Trainer Brian McCormick dishes on how NBA scouts evaluate draft prospects:
Last spring, I wrote about my philosophy for the NBA Draft. I wrote that I would take Memphis’ O.J. Mayo as the #1 pick based on his potential to develop into an NBA superstar because he possessed the characteristics like competitiveness, focus and discipline which often determine a player’s ultimate success.
I read ESPN’s Chad Ford’s latest look at the 2009 NBA Draft and the comments that he made, which supposedly reflect those of NBA General Managers, and their thoughts seem to reflect an unwillingness to learn from recent drafts and instead to fall back on the popular perceptions of height, length and upside.
When the NBA instituted its Age Limit, those in favor argued that high school players needed a year of college to develop their skills. However, NBA teams continue to draft on perceptions, not skills. At the end of last season, most viewed Davidson’s Stephon Curry as a mid-1st Round pick (15-20). He dominated the post-season last year and almost single-handedly beat eventual champion Kansas. What do scouts want to see? He is a shooter and he shoots as well as anyone, and he can create his own shot. Yet, through most of the season, most mock drafts had six to seven guards rated above Curry. He started the season at #22 on Ford’s list. If Curry clearly illustrates the most skill at the college level, and scouts still feel other players should be drafted ahead of him, then why do these players need college? Skill development is not enhancing their draft status; instead, teams value the same talent which was present when they were in high school.
January 9th, 2009 at 7:15 pm
The NBA’s rule that players must play a year of college is so bogus. The idea that they will learn to play defense is just ridiculous. College’s play zones anyway.
There is no “CORRECT MODEL” for determining where a player should be drafted. One of the most physically gifted players in recent years that I can remember was Tyrus Thomas. BUST!
Joe Alexander was a physical specimen at the combine – what is he doing exactly?
But then you have instances where Dwight Howard was much more raw than Emeka Okafor – we’ve all seen how that turns out.
So, it is a combination of factors.
I mean, JJ Redick had more focus, determination, and drive than anyone I saw come out of Duke – and he’s a bust, so it’s not always those intangibles either.
Btw, I think Curry will be good in the NBA. Better than Jamal Crawford, possibly as good as Arenas.