Grant and the NBA | Syracusefan.com

Grant and the NBA

007

All American
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
5,391
Like
12,804
I found this take on Grant from Orangeyes articles to be particularly interesting:

"For a guy with such limited skills, it's amazing how productive Jerami Grant continues to be. He relies strictly on his crazy length and athleticism to pick up buckets at the rim—no jumper, no shot creativity and a 65 percent free-throw stroke. ...But to play the wing in the pros, you must have some sort of a perimeter game. And Grant doesn't right now."

I love Grant's game as an elite college athlete, but I find myself agreeing with the above "scouting report." To be honest, I don't see Grant's skill set translating to the NBA - at least not yet. My opinion does not come from an egocentric Orange fan perspective who hopes he stays at SU just because it benefits SU. I think Grant is a player who will be better served in the long term by staying in college and developing his skill set to whatever degree he can before he enters the league.

But, I would not blame him for jumping given the majority of the NBA projections I have read.
 

HarrisonJBounel

All Conference
Joined
Dec 29, 2011
Messages
3,212
Like
2,253
I found this take on Grant from Orangeyes articles to be particularly interesting:

"For a guy with such limited skills, it's amazing how productive Jerami Grant continues to be. He relies strictly on his crazy length and athleticism to pick up buckets at the rim—no jumper, no shot creativity and a 65 percent free-throw stroke. ...But to play the wing in the pros, you must have some sort of a perimeter game. And Grant doesn't right now."

I love Grant's game as an elite college athlete, but I find myself agreeing with the above "scouting report." To be honest, I don't see Grant's skill set translating to the NBA - at least not yet. My opinion does not come from an egocentric Orange fan perspective who hopes he stays at SU just because it benefits SU. I think Grant is a player who will be better served in the long term by staying in college and developing his skill set to whatever degree he can before he enters the league.

But, I would not blame him for jumping given the majority of the NBA projections I have read.

It's still early in his career, and his skills will surely continue to develop, but in the NBA he runs the risk of becoming a relatively unproductive "'tweener" - too small for a PF, and too unskilled to be a SF. He can certainly make a very nice living, but he has a ways to go before living up to the family name.
 

two3zone

RIP Shark58
Joined
Aug 23, 2013
Messages
59,300
Like
37,181
He's what, 19 years old? MCW was 21/22 when he left. No doubt in my mind Grant expands his game by the time he's that age and is an very serviceable player in the NBA. He's just as athletic as Darius Miles was when he came out of high school and he was solid in the league. Anybody who questions Grants draftability at this stage of his career probably doesn't follow the NBA nor it's drafts, it's the same people who said MCW was stupid for leaving and the same people who think Ennis is in the lottery this year. Do your homework or leave it alone.
 

jdubs30

Living Legend
Joined
Nov 26, 2011
Messages
14,370
Like
28,513
Grant shown flashes of being able to develop a jumper; his handle however, may be harder to develop. He is a stretch 3/4 in the NBA right now. He has 2 choices; put on more muscle and become more of a 4, or work on that shot a la CJ Fair and become a big 3. Right now he is very sloppy in driving to the rim, he just throws his body into defenders and kind of chucks at the basket hoping to either get a foul called or to somehow make it, that might fly in college but in the NBA vs. other elite athletes you better have a better move than that.

Like two3zone said, he's 19. He's far from his peak and he'll work on it. You can tell from last year to this year eeven that his jumper is way better.
 

jdubs30

Living Legend
Joined
Nov 26, 2011
Messages
14,370
Like
28,513
I don't think that's a knock at all, at this point it's true, but I think the ceiling is higher for Grant.
Hak will be better a college player than Grant; but Grant will be better in the NBA IMO. Hak played a long time in the league and had some decent seasons, but he was never really an impact guy and I think Grant could be. You could tell Hak's game would have trouble translating to the next level.
 

IthacaMatt

Old Timer / Unofficial Contributor for 25+ years
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
19,768
Like
26,505
Hak will be better a college player than Grant; but Grant will be better in the NBA IMO. Hak played a long time in the league and had some decent seasons, but he was never really an impact guy and I think Grant could be. You could tell Hak's game would have trouble translating to the next level.


Give us an example of what you're talking about. Hak was a pretty fair 3 point shooter as a senior and was a better rebounder. He also had that go-go-gadget dunkability that Grant is just beginning to approach. In what way do you project Grant to be better than Hakim? It's not the handle. I guess the only thing left is the defense, but Grant seems that same kind of in-between guy to me. People may have forgotten just how good of a college player Warrick was because his NBA career was a disappointment, relatively speaking.
 

iommi

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
12,694
Like
27,763
Give us an example of what you're talking about. Hak was a pretty fair 3 point shooter as a senior and was a better rebounder. He also had that go-go-gadget dunkability that Grant is just beginning to approach. In what way do you project Grant to be better than Hakim? It's not the handle. I guess the only thing left is the defense, but Grant seems that same kind of in-between guy to me. People may have forgotten just how good of a college player Warrick was because his NBA career was a disappointment, relatively speaking.

You are probably right but I don't remember Hak being a three point shooter.
 

SoBeCuse

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
12,178
Like
15,004
Grant shown flashes of being able to develop a jumper; his handle however, may be harder to develop. He is a stretch 3/4 in the NBA right now. He has 2 choices; put on more muscle and become more of a 4, or work on that shot a la CJ Fair and become a big 3. Right now he is very sloppy in driving to the rim, he just throws his body into defenders and kind of chucks at the basket hoping to either get a foul called or to somehow make it, that might fly in college but in the NBA vs. other elite athletes you better have a better move than that.

Like two3zone said, he's 19. He's far from his peak and he'll work on it. You can tell from last year to this year eeven that his jumper is way better.

I agree with all of this. It will be interesting what happens with his game in terms of working on being a 3 or developing more of a 4's body like you say.
 

OrangeDW

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 8, 2012
Messages
57,809
Like
169,968
Give us an example of what you're talking about. Hak was a pretty fair 3 point shooter as a senior and was a better rebounder. He also had that go-go-gadget dunkability that Grant is just beginning to approach. In what way do you project Grant to be better than Hakim? It's not the handle. I guess the only thing left is the defense, but Grant seems that same kind of in-between guy to me. People may have forgotten just how good of a college player Warrick was because his NBA career was a disappointment, relatively speaking.

Agree with most of this. Except I don't think Warrick's pro career was a disappointment based on where he was drafted. It would seem he had a better career than most 19th picks do.
 

IthacaMatt

Old Timer / Unofficial Contributor for 25+ years
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
19,768
Like
26,505
You are probably right but I don't remember Hak being a three point shooter.

He wasn't until his senior year, but he got fairly good at it and made 1st team AA, if I recall correctly.
 

iommi

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
12,694
Like
27,763
He wasn't until his senior year, but he got fairly good at it and made 1st team AA, if I recall correctly.

He was a great player but not a good 3 point shooter.
 
H

headmaster9

Guest
He may not have been a great three point shooter ...but he does have the biggest block in the biggest game.
 

pfister1

2019-20 Iggy Co-Winner Reg Season Rcd
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
8,629
Like
14,650
He wasn't until his senior year, but he got fairly good at it and made 1st team AA, if I recall correctly.

He was a first team AA, but it had absolutely nothing to do with three point shooting. I wouldn't characterize 9 made three pointers as being fairly good at hitting three point shots, by that measure Elvir Ovcina would be a prolific 3 point marksman.

He played 8 seasons in the NBA, appearing in more than 60 games 6 of those seasons. Scored just under 5,000 career points and more than 2,000 rebounds. I'm not sure his career was a disappointment if you looked at it realistically. He was never a star, but everyone can't be.
 

two3zone

RIP Shark58
Joined
Aug 23, 2013
Messages
59,300
Like
37,181
IthacaMatt said:
Give us an example of what you're talking about. Hak was a pretty fair 3 point shooter as a senior and was a better rebounder. He also had that go-go-gadget dunkability that Grant is just beginning to approach. In what way do you project Grant to be better than Hakim? It's not the handle. I guess the only thing left is the defense, but Grant seems that same kind of in-between guy to me. People may have forgotten just how good of a college player Warrick was because his NBA career was a disappointment, relatively speaking.

Warrick was 9 for 31 for three his senior year. Not a great sample size but not good enough to call fair.
 

IthacaMatt

Old Timer / Unofficial Contributor for 25+ years
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
19,768
Like
26,505
He was a great player but not a good 3 point shooter.


By his senior year, he showed that he could hit one. Proof of concept. It may have only been about 1 attempt a game, but he hit almost 30%. After having not hit any except for a lucky one his freshman year, that was an extra element he added to his game for the benefit of projecting his game to the next level, just like John Wallace never really made any until his senior year (and then, BOY, did he hit a couple big ones!).

Getting back to the original point, at what skill does Grant project better as a pro than Warrick?
 

IthacaMatt

Old Timer / Unofficial Contributor for 25+ years
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
19,768
Like
26,505
He was 10/40 his entire college career. 9/31 his senior year.

Kind of like Fair a year ago. Showed he could make them if you left him open.
 

IthacaMatt

Old Timer / Unofficial Contributor for 25+ years
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
19,768
Like
26,505
Warrick was 9 for 31 for three his senior year. Not a great sample size but not good enough to call fair.


It's better than MCW was able to put up.
 

Marsh01

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
15,129
Like
21,334
rrlbees said:
Not a knock on Jerami but I view him as a poor mans Hak.

A very poor mans hak
 

Forum statistics

Threads
160,544
Messages
4,344,189
Members
5,642
Latest member
CoachBrew

Online statistics

Members online
170
Guests online
692
Total visitors
862




Top Bottom