My Take on the Wing Prospects of 2010 NBA Draft
Here are my thoughts on this:
the best wings imo are:
1. Wes Johnson: just below being an all-star, natural fit for the teams with shooting deficiencies (clippers). He can light it up with his jumper and has many step back, pump fakes, and other subtle moves to get his lightning quick shot off. He might have trouble doing much off the dribble in terms of getting to hole and getting to the free throw line, but I believe eventually his great shooting will spread the floor for his NBA team and they'll let him drive to prevent him from getting off a long range shot which will open up his game. I believe he has good defensive potential with his long arms, but not as much as Aminu. However, he is a sure thing imo, and isn't just a safe pick because he does have the potential to be an all-star I just don't think he'll ever quite get there.
Comparison: Small forward version of the current ray allen
2. Aminu: border-line all-star, but more risky so he's below wes. The thing that separates Aminu from past potential busts that were hyped on athleticism is that aminu was actually a very good ncaa player without even having much of an offensive game. I mean he was able to play a little down low and had nice form on his jumper, but he wasn't a guy you were going to double. However, even with that, he still averaged 16 and 11 in a tough ACC conference at just 20 years old! I mean if he, as raw as he is, can already do that in a great conference, whats he going to do when he develops some more offense and plays with a better supporting cast? Look, even if Aminu doesn't develop a great offensive game, he will still be a great NBA defender, he will still be a versatile wing, he will still be a great rebounder, and he still will be a big mismatch. And the great thing about Aminu is that he is a hard worker so he should be a very good NBA player. One last thing that will help him, he is great at moving without the ball which will help him get his points. Aminu has all the potential to be a great NBA player and currently posses all the tools to at the very least be a great NBA role player.
Comparison: Gerald Wallace
3. Paul George: most potential imo, but is a question mark. I think he'll be an all-star, but i would take wes and aminu before him due to his question marks (his failure to dominate weak opponents and his raw traits). He will be due to his overall package: his combination of skills, athleticism, size, and character is a recipe for success. He has the outside shot to spread the floor, but he also has the ability to get to rack and finish with his extraordinary athleticism. Right now he might be a little on the skinny side but he has the frame to put weight on pretty easily. With that added strength he would then be much more dangerous player as he would be able to out-muscle his opponents. Now you might think that most SFs in the NBA have great strength and he would have average strength but he claims that he is a natural SG so therefore he would definitely be able out-muscle his opponents at times. Also, he has the raw tools to be a good NBA defender and if he works at it, it could be a strength of his. If he is surrounded by the right coaching staff and players and works hard, he will definitely be an all-star imo.
Comparison: Danny Granger
4. Xavier Henry: he is a safe pick who will be a nice role player for a playoff team, but if your picking this high and you have uncertainty regarding your roster, imo you need to take a player with more potential because high lottery picks are had to turn into stars not bench guys. If i'm the jazz i would take henry over george, but not if I am the clippers and most lottery teams.
Comparison: Michael Redd (if he were a role player)
5. Gordon Hayward: In my opinion, this guy won't be great in the nba because his best trait is his shooting and his numbers aren't elite for a shooter, they're actually mediocre! I mean thats concerning as is his athleticism. Sure he plays tennis and he can dunk but thats not what matters in the NBA. Its about getting by people and being able to get the shot you want when you want, and he doesn't have that. He is very averaging in playmaking and defense also. I just don't see the upside in Hayward.
Comparison: Rich man's Luke Walton
6. Luke Babbit: Everyone will hate me for this but this guy will flat out bust. why? he just isn't that great. Stop looking at the combine numbers, stop looking at the highlight reels, and look at the in game footage. He frankly is just a workout wonder. Plus his defense is less than satisfactory. I mean he'll probably be a good bench guy for the jazz or another team with a good system in place, but he can't start. And if you disagree, you can't seriously tell me that you watched this guy often are basing your opinions on something or then highlights. Watch for yourself:
Comparison: Sort of like Kyle Korver (in terms of role)
Finally someone agrees with me. I think the guys is too slow to play defense on the greatest majority of SF in the league. That is the problem. Sure he is a great shooter and has some intensity, but no way I would use a lottery pick on him. He is a Jason Kapono to me. Useful...but off the bench
Hayward is nothing like walton, they are just both white. I think thats why you came up with that comparison
I think he means a Walton like impact, plus theyare both decent shooters and passers....
explain the babbitt ne then.
What I mean by babbit korver is that he will be a long SF 3 point specialist like korver. he won't be very effective starting bcuz he was limited to staying on the perimeter while in college so what makes you think he'll suddenly become an all-around player that can drive to hole against stronger, more athletic competition. Babbit is overrated just like Korver was when he was starting out.