TrillCauleyStein
Banned
Last edited:
Essential The Official ESPN Insider Thread (ESPN+)
- Thread starter the cool
- Start date
TrillCauleyStein
Banned
Last edited:
TrillCauleyStein
Banned
TrillCauleyStein
Banned
thanks for all the pieces skooby breh....
954UAlreadyknow
All Star
How to bet Duke-Louisville, Miami-UNC and other key weekend games
Each Friday on ESPN Insider, ESPN Chalk college basketball handicapper Andrew Lange will give you against-the-spread picks on the biggest games of the weekend. Here's a look at Duke-Louisville, Miami-North Carolina and other intriguing Saturday matchups.
Note: Weekend lines are projections. All times listed are ET.
#20 Duke Blue Devils at #18 Louisville Cardinals
(Noon, ESPN)
Projected line: Louisville -5
Projected total: 142
These two squads met nearly two weeks ago, with Duke prevailing in Durham 72-65 as -3.5 favorites. It marked the third win in what's become a five-game winning streak (4-1 ATS) for the Blue Devils, including marquee triumphs over Louisville, Virginia and North Carolina. It was as impressive (and somewhat fortunate, with two one-point wins) a three-game stretch as there has been in college hoops this season, and at some point the short-handed Blue Devils are going to suffer a letdown. If guard Matt Jones (ankle) is unable to play, it sets up as a situation where escaping Louisville with everyone healthy becomes a top priority.
CBB PickCenter
Wondering which side to take? Check out PickCenter and do your research before making that critical decision. PickCenter
Prior to Wednesday's game against Syracuse, Rick Pitino admitted that the recently imposed postseason ban was starting to wear on his players. The Cardinals then went out and crushed the Orange 72-58. The key ingredients to that strong showing? A home game and a marquee opponent -- and that's exactly what they'll have on Saturday. At some point, likely in one or more of their three upcoming road games, the realities of having no postseason will impact Louisville's play on the court. I don't think it's a factor in this matchup.
Even with Jones, this is an awful spot for Duke, and I have a hard time envisioning there's much left in the tank. While the Blue Devils deserve credit for their recent run, let's not forget that less than a month ago this squad looked completely lost, having lost four of five, including two in Durham. Their true identity is probably somewhere in between these two extremes. I can only support Louisville here if my strike price is -5 or less, though.
Pick: Louisville
#11 Miami Hurricanes at #5 North Carolina Tar Heels
(1 p.m., CBS)
Projected line: North Carolina -5.5
Projected total: 151
While everyone is focused on the Duke-North Carolina rivalry, Louisville's postseason ban and Virginia's hellacious defense, the Miami Hurricanes quietly find themselves tied atop the ACC standings at 10-3. On the season, Miami sports an ACC-best 16-8 ATS mark, including covers in four of its last five.
North Carolina limps into Saturday's matchup after coughing one up against Duke at home. The Tar Heels led by as many as eight with less than seven minutes to play but managed only five points the rest of the way. It's important not to put too much stock in such a high-profile loss. Yes, the Tar Heels have lost three of five after opening ACC play 8-0, but losing to Louisville and Notre Dame on the road and to short-handed Duke in a coin-flip game at home isn't the end of the world.
You've probably noticed a common theme among top-tier teams this year: subpar stretches of play. Virginia was at one point 2-3 in ACC play. Michigan State lost three in a row. Kansas lost three of five, including a 19-point drubbing at Oklahoma State. Oklahoma has struggled of late, with three losses in four games. Iowa gave up 79 in a loss to bottom-feeder Penn State. Point is, you can't get too high or low on a team based on short-term swatches of play.
As for this matchup, I'm a big fan of Jim Larranaga's ability to draw up a game plan -- and it's very likely he's going to want to keep the pace moderate. It's obviously tricky to control tempo on the road as an underdog, but we're likely to see a total around 150. Miami has been an under machine in ACC play at 3-10 O/U, and I would look that way for Saturday's matchup.
Pick: Under
#17 Purdue Boilermakers at #22 Indiana Hoosiers
(8:30 p.m., ESPN)
Projected line: Indiana -3.5
Projected total: 145
Purdue's problem has been inconsistency on both ends of the floor. We're nearing the end of the regular season, and I still don't know who the Boilermakers want to be -- an issue Matt Painter would likely acknowledge. The offense is capable, but it struggles in a half-court setting. The defense, which should be a strength, ranks a modest fourth in the Big Ten in terms of efficiency (1.04 points per possession allowed). Their last game against Northwestern was a perfect example of the Boilermakers' inconsistent ways: Purdue dominated the glass 45-24 and held a 28-8 free throw attempt advantage but mysteriously allowed the Wildcats to shoot 19-of-29 (65.5 percent) on 2-pointers. The result was a lackluster non-cover in a 71-61 win.
Indiana, meanwhile, is a little easier to get a read on. The Hoosiers are consistent producers on the offensive end (1.13 PPP vs. Big Ten) and put up just enough defensive resistance to win games. While Purdue has played the slightly tougher conference slate, it's worth noting that IU's defensive numbers are nearly as strong as Purdue's; Indiana is fifth in the Big Ten in points allowed per game -- just behind Purdue, which sits fourth.
Bettors should be asking if they can trust Purdue to beat a team of equal quality on the road. The Boilermakers lost by 12 at Iowa, were right there at Maryland before faltering late in a nine-point loss and managed only six points in the last 10 minutes of a 61-56 loss at Michigan. I really, really want to believe in this team, but there's not enough there to support them on the road in a short-lined game. The only option I can see here is over anything below 145.
Lean: Over
Saint Mary's Gaels at Gonzaga Bulldogs
(9:10 p.m., ESPN2)
Projected line: Gonzaga -5.5
Projected total: 135
Last week I played against Gonzaga as it stepped out of conference against SMU. The Zags jumped out to an early lead, but the Mustangs bullied their way to a spread-covering 69-60 win. Gonzaga bounced back with a dominant 90-68 win over Pacific and now turn its attention to rival Saint Mary's.
In the first meeting, the market steamed the Gaels up to -5, and I ended up grabbing the generous points. Gonzaga was in control for much of the game but collapsed late and was outscored 29-13 over the last 10 minutes of a 70-67 loss. Randy Bennett deserves WCC Coach of the Year honors considering how young his squad is, with five underclassmen in the regular rotation, but I'm still not completely sold on this team, as it relies almost exclusively on shooting its way to victory (35.2 percent of its points vs. the WCC come from 3). Then there's the issue of the Gaels' overinflated status in the betting markets. After starting the year 12-0 ATS, Saint Mary's is on a 1-9 ATS slide.
I've had this game circled since the first meeting as a "bet on" spot for Gonzaga. The Zags have flaws, but look for their best showing of the season Saturday.
Pick: Gonzaga
Ranking Giannis, Olynyk and the top 10 'juniors' by future potential
Kevin Pelton: Chad, we've debated our top 10 players from this year's rookie class (Kristaps Porzingis, Karl-Anthony Towns and the rest) and the 2014-15 sophomore crop (Andrew Wiggins, Jabari Parker, et al.) based on their long-term potential.
Now, how about considering the NBA's "juniors," players who entered the league in 2013-14?
Despite an additional year of watching them play in the NBA, I'm not sure we have much more clarity on this list. What has become clear is this class, which struggled during its first season, has some surprising NBA contributors.
At the top of the list is the biggest player in the draft, Rudy Gobert of the Utah Jazz. The No. 27 overall pick broke out in his second year, claiming a starting spot after Enes Kanter was traded at the deadline and emerging as perhaps the league's best rim protector.
Gobert has carried that over this season, and his value was reinforced when Utah collapsed defensively during his absence with a sprained MCL. Gobert's offensive game is still a work in progress, but he's shown enough as a playmaker and roll man that it appears he'll be a good starter for years to come with the chance to develop into an All-Star.
Do you have him No. 1 as well?
Chad Ford: This is a tough call for me between Gobert and Giannis Antetokounmpo. But I lean Gobert for all the reason you mentioned.
His defensive presence is elite and there's enough potential there as an offensive player to believe he'll have an impact on that end too. I also love Gobert's work ethic and how he's continued to work on his game.
Interestingly, the fact that Gobert slid to No. 27 shows a real weakness in the draft evaluation process. Early in the 2012-13 season, Gobert was considered a top-10 pick, and he was still likely to go in the lottery coming into the NBA draft combine. But a poor performance there combined with lackluster individual workouts torpedoed Gobert's stock.
Had he not had a killer workout for the Jazz right before the draft, he might have slid out of the first round. Clearly, the early scouting process was more accurate than where it ended up. I think NBA scouts (and I) may put too much emphasis on what prospects do in workouts. Gobert is certainly a cautionary tale.
I've sort of tipped my hand on who I have No. 2. Who do you have, Kevin?
Pelton: I also have the Greek Freak, though it wasn't a hard call for me between him and Gobert for No. 1. It's been a bit of a disappointing season for Antetokounmpo, who has made only modest strides in his development. He's still not anything of a 3-point threat, having made 16 triples all season at a 23.5 percent clip, and if he doesn't develop that range, Antetokounmpo might be more of a power forward with great athleticism than a multipositional player.
At the same time, it's surely worth remembering that Antetokounmpo is younger than one-third of the players drafted in the 2015 first round, including more than two years younger than New York Knicks rookie Jerian Grant. Time is still very much on his side, which is why I'd put him ahead of older third-year players who are better today.
Ford: Antetokounmpo is my second choice as well. He's still a youngster in basketball terms, but there are so many things to love. His skill level and feel for the game for his size are remarkable.
While his development does seem to have stalled a bit, I still see so much untapped potential. He still needs to be a more credible threat from 3, but overall I think he could be an All-Star in a couple of years.
Antetokounmpo also fell too far in the draft, though it's hard to argue with where he was drafted. He was a complete unknown. The competition he played against wasn't elite. Every scout felt like he was several years away.
But so far, he's hit his ceiling and if he continues to do it, I think he could pass Gobert in a few years -- that's why I'm torn.
After those two, things get a lot fuzzier for me, Kevin.
Who do you have at No. 3?
Pelton: To me it's pretty clearly C.J. McCollum. In his first year as a starter, McCollum has proven he can score with anyone, ramping up his usage rate to 27 percent of the Blazers' plays while maintaining his efficiency at precisely the same level as last season.
His size is a bit of an issue at shooting guard next to Damian Lillard, but McCollum showed enough playmaking chops to run the team when Lillard missed time in late December and early January. McCollum averaged 26 points, 6.5 assists and 5.5 rebounds in those six games, and perhaps more importantly Portland went 4-2 without its best player. That's heady stuff.
Agree, Chad?
Ford: I am a little torn between McCollum and Victor Oladipo, two undersized combo guards. Oladipo is much better defensively. McCollum is much better offensively.
I'm going to go with offense here. McCollum's scoring ability and his 3-point jumper make him one of the most lethal scoring threats in the league. And I agree with you that while he's undersized as a 2, he's a good enough passer that if Lillard wasn't around he could easily be the team's point guard.
It will be interesting to see if Portland can keep the two together when McCollum hits restricted free agency.
Again, I think I tipped my hand to who I have at No. 4.
Who do you have, Kevin?
Pelton: Here's where things get a little interesting, because I don't have Oladipo. Instead, I have Kelly Olynyk fourth.
Olynyk's rating in ESPN's real plus-minus (plus-4.0 points per 100 possessions) is second among all NBA juniors, behind Gobert. I think that reflects Olynyk's unique skill set. He's a 7-footer who looks natural shooting and handling the ball from the perimeter because of his background playing guard before a growth spurt, as well as defending in space.
Olynyk is shooting better than 41 percent from 3-point range this season, and while that's probably not going to continue, it's pushed his career mark higher than 37 percent. Among 7-footers with at least 300 career 3-point attempts, per Basketball-Reference.com only Dirk Nowitzki (38.3 percent) has been more accurate beyond the arc.
So maybe Tommy Heinsohn wasn't so crazy after all?
(Yes, yes, he actually was.)
Ford: That's more than defensible. Olynyk was fifth for me. But it's taken me a while to warm up to him. On the other hand, I've always been a big Oladipo fan and while he hasn't become the player I hoped he could become, there's a lot to like.
Oladipo's defense has always been his calling card. While I don't think he's quite risen to the level I thought he could get to pre-draft, he has all the tools to lock others down.
And he continues to show improvement as an offensive player -- both as a shooter and a playmaker. Oladipo is never going to be a pure point guard, but he can handle the position in a pinch.
So, who's No. 5?
Pelton: We're flip-flopped here, as I do have Oladipo fifth. I still haven't quite figured out how Oladipo can become an efficient scorer without developing 3-point range, but there are times where his athleticism makes him nearly impossible to stop one-on-one and Scott Skiles' arrival does seem to have boosted his individual defense.
One of the traits that made Oladipo so attractive to the Magic was his work ethic, and I expect him to keep getting better through his mid-20s.
Ford: I was a pretty big skeptic toward Olynyk on draft night. I wondered how his game would translate to the next level. For the first few years in Boston, that skepticism remained high. But after watching him this year, I think he has a chance to be a really good pro.
Every time he's on the court, good things happen for the Celtics. In a league that values bigs who can stretch the floor and make great basketball decisions, Olynyk should thrive. He may be the best young player on the Celtics.
Who do you have in your next 5?
Pelton: These were probably more difficult choices for me. Here's where I settled:
6.Kentavious Caldwell-Pope
7. Mason Plumlee
8. Steven Adams
9. Robert Covington
10. Gorgui Dieng
Caldwell-Pope has developed into a terrific defender who's really good at cross-matching and using his size and length against point guards. He won't be 22 until next month and will be a valuable role player for years if he can merely get to league average from 3-point range.
The 2013 draft produced a bunch of useful centers, many of them older players with lower ceilings but more immediate value. Plumlee has been a revelation as a playmaker in Portland, Adams has established himself as part of Oklahoma City's core at age 22 and Dieng has proven an effective complement for Karl-Anthony Towns in a positionless frontcourt. Add Festus Ezeli to that group; he was on my list before his knee surgery scared me off.
Covington's shooting has slumped this season, but he's got role-player skills as a solid defender at both forward spots and a dangerous outside shooter in addition to the ability to create his own shot. Cracking the top 10 is impressive for a player who went undrafted less than three years ago.
How much did we overlap here?
Ford: We agree on about three out of five players. The rest of my list:
6. Dennis Schroder
7. Otto Porter
8. Mason Plumlee
9. Steven Adams
10. Kentavious Caldwell-Pope
I'm surprised you didn't have Schroder. Schroder has always been intriguing for me as a German Rajon Rondo with most of the same strengths and weaknesses. I'd love to see him unleashed as the floor leader for a team.
I continue to like the development of Porter, though until he gets a dangerous 3-point shot, he'll always be a little lacking.
Plumlee's real-plus minus is just a tick under Gobert's this season. He's been especially effective on the defensive end for Portland. Adams is limited offensively as well, but provides a real boost defensively.
So on the positive side, we've named a dozen players in all, several of whom have been pleasant surprises.
But what's shocking is how poorly the big names in the draft fared.
In fact, most of those guys didn't show up in our lists, including several players who were considered the potential No. 1 pick.
Anthony Bennett, Cody Zeller, Alex Len, Trey Burke and Ben McLemore didn't make either of our lists -- all top 10 picks, with Bennett going No. 1 to Cleveland.
Neither did rookie of the year Michael Carter-Williams, who has been traded once and had been rumored to be available again at the trade deadline.
Nor did Shabazz Muhammad, a late lottery pick who comes off the bench in Minnesota. And of the top 10 picks, only Porter made my list. (No. 6 pick Nerlens Noel was injured during college and was ranked with the NBA sophomores.)
We knew it was a weak draft, but that's brutal.
TrillCauleyStein
Banned
Lucky_Lefty
Dreams Are Colder Than Death...
Recruiting Q&A with Alabama coach Avery Johnson
play
Retin Obasohan scores a career-high 35 points and Alabama beats LSU 76-69 for the Crimson Tide's fifth straight victory on Wednesday night. (2:39)
Feb 19, 2016
And that could be just the beginning for Johnson in Tuscaloosa. The Tide have a pair of ESPN 100 players earmarked for Alabama in 2016-17, as wingsTerrance Ferguson (No. 13) and Braxton Key (No. 54) are both pledged to be part of next year's class along with JC signee Ar'mond Davis.
Johnson, who was an NBA champion as a player (with the Spurs in 1999) and reached the Finals as a coach (with the Mavericks in 2006) talked with Paul Biancardi about his transition to the college game, how he's set about attracting talent to Alabama, and what he looks for at the point guard position.
One of the primary questions observers might have about a coach whose background is mostly at the NBA level is how they’ll navigate the recruiting trail. Why did you feel like you were prepared for that aspect of the job?
Avery Johnson Jr., who is sitting out this season after transferring from Texas A&M). My daughter (Christianne) has excelled and graduated from an Ivy league school (Penn). The University of Alabama has had terrific coaches in the past such as C.M. Newton and Wimp Sanderson, so it has tradition. Our other sports such as gymnastics and especially football have produced championships. The ground is fertile enough in the state of a Alabama to field a team that can be a perennial NCAA [tournament] team and compete for championships down the road.
What kind of surprises have you encountered during your first year, either on the recruiting trail or elsewhere?
Pleasantly surprised by the support of our home crowds. Currently we have had four sellouts, compared to maybe four sellouts over the last seven years. Fan and student support has been great. How we have been received outside Alabama, our alumni really care both in the state of Alabama and nationally. Because of my son being recruited and his teammates (with the Texas Titans on the AAU circuit), I have talked with dozens upon dozens of college coaches over a three-year period. I have dealt with many high school and summer coaches, and have spoken with parents of my sons' friends. Overall, I have not encountered many surprises.
You’re recruiting elite-level players to a program that has been to one NCAA tournament in the last nine seasons and hasn’t won a tournament game since 2006. What would be your message to a player who might dismiss Alabama because of that lack of recent tradition?
They can write their own script to this movie. They can be the star of their own movie. They don’t just have to be an actor, they can come to Alabama and be a star or a co-star. With the absolutely elite players I tell them that I would rather use a timeout than sub them out -- if you have that type of ability I want you on the floor, you are going to play extensively. We are not a program that has 10-to-12 McDonald's All-Americans, but if we get one or two we are going to count on them to play heavy minutes and build around them.
How do you utilize Alabama's national champion football program in your basketball recruiting?
I try and meet with coach Nick Saban on a weekly basis. He allows me to pick his brain about recruiting or practice at any time. He has met with our key recruits. When he goes on the road he is selling football, but he is promoting basketball [too]. Sometimes he runs into parents or coaches that ask about me, and he can give some firsthand knowledge on the situation. We can lean on each other. I went to their championship game to show my support.
You are going up against some of the game’s top all-time recruiters just within the SEC -- John Calipari, Bruce Pearl and Ben Howland among them. Do you consider your job to be even tougher because of that competition, or do you try not to think about who you’re going up against on the trail?
I think about fielding my team, but at the same time we are fortunate to have some outstanding coaches and recruiters -- that’s one of the attractions of coming to the SEC. Not only the [longtime league] coaches who are outstanding but the new coaches such as Ben Howland, Mike White, Rick Barnes that were coming into the league from other places. Independent of me, I think we have an unbelievable roster of coaches in the SEC. These guys are really good. I think about and anticipate what they might do in certain situations from a philosophical standpoint in games or recruiting based on their style or DNA, but I never think of going up against one coach on an individual basis. At the end of the day I want all of our coaches to be successful -- it’s good for our league. These guys could coach in any league in any era.
You played point guard for 16 years in the NBA, and played and coached against some of the best point guards in the history of the sport. Is there one player who is a prototype for what you’re looking for at the point guard position at Alabama? Are you the prototype?
I don’t want to box these guys into any one player. I like the size of a Magic Johnson who can see over a defense. We have [6-foot-5] freshman Dazon Ingram who is out for the year with an injured foot. … I like his size to see over the defense and pass. I also like guys like the former Pistons Isiah Thomas and Joe Dumars. I look at good guards who do a little bit of everything well, they don’t have to be labeled. I have Retin Obasohan who has variety in his game, and he is having a very good season for us.
[I like] John Stockton-types -- crafty, feisty and a great screener. Plays work best when point guards screen, and he was never afraid to free up his teammates. Gary Payton was a great defender, would go after the long rebounds and would ignite the fast break by himself. Those are the guys that I played against in the NBA and looked up to. I look for those qualities when I am evaluating point guards.
Outside of talent and athletic ability, what are a couple of traits that you look for in the evaluation process?
Being coachable is first and foremost or you can’t play for Alabama. You've got to be coachable and that’s why I prefer to go to practices not just games [when evaluating]. At games I carefully watch when guys are losing, how they respond to the head coach and the assistants. I also like guys with real self-confidence. I don’t like whiners. I like kids even though they are young, who try to handle adversity the right way. You don't have to be the most mature college student in the world, just be able to fight through adversity and meet it head-on. Don’t play the blame game -- I want guys who are all about the team and show unselfishness.
Describe your team in one word so far this season.
Overachieving.
play
Retin Obasohan scores a career-high 35 points and Alabama beats LSU 76-69 for the Crimson Tide's fifth straight victory on Wednesday night. (2:39)
Feb 19, 2016
-
Paul BiancardiBasketball Recruiting
- comment
And that could be just the beginning for Johnson in Tuscaloosa. The Tide have a pair of ESPN 100 players earmarked for Alabama in 2016-17, as wingsTerrance Ferguson (No. 13) and Braxton Key (No. 54) are both pledged to be part of next year's class along with JC signee Ar'mond Davis.
Johnson, who was an NBA champion as a player (with the Spurs in 1999) and reached the Finals as a coach (with the Mavericks in 2006) talked with Paul Biancardi about his transition to the college game, how he's set about attracting talent to Alabama, and what he looks for at the point guard position.
One of the primary questions observers might have about a coach whose background is mostly at the NBA level is how they’ll navigate the recruiting trail. Why did you feel like you were prepared for that aspect of the job?
Avery Johnson Jr., who is sitting out this season after transferring from Texas A&M). My daughter (Christianne) has excelled and graduated from an Ivy league school (Penn). The University of Alabama has had terrific coaches in the past such as C.M. Newton and Wimp Sanderson, so it has tradition. Our other sports such as gymnastics and especially football have produced championships. The ground is fertile enough in the state of a Alabama to field a team that can be a perennial NCAA [tournament] team and compete for championships down the road.
What kind of surprises have you encountered during your first year, either on the recruiting trail or elsewhere?
Pleasantly surprised by the support of our home crowds. Currently we have had four sellouts, compared to maybe four sellouts over the last seven years. Fan and student support has been great. How we have been received outside Alabama, our alumni really care both in the state of Alabama and nationally. Because of my son being recruited and his teammates (with the Texas Titans on the AAU circuit), I have talked with dozens upon dozens of college coaches over a three-year period. I have dealt with many high school and summer coaches, and have spoken with parents of my sons' friends. Overall, I have not encountered many surprises.
You’re recruiting elite-level players to a program that has been to one NCAA tournament in the last nine seasons and hasn’t won a tournament game since 2006. What would be your message to a player who might dismiss Alabama because of that lack of recent tradition?
They can write their own script to this movie. They can be the star of their own movie. They don’t just have to be an actor, they can come to Alabama and be a star or a co-star. With the absolutely elite players I tell them that I would rather use a timeout than sub them out -- if you have that type of ability I want you on the floor, you are going to play extensively. We are not a program that has 10-to-12 McDonald's All-Americans, but if we get one or two we are going to count on them to play heavy minutes and build around them.
How do you utilize Alabama's national champion football program in your basketball recruiting?
I try and meet with coach Nick Saban on a weekly basis. He allows me to pick his brain about recruiting or practice at any time. He has met with our key recruits. When he goes on the road he is selling football, but he is promoting basketball [too]. Sometimes he runs into parents or coaches that ask about me, and he can give some firsthand knowledge on the situation. We can lean on each other. I went to their championship game to show my support.
You are going up against some of the game’s top all-time recruiters just within the SEC -- John Calipari, Bruce Pearl and Ben Howland among them. Do you consider your job to be even tougher because of that competition, or do you try not to think about who you’re going up against on the trail?
I think about fielding my team, but at the same time we are fortunate to have some outstanding coaches and recruiters -- that’s one of the attractions of coming to the SEC. Not only the [longtime league] coaches who are outstanding but the new coaches such as Ben Howland, Mike White, Rick Barnes that were coming into the league from other places. Independent of me, I think we have an unbelievable roster of coaches in the SEC. These guys are really good. I think about and anticipate what they might do in certain situations from a philosophical standpoint in games or recruiting based on their style or DNA, but I never think of going up against one coach on an individual basis. At the end of the day I want all of our coaches to be successful -- it’s good for our league. These guys could coach in any league in any era.
You played point guard for 16 years in the NBA, and played and coached against some of the best point guards in the history of the sport. Is there one player who is a prototype for what you’re looking for at the point guard position at Alabama? Are you the prototype?
I don’t want to box these guys into any one player. I like the size of a Magic Johnson who can see over a defense. We have [6-foot-5] freshman Dazon Ingram who is out for the year with an injured foot. … I like his size to see over the defense and pass. I also like guys like the former Pistons Isiah Thomas and Joe Dumars. I look at good guards who do a little bit of everything well, they don’t have to be labeled. I have Retin Obasohan who has variety in his game, and he is having a very good season for us.
[I like] John Stockton-types -- crafty, feisty and a great screener. Plays work best when point guards screen, and he was never afraid to free up his teammates. Gary Payton was a great defender, would go after the long rebounds and would ignite the fast break by himself. Those are the guys that I played against in the NBA and looked up to. I look for those qualities when I am evaluating point guards.
Outside of talent and athletic ability, what are a couple of traits that you look for in the evaluation process?
Being coachable is first and foremost or you can’t play for Alabama. You've got to be coachable and that’s why I prefer to go to practices not just games [when evaluating]. At games I carefully watch when guys are losing, how they respond to the head coach and the assistants. I also like guys with real self-confidence. I don’t like whiners. I like kids even though they are young, who try to handle adversity the right way. You don't have to be the most mature college student in the world, just be able to fight through adversity and meet it head-on. Don’t play the blame game -- I want guys who are all about the team and show unselfishness.
Describe your team in one word so far this season.
Overachieving.
TrillCauleyStein
Banned
MUST READ:
Keating: Why the average NBA body is shorter than 15 years ago, but with a wider wingspan
skooby
Keating: Why the average NBA body is shorter than 15 years ago, but with a wider wingspan
skooby
Last edited:
Keating: Reaching for the Stars
HEIGHT IN BASKETBALL is the most obvious physical advantage any athlete can enjoy. But tracking the physical dimension of NBA bodies over time reveals a stark truth: Tall ain't what it used to be.
For decades, the pursuit of NBA championships was a race to the top, literally. From George Mikan to Bill Russell to Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, humongous men dominated the court. But after the game opened up about 30 years ago, the titans' influence started to wane. By the 1990s, the Big Dork, a breed of NBA player whose only job was to take up floor space (my favorite was Chris Dudley), became useless in the era of Michael Jordan. Still, NBA players at all positions kept getting taller, peaking at a leaguewide average of 6-foot-7 9/10 in 2000-01.
Since then, average height has plateaued. The biggest big men can't keep growing, for the same reason ants and tarantulas can't survive in giant form like they do in old horror movies: As three-dimensional bodies add height, proportionally they add even more weight and, sooner or later, threaten to collapse under their own bulk. (Witness the short career of the great but 7-6 Yao Ming.) Moreover, as teams began to value 3-point shooting about a decade ago, they shifted minutes to the perimeter, and often to smaller players.
Even so, many teams kept putting a premium on the tallest guys, to the point that the NBA actually overvalued height. Consider: In a 2011 study, my colleague Tom Haberstroh examined the height and productivity of every player drafted since 1996. He found that at four out of five positions on the court, the most effective height for players was shorter than average. (The exception was small forward.) For example, NBA shooting guards measured 6-5 on average. But shooting guards who were 6-3 had a mean player efficiency rating of 13.6, tops among the position. If performance lagged height, how much sense could it make to keep chasing altitude for its own sake?
I'd say the fever finally broke in 2013, after six NBA teams drafted 7-footers in the first round only to watch the slightly shorter but no less clumsy Mason Plumlee(!) outplay them all. (The Knicks, of course, made the worst move: trading the equivalent of a lottery pick for 7-foot Andrea Bargnani only to watch him play like Andrea Bargnani.) Over the past couple of seasons, there has been a distinct shift in how the smartest GMs and analysts talk about NBA physiques. To oversimplify, height is out and length is in.
Athletes with reach can give teams most of the skills traditionally associated with height, such as blocking shots and grabbing loose balls, without necessarily sacrificing the mobility that many giant players lack. And while every era sees some impressively long arms -- legend had it Kevin McHale didn't have to bend over to tie his shoes -- a whole batch of today's young superstars play above their height because of their extraordinary length.
Most humans have an arm span roughly equal to their height, as in Leonardo da Vinci's famous illustration. But Kawhi Leonard, who stands 6-7, has a wingspan of 7-3. (For more on how he's changing the game, see page 42.) Kevin Durant is 6-10 but with a 7-5 reach. Anthony Davis was 6-11 with a 7-6 span when he was drafted in 2012 and was so young that he might have grown even longer since. Incredibly, the average NBA player has a wingspan 1.063 times his height -- beyond the threshold for Marfan syndrome, a genetic illness that causes unusually long arms and legs, according to David Epstein, author of the book The Sports Gene.
And now the best team in the league has elevated, or should I say extended, length to an art form. Beyond the sublime talents of Steph Curry, why are the Warriors always shooting over opponents, and how are they so disruptive on defense? Well, Golden State's four other starters range from 6-7 to 7-0 in height but average 7-0 in wingspan. Make no mistake, that's intentional: The Warriors spent their lone draft pick last year, a late first-rounder, on Kevon Looney, a 19-year-old out of UCLA known for his condorlike 7-4 arm span. When an entire roster has that kind of length, you might say its reach won't exceed its grasp.
With the Warriors now leading the way, a basic fact has taken root: The world's most vertical game is going horizontal.
TrillCauleyStein
Banned
thanks skooby and:
Five Up, Five Down: What happened to Maryland's Melo Trimble?
Five Up, Five Down: What happened to Maryland's Melo Trimble?
954UAlreadyknow
All Star
Five Up, Five Down: What happened to Melo Trimble?
There was a time, not all that long ago, when Melo Trimble was considered one of the elite point guards in the country. A potential first-team All-American, in a class with Kris Dunn and above Tyler Ulis.
Lately, Trimble has been ordinary.
Maryland can't afford for its sophomore point guard to be anything less than exceptional. Not if the Terps expect to make an appearance in Houston.
Where has the Melo Trimble gone who put on that show in Chapel Hill on Dec. 1? That was when he and Tar Heels senior guard Marcus Paige put on a shooting display, and Maryland's floor leader nearly took care of UNC singlehandedly, finishing with 23 points, 12 assists and making 4-of-5 from beyond the arc.
Where has the Melo Trimble gone who went for 24 points (3-of-7 from 3), 8 boards, 8 assists and not a single turnover in a win at Northwestern?
We haven't seen that guy in a while.
Now Trimble is excessively turning the ball over -- and most concerning, he's no longer making shots.
"He can't shoot," one coach who faced him recently said. "And we just slapped down hard on all penetration."
For the first 16 games, Trimble made 48 percent of his shots from the field and 40 percent from beyond the arc. He also had an assist-to-turnover ratio of 2.3-to-1. Over the past dozen games, Trimble is shooting 35 percent from the field, 25 percent from deep and has 54 assists and 41 turnovers (1.3-to-1 A/T).
In three of Maryland's four Big Ten losses (Michigan, Wisconsin and Minnesota), Trimble was just 5-of-32 from the field, 1-of-8 from 3 and had more turnovers (15) than assists (13).
Rasheed Sulaimon has played better than just about anyone anticipated this season. He has been the team's best perimeter defender, has made shots and moves the ball. Freshman big man Diamond Stone has been a consistent factor, averaging in double figures in 17 of his last 19 games. Jake Layman has been solid, and Robert Carter has had his moments, although has been plagued by inconsistency.
Maryland has as much talent -- and balance -- in its starting unit as just about any team in the country. Sure, they miss backcourt depth after Dion Wiley went down because of a season-ending injury in the preseason. But the Terps are still 23-5 overall and 11-4 in the Big Ten, only a game out of first place with three left.
But unless Trimble finds his old self, the one who was a legitimate threat from the perimeter and a caretaker of the ball, he and the Terps will be watching the Final Four as bystanders instead of participants.
The Rest of Five Down
Five Up
No. 1 pick: Ben Simmons or Brandon Ingram?
Is Ben Simmons still the No. 1 pick?
Chad Ford: We're nearing the end of the college basketball season. LSU's Ben Simmons has sat atop the Big Board since I published the first one in July. Eight months later, he still looks like the favorite among NBA scouts and executives to be the No. 1 pick.
But he does have competition. Duke's Brandon Ingram has been improving all season, and his combination of elite size and scoring ability at small forward is highly attractive to NBA teams. Factor in Simmons' shooting woes and LSU's struggles to make the NCAA tournament and we might have a legit two-man race for the No. 1 pick.
What do the stats say, Kevin? How close are these two in your projections?
Kevin Pelton: There was a stretch of a few weeks where Ingram had the better WARP projection, before the recent shooting slump that has seen him make just 34.0 percent of his 2-point attempts in February.
However, that's largely because of the nature of my projection system. As we've discussed in the past, it's designed to adjust for fluky, outlier performance that won't likely continue in the NBA.
Because that's tied to positional averages, my projections don't believe anyone can truly be as good at both rebounding and playmaking as Simmons has been this season. As he continues to prove his performance is no fluke, Simmons' projection will improve with the same level of play.
When we look at unadjusted stats on Sports-Reference.com, the difference between Simmons and Ingram in terms of production becomes much wider. Simmons has the sixth-best score among freshmen in box plus-minus (a form of statistical plus-minus akin to what helps inform ESPN's real plus-minus) in the Sports-Reference.com database back through 2010-11, behind Anthony Davis, Karl-Anthony Towns, Joel Embiid, Nerlens Noel and Cody Zeller. By contrast, Ingram's BPM ranks 51st among freshmen over that span -- very good, certainly, but not elite.
Whose skills are more unique: Ingram's or Simmons'?
Pelton: Are there reasons scouts believe that Ingram can close that gap in the NBA?
Ford: I think in January, when Ingram was shooting the ball at a much higher clip, the thinking was this: The way the league is evolving, Ingram's shooting ability at his size might trump Simmons' passing and rebounding skills.
In a league where the Warriors are flirting with the best record ever, having an elite shooter, especially a 6-foot-10 one like Ingram, is a rare and valuable commodity. However, I think they might be underestimating just how gifted Simmons really is. Ingram projects as a good shooter. Simmons projects as an elite rebounder and passer.
Can we estimate the relative worth of these skills in a forward?
Pelton: That's tough because there's not really a big sample to draw from in terms of elite rebounding and passing, is there?
Before applying the regression factor, Simmons' LSU stats translate to an NBA equivalent of a rebound rate near 15 percent and an assist rate near six per 100 plays. There's precisely one NBA player who can meet both of those standards this season: Joakim Noah. Draymond Green (14.5 percent rebound rate) and Blake Griffin (13.5 percent) are close.
This is sort of making the argument for Simmons, right?
I think one factor that works in Simmons' favor is the growing value the NBA puts on passing out of big men, with Green as a primary example. The playmaking 4, as popularized by ESPN's Zach Lowe, has become nearly as important as the stretch 4.
To me, the biggest opportunity for offenses in the game today is when a guard gets trapped on the pick-and-roll and throws to the screener, who then has to make a play with a man advantage (there are four offensive players involved and just three defenders). When executed properly, this tends to lead to dunks and wide-open corner 3s.
Nobody is better at this than Green. Well, guess who Simmons' best comparison is via SCHOENE? Draymond Green, and nobody else is particularly close.
Who are comparisons for Ingram and Simmons?
Pelton: I know they have very different body types and motors, but have you heard anyone else draw the Green comparison?
Ford: Yes. And I believe this is why the overwhelming majority of NBA folks think Simmons will be the No. 1 pick. What if Green were 6-foot-10 and athletic? Players that perform like Simmons rarely have his size and athletic abilities.
That said, how much will his lack of shooting affect Simmons' ceiling in the NBA? Green was a career 36 percent 3-point shooter in college and has shot 34 percent in the NBA. Simmons won't even take midrange jumpers right now. Would Green be as effective if he lacked a serviceable jumper?
And if a bigger, more athletic Draymond Green is the best current comp for Simmons, what about Ingram? Rick Pitino compared Ingram to Kevin Durant last week (before Louisville held him to three baskets and forced 10 turnovers from Ingram). That's seems overly optimistic, though.
Last time we discussed Ingram, I felt like Paul George was a better comp. I still like that one. You were leaning toward Giannis Antetokounmpo.
Where do you see him now?
Pelton: Well, I think Blake Griffin is an interesting example in that regard. He was an even worse free throw shooter than Simmons in college and early in his NBA career before developing into a solid midrange shooter, albeit not a 3-point threat.
Griffin's shooting isn't really an issue when the ball is in his hands, but we've seen the last couple of years how much better Chris Paul-DeAndre Jordan pick-and-rolls work with a spacer at power forward rather than Griffin.
As Griffin's example shows, shooting is not a fixed thing. The same is true of Green, who made two 3-pointers in 17 attempts his first two seasons at Michigan State before making 89 as an upperclassmen. A lot of Simmons' future will be tied to how much he can develop as a shooter.
That same question also applies to Ingram, despite his success beyond the arc. He looms as one of the most interesting test cases yet for my research finding that college free throw percentage predicts NBA 3-point percentage as well as college 3-point percentage.
As good a 3-point shooter as he has been (40.8 percent), Ingram has only been marginally better at the foul line than Simmons (67.5 percent to 67.2 percent). Ingram's attempted more 3s than free throws, so this isn't exactly Justise Winslow hitting 41.8 percent of 3s in a smaller sample (110 attempts) last year at Duke. Still, 3-point percentage tends to be volatile over hundreds of attempts and Ingram may just be riding a hot streak beyond the arc.
Ingram's statistical similarity to George has declined as the season has gone on, and I do think the 3-point ability he has shown distinguishes him from Antetokounmpo.
Intriguingly, SCHOENE now favors another Milwaukee wing: Khris Middleton. Ingram is much bigger than Middleton, but I remember how much Middleton reminded me of Durant when I first saw him play in college. And a "rich man's Middleton" is probably fairer to Ingram as a comparison than players as good as Durant and George.
Can Ingram still pass Simmons?
Pelton: Let's wrap up by posing this question: What could Ingram do the rest of the season to jump Simmons on draft boards?
Ford: It will be interesting. LSU is unlikely to play in the NCAA tournament unless they win the SEC tourney. In other words, Simmons' run is almost over, and it's shown.
His lackluster game on Saturday drew a ton of criticism. Some are raising questions about his competitiveness and the poor performance of his team. But the large majority of NBA folks I speak with think that's nonsense.
He had poor body language in a game where he was taken out of the starting lineup for academic reasons. It happens. Overall, scouts rate his character very highly. It's a selling point, not a detraction, for those who have done their homework.
Nevertheless, it creates an opening for Ingram. If he gets hot in the NCAA tournament -- especially if he starts hitting 3s and Duke can return to the Final Four -- the drumbeat for Ingram to go No. 1 will be loud.
While scouts swear the tournament doesn't really affect their scouting reports, there is plenty of evidence to say that it does. We always underestimate the power of psychology in the draft.
I know you won't be swayed by any of that, Kevin. Your model doesn't weigh the tournament any differently than the rest of the season. So, from an analytics standpoint, is Simmons the clear No. 1 regardless of how the next few weeks play out? Or is this a real two-man horse race for the No. 1 pick?
Pelton: I don't know about the clear No. 1. As I said when we started, their NBA projections aren't that different because of the regression factor.
Still, the challenge for Ingram from a statistical standpoint is that his strongest current skill -- 3-point shooting -- is also the one that's most likely to regress. We don't often see players have a "hot streak" in terms of rebounds, steals and blocks, but those are the skills where Ingram really has room to improve his projection.
So I'd be surprised if Ingram ends up surpassing Simmons in my projections.