Toronto, or whoever else might be
selecting first on June 28, might not open the NBA Draft by calling the name of
University of
Washington guard Brandon Roy.
Depending on who holds the first
choice (and the Raptors currently do, although many within the league believe
they may deal it), LaMarcus Aldridge (Texas), Tyrus Thomas (LSU) and Adam Morrison (Gonzaga) seem the most likely candidates to get that initial
post-selection hand shake with Commissioner David
Stern.
But who is the best
“player”, period, available in the 2006 Draft pool?
Roy gets our
vote.
Some veteran NBA talent
evaluators have tossed about the “Dwyane Wade” comparison. That’s quite a bit of
praise for Roy but it is off in several
ways.
For one,
Roy isn’t quite the explosive
athlete that the Miami Heat standout is. Nor does he appear to be (at least, at
the same stage) quite the overall “scorer” that Wade was as a
Marquette junior (his final season on
the college level).
But Roy is at least a couple of
inches taller than Wade, a better defender than he was in college and a bit more
refined as a passer and ball-handler than Wade was when he led Coach Tom Crean’s
team to the Final Four in 2003.
Are we convinced
Roy will become anything
approaching the player Wade has become in his third season in the NBA? We’re not
going to go that far. But we are convinced – and have been for a while – that
Roy is the best prospect in
this draft.
He’s the best of a pretty
good crop of guards that also includes probable Top 10 selections Randy Foye of
Villanova and Marcus Williams of Connecticut.
But we do think that the
group of point guards in this draft class isn’t nearly as strong in the upper
tier as it was a year ago when Deron Williams, Chris Paul and Raymond Felton
went 3-4-5 in the first
round.
A look at the guards with the best
opportunities of being chosen in the first
round:
(*Are heights (without shoes) and
weights as measured during the Pre-Draft Camp in
Orlando)
Brandon Roy (*6-5 ¼, 207;
Washington)
Projected position:
Combination
guard
What NBA talent evaluators
like: Yeah
– what is there not to like? No one, with the possible exception of
Connecticut’s Marcus Williams, did as
much to make teammates more productive players last season. On the perimeter or
in the post, he creates quality shot attempts – for him or his teammates.
Huskies’ teammate Bobby Jones is being touted by some as the best prospect on
the defensive end of the floor in the draft. But
Roy was, at times, an even more
affective defender – just ask UCLA’s Jordan Farmar.
What they wonder about:
Is he more
than just a “solid” athlete? How consistent a jump shooter is he from
deep?
Frank Says: By March, most of those in the “national”
media had caught on to what those who follow the Pacific 10 Conference regularly
knew by mid-January – Roy was the most “complete”
player in college.
Draft night projection:
Top
Five
Randy Foye (*6-2 ¼, 212;
Villanova)
Projected position:
Combination
guard
What NBA talent evaluators
like: He’s
tough and determined at both ends of the court. Other than J.J. Redick, there
was no guard tougher to keep from scoring, straight up, than Foye last season.
He’s drawn comparisons to Chicago’s Ben Gordon but he seems a
more willing distributor. Like Brandon Roy, he defies being pigeonholed as a
“point” or a “two” guard. And, along with Roy, he’ll be able to adapt to,
and flourish in, the NBA a lot sooner than any of the other June 28 first-round
selections.
What they wonder about:
He’s too
good a shooter to finish his best season in college with a .411 field goal
percentage – which tells you he’s apt to heave up some ill-advised
attempts.
Frank Says: We’d have a more accurate
read on his ability to be a primary ball-handler/set-up guy in the NBA if he
hadn’t shared those duties with three other guards at
Villanova.
Draft night projection:
Top
10
Marcus
Williams
(*6-2, 215; Connecticut)
Projected position:
Point (one)
guard
What NBA talent evaluators
like: He
was easily the most effective passer, in full- and half-court settings, on the
college level last season. Williams, despite heavily favoring his left (strong)
hand on penetration moves, gets into the lane with absurd ease while usually
being on-balance. He is willing to give up the ball in a hurry to an open
teammate. He evolved into a more-than-reliable shooter, with decent range, over
three seasons despite not getting a great deal of elevation.
What they wonder about:
He is more
“clever and slick” with the ball in his hands than he is “fast and quick”. He’ll
have to mix in plenty of salads on the next level to keep his weight in
check.
Frank Says: He’s clearly the best passer
in the draft pool and should be the first “true” point guard
selected.
Draft night projection:
Seven to
13
J.J. Redick (*6-4, 190;
Duke)
Projected position:
Shooting
(two) guard
What NBA talent evaluators
like: Along
with Adam Morrison, he was one of the two best scorers on the college level the
past two seasons. And, like his compadre from Gonzaga, there is no apparent
reason why Redick shouldn’t be a dangerous scoring threat almost immediately in
the NBA. He’s a nails jump shooter, mid- and deep-range, spotting up or coming
off screens, with as quick a release as there has been in college in recent
memory. And he’s much better off the dribble, creating for himself or teammates,
than he was advertised to be going into his senior
season.
What they wonder about:
How serious
are the concerns over the reports of a “sore’ back? Can he evolve into at least
an adequate defender on the NBA level?
Frank Says: He’s a much better “athlete”
that some assume and he’ll be a solid scorer in the NBA for a long
while.
Draft night projection:
Seven to
14
Rajon Rondo (6-1 ½, 175;
Kentucky)
Projected position:
Point (one)
guard
What NBA talent evaluators
like: He
is, arguably, the fastest player in this draft pool while dribbling. While
Marcus Williams get by defenders with an overflowing tank of savvy, Rondo does
it by going fast, faster and fastest. He’s capable of getting to the rim as
abruptly as any sub- 6-5 player in the draft, in large part because of his
quick-leaping ability, long arms and big hands. His shooting numbers (from
3-point range and the free-throw line) were mostly miserable in two years in
Lexington although he’s supposedly
shot a lot better in workouts than he did in five-on-five
competition.
What they wonder about:
The
aforementioned concerns about his jump shot (and free-throw touch) are the first
things mentioned. He’s got exceptional defensive potential but has to learn to
rely on staying in front of his man instead of reaching, which resulted in his
being beat off the dribble much too frequently for a player with his
tools.
Frank Says: He’s the most explosive
athlete among the guard prospects in this draft and he will eventually evolve
into a dependable NBA player.
Draft night projection:
13 to
22
Shannon Brown (6-2,
185; Michigan State)
Projected position:
Combination
guard
What NBA talent evaluators
like: Other
than Rajon Rondo, they don’t come any better, athletically, among backcourt
prospects in this draft. Along with Guillermo Diaz, he’s one of the two most
explosive (vertically) guards who will be selected on June 28. He’s also been an
exceptional “catch-and-shoot-it” threat, from mid to deep range. His
ball-handling skills improve incrementally over three seasons in
East
Lansing. Defensively, he’ll be able
to check guards of any size once he has been in the NBA
awhile.
What they wonder about:
He’s more
undersized shooting guard than a guy who could spend a lot of time running a
club’s offense.
Frank Says: No guard’s NBA stock has
improved as much since the end of his college
season.
Draft night projection:
14 to
20
Kyle Lowry (6-0, 185;
Villanova)
Projected position:
Point (one)
guard
What NBA talent evaluators
like: He
may have the tightest handle in the draft and, along with Rajon Rondo, is one of
the two players that defenders will have the most difficulty staying in front
of. He could be the best “drive and kick” playmaker in this draft pool as well.
Lowry is every bit the defender that Rondo
is.
What they wonder about:
His jump
shot (and, to a lesser degree, his size) is the biggest issue. He’s got a low
release point and needs room to launch.
Frank Says: With another year at
Villanova, he might have become the best point guard in
college.
Draft night projection:
17 to
25
Sergio
Rodriguez
(6-3, 170; Spain)
Projected position:
Point (one)
guard
What NBA talent evaluators
like: He’s
got the kind of speed and quickness possessed by the upper-tier playmakers in
the NBA – with a liberal dose of flair mixed in as well. Rodriguez has some of
the best on-court vision in the draft, rivaling that of Marcus Williams. The
effectiveness (mostly, in consistency) of his jump shot is supposed to be a
mixed bag.
What they wonder about:
He tends to
play “too fast’ and gets a bit careless in his decision making. Defensively, no
one is confusing him with Brandon Roy, Rajon Rondo or Kyle
Lowry.
Frank Says: Some NBA talent evaluators
think he has as much “upside” as any point guard prospect in this
draft.
Draft night
projection:
17 to 25
Quincy Douby (6-3, 170;
Rutgers)
Projected position:
Shooting
(two) guard
What NBA talent evaluators
like: His
NBA calling card is his jump shot – some talent evaluators say it’s as
dependable as any in this draft, J.J. Redick’s, Adam Morrison’s and Steve Novak’s included. He also has solid potential,
defensively.
What they wonder about:
He’s a high
volume shooter (he averaged almost nine 3-point attempts per game) and had only
11 more assists than turnovers last season.
Frank Says: How early he is drafted
hinges on his convincing decision makers that he’s more than “just a
shooter”.
Draft night projection:
16 to end
of first round
Maurice Ager (*6-3 ¼, 203;
Michigan State)
Projected position:
Shooting
(two) guard
What NBA talent evaluators
like: He’s
got plenty of balance in his scoring repertoire, with the ability to create his
own shot (via jump shot or drive), spot up or come off screens. He’s also among
the strongest guards in the draft pool. And he’s used to sharing shots while
playing in a talented program that could have three first-round selections on
June 28.
What they wonder about:
He didn’t
do much playmaking for the Spartans and he’s considered a “pretty good” but not
“exceptional” athlete.
Frank Says: Other than the “Big Three”
(Brandon Roy, Randy Foye and J.J. Redick), he is the most polished “two guard”
prospect in the draft.
Draft night projection:
16 to end
of first round
Guillermo Diaz
(6-2, 180;
Miami)
Projected position:
Shooting
(two) guard
What NBA talent evaluators
like: He’s
an explosive scorer, in transition or in half-court settings. He’s a big-time
finisher on the break, and can bang over defenders via an explosive first step.
And he’s a dangerous jump shooter from deep, although his shot selection can
waiver.
What they wonder about:
He’s
strictly a “scorer” and a long way from being a contributor as a floor
leader/playmaker.
Frank Says: He’s another guy being
compared to Ben Gordon “an undersized two guard who can score a bunch of points
in a hurry”.
Draft night projection:
17 to early
second round
Jordan
Farmar
(*6-0 ¾, 171; UCLA)
Projected position:
Point (one)
guard
What NBA talent evaluators
like: He
runs pick-and-roll and pick-and-pop (staples of the NBA offensive diet these
days) as well as any guard in this draft. Farmar has solid floor vision and the
ability to find an open teammate even as a play seems to be breaking down. He’s
already got an advanced “middle game”.
What they wonder about:
He has
something approaching average quickness, although his ability to change speeds
and set up defenders frees him consistently. He needs more commitment on the
defensive end and much more consistency on his jumper, especially from
deep.
Frank Says: Farmar, who is only 19,
could be a preseason first-team All-America if he returns to
UCLA.
Draft night projection:
22 to early
second round
Rudy
Fernandez
(6-5, 180; Spain)
Projected position:
Shooting
(two) guard
What NBA talent evaluators
like: Fernandez, a member of
Spain’s 2004 Olympic team, has
deep range on his jump shot and gets wonderful elevation anytime he releases a
shot. He’s also quite a finisher in transition and is deceptively
explosive.
What they wonder about:
He’s just
an OK ball-handler and passer and still has a ways to go before he’s a solid
defender.
Frank Says: He could pull his name out
of the draft pool if he’s not happy with where he thinks he may be
chosen.
Draft night
projection:
Final 10 picks in first round, to early second
round
Mardy Collins
(*6-4 ¼, 224; Temple)
Projected position:
Combination
guard
What NBA talent evaluators
like: He’s
one of the strongest guards in the draft pool and has drawn comparisons to
another former Owl, Aaron McKie of the Lakers. He’s crafty with the ball and is
able to create shots for himself (mostly off penetration) or teammates. Although
the Owls played almost strictly zone, he has marvelous potential as a man-to-man
defender.
What they wonder about:
He has
average athleticism, at best, and is a below average
shooter.
Frank Says: If he can convince someone
he’s a better shooter than a lot of scouts think, he should land safely in the
first round somewhere.
Draft night projection:
Final five
picks in first round, to mid second round
Dee Brown (5-11, 175;
Illinois)
Projected position:
Point
guard
What NBA talent evaluators
like: He’s
just about as fast anyone (Rajon Rondo and Kyle Lowry included) who’ll be a
rookie in the league next season. Brown is extremely hard-nosed at both ends of
the floor and is as sound, defensively, as any point guard in the draft. He’s
the ultimate in “high energy guys”.
What they wonder about:
His jump
shot. His percentages, overall and from behind the 3-point arc, dropped 100-plus
points from his junior season. The scouting theory: Many of those teams were
coming off the dribble instead of off of passes from Deron Williams and Luther Head, NBA rookies last season who were his teammates his first three years at
Illinois.
Frank Says: One would feel a lot more
comfortable about his chances for NBA success if one were convinced that the
shooting numbers of his senior season were an
aberration.
Draft night projection:
First 10
picks, second round
MORE DISTINCT SECOND-ROUND
POSSIBLITIES:
Point guards: Juan Jose Barea
(5-11, 175; Northeastern); Will Blalock (*5-11 ¼, 194; Iowa State);
Darius Washington (*5-11 ½, 195; Memphis); Daniel Gibson (6-2,
175; Texas); Curtis Stinson (*6-1 ¾, 208; Iowa State); Mustafa Shakur (*6-2 ½, 183; Arizona); C.J. Watson (*6-0 ½, 171; Tennessee);
Keydren Clark (*5-9, 184; St. Peter’s); Daniel Horton (*6-0 ½,
198; Michigan).
Shooting guards: Mike
Gansey
(6-4, 185; West Virginia); Hassan Adams (6-4,
205; Arizona); Richard Roby (6-5,
180; Colorado); Brad Newley (*6-5,
198; Australia); Dwayne Mitchell
(*6-2, 208; Louisiana-Lafayette); Allan Ray (*6-1, 204;
Villanova).
Inducted into the USBWA Hall of
Fame in April, 2005, Frank Burlison is Scout.com’s national basketball expert and is
also a columnist for the Long Beach (Calif.) Press-Telegram. He can be reached at
frank.burlison@presstelegram.com. Read more of Burlison’s pieces at
www.frankhoops.com