Yeah, I understand that reasoning of watching players develop through college is very popular. And for some players, it works. Deron Williams, Brandon Roy, Paul Millsap, and David Lee IMO all played far better in the NBA than they did in college. For many of these players, I was thrown into a curveball: Roy didn't take many threes in college at all, didn't shoot free throws as well, and didn't pass as well. I thought he was a NBA SG. Then all of a sudden, he can play PG in a pinch, hits free throws consistently at a 80% clip, and maintained consistency into NBA three point range. That really, really opened up his game. Deron didn't score that much in college, arguably regressed from his sophomore to junior year in Illinois, for whatever reason was a poor free throw shooter. All we knew was that he was an excellent passer. Then, he draws fouls and hits free throws better in the NBA, opening up his scoring while maintaining his passing game. Paul Millsap looked like a 6'8" center out of college, with center like ballhandling and questionable free throw shooting. He really, really improved his jumper and passing ability in the NBA and became a force of a PF when combined with his always-present elite rebounding and defensive playmaking. David Lee was a special case--whereas most guys fail to maintain their college-level production to the NBA, Lee brought it right with him, arguably even improving his rebounding numbers, and definitely improving his free throw shooting.
And then there are the lotto busts--Melvin Ely. Wes Johnson. Hilton Armstrong. Cedric Simmons. Adam Morrison. Jonny Flynn. I won't go into the boring, mind-numbing details of the red flags and what I thought would translate, never translated to the league--but I was never high on any of these players, for many of the same reasons I've used in evaluating this season's current crop of NBA prospects. Did they look at PG/SG, SF/PF, PF/C tweeners in college? Were they diverse enough in their scoring techniques? How was their shooting? Did they impose their athleticism (rebounding/defensive playmaking) on their court? If they had a huge jump, did their current season look like "the fluke"? These are all questions every scout has to consider for themselves. There were reasons I thought our own Jimmer Fredette (22nd) and Thomas Robinson (26th) were overdrafted, and while Jimmer's eased his way into a shooting role, the consensus in the NBAsphere is that both were overdrafted. Adam Morrison was the scoring king, and I had him as a late 1st rounder. Sure, there's misses like with your Millsaps, Roys, Lees, and the ones that we need to account a UCLA/Florida fudge factor for (Jruth, Westbrook, Afflalo, Haslem, Parsons and David Lee) but for the most part, the analysis tends to be correct. Let's face it--every draft will have busts. There needs to be a means to cut through the clutter.
This year, I really think Isaiah Austin and James McAdoo need another year. Everyone thinks Shabazz is the next Kobe, but Kobe passed way better than that and had far greater reflexes on defense. I know he's shooting very well and will be drafted high, it's just that I'd like to see a lot more dimensions to his game. I don't want to say Shabazz is a me-first player, because at this point he's looking like a DeMar DeRozan/Gerald Green hybrid rather than a Kobe Bryant. I know, unpopular, but if I were a GM I'd be concerned about building a team around him, and I think he could use another year in college to fine-tune those areas. Alex Poythress just appears to be a major tweener to me. He isn't very disruptive on defense, has few ball skills and the jumper's a work in progress. There are a few others in this draft who are dubbed lottery picks who have similar red flags.
I'll start at the bottom and work my way up. At the moment, I'm not a big fan of Austin's. Having said that, he's actually putting up pretty good numbers, and rebounds pretty well for playing away from the basket as much as he does. My first instinct is to say that he needs to add muscle, and that at his current body weight and strength, he'll get pushed around too much in the post. At the same time, especially when he puts on those goggles, he'll make a move that reminds me of Kareem Abdull-Jabbar. So I know I have to be careful with him. He could be an easy one to miss on.
I have to tell you, I think your way off base on Poythress. I watched him play in highschool, and he's a very, very tallented player. He may end up being the best player on the Kentucky team down the road. His worse enemy is himself. I think he's trying too hard to just fit in, and therefore isn't aggressive enough. He has a very good jumpshot, and handles the ball very well. He's definitely a SF in the NBA if your going to go to his strength. I also think you have to take into consideration who the head coach of any team is when evaluating players. For instance, Calapari is the type of coach that gives his players a precise role to play, and if they venture out of the role, their watching the game from the bench. For example, most people had no idea that Cousins had such a nice jumpshot. Thats because if the ventured out of the post, he was on the bench.
As for Muhammad, I'm not sure how in the world you can compare him with Kobe. Kobe never played college ball, and in his first two years with the Lakers, his minutes were very limited, and he never broke into the starting lineup. What Kobe had going for him was his father was an ex-NBA player, and that he was a very good highschool player, who was also a great athlete. With Muhammad your getting to see what you never got a chance to see with Kobe, a player considered the best highschool player in the nation, playing college basketball at a major school. Even though I hate Howland as a coach (Mickey Mouse could coach this team and win), at least he's letting Shabazz showcase his talent. To be honest, at this stage of Muhammad's career, I'm not sure whats not to like. I'm certainly not going to predict that he's the next Jordan or Kobe, but I will predict he's going to be a very very good NBA player down the road.
As for myself, if I watch a player play 2 or 3 times, I don't feel as though I really have a good idea of how good he's going to be. I might catch him on all his good nights, or perhaps all his off days. So from my prespective, I love it when a player stays in college for 2 or 3 years. By then I have a pretty good idea of how his talent will translate to the NBA. Jeffery Taylor is an example. There simply isn't much I don't know about Talyor. I've probably seen him play at least 50 times over a three year period. During that period I watched him improve and grow as a player. He still does his disappearing act from time to time, but all in all, he always shows up defensively, and when he's hot, he can score points in a hurry. I always wanted him to grow longer arms.
I try to not be influenced by draft boards and their opinion, and I try and not let stats influence me. Nothing beats what you see with your own eyes. Stats can be the result of how your used by your coach and the style of basketball he implements. I remember watching Kevin Johnson at Cal, and how restricted he was in what he could do. But every once in a while, he would just break out and do what he could do, and you'd say, WOW, where did that come from. Problem was, if you didn't watch a lot of Cal's games, you probably never saw that, and you drafted Kenny Smith instead. I sat there screaming at my TV for the Kings to draft Johnson. Same thing with Karl Malone. He wasn't the Karl Malone everybody thinks of today. He didn't even look like the Karl Malone we all remember. But if you watched him play a lot, you just knew he was going to be special. Just think, we could have had Kevin Johnson and Karl Malone on the Kings, and history would have been rewritten. Instead we had Kenny Smith and Joe Klein.
I will admit that its not an exact science. I believe that the more you watch a player, the more you limit the chances of being wrong. You have to see his bad days along with his good days, and how he reacts when he's having a day when nothing is going right. One of the reasons I never got on a "WE have to draft Lillard" bandwagon, is that I just never got to see him play enough, and the games I did see, were against lesser competition. By no means did disregard what I saw, its just that it wasn't conclusive. I will admit that I was impressed more by his demeanor on the court than I was his skill level. He never appeared rattled or out of sorts. Whats that saying about if you can keep your head when all around you are losing theirs! So I guess I can say that I missed on Lillard, who will probably be ROY, and who will become the next great PG in the league.
. Wolters is a better shooter than Carter-Williams and Smart, though, but we can't be too sure of anything since he plays in a weak conference and spent four years in college (the other two are underclassmen). But, I can already tell I'm on the generous side because most people have Wolters deep in the 2nd round. I'd like to think I'm right and he'll be a steal. He certainly has the toughness to be one, and that's a huge part of the battle IMO.