I'm having a tough time gauging how Tony Mitchell will play once in the league. I've watched quite a bit of tape on him and there's no denying that he is a special athlete. Unfortunately, his ball skills are very low. He can dribble the ball in transition, but with no left-hand he is completely unable to dribble through traffic.
He put up decent stats against good teams, but they were all major blowout losses. For example, in their loss against Saint Louis,
the starters sat for a large portion of the game. How do you guys see Mitchell panning out? I can't help but see the similarities between him and Brandan Wright. Long athletes who glide down the court, just can't score.
Every player in the NBA is an athlete. They need skill to stick. Honestly, I think Mitchell will be gone in less than 5 years. If he slips to 2nd round, he may never make the league. 1st rounders have too much invested in them, they are given extra chances.
I don't see the Brandan Wright comparison. Physically there is a huge difference. Wright's main problem early on in his career was that he was an inside scorer who was physically weak so he couldn't play his game. That, along with injuries. Mitchell's not a post player and he won't have an issue with strength early on since he's already 235+lbs of granite. Scoring should be the least of Tony Mitchell's worries. He should just focus on rebounding, defense and making athletic plays.. Basically, if he just focuses on what he CAN do instead of proving he can do what he's not good at, then he can be a valuable role player.
He's got the athleticism, strength, rebounding and shot-blocking instincts to be a defensive minded energy player. The question is if he'd be satisfied with that type of role and does he have the mindset to be that type of player. I think he's already accepted the fact that he's a PF at the NBA level so that's a good start.
Wright is taller, but I do think that both Mitchell and Wright have similar limitations. They both were/are considered tweeners who displayed rebounding and defensive potential at the college level.
I think Mitchell can be a decent rebounder early on in his career. I do think he has to develop offensively though. Teams can't afford to cart out someone who is a complete no-show on offense. Reggie Evans is the exception to this rule since his tenacity and girth allow him to contribute in a variety of ways.... Mitchell hasn't come close to displaying that kind of toughness. So if he can't score, he'll be in trouble IMO.
How was Wright a tweener? He was a skinny PF who liked to operate on the block. He didn't have any SF skills. Mitchell doesn't have many SF skills either outside of the ability to occasionally hit an outside jumper, which is why it's a good thing he's seemingly accepted that he's a NBA PF.
Mitchell does need to develop offensively, but in the meantime he should just focus in games on the things that he can do.
If he doesn't improve much offensively, I still think he can be a valuable role player. Offensively, if he just scores in transition, crashes the glass, makes himself available on offense while occasionally hitting the open J, he won't be too much of a liability.
He doesn't need to be a tough guy like Reggie Evans. He's a much better athlete with better coordination and skill. He doesn't have to be a "grunt" guy like that. What he can be is a versatile defender who can make plays in help situations, whether it just be switching out in space or contesting shots in the paint, while rebounding and making athletic plays. That's basically what Josh Smith does (while attempting a bunch of extra crap that he has no business doing). Smith is considered a productive player. A Josh Smith-type player with more self-awareness can be a valuable player. I think Mitchell has that type of potential.
To clarify, I consider Wright a tweener between PF/C. He was suppose to be a 4, but now usually plays the 5 with Dallas.
I like the idea of a Josh Smith ceiling. It would be ideal if he was picked up by the Bulls where he could develop his defensive potential in limited minutes.
Agree with you, thumbs up. Mitchell reminds me of JJ Hickson. Athletic as hell but not skilled enough. He'll probably play some C in the league.
He reminds me of a Thaddeus Young type player a combo forward who will provide a spark off the bench.
There's a brand brand new TM workout/interview up on youtube yesterday. Look it up, i dont want to link to the Other site's work.
His spin move is a blur. His jumper looks more polished, higher release.
I think the embarrassment of last season could be the best thing for him in some ways, super motivated to rehabilitate his rep.
I'm not so sure Bennett is much better overall, considering Mitchell's long term positional versatility and better defense.
Focusing on PF skills with nba coaching will make him quite deadly as a stat stuffing super role player.
Gerald Wallace/Kenyon Martin but doesn't quite have the motor those to did coming into the leagie but I believe his energy level will improve drastically if he's taken by a good team in the late lotto.
Tony Mitchell is a guy that will look like he's improved by miles as soon as he's under a coach that is qualified to run a peewee basketball team.
He can stick in the NBA if he decides to play a Faried type role where he just goes extra hard at rebounding and defense. He will not play C as someone suggested
I've read the Knicks really like him. I don't know if Amare is the mentor type or if Mitchell's attitude is conducive to being a mentee, but that could be a great situation if a few things line up.
Tony Mitchell is a more athletic Chris Singleton with less polish coming out of school.