Stanley Johnson (and Justise Winslow)
Jul 8, 2015 15:06:27 GMT -5
Post by ChrisBrown on Jul 8, 2015 15:06:27 GMT -5
So, this comes with the huge caveat that I'm basing my conclusions on an extremely small sample size of games involving fringe NBA talents, but I think I have a pretty good understanding of why the Pistons took Johnson instead of Winslow.
First, I think Winslow has a chance to be an elite scorer in the NBA. He seems to be able to get to the rim at will, and I think he'll eventually develop into an above-average shooter at the pro level. I also think he may end up being a solid distributor, and I understand why he gets some James Harden comparisons. It's unlikely that he ends up that good, but I can see him being a 20-4-4 guy, which is obviously still pretty damn good.
At the same time, I can absolutely see the Artest comparisons for Stanley Johnson. For one thing, Johnson is built like a brick shithouse. He's strong as hell for such a young kid, and he seems to really pride himself on being an annoying, almost dickish defender. I can see him drawing technical fouls on a lot of opposing players. He's okay with the ball in his hands, and he can shoot a bit from distance, but I don't think he's ever gonna be a bigtime playmaker, or a consistent threat to drop 30 on you. However, he's gonna bang for rebounds and get putbacks, dive for loose balls, and stay in the shorts of the guy he's defending. I can see him developing into an 18 and 6 guy with a couple of steals, and that should make him a contender for first-team defensive honors in his prime.
Obviously it's possible that neither guy will live up to his potential, but both could be really good in different ways. I think Johnson is the better fit for the Pistons right now, because they've cast their lot with Reggie Jackson dominating the ball, and I think Johnson has a better chance to really affect the game without having the ball in his hands.
First, I think Winslow has a chance to be an elite scorer in the NBA. He seems to be able to get to the rim at will, and I think he'll eventually develop into an above-average shooter at the pro level. I also think he may end up being a solid distributor, and I understand why he gets some James Harden comparisons. It's unlikely that he ends up that good, but I can see him being a 20-4-4 guy, which is obviously still pretty damn good.
At the same time, I can absolutely see the Artest comparisons for Stanley Johnson. For one thing, Johnson is built like a brick shithouse. He's strong as hell for such a young kid, and he seems to really pride himself on being an annoying, almost dickish defender. I can see him drawing technical fouls on a lot of opposing players. He's okay with the ball in his hands, and he can shoot a bit from distance, but I don't think he's ever gonna be a bigtime playmaker, or a consistent threat to drop 30 on you. However, he's gonna bang for rebounds and get putbacks, dive for loose balls, and stay in the shorts of the guy he's defending. I can see him developing into an 18 and 6 guy with a couple of steals, and that should make him a contender for first-team defensive honors in his prime.
Obviously it's possible that neither guy will live up to his potential, but both could be really good in different ways. I think Johnson is the better fit for the Pistons right now, because they've cast their lot with Reggie Jackson dominating the ball, and I think Johnson has a better chance to really affect the game without having the ball in his hands.