TJ Wells
03/22/06, 08:25 AM
There is one thing eluding me about the debate over whether the national Player of the Year should be Duke's J.J. Redick or Gonzaga's Adam Morrison, namely, what the heck is the debate? J.J. Redick is a great college basketball player, an All-American for sure. He's had a great season playing for the top-seeded Blue Devils, who boast the greatest promotional machine in college athletics – the way it used to be with football at Notre Dame.
But are there people out there who really, truly believe J.J. Redick is better than Adam Morrison?
"People are actually saying that?" asked a befuddled general manager of an NBA Western Conference team. "Who?"
The media, I said.
"Yeah, but aren't all you media guys from Duke?" he laughed.
Actually, it just seems that way.
Sarcastic comments are mostly what you get when you ask NBA talent evaluators about the supposedly raging Redick-Morrison debate, and on Wednesday, we got a hold of eight of them – scouts, general managers and player personnel directors – to get their opinions.
"It's not even close," said a Central Division player personnel director, one of seven Morrison supporters in my informal, unscientific and anonymous survey (NBA rules prohibit teams from commenting on underclassmen). "Adam is way better. It's not even worth discussing."
Only one of the eight thought differently and went with Redick. "They don't play the same position, so it's like comparing apples and oranges," a Southwest Division scout said. "On NBA potential, they are not close, but J.J. played in a much superior league and delivered every single night."
This isn't to say NBA scouts should be the final verdict on college awards. They are obsessed with the talent of Connecticut's Rudy Gay, but his wild inconsistency has made him a non-candidate. But since both Redick and Morrison have had equally exceptional seasons on equally exceptional teams, this debate, you'd hope, would hinge on actual ability.
The beauty of NBA front office guys is they don't care about ESPN appearances, broadcaster raves, promotional campaigns or geographic biases. Mostly, they just care about the player. They just watch the games.
And mostly, they see what I've seen.
As great of a scorer and as superior of a pure shooter as Redick is, he isn't close to the offensive talent of Morrison, the over-hyped mirror scoring averages not withstanding. Redick scores mostly because Duke runs so much offense for him by coming off screens and staggers. Yes, he can make a one-dribble or one-step move to create separation on a defender, but other than that, he is almost wholly reliant on his very talented teammates and the Duke system.
Like Morrison, he isn't much of a defender, so that's a double-negative wash.
Morrison, on the other hand, is a nearly complete offensive player. At 6-foot-8, he stands four inches taller and can create his own shot at any spot on the floor. He has a high release that is almost impossible to block, can post people up and either pivot toward the hoop or hit fall-away jumpers. At the college level, he can consistently slash to the hole and either finish with a dunk or utilize his terrific mid-range game.
While the one pro-Redick scout thought the level of league competition mattered, I don't think it was as big of a deal since Morrison hung 43 points on both Michigan State and Washington, 35 on Xavier, 34 on Memphis and Stanford and so on and so on. Put him in the ACC and he'd produce.
Morrison is also a superior passer and a pretty strong rebounder. When his shot isn't falling (or he is facing three defenders), he is capable of impacting the game in so many more ways than Redick. In the Zags' second-round victory over Indiana, he was critical in the final minute when he made a sweet assist, grabbed a huge defensive rebound and then hit two free throws after being fouled.
The value, by the way, of having a rebounder who can hit free throws can't be understated at the end of close NCAA tournament games. With Morrison, there is no need for a dangerous outlet pass to a guard and no chance for the other team to get a bad shooter to the line, both situations that cause teams to gag away leads.
Free throws are one of those confusing perception-versus-reality deals. I suspect most voters would claim Redick is the much better free-thrower because of his .862 to .772 shooting percentage advantage. But Morrison has hit more free throws (237 to 219) because he can dribble-drive and get to the line almost at will, which is another undervalued skill.
"Adam Morrison is a 20-point-a-game scorer in the NBA for a long, long time," one Western scout said. "The son of a bitch can score on anyone."
"He's like (Larry) Bird. He just finds a way to get the ball in the basket," a Southwest Division scout added.
"I've spent the last four months on the road, at least six games a week. If (Morrison) isn't the MVP, then they must be hiding the guy who is better," a Western scout said. "Morrison can do 10 things Redick couldn't dream of."
Everyone agrees Morrison goes in the first two or three selections of June's NBA draft, which isn't a particularly strong one. Redick, meanwhile, is slated to be taken among the teens. Some say he should slide into the 20s because the general rule of thumb is to not take a bench player at, say, 15. But, they all agree, there is always one GM who drafts the college Player of the Year high, warranted or not.
The only Duke player who will be drafted near Morrison is freshman big man Josh McRoberts, who, despite being under wraps most of the season, is a top-five or top-six pick should he choose to come out.
"(Redick) is a rotation player in the NBA. He's an NBA player but he's probably coming off the bench," an Atlantic Division player personnel director said.
"He's a specialist," an Eastern Conference scout said of Redick. "Great shooter, great competitor. I love watching him, but his game has so many holes. (Mike) Krzyzewski is great at maximizing strengths. (That's why) a Duke player (almost always) wins (Player of the Year)."
Just imagine if the two players switched teams. If Morrison had high school All-American teammates, an offense that would get him open threes and the best media exposure in the game, he'd run away with the award.
Put Redick at Gonzaga, where he'd be the sole focal point of opposing defenses, and he not only wouldn't be the best player in the country but he also wouldn't be the best player in the state. Washington guard Brandon Roy is a better all-around player than Redick, especially considering his defensive skill.
Roy, in fact, could make his own argument for Player of the Year, although we'll stick with Morrison because we love his offense so much. But at least that discussion is an argument.
An argument, of course, you never hear, or never see on magazine covers.
Instead, Redick – a very good college player but one with a limited skill set, fewer tools than his prime opponent and fewer responsibilities – is the favorite to win all of the awards.
NBA laughs notwithstanding.
Call it a Duke bias or an East Coast bias or whatever you choose. I certainly don't know the answer.
When it comes to Redick vs. Morrison, I have never even understood the question.
But are there people out there who really, truly believe J.J. Redick is better than Adam Morrison?
"People are actually saying that?" asked a befuddled general manager of an NBA Western Conference team. "Who?"
The media, I said.
"Yeah, but aren't all you media guys from Duke?" he laughed.
Actually, it just seems that way.
Sarcastic comments are mostly what you get when you ask NBA talent evaluators about the supposedly raging Redick-Morrison debate, and on Wednesday, we got a hold of eight of them – scouts, general managers and player personnel directors – to get their opinions.
"It's not even close," said a Central Division player personnel director, one of seven Morrison supporters in my informal, unscientific and anonymous survey (NBA rules prohibit teams from commenting on underclassmen). "Adam is way better. It's not even worth discussing."
Only one of the eight thought differently and went with Redick. "They don't play the same position, so it's like comparing apples and oranges," a Southwest Division scout said. "On NBA potential, they are not close, but J.J. played in a much superior league and delivered every single night."
This isn't to say NBA scouts should be the final verdict on college awards. They are obsessed with the talent of Connecticut's Rudy Gay, but his wild inconsistency has made him a non-candidate. But since both Redick and Morrison have had equally exceptional seasons on equally exceptional teams, this debate, you'd hope, would hinge on actual ability.
The beauty of NBA front office guys is they don't care about ESPN appearances, broadcaster raves, promotional campaigns or geographic biases. Mostly, they just care about the player. They just watch the games.
And mostly, they see what I've seen.
As great of a scorer and as superior of a pure shooter as Redick is, he isn't close to the offensive talent of Morrison, the over-hyped mirror scoring averages not withstanding. Redick scores mostly because Duke runs so much offense for him by coming off screens and staggers. Yes, he can make a one-dribble or one-step move to create separation on a defender, but other than that, he is almost wholly reliant on his very talented teammates and the Duke system.
Like Morrison, he isn't much of a defender, so that's a double-negative wash.
Morrison, on the other hand, is a nearly complete offensive player. At 6-foot-8, he stands four inches taller and can create his own shot at any spot on the floor. He has a high release that is almost impossible to block, can post people up and either pivot toward the hoop or hit fall-away jumpers. At the college level, he can consistently slash to the hole and either finish with a dunk or utilize his terrific mid-range game.
While the one pro-Redick scout thought the level of league competition mattered, I don't think it was as big of a deal since Morrison hung 43 points on both Michigan State and Washington, 35 on Xavier, 34 on Memphis and Stanford and so on and so on. Put him in the ACC and he'd produce.
Morrison is also a superior passer and a pretty strong rebounder. When his shot isn't falling (or he is facing three defenders), he is capable of impacting the game in so many more ways than Redick. In the Zags' second-round victory over Indiana, he was critical in the final minute when he made a sweet assist, grabbed a huge defensive rebound and then hit two free throws after being fouled.
The value, by the way, of having a rebounder who can hit free throws can't be understated at the end of close NCAA tournament games. With Morrison, there is no need for a dangerous outlet pass to a guard and no chance for the other team to get a bad shooter to the line, both situations that cause teams to gag away leads.
Free throws are one of those confusing perception-versus-reality deals. I suspect most voters would claim Redick is the much better free-thrower because of his .862 to .772 shooting percentage advantage. But Morrison has hit more free throws (237 to 219) because he can dribble-drive and get to the line almost at will, which is another undervalued skill.
"Adam Morrison is a 20-point-a-game scorer in the NBA for a long, long time," one Western scout said. "The son of a bitch can score on anyone."
"He's like (Larry) Bird. He just finds a way to get the ball in the basket," a Southwest Division scout added.
"I've spent the last four months on the road, at least six games a week. If (Morrison) isn't the MVP, then they must be hiding the guy who is better," a Western scout said. "Morrison can do 10 things Redick couldn't dream of."
Everyone agrees Morrison goes in the first two or three selections of June's NBA draft, which isn't a particularly strong one. Redick, meanwhile, is slated to be taken among the teens. Some say he should slide into the 20s because the general rule of thumb is to not take a bench player at, say, 15. But, they all agree, there is always one GM who drafts the college Player of the Year high, warranted or not.
The only Duke player who will be drafted near Morrison is freshman big man Josh McRoberts, who, despite being under wraps most of the season, is a top-five or top-six pick should he choose to come out.
"(Redick) is a rotation player in the NBA. He's an NBA player but he's probably coming off the bench," an Atlantic Division player personnel director said.
"He's a specialist," an Eastern Conference scout said of Redick. "Great shooter, great competitor. I love watching him, but his game has so many holes. (Mike) Krzyzewski is great at maximizing strengths. (That's why) a Duke player (almost always) wins (Player of the Year)."
Just imagine if the two players switched teams. If Morrison had high school All-American teammates, an offense that would get him open threes and the best media exposure in the game, he'd run away with the award.
Put Redick at Gonzaga, where he'd be the sole focal point of opposing defenses, and he not only wouldn't be the best player in the country but he also wouldn't be the best player in the state. Washington guard Brandon Roy is a better all-around player than Redick, especially considering his defensive skill.
Roy, in fact, could make his own argument for Player of the Year, although we'll stick with Morrison because we love his offense so much. But at least that discussion is an argument.
An argument, of course, you never hear, or never see on magazine covers.
Instead, Redick – a very good college player but one with a limited skill set, fewer tools than his prime opponent and fewer responsibilities – is the favorite to win all of the awards.
NBA laughs notwithstanding.
Call it a Duke bias or an East Coast bias or whatever you choose. I certainly don't know the answer.
When it comes to Redick vs. Morrison, I have never even understood the question.