Lamb, Barnes, and the curiously-neglected Bradley Beal

by Newjamarcus on Feb 19, 2012 12:50 PM EST

I've seen a lot of love for both Harrison Barnes and Jeremy Lamb on this board, and almost none for Bradley Beal. For the purposes of this post, let's assume the Wizards want to draft a SG or SF (getting a really good PF is certainly a good option too, but let's table it for now).

My question to the community is, who would you rather have: Barnes, Lamb, or Beal, and should Beal at least be in the conversation? Here's my (only moderately informed) view on each of the three:

Barnes: he's the highest rated prospect of the three, but when I watch him (and I've watched several UNC games this year), I get a bad feeling. He does not look like an active or committed defender to my eyes, nor does he seem to have a great nose for rebounds (although UNC has plenty of rebounding, so I don't place too much credence in that). On offense, meanwhile, he's very smooth and polished, and seems to pass appropriately (though he's not a gifted passer). But he doesn't seem terribly explosive or especially long, and I worry that he won't be able to get past guys or create space in the NBA like he does in college. My eyes may be lying, of course, and there's a lot to be said for his very in-control offensive game. But even when puts up big numbers, I can't shake the feeling that he's not going to be a special pro.

Lamb: simply haven't seen him play. Of course there's a lot to love about a guy with that wingspan (7'1''!) who shoots that well. Still, some of the scouting reports make me worry that he may have some NY tendencies and deficits. Curious to hear from people who've seen him play a lot.

Beal: hasn't shot nearly as well so far as he was rated to coming out of high school (when scouts kept comparing him to Ray Allen or Eric Gordon). And he's a little undersized. Then again, he's less undersized now than he was in the summer (according to TV commentators, he's grown an inch, is now 6-4 w/o shoes, and may still be growing). And when I watch him play, I keep thinking, "wow he looks good" -- explosive, intuitive, incredibly high-motor, high-IQ. He is also already grown-man strong, and his rebounding rate is insane. Draft Express has him rated above Lamb, I believe. He strikes me as nearly flawless. Then again, I'm kind of assuming that because his shooting stroke is so sweet, and because he's such a great athlete, that his shooting numbers so far this season are an aberration (though they're certainly not terrible even now).

Anyway, would love to hear other thoughts on each of these guys. Does anyone share my mistrust of Barnes? Am I being irrational about Beal?

Some numbers, fyi:

Beal -- 56.6 TS%, 33.3 3PT%, 2.0 APG, 6.3 RPG, 1.3 steals, 2.3 TO ; 6-3, 207 lbs as per ESPN (but I think he's now 6-4)

Lamb -- 59.4 TS%, 34.2 3PT%, 1.7 APG, 4.6 RPG, 1.4 steals, 2.2 TO; 6-5, 180 lbs

Barnes -- 55.8 TS% 43.0 3PT%, 1.0 APG, 5.1 RPG, 1.2 steals, 1.8 TP; 6-8, 215 lbs

This represents the view of the user who wrote the FanPost, and not the entire Bullets Forever community. We're a place of many opinions, not just one.

Tweet Comment 49 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I should have included minutes per game, which make Barnes’s non-shooting numbers look significantly better, and Lamb’s a little worse:

Barnes 27.5 mpg; Beal 33.9 mpg; Lamb 36.9 mpg

by Newjamarcus on Feb 19, 2012 1:12 PM EST reply actions 1 recs

If Lamb has a higher TS% playing MORE minutes

How can that possibly make his numbers look worse?

I'm not going to think of something extra witty or clever to say, I don't want to convince you to see things my way, I just have 2 words for you: JEREMY LAMB

by qthaballa on Feb 19, 2012 7:28 PM EST up reply actions

I said non-shooting numbers

Those are raw, per-game numbers, not percentages and not per 40 minutes. So because Lamb has played more than Beal and Barnes, his raw numbers will look better than theirs. The difference between Lamb and Beal in minutes per game is small; Barnes has played much fewer minutes, though, so his numbers look lower than they should in comparison to the other two.

by Newjamarcus on Feb 19, 2012 9:00 PM EST up reply actions

Beal?

Will he b there in the 2nd round??? I hope your not suggesting wasting our lottery pick on him…

by ATLredskin on Feb 19, 2012 1:27 PM EST reply actions

Huh?

We don’t really know where our lottery pick will fall. Beal projects in most mock drafts I’ve seen between 7 and 11. If the Wizards catch Toronto and Sacramento, they could pick as late as 7. So I’m not sure it’d be a “waste.”

I would obviously prefer we have a great draft, end up with Drummond or Davis. But I think there are a lot of good possibilities in this draft, unlike last year.

by GJennings on Feb 19, 2012 2:16 PM EST up reply actions

Oh Beal...I was thinking of Walker...

I don’t follow Florida much, but watched a couple of their games though (Rutgers, some of Vandy, and some UK) and he don’t really stand out to me. I’m on the Robinson bandwagon though. I love Davis, but highly doubt we get him.

by ATLredskin on Feb 19, 2012 5:22 PM EST up reply actions

I'd rather we get beal than lamb

Lamb seems to me like a bit of a loner, and I don’t want to get another singleton who doesn’t mesh with the team.

by oakhillswag on Feb 19, 2012 4:13 PM EST via mobile up reply actions

What makes him seem like a loner?

From all I know he is a good locker room guy and meshes well with everyone on the team and the campus that loves him. I’m curious what makes you think otherwise?

I'm not going to think of something extra witty or clever to say, I don't want to convince you to see things my way, I just have 2 words for you: JEREMY LAMB

by qthaballa on Feb 19, 2012 7:26 PM EST up reply actions

I wasn't aware of how we was on campus

But during timeouts he doesn’t seem to get too inched and looks distant. But that just may be because of the coaching situation

by oakhillswag on Feb 19, 2012 8:39 PM EST via mobile up reply actions

not sure

But its clear that team has bad chemistry. IMO it starts with the PGs who seem to think its their turn to be Kemba Walker.

by Jheiser3 on Feb 20, 2012 3:07 PM EST up reply actions

be

by ATLredskin on Feb 19, 2012 1:30 PM EST reply actions

I think the team should buy another 1st and package our lowest 2nd.

Hopefully that could get a pick in the 15-20 range. The team needs to come away from this draft with a starter quality PF and SG.

Redskins @RGIII - 2012

by Copious 1 on Feb 19, 2012 1:33 PM EST reply actions 1 recs

I'm all for that...

Agree completely if it’s possible. That probably won’t get them Beal or Lamb, though (assuming, fingers crossed, they get a top 5 pick and can land one of the really good PFs). Draft Express has Beal at #10 (with Lamb at #12 and Barnes at #4). ESPN has Beal at #8 (with Lamb at #9 and Barnes at #3).

by Newjamarcus on Feb 19, 2012 2:18 PM EST up reply actions 1 recs

Beal has Dwayne Wade like size

I need to see more of him though. I remember watching the under-18 USA national team and the 4 players that stuck out then were Anthony Davis, Bradley Beal, Austin Rivers, and Michael Kidd-Gilchrist.

I think Barnes is the best right now easily of the SF and SGs projected this draft. The Wizards need some more shooters and natural scorers….I think of anyone Rivers needs to be talked about more, even if he isn’t as amazing as everyone thought he’d be right away. He is lighting fast, a good shooter, and his dad is Doc Rivers, so he has the pedigree for a high bball IQ…just like McGee’s pedigree…

by DaGribb on Feb 19, 2012 7:18 PM EST reply actions 1 recs

That'd be a no on Rivers for me

He is a guy who needs the ball in his hands to be effective even though his deft outside shooting would allow him to play off the ball some. He is also undersized and not the best defender in the world. His best asset is his shooting after watching many Duke games, he isn’t as good a playmaker as you would expect if you were hearing about him.

It may be just me, but I’d prefer a player with more size on the wing and one that will bring more to the table in all aspects of the game. Rivers would be a better fit on a team like Boston with a foundation in place and that can use a player who can create for themself off the bench

I'm not going to think of something extra witty or clever to say, I don't want to convince you to see things my way, I just have 2 words for you: JEREMY LAMB

by qthaballa on Feb 19, 2012 7:34 PM EST up reply actions

Lamb does not have any Nick Young tendencies

2 completely different players. I hate when I don’t know enough about a player so my suggestion for you would be to find some time to catch a few UConn games, as I’m about to catch a few more Florida games (coincidentally the first time I see Beal in a full game will be the next time I see a guy i am REALLY high on, Jeffrey Taylor from Vanderbilt)

I'm not going to think of something extra witty or clever to say, I don't want to convince you to see things my way, I just have 2 words for you: JEREMY LAMB

by qthaballa on Feb 19, 2012 7:25 PM EST reply actions

Taylor is my sleeper

I think he should be a mid first rounder

by Llamaman on Feb 19, 2012 7:36 PM EST up reply actions

One of the most underrated players in the nation

I don’t understand why he isn’t more highly touted. I heard about Taylor all before last year’s draft on fanposts etc, here but never got a chance to see him play. Now I understand. I really hope there is a way the Wiz could package both their 2nd rounders and extras to move up to get him (he will not last past pick 22)

I'm not going to think of something extra witty or clever to say, I don't want to convince you to see things my way, I just have 2 words for you: JEREMY LAMB

by qthaballa on Feb 19, 2012 8:03 PM EST up reply actions

Re: Taylor

As a Vandy fan, I’ll explain why Taylor isn’t as highly rated as his talent would allow. Even though he is a freak athlete, who outplayed Kidd-Gilchrist and just dominated Ole Miss this past weekend. … Until the Ole Miss game, he hadn’t dominated a game in his whole college career. He’s not a great shooter, and really just started shooting 3s well this year. It may take a few years before he’s a good NBA 3 pt shooter which he will need to be to get steady minutes. At Vandy, he is passive on O and disappears for long stretches of the game. He cannot go to the left and does not drive to the hole at all. He’s unstoppable in the college game when he does, but has not figured that out in 4 years. He’s an okay passer and should be a above average defender in the NBA, but I think BEST case scenario, he tops out as a starter but 4th/5th offensive option on a team.

Still I think it’s very possible he goes late first round, but if you watch Vandy play every game, he’s a very frustrating player. If he’s aggressive going to the hoop, stays focused every game and improves his shooting significantly, he could easily prove me wrong though.

by ballerstedt on Feb 20, 2012 10:35 AM EST up reply actions

Thanks for the insight

I saw his stats, especially the 47% 3 point shooting, but unfortunately I’ve only been able to catch one game, on ESPN3, and it was the Georgia game, which wasn’t his best.

by Llamaman on Feb 20, 2012 10:49 AM EST up reply actions

big fan of Taylor

I hope he’s there with our second pick.

by Jheiser3 on Feb 20, 2012 2:56 PM EST up reply actions

Been Watching Vandy All Season

Taylor reminds me of the San Antonio Spurs, not flashy, just consistent, and solid all around. He’s got all of the skills you could ask for from a 6’7" wing with a great feel for the game. We see “veteran” college players like Taylor slip into the mid to late 1st round all the time and usually a perennial playoff team licks their chops as a NBA ready talent slips to them, while the team’s picking ahead of them go with players with higher “potential’s”.

I also really like John Jenkins. Perhaps he develops into a Jodie Meeks/Randy Foye/Jamal Crawford type of player.

by SpecialSauce on Feb 20, 2012 7:56 PM EST up reply actions

Jenkins

also reminds me of Wayne Ellington.

by Jheiser3 on Feb 20, 2012 8:12 PM EST up reply actions

Taylor =? Landry Fields

As a UK fan from time in Memorial, I watched both Landry Fields and Taylor play against the Cats. The latest version of Taylor was very reminiscent of Fields’ game against UK, when he almost took UK down by himself with his energy play and rising to the challenge of keeping his team in the game I would say he should be able to bring at least the same level of play that Fields brought, much to the surprise of a lot of soothsayers, as the Knicks 2nd round draft choice. That said, there are others that could offer a similar level of performance that will be available in the second round, Darius Miller being not the least of them. (In the interest of full disclosure, I think I was touting Josh Harrellson along the same line, in last year’s draft)

by LotteryNot2Day on Feb 21, 2012 4:02 PM EST up reply actions

I agree with this completely

Lamb basically plays the way nick young should be playing

by oakhillswag on Feb 19, 2012 8:44 PM EST via mobile up reply actions

Yeah, I hope to see him

I just haven’t a chance to do so yet. The scouting report that worried me was from Draft Express. Here are some quotes:

“He at times has a tendency to bail defenses out by settling for low percentage attempts, either by pulling up off the dribble in the 17- to 19-foot area, or taking difficult shots from just outside the paint trying to use the glass. … Lamb’s laid back demeanor can get him in trouble when he doesn’t put forth the intensity required to help his team come up with stops. …What we did see at times was that Lamb was out of place, not hustling, or defending with his arms to his sides — showing average fundamentals. While his length and timing will sometimes bail him out on this end of the floor, relying on his athletic prowess probably won’t work as well against a higher caliber of competition, for example in the NBA. … He doesn’t show very much emotion on the court and at times gives the impression that he’s playing by himself. He’s somewhat single-minded (some would say laid back) in his approach to the game.”

I’m only taking the negatives from the report — there are many positives. And this is just one report. I’m eager to see him.

I’ll be curious for your take on Beal as well. I think he looks really, really good — which (along with my concerns about Barnes) was really the main point of my post.

by Newjamarcus on Feb 19, 2012 9:10 PM EST up reply actions

Hope you were able to catch UConn vs Villanova tonight

If not, you can probably catch it on replay on watchespn.

I'm not going to think of something extra witty or clever to say, I don't want to convince you to see things my way, I just have 2 words for you: JEREMY LAMB

by qthaballa on Feb 20, 2012 9:43 PM EST up reply actions

Beal

I really like Beal. He can shoot, and he knows how to play without the ball. 6’4, 207 is a pretty good size to me considering that Lamb is only an inch taller but over 20 pounds lighter. At 207lbs Beal should be strong enough to finish at the rim with contact. He also plays defense. I feel like Barnes just has bust written all over him for some reason even though he looks unstoppable at times at UNC.

by InMylesWeTrust on Feb 19, 2012 9:56 PM EST reply actions

If I were picking a 2-guard in the second round (or late first round perhaps)

I might go with FSU’s Michael Snaer… Every time you turn around, the kid is hitting a key shot.

by khrabb on Feb 20, 2012 6:43 AM EST reply actions

The Wiz....

….desperately need Barnes. First, the stats you quote are for 27 minutes a game. For example, getting 5 rebounds per 27 minutes when you have two 7 footers on your own team is very good. Barnes has a nose for the ball.

Second, I believe your concern emanates from the team performance. The Tar Heels have played without passion for most of the year. Second, it took them most of the season to figure out that Barnes should be the number 1 option on offense. Hence, Barnes hasn’t stood out.

Third, Barnes doesn’t look good on defense at times because he is playing help defense. This is not a bad skill for a team with McGee at center.

Overall, Barnes brings offense and high basketball IQ. He doesn’t have to be the leader (which should be Wall), meaning he would fit in well. He’s similar to Deng on Chicago, only with much higher potential. In fact, Wall/Barnes/McGee could be comparable to Rose/Deng/Noah with continued improvement.

And, finally, there are the intangibles. For example, work effort, desire, chemistry, etc. I would rate him very highly for the Wiz on these factors.

I would watch for intensity by Barnes in the NCAA tournament. If he brings it, that should seal the deal.

But, on the other hand, if we ended up with a top 3 pick, I wouldn’t be surprised if EG traded down for two or three lower picks to get players that he has been coveting for years.

by Izman on Feb 20, 2012 8:06 AM EST reply actions

I agree, Barnes is the most certain pick that could help us

Who won? Who lost? Who cares?! The NBA is Back! - David Aldridge

What seems to be the officer, problem? - Randy Marsh

by Dutch Hoopfan on Feb 20, 2012 9:45 AM EST up reply actions

Luol Deng is a very, very good player.

by DCrez on Feb 20, 2012 10:48 AM EST up reply actions

I actually think he can be a slightly better Deng

Formerly know as iNFamous SWaGG

by DMVLeGenD on Feb 20, 2012 3:07 PM EST up reply actions

Love HB

Don’t ever see him being what Deng is defensively. Offensively I’d say he will surpass Lou.

by Jheiser3 on Feb 20, 2012 3:34 PM EST up reply actions

agree

I definitely agree with all of this. Barnes is without a doubt the best of three and has to be the pick given his work ethic, desire, offensive potential, willingness, bball iq, etc. The only problem I have is his “killer instinct,” he displays it at times but it will fade really quickly within a few possessions.

As a fan I want him to be more ball-dominant, but its fine that hes not because he seems to be hyper efficient and shoots very well. He doesn’t need 20 shots to get 20 points. But what will happen when he plays for the wizards and not UNC, where he gets open looks because the other players are also good?

by dukespike20 on Feb 21, 2012 9:44 PM EST up reply actions

all true

Coach Williams demands they pound it inside first. That makes a lot of sense with Henson and Zeller in there. Barnes also came in trying to be the ultimate team player instead of being himself. We saw what happened when he took over in the tourney last year though.

Even this season he was deferring to others while still acting as the shot-taker at the end of the clock. It wasn’t until the second half of the ACC season where he came out aggressively in the first half. His scoring is ticking upward just at the right time. I feel like he is the type of shooter that can get open in a phone booth. His footwork offensively is fantastic.

by Jheiser3 on Feb 22, 2012 3:49 PM EST up reply actions

Rebounding

Henson is 1st in the ACC in rebounding. Zeller is 3rd!

by Jheiser3 on Feb 20, 2012 3:04 PM EST up reply actions

Jeremy Lamb might be the most overrated prospect in the draft

Any team that takes him over Rivers, Beal, or Barnes/Kidd Gilchrist will regret that pick. I’m honestly starting to think that Doron Lamb is better than Jeremy.

I think Lamb can be an efficient 15 ppg in the nba, who might develop into a solid defender, but that’s it. I think every other solid wing has more potential in addition to being flat out better right now. What it comes down to is this: every single Uconn player got overrate because of that title run last year. That team was mediocre all year except for the big east tourney and ncaas. So the team got hot and hit shots and all their prospects got overhyped. Jeremy lamb becomes a top 5 pick somehow because hes lanky athletic and can catch and shoot?

Also, if you like j lamb simply because he isn’t ball dominant, why not just take Doron instead? Far better shooter, better defender, better handle and ability to run an offense. He’s not as tall, but he also isn’t frail like Jeremy and has just been a more productive player IMO.

Still gotta say that Rivers is criminally underrated. I couldn’t fathom taking Lamb over him if my team needed a 2. I don’t know why people hate on rivers so much, there’s A LOT to like with him.

Formerly know as iNFamous SWaGG

by DMVLeGenD on Feb 20, 2012 9:24 AM EST reply actions

I'd Have a Tough Time With Lamb

UCONN is the #1 biggest disappointment in college ball this season. Lamb is the leader and gets a ton of minutes. The other guys on the draft radar are all on winning teams. It’s one thing to be on a losing team like John Wall is here. The Wiz were bad, got the top pick, and drafted an excellent player from a very good team. But I wouldn’t be thrilled about using a top 6-7 pick on a guy that wasn’t good enough to carry his very talented team to a much better record.

by SpecialSauce on Feb 20, 2012 8:04 PM EST up reply actions

Doron Lamb better than Jeremy Lamb?

Has to be a joke or you have some bias no one knows about. This isn’t ven debatable so I’ll respectfully disagree

I'm not going to think of something extra witty or clever to say, I don't want to convince you to see things my way, I just have 2 words for you: JEREMY LAMB

by qthaballa on Feb 20, 2012 9:41 PM EST up reply actions

Beal would be my 2nd SG

Maybe more of a combo since he’s a good enough decision maker and passer to run the point in a pinch.

I like what i see. I just have reservations about his ability to shoot on the move. Looks like more of a static position shooter or straight line shooter (pull-ups and step backs). People compare him to Ray Allen but i dunno about that. His stroke is pure but i have some reservations about his ability to run around screens and hit shots in that fashion. He’s a much better shooter when he’s able to set up and fully use his legs (well, every shooter is, he just hasnt looked like as good of a shooter on the move). I still think he can be a Joe Dumars type player, a real pro’s pro and a factor on both ends of the floor.

Formerly know as iNFamous SWaGG

by DMVLeGenD on Feb 20, 2012 9:27 AM EST reply actions

Looking at more comparable stats...

Per 40 minutes, pace adjusted (more comparable):
Barnes: 23.1 pts 6.6 reb 1.3 ast 1.6 stl 0.5 blk 2.4 TO 2.1 PF TS 56%
Lamb: 19.1 pts 5.0 reb 2.0 ast 1.6 stl 0.7 blk 2.5 TO 1.9 PF TS 59%
Beal: 16.8 pts 7.2 teb 2.3 ast 1.5 stl 0.9 blk 2.5 TO 2.4 PF TS: 56%

Looking only at that, Barnes looks like the best player. Beal’s stats are very similar to Lamb’s freshman year stats.

by steadyhand on Feb 20, 2012 12:50 PM EST reply actions

Not sure I’d say Barnes looks best based purely on these numbers. He scores more, but no more efficiently than Beal, and less efficiently than Lamb. Beal, despite being a guard, is a better rebounder and shot-blocker. Both he and Lamb get more assists.

That’s not to say Barnes might not be the best player, but I don’t agree that these numbers show that.

by Newjamarcus on Feb 20, 2012 3:52 PM EST up reply actions

I guess it depends on how you value scoring

I feel like there has been an over-reaction to the way volume scoring was overvalued for so long. 23.1 vs 19.1 is pretty meaningful. That’s 21% more. Efficiency matters, but is only meaningful IN COMBINATION with volume.

With that in mind, Lamb’s 19.1 is pretty good, but could he score 4 more points a game without losing 3% off his TS%? It’s incrementally harder to increase your scoring as your average goes up (as defenses key on you more), so I highly doubt it. I think the other differences pretty much balance out, so I think Barnes wins that one.

As for Beal, there are probably over a hundred college players who put up 16.8 pts or more per 40 minutes. Beal only gets 0.6 more rebounds per 40 minutes than Barnes. Not a very big difference, and not as valuable a skill for SG/SF, in my opinion. Ditto the 0.4 blocks (halfway offset by 0.1 disadvantage in steals and turnovers). The assists is actually the advantage I think is most meaningful, but I still think the scoring (and associated easier scoring for teammates) more than offsets that. (Just looking at the stats — I might watch Beal for one game and swear he’s the better prospect.)

by steadyhand on Feb 20, 2012 5:24 PM EST up reply actions

Terrence Jones at last had a big game for Kentucky

He may be the dark horse in this draft, someone to go for if we wind up adding a mid first round pick as his stock has dropped. And what on earth has happened to Perry Jones III?

by khrabb on Feb 20, 2012 5:23 PM EST reply actions

Jones and PJ3

I think both guys have been a major disappointment this season. Baylor has really struggled recently and PJ3 disappears way to often in crunch for the Bears, while Jones lacks consistent effort, despite returning to KY for his sophomore season to prove otherwise.

by SpecialSauce on Feb 20, 2012 8:09 PM EST up reply actions

T. Jones will be a scrub in the NBA

I think PJIII will be a Tim Thomas-like underachiever.

Formerly know as iNFamous SWaGG

by DMVLeGenD on Feb 21, 2012 11:56 PM EST up reply actions

tough call

Someone needs to study why guys like Darrell Arthur and Thaddeus Young succeed, while so many other 6’8ish forwards don’t. I agree that those two seem to have a high level of ‘bust-a-bility’ around them.

by Jheiser3 on Feb 22, 2012 4:01 PM EST up reply actions

Problem is that Perry is playing out of position

I hope he keeps slipping and that we’re able to move up for him because I think he can be an outstanding 3. I wouldn’t touch him early, but if he is on the board at the end of the lottery, I’d make a major push.

I think he’s not built to be “the man” or be used as a big, but with a facilitator and leader like Wall, he’d be able to play within himself. Hopefully we get Anthony Davis, but a lineup of Wall, Perry Jones, Davis and McGee could develop to be unstoppable.

by gorebd on Feb 22, 2012 7:56 PM EST up reply actions