share

Shabazz Not A Future Star

don042488
don042488's picture
Registered User
Joined: 12/03/2008
Posts: 602
Points: -2092
Offline
Shabazz Not A Future Star

Shabazz looks very one dimensional as a player so far, apart from scoring he doesn't bring much to the table...Even Carmelo, Durant, and Beasley who were monsters their freshmen year, passed the ball more than him...smh This site has him compared to Kerry Kittles & Sprewell, to me he's more like CJ Miles with more motor, that's his best comparison to me...He's going to turn out to be a cocky, selfish, overrated role player, who's just a spot up shooter, who thinks he's all that from the high school hype...CJ Miles isn't like that from a personality standpoint, but his game & Shabazz's game is very reminiscent, both lefty's too


llperez
llperez's picture
Registered User
Joined: 04/13/2009
Posts: 11894
Points: 11689
Offline
It's early to write him off.

It's early to write him off. Yes he is one dimensional. But when that one dimension is putting up buckets in a variety of jumpers runners, post ups and run outs, that one dimension can still lead to great succes ad an NBA player. I would say Michael redd was pretty one dimensional, but still a major contributor and all-star.

Scotty5000
Registered User
Joined: 11/13/2012
Posts: 58
Points: 9
Offline
He will get handled in the L.

He will get handled in the L.

hoopscop
Registered User
Joined: 01/09/2011
Posts: 100
Points: 189
Offline
Shabazz will turn out great

He has all the intangibles to get better, much better. He has the motor, the work ethic, desire to get better. The guy basically couldnt practice or work regularly out for 4 months prior to the season because of a high ankle sprain, then his shoulder injury, all the NCAA investigation and probability to sit out the season. And Ben Howland, well look at all his teams, Pitt or UCLA, its kind of ugly and every kid he had looks kind of underwhelming.
No I have no doubt whatsoever that Shabazz will be a very good NBA player, an efficient high level scorer.

AwardedBaller
AwardedBaller's picture
Registered User
Joined: 04/03/2012
Posts: 172
Points: 1023
Offline
Shabazz is cocky? Listen to

Shabazz is cocky? Listen to his inteeviews, read his articles and what others say about him. He's a soft spoken kid who knows how to score. Yeah, he gets mad here and there but what basketball player doesent? Even with that being said he has Tourette's syndrome that contribute's to that. Scoring is his role on the team, UCLA didn't recruit him to be a Magic Johnson. Everyone ignores the fact he also plays strap defense. Just because he's not overly aggressive in the passing lane and doesn't reach every second in on ball defense segments doesn't mean his a bad defender. Stop paying attention to the box score and watch some games.

Ghost01
Ghost01's picture
Registered User
Joined: 11/30/2010
Posts: 2715
Points: 1716
Offline
Yes Shabazz is cocky. Site

Yes Shabazz is cocky. Site the end of the Washington game. I know he will be a scorer at the next level, but lets not award this guy like many on this site do that he is definitely the best player in the league. And since when was getting points on "run outs" a skill? I thought that was just the easy way for D Wade to keep his statistics relevant?

Lebron's Hairline
Lebron's Hairline's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/07/2012
Posts: 2152
Points: 5928
Offline
Dang is everyone forgetting

Dang is everyone forgetting that he's a freshman?!?!?!?! It's remarkable that he's scoring so efficient despite not getting many touches on offense, yeah his game needs work but he's only 18

For_Never_Ever
For_Never_Ever's picture
Registered User
Joined: 08/14/2011
Posts: 2955
Points: 3668
Offline
I see him being a very good

I see him being a very good role player, because he lacks the ability to create for himself and using his right hand for anything related to basketball. I've noticed all you need to do is play his left hand, he'll quickly take a rushed shot or pass the ball. I have yet never seen him use is right hand even in mixxtapes. Can he become All star calibur perimeter players when defenders don't have to respect you're dribble ?

Meditated States
Meditated States's picture
Registered User
Joined: 04/29/2009
Posts: 2797
Points: 575
Offline
I like

What I saw defensively from Shabazz most of the games I have seen. He is solid. On O he is good by college standards but needs to improve his right hand. Don't sleep on his D cuz it could end up being his best NBA attribute. I honestly expect a 13 ppg defensive type NBA player.

Siggy
Registered User
Joined: 02/25/2012
Posts: 2926
Points: 1731
Offline
Shabazz has all the tools but

Shabazz has all the tools but he has not been a good defender for UCLA. He doesn't nearly play with the same intensity on that end of the floor. His awareness isn't great and he isn't disruptive either. On a poor defensive team filled with bad individual defenders, he has the worst defensive rating among the rotation players.

As for the topic, I don't think that saying that Shabazz won't be a star is "writing him off." How many stars are likely to come out of this draft? 1..and that's a maybe. I still think Shabazz projects to be a good scorer, but just being a good scorer doesn't make that player a star.

Chewy
Chewy's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/10/2010
Posts: 1310
Points: 3615
Offline
Shabazz

is the second coming of Xavier Henry. Both are strong. Both are athletic. Both are completly left hand dominate. Both fall in love with their jump shot. Both provide little to none in anything other than scoring.

I was big on Henry and though he would be a stud in the league and that his style was more suited for the NBA than KU. However, he still hasn't done anything that really inspires confidence. That's why I have never been high on Bazz (much rather than Wiggins or Parker) because that comparison has been in my head since I saw his first mixtape on Youtube to now watching him at UCLA.

Sidenote: Jabari is NOT ATHLETIC ENOUGH to be compared to Carmelo. His game has Paul Pierce written all over him!

Siggy
Registered User
Joined: 02/25/2012
Posts: 2926
Points: 1731
Offline
I'm not crazy about that

I'm not crazy about that comparison. Not only was Xavier 1 dimensional, but he's passive as well. Shabazz will never be mistaken for being passive on the offensive end. Shabazz is also the more versatile scorer who can score from different spots on the floor via off the ball cuts, crashing the o-glass or posting up. Xavier pretty much spotted up and that's it.

For_Never_Ever
For_Never_Ever's picture
Registered User
Joined: 08/14/2011
Posts: 2955
Points: 3668
Offline
He doesn't have that quick

He doesn't have that quick step like Melo, but he looks taller and longer could end up being bigger then Carmelo too. They have their differences, but if I had to compare Melo to anyone in the league it would be Pierce. Both guys are all around good shooter, good post players, good foot work, baseline drives, spin moves and get to the free throw line. Pierce became a more complete player later on in his career by focusing more on defense. Carmelo has yet to do that.

JoeJo
Registered User
Joined: 08/02/2011
Posts: 175
Points: 83
Offline
You think Shabazz is taller

You think Shabazz is taller than Carmelo? Shabazz measured out at 6'4.75 in barefeet and Carmelo at 6'6.5 in barefeet. Even without those measurements, Carmelo clearly looks like the bigger guy to the naked eye.

khaled_a_d
Registered User
Joined: 02/25/2010
Posts: 510
Points: 436
Offline
The problem with Xavier Henry

The problem with Xavier Henry is that he forget how to shoot the ball once he entered the league while he was drafted b/c he is a shooter ,hopefully that isn't the case with Shabazz

Meditated States
Meditated States's picture
Registered User
Joined: 04/29/2009
Posts: 2797
Points: 575
Offline
Bazz will be a good NBA defender

One on one. He will get the scorers in the L. Just a scouting look. I would like to see him improve his mid range. His mid J falling all the time would be huge for him in the NBA for his scoring prospects. I still like his individual D as what I would go back to a team and say as his highest potential point. Scoring in the L is tougher to do at a high level from the positions he would play. He is only a freshmen though so he has potential on O but I don't see 20 PG yet. Defender who will look better on O if he is set up for easy finishes and spot ups on the wing.

Siggy
Registered User
Joined: 02/25/2012
Posts: 2926
Points: 1731
Offline
I still don't see how you can

I still don't see how you can come to the conclusion that he's a defender who'll look better on O, when he's not a good defender and hasn't been one all yr. Worst defensive rating among UCLA's rotation players. 7th on the team in defensive win shares. He's neither solid 1 on 1 nor disruptive off the ball, not causing TOs or getting deflections.

jwostrum
Registered User
Joined: 08/06/2012
Posts: 332
Points: -106
Offline
he has been getting steals

siggy, shabazz has had at least 1 steal in 6 of the last 7 ucla games. so i would say he has been getting quite a few deflections and steals as of late. he has not been a bad defender all year. he has been improving all year. he's not a great defender, but he's not a bad defender either.

Siggy
Registered User
Joined: 02/25/2012
Posts: 2926
Points: 1731
Offline
IMO the only above average

IMO the only above average defenders on that entire UCLA roster are Drew and Powell. The rest are below average or bad.

jwostrum
Registered User
Joined: 08/06/2012
Posts: 332
Points: -106
Offline
hes average

hes an average defender and improving. he has the potential to be a good not great defender, but hes not below average or bad. he went to ucla to improve his defence and he has. he would not and howland would not let him completly ignor that aspect of his game. heres a tip too, theres a reason spell check does not correct IMO, its not a word.

Siggy
Registered User
Joined: 02/25/2012
Posts: 2926
Points: 1731
Offline
He's not an average

He's not an average defender.
If he's average on a bad defensive team then why is he last among UCLA rotation players in defensive rating? Why is he only ahead of Tony Parker in the rotation in Defensive Win Shares? Coincidence?

Not sure if you're being facetious so here's a tip for you: IMO = in my opinion.

jwostrum
Registered User
Joined: 08/06/2012
Posts: 332
Points: -106
Offline
he is average now

just because his numbers don't show it does not mean hes not an average defender. he started of the year as a bad defender because he never worked on it in high school and he was out of shape, so thats why his defensive numbers are not great. like i said if you look at 6 of his last 7 games he HAS been getting more steals and he competes hard on defence, his technique still needs a little more work. but he has improved a lot since his first game this year. do you ever even watch ucla games? and for someone who people look to on this site for draft info, you might want to just right out in my opinion if you ever want to be a sports writer and not just on here aruing with people like me. you wont find a sports writer on the interernet that uses IMO in their articles, they would not get the stuff published and would be told to fix it.

Siggy
Registered User
Joined: 02/25/2012
Posts: 2926
Points: 1731
Offline
Then what else could those

Then what else could those number mean? Shabazz wasn't just a bad defender to begin the season. He was awful. Here's another number for you. Vs lesser competition in UCLA's out of conference schedule, Shabazz' PPP (Points Per Possession) against was 1.067. That number put him in the bottom 10-15% in the entire nation as a defender. That is really bad. So you're saying that in a little over a month, Shabazz has transformed from an awful defender to average? It's hard to imagine a player improving as much in such a short span of time in an area it takes years for NBA players to go from bad to average.

You don't need to tell me how I should or shouldn't post on a message board. These aren't published works. I'm not a sports writer and I don't plan on being one. It ain't my fault that you can't recognize shorthand that everyone else on the Internet can recognize.

jwostrum
Registered User
Joined: 08/06/2012
Posts: 332
Points: -106
Offline
yea he has improved a lot

numbers are not everything. go to espn and you will see his number of steals have been getting better each game. he has been learning better defence. once he gets to the nba his game is really gonna take off all-around because he has great work ethic and wants to be the best player he can be. regardless of what you say he has been getting a lot more steals and has been an agressive defender. his technique could still use some more polish, but hes 19. im glad your not gonna become a sports writer because you would never make it siggy. i know because i actually have family that are sport writers. stick to your all day job on here siggy, your not chad ford. average defender, future good defender.

Siggy
Registered User
Joined: 02/25/2012
Posts: 2926
Points: 1731
Offline
No, numbers aren't

No, numbers aren't everything, but if I described why I think he's a bad defender (like I touched on above, talking about his bad awareness and instincts) then that's just opinion and conjecture based on an eyeball test. The difference b/t my argument and yours is that I'm backing mine up with stats. More steals? And? As if there's a direct correlation b/t steals and being a good/improved defender. A player can be a below average to bad defender and still get steals because they gamble for them. Jennings, Harden, Collison, today's version of J.Kidd for example are all below average defenders who get steals. A bad defender cannot gamble his way into having a much improved PPP against, DWS or even DEF rating (the latter since it's based on points per possession).
If Shabazz went from a crappy defender to an average one, which is a huge leap in ability in the span of a month, then we'd be hearing about it.

Here's a pro tip. If your argument is weak, give up. Lame attempts to discredit a poster are nothing but misdirection to draw attention away from your weak argument. Am I supposed to be disappointed that a single poster on a message board doesn't believe that I couldn't succeed in something I'd never pursue? I'm gutted dude.

jwostrum
Registered User
Joined: 08/06/2012
Posts: 332
Points: -106
Offline
yea sure

when you have no steals per game and you start getting 1 or 2 steals nearly every game then i would say his gambles are paying off which shows he is picking the right time to gamble, and that to me shows improved knowledge on d. you can throw out all your little stats, try watching a game and watching him play. you might gain some more insight on him. by the way siggy, i don't take supposed pro tips from amaetures like yourself. everybody else may think your some king on here but im not one of those people. i got my opinion on what ive seen and your not gonna change that because your ego is up in space.

BothTeamsPlayedHard
BothTeamsPlayedHard's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 3415
Points: 4668
Offline
To be fair, Melo didn't start

To be fair, Melo didn't start passing the ball until late in the year when teams made him do it. Beasley and Durant didn't pass much either unless it was a blowout one way or the other. I prefer guys who move the ball and think the game is much easier when it does, but part of the numbers issue is that UCLA doesn't really have much in the way of shooters. Jordan Adams came down to earth since Pac 12 play began (38 percent shooting and 19 percent from three). Kyle Anderson, Norman Powell, and LD3 aren't making shots in any consistent way. When they aren't getting transition points, they need Muhammad and Travis Wear to do the scoring for them, and to their credit it is hard to fault their results.

In this upcoming draft, it is hard to find a better and more certain prospect.

BA30
Registered User
Joined: 02/03/2012
Posts: 172
Points: 220
Offline
UCLA's Offense

UCLA's offense is just embarrassing. Watching that game against Washington made me cringe. They don't get Shabazz in good positions to be successful and he is still putting up the kind of numbers that he is this season. He has to create almost everything himself and it appears there are many selfish players on that team who don't understand the concept of moving the ball.

Side note: the guy has a right to be a little irritated he didn't get the ball at the end of the Washington game. You get the ball in the hands of your best player to win it at any level of basketball. He was wide open at the top of the key to get the ball and they just ignored him. Yes the result was a UCLA win, but it wasn't a win to be proud of that is for sure.

llperez
llperez's picture
Registered User
Joined: 04/13/2009
Posts: 11894
Points: 11689
Offline
i dont know if your comment

i dont know if your comment about the ucla offense being embarrassing based on the washington game or more then that, but i think the washington game was the worst i have seen the bruins play this entire season on offense. Very lucky to get a win with the way they played that game.

And you are right it was not a win to be proud of. BUt i disagree shabazz was wide open. He barely got free and had the defender on his hip while his momentum was carrying him away from the basket. He would have had to fight to get a look up even if he got it. Drew made sure his team got the last shot in tie game which is what you are supposed to do and he made the play. Bazz has no right to be mad on that play.

BA30
Registered User
Joined: 02/03/2012
Posts: 172
Points: 220
Offline
I admit

I admit that this is the only game I have had the opportunity to watch of UCLA because they are never on national television. So perhaps you are right about this being their worst offensive game.

I also went back and watched the last play again. You are correct, wide open is not an appropriate description, but he was open enough to receive the ball and make a move similar to the one Drew made to get his team the win.

I guess my point is, I am not going to write off Shabazz and his surplus of talent because of a single game.

BA30
Registered User
Joined: 02/03/2012
Posts: 172
Points: 220
Offline
I admit

I admit that this is the only game I have had the opportunity to watch of UCLA because they are never on national television. So perhaps you are right about this being their worst offensive game.

I also went back and watched the last play again. You are correct, wide open is not an appropriate description, but he was open enough to receive the ball and make a move similar to the one Drew made to get his team the win.

I guess my point is, I am not going to write off Shabazz and his surplus of talent because of a single game.

Sewok15
Sewok15's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/19/2011
Posts: 1885
Points: 3407
Offline
If you are going to be one

If you are going to be one dimensional scoring 20 points a game is probably the best dimension to go for. It will get you hype and make you money but I don't see him as a consistent winner at the NBA level unless he has great teammates and can be the 3rd best player. He will score pretty much immediately in the NBA but his career will depend on how quickly he picks up the other aspects of the game.

SgtMcSquiggles
Registered User
Joined: 01/31/2013
Posts: 19
Points: -21
Offline
I agree 100% with you. I see

I agree 100% with you. I see Bazz as a scorer off of the bench. He just can't do anything other than score. He can't defend, rebound, or pass. The only reason i even see him being an NBA prospect is because he can score.

omphalos
omphalos's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/19/2010
Posts: 3188
Points: 4524
Offline
Why do people automatically

Why do people automatically assume that if a guy isn't a 1st option he's best suited as a scorer off the bench? Now, I personally think Bazz can still be a franchise player, but assuming I didn't, there's no reason he couldn't function as a second option in the starting lineup.

He's not a ball-dominant guy like a Tyreke Evans, he runs off screens, moves without the ball, spots up and can post-up too. Nothing about that says 6th man; it says scoring starter. If you look at what he brings to the table, he's almost the prototypical NBA SG, assuming he isn't required to create for others and has a talented playmaker alongside him to get better looks.

He's a guy who can complement almost any sort of player because the way he scores doesn't require incessant dribbling for him to be effective.

Paul George wasn't looked at as a guy who could create his own shot coming into the NBA, but here he stands before us an accomplished scorer who has brought his handle to a whole other level since entering the NBA. People can talk about how Bazz can't go right until they are blue in the face, but that's only a temporary thing, he'll be taught how to go right sooner or later, and he already has so many intangibles that when learns the things that can be taught, he'll be a star.

SgtMcSquiggles
Registered User
Joined: 01/31/2013
Posts: 19
Points: -21
Offline
The problem isn't that he

The problem isn't that he can't create his own shot. The problem with Bazz, and the reason i believe he will be a bench scorer, is that he can't do anything other than score and is a liability rebounding, and on defense. I think a good comparison to him is a Jodie Meeks or Nick Young type player.

llperez
llperez's picture
Registered User
Joined: 04/13/2009
Posts: 11894
Points: 11689
Offline
those are bad comparisons. I

those are bad comparisons. I mean bazz attacks the paint and plays a lot down low so the meeks comparison is off and he is a different style player then young. He is already better as a freshman then young ever was in 3 years of college ball at usc. Give bazz some time before we decide he does nothign but score and is a role player.

SgtMcSquiggles
Registered User
Joined: 01/31/2013
Posts: 19
Points: -21
Offline
Honestly I don't really care

Honestly I don't really care about how a player get his points, but i would rather look at their 2 point percents and 3 point percents to see their efficiency. While Bazz is a significantly better rebounder than Meeks (6.5 rebounds/40 compared to 3.9 rebounds/40) and that does show he plays more physically, but he is still a very poor rebounder compared to great NBA SGs. But where i draw the comparison is that neither of them do anything other than score, but they do score well (Bazz has a 48 2 point % and a 43 3point% while Meeks had a 52 2p% and a 40 3p%). And obviously nothing is set in stone yet, but Bazz hasn't shown anything in the ncaa that would give teams any reason to draft him top 8.

RSS: Syndicate content