SPL 2006 Scouting Reports

[Mike@LG]

Player Evaluation Sheet

Jordan Farmar

NBA Comparison
Upside: Steve Nash (Think how long it took Nash to develop.)
Average: Luke Ridnour/Delonte West (Less quicks and jumper, more vert.)
Downside: 6'2" Marko Jaric

Size:
1. Height – 6'-3/4" w/o shoes, 6'2" w/shoes
2. Wingspan – 6'3"
3. Weight - 171
4. Body Fat – 4.4%

Athleticism:
1. Lateral movement – Good. Tested at 11.07 seconds, a smidge slow for a good defensive PG. Doesn't really show on man-defense situations, but stands out when he positions himself to deny passing lanes and block angles. When he wants, can shutdown penetration against seemingly quicker PGs.
2. Initial quickness - Good. Uses a combination of the crossover along with quickness to create separation. Hasn't really been tested against a quality athletic defender. Doesn't completely go all the way to the basket from penetration, but can create high percentage shots from within 5'.
3. Top speed – Very good. Tested at 3.17 seconds for the 3/4 sprint.
4. Vertical leap – Excellent. Tested at 42". Shows when he's contesting shots and going for rebounds. Doesn't show when he's trying to finish a play. His leaping ability drops dramatically when he's got the basketball with him.
5. Reflexes – Quick. Gets into passing lanes well. Denies lanes well. Deflects well.
6. Strength – Tested with 11 bench presses, but doesn't have much of a base. A better base would allow him to be more effective protecting the dribble against bigger guards.
7. Conditioning – Never looked winded
8. Footwork – Very good. Able to change directions well. Utilizes the jumpstop well. Never fades away on jumpshots. His feet are under him all the time.
9. Balance – Very good. Didn’t get pushed on penetration.

Skill Level:
1. Offense
• Perimeter Play
• Dribble penetration – Quick. Utilizes ball-handling and a quick first step to create separation. Effective in creating shots or plays for tohers.
• Post play – N/A
• Off-the-ball – Good footwork off the ball. Doesn't dominate the basketball at all. Maintains spacing very well while creating a passing angle to bail out his teammate along the perimeter.
• Short game (0’-7’) – Finishes well. Doesn't dunk. Layups. Has an effective 5' tear drop with high arc.
• Midrange game (8’-18’) - Has shown the ability to hit from midrange off the dribble.
• Long range (19’-23'9" or longer) – Very slight mechanics issues when shooting from range which leads to some inconsistency. Does a great job of setting a base, but doesn't always create great lift into the shot.

2. Defense
• Man to man defense
Position – Average. Can get blown past by smaller PGs. Doesn't dictate where the PG should go effectively. Can fight screans off of pick and roll situations, when he wants to. Does a solid job cutting off angles.
Anticipation – Excellent. Quick hands allow him to steal the ball off the dribble or when exposed. Great job of ball-denial.
• Off-the-ball defense
Position – Solid. Didn’t get beat by backdoor cuts. Aware of his man and the location of the basketball relative to his position. Sometimes lapses. Reads lanes well.
Anticipation – Excellent. His timing is great.
• Team defense
Position - Excellent. Helps out effectively and always has a hand on the ball.
Anticipation – Excellent. Contests shooters very well, recovers very well, and knows when to apply added pressure to the opponent.

Rebounding
1. Offensive
• Box-out – N/A
• Hustle – N/A
• Energy level – N/A
• Position – N/A
2. Defensive
• Box-out – Doesn’t box out.
• Hustle – Hustles well after loose balls. Utlizes vertical leaping to compensate for the lack of box-out.
• Energy level – Good energy shown going after the basketball.
• Position – Slight nose for the ball. Weaves around opponents to get rebounds. Finds himself in traffic at times and contests well to acquire defensive rebounds.

Intangibles
• Leadership - Exerts a high amount of poise and controls tempo well. Does a great job of distribution among teammates and running the offense.
• Attitude - Good. Doesn't get too down on himself. Expects more of himself.
• Work Ethic - N/A, though 4.4% body fat and high basketball IQ came from somewhere.
• Competitiveness - Very competitive. Tends to be more assertive when running the offense doesn't work.
• Unselfishness - Very unselfish. Makes the right decision between taking high percentage shots and creating them.
• Toughness - Tends to mix it in with bigmen for rebounds. Doesn't seem to mind a little contact. Can be bothered by bigger SGs defensively, and facing bigger opponents off the dribble.
• Mental - N/A
• Physical - A tad slight of frame, even at 6'2". Doesn't really out mind-blowing quickness that allows him to compensate for strength (like Iverson, TJ Ford, Felton, etc.) Can be bothered by some contact along the perimeter.

Summary:

Farmar demonstrates great PG skills and intangibles at a high level considering his young age. He does a great job of controlling tempo, knowing when to run the offense, when to push in transition at high speed, and semi-transition. He does an excellent job of finding the open man in static situations as well as through dribble-penetration. A consumate triple threat guard who's weakness is perimeter shooting, which is average at best. With some better mechanics and added strength, could really excel under the triangle offense while implimenting the transition phase within the triangle.

Defensively, I expect him to just be average. His IQ and lateral quickness are very good, but the lack of wingspan and initial footspeed on man-D won't allow him to be a stopper or container at the NBA level. He continually goes behind screens and doesn't fight them, nor does he have the wingspan to makeup for any deficiencies on man-defense. When he wants to commit, the ability is there. Over 30-40 minutes a game to stop penetration and fight screens is a bit much to ask. More strength would really help in this department.
_________________
Resident Car Nut.

https://lakersdraft.substack.com/

I am not an economic advisor nor do I advise economic strategies or plans.

[DzLaker]

how is his athleticism compared to Nash?

who could he be compared to on D?

it sounds like if he gets stronger and improves his long-range jumper he could be a star.

[Mike@LG]

He's actually a tad quicker and far more explosve leaper than Nash, but doesn't have that clean ball-handling, the IQ to keep a guy at his hip, the pure, refined PG skills.

Defensive comparison? Hm. The less quick, nowhere near as strong, average wingspan of Jason Kidd. Don't expect Farmar on the All Defensive Teams like Kidd did. Kidd was very fortunate to have elite size and quickness at the PG position to maximize his hoop IQ. Farmar doesn't have that elite size and quickness. Team defense was better than man defense. Similar reactions to double teams. Similar reactions to deflections and denial of passing lanes.
_________________
Resident Car Nut.

https://lakersdraft.substack.com/

I am not an economic advisor nor do I advise economic strategies or plans.

[MntnLaker]

Its amazing to see what a great coach like Howland adds to a player:

The team defensive awareness is in large part due to Howlands training, JF is much better at it than he was his frosh year coming in.

Ditto the jump stop, Howland works with all the guards on that move.
Though JF may not have been able to show all his skills in the UCLA offense, working with Howland for two years really helped him.

Another year in the weight room where he can go harder now that he is healthy should improve the strength issues. You may not be able to get quicker at 19 but you can get a lot stronger with some dedication. And he already added a lot of strength from his F year. If you compare his tournament game against Texas tech last year vs. this year's games you'll see the difference in strength. I don't think work ethic will be a problem.

Given Mike's usual critical reviews , this review is high praise.

[wormz1012]

Mike.....

I thought your assessments are a bit on the good end.

On a good day, Farmar can look like a poor man's Jason Kidd.

On a bad day, he might look worse than Rick Brunson.

Hope as he gains more experience, he can learn how to FULLY utilize his skills. But looking on the bright side, this kid does play smart and composed for his age.

If he could ever develop a great spot up jumper, his size and athlectism are comparable to Kevin Johnson.
_________________
This game is in the refrigrator! Door's closed, light's out, egg's cooling, butter's getting hard and the jellllloooo is jiggling. - You'll be greatly missed, Chick.

[Kareem of the Crop]

the think i like the most is his court savy. He really gives off a sense of control.
_________________
Romans 1:16

[Mike@LG]

[pokoy]

Excellent, I was waiting for these.

So give it a few years before he can actually play meaningful minutes in the NBA, after he gains strength?

Think he'd ever be able to be a quality starter? Sounds like his speed and strength are the main things holding him back, and strength can be improved.

[Mike@LG]

I was telling emplay the other day... within 1-2 years.

Speed isn't holding back. Strength and perimeter shooting. Average at best.
_________________
Resident Car Nut.

https://lakersdraft.substack.com/

I am not an economic advisor nor do I advise economic strategies or plans.

[Mike@LG]

Name: Andrew Bynum

Player comparison: Kelvin Cato athleticism/Brendan Haywood skill
Upside: More athletic Jamaal Magloire. Pre-injury Erick Dampier.

Size:
1. Height – 7'1/4" (Did look at least 2" shorter than listed 7'2" Andreas Glyniadakis)
2. Wingspan – 7'6"
3. Weight - 270
4. Body Fat – N/A

Athleticism:
1. Lateral movement – Good lateral movement for his size. Players like Kelvin Cato are quicker, but, he's just lazy. Prone to being a tad late on weakside help rotation.
2. Initial quickness - Average quickness. Not one to blow by players one on one.
3. Top speed – Good. Willing to run the floor. Increased his transition speed compared to last year. Sometimes, he's the first man down the floor.
4. Vertical leap – Above average. Doesn't show full vert. when he wants. Full vert. was shown on a few rebounds and blocked shots. Has shown some explosion, but really needs to gather his base in order to do it. Has shown a drop-step dunk, power-up dunk on defenders. Still prone to getting dunks blocked by sub-par NBA talent.
5. Reflexes – Good. Not stellar. Not the first to the ball. Getting by on physical characteristics. Namely wingspan.
6. Strength – Below average in the sense that his legs and explosiveness aren't prevalent for such an athlete. Not Amare Stoudemire/Shaquille O'Neal explosive. A bit mechanical. Can vary by the amount of energy he has. Ankles could really use some work in terms of strength and quick-twitch muscles.
7. Conditioning – Improved. Puts in a strong 30 minutes of play. After a series of back to back games, got seriously winded and regressed to playing like Bynum of last season.
8. Footwork – Average. Utilizes the dropstep, but showed better pivot work with the spin move. Go-to shot is the spin pivot for a 2' jumpshot.
9. Balance – Average. Can get knocked off the block. Doesn't use leverage well. Doesn't fall a lot either, despite all the contact he faces.

Skill Level:
1. Offense
• Perimeter Play
• Dribble penetration – N/A
• Post play – Methodical post player. Willing passer who's good at decision-making. Could be more precise. Smart triangle execution as a post-playmaker. Needs more go to moves. Utlizes the pivot foot well to create shot opportunities. Aggressive backing down and going towards the basket. Good extension and elevation on a jumphook. Doesn't have any countermoves. Doesn't re-post well. Hasn't shown the ability to steal position in the paint going from strongside to weakside.
• Off-the-ball – A bit lost at times. A bit indecisive. Doesn't box-out well.
• Short game (0’-7’) – Soft touch in the paint. Should be a high percentage FG shooter. Good shots within 6' usually drop.
• Midrange game (8’-18’) - Needs work. Shot form better, but reluctant to use it as a reliable shot.

2. Defense
• Man to man defense
Position – Average. Prone to quick moves by sub-par NBA talent. Post defense slightly improved, but hasn't really been challenged.
• Off-the-ball defense
Position – Very good. Shows well in pick and roll situations and is improving his timing. A bit late on rotation but contests jumpshots, even behind screens. Gets lucky to even block some of those jumpshots.
Anticipation – Solid.
• Team defense
Position - Solid. Not often late on rotation, but doesn't establish defensive position well.
Anticipation – Inconsistent. A bit slow at times. Rarely caught on no-man's land which allowed Warrick to dunk on him.

Rebounding
1. Offensive
• Box-out – Average. Doesn't actively box-out his man or any man consistently. Doesn't utilize footwork properly for position. Still relying too much on length for rebounding.
• Hustle – Good. Wins on the boards due to wingspan.
• Energy level – Decent.
• Position – Often finds himself boxed out or surrounded by 2 men. Steals boards on wingspan.
2. Defensive
• Box-out – Average Showing improvement game by game.
• Hustle – Average. Shows more energy for offensive boards.
• Energy level –Average.
• Position – Wins the boards on wingspan and rooting guys out of the paint. Better defensive rebounder than offensive rebounder. Slight nose for the ball.

Intangibles
• Leadership – N/A
• Attitude – Good attitude. High effort all over the floor. Learning on the fly with improvement every game.
• Work Ethic – Gained roughly 10lbs on muscle ... upper and lower body. Reflects on his ability to root out players a bit in the post, conditioning, shotblocking, rebounding, and powering up on offense.
• Competitiveness – Quiet demeanor, but never stops trying.
• Unselfishness – Good. Sometimes takes bad shots. Gets caught up in the crowd wanting him to do well in the post. Becoming more unselfish every game.
• Toughness – Good competitor. Just gets a bit winded and outmuscled in the paint at times.
• Mental – N/A
• Physical – Good frame. Could lock him up in a gym and make a granite rock out of him. If he was more chiseled, the man-defense, offensive positioning, and boxing out would all improve.

Summary: I'm not expecting a 25ppg 12rpg player unless he shows the work ethic to get himself a chiseled physique. I'm thinking more along the lines of a 14ppg 11rpg 2bpg player. Solid on both ends of the floor. Shows improvement every game. Shotblocking. Passing in the post. Decision-making within the triangle. Has a lot to learn: Dropstep, jumphook, face up game, arc in his midrange shot, FT consistency, box-out, solid man-defense, maintaining deep position when going from strongside to weakside or how to open up the passing angle, needs leg strength to steal position away from players, etc. An obvious project who is 3-4 years down the road, but definitely one worth waiting for. If he turns out to be a more athletic, better sized Magloire with the 14ppg 11rpg 2bpg relative upside, the Lakers have an absolute steal.

Edit for 7/13: Improved strength, conditioning, pivot work, power up game, rebounding, and triangle execution all up 1 level. If he wants to be a dominant player, there are 4 more levels to go in those same departments. Should definitely warrant 15 minutes of backup center time at least.
_________________
Resident Car Nut.

https://lakersdraft.substack.com/

I am not an economic advisor nor do I advise economic strategies or plans.

[RCS926]

[Mike@LG]

Depends on his work ethic into next season. Can't really project ahead too far. 10-15 next season? Warranted.
_________________
Resident Car Nut.

https://lakersdraft.substack.com/

I am not an economic advisor nor do I advise economic strategies or plans.

[mm708]

How about Marcus Slaughter?

[lakers399]

His downside is Kelvin Cato and Brendan Haywood, upside is Jamal Magloire and pre-injury Dampier? You're being way too conservative Mike. I'm not sure if any of those guys have ever drawn consistent double-teams, even in the summer league.

Also, didn't you say that Patrick O'Bryant is a more polished Bynum? Well that guy is averaging something like 2 points, 2 boards and 7 fouls in 20 min a game right now. Now I'm not saying that you don't know your stuff, but you're being way too hard on this kid.

[LakerJam]

[Mike@LG]

Player comparison has little reflection on actual statistics.

I do my best to imply athletic levels and size on one hand, skill level the next.

Sorry, even average centers don't get swatted by weaker, smaller guys that aren't even NBA level.

He's improved? Yes.

But, I still recognize how much road is left for him. Of 100 miles, he's done 10.

What's worse, is, I already included projected statistics.

Really, I don't know how much more specific or clear I have to be.

[loseyourname]

Well, if you include the fact that he's also much bigger than Jamaal Magloire, I don't think that's such a bad upside. Put Magloire's offensive ability in a body like Bynum's after a few more years of weight training, and add in Dampier's defensive and rebounding prowess during his career year, and that's a pretty damn good player. Outside of Shaq and Yao, what center in the NBA is better than that right now? Plus, Bynum would likely reach that level around 22 or so, way earlier than either Magloire or Dampier.

[Mike@LG]

^Agreed.
_________________
Resident Car Nut.

https://lakersdraft.substack.com/

I am not an economic advisor nor do I advise economic strategies or plans.

[LakerJam]

[LakerJam]

[Mike@LG]

Wow.

Jamaal Magloire is an underacheiver? I Highly disagree with that. He was just supposed to be some backup PF for the rest of his career because he's barely 6'10" with long arms and barely above average athleticism.

He's overacheiving.

Then about Dampier. Well, think is Dampier is unmotivated and was injury prone most of his career. That tends to hinder player development.

Yet, I have NEVER said that Bynum lacked in work ethic OR was motivated.

Absolute maximum potential. You realize how tiny that percentage is? Why would I make an expectation on Absolute maximum potential when I just say his general upside is... whatever I project?

You think his ceiling is higher than that? Fine. So do I, but SO MANY things have to work perfectly in order for that to happen.

In 1 summer, all the stars didn't align.

As for DraftExpress, I don't always agree with their player comparisons. They say his upside is Shaquille O'Neal. Well, hey do you remember what happened about Bynum's draft? He showed up VERY VERY late to the radar, didn't have a player workout against a player of similar competition, and barely showed basic set of skills. GMs that saw him knew they had a long road project if they drafted him, which is precisely why he slipped to #10 in the first place.

Even until now, little about him says franchise player.

Then, I've already put the statistical comparison up there. What is so hard for you to accept that it's a good set goal that he may become a more athletic Magloire? What, you want his upside to be Alonzo Mourning when there's nothing about his game that says so? What about Yao Ming when he barely has 1 set post move? Andrew Bogut even though they're near the same age and he's got twice the skill level?

I list a player upside that I think he can absolutely reach, and absolutely maintain for his career, not a borderline impossibility on a player reaching their max potential. Barely 5% of the NBA can vouch for that and I definitely don't think it's fair to put the expectation that he can even be in that 5% that does.

As if I haven't seen more improvement from other NBA players in 1 season compared to Bynum...
_________________
Resident Car Nut.

https://lakersdraft.substack.com/

I am not an economic advisor nor do I advise economic strategies or plans.

[Mike@LG]

[LakerJam]

You're missing my point, Mike. The only thing I was addressing was the maximum potential, the player's "ceiling" that you gave. That's all. Nothing more. I actually LOVE your in depth assessments, even when I don't necessarily agree. Gives me food for thought and things to look for I may have missed. Believe it or not, I appreciate your conservative side for its balance.

Perhaps a more universal definition of "best and worse Case Scenario" is why we're bumping heads. My understanding is that if you're going to give a worse case and a best case scenario of any player, the specific idea is to list the absolute worst the player will be if he doesn't improve, and the absolute best he could be if he fully maximized his talents and physical gifts. Otherwise, they'd just call it the most likely scenario. I'm not at all critiquing your present day assessment, though you're responding as though you think I am. It's the players you list as his best case, that I'm having trouble digesting, as I don't think highly of either Magloire or Dampier - 2 passionless players who don't have a natural feel for the game of basketball.

As for Magloire, when a 6'10" athletic player with long arms only grabs 6-7 rebounds per game as a starting center, that IS underachieving.

[Mike@LG]

But, it's not a "ceiling" I'm projecting.

It's an upside, a bar, a standard that I think he can reach and will maintain.

[LakerJam]