As you probably know by now (shame on you if you missed it), Mike Scott was drafted by the Atlanta Hawks with the 43rd selection in last Thursday's NBA draft.
The 2nd round pick doesn't give Mike a guaranteed contract; he'll have to make the team this summer in order to get paid. But with the Hawks in salary-dump mode right now, blowing up their middling roster in attempt to free up cap space for a hard charge at the 2013 free agent class, Mike finds himself as one of the Hawks' few playable assets heading into the 2012-13 season. Take a look at their current roster, post Joe Johnson trade to the Nets and Marvin Williams trade to the Jazz:
PG) Devin Harris, Jeff Teague
SG) Anthony Morrow, John Jenkins
SF) DeShawn Stevenson
PF) Josh Smith, Jordan Williams, Mike Scott, Ivan Johnson
C) Al Horford, Zaza Pachulia, Johan Petro
No doubt this roster remains in flux, but one thing jumps off the screen at me: A GIANT, SUCKING HOLE AT SMALL FORWARD. DeShawn Stevenson is pretty much worthless, and while Josh Smith might be able to log some minutes as a big 3, and/or the team could go with a three-guard look with Teague and Harris both on the floor together, I still see this roster as being very wing-poor. The question then becomes: Can Mike Scott - an NBA "tweener" at the 3/4 position - grab some meaningful minutes off the wing in his typical stretch 4 role and make an impact?
Going into the draft process, I imagined Mike would land somewhere where he'd be expected to come off the bench at the 4 as an offensive-minded reserve, maybe as a 9th or 10th man in a rotation. A pick and pop weapon who could snare some rebounds, nothing more. But now I'm not so sure he won't get an opportunity to show that his shooting range can extend beyond 17 feet and that his floor game can grow past simple catch and shoot or moves in the post.
Interesting...
Meanwhile, here's what Bret Lagree from the really good TrueHoop Network Hawks site Hoopinion had to say about the Mike Scott draft pick:
Regardless of identity, it is unreasonable to expect anything from the 43rd pick in the draft. Mike Scott does not figure to challenge that precept. Successful as a fifth-year senior at Virginia, Scott turns 24 in a couple of weeks. He's just two years younger than Marvin Williams and Al Horford. There's little precedent of a power forward draftee of any age succeeding in the NBA with the poor athleticism markers evident in the stats from Scott's excellent senior season. Scott averaged just one blocked shot and 1.4 steals per 100 on-court defensive possessions. He rebounded less than ten percent of Virginia's misses.
It's difficult to find recent comparisons to Scott's numbers. Best I can come up with are Luke Harangody without demonstrating college three-point range, a less efficient Tyler Hansbrough, or Gary Wilkinson, who went undrafted out of Utah State and currently stars in the Australian league. All three of those guys turned the ball over significantly less than Scott in their final college seasons so even the best comparisons for Scott break down eventually and not in his favor.
Furthermore, it's puzzling to comprehend how Scott fits on a roster with Ivan Johnson. Were Scott younger, it might make more sense to carry him as fifth big man (sure to be sixth once the Hawks sign a franchise-defining third-string center) in the hopes he develops into a rotation player. With Johnson yet to receive a qualifying offer, the suspicion lurks that the Hawks may be comfortable replacing him with an inferior, younger (but not young) player, in order to save about $500,000.
(Read more from that "Draft Dissent" post, HERE.)
Not a glowing endorsement.
I tend to disagree with that piece, and I think it was just an axe-grinding session that really stemmed from frustration over the John Jenkins pick when more naturally-talented players were still on the board. (I happen to LOVE John Jenkins -- best pure shooter I've seen in college in a long, long time. I think he's Ray Allen-esque. Or at least Michael Redd-esque.)
As for Mike Scott, jury's out. I've already gone on record saying that I think he has the best chance of NBA success of any UVA players from the last decade-plus (Sean Singletary was too small, and I didn't think Roger Mason had enough athleticism) because of one simple yet vitally important trait: the ability to shoot the basketball, especially off of pick and pop plays, and especially with that deadly 17-foot fadeaway.
(From Wikipedia: The pick and pop is an offensive play that is a derivative of the classic pick and roll. Instead of rolling toward the basket, however, the player setting the pick moves to an open area of the court to receive a pass from the ballhandler and "pops" a jump shot. The "pop" in pick and pop refers to the player that screens when they "pop" out for the pass as opposed to rolling to the basket in a pick and roll. The premise between the two plays is the same: a ballhandler uses a teammate's pick to attract the attention of two defensive players to free his teammate for a scoring opportunity. A successful pick and pop relies on a ballhandler who demands constant defensive attention and a teammate with an accurate jumpshot.)
Mike Scott has that accurate jumper and he has tremendous pick and pop potential. Meanwhile, Dirk Nowitzki - albeit a bigger guy and a better perimeter shooter - has forged a pretty decent NBA career shooting that mid-range fadeaway as a "big."
Mike Scott: Poor Man's Dirk Nowitzki. You heard it here first.
 |
| He'll be an asset for the Hawks, and a long-time role player in the NBA, I feel it in my bones. |
But will he stick with the Hawks, and is this the right team for him?
All of that remains to be seen. However, it does sound like big things are happening in Atlanta, and a bench scorer and spot rebounder like Mike Scott would be an invaluable part of a rotation featuring Dwight Howard and Chris Paul, ala Udonis Haslem with the Heat. Mike will have this upcoming season of transition to prove his worth to the Hawks before they go fishing for the BIG ONES next summer.
As far as landing spots go, I think this is a pretty good one for Mike. It's a team that straight-up needs warm bodies, and it needs guys with good intangibles who are willing to take and embrace specific roles. I think Danny Ferry was smart to draft John Jenkins and Mike Scott as complimentary pieces to the puzzle he's assembling with the Joe Johnson and Marvin Williams trades to free up future cap space.
But first... let's not get ahead of ourselves... Mike has to make the team first. That fight happens this summer, and we'll keep you posted on his progress.
No comments:
Post a Comment