McCollum vs. Muhammad, revisited

[Lipoli390]

I'm not so sure anyone anywhere has the ability to predict NBA success based on college statistics, let alone anyone on this board. It is fun to speculate - but that stats would have suggested that players like Danny Ferry, Stomile Swift, and Michael Beasley would have at least been very good NBA players if not great NBA players and by the same token Paul Millsap should have been a bust, right?

Leado -- Millsap's college stats did not project bust. Quite the opposite. Millsap had terrific rebounding stats in college -- the one stat that tends to translate well from college to the NBA.

Steals in college is another stat that tends to be predictive of NBA success. College scoring isn't as predictive. So I tend to look more at non-scoring stats, quickness, ballhandling and attitude. The non-scoring stats translate more readily to the NBA. Quickness is an innate physical talent that is tremendously important in basketball and it doesn't generally improve once you're 19/20 years old or older. Ballhandling is a critical skill at the PG and two wing positions and it is something that develops early without much improvement once a player is draft eligible. Attitude is another innate quality that is critical to NBA success. I'm talking about a very strong drive to succeed, a high level of competitiveness from both a team and individual perspective, a love of the game, and a lot of self discipline. By the time you're 20 years old you either have these qualities or you don't. Beasley is incredibly talented, but lacks the drive and discipline. Wes Johnson is loaded with great physical gifts, but lacks the competitive drive and ballhandling skills to succeed in the NBA.

[WildWolf2813]

I've said this a million times during the pre-draft debates when this issue came up: UCLA played a faster pace last year than they had in years. Guys like Love, Holiday, and Westbrook played at a snail's pace, which prevented them from piling up numbers in volume. In addition, Shabazz was immediately made a starter and was their #1A or 1B option all year. Love and Westbrook played on a loaded squad, thus had more competition for shots, rebounds, assists, etc.

And if you had watched Shabazz in summer league, he did absolutely nothing to allay the fears of his skeptics. He looked slow, his shot was unreliable, and he did nothing off the ball to suggest that he can impact the game in other ways. Yet some folks thought he would shine in that setting because it's more free-wheeling. What they don't realize is that the cause of Shabazz's struggles wasn't Ben Howland, Larry Drew, or any other third party. It's the fact that he just isn't very skilled or athletic when compared to his contemporaries.

Ben Howland didn't change how he coached though. Who did his "change" benefit? Who was it supposed to benefit? The only player that somewhat benefited off of that offense was UNC castoff Larry Drew II, NOT Shabazz. If Drew's the one being trusted to take the last shots in a game and have the ball in his hand, then the benefit wasn't directed towards Muhammad. That team was chock full of talent (Anderson, Wear Twins, even Joshua Smith before he transferred) and only Drew looked good.

As far as Shabazz in summer league, if we wanna get into it, all CJ showed in summer league was that he chucks the ball at will. Heck, when's the last T'wolf player that you saw in summer league and walked away impressed? Probably Flynn and we know how that worked out. Summer league is to be taken with a grain of salt.

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

Ben Howland didn't change how he coached though. Who did his "change" benefit? Who was it supposed to benefit? The only player that somewhat benefited off of that offense was UNC castoff Larry Drew II, NOT Shabazz. If Drew's the one being trusted to take the last shots in a game and have the ball in his hand, then the benefit wasn't directed towards Muhammad. That team was chock full of talent (Anderson, Wear Twins, even Joshua Smith before he transferred) and only Drew looked good.

[longstrangetrip [enjin:6600564]]

Q, your comment that just because Shabazz was great in AAU doesn't guarantee success in the NBA is true. However, just for the heck of it, here are the last 10 winners of the Naismith Prep Player of the Year Award:

2013: Andrew Wiggins
2012: Shabazz Muhammad
2011: Austin Rivers
2010: Jared Sullivan
2009: Derrick Favors
2008: Brandon Jennings
2007: Kevin Love
2006: Greg Oden
2005: Lou Williams
2004: Dwight Howard

Years before that include names like LeBron James, Gerald Wallace, Kobe Bryant, Jason Kidd, Chris Webber, and Alonzo Mourning. While there will be the occasional Austin Rivers or, in earlier years, Jerod Ward, I would argue that being on this list means a very good chance of being a good NBA player, and a 50% chance of being a star. Scouting is so sophisticated these days that future stars are noticed at an early age, and scouts are talented enough that there aren't too many flameouts in the future stars they list.

I'm happy we were able to get a guy with this kind of potential with the 14th pick. And since this thread is about comparing McCollum to Muhammad, you won't find CJ in the top 100 of any list. It's going to take a few years for this to play out, but I still like Flip taking Shabazz (and Dieng) over CJ McCollum.

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

LST, still trying to understand what it is folks have seen in Shabazz since AAU that would validate his potential as an NBA star. Guys like Webber, Love, and Mourning actually produced strong results in their brief college tenures. What specifically about Shabazz's game have you seen that makes him stand out from the crowd? Athleticism? Shooting? Floor vision? Because both on stats and the "eye test" of actually watching him play, I don't see the skill level. I think he's a beneficiary of being able to physically dominate most high-school aged wings. That's not the case anymore.

[longstrangetrip [enjin:6600564]]

Q, don't get me wrong...I think there are still a lot of unanswered questions about Shabazz.. My main point in starting this thread was to reiterate my belief that Flip made the correct choice in selecting Shabazz/Dieng over McCollum, albeit mostly because I perceived CJ as being an enormous risk at #9.

But I'll take a shot at what scouts have seen in Shabazz since his dominating AAU days, which in all fairness was only one season ago. At least this is what I've seen. They saw a guy set the all-time season scoring record for Pac 12 freshmen, despite having a point guard who froze him out and only seemed able to pass to Jordan Adams. The Pac 12 has had a long history, so that fact can not be overlooked. You have correctly pointed out the inefficiency in his scoring, but since this is a CJ/Shabazz thread, it is readily apparent that Shabazz was much more efficient than CJ when facing similar D1 competition (i.e, .disregard the service academies and the Quinipiacs). They saw a guy who had to add new facets to his scoring since he could no longer rely only on overpowering smaller defenders, so he improved his long distance shooting and ability to score on the fast break to complement his continuing ability to score on the offensive boards. And they may also have fantasized about how a player like Shabazz with his superior inside strength and quick left-handed release would flourish with a point guard who actually wanted to make him better.

Now, Summer League was a different story, because I found him to be a disappointment in the games I watched. But again, since this thread is intended to compare Shabazz and CJ, I found Shabazz to be by far the superior player. Yes, CJ scored better and actually rebounded well, but he was playing a completely different style of game than Shabazz. CJ looked like he was the consummate gunner playing at the Y, shooting every time he got the ball and making little effort to get his teammates involved, resulting in a shooting percentage around 35% and a team that never won a game. And defensively he was a joke...not quick enough to guard point guards and not big enough to guard shooting guards. At times he just looked disinterested defensively. Shabazz showed some technical flaws on defense, but nobody could accuse him of looking disinterested. He showed 100% effort on every defensive play, and his most glaring errors came when he overcommitted or took a bad angle...aspects that can improve with coaching.

So, except for summer league, I think the scouts saw in Shabazz a player with the ability and work ethic to reinvent himself rather than just relying on what has worked in the past. He will have to continue to do this in order to succeed in the NBA, and his off-season attempts to improve his right hand and his passing shows me that he is willing to do the work to make this happen. He had better, because getting minutes on this deep Wolves team will not be easy.

[thedoper]

Scoring inefficiency was a UCLA problem. Look at their team FG% last year. I believe that despite Drew's high assists per game he ran horrible half court sets which accounted for everyone's inefficiency on the team. I agree with you trip that Drew seemed to be freezing Shabazz out in a lot of games. Particularly in the half court it would take until the end of the shot clock to get it to Shabazz to put up a desperation shot. Shabazz will be more clearly judged with a good half court PG like Rubio and a system that rewards good shooters like Adelman's. If Shabazz can't succeed with that combo he will be journeyman at best. I think he will get it and perform quite well.

[khans2k5 [enjin:6608728]]

I think anything he did in high school needs to be thrown out because he was a year older, stronger, with more practice and with the lowest competition available to declare NBA success. That is a very big advantage at that level. So I think the argument comes down to how does his college success or lack of success depending on how you view it predict his NBA success.

I think that big of a drop in success rate between high school and college doesn't bode well considering he is moving up another level. I don't see how people can say Drew held him back when he took 14 shots a game. That is the amount of shots a number 1 option takes in college and he didn't score very efficiently. When you take 14 shots, your PPG average and efficiency is on you and whether or not you are taking good shots. Love is the only player on our team last year who took more than 14 shots, so I don't get why blame is getting put on Drew when Bazz got his shots in. The misses are on Bazz, not Drew. There certainly aren't going to be 14 shots a game for Bazz on this team, so the question is whether or not he can score with even less touches.

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

I think anything he did in high school needs to be thrown out because he was a year older, stronger, with more practice and with the lowest competition available to declare NBA success. That is a very big advantage at that level. So I think the argument comes down to how does his college success or lack of success depending on how you view it predict his NBA success.

One year isn't as much of an advantage as you and a lot of other people are saying. Once a basketball player gets to about 16 or 17, they usually have a skill set and a decent enough body to hang with guys a couple years older than them. When I say "basketball player," I mean the guys that are actually NBA/NCAA prospects and not your average guys at the park. There's a guy in my hometown that's been balling on guys on the JV/Varsity high school team since he was in middle school. Reason being because he's got better skills.

Shabazz has his speed bumps ahead of him, but I don't think it's fair to throw out everything he did in high school.

[thedoper]

Your PG always has an impact on the quality of shots you are getting at any level. If he can't succeed with Rubio and Adelman I will agree with you. Drew ran a crappy half court game that could be seen by watching the Bruins play. It was why Bill Walton was so furious how they used Shabazz all year. He took so many shots off broken plays at the end of shot clocks from what I could see.