2021 NBA Draft

[Scoop Snoop]

I agree with your point, but you can’t develop Markus to be 6’3” and you can’t really develop Sam into an NBA-type athlete.

Kyle Korver had a very long career in the NBA  based solely on his shooting, but he was a lot more athletic than Sam.

He would need to find the perfect team to cover his defensive weaknesses.

I always really liked Sam and hopefully I am proven wrong about his NBA prospects but the highlighted is spot on.

Edit: I think he will be a really good coach someday though. At Marquette and UVA, he was always talking to teammates, even when on the sidelines, telling them what he was seeing develop. The guy had great court vision and never got the credit he deserved for being a player-coach who covered as best he could for Wojo's woeful game coaching.

[Jockey]

I always really liked Sam and hopefully I am proven wrong about his NBA prospects but the highlighted is spot on.

Edit: I think he will be a really good coach someday though. At Marquette and UVA, he was always talking to teammates, even when on the sidelines, telling them what he was seeing develop. The guy had great court vision and never got the credit he deserved for being a player-coach who covered as best he could for Wojo's woeful game coaching.

I hope I am wrong, as well. I like seeing as many MU guys as possible in the league.

[MU82]

Kyle Korver had a very long career in the NBA  based solely on his shooting, but he was a lot more athletic than Sam.

A lot more? Hmm.

Novak had a 10-year NBA career ... and Hauser is more (and maybe a lot more) athletic than Novak was.

As you said, we'll get to see instead of debate it soon enough!

[MuggsyB]

A lot more? Hmm.

Novak had a 10-year NBA career ... and Hauser is more (and maybe a lot more) athletic than Novak was.

As you said, we'll get to see instead of debate it soon enough!

You're correct.  However, Novak was a lights-out spot shooter.  Meaning, that with time, an automatic bucket with minimal net movement.  Very few guys, including  Sam, have that skill-set.

[MU82]

You're correct.  However, Novak was a lights-out spot shooter.  Meaning, that with time, an automatic bucket with minimal net movement.  Very few guys, including  Sam, have that skill-set.

We don't know if Hauser will be able to shoot the NBA 3 as well as Novak did. But as college players, Novak shot 46% and Hauser 44%. That's better, but it's not crazy better. And Sam certainly had lights-out, spot-shooting skill-set in college.

We'll see!

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Is Hauser really a better athlete than Novak?

[Uncle Rico]

Is Hauser really a better athlete than Novak?

Not even close IMO.  Sam is a very good basketball player but I think people forget how good Novak was

[Uncle Rico]

Novak/Sam KenPom stuff:

His senior year, his real shooting % was 64.3%. Junior year, it was 61.7%.  He didn’t rebound but he made up for that by never turning the ball over and making every FT.  His last two years, he was 28th and 26th in the nation in 3%.

Sam was 61% and 57% real shooting his senior and junior years.  He was 139th and 214th in 3PT % those years, however, he was best in the ACC in 2021 and 15th in the BE in 2019.  Sam is a way better rebounder, at least in college and also didn’t turn it over.

Steve was a better shooter.  Maybe not a lot better but arguably enough to make a difference why he had an NBA career

[MuggsyB]

We don't know if Hauser will be able to shoot the NBA 3 as well as Novak did. But as college players, Novak shot 46% and Hauser 44%. That's better, but it's not crazy better. And Sam certainly had lights-out, spot-shooting skill-set in college.

We'll see!

I'm not sure you understand what "lights-out" means.  In the most basic terms it's analogous to watching a cheetah vs anyone in a 100m-800m sprint.  In other words I had 0.0 anxiety when SN had an open J with time to spare.  The same cannot be said for Sam, Markus, AR, or any of MU's elite shooters.   It was automatic and stress-free consistently.

[MuggsyB]

Extending this discussion....if your life depended on someone drilling a 24 foot J who would you go with? Curry?  Bird?

[ATL MU Warrior]

We don't know if Hauser will be able to shoot the NBA 3 as well as Novak did. But as college players, Novak shot 46% and Hauser 44%. That's better, but it's not crazy better. And Sam certainly had lights-out, spot-shooting skill-set in college.

We'll see!

Both Novak and Korver (mentioned earlier) had/have  much quicker releases than Sam. Korver in particular as he could come off a screen and jump/release in one super-quick motion. I’ve never seen Sam do anything close to that. Novak’s release was also much quicker, but Korver had them both beat.

Sam is very deliberate in his shot mechanics and it works for him, but it is a strike against his NBA aspirations IMO.

[Jockey]

Novak/Sam KenPom stuff:

His senior year, his real shooting % was 64.3%. Junior year, it was 61.7%.  He didn’t rebound but he made up for that by never turning the ball over and making every FT.  His last two years, he was 28th and 26th in the nation in 3%.

Sam was 61% and 57% real shooting his senior and junior years.  He was 139th and 214th in 3PT % those years, however, he was best in the ACC in 2021 and 15th in the BE in 2019.  Sam is a way better rebounder, at least in college and also didn’t turn it over.

Steve was a better shooter.  Maybe not a lot better but arguably enough to make a difference why he had an NBA career

Sam isn’t quite the shooter that Novak was, but he is very, very good AND mentally Sam is very good as well.

We will find out if that overcomes the lack of NBA-type athleticism.

[Herman Cain]

We don't know if Hauser will be able to shoot the NBA 3 as well as Novak did. But as college players, Novak shot 46% and Hauser 44%. That's better, but it's not crazy better. And Sam certainly had lights-out, spot-shooting skill-set in college.

We'll see!

One positive point in Sams favor is he continued to shoot well in college after the 3 point line was moved out farther this year .

Also when carefully examining Sams career he was a consistent 3 point shooter game after game . Not super streaky . His stroke was extremely consistent and well formed.

I agree with you and believe some NBA team will provide an opportunity for Sam .

[JWags85]

I'm not sure you understand what "lights-out" means.  In the most basic terms it's analogous to watching a cheetah vs anyone in a 100m-800m sprint.  In other words I had 0.0 anxiety when SN had an open J with time to spare.  The same cannot be said for Sam, Markus, AR, or any of MU's elite shooters.   It was automatic and stress-free consistently.

Why do you keep doing this man?  I respect your passion for basketball, but you ignore statistics and actual facts for these completely subjective assessments that are founded in nothing.  If both players took 100 3s in college, Steve would make 2 more.  Yet you make it sound like he was a 40% shooter and Novak from 3 was like his FT shooting.   You make yourself sound like a silly homer talking like that, be better.

Not even close IMO.  Sam is a very good basketball player but I think people forget how good Novak was

People aren't saying who was a better player, just who was a better pure athlete.  Novak wasn't gonna take anyone off the dribble or out quick anyone.  Novak had a quicker release but Sam has better hops and explosiveness than Novak does even if he isn't Deonte Burton.

[jficke13]

Extending this discussion....if your life depended on someone drilling a 24 foot J who would you go with? Curry?  Bird?

Is it defended? Because open/in practice either hits them almost as often as they want. I'll take Curry but frankly it doesn't matter.

If it's live action, then I guess I take Steve Kerr because he's the alltime 3 point percentage leader in NBA history and numbers don't lie.

[MU82]

Both Novak and Korver (mentioned earlier) had/have  much quicker releases than Sam. Korver in particular as he could come off a screen and jump/release in one super-quick motion. I’ve never seen Sam do anything close to that. Novak’s release was also much quicker, but Korver had them both beat.

Sam is very deliberate in his shot mechanics and it works for him, but it is a strike against his NBA aspirations IMO.

The eye test says this, but the scouting reports I have read say that Hauser gets his shot off plenty quick enough, he can do it off the bounce and he has good height to shoot over most any defender.

There is Steph quick, and there is Jokich slow. Hauser is in the middle IMHO. I don't think it will keep him from having an NBA career, but maybe it will.

For the record, I am not predicting that Hauser will get drafted, though I wouldn't be stunned if he ended up being a second-rounder. I do think he will get at least a two-way contract ... and from there we'll see.

[forgetful]

Extending this discussion....if your life depended on someone drilling a 24 foot J who would you go with? Curry?  Bird?

Is it defended? Because open/in practice either hits them almost as often as they want. I'll take Curry but frankly it doesn't matter.

If it's live action, then I guess I take Steve Kerr because he's the alltime 3 point percentage leader in NBA history and numbers don't lie.

I think these discussions and statistics based analysis across generations is futile. In Bird's days (and Kerr's) the 3 point shot wasn't a focus. Bird was pre-3pt focus, but was unquestionably the best 3-point shooter of his era, and possibly the best pure shooter. He once scored 47 points in a game shooting left-handed. Kerr shot an amazing percentage, but low volume, mostly open shots.

Someone like Curry takes as many 3 point shots in a month, as many from that era took in a career. So statistic not comparable.

What is true, is that all three were elite shooters.

Now if the question is simply 1 shot uncontested. I have to go with Curry or Novak. They simply have shot the volumes needed to stand out, and Novak once hit 95/100 in a tryout, and Curry 94/100 in drills (77 in a row). Those are freakish numbers I don't think anyone else can match. And Kerr has said Curry is a better shooter than him.

But if you take Kerr or Bird, and have them grow up in this era, and they are hitting 94 or 95 out of a hundred too.

[MU82]

I think these discussions and statistics based analysis across generations is futile. In Bird's days (and Kerr's) the 3 point shot wasn't a focus. Bird was pre-3pt focus, but was unquestionably the best 3-point shooter of his era, and possibly the best pure shooter. He once scored 47 points in a game shooting left-handed. Kerr shot an amazing percentage, but low volume, mostly open shots.

Someone like Curry takes as many 3 point shots in a month, as many from that era took in a career. So statistic not comparable.

What is true, is that all three were elite shooters.

Now if the question is simply 1 shot uncontested. I have to go with Curry or Novak. They simply have shot the volumes needed to stand out, and Novak once hit 95/100 in a tryout, and Curry 94/100 in drills (77 in a row). Those are freakish numbers I don't think anyone else can match. And Kerr has said Curry is a better shooter than him.

But if you take Kerr or Bird, and have them grow up in this era, and they are hitting 94 or 95 out of a hundred too.

Given that several contemporaries made 3s at a higher percentage than Bird did -- Mark Price, Dale Ellis and Craig Hodges to name three -- Bird wasn't "unquestionably the best 3-point shooter of his era." I probably would have taken your boy to shoot if I needed a clutch 3, but that's a very different conversation. You can't look at Bird's .376 and Price's .402 and say Bird was "unquestionably" better, no matter how much you worship Bird. Or I guess you can, but you'd be inaccurate.

Curry's the best shooter I've ever seen.

[MuggsyB]

.974 and 72 straight.  Don't forget that JWags.

[forgetful]

Given that several contemporaries made 3s at a higher percentage than Bird did -- Mark Price, Dale Ellis and Craig Hodges to name three -- Bird wasn't "unquestionably the best 3-point shooter of his era." I probably would have taken your boy to shoot if I needed a clutch 3, but that's a very different conversation. You can't look at Bird's .376 and Price's .402 and say Bird was "unquestionably" better, no matter how much you worship Bird. Or I guess you can, but you'd be inaccurate.

Curry's the best shooter I've ever seen.

Well you can, and nearly every NBA expert and analysis of the best 3-point shooters (and in general just shooters) puts Bird at the top of his era, and typically in the top 3-5 for all time (that seems pretty unquestionable). They do the for a reason...and it isn't to be inaccurate.

And while I agree with you on Curry, using the stats logic, how can you say that if Seth Curry and Joe Harris have better career averages than him? Quite simply, because a blanket stat like career 3-point percentage doesn't tell the entire picture. Curry is one of a kind.

[jficke13]

Well you can, and nearly every NBA expert and analysis of the best 3-point shooters (and in general just shooters) puts Bird at the top of his era, and typically in the top 3-5 for all time (that seems pretty unquestionable). They do the for a reason...and it isn't to be inaccurate.

And while I agree with you on Curry, using the stats logic, how can you say that if Seth Curry and Joe Harris have better career averages than him? Quite simply, because a blanket stat like career 3-point percentage doesn't tell the entire picture. Curry is one of a kind.

Right, because defense, shot selection, context all aren't necessarily captured in the statistic. But, when literally the only thing that's being asked is: "Who ya got if you get murdered if your choice can't hit a 3?" then all that context is stripped out of the analysis. At that point you actually revert to a pure numerical analysis.

Or. Whatever. It's your fictional life on the line, so if you wanna be a tough guy no nerdy-nerds with their nerdy numbers allowed and go with your gut, by all means. It's a message board, so have at man.

[MuggsyB]

I suppose I'd go with Curry.  I think he hit 77 straight once in a warm-up session. 

[MUfan12]

Is Hauser really a better athlete than Novak?

Nope. At the very least on par, but Steve's footwork and mechanics were so much more efficient than Sam's.

[MUBurrow]

I think Hauser is a "better athlete" compared to Novak in the sense that he was a more versatile college player taking guys off the dribble and functioning in space. But he's not a better athlete by a wide enough margin or in the ways that matter from an NBA perspective.  Sam is not taking a soul off the dribble in the league and he'll be a defensive liability.  Sam also gives up two inches to Novak, some lbs (though that could be rectified) and has a slower release.  Ultimately Sam's role in the NBA would be to stretch defenses and stand in the corner, same as Novak, and he's worse than Novak on the things that matter for that role.

[Jockey]

I think Hauser is a "better athlete" compared to Novak in the sense that he was a more versatile college player taking guys off the dribble and functioning in space. But he's not a better athlete by a wide enough margin or in the ways that matter from an NBA perspective.  Sam is not taking a soul off the dribble in the league and he'll be a defensive liability.  Sam also gives up two inches to Novak, some lbs (though that could be rectified) and has a slower release.  Ultimately Sam's role in the NBA would be to stretch defenses and stand in the corner, same as Novak, and he's worse than Novak on the things that matter for that role.

Bingo.

It’s what I was trying to say, but you said it way better than I.