greg4012 wrote:
Chalmers had nearly identical FRESHMAN stats to Reed with the big difference being the 3 point percentage (especially when adjusted per 40 minutes). Chalmers gets clear edge on steals.
I think Reed will be a better pro than Chalmers. I just think he's such a unique player type that it's important to point to the similar archetypes to identify and assess NBA viability. The NBA is as much or more about what you CAN'T do as it is what you can do.
If Reed isn't going to become a true lead ballhandling PG, then his archetype is Mario Chalmers with more dynamic shooting in the NBA IMO (and less wingspan to defend up).
Any player has a chance to fail, but the Chalmer comp I think is like a worse-case scenario for him, I should point out that we don't have quite as good of data sample back when he played, but I'm fairly sure Chalmer's PER would have came out significantly lower than Reed, as Reed has way better assist to turnover, and also more rebounds, they're kinda even in blocks/steals if you're talking about their freshmen year.
The "can he be a point guard" is obviously the difference between the ceiling of a "great rotation player / situational starter" to some sort of star level player. I think Reed has the feel / pace / passing vision down pretty well, the question is obviously is he one of those guys who just somehow gets to his spots even though it doesn't look like he's just breaking his defender's knees and ankels with insane cross-over and burst.
But even if it's just a connecter role player type, for what the Rockets need that seems quite great, yeah if you're really early in the rebuild you might want to think of someone who's ceiling seems more likely/extreme (granted if Reed can actually get to a PG level usage / handle while shooting like that we might be vastly underrating the ceiling. )
