McCollum vs. Muhammad, revisited

[Monster]

Q is right. The numbers tell the tale. But the tale gets even more on-sided when you consider the knucklehead factor. I was recently reading a draft analysis written before the draft. That analysis said that Flip had liked Shabazz for a long time. So no matter what Flip might say now, getting Shabazz was a big motivation behind the deal. I'll venture a prediction that Shabazz will go down as Flip's folly.

I would have drafted McCollum. If Flip really wanted a 2 for 1 and a better shot at getting Dieng, he should have drafted Karesev at #14. Drafting Shabazz looks to me like a big mistake. Sure hope I'm wrong, but the evidence suggests I'll end up being right.

I personally think people are too high on McCollum. I think you are right that Flip liked Shabazz, but not high enough at #9. I also would have been very interested in Karesev at #14. I think we sometimes forget how much of a crapshoot the draft is. Its fun to think about what these guys are and aren't based on the info we have now, but I look forward to seeing how this plays out.

[longstrangetrip [enjin:6600564]]

I'm with you, monster. CJ was a fine Patriot League player, but as a 6-3 shooting guard he doesn't have the kind of upside that warrants a 9th pick.

Q, good catch, I picked up McCollum's sophomore numbers (ESPN only shows three years of stats, so the earliest year presented was his sophomore year), where his points per shot was 1.26, virtually equal to Shabazz's 1.25. But actually it's a better comparison, because they were the same age in the years I compared.

But I'll say again that it's not fair to compare Muhammad's performance against Pac 12 competition to McCollum's against Patriot League guys. I've watched most of my college basketball at Williams Arena and Pauley Pavilion, but the third conference I am most familiar with is the Patriot. I was stunned when I went to my first Colgate game. It was more like a suburban high school game than any college game I had ever seen...a huge dropoff in talent level. I invite you to look at CJ's game log on ESPN. His senior year he fattened his points per shot against powerhouses like Quinnipiac (1.67) and Sacred Heart (1.85). But when he faced his only legitimate opponent his senior year, Baylor, he posted his lowest PPS of 1.1. You will see a similar pattern in his other three years too...great stats against opponents like Navy, but terrible efficiency against legitimate defenses. Do you think Flip wasn't aware of CJ's record against real Division 1 teams? It would have been an enormous risk to use the 9th pick of the draft on a player who wasn't highly regarded in high school, and wasn't successful against good competition in college. Much better to turn that pick into two players who were actually battle tested in college.

The other points that the CJ>Shabazz crowd is making I have to agree with. Shabazz's stats other than scoring were non-existent, while CJ provided rebounds and assists (although the fact that he had almost as many turnovers as assists in his 4 years tells me he is not destined to get any minutes at PG in the NBA). And there is no question who is the bigger knucklehead. CJ seems to have excellent character, while Shabazz will always have me holding my breath.

But as they say, ultimately it's all about buckets...and I'm guessing Flip was fairly certain that Shabazz would be a more efficient scorer in the NBA than CJ. (He obviously "scored" better than CJ at the rookie orientation...sorry, bad joke). I agree, but only time will tell.

[WildWolf2813]

First off, these guys play different positions. Shabazz is a SF and CJ is more of a combo guard. Second, in terms of scoring efficiency, TS% is the best metric and CJ sported a 59 TS% as a freshman vs. Shabazz's 53%. The reason is because he took anad made a higher volume of free throws and 3 pointers, two of the most efficient shots in basketball. Also, they weren't equal in PPS as freshman. McCollum averaged 19 points on 13 shots and Shabazz averaged 18 points on 14 shots. So basically McCollum scored more points and did so with better efficiency than Shabazz.

Now let's turn to the other metrics. Other than rebounding and keeping his TOs down, Shabazz is an abject failure as a prospect, averaging .8 assists, .7 steals, and .1 blocks per game. I don't know if I can find another first rounder in the history of the draft with such a pathetic combination of numbers in those three categories. McCollum averaged 2.4 assists, 1.3 steals, and .2 blocks per game as a freshman while leading his team in scoring.

So let's see, Shabazz can't score efficiently, can't dribble, can't pass, and can't get defensive deflections. Plus he has problems following simple rules.

I just don't see the comparison. I'm not suggesting that McCollum is going to light the NBA on fire. But I am suggesting that Shabazz will likely flame out of the league or be a fringe journeyman unless he fashions himself into a catch and shoot 3 & D guy, which will require a complete re-work of his mental make-up and focus. That's a tough thing to see happening.

Shabazz played at UCLA = throw those stats out of the window. When you play under Howland, your numbers will go up afterward. Every player that played under him got better after they left, especially on defense.

Russell Westbrook didn't show he was going to be an elite scorer and passer there. Kevin Love didn't show how great of a scorer he'd be (in fact, at UCLA, he showed he was really good at passing, something he's been awful at since being here). Jrue Holiday is probably the best case scenario in terms of real highly rated prospects that struggled under Howland and proceeded to be better than ever once in the pros. The only thing Jrue showed in college was an ability to defend. Anyone that saw him there and said "this kid's a future all-star" is lying. His stock fell to 17th-- lower than Shabazz, got drafted and got to blossom. Why we're all so ready to close the book on a player like Shabazz, I'll never understand, but man, I just hope Shabazz has thick skin, because I don't think he realizes how much we hate our rookies. Rubio's probably the only rookie that has come in since probably Wally that the fans universally liked.

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

I just don't see the comparison. I'm not suggesting that McCollum is going to light the NBA on fire. But I am suggesting that Shabazz will likely flame out of the league or be a fringe journeyman unless he fashions himself into a catch and shoot 3 & D guy, which will require a complete re-work of his mental make-up and focus. That's a tough thing to see happening.

Shabazz hasn't even played ONE NBA game and you think he'll flame out of the league. Yikes. Give him some NBA games before we conclude that his career will be a failure.

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

I'm with you, monster. CJ was a fine Patriot League player, but as a 6-3 shooting guard he doesn't have the kind of upside that warrants a 9th pick.

Q, good catch, I picked up McCollum's sophomore numbers (ESPN only shows three years of stats, so the earliest year presented was his sophomore year), where his points per shot was 1.26, virtually equal to Shabazz's 1.25. But actually it's a better comparison, because they were the same age in the years I compared.

But I'll say again that it's not fair to compare Muhammad's performance against Pac 12 competition to McCollum's against Patriot League guys. I've watched most of my college basketball at Williams Arena and Pauley Pavilion, but the third conference I am most familiar with is the Patriot. I was stunned when I went to my first Colgate game. It was more like a suburban high school game than any college game I had ever seen...a huge dropoff in talent level. I invite you to look at CJ's game log on ESPN. His senior year he fattened his points per shot against powerhouses like Quinnipiac (1.67) and Sacred Heart (1.85). But when he faced his only legitimate opponent his senior year, Baylor, he posted his lowest PPS of 1.1. You will see a similar pattern in his other three years too...great stats against opponents like Navy, but terrible efficiency against legitimate defenses. Do you think Flip wasn't aware of CJ's record against real Division 1 teams? It would have been an enormous risk to use the 9th pick of the draft on a player who wasn't highly regarded in high school, and wasn't successful against good competition in college. Much better to turn that pick into two players who were actually battle tested in college.

The other points that the CJ>Shabazz crowd is making I have to agree with. Shabazz's stats other than scoring were non-existent, while CJ provided rebounds and assists (although the fact that he had almost as many turnovers as assists in his 4 years tells me he is not destined to get any minutes at PG in the NBA). And there is no question who is the bigger knucklehead. CJ seems to have excellent character, while Shabazz will always have me holding my breath.

But as they say, ultimately it's all about buckets...and I'm guessing Flip was fairly certain that Shabazz would be a more efficient scorer in the NBA than CJ. (He obviously "scored" better than CJ at the rookie orientation...sorry, bad joke). I agree, but only time will tell.

LST, I am not denying some of the potential holes in rating CJ as a prospect. That's why he was at best a mid-lotto pick as opposed to a top 5 pick. Had he played at Duke, NC, etc. and put up those numbers, he would have easily been a top 3 or 4 pick. What I am saying is that Shabazz compares poorly to almost anyone you put up against him that was considered a 1st round wing prospect.

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

First off, these guys play different positions. Shabazz is a SF and CJ is more of a combo guard. Second, in terms of scoring efficiency, TS% is the best metric and CJ sported a 59 TS% as a freshman vs. Shabazz's 53%. The reason is because he took anad made a higher volume of free throws and 3 pointers, two of the most efficient shots in basketball. Also, they weren't equal in PPS as freshman. McCollum averaged 19 points on 13 shots and Shabazz averaged 18 points on 14 shots. So basically McCollum scored more points and did so with better efficiency than Shabazz.

Now let's turn to the other metrics. Other than rebounding and keeping his TOs down, Shabazz is an abject failure as a prospect, averaging .8 assists, .7 steals, and .1 blocks per game. I don't know if I can find another first rounder in the history of the draft with such a pathetic combination of numbers in those three categories. McCollum averaged 2.4 assists, 1.3 steals, and .2 blocks per game as a freshman while leading his team in scoring.

So let's see, Shabazz can't score efficiently, can't dribble, can't pass, and can't get defensive deflections. Plus he has problems following simple rules.

I just don't see the comparison. I'm not suggesting that McCollum is going to light the NBA on fire. But I am suggesting that Shabazz will likely flame out of the league or be a fringe journeyman unless he fashions himself into a catch and shoot 3 & D guy, which will require a complete re-work of his mental make-up and focus. That's a tough thing to see happening.

Shabazz played at UCLA = throw those stats out of the window. When you play under Howland, your numbers will go up afterward. Every player that played under him got better after they left, especially on defense.

Russell Westbrook didn't show he was going to be an elite scorer and passer there. Kevin Love didn't show how great of a scorer he'd be (in fact, at UCLA, he showed he was really good at passing, something he's been awful at since being here). Jrue Holiday is probably the best case scenario in terms of real highly rated prospects that struggled under Howland and proceeded to be better than ever once in the pros. The only thing Jrue showed in college was an ability to defend. Anyone that saw him there and said "this kid's a future all-star" is lying. His stock fell to 17th-- lower than Shabazz, got drafted and got to blossom. Why we're all so ready to close the book on a player like Shabazz, I'll never understand, but man, I just hope Shabazz has thick skin, because I don't think he realizes how much we hate our rookies. Rubio's probably the only rookie that has come in since probably Wally that the fans universally liked.

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.

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

I just don't see the comparison. I'm not suggesting that McCollum is going to light the NBA on fire. But I am suggesting that Shabazz will likely flame out of the league or be a fringe journeyman unless he fashions himself into a catch and shoot 3 & D guy, which will require a complete re-work of his mental make-up and focus. That's a tough thing to see happening.

Shabazz hasn't even played ONE NBA game and you think he'll flame out of the league. Yikes. Give him some NBA games before we conclude that his career will be a failure.

Yup, message boards are great places for predictions and speculation. And yes, I do believe that Shabazz will either be a journeyman bench player or leave the league if he doesn't change his make-up and focus. The guy is simply not going to be an alpha dog scorer or good all-around player. He doesn't have the handles, quickness,floor vision, or ability to hit shots off the dribble. I do think his strong frame and decent ability to hit catch-and-shoot jumpers could be parlayed into a valuable career as a role player. We'll see what happens!

[Leado01]

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?

[khans2k5 [enjin:6608728]]

People seem to forget that Beasley had to completely change his play style when he got to the NBA. He was able to dominate the smaller college competition in the paint, hence the huge rebounding numbers. When he got to the NBA, his 6'7 frame couldn't do that anymore because of the size of the NBA and he had to become a perimeter oriented player. He was not really a get to the bucket from the 3 point line in college kind of guy and that is the player he needs to become if he will ever reach his potential in this league. He just got to the league and didn't have a position that could match with what he did well in college.

I don't think anyone is declaring that CJ will be a great player. The arguments are that he can do what Bazz does and more. He may not have the size, but there have been plenty of guys who have made it with that being their biggest obstacle. CJ is the ideal bench player as someone who can get his own shot, while being a threat to score off the ball that stretches the D. I'm not sure how Bazz is going to score in this league if he isn't set up and we have way too many better options to set up than him. Combine that with his lack of ability to really do anything else and you have yourself a guy who isn't worth much out on the court. Bazz is a classic AAU guy who dominated that level and didn't learn to do anything other than score because he didn't have to. Now he gets to this level and his ability to score goes away because he doesn't have the physical advantage he did in high school.

[petecorcoran [enjin:6658618]]

In the context of what teams hope to get from the draft, I don't have a problem. I had a front office guy (another team) once tell me that when teams are drafting #1 to about 6 or 7, they absolutely go "best player available:"... they're looking for long time starters to All-stars. from there to about #20, they try to project ahead a couple of years because they know those players are usually not ready for at least that long. And then from about 20 into the mid-second round, they look for specialty skills... there aren't likely to be all-around-skilled players left, but you can get a shot blocker, a 3 pt shooter, a guy who might become a decent distributor.

It looks to me like Flip followed that script. And I think we need to look at it as two separate transactions. In the first one, Flip decided he didn't want McCollum... maybe it was looking ahead 2 years and seeing Martin (or whoever he signed for immediacy) and Rubio as still primary options playing big minutes. And maybe he's projecting Shved to move ahead as a combo. So, I measure that non-draft of Mac vs. how well Rubio-Martin-Shved look in 2 years.

In the second one, he had two choices... someone who might develop at SF or someone who might become a PF-C two play some big minutes in a couple of years. He chose the SF and my comparison of success or failure will be versus the players chosen right after him, including Karasev. As for Dieng, there is no way Flip could have projected whether or not he'd be available, but he fits the model of specialty skills.

As for this year, we only need to look at signings of Bud, Corey, and Turiaf to know that Flip is counting on nothing this year.