I for one am optimistic about Nolan Smith becoming a very good backup Point Guard in the NBA. I even think he can one day be a Darren Collison type of player. As long as he works hard, I think he'll be a success [video=youtube;2q3Rk0UESRg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2q3Rk0UESRg[/video] (Don't get on and slaughter me about highlight videos, I realize even Adam Morrison can look decent in certain lights. Just give it a chance)
Better handle than I thought. Nice dribbler. Coming from the best coaching in college is a head start in basketball IQ of at least 2 years.
If the lockout goes too long, Nolan may become our starting PG next year. Scary, uncertain off season for us!!!!
Ridiculously overhyped impossibly high omg homer ceiling: Pass-first Roy. Those herky-jerky dribbling moves were straight out of Brandon's playbook, but they mostly ended in an assist. If he's smart enough and creative enough to keep that up in the pros? Even half that good is good enough to full-on backup PG or even emergency starter PG. *Yes, I know... it's a highlight video, and even Ha Seung Jin has one.
Decently quick, lacks explosion, takes a lot of time to get by his defender. I'm hoping for Darren Collison but I'm not holding my breath.
I just wonder why everyone had projected Nolan Smith to be picked so late? The guy was one of the best players for two years at Duke, when the team won the national championship and advanced far in the tournament as a #1 seed. I mean he's really quite good and polished. Do teams not trust players who can play both backcourt positions? Is "upside" so important that you're going to pass on a player who's shown you most of what he's capable of - even if it includes outstanding play in the toughest conference in college basketball? I expect Smith to be very good backup, who could well be a starter. I'm thinking a smarter and quicker Jarrett Jack.
It is important unless you think what he's capable of right now is enough to be a good NBA player. I don't think very many people feel that way, and thus the lack of upside (to improve into a good NBA player) is concerning.
In the old days.......60's 70's, 80's and part the 90's, most players stayed in college 3-4 years. And they still improved their game after being in the league a few years. The difference between year 1 and 2 were significant. Now players who come out of college at 22-23 aren't expected to get much better. I understand how a 18-19 would have more room to improve, but I still think guys who play 4 years in college can to. If they work hard enough.
Remember when everyone though Roy had hit his ceiling at WSU? And that, for as well as he'd done his rookie year (ROY for ROY!), that he'd hit his ceiling *then* as well? But he improved again, even more than his improvement from college to rookie. Sure, his knees gave out under, and we're here now, but! I'm going to go out on a thin, high-placed limb and say that Nolan will be unexpectedly good, so much so that in three seasons' time, he will be our starter. He was a good player in a disciplined system, moving to a similarly disciplined system in Portland. Nate has squeezed the best from mid-level and low-level players for years, and while that's not enough to get out out of the first round, it might just mean that a player like Nolan will flourish in the same way Wesley Matthews and Brandon Roy did: unexpectedly, through smart play and a good opportunity.
Nolan Smith is a turnover machine, he averaged 3.3 turnovers in college. Nate HATES turnovers. Bayless came in averaging 4 turnovers in college, and Johnson came in averaging 3.4 turnovers in college. Both reportedly had issues with Nate. The same thing happened to Sergio, a high turnover player. Jack, despite being a better overall player, was benched in favor of Blake partly because of turnovers. None of those guys (except Johnson, who may or may not be) are still on the team, yet Nate is still coaching. I have a good feeling Nate is going to outright bench Smith in the middle of the season, or he'll probably be used very sparingly.
I was definitely one who underestimated Roy's upside, but one factor in that was a quote he gave (a couple of years into his NBA career) about how he had been a high-flyer in high school but had purposely avoided that, suppressed his athleticism, in college in order to get more skilled, rather than relying on athleticism. One part of fans on this site (myself included) viewing him as lower upside was that he didn't seem to have a ton of athleticism to his game. He seemed all polish. As it turned out, he was both polished and extremely athletic. So it was a bit deceptive to evaluate him (as a fan, who hadn't watched him in high school). Might Nolan Smith also be harboring a secret upside? Possible, but I think a situation like Roy's (where he purposely suppressed a key strength) is pretty rare.
On the flip side, people mocked me for saying Rudy had pretty well reached his ceiling as a rookie. Smith was only the starting PG for his college team because somebody else got hurt. If Nate couldn't turn Bayless into an NBA PG, I don't understand why people expect him to do it with Smith and/or Williams.
Absolutely. I'm skeptical about the Smith pick, but I'd be thrilled if (and I know no one is projecting this) he became an All-Star point guard.
