Scouting Guru = 2009 NBA Draft = NCAA Basketball Players

SCOUTING THE NBA.com 06/24/09

2009 NCAA BASKETBALL PLAYER EVALUATION RANKINGS

Version 7.0 Final Edition

All evaluations are done by a computer program with no human influence.

Pos.	Player	Team	Position	Intangibles	Evaluation
1	Blake Griffin	Oklahoma	Iso-PF - O	38.1	222.6
2	James Harden	Arizona State	SG - Iso	37.9	211.1
3	Ty Lawson	North Carolina	TruePointG	34.9	187.1
4	Hasheem Thabeet	Connecticut	iso -Center	44.6	174.2
5	Terrence Williams	Louisville	CG - Def	18.0	164.9
6	Tyreke Evans	Memphis	CG - Def	45.6	161.0
7	Stephen Curry	Davidson	SG - Iso	28.4	160.5
8	Earl Clark	Louisville	SF - Def	16.5	143.1
9	Demar DeRozan	USC	Def-Wing -SF	17.1	127.8
10	B.J. Mullens	Ohio State	Center -high	27.9	118.8
11	DeJuan Blair	Pittsburgh	Iso-PF - O	14.9	112.7
12	Jordan Hill	Arizona	PF - Def	1.3	109.9
13	James Anderson	Oklahoma State	SG - Iso	11.3	105.1
14	Jonny Flynn	Syracuse	Pg >phys	-12.5	103.9
15	Wayne Ellington	North Carolina	SG>neg	-12.5	102.2
16	Jeff Pendergraph	Arizona State	PF	-7.2	101.9
17	Gerald Henderson	Duke	Def-Wing -SF	10.6	98.6
18	Tyler Hansbrough	North Carolina	PF -wing	4.0	94.8
19	Derrick Brown	Xavier	SF - Iso	7.3	93.6
20	Jrue Holiday	UCLA	CG - Def	13.2	89.5
21	Nick Calathes Fr, 6-5 200(2008)	Florida	Pg = Paint	16.9	88.9
22	Chase Budinger	Arizona	SF - Range	-12.5	88.7
23	Eric Maynor	Virginia Commonwealth	PG	4.5	88.4
24	Darren Collison So, 6-1(2007)	UCLA	TruePointG	0.0	86.4
25	Marcus Thornton	LSU	SG - Iso	7.3	85.6
26	Jodie Meeks	Kentucky	SG - role	-12.5	82.3
27	Jeff Teague	Wake Forest	SG - Iso	10.4	79.9
28	Dante Cunningham	Villanova	SF - Def	-6.8	77.0
29	Danny Green	North Carolina	Def-Wing -SF	-12.5	75.8
30	Antonio Anderson Sr,	Memphis	CG - Def	-12.5	74.7
31	DeMarre Carroll	Missouri	SF - paint	-4.8	74.0
32	Jerel McNeal	Marquette	Pg >phys	-12.5	72.5
33	Jerome Jordan	Tulsa	Center	10.1	71.1
34	Shawn Taggart	Memphis	Iso-PF - O	-8.8	69.8
35	Josh Heytvelt	Gonzaga	IC/IPF	0.4	68.9
36	James Johnson	Wake Forest	SF - paint	-12.5	68.7
37	Ahmad Nivins	Saint Joseph's	PF	-7.2	68.4
38	Daniel Hackett	USC	CG - Def	-12.2	68.2
39	Luke Nevill	Utah	Center	5.8	67.6
40	Sam Young	Pittsburgh	Def-Wing -SF	-10.2	67.4
41	Austin Daye	Gonzaga	Def-Wing -SF	11.8	66.8
42	Robert Dozier	Memphis	Iso-PF - O	-3.0	65.6
43	DaJuan Summers	Georgetown	IC/IPF	-3.6	64.2
44	Patrick Mills	Saint Mary's	Pg >phys	-12.5	64.1
45	Jon Brockman	Washington	PF - Def	-4.7	63.0
46	Jeff Adrien	Connecticut	SF - paint	-8.4	62.8
47	Alex Ruoff	West Virginia	Pg >phys	-12.5	62.6
48	Dionte Christmas	Temple	SG>neg	-12.5	62.2
49	Leo Lyons	Missouri	PF	1.0	61.8
50	Luke Harangody	Notre Dame	IC/IPF	-10.8	61.4
51	Goran Suton	Michigan State	PF - Def	-12.5	60.5
52	Wesley Matthews	Marquette	SF - paint	-7.0	59.2
53	John Bryant	Santa Clara	Center	-5.7	56.2
54	Micah Downs	Gonzaga	SG	-12.5	56.2
55	Ibrahima Thomas	Oklahoma State	Center - Def	12.1	55.8
56	Jermaine Taylor	UCF	SG>neg	-12.5	55.1
57	A.D. Vassallo	Virginia Tech	SG - role	-12.5	54.8
58	Brandon Costner Fr, 6-9	North Carolina State	IC/IPF	-11.4	54.7
59	Taj Gibson	USC	Per/Block	-12.5	54.5
60	Paul Harris	Syracuse	Def-Wing -SF	-12.5	54.5
61	Byron Eaton	Oklahoma State	Pg >phys	-12.5	54.2
62	A.J. Price	Connecticut	Pg >phys	-12.5	53.9
63	Lester Hudson	Tennessee-Martin	Pg >phys	-12.5	53.8
64	Charles Little	Dayton	SF - paint	-12.5	53.3
65	Toney Douglas	Florida State	SG>neg	-12.5	50.8
66	Connor Atchley	Texas	IC/IPF	-12.5	50.3
67	Josh Carter , 6-7	Texas A&M	SG - role	-12.5	49.7
68	Sherron Collins	Kansas	Pg >phys	-12.5	49.3
69	Jeff Allen	Virginia Tech	PF - Def	-12.5	49.3
70	Aaron Jackson	Duquesne	Pg >phys	-12.5	49.3
71	Lee Cummard	Brigham Young	SG>neg	-12.5	48.9
72	JaMychal Green	Alabama	Per/Block	-10.3	48.2
73	Arinze Onuaku	Syracuse	PF - Def	-12.5	47.8
74	Tyrese Rice So, 6-0	Boston College	Pg >phys	-12.5	47.4
75	Ben Woodside	North Dakota State	Pg >phys	-12.5	47.2
76	Paul Delany	UAB	sg	-12.5	46.9
77	Patrick Beverley Fr, 6-1	Arkansas	CG - Def	-10.7	46.8
78	Kyle Spain	San Diego State	Def-Wing -SF	-5.4	46.7
79	Curtis Jerrells	Baylor	Pg >phys	-12.5	46.4
80	Dominic James So, 5-11(2007)	Marquette	Pg >phys	-12.5	46.0
81	Chinemelu Elonu	Texas A&M	Iso-PF	-12.5	45.7
82	Jeremy Pargo jr, 6-2, 208	Gonzaga	Pg >phys	-12.5	45.4
83	Chas McFarland	Wake Forest	PF - Def	-8.8	44.9
84	Lawrence Hill So, 6-8	Stanford	Def-Wing -SF	-12.5	44.4
85	Gary Wilkinson	Utah State	PF -wing	-12.5	43.7
86	Joe Krabbenhoft	Wisconsin	PF - Def	-12.5	43.4
87	Ronald Steele So, 6-3 (2006)	Alabama	Pg >phys	-12.5	43.4
88	Lorrenzo Wade	San Diego State	Def-Wing-SG	-11.4	43.3
89	Michael Bramos	Miami (OH)	SG - role	-12.5	42.4
90	Aron Baynes	Washington State	Center -high	-12.5	42.2
91	Stefon Jackson	UTEP	SG - role	-12.5	41.7
92	Eric Devendorf	Syracuse	SG - role	-12.5	41.7
93	Jack McClinton	Miami (FL)	SG>neg	-12.5	40.5
94	Robert Vaden	UAB	SG - role	-12.5	40.5
95	Russell Robinson Sr, 6-2, 198	Kansas	Pg >phys	-12.5	40.4
96	Garrett Temple	LSU	Pg >phys	-12.5	40.0
97	Lorrenzo Wade Jr, 6-6	San Diego State	ComboGuard	-1.6	39.6
98	David Padgett Jr, 7-0, 240	Louisville	Center -high	-7.0	39.5
99	Tony Gaffney	Massachusetts	SF - paint	-12.5	39.3
100	Tasheed Carr	Saint Joseph's	Pg >phys	-12.5	39.2
101	Hamady N'Diaye	Rutgers	Per/Block	-12.5	39.1
102	Alade Aminu	Georgia Tech	PF - Def	-12.5	39.0
103	Jeremy Chappell	Robert Morris	SG - role	-12.5	38.7
104	Bryan Davis	Texas A&M	PF - Def	-12.5	38.2
105	Alfred Aboya	UCLA	PF - Def	-12.5	38.1
106	Korvotney Barber	Auburn	SF - Def	-12.5	38.1
107	Gavin Grant Jr, 6-8	North Carolina State	SG - role	-12.5	38.1
108	Chester Frazier Soph, 6-2	Illinois	Pg = Paint	-12.5	37.8
109	Chris Johnson	LSU	Per/Block	-12.5	37.8
110	Damian Johnson	Minnesota	SF - paint	-12.5	36.9
111	Josh Shipp So, 6-5	UCLA	SG - role	-12.5	36.2
112	Dior Lowhorn	San Francisco	SF - paint	-12.5	36.0
113	Kyle McAlarney	Notre Dame	Pg >phys	-12.5	35.3
114	Deonta Vaughn	Cincinnati	Pg >phys	-12.5	34.8
115	Ryan Toolson	Utah Valley	SG - role	-12.5	34.6
116	Weyinmi Efejuku	Providence	SG - role	-12.5	34.3
117	Landon Milbourne	Maryland	SF - paint	-12.5	33.3
118	Edwin Ubiles	Siena	SF - paint	-12.5	33.3
119	Chris Lowe	Massachusetts	Pg >phys	-12.5	32.9
120	Vernon Goodridge	La Salle	Per/Block	-12.5	32.4
121	Jeremy Hazell	Seton Hall	SG - role	-12.5	32.1
122	Trent Meacham	Illinois	Pg >phys	-12.5	32.0
123	Chamberlain Oguchi	Illinois State	SG - role	-12.5	31.2
124	Taylor Rochestie	Washington State	Pg >phys	-12.5	30.5
125	Lewis Clinch	Georgia Tech	SG - role	-12.5	30.4

Tier I	225.0.+	Has enough strengths to be a 1st team ALL NBA or Defensive Team
Tier II	200.0 - 224.9	Could be 1st - 2nd best player on the team
Tier III	175.0 - 199.9	Could be 2nd - 3rd best player on the team
Tier IV	150.0 - 174.9	These players usually emphasize a strength and become a big part of a team 3rd - 4th best player on team 3rd-4th
Tier V	125.0 - 149.9	Starter capabilities 4th -5th man
Tier VI	100.0 - 124.9	These players are more than likely a 5th - 6th man / usually a lack of separation or strength keeps these players from succeeding early. / Players drafted from this spot normally get a better chance to prove themselves if drafted to a losing team.
Tier VII	67.5 - 99.9	NBA Player 6th - 8th man / more than likely something obvious keeps these players from rating higher
Tier VIII	39.90 - 67.4	Prolonged time trying to make a mark in the NBA 8th - 12th man / Specialty players are big here aka rebounders, defenders - scorers. / These players normally play one side of the court well enough to make a roster spot
Tier IX	39.9. - Below	Prolonged time also just trying to stick on a NBA team as something more than a journeyman. Players that were fully evaluated will be career overseas or D-League players.

Positions	LEGEND
Iso - Center	These players are isolation defensive and offensive players that have the complete game ready for the NBA.
International C / PF	These players games are more shaped for the international style of play. These players stretch the floor as C / PF and many times these players have really good range and court vision. These players are normally not defensive standouts but some can play a decent amount of defense.
Center - Defense	This player is lacking the offensive go to moves but will definitely have an impact on the defensive end
Center - High	This Center plays best at the free throw or higher. One negative is they are sometimes softer in the paint.
Center - Low	This player will be a liability outside of the block, however he can be very effective around the basket
C / PF - Def	These players can actually play the defensive side of the ball better than the offensive side. These players are normally lacking go-to-moves, range, and court vision. On the positive side its possible some of these players will develop into nice NBA role players after 3 years.
Center - Defense	These players are lacking enough offense in their game due to a lack of a go-to move, able to face the basket and shoot outside 10ft., and finally consistency when they handle the ball.
Iso - PF	These players can play isolation on offensive and defensive and ends. While some may have big advantages on one end of the court compared to the other all meet minimumal historical values to play at the next level.
Iso - PF - O	These players are strictly isolation offensive players, and historically these players will have a tough time at the next level stopping other isolation players in the paint. Players with a long reach can at least begin their NBA careers with their arms raised as a defensive tool. Most of these players are simply missing the basic footwork, athleticism, length, or even defensive fundamentals for the next level. Offensively some of these players can go in and score big at the next level.
PF	These players usually play the traditional power forward position but may lack either a go to move, play mainly with back to the basket, or defensively have proven they can play the block vs. isolation players.
PF / Block	These players have the ability to play in the paint and block but are missing at least 2 major development critieria to contribute at the next level. These players may be lacking in upper body strength, ball handling, foul trouble, back to basket only, or missing go to move in the paint. These players could take 3-4 years to contribute on a play-off team.
SF - Iso	These players have the complete game on both sides of the ball and are above the basics to be ready for the NBA
SF - Iso - O	These players have the offensive games that are ready for the NBA, but are missing some element which exposes them on the defensive end.
SF - Def	These players are athletic and have proven to be ready to get minutes at the NBA level for how they play defense. Some of these players may be decent at offense but none of them qualified for the appropriate offensive categories or isolation categories.
SF or SF>2Neg	These players did not qualify for any of the above isolation, offensive, defensive categories. There are players here that can play at the next level but more than likely none of these players will lead their teams offensively or defensively. They can however contribute good minutes. These players are probably career role players or they are simply not fully developed into the players they could be most due to age at the time of the draft declaration.
Defensive Wing - SF	These players normally play a multitude of positions on the court, there are some factors that show that these players are mostly inclined to play the SF position either due to size, speed, or placement on court.
Defensive Wing - SG	These players normally play a multitude of positions on the court, there are some factors that show that these players are mostly inclined to play the SF position either due to size, speed, or placement on court.
SG - Iso	If a player qualifies for this position he can literally be a hi-light reel waiting to happen. This player can usually explode for points on one end and play competent defense on the opposite side of the court. This is one of the hardest rankings to obtain in the scouting evaluation.
SG - Iso - O	These players are offensively explosive but do not have the defensive makeup at this point to be consider ready to guard isolation players at the next level. These players will rely on their athleticism to make up for any defensive problems they have.
SG - Pass or SG > neg	These players have good court awareness but they are lacking something that will keep them as a backup player their entire career unless they land on a non-playoff team and are allowed time to play and grow. For the most part these players will play about 18-24minutes max.
SG - Role	These players have not shown enough areas of consistency to be anything more than a role player at the next level. It is possible that some players are on a very deep team or they are still very young and their evaluation is not complete. Otherwise it will be tough for any of these players to get more than 18 minutes in a game if they are on a playoff team.
CG - PtFwd	These players have demonstrated some ability to run a teams offense but not at the NBA level as a starting point guard. Some of the players here will really be relied upon due to their versatility.
Guard - Def	These players have a shown a keen sense to play primary defense against other point and shooting guards. Some of these players could run the offense as a point guard under certain circumstances.
PG - Paint	These point guards are really good playmakers but they are limited by their range. This could cause opposing defenders to be able to sag back on defense. Most of these players get their points from fast breaks and attacking the rim.
PG - Range	These point guards are normally missing something that keeps them from being recognized as a true point guard that encompasses all the traits needed as a true point. These point guards also are able to run the break and attack the rim.
True Point Guard	This is the ultimate general on the court. This player will set the offense, run the break, be counted on for isolation situations, his range, and crucial late game free throws. This player also is a decent defender and should hold his own at the next level.
Intangibles	Intangibles are statistical combination of every area that was either +/- range to each category. Some categories players had to many or too few points and were added or subtracted. The amounts left over were listed as intangibles.
(Reb)	These players are literally guaranteed to have a big impact on the rebounding category even when sometimes they do not rate high overall as a total player

Contact: admin@scoutingthenba.com if you are interested in professional services or have any questions about the program