Adopt a Prospect: Hassan Whiteside

by bearded thundar on Feb 28, 2010 6:35 PM EST

I've never seen the guy play, nor do I have time to do another scouting report, but one guy who seems to be shooting up draftexpress' mock draft is Hassan Whiteside.

If you think Jarvis Varnado is an impressive shotblocker with 5 blocks in 30 minutes, Whiteside is averaging a mammoth 5.5 in 25! The guy is also averaging 9 boards, so per 40 you have 14 boards and 8.5 blocks.

"Standing 6’11 with excellent length and great athleticism, Whiteside is an extremely intriguing physical prospect, theoretically having the tools to effectively multiple positions at the next level. Since the first time we saw him a little over a year ago at a prep tournament, he’s added some weight to his frame, but still could stand to add significant lower and upper body strength in the near future, both of which could help his game substantially."

The guy seems to be a bit raw on the offensive end, so not someone you'd take top 5, but as it is, we project to end up closer to 10th than we do 3rd (which more than likely is where Cousins will be taken). It's noted that he's not only a great off ball defender due to timing, but also has great lateral quickness, something you very rarely see in 6'11" players.

The guy looks like an impressive prospect, who's willing to adopt him? I've got a big organic chemistry exam in a week so I won't be seeing too much daylight.

For some more information on him, check out DraftExpress' Scouting Report.

FanPosts are user-created posts from the Detroit Bad Boys community and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of all fans or the staff at DBB. The DBB staff reserves the right at any time to edit the contents of FanPosts as they reasonably see fit.

Tweet Comment 10 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

No volunteers?

Guys it would be nice if someone could pitch in

by bearded thundar on Mar 5, 2010 4:01 PM EST reply actions

i think you have done such a stellar job that people are intimidated

i know i am, you have set the bar high beardo.

by dandresden on Mar 7, 2010 11:24 PM EST up reply actions

He was one of my “adopt a prospect” guys, but I’ve been out of town, and since I generally believe the best way to evaluate prospects is using statistics I’ve been waiting until Whiteside’s season is over and all possible data is available before looking more closely at him.

by Gabe F-B on Mar 10, 2010 11:36 PM EST reply actions

see I believe the opposite

I only use statistics to choose which prospects I want to follow and what aspects to detail, from there it’s all about what I see with my own eyes. I don’t think you can truly evaluate a prospect until you’ve seen how well he does in game environments. Otherwise you end up with guys like Darko or Amir, people who did great in workouts, but subpar in game situations (or couldn’t stay in the game in Amir’s case).

For instance, Ed Davis was putting up fairly nice numbers, but my god is he a stiff. Draft Express recently redid his profile and called him a complete disappointment, as he was supposed to lead his team but instead he just stands around. Or Cole Aldrich, his numbers took a serious hit from last year. However if you actually watch Kansas’ games, you’d see that they love to run their offense through him and just how important his is to that team, especially on the defensive end.

DeMarcus Cousins and Evan Turner are probably the only prospect who look as good as their stats say they are. Not even John Wall has lived up to the hype IMO. The guy is extremely athletic (like take Derrick Rose and give him an additional gear), but he just doesn’t seem to understand the point guard possession. He’s a complete one on one player, out of all the Kentucky games I’ve watched I’ve rarely seen him actually run the offense or setup his teammates. Then again Rose isn’t a pure point either (dude does far more scoring than assisting) and look at Chicago, with Noah healthy and a better scoring big, they’d be fighting for a top 4 seed.

by bearded thundar on Mar 13, 2010 10:26 AM EST up reply actions

Honestly, I think you have it exactly backwards.

I don’t think you can truly evaluate a prospect until you’ve seen how well he does in game environments.

Stats track what players do in games. So they literally track what players do “in game environments.”

Otherwise you end up with guys like Darko or Amir

Darko is/was a triumph of trusting “scouts” rather than “stats.” Not sure how using him as an example helps your argument.

Ed Davis was putting up fairly nice numbers, but my god is he a stiff. Draft Express recently redid his profile and called him a complete disappointment

Here is Davis’s draftexpress profile. I really have no idea how you read the latest entry and concluded that they called him “a complete disappointment.”

I’m assuming this is the passage you were referring to:

Coming into the season with massive expectations after flashing brilliant glimpses of potential playing a small but important role en route to winning a national championship, the general consensus amongst NBA teams and the mass media is that Davis had somewhat of a disappointing sophomore campaign—especially when considering how badly his team has underachieved.

Digging deeper, though, and seeing the glaring offensive limitations he showed as a freshman, it was pretty obvious that Davis was always going to need time to develop into the player many envision him becoming down the road.

Looking at his physical profile, Davis continues to sport an outstanding frame that is still at least 2-3 years away from fully filling out. His wingspan is outstanding on top of that, and allows him to play much bigger than his size.

…so… yeah… It’s pretty clear that you’ve developed some heavily subjective feelings on several players and are only seeing what you want to see.

by Gabe F-B on Mar 13, 2010 11:01 AM EST up reply actions

You and I disagree

…so… yeah… It’s pretty clear that you’ve developed some heavily subjective feelings on several players and are only seeing what you want to see.

That’s fine if you want to have a different view but don’t act like that makes you the superior person. I don’t think I have heavily subjective feelings, look at the Cole Aldrich report, I explicitly stated how I didn’t think he would be an effective player based off the numbers, but was very impressed by how well he fit within the team. You seem to have ignored that in your retort.

Stats track what players do in games. So they literally track what players do "in game environments."

Stats also do nothing to represent the competition they went against or how they achieved them. Once again, Amir Johnson looked like the second coming of KG with his efficiency numbers against bench scrubs, but can’t stay on the court against decent players nor can he score consistently 10 feet away from the basket. The guy is a great third big, but he’s no where near the caliber of player that stats would have projected him to be.

My point with Darko was that people didn’t pay much attention to how well he did in games and only looked at his measurables in workouts; the guy never got legit minutes in Europe for any scouts to see. If you only look at statistics and not actually how he achieved them against live competition, then you’re missing a big part of the picture. That’s like saying JJ Redick holds the NCAA scoring record so he must be a top 5 NBA player.

As for Davis, I’m not sure what your point there is, this is directly from your quote:

Davis had somewhat of a disappointing sophomore campaign—especially when considering how badly his team has underachieved.

When a team underachieves, the blame is generally put on the person who was supposed to be the leader. Davis didn’t even play the final 6 games, that has to say something about his play (his player card didn’t say anything about injuries).

I don’t really understand why assume I don’t look at stats.

I only use statistics to choose which prospects I want to follow and what aspects to detail, from there it’s all about what I see with my own eyes.

I still follow the statistics a lot, I simply don’t let them tell the whole story.

Also, just wondering, but how much college basketball do you even watch? Even Dallas, who leads the MIT charge, has a great scouting team. You can’t completely ignore the actual game, and even if you could, that would take away more than half the fun of the draft.

by bearded thundar on Mar 13, 2010 12:14 PM EST up reply actions

RE: Davis… You said draftexpress had a new write-up where they “called him a complete disappointment.” Your words.

I posted the actual draftexpress write-up, where it’s clear that they are summarizing the feelings of NBA teams and media. Not their own feelings (and it was much less harsh than you made it out to be- “somewhat of a disappointing sophomore campaign”). Then they go on to describe the reasons why Davis is still a top prospect.

I agree that Cole Aldrich looks good. If you remember, I’ve been on the bandwagon for a while myself. And his stats indicate he’ll be a terrific pro.

I pointed out that it’s clear you’ve decided Davis “is a stiff” which is obviously a subjective impression, but the impression you’ve developed of him makes you believe he’s unlikely to do much in the NBA, regardless of any evidence to the contrary (such as his college stats actually being very good).

Scouts had the opposite impression of Darko (“fluid, athletic, looks great, etc…”), and this caused them to overlook the numerous risks in picking him so high.

Stats balance out the difference between perception and reality. A player may look like “a stiff.” But, if he’s producing, who cares? And the same is true in reverse, a player might have all the physical tools, but if he can’t use them to produce on the court, what good are they?

Anyway, your suspicions are correct, I’ve never actually played, or even watched basketball. I only tune in for the NBA Draft Lottery and the game of h.o.r.s.e. at All Star weekend.

by Gabe F-B on Mar 13, 2010 2:04 PM EST up reply actions

Fair enough

I think most of that is reasonable, but you really have to watch Davis to understand why I call him a stiff. Aldrich and Cousins are all over the court, get their hands on the ball on most plays, not so much for Davis.

The only reason why I call Davis a stiff is because if you watch him, he literally just stands around. How he manages to get any rebounds is beyond me, and that’s why I think watching them in game environments matters. Davis is tall and athletic, but routinely gets out muscled in the paint, doesn’t have nearly the jumper that Bosh does (whom he gets compared to) and hardly ever demands the ball the few times he is open in the paint. That’s why I don’t think he’ll be a very good pro.

In the NBA, there are 3 factors (in order of importance):
1. Desire
2. Skill/IQ
3. Athleticism/size

History has shown that if you draft a player purely off their height and athleticism, they’re going to bust, especially if they didn’t dominate in college. You look at Ben Wallace, he’s going to the HOF because he has all 3 (IQ for second one, not much in the offensive skill department). Where as Kwame had excellent athleticism and size coming into the draft, but not much in the IQ or desire department.

by bearded thundar on Mar 13, 2010 2:31 PM EST up reply actions

Forgot to finish my point

Even though Big Ben doesn’t have nearly the athleticism he used to have and has always been undersized, he’s routinely outplaying his opponents because his desire is so much greater. And if anything, his IQ has gone up since he last was in Detroit.

It could just be me, but I personally could not see anything in the semblance of desire or IQ in him. It was a complete disappointment, I was expecting to see a much better player off the high status he had. Regardless it was Joel, not me, who originally coined him a stiff: