC players, including Smith, Singler, Irving, Mason, Henson, Barnes, and Zeller.

[uh_no]

Tyler Zeller, 7-foot junior center, North Carolina
What does he do? He can't play in traffic, can't rebound in a crowd. You can pick-and-pop him because he can shoot it and he runs OK, but I don't see him as an impact [/I]player. He's not as strong as Michael Doleac, and he's not as good as Brad Miller. But he shoots it from 15 feet pretty easy, so maybe that's something people will bring up.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/seth_davis/02/14/nba.scouting.finch/index.html?eref=sihp

he coulda fooled me last week!

[Class of '94]

Nolan Smith, 6-2 senior guard, Duke
I like his size, but I don't think he's a point guard. His decision making needs to tighten up, but I like the way he works off the ball, and he absolutely wants to be good. Can he make it as a two guard? That's the question. I'm not sure he has the kind of speed and quickness to be able to attack guys. I think he's proven enough to be drafted and he'll figure it out once he gets up there. I don't know that there are 360 better players than him in the NBA right now....

I agree that Nolan's decision making can be suspect at times and he would be a small 2 guard; but look at Monte Ellis of Golden State. From Seth's article, it appears that Nolan might be a second rounder; but how can a player who might end up leading the ACC in scoring and assists (an accomplishment that has never been done), and is a lock of ACC POY go in the second round? I see Nolan as a first rounder; but maybe I am looking at this with Duke-blue colored glasses. Can anyone share their insights and thoughts on Nolan's potential draft prospects?

[miramar]

At Duke, if you stick around, you're going to get better.



Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/seth_davis/02/14/nba.scouting.finch/index.html#ixzz1Dxj1ssww

[epoulsen]

"I agree that Nolan's decision making can be suspect at times and he would be a small 2 guard; but look at Monte Ellis of Golden State. From Seth's article, it appears that Nolan might be a second rounder; but how can a player who might end up leading the ACC in scoring and assists (an accomplishment that has never been done), and is a lock of ACC POY go in the second round? I see Nolan as a first rounder; but maybe I am looking at this with Duke-blue colored glasses. Can anyone share their insights and thoughts on Nolan's potential draft prospects?"

I agree with you, however as others on this board have pointed out to me, the NBA is a potential based league and many feel as though Nolan has reached his.

[Matches]

I agree that Nolan's decision making can be suspect at times and he would be a small 2 guard; but look at Monte Ellis of Golden State. From Seth's article, it appears that Nolan might be a second rounder; but how can a player who might end up leading the ACC in scoring and assists (an accomplishment that has never been done), and is a lock of ACC POY go in the second round? I see Nolan as a first rounder; but maybe I am looking at this with Duke-blue colored glasses. Can anyone share their insights and thoughts on Nolan's potential draft prospects?

I'll be surprised if he's a first-rounder, for pretty much the same reasons discussed in the article. Being ACCPOY isn't a guarantee of anything, as Chris Carrawell can attest. Always important to keep in mind that players (usually) aren't drafted based on their accomplishments in college, but rather the expectation of what they can do in the NBA. Nolan is undersized to play the "2" and doesn't have a-list quickness.

With that said, given the way Nolan has improved year after year, it wouldn't at all surprise me if he sticks in the NBA, probably not as a star but perhaps as a useful role player.

[dcdevil2009]

I'm not sure if this has been said elsewhere, but Nolan reminds me a bit of Scottie Reynolds, with a better off-ball game. Does anyone else see this or am I reaching? They're both guys who had great all around games that allowed them to excel on the college level, but lack a single "great" skill that NBA scouts can put a finger on.

[nyr484]

At Duke, if you stick around, you're going to get better.

That's exactly the quote that I picked out and was going to post. Really interesting to read that coming from an NBA scout. Is it too much of an inference to read that quote as saying, in part, that sticking around at other schools does not add value to a player?

[SMO]

At Duke, if you stick around, you're going to get better.



Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/seth_davis/02/14/nba.scouting.finch/index.html#ixzz1Dxj1ssww

Wait, I thought Duke didn't develop big men. He must have been talking about a guard...

Mason Plumlee, 6-10 sophomore forward, Duke
He struggles playing in traffic. When you run and throw a lob to him, he can go get it, but if you throw it to him on the block he struggles. He's so big and athletic that there's a place for him in our league, maybe as a backup five, but I'd like him to continue to get stronger. He has no business coming out, though, if you ask me. At Duke, if you stick around, you're going to get better.


Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/seth_davis/02/14/nba.scouting.finch/index.html#ixzz1DxoA2vIX

Guess not. Hmmm.

[MChambers]

Wait, I thought Duke didn't develop big men. He must have been talking about a guard...

Mason Plumlee, 6-10 sophomore forward, Duke
He struggles playing in traffic. When you run and throw a lob to him, he can go get it, but if you throw it to him on the block he struggles. He's so big and athletic that there's a place for him in our league, maybe as a backup five, but I'd like him to continue to get stronger. He has no business coming out, though, if you ask me. At Duke, if you stick around, you're going to get better.


Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/seth_davis/02/14/nba.scouting.finch/index.html#ixzz1DxoA2vIX

Guess not. Hmmm.

At IC, they're probably gnashing their teeth wondering how Coach K got the scouts to say that.

[NovaScotian]

would have liked some insight into how kyle's year has affected his stock. my opinion is that he hasn't hurt himself, and the emergence of landry fields in new york (who i see as a perfect analogue to kyle) should convince teams that there is a place for tweeners who can shoot, hustle and defend.

[superdave]

I think both Nolan and Kyle will be 7th or 8th men in the league.

Nolan = Nate Robinson. High energy in 10-15 minutes per night. Can change up the pace when a team's offense is stagnant.

Kyle = Shane Battier. Hustle guy on D. Three point specialist on O.

Both guys will find their niche. As we've seen with JJ, guys have to put in work to crack their team's rotation.

[Kedsy]

Kyle = Shane Battier. Hustle guy on D. Three point specialist on O.

Shane's primary value in the NBA is as a defensive specialist. Kyle is a great defensive player, but he's not in Shane's league (so to speak).


From Seth's article, it appears that Nolan might be a second rounder; but how can a player who might end up leading the ACC in scoring and assists (an accomplishment that has never been done), and is a lock of ACC POY go in the second round? I see Nolan as a first rounder; but maybe I am looking at this with Duke-blue colored glasses. Can anyone share their insights and thoughts on Nolan's potential draft prospects?

Two words: Scottie Reynolds. First team All American. Roughly the same size as Nolan, the scouts viewed him as an undersized shooting guard rather than a combo guard. Undrafted.

[wilson]

"I agree that Nolan's decision making can be suspect at times and he would be a small 2 guard; but look at Monte Ellis of Golden State. From Seth's article, it appears that Nolan might be a second rounder; but how can a player who might end up leading the ACC in scoring and assists (an accomplishment that has never been done), and is a lock of ACC POY go in the second round? I see Nolan as a first rounder; but maybe I am looking at this with Duke-blue colored glasses. Can anyone share their insights and thoughts on Nolan's potential draft prospects?"

I agree with you, however as others on this board have pointed out to me, the NBA is a potential based league and many feel as though Nolan has reached his.A pretty good recent example would be Chris Carrawell. Like Nolan, he plugged away throughout a four-year career, and in his senior year, he was rewarded with a consensus ACC Player of the Year award.
However, Chris was drafted late in the second round, cut by the Spurs during training camp, and never played a single NBA regular-season minute.
I think Nolan's professional ceiling is well north of Chris Carrawell's, but Chris still serves as an example of the fact that college accolades mean next to zero with regard to draft position and a chance at an NBA career.

[moonpie23]

sigh.....i guess i need to remind all of you ....


boozer "slipped" to the second round...

[Kedsy]

boozer "slipped" to the second round...

And for the same reason: he was undersized for the position he played. A more recent example is DeJuan Blair.

Sometimes guys are good enough to overcome the size issue, but NBA teams are almost always hesitant to assume it will happen.

[juise]

the emergence of landry fields in new york (who i see as a perfect analogue to kyle) should convince teams that there is a place for tweeners who can shoot, hustle and defend.

Another analogue to Kyle: Landry can put together a solid viral video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t9tvpiJkBgA).

[superdave]

Shane's primary value in the NBA is as a defensive specialist. Kyle is a great defensive player, but he's not in Shane's league (so to speak).

Two words: Scottie Reynolds. First team All American. Roughly the same size as Nolan, the scouts viewed him as an undersized shooting guard rather than a combo guard. Undrafted.

I thought about comparing Singler to Mike Miller (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/stats?playerId=558), but I dont know Kyle will ever average over 18 ppg in the NBA. Or Matt Harpring (http://espn.go.com/nba/player/_/id/306/matt-harpring).

That's why I think Shane is a good comparison - Kyle's a better rebounder, but Shane probably has more lateral quickness defensively. Shane is a 30 mpg game player, but I think Kyle will really have to work hard and improve to get starter's minutes like that.

As for Nolan, scacchoops has his comparable players as Toney Douglas (22 mpg in the Knicks rotation), Wayne Ellington (Booooo! I mean, 17 mpg in the T-wolves rotation) and Daniel Ewing (playing in Poland). Nolan is a much better ball handler than all three of these guys though.

[NashvilleDevil]

As for Nolan, scacchoops has his comparable players as Toney Douglas (22 mpg in the Knicks rotation), Wayne Ellington (Booooo! I mean, 17 mpg in the T-wolves rotation) and Daniel Ewing (playing in Poland). Nolan is a much better ball handler than all three of these guys though.

Not a huge NBA follower but is there any comparing Nolan to Gilbert Arenas when he came out of Arizona? Gilbert is a couple of inches taller but was seen as a tweener as well if I remember right.

[CLW]

Pretty interesting article and I agree whole heartedly with the assesments of all the Duke players.

I think Kyrie is a star and Nolan and Kyle will stick somewhere and have decent careers as backup/role players in the NBA.

MP2 should definitely stay and see if he can develop any back to the basket/post game.

[Kedsy]

I thought about comparing Singler to Mike Miller (http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/stats?playerId=558), but I dont know Kyle will ever average over 18 ppg in the NBA. Or Matt Harpring (http://espn.go.com/nba/player/_/id/306/matt-harpring).

You have to look at how they're viewed coming out of college, and in that light I think Miller and Harpring are decent comparisons. It's just my opinion, but Shane Battier is not anywhere close to a good comparison for Kyle.

[Starter]

It has to be said: I love Nolan, but he has nowhere near the athletic gifts of guys mentioned here like Monta Ellis or Gilbert Arenas (before all the injuries). I do think he'll get drafted in the first round, and he'll be a guy teams will love to have. But comparing him to those guys is way off-base. Nolan's quick, but the athleticism just isn't on that level. But he plays D, he can shoot and he's not a bad ball handler. He'll be just fine.

I don't think Singler's senior year -- maybe not quite what we expected, but still very solid -- has hurt him a bit. I bet there are some teams that are absolutely in love with him. As good a shooter as he is now, players always become better shooters in the NBA, and he's tough as nails. I love his chances.

[jipops]

I'm not sure if this factors into scouts' opinions of Mason, I'm betting it does, but his defensive instincts and development are still behind. Last night again he was burned on switches and rolls and many times caught out of position. An NBA coach is not going to want to give him any burn if he is not playing D. He needs improvement in this area just as much or even more than his post skills.

[loran16]

And for the same reason: he was undersized for the position he played. A more recent example is DeJuan Blair.

Sometimes guys are good enough to overcome the size issue, but NBA teams are almost always hesitant to assume it will happen.

Bad Example. Blair slipped because he has no ACLs and no team wanted to risk him. Not because of his size.

[toooskies]

Undersized guards are very different from undersized forwards. As a forward, better positioning and fundamentals can make up for height. As a guard, if someone can shoot over the top of you, there isn't anything you can do about it. You give up an advantage.

I think Nolan still has NBA potential, but as a Mo Williams or Jameer Nelson-style scoring PG instead of a pure PG or an assist machine. But there will definitely be times, and teams, where he doesn't fit in.

[Starter]

I think Nolan still has NBA potential, but as a Mo Williams or Jameer Nelson-style scoring PG instead of a pure PG or an assist machine. But there will definitely be times, and teams, where he doesn't fit in.

I think Mo Williams is a good comparison, and a perfectly acceptable best-case scenario.

[davekay1971]

I'm not much at being able to guess whether a guy like Nolan is going to be a 1st or 2nd rounder, but I have faith that he's going to get drafted, and he's going to make a team. Nolan may not be the quickest or strongest, but that kid is all heart, and he's got, as the scout noted, tremendous desire to improve. His year-to-year improvement at Duke is remarkable. A smart GM will take Nolan and be willing to let him learn for a couple years, because he'll be a strong contributor, even if off the bench, and the kind of guy coaches absolutely LOVE to have in the locker room.

[Saratoga2]

Pretty interesting article and I agree whole heartedly with the assesments of all the Duke players.

I think Kyrie is a star and Nolan and Kyle will stick somewhere and have decent careers as backup/role players in the NBA.

MP2 should definitely stay and see if he can develop any back to the basket/post game.

While some on the board will want more respect for our best players, the NBA scouts have a different agenda. They are looking for physical traits and skills that will translate into success in the NBA. Kyrie has those skills in spades and will go high in the draft. Nolan is a great college players and has sufficient skills to be a backup player in the NBA. The same is true for Kyle. Both are very good players, but neither has skills that will make them stars in the NBA. I also agree that Mason has a lot to offer but is not ready yet for the NBA. If he does stay another year at Duke and improve his game, it is possible he will be a first round pick next year.

[hq2]

Nolan is a great college players and has sufficient skills to be a backup player in the NBA. The same is true for Kyle. Both are very good players, but neither has skills that will make them stars in the NBA.

I think that's about right. Nolan would probably fit in nicely as a backup combo guard, a la Delonte West. I think Kyle could start for the right team if his jump shot got a little better; otherwise, his hustle on both ends of the court would make him a fine off the bench "energy" player at the 3 position. We'll see them both up there, just probably not as starters any time soon.

[jimsumner]

Nolan helped himself last summer on the college team that worked against the national team.

[-jk]

Undersized guards are very different from undersized forwards. As a forward, better positioning and fundamentals can make up for height. As a guard, if someone can shoot over the top of you, there isn't anything you can do about it. You give up an advantage.

I think Nolan still has NBA potential, but as a Mo Williams or Jameer Nelson-style scoring PG instead of a pure PG or an assist machine. But there will definitely be times, and teams, where he doesn't fit in.

Meh. Tell that to Muggsy Bogues.

-jk

[taiw93]

My personal predictions (based on nothing much in particular, other than my own observations and opinions):

Kyrie: Chris Paul. Assuming the toe heals completely and isn't a lingering problem, the kid is an excellent floor general with great floor vision, handling ability, shooting ability, and quickness. What he lacks in "elite" athleticism (he's not John Wall, but he's still pretty damn athletic, IMO), he makes up for with intangibles and leadership ability. The kid is going to be a winner, and very likely a star. He has the charisma and talent to one day be the face of the NBA.

Nolan Smith: I could see him playing a role similar to the one that Toney Douglas plays with the Knicks (i.e. backup combo guard who averages about 10ppg and plays good D). He can defend, is a winner, and is VERY charismatic and a great "clubhouse guy." He's more athletic than people give him credit for, and at 6'2" or 6'3", he's not THAT short either. In my mind, their will always be room for cerebral, good-natured, and winning players like Nolan in the NBA.

Kyle Singler: A more offensive-minded Shane Battier. Obviously, Kyle is not on Shane's level defensively, but I could see him developing a better offensive arsenal. I predict a role-playing starter at SF or a sixth-man type on a perennial contender. The kid's gritty, and just plain wins.

Mason: He kind of reminds me of a poor man's young Dwight Howard, before the muscles (and by poor, i mean DIRT poor), just in that he is a very athletic big man whose game consists almost entirely of dunks, rebounds, and blocks. I am in no way suggesting that he is or will be that good - just that they are similarly reliant on athleticism. I think that in order to be a good NBA player, Mason needs to improve significantly on at least two of the following things: strength, shooting ability, and post moves. If he can make significant strides in all three areas, he has the potential to be an all-star; if not, he also has the potential to be a huge bust.

Dre: Ray Allen is his ceiling, but he needs to improve his handle, movement without the ball, defense, consistency, and attitude when he's missing shots (though he is, by all accounts, a GREAT kid, he seems to get easily frustrated, a problem that plagues a lot of young shooters). He has a long way to go, but he has the tools to be really, really good.

Seth: The easy way out would be to say his ceiling is his brother, but Seth does have some differences. Seth does not have the perfect shooting form that Stephen had, and is thus much streakier - though his consistency does seem to be improving as he adjusts to the ACC. However, Seth seems to have better ball-handling abilities than Stephen did as a soph, and is a MUCH better defender (for which Coach K is largely to thank) - I think he may even be quicker as well. Seth is shorter than Stephen was, so he will definitely need to keep working on his PG abilities before moving to the next level.

Ryan Kelly: Hard to pigeonhole him, since he is just SUCH a unique player. I have no idea what type of player he will be by the time he leaves Duke, but if he can get stronger and improve his post D and rebounding and improve his shooting consistency, he could be a VERY valuable asset to an NBA coach. Perhaps a more inside-minded Danillo Gallinari?

Sorry if my comparisons are somewhat inaccurate, btw. As you can probably tell, I'm a Knicks fan and know their players best.

[g-money]

I think back to the way Nolan lit up a "long, athletic" Baylor in the tournament last year, as well as the multiple games in which he's carried the team this year, and have to believe that Nolan has the:

Athletic ability
Ballhandling & finishing skills (aka "creating off the dribble")
Brains/Savvy
Character
Courage to take big shots
Effort on the defensive end
Heart
Mid-range game
Positive attitude/team player
Quickness
Work ethic (from what I've heard, it's second to none)
Winning mentality

to play for a long, long time in the NBA. He may not be a future all-star, but in my (completely biased) view he'll make a great role player on an NBA team for many years to come - just as several other Duke guards have in the recent past. He's admittedly a bit of a tweener and does not possess a classic point guard's mentality, but he can provide a terrific value to a team based on his offensive skillset. His intangibles (see above) are off the charts.

Put me down for Nolan going to a playoff-caliber team in the 20-30 range in this year's draft, and making an increasingly significant contribution to the team as his rookie season progresses.

[Richard Berg]

If Nolan continues to improve his shooting form and attack mentality, how about an "upside target" of Ben Gordon?

[arydolphin]

Nolan = Nate Robinson. High energy in 10-15 minutes per night. Can change up the pace when a team's offense is stagnant.


I completely agree with this. Admittedly, I get to watch a lot of Celtics games up here, but I could easily see Nolan being an energy guy off of the bench, especially on the defensive end. He's going to have to prove to the NBA guys that he can run the point effectively though. Obviously, I'd love to see him eventually start someplace, but I think that his long-term NBA future is as a 6th or 7th man.

Another NBA comparison is Jason Terry, who has found a nice role as the 6th man on the Dallas Mavericks, and also usually plays for them in crunch time as well. He can really light it up from the 3-point line, but can also get to the rim when needed.

[JohnGalt]

I think both Nolan and Kyle will be 7th or 8th men in the league.

Nolan = Nate Robinson. High energy in 10-15 minutes per night. Can change up the pace when a team's offense is stagnant.

Kyle = Shane Battier. Hustle guy on D. Three point specialist on O.

Both guys will find their niche. As we've seen with JJ, guys have to put in work to crack their team's rotation.

I don't really buy either of these, superdave. Kyle puts pride in defense, but Shane prided/prides himself in defense. And even though Kyle's smart on the floor, Shane's bball IQ is off the charts. I love Kyle as I think he's the consummate competitor, but I think it's overly optimistic to think he could be as much a contributor in the league as Shane. I hope I'm wrong about that, too.

Nate Robinson is a completely different build than Nolan. 5'9, 180 vs 6'2 185. Nate's small and compact and relies on his incredibly quick first step and superior leaping ability to get to the rim. He's a 3 time slam-dunk champion, after all. He's also above - perhaps, way above - average athletically which allows him to score amongst the trees; whereas, Nolan is average to slightly below average athletically, even in college. He's somewhat longer though so he can get to the rim using his length a little more than Nate can/could. I think Nolan has a place in the league, though not in the Nate Robinson Mold.

[hurley1]

If I was Irving's dad, I would tell him to ignore all this NBA talk and come back to school next year, for many reasons. The NBA will be there waiting when he goes. 82 games a year is alot more than he has ever played. He is a kid and he needs to live like a kid for as long as he can. Very, very few kids have the opportunity to experience being a Duke Blue Devil, and he hasn't really experienced that due to his injury. He will regret it down the road if he passes up that experience. The contract in the NBA that is most important is the second contract, not the first one. These NBA sharks love to get a green talent like Irving and let him struggle a little bit and offer him less in the second contract. He may go, but, I don't recommend it.

[yancem]

If I was Irving's dad, I would tell him to ignore all this NBA talk and come back to school next year, for many reasons. The NBA will be there waiting when he goes. 82 games a year is alot more than he has ever played. He is a kid and he needs to live like a kid for as long as he can. Very, very few kids have the opportunity to experience being a Duke Blue Devil, and he hasn't really experienced that due to his injury. He will regret it down the road if he passes up that experience. The contract in the NBA that is most important is the second contract, not the first one. These NBA sharks love to get a green talent like Irving and let him struggle a little bit and offer him less in the second contract. He may go, but, I don't recommend it.

That sounds nice but I don't think that many people (outside of the fans) share your view. The 82 game schedule does bring up an interesting question though. Due to the unique nature of Irving's toe injury, would he better off coming back to Duke next year and only playing 35-40 games (and more probably importantly only 2 games a week)? This would give the toe an entire year to strengthen and get used to live basketball again with less of a chance of over exerting it. Obviously I have no professional knowledge in this area but if there are concerns about re-injury or thoughts that it may take time to get back to full speed (I know that some injuries can take over a year before a return to 100% explosiveness occurs) than a year in college may have some benefits.

Just a thought.

[Tim1515]

That sounds nice but I don't think that many people (outside of the fans) share your view. The 82 game schedule does bring up an interesting question though. Due to the unique nature of Irving's toe injury, would he better off coming back to Duke next year and only playing 35-40 games (and more probably importantly only 2 games a week)? This would give the toe an entire year to strengthen and get used to live basketball again with less of a chance of over exerting it. Obviously I have no professional knowledge in this area but if there are concerns about re-injury or thoughts that it may take time to get back to full speed (I know that some injuries can take over a year before a return to 100% explosiveness occurs) than a year in college may have some benefits.

Just a thought.

i'm sure less games would be better for Irving physically...but then again it is hard on all rookies just like the transition to college basketball is.

I would think the bigger concern is...what if this is a recurring thing and he gets hurt at Duke next year...that could put a huge dent in his draft stock.

[Starter]

I would think the bigger concern is...what if this is a recurring thing and he gets hurt at Duke next year...that could put a huge dent in his draft stock.

I don't think so. Barring a catastrophic injury, Irving's stock will stay up there with Apple's.

[Billy Dat]

It always cracks me up when, looking for comps of guys in the NBA, people tend to select All-Star level talents and proven starters. Mason Plumlee = Dwight Howard? I know there were some disclaimers made, but that is a little insane.

For Nolan, I think Toney Doulgas is a pretty good comp, as is Jeff Teague. Both are 6'2"...Douglas is more powerfully built, Teague is quicker, Nolan is probably as offensively talented.

For Kyle, I think Shane is a bit of a reach comp. Jared Dudley and Luke Walton come to mind. Dudley transformed himself into a NBA-level 3 point shooter which is something I think Kyle will have to do to be a rotation player (and I think he will).

Mason still hasn't shown enough on the offensive end for me to think of a comp. If he keeps evolving as a defender, and keeps getting stronger, I see him going two ways. He could be a Chris "Birdman" Andersen type, minus the ink, who creates havok with his unstoppable motor running the court, blocking shots, etc. Or, he could focus on scoring and try and become a Channing Frye type, a finesse big who stretches defenses with his shooting (Mason hasn't flashed the 3 this year that he showed last year).

For Mason AND Miles, they will get serious looks because they are going to score off the charts at the pre-draft camp on the speed, agility and jumping tests.

Three important points:
-For the draft, you only need one team to fall in love with you. That's all that matters. Nail one workout for a team that needs what you can bring, and you've got your golden ticket.
-Much of a players success happens based on what they do once the draft is over. Making it in the NBA, save for the top tier of physical talents, requires an insane amount of work, focus and perseverance. JJ Redick MADE himself an career NBA player, Adam Morrison did not. One is an important cog for a championship contender, the other is out of the NBA.
-You also can't factor out luck...finding the right situation to establish yourself and getting a foothold. Why did Chris Duhon make it and Daniel Ewing did not? Why is Josh McRoberts a rotation player and Shelden Williams is a bench player? Granted, there are more reasons than just luck, but getting the right coach/system/opportunity is often luck, and then the player has to step through that open door.

[Wildcat]

Nolan Smith is having a solid year leading the team in scoring and senior leadership. Being
that his father played in the league; he is from Duke/connections; his above average scoring
abilities; average speed; desire/work ethic; attitude; he should be a first rounder. Barring an
injury or some unforseen glaring weakness in his game; he will get a chance to play at the
next level.

Sing, Sing: Is having a good year; with obviously a lot less "shine", applause than last year.
Because of his Duke/K affiliations; attitude; above average shooting and offensive abilities;
he will definetly get good looks. I believe he will go in the first round; but he will have to get
stronger and prove that he's tough enough to be at the next level. Just like JJ; he will get
tested. It'll be up to him to breakthrough and find his niche. I believe he can and will do just
that.

Plums I like the idea of Miles/Mase?; the younger one leaving after this year. He will have more
space to develop and challenge his game. A player needs some space to grow and develop;
without all of the attention on whether you're meeting expectations or not from fans, coach
and All-Star recruits all around you. If he can get a shot at the next level soon; it MIGHT
not be a bad idea.

There's really no need for commentary on Dre and Curry at this point. They are in a good
place because they are not: "NBA hyped/pressured/expectations." They can relax, enjoy
playing for a great coach and school and develop good basketball experience.

[Billy Dat]

There's really no need for commentary on Dre and Curry at this point. They are in a good
place because they are not: "NBA hyped/pressured/expectations." They can relax, enjoy
playing for a great coach and school and develop good basketball experience.

I have seen others say this, but I think Dre has more pro potential than anyone aside from Kyrie - he just doesn't know it yet. He's got great size for an NBA 2, can obviously shoot the lights out, and has great quickness and driving ability, and the ability to flush it when he gets to the rim. His defense needs a lot of work, but the tools are there. What he needs is to believe that he is that good, and to ignite that fire in the belly. I understand why last year was a lost year for him, and, without knowing what's going on behind closed doors at practice, he seems too deferential this year, but the talent is there. I hope he buys in and gives K and the coaches the chance to help pull it out of him.

As for Seth, he's going to have to be a PG to make the NBA. That's going to be a fierce battle between he, Tyler and Quinn Cook for that role next year. If Kyrie comes back, all bets are off and someone may be going to transfer route.

[gam7]

I have seen others say this, but I think Dre has more pro potential than anyone aside from Kyrie - he just doesn't know it yet. He's got great size for an NBA 2, can obviously shoot the lights out, and has great quickness and driving ability, and the ability to flush it when he gets to the rim. His defense needs a lot of work, but the tools are there. What he needs is to believe that he is that good, and to ignite that fire in the belly. I understand why last year was a lost year for him, and, without knowing what's going on behind closed doors at practice, he seems too deferential this year, but the talent is there. I hope he buys in and gives K and the coaches the chance to help pull it out of him.

As for Seth, he's going to have to be a PG to make the NBA. That's going to be a fierce battle between he, Tyler and Quinn Cook for that role next year. If Kyrie comes back, all bets are off and someone may be going to transfer route.

Even though Curry doesn't look like a prototypical PG, he appears to be smart with the ball (he has just over a 2:1 assist to turnover ratio) and he's improved dramatically this season defensively as well. He very well may be our primary ball handler next year.

As for the transfer speculation if Kyrie comes back, I don't see it. Of course things change after guys actually have to ride the pine for a season, but I don't see Seth transferring a second time. By most accounts, Tyler came in with fairly low expectations for playing time, which he has far exceeded this season. He will continue to earn minutes because of the defensive niche he fills. And Quinn committed to Duke knowing that there was a possibility that Kyrie would come back and has discussed that possibility publicly. I don't think a transfer will be an issue for him after year 1.

[-bdbd]

Even though Curry doesn't look like a prototypical PG, he appears to be smart with the ball (he has just over a 2:1 assist to turnover ratio) and he's improved dramatically this season defensively as well. He very well may be our primary ball handler next year.

As for the transfer speculation if Kyrie comes back, I don't see it. Of course things change after guys actually have to ride the pine for a season, but I don't see Seth transferring a second time. By most accounts, Tyler came in with fairly low expectations for playing time, which he has far exceeded this season. He will continue to earn minutes because of the defensive niche he fills. And Quinn committed to Duke knowing that there was a possibility that Kyrie would come back and has discussed that possibility publicly. I don't think a transfer will be an issue for him after year 1.


I don't see it especially for Tyler (who has had lots more minutes than he probably expected, plus he seems to be a real "team" guy) and Seth (b/c he has surged late and sitting out yet another year seems unlikely regardless). And the expectations would be VERY low that KI would return for a third year (so he'll be gone before any of these guys could transfer, sit out a year, and then play elsewhere anyway). Dawkins is the one I'd me most concerned about, given his drop-off this season, but I know little about his happiness level. It does seem that at 6'4" he'll inherit a lot of minutes made available by KS's departure from the 3 spot.

I sure HOPE everyone stays. This seems like quite a cohesive, "together" group.

[superdave]

I have seen others say this, but I think Dre has more pro potential than anyone aside from Kyrie - he just doesn't know it yet. He's got great size for an NBA 2, can obviously shoot the lights out, and has great quickness and driving ability, and the ability to flush it when he gets to the rim. His defense needs a lot of work, but the tools are there. What he needs is to believe that he is that good, and to ignite that fire in the belly. I understand why last year was a lost year for him, and, without knowing what's going on behind closed doors at practice, he seems too deferential this year, but the talent is there. I hope he buys in and gives K and the coaches the chance to help pull it out of him.

As for Seth, he's going to have to be a PG to make the NBA. That's going to be a fierce battle between he, Tyler and Quinn Cook for that role next year. If Kyrie comes back, all bets are off and someone may be going to transfer route.

What about Ryan? If he adds another 20 lbs of muscle so he can defend the post in the NBA, he's got the jump shot to make it all work. And if he keeps extending his range, he could be a Brad Miller type.

[Billy Dat]

What about Ryan? If he adds another 20 lbs of muscle so he can defend the post in the NBA, he's got the jump shot to make it all work. And if he keeps extending his range, he could be a Brad Miller type.

Hmmm...a Ryan Kelly comp....I am not loving the Brad Miller comp because Miller is a 7-footer and, despite the seemingly ridiculous threshold, a 6'10"er is not a 7 footer in the same way that a 6'8"er is not a 6'10"er. Miller played the 5 most of his career. Plus, he was a multiple NBA All Star - I think we need to tamper our expectations a bit.

Were Ryan quicker, I'd have him pegged as a 3 but most NBA 3s would go by him as if he were standing still. I think he'll be better matched-up with 4s, although he'll need to work on his defense the way JJ did.

I see the following as Ryan Kelly comps:
-Veal Scalabrine
-Ryan Anderson

Scalabrine has somehow managed to stay in the league by the tips of his fingers and he's more of a banger as an NBA player. Anderson is an important rotation player for the Magic, and was good enough by his senior year at Cal to be a first round pick. No one is talking about Ryan as an NBA player right now, but he's going to get plenty of exposure and minutes for the next 2.33 years so he'll get his chance.

[mike88]

Scalabrine has somehow managed to stay in the league by the tips of his fingers and he's more of a banger as an NBA player. Anderson is an important rotation player for the Magic, and was good enough by his senior year at Cal to be a first round pick. No one is talking about Ryan as an NBA player right now, but he's going to get plenty of exposure and minutes for the next 2.33 years so he'll get his chance.

Ryan Anderson was PAC-10 Player of the Year as a sophomore and declared for the NBA draft after his 2 years at Cal, IIRC. He was selected #21 in the 2008 NBA draft. I hope Ryan Kelly reaches that same level of success, but as a senior!

[gwlaw99]

Two skills that I think will help Nolan tremedously in the NBA are his excellent floater in the lane and pull up mid range jumper. He also dribbles the ball equally well with both hands.

[Billy Dat]

Ryan Anderson was PAC-10 Player of the Year as a sophomore and declared for the NBA draft after his 2 years at Cal, IIRC. He was selected #21 in the 2008 NBA draft. I hope Ryan Kelly reaches that same level of success, but as a senior!

Good god...bad job by me...that makes more sense in terms of his draft position. He's a good model for Ryan to aspire to, same height, ability to knock down the 3, smart but not athletically gifted, etc. Maybe JJ can introduce the two of them for some NBA mentoring. It seems like JJ and Anderson, even though they compete for off-the-bench minutes, are friendly. Of course, I am basing that on my interpretation of their interactions on the bench and coming into and out of timeouts as viewed from my living room couch!!!

[juise]

It seems like JJ and Anderson, even though they compete for off-the-bench minutes, are friendly. Of course, I am basing that on my interpretation of their interactions on the bench and coming into and out of timeouts as viewed from my living room couch!!!

Friendly? Have you not heard of "James Clay (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBuAFSLHZPo)?!" It's the Redick-Anderson rap group. The much-anticipated first single is just around the corner... any day now. :p


Returning back to topic, how about the current game of Channing Frye as a ceiling for Ryan? In college, Frye was a little more of an interior presence (averaging 8 rebounds and 2 blocks by his senior year) and he hardly shot behind the arc. Now his stats look more comparable to Ryan's. Obviously, Ryan would need to work hard to play PF in the NBA, but hit height and weight are comparable to Frye.

[Orange&BlackSheep]

I have seen others say this, but I think Dre has more pro potential than anyone aside from Kyrie - he just doesn't know it yet. He's got great size for an NBA 2, can obviously shoot the lights out, and has great quickness and driving ability, and the ability to flush it when he gets to the rim. His defense needs a lot of work, but the tools are there. What he needs is to believe that he is that good, and to ignite that fire in the belly. I understand why last year was a lost year for him, and, without knowing what's going on behind closed doors at practice, he seems too deferential this year, but the talent is there. I hope he buys in and gives K and the coaches the chance to help pull it out of him.

As for Seth, he's going to have to be a PG to make the NBA. That's going to be a fierce battle between he, Tyler and Quinn Cook for that role next year. If Kyrie comes back, all bets are off and someone may be going to transfer route.

I love Andre D, but "great quickness"??? Isn't he is the exact opposite of great quickness? Alan Iverson is great quickness, right?

[taiw93]

It always cracks me up when, looking for comps of guys in the NBA, people tend to select All-Star level talents and proven starters. Mason Plumlee = Dwight Howard? I know there were some disclaimers made, but that is a little insane.

Figured I'd get some flack for that. To clarify, I didn't intent to actually compare the two in terms of ability - I just wanted to point out that Mason's game currently consists of blocking shots, dunking, rebounding and just being generally athletic, and a young Howard was a player who also clearly fit that description (though he was MUCH better in every category, even as a rookie).

[Billy Dat]

Figured I'd get some flack for that. To clarify, I didn't intent to actually compare the two in terms of ability - I just wanted to point out that Mason's game currently consists of blocking shots, dunking, rebounding and just being generally athletic, and a young Howard was a player who also clearly fit that description (though he was MUCH better in every category, even as a rookie).

I didn't mean to pile on a fellow Knick fan, and I also hate when DBR posters select one line out of a long piece and nitpick it. I just laugh how people tend to select the most elite comps when talking about guys we don't even know will make it in the pros.


I love Andre D, but "great quickness"??? Isn't he is the exact opposite of great quickness? Alan Iverson is great quickness, right?

I would characterize Allen Iverson as having world class quickness, or whatever adjective adequately describes the uber top of the pyramid...Russell Westbrook/Aaron Brooks type quickness. I don't think Dre is the opposite of that. Based on the times he does put the ball on the deck, I feel like he has better than good quickness. Maybe "great" was too strong...how about, in musical terms, good sharp or great flat?

Maybe it's just that defenders are so surprised that he's driving that they stand up and he blows right by them?

[UrinalCake]

Returning back to topic, how about the current game of Channing Frye as a ceiling for Ryan?

That's a horrible comparison. Frye is black, while Ryan is white.

(Yes, I'm being sarcastic. White players are almost never compared to black players. Though I suppose someone did earlier with their Mason/Howard comparison).

[Dukeface88]

I didn't mean to pile on a fellow Knick fan, and I also hate when DBR posters select one line out of a long piece and nitpick it. I just laugh how people tend to select the most elite comps when talking about guys we don't even know will make it in the pros.



I would characterize Allen Iverson as having world class quickness, or whatever adjective adequately describes the uber top of the pyramid...Russell Westbrook/Aaron Brooks type quickness. I don't think Dre is the opposite of that. Based on the times he does put the ball on the deck, I feel like he has better than good quickness. Maybe "great" was too strong...how about, in musical terms, good sharp or great flat?

Maybe it's just that defenders are so surprised that he's driving that they stand up and he blows right by them?

I think it depends on whether we're talking north-south, lateral, or explosiveness. If I remember correctly from pre-season discussions, Andre was our fastest player in timed sprints. He hasn't really harnessed that in his drives yet; I suspect his handles are the main limitation in that department. It's also tough to tell from either his off-ball movement or his defense, since they're so dependant on whether his shot is falling. I agree he has all the physical tools to succeed; it's just a matter of attaining the skill set and mentality to use them (not unlike Mason, although the areas they need to work on are different).

[Orange&BlackSheep]

I would characterize Allen Iverson as having world class quickness, or whatever adjective adequately describes the uber top of the pyramid...Russell Westbrook/Aaron Brooks type quickness. I don't think Dre is the opposite of that. Based on the times he does put the ball on the deck, I feel like he has better than good quickness. Maybe "great" was too strong...how about, in musical terms, good sharp or great flat?

Maybe it's just that defenders are so surprised that he's driving that they stand up and he blows right by them?

I personally feel that he and JJ are comparably quick and that he, like JJ, will have to learn how to use the dribble effectively given that he is neither especially quick nor explosive (and yes his throw downs prove him to have slightly better hops than JJ).

[FireOgilvie]

I personally feel that he and JJ are comparably quick and that he, like JJ, will have to learn how to use the dribble effectively given that he is neither especially quick nor explosive (and yes his throw downs prove him to have slightly better hops than JJ).

That's quite the understatement.

Andre:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cFSBQaskzA0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78GHbtZKzIo

JJ:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJSELHVHk2E&feature=related

[Andy7207]

I think it depends on whether we're talking north-south, lateral, or explosiveness. If I remember correctly from pre-season discussions, Andre was our fastest player in timed sprints. He hasn't really harnessed that in his drives yet; I suspect his handles are the main limitation in that department. It's also tough to tell from either his off-ball movement or his defense, since they're so dependant on whether his shot is falling. I agree he has all the physical tools to succeed; it's just a matter of attaining the skill set and mentality to use them (not unlike Mason, although the areas they need to work on are different).

Agreed on all of this. I don't think he has the ball-handling skills to beat ACC-level guards off the dribble, but he can occasionally get by small forwards when he uses his body as protection. In terms of finishing, he can dunk like a monster, but he doesn't have the set of double pumps and teardrops needed to finish his drives against tall defenders. IIRC, his two(?) failed drives in the last game were not a matter of getting to the rim, but just a matter of touch. I'm 100% sure he'll get there as it's just a matter of practice especially ball-handling - I'm sure his bigger focus to this point has rightfully been perfecting his shot and improving his defense.

[juise]

That's a horrible comparison. Frye is black, while Ryan is white.

(Yes, I'm being sarcastic. White players are almost never compared to black players. Though I suppose someone did earlier with their Mason/Howard comparison).

Yeah, the unwillingness to make such comparisons annoys me... like when every white shooting guard is immediately compared to Steve Kerr. Of course, Channing went out tonight and scored 31 with 11 boards, which kinda made me look like an idiot for making the comparison. Thanks, Channing. ;)


Speaking of comparisons, I'm intrigued by why Mason is projected as a lottery pick (or at least has been over the last year... Draft express has him #10 in 2012) while Josh McRoberts went 37th. They're the same size. They can both jump. Perhaps Mason gets a bit higher, but Josh was no slouch. As sophomores, they were roughly equivalent as shot blockers and rebounders. Josh had a better jumper, was a bit more consistent from the line, could handle pretty well, and was an excellent passer for his size. The only minus I can think of for Josh were rumors of chemistry issues with teammates.

So what makes Mason 20+ picks better than Josh? Don't get me wrong, I love having Mason on this team. I think he's improved a lot this year and that he has a future in professional basketball. It's not like being compared to the consensus #1 player in the 2005 class is an easy test (though looking at the RSCI rankings for that class... it was weak!). Any thoughts on this?

[Richard Berg]

Josh had a better jumper, was a bit more consistent from the line, could handle pretty well, and was an excellent passer for his size.
You're too kind. Josh's ballhandling as a sophomore was about 1000X better than anything Mason has shown to date.

[Saratoga2]

I think it depends on whether we're talking north-south, lateral, or explosiveness. If I remember correctly from pre-season discussions, Andre was our fastest player in timed sprints. He hasn't really harnessed that in his drives yet; I suspect his handles are the main limitation in that department. It's also tough to tell from either his off-ball movement or his defense, since they're so dependant on whether his shot is falling. I agree he has all the physical tools to succeed; it's just a matter of attaining the skill set and mentality to use them (not unlike Mason, although the areas they need to work on are different).

I also think Andre has excellent tools, however, I think he is a little slow getting his shot off. Where Seth has improved his quickness getting his shots off, Andre still is taking a long backstroke and can be blocked if he doesn't have a good amount of space. Andre also clearly needs to improve his handle.

[Starter]

I actually think Frye is a reach for Kelly. Bear in mind that Frye was drafted No. 8 overall by the Knicks after being an absolute beast in college. (16 points, 7 rebounds, 2.3 blocks his last two years, shot like 55%) His game changed a lot too, i.e. he didn't shoot threes for Arizona. There was a while when it really looked like Frye would be a major star for the Knicks; he was even untouchable in a few deals. Then people kind of figured out his game, and he ended up on Phoenix, which is why he modified it and started jacking up threes.

I think the Ryan Anderson comparison probably is okay, or maybe Shawne Williams. Except... I just don't see Ryan Kelly making the NBA. *Shrugs* I could be wrong, but to me he resembles someone who could round into a pretty good college player, nothing more.

[hq2]

Most people expected McBobs to go higher; Mason, by the way, may not go that high. The issue I think is that McBobs didn't improve all that much from his freshman to sophomore years. He scored more, but he had to, with J.J. and Shelden being gone, and his overall offensive game didn't develop that much, although it did improve some. Mason's hasn't either, but based on his improvement rate, the pros seem to thing he has a higher ceiling. Plus, McBobs had an attitude problem; no one seems to think that about Mason. We'll see how good he actually gets.

[superdave]

I actually think Frye is a reach for Kelly. Bear in mind that Frye was drafted No. 8 overall by the Knicks after being an absolute beast in college. (16 points, 7 rebounds, 2.3 blocks his last two years, shot like 55%) His game changed a lot too, i.e. he didn't shoot threes for Arizona. There was a while when it really looked like Frye would be a major star for the Knicks; he was even untouchable in a few deals. Then people kind of figured out his game, and he ended up on Phoenix, which is why he modified it and started jacking up threes.

I think the Ryan Anderson comparison probably is okay, or maybe Shawne Williams. Except... I just don't see Ryan Kelly making the NBA. *Shrugs* I could be wrong, but to me he resembles someone who could round into a pretty good college player, nothing more.

You dont see Ryan Kelly getting a lot of Kyle's jump shots next year? I could see 25 minutes, 12 points, 6 boards, 2 blocks per game as a junior and 50% more as a senior when Miles is gone.

[Starter]

You dont see Ryan Kelly getting a lot of Kyle's jump shots next year? I could see 25 minutes, 12 points, 6 boards, 2 blocks per game as a junior and 50% more as a senior when Miles is gone.

Not really. I see Austin Rivers, Seth Curry and (hopefully!) Dawkins getting a lot of Singler and Smith's looks -- which I'd prefer. If the Plumlees are both still around next year, and it's looking like they will be, I'd say the frontcourt rotation would probably look pretty similar to this year. I see Kelly as getting like 22 minutes a game, and there's nothing wrong with that.

Please don't get me wrong, I don't hate what Kelly brings to the table. He's a good shot blocker, for example, though not really an enforcer in the middle, and shoots 40% on his threes (though if he started taking more, that number would almost certainly come down a bit). I was just saying I doubt he puts up college numbers like Frye -- or even Shawne Williams -- and I don't see him in the NBA.

[Billy Dat]

Speaking of comparisons, I'm intrigued by why Mason is projected as a lottery pick (or at least has been over the last year... Draft express has him #10 in 2012) while Josh McRoberts went 37th. They're the same size. They can both jump. Perhaps Mason gets a bit higher, but Josh was no slouch. As sophomores, they were roughly equivalent as shot blockers and rebounders. Josh had a better jumper, was a bit more consistent from the line, could handle pretty well, and was an excellent passer for his size. The only minus I can think of for Josh were rumors of chemistry issues with teammates.

I agree with what hq2 said, and I'll add that a huge reason he dropped was that when the JJ and Shelden smoke cleared, he was supposed to step up and be THE MAN. Instead, as K used to say, he turned into a "PG on stilts". He did not step up and shoulder the burden of being the primary stud on the team...didn't demand the ball, didn't appear to be a leader, and basically looked like he wished JJ and Shelden were around. He liked to pass, and couldn't finish. For the money, he should have left after his freshman year. For his skills set, he should have stayed longer. Ultimately, as a current NBA starter, he did VERY well for himself.

[AtlDuke72]

Plums I like the idea of Miles/Mase?; the younger one leaving after this year. He will have more
space to develop and challenge his game. A player needs some space to grow and develop;
without all of the attention on whether you're meeting expectations or not from fans, coach
and All-Star recruits all around you. If he can get a shot at the next level soon; it MIGHT
not be a bad idea.

I must admit that I just don't get all the talk about Mason going to the NBA early. Comparisons to Dwight Howard are from fantasy land. I have not seen the glimmer of an inside game and cannot recall him ever making an outside shot. He rebounds well for the college game and has the potential to be a good defender but seems to make multiple mistakes. The first half of the Carolina game was brutal. Zeller totally outplayed Mason and he is considered a marginal prospect. I hope Mason proves me wrong, but I must be watching different games from all of the people that from the start have described him as a potential lottery pick.

[Kedsy]

Not really. I see Austin Rivers, Seth Curry and (hopefully!) Dawkins getting a lot of Singler and Smith's looks -- which I'd prefer. If the Plumlees are both still around next year, and it's looking like they will be, I'd say the frontcourt rotation would probably look pretty similar to this year. I see Kelly as getting like 22 minutes a game, and there's nothing wrong with that.

You have a point about the crowded rotation next year, but I think Ryan may surprise you. By his senior year, I would expect to see something approaching Frye's senior year numbers.

[UrinalCake]

Yeah, I think McRoberts was someone done in by the expectations regarding his role on the team. He didn't have the physical or psychological makeup to be The Man; however that doesn't mean that he couldn't be a solid pro player. If Mason were put in a similar position where he was expected to be the primary scoring option, it's entirely possible that he wouldn't succeed and that his draft stock would slip because of it. Fortunately for all of us, we'll just never really know.

BTW saying Mason is like Dwight Howard without the muscles is akin to saying that Ryan Kelly is like Larry Bird without the insane shooting ability.

[Starter]

You have a point about the crowded rotation next year, but I think Ryan may surprise you. By his senior year, I would expect to see something approaching Frye's senior year numbers.

I hope so. Frye was really good. I guess I wouldn't rule it out, but he has a long way to go to reach where Frye was as a senior (http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/player/profile?playerId=4971). (And a bit of a ways to go to reach Frye as a freshman) They're different players, too: Frye had the midrange game but could go inside; Kelly is more of a shooter but can also block shots, an interesting niche.

I'd say if Kelly as a senior can approach Singler's freshman year numbers (http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/player/profile?playerId=36156), if not performance level, I'd say that's relatively fair to target and I'd be perfectly satisfied with it.

[Andy7207]

How about JaVale McGee as Mason comparison? He was picked 18th overall, can jump out of the building, spectacular dunks, not the best footwork, makes defensive mental slips, long wingspan... McGee is bigger and quicker and has a little better offensive game, but I think Mason could have posted similar numbers if he were starting at Nevada (McGee had 14 and 7 his sophomore season).