Release From Hibernation: NBA Draft Early Entrants Part 2

Continuing the slow return of content on this here blog, some more fun NBA Draft stuff coming your way today. Last week I looked at the guys who declared early for the draft and hired an agent. Today we will look at some folks that are “testing the waters,” as the kids say. Now, there are a million of these folks, so some might get left out and many of these looks will be brief.

Before we get into each player, a disclaimer: With the new rule that NBA teams pay for expenses for a player’s individual workout, there should be some obvious decisions to be made. First, NO ONE should finish college without declaring for the draft. I might be missing something here, but if there is no money to lose, then there is absolutely nothing to lose by declaring and not hiring an agent. The school year is over by draft time, most college coaches are gonna want you in the weight room or on the track in the morning around this time of year, all the chicks are off campus, you get exposure, a chance to play directly in front of NBA execs and you get an idea of where you might fall in the Draft. Plus, if you play decent enough you could get more scouts at your games if you go back to college.

Guys like George Hill at IUPUI, Courtney Pigram at East Tennessee State and Walter Sharpe at UAB are a few players who have realized this. Maybe they have a career game in a pre-draft camp, maybe they fit a specific team’s need, maybe some scout’s latte is spiked with angel dust and he hallucinates that you scored 55 points, grabbed 22 rebounds and swallowed a unicorn whole. WHO KNOWS WHAT WILL HAPPEN TYLER?

So yeah, keep that in mind as we look at some of these folks.

Darrell Arthur- This is an interesting case because he’s probably already a lottery pick, and yet there is still work to be done. Signs of a mid-range jumper emerged late in the season, which is exactly what scouts were worried about, so the only thing left is probably some strength and overall polish. I think Arthur is a stud, quite frankly and I’m not sure how much better he can get next year at Kansas. He’s very quick and very fast for a power forward and has all the tools to be a go-to scorer once some post moves emerge. Sacramento and New Jersey should fight to the death for this man.

Mario Chalmers- Everyone in the NBA should want Chalmers as their back-up point. He’s probably not going to go as high as he wants, but he has no reason to go back.

Donte Greene- As a Syracuse fan, I obviously want him to come back. The Orange would be filthy next year if he did. And with a final month of the season that basically saw him shoot 25-footers from 30 minutes a game, you wouldn't think he'd be a lottery pick, which is probably what he wants. But the problem is, for me at least, that Greene is a 6-10 athlete with unlimited range and probably one of the top five offensive players in the draft if he stays in. He needs a lot of work, specifically on defense and rebounding, to play either forward spot in the pros, but I fear he's going to hear what he wants once GMs see him in workouts. (sigh).

Chase Budinger- It’s quite possible that Chase has peaked at the ripe old age of 20. The talent is there but if he goes back is he suddenly going to become a good defender or someone that actually cares about basketball 100 percent of the time? No, especially not on a team with a weird coaching situation and yet another incoming guard to steal shots and the spotlight. Budinger isn’t a lottery pick this year, but I don’t think he is next year either. He’s probably a 20-24 guy that will go higher because he’ll be a workout wonder. So I guess he should stay in.

Joe Alexander- I’m not sure what Alexander’s role is in the NBA. It appears his best quality is his scoring and he’s not going to be a go-to scorer in the NBA because there won’t be the mismatches he so frequently saw in college. So why do you draft him? Unless he improves his range out to the NBA three line, you don’t. He’s not an NBA starter right now and should probably go back to school, but I could still justify a playoff team taking him around No. 20 as a potential rotation guy. He and Budinger will have many workouts together, which will most certainly be followed by a friendly milkshake at the diner and some Scrabble.

JJ Hickson- Get the hell out of there JJ, while you still can. I was surprised he didn’t hire an agent right away. I’m assuming due to the atrociousness of the Wolf Pack last year, not enough NBA scouts know about him yet, which is why he might be skeptical of his position. But once he starts working out, he will rise on the draft boards. He needs to work on conditioning and his defense, but the potential to be a great scorer in the NBA is there. He’s a 15-20 guy right now and would be interesting on Philly or Washington.

Ryan Anderson- He’s like Alexander, except taller and better in my opinion. Most people don’t have this opinion. Chad Ford thinks he’s a bubble first-rounder and NBADraft.net doesn’t even think he’ll stay in the Draft, while Alexander is in most top 20s. Anderson is a guy that needs the right fit, an up tempo team with multiple forward options and a good point guard. Some people will say he’s a “tweener” but I don’t there really are tweener forwards anymore. He’s a small-ball power forward and with basically every team in the NBA making frequent use of a small line-up, Anderson could be a legit 15-point scorer pretty soon on a team that likes the pick and pop or has a go-to post scorer that attracts double teams. Teams in the 17-24 range that make sense are Toronto, Cleveland, Denver and (obviously) Utah.

Russell Westbrook- You’re gone Russ. Seriously don’t go back there; we need you in the NBA. I would take Westbrook over every guard in the Draft besides Rose and Mayo. He’s got perfect size, quickness and explosiveness for a combo guard in a league that has seen combo guards thrive under the new rules. He is already a great defender and if he can develop any type of consistent jumper, he will be an assassin. Some will say he needs to be more of a point guard but that would take away a lot of his value because he wouldn’t be going to the basket as much. I hate comparing players but he reminds me very much of Monta Ellis, who will be a top 25 NBA player soon. When all is said and done I expect Westbrook to be a Top 7 guy and end up as possibly one of the top three from this class looking back. So yeah, he should stay in the draft.

Jamont Gordon- Consider me a staunch Jamont Gordon supporter. The big point guard fits much better in the NBA than college because teams can't pack it in on you if you're not a great shooter, which Gordon is not, and guards can actually utilize a post game, which Gordon possesses. He’s going to have to cover shooting guards in the NBA though and is useless as a spot-up shooter off kick-outs, but I don’t see how a guy with his size, ball-handling and strength can’t be a major asset in the NBA. In terms of draft position, which you know, affects his well-being, he should go back, but for me, he is a perfect early-second round steal.

DeAndre Jordan- No one player’s value will be more disputed by me than Jordan. Obviously based on athleticism and size, he is a perfect NBA center. People will see Andrew Bynum and flip out and want to take him Top 10, which will keep him in the draft. But seriously, the guy was terrible last year. He couldn’t stay on the court, took bad shots and nearly all of his success was due to just being bigger and more athletic than everyone. In the right, patient organization he could be great but, man, how can you take someone this unproven in the age-minimum era? Either way, Dick Vitale’s head will explode over Jordan’s draft slot.

Antonio Anderson- Antonio knows exactly what I was talking about in the intro.

Robert Dozier- In cahoots with Antonio Anderson.

Marreese Speights- He could go back to Florida and be a Top 10 guy in 2009, but right now, he’s still pretty freaking good. He’s already got the prototypical NBA power forward body and will be able to hold his own athletically. Speights won’t be a post scorer in the League for another few years though, so whichever team between 12 and 17 takes him will need a viable starting option already.

AJ Abrams- He doesn’t really have any chance of making the first round unless teams are just foaming at the mouth to give a guaranteed contract to a guy whose ceiling is “Eddie House.” Come back and learn to play some point AJ, then we can talk.

Wayne Ellington- I can’t decide if Ellington is a sucky prospect or if he’s just equivalent to Rashad McCants (sadly, not this Rashad McCants). He’s a first-round bubble guy because he pales in comparison to guys like Brandon Rush and Chris Douglas-Roberts. His problem is he doesn’t do one thing exceptionally well and he is undersized. Again, returning to school isn’t going to help his stock that much, but it will be a weaker draft class next year and UNC would probably win the title. Oh, and something like this will still be in the realm of possibility for his life.

Danny Green- He’s actually a better pro prospect than his teammate Ellington because he has better size, long arms and more athleticism. Green sacrificed his numbers because he fit that sixth man role on UNC so well and I think he could eventually fill that role in the NBA. Plus there is the potential for him to be a defensive stopper on an opponent’s best wing player. For some reason I still feel like him, Ellington and Lawson already know they are going back and are just testing the waters in case some team makes a crazy promise. With Isiah Thomas and Billy Knight not in this draft, they shouldn’t hold their breath.

Ty Lawson- Unfortunately the lasting image of Lawson was him clearly not at full strength. He is really fast and a good playmaker, but there were some serious flaws evident this year. He can’t shoot, he has no mid-range game and he seemed to play smaller this year than his freshman year, if that makes any sense. He’s not an NBA starter, plain and simple. That being said, he is probably a late first-rounder, so that might be enough. I’d stay in school, try to get that swag back, win a title, ride some Psycho T coattail and be a Top 5 point in 2009’s class.

Alonzo Gee- Maybe next year.

Lee Cummard- Google search nightmare.

Kosta Koufos- I went all crazy over Koufos in the beginning of the year, as did many NBA scouts I’m sure. Then he basically hit the wall and realized they don’t take kindly to his kind in the college ranks. I still don’t see how a 7-1 power forward who can shoot and handle the ball will fail in the NBA, but I’m not sure he’s a lottery pick right now. Although once NBA scouts see a 7-1 kid nail threes over chairs in workouts, who knows. If he stays another year, he’s probably a lock for the Top 10.

Bill Walker- He can go back to KSU and be “the guy” for a year, which would make him a possible lottery pick in 2009 unless he is murdered by Frank Martin, Crazy Person. It’s impossible to know how the Beasley Effect changed his game. It could have either made him look much better because of the lack of attention or make him look much worse because touches were limited and he had to force everything just to get his numbers. I’d take him in the 20 to 25 range if I was a playoff team that could take a gamble. Oh, and this doesn't fly in the NBA.

Richard Hendrix- Reminds me of the Cedric Simmons, Hilton Armstrong, Josh Boone type as a guy who will be drafted too high by a team loaded with guards just because he is best big man available by default. In that case, he should stay! The NBA: Where multi-million dollar contracts given out by default Happens.

Lester Hudson- I love Lester and would love to waste a second-round pick on him.

Shawn James- Coming to a Turkish League near you.

Josh Carter- He’ll be back, although he probably won’t be happy about it, as the best player on a dismal-looking Aggie team next year. He can shoot and uh… shoot.

DeMarre Carroll- No idea.

Leo Lyons- Whatever you say, Leo.

Jerel McNeal- He is the type of guy that will always be undervalued because of his limitations (ball-handling, shooting) despite the potential to be a great role player in the NBA as a lock-down, Bruce Bowen-type defender. There’s no real reason for him to not come back for another year of college, but I’d put him on my NBA bench today.

Luc Richard Mbah a Moute- Should probably go back to school but in doing so, would immediately risk breaking every bone in his body.

Jeremy Pargo- Prototypical undersized scoring guard. That used to mean you go undrafted, but in today’s NBA, you’re a valuable bench player. He’s actually very much like his brother Jannero, who is great for the Hornets, except stronger with a bit less range. He’s not going to gain anything from another year of college except maybe some more TV games, but he’s probably a 30-40 range guy that sneaks on a roster.

Trent Plaisted- Chad Ford says he could be a mid-to-late first rounder, which is insane. He’s got good post moves but is way too mechanical to be a consistent scorer and won’t be able to guard 80 percent of the 4s and 5s in the NBA. Some terrible franchise that is mesmerized by 7-footers (uh oh, Memphis has the Lakers pick) will take him if he stays.

Josh Shipp- Probably should have done this after last season. Might want to stay in the draft to avoid the embarrassment of losing his starting job with the Bruins next year.

Ronald Steele- Obviously he needs to go back but if I’m Steele (and particularly Steele’s knee), I am scared shitless of Alabama right now. I just hope people don’t forget how incredibly sick he was as a freshman.

Robert Vaden- Under-sized shooting guards who can only shoot make for great tenth and eleventh guys on NBA rosters. Live the dream Robert.

Last time I gave my 2008 lottery picks in no particular order, this time I am giving the guys on this list that would be lotto picks, barring a disaster, next year if they were to go back. And then also the guys who have already announced they are going back to school who will be lotto picks in 2009. And yes, this is pointless.

Darrell Arthur
Russell Westrbrook
Kosta Koufos
Ryan Anderson
DeAndre Jordan
JJ Hickson
Blake Griffin (going back)
Austin Daye (going back)
Hasheem Thabeet (going back)
Tyler Hansbrough (going back)
Patrick Patterson (going back)

Hooray For Links! NCAA Tournament Edition

I was never a big proponent of doing link dumps and the like on this site because, well, it didn't really make sense to me. Why would I simply reproduce things that are already out there? But as I did my own scouring of the Intertubes for college hoops content, I realized there was just too much quality (and, at times, utterly awful) stuff out there to simply leave untapped. So I give you Hooray For Links! which should appear at completely random intervals. Because without links, it's not really a blog, it's just a place to put thoughts I might not want to forget.

I haven't written all that much about the Tournament, except for some wildly outstanding previews; I prefer to just kinda enjoy it as a spectator and avoid consuming the enormous mass of regurgitated storylines and feature ideas. This year's March Madness has been tremendous, something I was worried about after the mediocrity that highlighted the regular season and the general lack of interesting match-ups. I thought this year would be an event that would bore for the first two rounds and then really shine in the regionals, after all the craptastic teams were eliminated. Well the second part of that has came true -- these games this weekend should be awesome -- without the boring part. So here are some links, many of which are preview items as the content produced about the actual Tournament is pretty boring.

Them links be after the jump.
Continue...

- Given their first meeting and its outcome, watching the diverging paths of North Carolina and Duke in the NCAAs was fascinating. The Heels have been utterly dominant. Duke was awful, would've been the victim of the biggest upset in NCAA Tournament history if not for Gerald Henderson playing like a man, were destroyed in the second half against West Virginia and are home now. I'd like to think this moment, and this moment alone, was the turning point for both teams. Revel in its beauty.


- This CBS Sportsline column about Tyler Hansbrough from Mike Freeman was pretty bold, pretty controversial (read the comments) and difficult to argue with. I'm not going to go to deep into it; he basically feels there is a double standard perpetuated by the media regarding highly visible white players in college hoops. The giveaway line is : "America loves a tough, white guy." He is right in that regard but doesn't quite make a full argument or offer a lot to support the hypothesis. Freeman is a fellow University of Delaware alum so in interest of full disclosure, I'm probably an apologist for a fellow Blue Hen. But it's an interesting read.

- Dan Steinberg at the fabulous (heterosexually fabulous, that is) DC Sports Bog with a great first-hand account of storming the floor following American's Patriot League Championship (which seems like it happened year ago).

- Everyone was all fussy about the Selection Committee matching up mid-major with each other, including me, and no one has been better at chronicling the view from the little guys than ESPN.com contributor and Mid-Majority editor Kyle Whelliston, Lord of the Mid-Majors. After the field was announced he penned this great column on the traveshammockery that is Selection Sunday. In light of the runs made by mid-majors like Western Kentucky and Davidson, which has hopefully validated the many cries of foul directed toward the Committee for seemingly wanting the BCS schools to conduct their business without losing face, Whelliston has renamed his site The WKU-Majority. Rather than link all of Whelliston's great posts from the weekend -- it would require many hyperlinks and possible carpel tunnel -- just go to his site and read it all. After a year where the big boys reigned, the mid-majors are back and have found a place at the top. George Mason was no fluke, watch out world.

- Basketball Prospectus, in its first year on the job, offered this season's best tournament preview. And to follow it up, they have been outstanding in their tourney coverage. So go there, read it, love it, live a better life.

- For someone with the rare and unfortunate combination of being a basketball addict and former English major in college, this piece on how Ernest Hemingway would analyze some of the top NCAA contenders was absolutely fantastic.

- I enjoyed this column from Andy Katz on Kevin Love and OJ Mayo, even if it was approximately the 8 millionth of its kind and basically jinxed the hell out of USC. Hopefully we can put all those preconceived notions about the two and the completely false "antithesis" they represent.

- Alright so one more Kyle Whelliston item to pass along. Last one, I swear, but the guy is doing great work over there. With my brackets in complete shambles, as I predicted, I enjoyed this column asking readers to not fill out a bracket this year. I wish I could do this. Unfortunately my body and mind will not allow me to abstain from Bracketering; I must have a chemical imbalance. But with my picks basically ruined, I have enjoyed this year's tournament even without having any real live reason to root for a specific. I've become a liberated fan, something that the boys at FreeDarko talk a lot about; I am simply an enjoyer of good basketball. And this makes very much sense. The reason I love the NCAA Tournament is not because I love winning office pools, it's because I love basketball. A lot. So, as Whelliston argues, by filling out a bracket you are simply celebrating prognostication, right and wrongness. Not basketball, which is what this thing is all about. Just because there is no prospect of winning money off of them, doesn't mean you can't like a team or have interest in a game.

- There certainly are some curious trends the Selection Committee seems to be perpetuating, and Gary Parrish is there to point them out and call out the Committee. For someone who is unusually Freshman-centric, I also enjoyed this column he wrote on young bucks and their big tourney roles.

- This is why I enjoy Bill Raftery.

- This was in Sports Illustrated's March Madness preview issue, a great look from Grant Wahl at how size dictates tournament success, especially in regards to this year's field, which contains a lot of small-ball teams, which follows the trend recently seen in the NBA. Looking at the teams left, many of the remaining top seeds at least has respectable post players, but squads like Texas, Tennessee, West Virginia and Memphis will be operating without a great deal of size. Should be interesting to see how that dynamic plays out (especially with Texas vs. Stanford; the best Sweet 16 match-up this year).

- Further proof that no matter how much Bill Simmons knows about the NBA (which is a whole lot), he should not write about college basketball.

- No No. 1 seed was really even tested in the first round this year, but there is really nothing better than when one gets scared. Here is a run-down of the closest calls in history.

- The world will never be the same. There is no God.

- Very good piece analyzing CBS' first weekend coverage of the NCAAs (even if it praises Seth Davis for non-comedic excellence). I thought it was pretty good coverage as well, except that Gus Johnson had all blowouts and Tim Brando was nearly comatose during that insane Friday in Tampa. Given all the tooting being done for Davis taking Davidson, I would like to point out that I said Belmont would give Duke all they could handle in the first round. I may be near last place in all my pools, but I will hold onto this for years.

- And here, an example of why local nightly news will not bring upon the end of civilization, contrary to popular belief:

So Wait, Why Can't Tyler Hansbrough Be A Lottery Pick?

I have the NBA League Pass. This might come as a shock to some people, seeing as how college basketball fans are supposed to despise the evil, emotionless, robot-ball of the NBA. What with all that talent and, you know, ability to make shots. Cheerleaders, stoned students and white guys. Now that is basketball. But I'm not going to digress on whether college is, in fact, a better basketball product as nearly every casual basketball fan and diehard college fan purports it to be. That is perhaps another column for another day.

No, the reason I bring up the League Pass is that I watch a lot of basketball (if you are looking to stay up until 1:30 every night before work -- and alcohol/a woman is not an option that particular evening -- the League Pass is a great alternative to accomplishing this goal) and I watch a lot of different players. Therefore, I have gained a knowledge that I am quite proud of and one that is very rare, likely because it is completely useless. I am familiar with every player that steps onto the floor of an NBA game. I have seen them all play before, I know their games, I know their roles on their given team and, most importantly, I know just how ridiculous it is for them to be in the NBA. There are some truly awful, truly lucky and truly inexplicable players seeing major minutes in the NBA. Chicago and New Orleans are on right now actually and Ryan Bowen, Rasual Butler, Aaron Gray, Hilton Armstrong and Jannero Pargo have all had an impact on this game one way or another (four of those five players are on New Orleans; if Byron Scott isn't Coach of the Year, Ralph Nader needs to get involved). And this is happening everywhere.

So, why in the name of Mark Blount can't Tyler Hansbrough make it in the NBA? Everyone even remotely involved in evaluating/analyzing college basketball absolutely loves Hansbrough and yet not one of those people give him any chance to be more than a fringe pro. He is a "great, college player" or "shows grit and determination" or "is relentless around the basket;" but at the same time he manages to be "undersized," "unathletic" and, worst of all, "a four-year player." He is listed as the No. 29 pick in the 2009 Draft (behind guys like Curtis Jerrels and Joe Alexander) on NBADraft.net and, more reasonably, No. 19 in this year's draft on Draft Express (behind DeVon Hardin). Now, I'm not going to suggest Tyler Hansbrough, as a result of his dominance of the college ranks, should be the No. 1 pick or something. But I do think he will be a very valuable NBA player.

And that depends on how you define success I suppose. I linked to this last week, but there was a nice piece on FreeDarko about how NBA GMs have been suckered into an era where they expect their draft picks to be franchise saviors -- rather than (gasp) effective contributors -- because they now get a chance to see the untapped talent of former high school-to-pro dudes at a college level. Conversely, those that show limitations to their talent at that level are penalized like they haven't been before (how else does Brandan Wright go ahead of Joakim Noah last year?). And this is what has happened to Tyler Hansbrough. He is a really fucking good player. He averages 2.5 points and 1.5 rebounds less than Michael Beasley and shoots roughly the same percentages all against similar, but probably better competition. On the other hand, he doesn't hit threes, blocks way less shots and is over three years older than Beasley. Me being a rational person, looking at only those facts, I would say Beasley is a much better prospect than Hansbrough. And that is true. But the question is how much? No matter what your limitations, putting up those numbers for a top team in a top conference with opposing defenses doing everything to stop you, is fairly impressive. And yet those numbers, except when considering the POY race, have somehow been rendered irrelevant. If you just look at the players and listen to the pundits, the difference is obvious, right? (Note: Wrong).

Well, since no one else wants to say it, here's what Tyler Hansbrough does well that will translate to the NBA. He has incredible touch around the basket. He somehow manages to get the weirdest shots from the weirdest angles to go in, and frequently does so while being fouled. The utter ugliness in aesthetic that these shots often display, is probably the reason people scoff at his game. He doesn't make it look very easy and for some reason we equate making the game look natural with having natural talent. For some, like Beasley and Durant, this is absolutely true, but it's certainly not the rule (JR Smith has a smoothness that makes the game look easy and he can barely read). Hansbrough is also outstanding with his body positioning. Kevin Love, another guy whose NBA stock is being persecuted, is also outstanding at this. When you are undersized, you have to compensate by being able to position your body at the right angles and seal off defenders in the post (just ask Charles Barkley). This is why Hansbrough gets rebounds, gets to the line like he does and manages to get shots off against bigger and more athletic opponents. This is something few NBA players can perform at Hansbrough's level because it's not something you have to teach athletic players as they grow up. But in the NBA, everyone is athletic, so positioning and footwork ends up being an important differentiator from defenders.

This season he has also shown a bit of a face-up game and a mid-range jumper. Now he hasn't done it at a level that will turn him into some unstoppable force, but it does dispel the myth that he has "peaked" in development. He is adding facets to a game that was already good enough to dominate on the college level and has shown signs of turning the J he's shown this year into a consistent 16-foot jumper in the League (the 16-foot jumper is the NBA big man's free meal ticket to offensive longevity, just ask Marcus Camby, Mark Blount, Zydrunas Ilgauskas, Kurt Thomas and Udonis Haslem... do not ask Ben Wallace).

OK, you say, "But he's still a barely 6-8 power forward, which position in the NBA can he guard?" If you haven't seen the NBA lately, there are tons of 6-8 players that are frequently slotted as a power forward. There are very few teams that play the majority of their games with a classic PG, 6-5 SG, 6-8 SF, 6-10 PF and 7-0 C anymore. I watched Cleveland play Atlanta the other day and LeBron James and Marvin Williams were the tallest players on the court down the stretch in the fourth. This league wants guys to get up and down the court, be able to run an effective screen and roll or screen and pop, and do the little things that help the stars stay stars. That sounds like a fine roll for Psycho T. He has great conditioning, is pretty fast end-to-end, should be able to set good screens, can knock down open, mid-range jumpers and rebounds like Satan is telling him to do so. By doing those things alone, coupled with his touch in the paint, toughness and basketball IQ, he will be a great secondary NBA player. And not some bench guy to steal minutes. He can be a starter on a contending NBA team. I mean, Fabricio Oberto is, Erick Dampier is, Joel Przybilla is, Kendrick Perkins is, Rasual Butler is. And while those guys aren't great players, I'd still rather use a late lottery pick on them than I would a guy with "untapped talent." Because there's no guarantee that guy is ever to going to tap himself (that didn't come out right, but you get the point).