Welcome to summer everyone. Without any real UVA sports left to talk about (sorry track, but good luck at the NCAAs), we turn to predicting the future. One of those events coming up is the 2012 NBA Draft, which for the first time since 2008 will [hopefully!] have a Wahoo selected in it. And that is of course Mike Scott.
Scott brings a strong all-around game to the table. Scott displayed a very solid outside shooting game to go with what we already knew was a decent inside game. Scott also plays with a ton of energy, exhibited by the amount of effort it took to carry us towards the end of the season. All these intangibles seem to be great for the NBA, so why is Scott only projected to be a mid to late second round pick? Well here's why:
Age
At 24 Mike is one of the oldest players in the draft. Think Brandon Weeden as a comparison for football. The average age in the NBA consistently hovers around 27 years old. Meaning Mike will be a wily old veteran in just 3 seasons. Given that the draft is usually full of 19 to 20 year-olds, this is not a pro for him. You just need to look at the career of Brandon Roy, who was a senior coming into the NBA draft as a warning to all NBA teams about drafting older players with a history of injury.
Over-Polished
This is going to seem stupid, so please just bear with me. Mike is a throwback prospect. He will require very little coaching to develop into his true maximum potential. While this seems perfect for most situations, the landscape of the NBA says otherwise. The number one pick this season is going to be Anthony Davis, an incredibly raw 6-11 bean pole with very little offensive game to speak of. Polish is not valued in the NBA nearly as much as potential. Andre Drummond, who has done absolutely nothing at Connecticut with any consistency, is most likely going to be a top 5 pick, based solely on his potential. Being over-polished means NBA teams aren't free to develop you as they see fit, and many teams will see that as a low ceiling on your play, and a damning trait for a prospect to possess.
Just on a side note, this is the biggest problem with the NBA in my opinion. Too much value is placed on potential and it produces the shitty basketball we get on a nightly basis.
Tweener-Status
Go ahead and tell me what position Mike Scott projects to in the NBA. He's too small to be a 4, or at least a starting 4. He has a Chris Bosh kind of game, but without the Chris Bosh length. (Kendall compares Mike Scott to Udonis Haslem, which I can see.) But can Scott play the 3? He has the jumper, but I don't really think he has the handle for the wing, nor the athleticism to guard the perimeter. The optimist in me says, well no 3 would be able to defend his post-up game, either! Which is true, Mike would possibly kill them in the post, but NBA-level athletes could cause him problems down low. Mike to me projects as a niche player, who can play a big, power three or a small, stretch four. He needs the right situation to flourish as an NBA role player.
With all that being said there is the right situation out there, I just know it. Mike does bring a ton to the table for an NBA team. Let's look at that for a minute:
Leadership
While the age and experience may hurt Mike's status on the court, off the court it plays huge into his hand. Mike is a solid kid with demonstrated leadership abilities, which is something NBA teams would love to have. He is the kind of player that helps keep teams together. Ask the Heat how much they could use a solid guy off the bench that keeps them going. Mike not only can lead, but he knows how to, which is a huge leg up on some of his younger counterparts. He's also the type of human being you'll never have to worry about -- he'll be a professional in every sense of the word.
Rebounding
Mike hits the boards hard. While his game may have changed a little this year I full expect him to get back to his bread and butter in the NBA, when he is no longer required to be 'the guy' on offense. And that means Mike will get back to attacking the glass and tearing down boards. Especially if he has a chip on his shoulder, Mike has the ability to become a very solid rebounder off the bench.
Motor
Building off the chip on his shoulder mentality from the last factor, Mike should come in extra motivated. If he goes all out to prove himself, it might be scary for teams, especially if that is coming off the bench at you in the 3rd and 4th quarter.
I look for Mike to be taken in the middle part of the second round. I would love to see him go 46th to my beloved train wreck that is the Washington Wizards. He brings a lot to the table for a young team that needs a kick in the pants. I think you look at where Draymond Green is picked as a barometer for where Mike will end up. If Green goes early in the second round then Mike will most likely not be far behind. As Green slips, Mike will slip with him. Those two will be tied together as the solid glue guy, stretch-style 4s. Let's hope someone takes a chance on Mike, because I would love to watch him play some more.
Kendall Sez: Mike Scott is an NBA role player, as he's the kind of guy you can bring in off the bench for pick and roll / pick and pop production; he's never going to be a an NBA starter. He's a mature kid with a well-rounded, pro-style game, and I think he can forge a career in the NBA. That being said, fit is literally everything on this one. For example, I could see Mike Scott playing for 6, 7, 8 years with the Spurs. I could just as easily see him drafted by the Wizards, never settling into that role tailor-made for his specific skill-set, and eventually schlepping off to play overseas. It's all about fit. Mike Scott is positionless, and he won't be a plus defender or a plus low post banger in the pros, but he could be a plus scorer and a serviceable rebounder. A less athletic Udonis Haslem, all the way. There's a spot for him in the NBA. Again, it's all about fit. So for that reason, it would not be the end of the world to see Mike Scott not be drafted, and instead free to choose which team for which he tries out.
Nice post, guys. I was wondering about Scott's draft status. I was thinking he was a Popovich kind of player, too.
ReplyDelete