RealGM

As the thread title asks - does Russell Westbrook has or will he have the capability to run the point in the NBA, or will he be an undersized SG?

What does he need to work on? What's his upside? Is he worthy of a 7-10 selection based on ability and potential?

When he's played PG this season he has done a good job with staying under control and being patient. But that just might be him being conservative because he wasn't a PG coming out. I think right now he is still a 2-guard but give him another year and fellow-competition (Collison staying?, UCLA's incoming class) I think he can be tamed into a true point. Reason being, he already has the explosiveness and penetrating ability. I think it's a blessing in disguise that his jumpshot isn't that great yet because the lanes close earlier for him to pass it up. On the defensive side, he's physical and shouldn't have a problem guarding PGs in the NBA.

I think he has good upside but his potential isn't that great. I can't really draw comparisons to anyone, maybe a smaller, but yet better Reece Gaines. I wouldn't waste a lottery pick on him this year, next year might be a different story. He has a long ways to go.

D-Wade is a very good undersized 2-guard. To me, if you can play, you'll play anywhere.

Or Monte Ellis - same story, AI, Ben Gordon. It will work at SG.

He has the potential to be better than both Ellis and Barbosa - who are similar styled players, mainly because Westbrook plays both ends so well.

Also, he not like someone like Ben Gordon who ideally needs to play with a bigger point guard because Westbrook is so good defensivley.

I'd be pretty surprised if Russel Westbrook ended up being a better player than Monta Ellis. to me that is like a 10% chance at best.

Westbook is just as explosive and fearless going to the rack, is just as athletic, has a slightly better body, has just as good handles and can play some lock down D.

There is no reason he couldn't surpass Monta.

It's no knock on Monta - I'm a big fan of his game, but I think that Westbrook can be better, especially because of his ability to play D.

ISB wrote:I'd be pretty surprised if Russel Westbrook ended up being a better player than Monta Ellis. to me that is like a 10% chance at best.

yea same here. That's not to knock on Westbrook there's a possiblity, but you underrate Ellis..he is an elite offensive player. Physical gifts between the two is bout a wash. However, Ellis is more naturally talented game wise not to mention one of the best finishers around the basket in the league..I'd be suprised if Westbrook surpasses him.

Westbrook most likely will come back next year and define a position for scouts. I really would be shocked if he went top 10.

I couldn't disagree more about Westbrook being as athletic as Ellis. Ellis is a 6'4 version of Iverson - unreal quickness, obscene hops, very long, with a very complex midrange game.

Westbrook might have the raw vertical leaping ability, but he doesn't get off the ground nearly as quick. Not even close. He can't do what Ellis does in the midrange, and he isn't nearly as long. Westbrook may be as explosive once he gets to the rim, but his tools to get there aren't in Ellis' league. I doubt Westbrook will ever be a "go-to" type shot creator, and Ellis is looking like a future 30 ppg scorer.

Now Westbrook is a lot thicker and probably has more defensive potential, but I see him in the mold of a young Antonio Daniels much more than a Monta Ellis. The guys that can legitimately play that undersized scoring guard position are few and far between, and I think we'll see Westbrook develop into more of a traditional combo guard roleplayer...

Here's a brand new Westbrook analysis:

http://www.draftexpress.com/article/NCA ... -Part-One/

How does Westbrook's point guard skills compare to, say, a 19 year old Tony Parker or Gilbert Arenas?

I think Jonathan Waters had it dead on about the type of athlete Westbrook is. He doesn't have that great quickness and first step as an Ellis or Parker or Gil. Ellis and Parker does things with their quickness in the NBA that Westbrook can't do in college.

In terms of physical gifts, he's similar to Keyon Dooling, virtually same size, good vertical, above average speed and quickness, but not enough to consistently blow by NBA guards.

Westbrook needs to stay another year and play the point fulltime. Its unfortunate though, that it probably won't happen. I don't think Collison will leave early, but even if he does, UCLA has Jrue Holiday coming in as well.

Westbrook's been overrated, I don't think he should be a lotto pick, even in this weak draft, unless a team is willing to spend a lotto pick on a guy that's probably going to project as a 3rd guard off the bench.

Jonathan Watters wrote:I couldn't disagree more about Westbrook being as athletic as Ellis. Ellis is a 6'4 version of Iverson - unreal quickness, obscene hops, very long, with a very complex midrange game.

Westbrook might have the raw vertical leaping ability, but he doesn't get off the ground nearly as quick. Not even close. He can't do what Ellis does in the midrange, and he isn't nearly as long. Westbrook may be as explosive once he gets to the rim, but his tools to get there aren't in Ellis' league. I doubt Westbrook will ever be a "go-to" type shot creator, and Ellis is looking like a future 30 ppg scorer.

Now Westbrook is a lot thicker and probably has more defensive potential, but I see him in the mold of a young Antonio Daniels much more than a Monta Ellis. The guys that can legitimately play that undersized scoring guard position are few and far between, and I think we'll see Westbrook develop into more of a traditional combo guard roleplayer...

I agree pretty much across the board.

Jonathan Watters wrote:I couldn't disagree more about Westbrook being as athletic as Ellis. Ellis is a 6'4 version of Iverson - unreal quickness, obscene hops, very long, with a very complex midrange game.

Westbrook might have the raw vertical leaping ability, but he doesn't get off the ground nearly as quick. Not even close. He can't do what Ellis does in the midrange, and he isn't nearly as long. Westbrook may be as explosive once he gets to the rim, but his tools to get there aren't in Ellis' league. I doubt Westbrook will ever be a "go-to" type shot creator, and Ellis is looking like a future 30 ppg scorer.

Now Westbrook is a lot thicker and probably has more defensive potential, but I see him in the mold of a young Antonio Daniels much more than a Monta Ellis. The guys that can legitimately play that undersized scoring guard position are few and far between, and I think we'll see Westbrook develop into more of a traditional combo guard roleplayer...

I agree with most of this, except Monta is closer to 6'2" than 6'4" and Westbrook is longer than him. Monta's measurements was one of the reasons why he slipped to the 2nd round (which I'm happy he did ).

Youngblood wrote:D-Wade is a very good undersized 2-guard. To me, if you can play, you'll play anywhere.

Wade is 6'5 in shoes and has a near 7-foot wingspan. He most definitely is not undersized.

And whoever said Ellis is longer than Westbrook - Ellis has like 6'3 wingspan. But I agree with the part about quickness. Westbrook on the other hand is stronger, longer and has bigger hands.

I don't see him going any higher than #20. But the tournament will say alot about where he gets drafted. I expect UCLA to move along the rounds and Westbrook will get alot of exposure( as will Love and Collison).

You never know. With a really good showing he could sway a team in the mid teens, but definitely not the lotto.

Fenix wrote:-= original quote snipped =-



Wade is 6'5 in shoes and has a near 7-foot wingspan. He most definitely is not undersized.

And whoever said Ellis is longer than Westbrook - Ellis has like 6'3 wingspan. But I agree with the part about quickness. Westbrook on the other hand is stronger, longer and has bigger hands.

OK, you are probably right on that. But Ellis certainly PLAYS longer than Westbrook and always will. He is closer to DWade than Westbrook is to him.

I agree Ellis is better than Westbrook, but PLAYING longer than you are doesn't make sense. It's not the least bit coherent. What does it mean to play longer than you? Well, I guess if you mean in the bedroom I understand, but I'm sure that's not what you're trying to say.