new under the radar prospect - Tony Mitchell
Not a center, (which are more valuable), but very intriguing because he blocks shots too.
One of the analysts that spoke about Jeremy Lin being good 2 years ago put me up on him. Says he's 2nd in the draft to Anthony Davis.
Not saying I agree with everything he says, but just had to share.
another article about him http://www.meangreensports.com/ViewArticle.dbml?DB_OEM_ID=1800&ATCLID=205349467
and here's his STATS:
http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/tony-mitchell-4.html
3 months ago
victor_e
35 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
Interesting, I'll keep an eye on Mitchell
Although, I don’t trust this Weiland fella even a little bit. Cody Zeller, the single most efficient offensive player in college basketball, 51st? Behind the likes of Robbie Hummel? Buffoonery.
i'm a lot higher on Zeller too
but you gotta be honest he doesn’t rebound like a 6’11 center and he’s too small. He’s more like a nifty layup maker. He’s a very talented project. He’s highly rated for his upside, natural skill and potential value, not stats or physique.
Not stats?
Really now? Dude’s averaging 15.4 with the second highest TS% in the country. He’s not rated highly, even though he’s one of the most productive, efficient players out there.
defense or rebounding
yes of course he’s good on offense.
we need defense and rebounding in a center.
He’s been nominated for the Lou Henson Award, the nation’s top mid-major collegiate player.
In league games, Mitchell leads the Sun Belt Conference in scoring (17.4 ppg), rebounding (11.8 rpg), 3-point field goal percentage (53.3 percent) and blocks (3.5 bpg), and he ranks second in field goal percentage (60.2 percent). He is the only freshman in the country averaging a double-double on the year.
Impressive numbers at first glance, but his Sun Belt conference foes average an RPI of 192. Middle Tennessee is the highest-ranked at 39 – some teams are in the 250-320 range. Ouch.
Also, according to Draft Express, he’s 6’9" and 220. A power forward in a weak league with the build of Tayshaun Prince? He’s an intriguing player, especially with the Gary Neals and George Hills out there, but he’d be a second-round consideration for me.
Three concerns
First, will his rebound rates hold up against NBA-caliber competition? It doesn’t look like he’s played against any yet.
Second, will his shot blocking ability be tempered by a failure to stay on court? He’s averaging more fouls than blocked shots, and the former is an even greater concern in such a weak conference.
Third, his offense looks solid, including an ability to connect from three and get to the line. Will this translate once he is faced with NBA caliber size and defense?
in my humble opinion
rebounding and efficient offensive skills translate to the NBA easily. From what I know neither Rodman or Faried played big name schools. And we can look at J Lin to see how offensive skills translate from small school to nba.
But I get you more on the foul concern. That could be a problem, but that’s a problem more easily solved by teaching and experience versus a lack of athleticism, skill, or heart.
That and the size concern are the real problems. Ben Wallace and Dwight Howard are 6’9… but they weigh a lot more. Can he gain muscle is the question? But then again, Anthony Davis is only 1 inch taller and the same weight. Only AD doesn’t foul. So the shot blocking skills and athleticism are the values that they will be drafted on.
right
so the point is competition level isn’t really a sure way to rate players, its more on their individual abilities/size, talent, and production
Actually, the point is that we can't "look at J Lin to see how offensive skills translate from small school to nba."
It’s a cherry-picking idea to begin with, not to mention Lin’s small sample size in a ridiculous season.
offensive skills “can” translate based on school size
or
offensive skills “may not” translate based on school size
Therefore, there’s no logical correlation based on school size. That means you have to look at individual skill, production, size, efficiency, athleticism.
and its weak logically to judge people on school size
and its weak logically to judge people on school size
Let’s say I play center for Greendale Community college and my competition at other schools is a bunch of 6’4" stiffs. If I totally dominate the glass and score like mad, will this production translate against NBA-caliber talent? Of course not!!
If a college player plays for a small school in a lesser conference, their numbers are harder to translate. They play against weaker competition, so their production is inflated. If they play in a top tier conference against NBA-caliber competition, their numbers are more likely to translate.
This is the whole reason why players from small programs are generally drafted lower than players with equivalent numbers from big programs.
It is absolutely logical to judge people on school size.
by Mike Payne on Feb 20, 2012 11:36 AM EST up reply actions 5 recs
how much experience
did Enes Kanter have… he didn’t play any college ball.
He dominated high schoolers.
Yet he’s one of the best rebounders on his team.
Isaiah Thomas (who I wanted the Pistons to draft last year, if we had gotten Biyombo) played in one of the lesser known conferences.
Yet he’s Sacramento’s best pg now, and had a near triple double his last game.
We can come up with examples on either side all day. People from small schools that made it. People from small schools that didn’t make it.
That in itself makes it obvious that school size is not the real issue.
If school size leads to success OR failure
Then obviously school size is not the strongest correlation to success in the NBA when compared to skill, productivity, and ability.
If A —> C
and
If notA —> C
then there is no strong correlation between A to C.
Perhaps bigger schools actually purposefully recruit based on skill, productivity, and ability, and they miss out on a few per year that slip to a small school? Does that mean that player is less of a player, or does that mean the big school missed them?
but if you are only looking at numbers
then I guess, yeah you’d probably be confused, because your just looking at the numbers.
but if you are only looking at numbers then I guess, yeah you’d probably be confused, because your just looking at the numbers.
I’m confused by this comment, that’s for sure.
Isaiah Thomas played for the University of Washington
The PAC-10/PAC-12 is not a “lesser known conference”. This conference included Arizona which happened to be in the Elite 8 last year…
Jonas Jerebko once killed a charging female rhinoceros in heat protecting its young with nothing more than a hook shot.
Also, Thomas was under-valued because of his size, not his conference.
At 5’9" many assumed he’d be a serious defensive liability. Also, UCLA happens to play in the PAC-10/12. In case you forgot, they’ve sent the following players to the NBA in the last 5 years alone:
Darren Collison
Russell Westbrook
Kevin Love
Jrue Holiday
Tyler Honeycutt
With the exception of Honeycutt, all of these players are starters for their respective teams.
Jonas Jerebko once killed a charging female rhinoceros in heat protecting its young with nothing more than a hook shot.
Dude you are entirely missing my point, and you’re again falling back to using individual players as evidence against a widely objective stance.
Perhaps bigger schools actually purposefully recruit based on skill, productivity, and ability, and they miss out on a few per year that slip to a small school? Does that mean that player is less of a player, or does that mean the big school missed them?
Playing for a big school doesn’t make you a stud. But if you’re dominating in a lesser conference, against lesser competition, that dominance has less of a transitional value than one against top tier competition. If you wear a Kentucky jersey, you’re not a god as soon as you put that jersey on. It’s not about the school or the coach or the program or the jersey, it’s about the competition in that conference and how you fare against it. The bigger the program, the bigger the competition. The smaller the program, the weaker the competition. Thereby, small school numbers don’t translate in the same way.
I would think this would be obvious.
The lesser competition is a concern, but to be fair, it’s unusual for a small school player to be putting up the across the board great numbers that Mitchell has so far as a freshman.
Mitchell was a top 20 recruit coming out of high school and players with that type of talent don’t go to small schools very often. Small school stars who get noticed tend to have a pronounced strength — gaudy scoring numbers or crazy rebounding (Faried!), but with some holes in their game. Mitchell’s stats don’t show any clear red flags at the moment.
Clear red flags, no, but obvious concerns. At the top of this very long chain of comments, by main concerns were this:
1) will his rebound rates hold up against NBA-caliber competition?
2) will his shot blocking ability be tempered by a failure to stay on court?
3) Will his offensive production translate once he is faced with NBA caliber size and defense?
I wouldn’t paint him as the number 2 prospect, as the source link did, until those questions can be answered. That doesn’t mean the kid won’t pan out, but I pretty strongly disagree that he should be taken second over all. Come on, HoopsAnalyst.
absolutely
hassan whiteside? keith benson? just recent examples of players we have wanted from small conferences to turn into nothing so far.
guards seem to have a better transition from small conferences than bigs do. look at stuckey, boykins, and lin to remain current, and i’m sure there have been others. then again look at ben wallace.
i just wouldn’t bet a high lottery pick on Mitchell, then again, I haven’t actually watched him play either.
rebounding and efficient offensive skills translate to the NBA easily. From what I know neither Rodman or Faried played big name schools. And we can look at J Lin to see how offensive skills translate from small school to nba.
It’s difficult to put any stock into single player comparisons as examples of statistic translation. Because Rodman excelled at rebounding in the NBA, I will not go ahead and expect small program players like Mitchell to translate. If a Hall of Fame player achieved something, is that evidence that another small program guy will? My concern about the translation of rebounding against weak competition vs. NBA bigs hasn’t changed.
that’s a problem more easily solved by teaching and experience versus a lack of athleticism, skill, or heart.
It’s a problem that prevents some players from staying in the NBA. Blocks:PFs is a loose metric, but one to pay close attention to especially when trying to evaluate a shot blocker.
Ben Wallace and Dwight Howard are 6’9
Dwight Howard is 6’11".
Can he gain muscle is the question?
You can’t teach height and length, and defensively, those can be more effective than weight especially when defending a player with a versatile offensive game. If you’re defending a guy that bangs in the post, weight is important. If you’re defending a guy who takes jump shots and three pointers, height and length are more important.
dwight howard's height without shoes is 6'9
http://www.draftexpress.com/article/A-Historical-Look-at-the-NBA-Pre-Draft-Measurements-2912/
-many “official” heights in the NBA are exaggerated.
stat heavy analysis
I like it. He’s pretty harsh on Drummond, Barnes, and Lamb. High on some sleepers. Wasn’t fond of the Robinson comments but overall some good stuff in that column.
by mcflies on Feb 19, 2012 1:44 PM EST via mobile reply actions
Something to say? Choose one of these options to log in.
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
NBA Playoffs Content Module
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
