Scouting Report: Kentavious Caldwell-Pope

Kentavious Caldwell-Pope spent two years at Georgia, after electing to stay with his hometown school despite being named a McDonald's All-American. The decision has kept it from the spotlight, but it didn't make scouts forget about his natural ability to shoot the basketball. Caldwell-Pope earned SEC Player of the Years honors this season - his sophomore year - and scored in double digits every game of the season. In one of the most dysfunctional offenses in a Big 6 conference, KCP still found ways to score every single game.

Its hard to get a read on how good of a feel Kentavious Caldwell-Pope has for things on the offensive end. There weren't many talented players on Georgia's offense and the Bulldogs lacked any kind of rhythm on that end of the court. Their most effective offense play was to get their star player coming off of a screen near the arc in order to set up a long jumper off of either one or two dribbles. It was very ugly basketball, but with a shooter like KCP, he was able to bail them out quite a few times.

While KCP's shot selection has been questioned, it was more a product of the players around him. He did take some bad contested shots in transition, but it was because he knew that was the best look he'd get at the rim the entire possession. Georgia didn't ever create easy looks for themselves and Caldwell-Pope constantly had a man in his face in the halfcourt. The only play Georgia really had to get him open was the aforementioned screen play at the top of the arc and that was extremely predictable.

Smart defenders were able to give KCP a hard time on those plays because KCP generally took one or two horizontal dribbles to his left before shooting a long range jumper. There wasn't much creativeness in his game. Just a constant display of how talented KCP is in making extremely tough shots. Surely Georgia could have done a lot better job getting him open, but KCP could have also done a better job himself moving without the ball. He was forced to post up outside the 3-pt line a lot of the ball or catch the ball 5 feet beyond the arc to even get a touch. Watching Crabbe yesterday to do his scouting report, there is a stark contrast in their feel for the game and ability to move off the ball.

Again, part of this has to do with coaching and teammates. And its up to teams to figure out how much Kentavious Caldwell-Pope can improve with good coaching. But if you look at Caldwell-Pope on the defensive end, it doesn't seem like he has a great feel for the game on that end either. Thats not a positive indicator.

Caldwell-Pope is a faceguarder on defense and gets caught up on overplaying his man. He loses track of the ball very easily and doesn't understand help defense. While Kentavious Caldwell-Pope can be a tenacious defender and take a guy out of the game, he doesn't understand the team concept of defending. He doesn't have a huge wingspan to be a lockdown type in the NBA, so he's really going to have to improve his court awareness.

Compared to Crabbe, he gives a lot more effort but doesn't have the same awareness. Crabbe is kind of the opposite - he can get too caught up in ball watching and lose his man. Crabbe has a perfect frame as a defender, but doesn't have the mentality to be a big time defender. To me, their defense is kind of a wash. You aren't drafting either of these guys because of their defensive abilities.

In terms of offensive skills, Caldwell-Pope struggles to handle the ball. When teams aggressively trap when he's coming off of a screen, he often either makes a bad pass or is forced to pick up his dribble. If he doesn't get to his spot in two dribbles, he has a habit of just picking up the ball. He also doesn't feel comfortable attacking the pick and roll inside the arc, choosing instead to just pull up for jumper after jumper. His dribbles often doesn't get him anywhere vertical - they are more horizontal to the basket.

He does have a good first step and a nice jab step to set up his jumpshot. And he is very good shooting off of one or two dribbles, even when he doesn't get the greatest separation. He especially loves to shoot moving towards his left. KCP isn't a guy that will isolate and use a crossover to create separation however.

His jumpshot is extremely balanced and he gets it off very quickly. He is able to pull up in transition and has the range to pull up from beyond NBA territory. His balance is something you generally don't see from players of his age.

But his balance on his jumpers also has a downside. He doesn't seem to have the ability to shoot in a fluid motion coming off of a screen. He doesn't ever fade from the basket which is something all the great shooters are able to do to get off their shot. KCP is always straight up and down with his shot. With the screens Georgia had to use to get KCP open, its a wonder if a NBA team can/will be willing to put in that much of an effort to create a shot for him. Or if he will be able to improve his game to be able to do it for himself.

Creativity is certainly something he lacks and he appears to be very stiff in the hips. He plays the game very upright and combined with his short arms, it seems to limit his ball handling ability. Caldwell-Pope has good enough hands to get into the lanes - but a lot of that is because of his first step. He is a straight line driver with not much in between game besides his balanced pull up jumpers. Lots of his shots going towards the rim end up being low percentage shots because he doesn't do a good job of gathering himself and slowly plays down. He is, however, able to be an effective finisher in college because of his explosive athleticism.

Passing wise, he makes a lot of lazy passes and doesn't have great vision. He looks to be very one-dimensional as a playmaker. On transition opportunities, he seems just as content to pull up for a quick transition 3 ball versus trying to get all the way to the rim.

There is a lot of intrigue with Caldwell-Pope and in a draft like this, teams are desperate to find guys with enough talent to be taken in the lottery. KCP can be one of those guys that at least looks the part and has the shooting ability. He is athletic, a great shooter, can hit off the dribble, and has the ability to be a good finisher at the rim. He also gives good effort and there is a mystery to him about how much better he can get with improved coaching/teammates. He is viewed to have more potential than other shooting guards ranked below him because he has the best combination of shooting ability and athleticism.

Thats the basis of the hype around him. A more likely scenario for Caldwell-Pope is him turning into a guy like Nick Young. Someone who lacks a high basketball IQ and takes a lot of ill-advised jumpers. These kind of guys are very one dimensional and only add scoring, but don't even always do so in an efficient matter.

The more I look at these shooting guard prospects, the more I am convinced that Allen Crabbe is a better pick than Caldwell-Pope. Crabbe isn't as easy of a sell as a lottery pick, but he is the better overall player. And if you can get Crabbe 20th versus Caldwell-Pope in the lottery, you are getting a LOT better value.

To read my previous scouting report on Caldwell-Pope from last summer, click here.

Stock Attack: Michael Carter-Williams

When I'm evaluating point guard prospects, I take a especially close look at their ability to control the tempo of the game, I also like to see how they handle adversity, run the pick and roll, change speeds, and balance scoring and passing. A point guard cannot disappear during the game. A point guard has to be the rock of the team. That is what I am looking for, guys with those traits.

Trey Burke has all of that. When it comes to Michael Carter-Williams, I'm hesitant to say he possesses any of those qualities. He disappeared from plenty of games. His passing consisted of a lot of drive and kicks and transition feeds. Yes, MCW did post great assists numbers. But how the assists were obtained are more important. When I look at MCW, I ask if he can consistently make plays out of the pick and roll and find teammates. Or if he can control the pace, set the offense, and make the simple plays. Where is his mid-range game? Carter-Williams makes a lot of spectacular plays and is a helluva talent, but he hasn't shown he can be a model of consistency. That is troubling from a point guard prospect.

There were a lot of games where Carter-Williams was quiet for an entire half and dominated the other. For some guys, thats just a matter of them knowing when to take over. For Carter-Williams, it was more of him being taken out of the game by the defense.

We are talking about a guy whose skills aren't up to par. He shoots a very flat shot with inconsistent mechanics. Some say he was a better shooter in HS, but that doesn't mean anything to me after he's had more than a full season at the college level. I saw that he did shoot well in Nike's EYBL events in AAU, but I don't take much stock into that. Those rims are very kind to make the players look better and benefit guys who don't shoot with much arc.

If you can't make shots consistently, the rest of your game better be refined. Carter-Williams is not. His ball handling skills are weak and magnified by his lack of strength. When he drives and the defense doesn't collapse on him to give him a passing option, he struggles to finish. He does have a nice floater, but can't get it off consistently. He lacks an explosive first step. Instead, Carter-Williams has to rely on his above average quickness for his size and a solid crossover. It works, but its much more of a shooting guard move than a point guard.

A point guard shouldn't need to overdribble to get his shot off. A point guard should understand how to change speeds and work the pick and roll game effectively. Burke was never taken out of games because he could always makes plays if he got a ball screen. Carter-Williams has a tougher task to operate in the pick and roll due to his height and he doesn't do himself any favors either. He doesn't change speeds well or mix up his strides. He's very shaky with the ball when two defenders are around him and his passing instincts look much more raw when it comes to more advanced plays.

Again, the drive and kick play is the most simple way for a point guard to get assists. Its the most basic play that any point guard should be able to execute. Carter-Williams can do it with the best of them in college, but  that doesn't make him a point guard. That is just the initial layer to being a point guard and when you look for more layers to his game, they aren't present.

Carter-Williams also struggled mightily against ball pressure as you saw if you watched the Big East Championship game against Louisville. For the first half, MCW and Cuse played well enough to have the lead. In the second half, Louisville turned up their defensive pressure and completely blew out Syracuse. The difference in halves was remarkable and the biggest blame goes to the point guard.

Then there was the Final 4 game against Michigan. Carter-Williams fouled out and went to the bench crying as if the game was over. Except it wasn't and Syracuse almost won the game. But there he was sitting on the bench with his head buried in a towel instead of cheering on his team. A leader doesn't act as if the game is over because he fouled out. Throughout the year, Syracuse was one of the most up and down teams in the country and there wasn't much leadership coming from their point guard. For a guy who should be the rock of the team, Carter-Williams was one of the most inconsistent players - both with his play on the court and in his emotions. You shouldn't ever get too high or too low as a basketball player - especially as a point guard. Its yet another thing Michael Carter-Williams has to overcome.

He gets some comparisons to Shaun Livingston but Livingston was a great athlete coming out of high school while Carter-Williams is just "good" athletically. Also, Carter-Williams wasn't even considered a point guard coming out of HS and there was a reason for that. Shaun Livingston had such pure point guard skills he was compared to Magic Johnson.

Defensively, Michael Carter-Williams has all the tools and good instincts to go with it. He had plenty of steals operating at the top of the zone and while his length and the system certainly helped, his ability to play the passing lanes should somewhat translate to the NBA. The biggest worry about his defense though is that he doesn't have experience at a high level playing man to man defense. And in recent times, Syracuse players have really struggled to make the adjustment. Even guys like Wes Johnson who people believed had all the athletic tools to make up for player in a zone. Right now, its just a very risky proposition to take a Syracuse player for his defensive ability. Carter-Williams could turn out to be very good defensively, but I wouldn't view it as a sure thing.

Potential is a word that is often associated with Michael Carter-Williams when you point out all these flaws. Sure, he has the height that most other point guards don't have. You can't teach size. But its also very hard to learn and improve all his other weaknesses when there are so many. There is potential and then there is the chances a player reaches his potential. I understand that you can't count out a guy improving his skills, but you can say a guy won't grow, but I'll take players with the necessary skills and ability over a guy with height anyday. Those attributes are very hard to improve as well. And at the age of 21, Michael Carter-Williams is far from the youngest player in the draft.

Comparing Robert Covington to Danny Granger

I wanted to give a scouting report of Covington and the best way to truly access his game in my opinion is to compare him against Granger, who reminds me a ton of Covington. Using DraftExpress's college scouting report of Granger, I'll breakdown how they are similar and also the differences that could prevent Covington from achieving the same success.

"Granger has a prototypical body for an NBA small forward. He has good size and strength at 6-8, 225 pounds, a solid wingspan and very solid athletic ability. He is smart and smooth, but very physical, and has fantastic footwork to go along with an excellent (and very quick) vertical leap."

Robert Covington came out of high school at a paltry 190 pounds but has gained 30 pounds in the last three season, bringing him up to 225 pounds. His frame doesn't look much different than Granger's. Both of them are built really solid and by the time Covington is drafted, he should have no problem being near Granger's combine weight. Covington is also listed at 6'9'', slightly taller than Granger and possesses a nice wingspan. I'd consider both to be similar athletes - very solid and smooth yet not freakish. But their combination of size, athleticism, and coordination make them a rare catch.

Granger might have been more physical, as he was more of a post player in his first few seasons before transferring to New Mexico State, but Covington is no softy. He never hesitates to put a body on someone. Definitely no concern there at small forward - he is above average if anything. He also has good footwork from the perimeter, threatening the offense with multiple potential moves with the ball. Again, his footwork doesn't touch Granger's in the post as Covington doesn't operate from the post much, but thats not completely relevant when discussing small forwards.

Covington is a quick leaper as well and he averaged 1.7 blocks per 40 minutes (pace adjusted as always) to prove it. In Granger's junior season, he had 1.8 rejections per game.

"What makes Granger an especially intriguing player for playoff teams who are picking in the 2nd half of the 1st round (15-30) is the fact that he is so versatile. He can score from anywhere on the floor, create his own shot, defend, rebound, block shots, come up with steals, and pass very well."

I could have very easily wrote that last quote word for word while switching Granger for Covington. Versatility is the name of both of their games. The are stat sheet stuffers - guys who can average 2 steals and blocks a game while getting rebounds and covering both perimeter and post players. Covington has no problem getting his shot up anywhere on the court, possessing a good crossover and the balance to rise and shoot off the dribble. He is a very smooth shooter who can hit the mid-range jumper and come off screens to hit 3s. He also can drive and finish at the hoop.

"Granger is a team player, he's extremely competitive and unselfish and only cares about one thing, and that's winning games. He had numerous opportunities to pad his stats and show off for the many NBA scouts who have made the trip to Albuquerque this year, but has shown absolutely no interest in doing so. He has a good court demeanor and plays the game calm, but very confident. In terms of character everyone agrees that Granger is the type of player and person an NBA team can feel comfortable investing money in. He's very smart on and off the court. Granger does not take many bad shots, which is especially impressive if you consider that his team usually needs him to score in bundles to win. Most star players who play for smaller schools don't shoot a great percentage from the field, but Granger is sitting at a very solid 53% on the year."

 Covington has been able to lead Tennessee State to their first winning season since 1995-96 and their first 20 win season in 20 years. If it wasn't for Murray State's big season, they would have been dancing in March. Covington has been a big part in turning around an abysmal program. He has definitely proven he is a winner. In terms of unselfishness, that fits Covington as well. In fact, it would be nice if he was more aggressive. He doesn't force anything or show off to scouts either. In the three games against Murray State, which were the most attended by NBA personnel, Covington shot above 50% in each of them. He always takes good shots and plays with a similar demeanor as Granger. As a fellow star player at a small school, Covington joins Granger on the rare list of players that shoot a good percentage from the field - shooting 53% as well. How about that?

"He is a very good passer with nice court vision and a knack for putting the ball exactly where his teammates like it, especially when it comes to feeding the post. He prefers to make the simple pass, but can also throw up good lob passes for the alleyoop dunk. At times he can be a little too unselfish even, making the extra pass when his team would clearly benefit from him trying to use his skills to take over the game. This is a borderline strength/weakness on the NBA level, though, especially considering what his role on the floor will be."

Here I would say there is a bit of a discrepancy. Covington's passing isn't anything Id write home about. He's a solid passer, but from what Ive seen, not to the extend that DraftExpress described Granger. His unselfishness can be a positive in the same way Granger's is in the NBA, though. Makes him a good complimentary wing.

"Defensively, his team plays a lot of zone, but he shows excellent potential in this area in the rare opportunity he gets to guard the other team's star player. New Mexico wisely saves his energy for the offensive end where they need him more, and therefore can not afford to get in foul trouble either. When he does get to play the type of tough man to man defense he seems to enjoy, though, he really shines. His combination of strength, length, athletic ability, intensity, determination and excellent footwork give him the potential to be a very good defender on the NBA level once he is fully unleashed. These same skills along with his good hands and the ability to elevate quickly off the floor also make him a very good rebounder as well, pulling down nine rebounds or more 17 times so far this season. He is also a terrific shotblocker on the college level thanks to his wingspan and excellent leaping ability, but also has very nice timing to really intimidate and alter shots at the rim. He rotates well and possesses a solid understanding of where to place himself in a zone defense, while also showing good leadership skills in directing his teammates on this side of the floor. He anticipates well and knows how to get in the passing lanes, coming up with many steals and igniting the fast break."

Covington faces the same problem of playing a lot of zone, but at times in big games, such as against Murray State, he was the guy they trusted to cover Isaiah Canaan. He definitely has a good feel on the defensive end and makes a lot of plays happen and his versatility is never a negative. He's a great college defender who should be a fine perimeter defender in the NBA. While Granger was raved about in this section defensively, he never became an elite defender so I would say they are in the same wavelength here. Granger's physical tools are slightly better, but its pretty close across the board.

"Offensively, he has a wide variety of skills he can use to score, although none of them can be considered too polished right now. He likes to use his strength and footwork to back his man down towards the basket, finishing in a variety of ways (spin moves, around the hoop thanks to his wingspan. He can put the ball on the floor and take the ball strong to the basket, finishing with contact if necessary. His range has improved dramatically over the years, a testament to his work ethic, going from hitting 9 threes in his first two seasons at a 24% clip to shooting 44% from behind the arc on over three attempts per game. He has very good mechanics and a high release on his jump shot. He is also pretty solid from the line at 74% and possesses a decent mid-range game."

This is where Covington's more perimeter oriented play in college helps him out. While Granger had the advantage in the post, Covington has had more time to adjust to playing small forward. There has never been a question about Covington's shot, as he is an excellent shooter, especially with his feet set. He is very smooth running around screens and has a quick trigger. Granger's high release is true for Covington as well. For Granger, he quickly turned into this kind of player when he went to the NBA, so while Covington seemingly had the edge in college, I think he'd be happy being able to do the things Granger can do shooting wise in the NBA. And with his range and ability to get his shot off, he should have no problem being a threat from deep. From the free throw line, Covington was slightly better but failed to get to the line as much.

In terms of taking the ball to the hoop, Covington has shown that ability consistently although there are some questions. He is comfortable with taking the ball to the rim, but lacks the ball handling abilities to fully take advantage of it. Right now, he has the confidence and picks his spots well, but improvement is a must. With his size and mid-range game it doesn't need to be great, he just gets the ball stripped to much at this point. He also needs to work on keeping the ball higher and more protected when driving. His left hand isn't far behind his right hand though, as he had no reservations driving either direction.

 Granger's two main weaknesses revolved around his inexperience on the perimeter -

Most of Granger's weaknesses stem from the fact that he was played in the post for most of his collegiate career. His main one is his ball-handling, which will need serious work for him to become a shot-creating threat in the NBA. His left hand is particularly weak, as most everything of what he does off the dribble tends to be with his right. This hurts his slashing ability, as his first step isn't lightning quick as it is.

Granger's perimeter shooting has always been a big concern, but he has worked extremely hard to improve his range and become more consistent in this area. He didn't take a large amount of 3 pointers this year (averaging about 1.5 makes per game) so he will likely have to show that his jump shot is solid in workouts, especially when it comes to shooting off the dribble."

We've touched on these subjects already, but Covington's first step isn't great either. Both did cover some ground on their steps though and could bait the defender with jab steps and the threat of the jumper. Covington may actually have had a better left hand than Granger at this point in time.

Granger became the shooting type and thats where I expect Covington to follow in Granger's footsteps. They took slightly different paths in college as Granger was forced into the post more, but I believe their skillsets ultimately could wind up the same. As you can see in the two pictures, both have a little lean on their jumpers that make it impossible to contest. Being able to get your shot off whenever while being a very high percentage shooter is a recipe for success. Especially when you can fill the stat sheet in other categories as well and play unselfish basketball.

Two small school guys, both wearing number 33, and both were heavily slept on following their junior seasons. I am a firm believer that Covington could surge into the first round like Granger and become a top 20 pick. Becoming an all-star player is a bigger limb to walk out on, but if Covington has a Granger-esque work ethic it is plausible. Either way, Covington is way underrated right now. He is possibly the best senior in the nation.

For Comparisons Sake Part II (Jereme Richmond)

Due to the length of this article, I'll limit this to strictly one player. I feel strongly about this comparison so I have a lot to say.

The first time I saw Richmond play in an Illinois uniform, I thought of Devin Ebanks. As it turned out, they have a lot of similarities on and off the court.

The physical similarities stood out first. They both possess long and slender frames, while playing tougher than they appear. Their toughness benefits them on the offensive glass, where they each pulled down over 3 offensive boards per 40 minutes. Without great skill sets, both players make the most of the opportunities they get to crash the boards and get easy buckets.

As I said, their skill sets aren't great - neither can hit a three pointer and struggle driving all the way to the basket - but they still show good feel on offense. Even without great quickness and handles, they both surprise you with sneaky good passes and cuts around the basket. They both managed a positive assist to turnover ratio and in the process, averaged over 3 assists per 40 minutes (pace adjusted). That is rare to find for two guys with average ball handling abilities at best.

Offensively, their futures revolve around being a slasher. They both have good touch around the hoop and have shown signs of a mid-range game. Their jumpers inside the arc are way too inconsistent now, but both enjoy taking the shot and can learn to convert in the future. And even though I praised their feel for the game, their IQs on offense could use some work. Richmond didn't average 22 minutes a game because he had zero flaws and Ebanks made plenty of boneheaded plays at West Virginia (most notably his decision at the end of the Villanova game late in the year).

Note: Oddly enough, Ebanks and Richmond both averaged 13.9 points per 40 minutes (pace adjusted) their freshman seasons.

While their offense has a ways to go, both have all the physical tools to contribute immediately on defense at the next level. In college, they were forced to play the PF position more often than they would have liked, but they both showed they had the toughness to battle inside. They rebounded extremely well and floated around 1 steals and block per game. In the NBA, they will guard SFs for the most part, and despite great lateral quickness, they both have a shot at being successful in this venture.

If their on court style seems similar, dig further into their off the court track record. While being willing teammates on the court, both have reportedly been in altercations with teammates off the court (Ebanks got in a fight with Truck Bryant, Richmond fought Brandon Paul). Ebanks was also suspended at the beginning of his sophomore year for academic reasons (apparently).

Richmond was no stranger to fights back in high school either, which makes his character perhaps more suspect than Ebanks. Devin seems to be adjusting fine in the NBA. In high school, Richmond also got in a fight with a teammate and in a separate incident, he got kicked off the team after getting into an argument with his coach. His history sends up some major red flags.

Reaching for some more similarities, both of them were big time recruits in high school. Richmond was an All-American and Ebanks most likely would have been if not for his post-grad status.

The draft results may end up being similar as well. Richmond would be lucky to be drafted by a team with the Lakers, and since they have 4 second rounders, his odds aren't awful. Of course, going in the first round would be ideal, and I wouldn't count that out either. Nobody likes to give guaranteed contracts to players with major red flags though.

For Comparisons Sake (Scotty Hopson, Iman Shumpert, Chandler Parsons)

This article is a bit hypocritical, but I enjoyed doing the research in order to find comparisons for this years draft class. So many comparisons get thrown around these days for fans looking for a simple answer, rather than taking the time to read a quality scouting report like those provided by draftexpress.com. There is much more to learn by taking time out to read in-depth reports, as no two players are exactly alike, but not everyone is a draftnik willing to spend their precious time reading delicate scouting reports.

That is where we get comparisons like the famous DeShawn Stevenson to Michael Jordan comparison by nbadraft.net. In their defense, comparisons can include a lot of things. You can compare one player to another because of how good they will be, their production level, college success, or their playing style. Rarely are you going to find two players with all those things in common.

For the sake of this article, I came up with some comparisons, but I will attempt to explain how they are alike as well as their difference. Most of these players are late first to early second round picks because I find that players with star potential are a lot more individually unique. LeBron James, Dirk, Kevin Garnett, Kobe Bryant, Wade, etc are all their own player without anyone matching their style or production. Lesser players have more similarities because they are forced into their own role and style once they hit the NBA.

Note: My research was helped immensley by draftexpress.com's college stats search found here. If you want to search for all the years in their database at once, change the web address from what ever year you originally seached for and insert the word "all". Because I used their database, my comparisons are fairly recent, dating back only to 2001. I wouldn't be able to compare farther back anyway, though, due to my age.

Scotty Hopson
Hopson entered the college ranks as one of the best high school players in the country. He has improved each year at Tennessee, but has failed to become a star. He physically looks the part, but his college numbers are more similar to a role playing shooting type like Thomas Gardner. While Gardner was built for that role, Hopson has a higher ceiling and a different mindset. I find it hard to see him lasting in the league as strictly a shooter, unless his defense picks up.

The two guys I would relate him to over anyone else would be Rodney Carney and Rasual Butler. Carney had even better athleticism than Hopson, but wasn't able to put it to use either. With their average ball handling skills, they were both relegated to more of a jump shooting role, which takes away from their strengths. They both have solid form, but aren't what NBA guys would classify as shooting specialists. They need more from the defensive end. Despite their athletic tools, though, they both put up underwhelming numbers in college in terms of rebounds, steals, and blocks. They have the tools to defend, but haven't shown the consistent effort and awareness to be an above average defender.

With Rasual Butler, I think they played similarity offensive in college. Butler had a more consistent jumpshot, while Hopson is somewhere in between Carney and Butler in that area, although Hopson has also shown some promise with his shot. Statistically, they mirror each other with a bad assist to turnover ratio and the lack of free throw attempts. They both move well, but have proven to be more effective off the pass or one or two dribbles. They aren't the type of guys to make teammates better.

In terms of draft stock, I see Hopson going somewhere in between where Carney (#16) and Butler (#24 in round 2) went. He has above average athleticism, but not on Carney's level where he has a good shot at intriguing a team with a mid-first rounder. He's a late to early second round pick right now.

Iman Shumpert
Shumpert's strength is fairly obvious to even a casual viewer - his defense. Right now he is labeled as a late first to early second round pick which is right where Kyle Weaver's draft range was. Weaver was also a very versatile defender who could handle and distribute offensively, but lacked a jumper or anything to stand out on that end. He has bounced around from the D-League and the NBA, but I believe Shumpert has a lot better chance of making an impact.

While Weaver is a very good defender, he isn't as gifted athletically as Shumpert. When looking at college numbers, he rivals Dwyane Wade (a fellow Chicago guard - he also shutdown another guard out of Chicago, Evan Turner, in last year's tournament) and Rajon Rondo with his ability to rebound and rack of steals from the guard position. Shumpert, Wade, Mardy Collins, and Cedric Jackson are the only guys to have over 7 rebounds (per 40 min pace adjusted) and 3 steals ("") in a college season since 2001.

Not only does his athleticism give him more of a chance to be effective defensively than Weaver, but offensively too. He has a better chance of playing point guard and with Paul Hewitt coaching him his entire college career, I think some qualified NBA coaching could really help him. Shumpert was another top 25 recruit that failed to improve under Hewitt. Guys like Anthony Morrow, Derrick Favors, Will Bynum, Jarrett Jack, Chris Boh, and Thaddeus Young were all better off after leaving for the pros.

For a late first to early second rounder, Shumpert is a good guy to take a flier on. He can step in right away and be a great defender and there is plenty of untapped potential offensively too.

Chandler Parsons
Searching for comparisons for Parsons is a meticulous task, as Parsons is a rare kind of player. He won SEC player of the year despite not being a big time scorer or a great defender. Instead, he showcased a wide variety of skills and unselfishness that ultimately helped his team earn a #2 seed in the NCAA tournament.

The first player that stood out to me as similar was Luke Walton. Walton has probably close to 35 pounds on him which has made him more effective posting up in the triangle offense, but the rest of their games are similar.

Like Parsons, Walton has a great feel for the game which shows up in the win column. During Walton's two years at Arizona, his team reached the Sweet Sixteen twice - one time making it to the Elite Eight. For their high skill level and feel for the game, both surprisingly struggled to shoot the ball, although Walton has gotten better over times. As I've said previously, I think Parsons will become a better shooter too, as he already showed signs of finding his stroke by shooting over 40% from three in conference play this year.

The second, and most accurate comparisons for Parsons, would be Mike Dunleavy. The Dukie, was yet another point forward type that was part of a winning college tradition. His physical strength more closely represent Parsons' than Walton, while Walton and Parson are more similar in their lack of consistent shooting. They all have an outstanding feel for the game in common though.

Parsons may be slightly behind these two in terms of stock, but he did outshine both of them in rebounding despite playing with Macklin, Young, and Tyus. He is one of my sleepers and he would make a fine choice early in the second round. He would fit best with a team that pushes the ball, just like Dunleavy.