/ laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"
Tweet
The draft previews continue on a cloudy Friday in south central Indiana as we take an in depth look at Notre Dame's Jerian Grant. Grant was a 5 year college player in South Bend, playing for one of the very best offensive minds in all of basketball in Mike Brey. Grant has a privileged pro pedigree, being the son of long time NBA forward Harvey Grant, and being the nephew of NBA champion Horace Grant. Grant grew up in Maryland, in the affluent suburb of Silver Spring and went to noted basketball powerhouse DeMatha Catholic. Truly, Grant has been as well trained and prepared to be an NBA player as he possibly could have been by his upbringing and development path.
Grant, despite being a 5 year guy in college, isn't a complete "old man" in this draft, as he enrolled early at Notre Dame. Grant was born on October 9, 1992, making him 22 years on draft night and he will turn 23 right before training camp. Jerian measured in at 6'4 1/4 at the NBA combine, and looked he may have dropped a few pounds to me, as I suspect he played at higher than his 198lbs he checked in at. His length for a point guard is a very respectable 6'7 1/2.
Grant was a key cog for one of the upper echelon teams in college basketball, and his strengths and weaknesses drove that team...for better, or worse. Grant scored 16.5 PPG with over 6.6 assists a night, though those numbers in a sense are overblown slightly by the very fast pace Notre Dame played at and the fact that Grant played 37 minutes per night for the Irish. Still, there can be no argument that Grant was one of the most effective offensive point guards in the college game last year....the questions we will examine today are how well will his game stand up at the highest level, and how fixable and critical are the weaknesses he clearly has to this point.
Let's put Grant under the microscope down below:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let's talk offense first. Grant has clear strengths and a few weaknesses which are clear to me in film study.
On the plus side, you clearly have to love Grant's size for the position, and how he uses that advantage to play offense. Grant I would wager had most of his assists as a direct result of being able to see OVER the defense, and his functional strength enabled him to make passes crossing the court as the ball continued to fire around the floor for the Irish. Grant has excellent vision, but what puts him above others is the size and ability to use that vision....he sees people all over the floor yes, but he actually can deliver the ball to open people from areas other smaller guards can't by throwing over the defense.
You also have to like how careful he was with the basketball. Grant had an excellent 3-1 assist to turnover rate, showing excellent fundamentals and attention to detail by Grant and his teammates. I do want to mention that in many cases, this can be a somewhat overrated number to factor in, because many turnovers a point guard can pile up are actually the fault of the receiver and not the passer....so you have to study guard play with that in the back of your head. Grant clearly benefitted from playing with veteran fundamentally sound teammates in a very well thought out and well coached system. Having made that disclaimer though, clearly being able to make a crosscourt pass over a good defense from one wing to an open shooter in the opposite corner on time and on target is a skill that most guards can't do unless they have the size and strength to do so.....and Grant is one of the rare people who can do that. Grant is a "floor expander"......the entire width of length of the floor is open to him, much like a quarterback who can read and see the entire width and depth of the field and then deliver the ball well.
Now I will say this: Grant sees people open, but I don't believe he will be a guy who "creates" people to be open, because I do think he lacks the burst to blow by people and draw traffic towards himself. More creative and savvy than athletic, he can use his body to hold people off more than he can get by NBA caliber athletes. They great system at Notre Dame clearly played to his strengths, as did the fact that he was playing against younger more inexperienced players all of the time. As impressive as Grant sometimes is on film, you have to factor in that he was 3-4 years older most of the time than his top competition was.
Grant has some negatives to me no question as we try and translate his game to the NBA. When faced with the idea of contact in traffic, Grant shrinks up and becomes less athletic.....the ball and the bumps seem to weigh him down. To avoid contact and physicality, he relies on trying to be crafty and often stepping back or around people instead of trying to power through them....and when he does try and power through he doesn't play as strong as he measures. I'd summarize it like this: HIS HEIGHT IS AN ADVANTAGE, BUT HIS OVERALL BODY TYPE DOESNT PLAY AS STRONG AS IT LOOKS in these situations.
Grant changes pace well, which is a huge attribute that I love about him....he can accelerate and slow down depending on the situation. But he does lack that elite 6th gear that top level point guards have. And to add to that, I BELIEVE GRANT WILL PLAY SLOWER THAN HE MEASURES because he is, in my view, a dribble waster. Maybe it is just me, but it looks to me like that Grant is a short strider with the ball who takes 1 or 2 extra dribbles most of the time. He covers very little ground with the bounce in both fast break push situations or in halfcourt attack moves. He most of the time can get where he is trying to go on tape, but he took extra bounces in college that I think will be fatal if they aren't eliminated in the NBA. This is a huge problem for me, because you need to be extra efficient against elite NBA athletes, and he will no longer have that strength and experience advantage going forward.
I rated his ballhandling as mediocre to good, but not elite. Making change of direction, highly advanced moves was possible for him, but he often used an extra bounce to gather himself, and in his behind the back type dribble move he'd often have to glance down slightly. Not fatal, but notable. The ball can still slow him down just a tiny bit.....but I am not sure he has any time to spare.
One thing I look for in point guards is an ability to pass with either hand. Grant clearly has that, and in the paint he can get the ball to people with either hand. He clearly preferred passing the ball with his dribble hand, regardless of which direction he was going which was interesting....sometimes that was good and sometimes it wouldn't have worked at a higher level. He isn't "Steve Nash" in terms of hooking the ball with the dribble hand out to people without having to gather it, as he usually will bring the ball up to the more basic navel area before delivering it.
But even that was a mixed bag, because to me even though he clearly showed ability to pass it either direction with either hand, he sometimes didn't, in my eyes anyway, often choose the correct hand to pass with based on the situation. He usually got away with it, and maybe this is just my own scouting bias, but I wonder against more athletic, better coached defenses if his turnovers will go up based on that particular quirk about his game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grant has a couple of major, game ready NBA weapons at his disposal besides his size.
I think his step back jumper will translate well. I see no reason why he won't be able to get that shot off at the next level, although as a coach you have to ask yourself if that self confidence he shows in that move will potentially be detrimental to your offensive scheme as a whole.....if a Grant step back 20 footer is the best shot you can get, you may have some other problems you have to fix with your offense. Still, he clearly has worked that move for years to use against bigger players, and his footwork with that exact move is exquisite. He has the dance move down.....he steps into the defense between their feet, gets them to rock back therefore taking away their leaping ability, and then steps back, fades away, and fires. It is a very nice move, though one he uses way too often probably.
Secondly and I think more importantly, Grant projects to be a major weapon as what I call a "Power Point"....a point guard who can turn his back to the defense, post up in various places around the floor, and either score or more likely read the defense and make the proper pass.
Let me go on a tangent here: IN MY OPINION, THE NEXT GREAT "MARKET INEFFICIENCY" THAT TEAMS WILL BE ABLE TO EXPLOIT IS HAVING GUARDS WHO CAN POST UP WELL, GAINING AN ADVANTAGE OVER GUARD DEFENDERS WHO AREN'T USED TO DEFENDING THAT AREA OF THE FLOOR. THIS WILL BE THE NATURAL BY PRODUCT OF HAVING BIGS WHO CAN BRING THEIR MEN OUT OF THE PAINT BY BECOMING STRETCH 4'S AND 5'S.
Yes, the "Mark Jackson" rule hurts this a little bit at the NBA level. Still, you can clearly see into the future how this can be exploited by power guards. No 6'2 sized defender ever does any defensive drill work on how to guard the post at this time, and if you have a player at that size that enables you to post up and "invert" your offense, then that is a major halfcourt offensive weapon in my judgment.
In Grant's case, he can turn his back to the defense in the post, at the mid range wing areas, and at the high post/elbow/slot areas and be a big offensive weapon as a passer in those areas, IF a team is a creative enough with the right kind of scheme/personnel around him to make that happen.
NBA teams repeatedly posting up their guards and inverting their offense around power backcourt guys hasn't caught on YET, but I think it very well might in the next few years, as more and more big guys seem to all want to play on the perimeter, then teams will have to get creative to generate post touches and opportunities to probe those areas.
I can see Grant being that type of 2nd unit power point guy, who can punish smaller back up guards around the league in that fashion, greasing the wheels to make your 2nd unit offense run smoother and with more horsepower.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
He better be able to post up, because Grant can't shoot well enough for my liking, and I highly doubt his particular flaws are fixable. Think about it...this kid has been coached by the very best in the game from an early age, and his shot STILL looks as bad as it does.....what makes you think it'll get fixed much now?
Off the dribble, Grant shoots it well enough to function, actually pretty well. He has a nice mid range game, and he clearly has been taught how to properly pound the last dribble to get into his shot when going to his dominant right hand. His shot looks better going right than some others do.
Mechanically going left, he seems to have a tough time getting the ball quickly into a shooting position....which is no doubt why he developed the step back move he favors so much, so he can gain than extra time and space. He gathers the ball lower and brings it under his belly button to get it to his right side so he can load up and shoot.....not terrible, but not great either, and it makes him shoot like a slightly smaller player would. He offsets that flaw by fading back, which is ok....but it is also what unathletic guys do playing the game. Still, while not technically perfect I wouldn't demerit him too much for that....I think he will be average as a shooter off the dribble, though way too irrationally confident in that step back jumper.
As a set shooter though, Grant is a disaster form wise to me. He looks completely and totally uncomfortable off of a catch and shoot to me, and I see why on film. He can't seem to get the ball up from the shooting pocket to a shooting position in such a way that he can see the rim clearly! he holds the ball in such a way that I would assume as a youth that was hard for him to make anything, and he has had to try and bandage and manufacture and groove a shot path that is clearly the opposite of what I would have suggested personally.
What Grant does (you have to watch his tape in super slow motion to see it) is lift the ball on the left side of his face, and looks at the target through his right eye. As the ball comes up he lifts it straight up, meaning the shooting arm crosses his nose, and the ball is released above and to the left of his head, so he can see and aim with his right eye. His shot is released way way off line, to the left of the target, and then he has to sort of will the ball back toward the dead center of the rim.
Grant shot a paltry 31.6% from the college line, and actually that is higher than I thought it would be based on how he shoots a catch/spot up.....which to his credit, he rarely attempts. Off the dribble he will be mediocre I think as a shooter, but off the catch he is going to be a total non factor. Too many flaws in that style to fix I think, or it would have been already.
If any of you remember Jordan Hulls at IU, remember how he shot the ball with the release to the right of his head? That style lets you keep the elbow underneath the ball, and lets you as a youth see the rim with both eyes. Obviously it is a low release and not often taught to top level guys, but that form would be WAY preferable accuracy wise than the mish mash elbow flying ****-eyed release Grant has. His shot off the dribble is much better than his catch and shoot form, which saves him from being a total non shooter.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grant is not a top flight defender at the tip of the spear of your defense, and it pissed me off quite frankly watching him defend on tape, because he should have been much better than he was.
Notre Dame in general is a poor defensive team year after year, so as much praise as I usually give Mike Brey for his offensive mind and schemes, his defensive coaching skills have been lacking for years in South Bend for whatever reason.
Grant looks to me to be a "scouting report" defender.....in both the ways that phrase can be used by coaches.
In the positive way, I think he processes information well it seems, and I bet he knows the strengths/tendencies of his opponents well. He reads plays and jumps routes, and I bet he knows and studies the tendencies of his individual opponents very well. He looks like a defender who will follow your team scheme and plan, and will prepare the right way for the opponent he has on that particular night.
But in the negative, his lack of defensive prowess and ability is circled in his opponents scouting report as well. Teams clearly targeted Grant often, and perhaps the extreme high volume of minutes he played fatigued him on that end more than I am accounting for. But teams, in big moments in big games, clearly targeted Grant to score against when they had to get a big hoop. And they did it in a variety of ways.
Against Kentucky, the Wildcats, WITH THE FINAL FOUR IN THE BALANCE, targeted Grant instead of going to Towns in the low post. Taking advantage of an alarming lack of focus and quickness, they blew by a standing straight up Grant and got to the rim, scoring the winning points after a foul caused by Grant getting blown by right from the top. Everyone gets beat sometimes off the dribble, but that was a pretty damn weak effort with the season on the line for a 5th year SR with an NBA pedigree.
Other teams liked to ISO him in the wings, drive into his body and stand him up, then spin dribble right by him. Like on offense, contact with other human beings seemed to really offend Grant's sensibilities. Grant stands up when attacked or threatened out of his stance, making him slow to move and react.
Where that really stands out though was when Grant was screened. Unlike a couple of other guards in this draft that are competitive and tough when screened, Grant was soft when contacted. He got engulfed on ball screens, standing up out of his stance and lacking that tough one step power slide all coaches teach to get through the trash and recover. Away from the ball was the same thing, as any screen that came toward he tried to avoid and not fight through, and when he couldn't dodge it or ND couldn't strategize a switch, Grant was screwed.....he simply didn't deal with contact well and his recovery skills were not good at all....all because he stood up vertically like a flag pole when screened.
Danny Granger used to do that, which annoyed me to no end when watching him play for us, but he had elite length and athleticism, to at least mitigate it a little bit, and Grant doesn't have elite tools for his position like Granger did.
Grant is a minus defender who might get better in a smaller role playing less minutes.....but I wouldn't bank on it. If you draft him, you have to like his pedigree, experience, and offensive size/skills enough to overlook his defensive shortcomings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So, what do we have in Jerian Grant?
In my case, we have a somewhat unique offensive player who has definite positive attributes, but to me has too many flaws to endorse. I rarely get as aggravated watching film as I did watching Grant play, because I wanted to like him.....but despite the fact that I love big guards who can post up and am a huge advocate for that being a key skill, I hate his shot and defense enough to clearly and easily recommending that we pass on Grant at #11. Grant should be better by now than he is, and since he isn't that annoyed me a great dea.
I have no idea if Indiana feels the same way as I do. The Pacers clearly do need a back up point guard, and maybe they will like his pedigree, size, and passing ability more than I do. Maybe they feel they can fix his shot and surround him with other good defenders so his lack of D can be hidden. We will just have to wait and see what Larry ultimately does, but I am pretty sure we will and should pass on Jerian Grant.
Having said that, Grant will get a shot somewhere in the first round I think. His character and intellect does count for something, and despite what you read everywhere, this draft isn't as deep as you think it is. He is going to be a first rounder for sure. Grant makes some sense for Dallas at #21, perhaps for Toronto at #20, and maybe for Cleveland at #24. But ultimately I think he ends up close to home and is picked the Washington Wizards at pick #19.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I simply don't have a great comparable for Grant. I've read other people say Bobby Jackson, or Reggie Jackson. I don't really like those guys that well for him, because they all played off defense better or played off the ball some.....and in my case I think Grant only has value as a point guard.
I'm open to suggestions on a comparable. Maybe a poor man's Jarrett Jack? I don't know.
Less than 4 weeks to draft night now!
As always, the above is just my opinion. Others should feel free to disagree if they choose, and I hope we can have intelligent discussion about it because I know I am much more down on Grant than most of you. If we end up with him, I hope you can convince me I am wrong to think he is a mediocre backup at best.
Tbird
Grant, despite being a 5 year guy in college, isn't a complete "old man" in this draft, as he enrolled early at Notre Dame. Grant was born on October 9, 1992, making him 22 years on draft night and he will turn 23 right before training camp. Jerian measured in at 6'4 1/4 at the NBA combine, and looked he may have dropped a few pounds to me, as I suspect he played at higher than his 198lbs he checked in at. His length for a point guard is a very respectable 6'7 1/2.
Grant was a key cog for one of the upper echelon teams in college basketball, and his strengths and weaknesses drove that team...for better, or worse. Grant scored 16.5 PPG with over 6.6 assists a night, though those numbers in a sense are overblown slightly by the very fast pace Notre Dame played at and the fact that Grant played 37 minutes per night for the Irish. Still, there can be no argument that Grant was one of the most effective offensive point guards in the college game last year....the questions we will examine today are how well will his game stand up at the highest level, and how fixable and critical are the weaknesses he clearly has to this point.
Let's put Grant under the microscope down below:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let's talk offense first. Grant has clear strengths and a few weaknesses which are clear to me in film study.
On the plus side, you clearly have to love Grant's size for the position, and how he uses that advantage to play offense. Grant I would wager had most of his assists as a direct result of being able to see OVER the defense, and his functional strength enabled him to make passes crossing the court as the ball continued to fire around the floor for the Irish. Grant has excellent vision, but what puts him above others is the size and ability to use that vision....he sees people all over the floor yes, but he actually can deliver the ball to open people from areas other smaller guards can't by throwing over the defense.
You also have to like how careful he was with the basketball. Grant had an excellent 3-1 assist to turnover rate, showing excellent fundamentals and attention to detail by Grant and his teammates. I do want to mention that in many cases, this can be a somewhat overrated number to factor in, because many turnovers a point guard can pile up are actually the fault of the receiver and not the passer....so you have to study guard play with that in the back of your head. Grant clearly benefitted from playing with veteran fundamentally sound teammates in a very well thought out and well coached system. Having made that disclaimer though, clearly being able to make a crosscourt pass over a good defense from one wing to an open shooter in the opposite corner on time and on target is a skill that most guards can't do unless they have the size and strength to do so.....and Grant is one of the rare people who can do that. Grant is a "floor expander"......the entire width of length of the floor is open to him, much like a quarterback who can read and see the entire width and depth of the field and then deliver the ball well.
Now I will say this: Grant sees people open, but I don't believe he will be a guy who "creates" people to be open, because I do think he lacks the burst to blow by people and draw traffic towards himself. More creative and savvy than athletic, he can use his body to hold people off more than he can get by NBA caliber athletes. They great system at Notre Dame clearly played to his strengths, as did the fact that he was playing against younger more inexperienced players all of the time. As impressive as Grant sometimes is on film, you have to factor in that he was 3-4 years older most of the time than his top competition was.
Grant has some negatives to me no question as we try and translate his game to the NBA. When faced with the idea of contact in traffic, Grant shrinks up and becomes less athletic.....the ball and the bumps seem to weigh him down. To avoid contact and physicality, he relies on trying to be crafty and often stepping back or around people instead of trying to power through them....and when he does try and power through he doesn't play as strong as he measures. I'd summarize it like this: HIS HEIGHT IS AN ADVANTAGE, BUT HIS OVERALL BODY TYPE DOESNT PLAY AS STRONG AS IT LOOKS in these situations.
Grant changes pace well, which is a huge attribute that I love about him....he can accelerate and slow down depending on the situation. But he does lack that elite 6th gear that top level point guards have. And to add to that, I BELIEVE GRANT WILL PLAY SLOWER THAN HE MEASURES because he is, in my view, a dribble waster. Maybe it is just me, but it looks to me like that Grant is a short strider with the ball who takes 1 or 2 extra dribbles most of the time. He covers very little ground with the bounce in both fast break push situations or in halfcourt attack moves. He most of the time can get where he is trying to go on tape, but he took extra bounces in college that I think will be fatal if they aren't eliminated in the NBA. This is a huge problem for me, because you need to be extra efficient against elite NBA athletes, and he will no longer have that strength and experience advantage going forward.
I rated his ballhandling as mediocre to good, but not elite. Making change of direction, highly advanced moves was possible for him, but he often used an extra bounce to gather himself, and in his behind the back type dribble move he'd often have to glance down slightly. Not fatal, but notable. The ball can still slow him down just a tiny bit.....but I am not sure he has any time to spare.
One thing I look for in point guards is an ability to pass with either hand. Grant clearly has that, and in the paint he can get the ball to people with either hand. He clearly preferred passing the ball with his dribble hand, regardless of which direction he was going which was interesting....sometimes that was good and sometimes it wouldn't have worked at a higher level. He isn't "Steve Nash" in terms of hooking the ball with the dribble hand out to people without having to gather it, as he usually will bring the ball up to the more basic navel area before delivering it.
But even that was a mixed bag, because to me even though he clearly showed ability to pass it either direction with either hand, he sometimes didn't, in my eyes anyway, often choose the correct hand to pass with based on the situation. He usually got away with it, and maybe this is just my own scouting bias, but I wonder against more athletic, better coached defenses if his turnovers will go up based on that particular quirk about his game.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grant has a couple of major, game ready NBA weapons at his disposal besides his size.
I think his step back jumper will translate well. I see no reason why he won't be able to get that shot off at the next level, although as a coach you have to ask yourself if that self confidence he shows in that move will potentially be detrimental to your offensive scheme as a whole.....if a Grant step back 20 footer is the best shot you can get, you may have some other problems you have to fix with your offense. Still, he clearly has worked that move for years to use against bigger players, and his footwork with that exact move is exquisite. He has the dance move down.....he steps into the defense between their feet, gets them to rock back therefore taking away their leaping ability, and then steps back, fades away, and fires. It is a very nice move, though one he uses way too often probably.
Secondly and I think more importantly, Grant projects to be a major weapon as what I call a "Power Point"....a point guard who can turn his back to the defense, post up in various places around the floor, and either score or more likely read the defense and make the proper pass.
Let me go on a tangent here: IN MY OPINION, THE NEXT GREAT "MARKET INEFFICIENCY" THAT TEAMS WILL BE ABLE TO EXPLOIT IS HAVING GUARDS WHO CAN POST UP WELL, GAINING AN ADVANTAGE OVER GUARD DEFENDERS WHO AREN'T USED TO DEFENDING THAT AREA OF THE FLOOR. THIS WILL BE THE NATURAL BY PRODUCT OF HAVING BIGS WHO CAN BRING THEIR MEN OUT OF THE PAINT BY BECOMING STRETCH 4'S AND 5'S.
Yes, the "Mark Jackson" rule hurts this a little bit at the NBA level. Still, you can clearly see into the future how this can be exploited by power guards. No 6'2 sized defender ever does any defensive drill work on how to guard the post at this time, and if you have a player at that size that enables you to post up and "invert" your offense, then that is a major halfcourt offensive weapon in my judgment.
In Grant's case, he can turn his back to the defense in the post, at the mid range wing areas, and at the high post/elbow/slot areas and be a big offensive weapon as a passer in those areas, IF a team is a creative enough with the right kind of scheme/personnel around him to make that happen.
NBA teams repeatedly posting up their guards and inverting their offense around power backcourt guys hasn't caught on YET, but I think it very well might in the next few years, as more and more big guys seem to all want to play on the perimeter, then teams will have to get creative to generate post touches and opportunities to probe those areas.
I can see Grant being that type of 2nd unit power point guy, who can punish smaller back up guards around the league in that fashion, greasing the wheels to make your 2nd unit offense run smoother and with more horsepower.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
He better be able to post up, because Grant can't shoot well enough for my liking, and I highly doubt his particular flaws are fixable. Think about it...this kid has been coached by the very best in the game from an early age, and his shot STILL looks as bad as it does.....what makes you think it'll get fixed much now?
Off the dribble, Grant shoots it well enough to function, actually pretty well. He has a nice mid range game, and he clearly has been taught how to properly pound the last dribble to get into his shot when going to his dominant right hand. His shot looks better going right than some others do.
Mechanically going left, he seems to have a tough time getting the ball quickly into a shooting position....which is no doubt why he developed the step back move he favors so much, so he can gain than extra time and space. He gathers the ball lower and brings it under his belly button to get it to his right side so he can load up and shoot.....not terrible, but not great either, and it makes him shoot like a slightly smaller player would. He offsets that flaw by fading back, which is ok....but it is also what unathletic guys do playing the game. Still, while not technically perfect I wouldn't demerit him too much for that....I think he will be average as a shooter off the dribble, though way too irrationally confident in that step back jumper.
As a set shooter though, Grant is a disaster form wise to me. He looks completely and totally uncomfortable off of a catch and shoot to me, and I see why on film. He can't seem to get the ball up from the shooting pocket to a shooting position in such a way that he can see the rim clearly! he holds the ball in such a way that I would assume as a youth that was hard for him to make anything, and he has had to try and bandage and manufacture and groove a shot path that is clearly the opposite of what I would have suggested personally.
What Grant does (you have to watch his tape in super slow motion to see it) is lift the ball on the left side of his face, and looks at the target through his right eye. As the ball comes up he lifts it straight up, meaning the shooting arm crosses his nose, and the ball is released above and to the left of his head, so he can see and aim with his right eye. His shot is released way way off line, to the left of the target, and then he has to sort of will the ball back toward the dead center of the rim.
Grant shot a paltry 31.6% from the college line, and actually that is higher than I thought it would be based on how he shoots a catch/spot up.....which to his credit, he rarely attempts. Off the dribble he will be mediocre I think as a shooter, but off the catch he is going to be a total non factor. Too many flaws in that style to fix I think, or it would have been already.
If any of you remember Jordan Hulls at IU, remember how he shot the ball with the release to the right of his head? That style lets you keep the elbow underneath the ball, and lets you as a youth see the rim with both eyes. Obviously it is a low release and not often taught to top level guys, but that form would be WAY preferable accuracy wise than the mish mash elbow flying ****-eyed release Grant has. His shot off the dribble is much better than his catch and shoot form, which saves him from being a total non shooter.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grant is not a top flight defender at the tip of the spear of your defense, and it pissed me off quite frankly watching him defend on tape, because he should have been much better than he was.
Notre Dame in general is a poor defensive team year after year, so as much praise as I usually give Mike Brey for his offensive mind and schemes, his defensive coaching skills have been lacking for years in South Bend for whatever reason.
Grant looks to me to be a "scouting report" defender.....in both the ways that phrase can be used by coaches.
In the positive way, I think he processes information well it seems, and I bet he knows the strengths/tendencies of his opponents well. He reads plays and jumps routes, and I bet he knows and studies the tendencies of his individual opponents very well. He looks like a defender who will follow your team scheme and plan, and will prepare the right way for the opponent he has on that particular night.
But in the negative, his lack of defensive prowess and ability is circled in his opponents scouting report as well. Teams clearly targeted Grant often, and perhaps the extreme high volume of minutes he played fatigued him on that end more than I am accounting for. But teams, in big moments in big games, clearly targeted Grant to score against when they had to get a big hoop. And they did it in a variety of ways.
Against Kentucky, the Wildcats, WITH THE FINAL FOUR IN THE BALANCE, targeted Grant instead of going to Towns in the low post. Taking advantage of an alarming lack of focus and quickness, they blew by a standing straight up Grant and got to the rim, scoring the winning points after a foul caused by Grant getting blown by right from the top. Everyone gets beat sometimes off the dribble, but that was a pretty damn weak effort with the season on the line for a 5th year SR with an NBA pedigree.
Other teams liked to ISO him in the wings, drive into his body and stand him up, then spin dribble right by him. Like on offense, contact with other human beings seemed to really offend Grant's sensibilities. Grant stands up when attacked or threatened out of his stance, making him slow to move and react.
Where that really stands out though was when Grant was screened. Unlike a couple of other guards in this draft that are competitive and tough when screened, Grant was soft when contacted. He got engulfed on ball screens, standing up out of his stance and lacking that tough one step power slide all coaches teach to get through the trash and recover. Away from the ball was the same thing, as any screen that came toward he tried to avoid and not fight through, and when he couldn't dodge it or ND couldn't strategize a switch, Grant was screwed.....he simply didn't deal with contact well and his recovery skills were not good at all....all because he stood up vertically like a flag pole when screened.
Danny Granger used to do that, which annoyed me to no end when watching him play for us, but he had elite length and athleticism, to at least mitigate it a little bit, and Grant doesn't have elite tools for his position like Granger did.
Grant is a minus defender who might get better in a smaller role playing less minutes.....but I wouldn't bank on it. If you draft him, you have to like his pedigree, experience, and offensive size/skills enough to overlook his defensive shortcomings.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So, what do we have in Jerian Grant?
In my case, we have a somewhat unique offensive player who has definite positive attributes, but to me has too many flaws to endorse. I rarely get as aggravated watching film as I did watching Grant play, because I wanted to like him.....but despite the fact that I love big guards who can post up and am a huge advocate for that being a key skill, I hate his shot and defense enough to clearly and easily recommending that we pass on Grant at #11. Grant should be better by now than he is, and since he isn't that annoyed me a great dea.
I have no idea if Indiana feels the same way as I do. The Pacers clearly do need a back up point guard, and maybe they will like his pedigree, size, and passing ability more than I do. Maybe they feel they can fix his shot and surround him with other good defenders so his lack of D can be hidden. We will just have to wait and see what Larry ultimately does, but I am pretty sure we will and should pass on Jerian Grant.
Having said that, Grant will get a shot somewhere in the first round I think. His character and intellect does count for something, and despite what you read everywhere, this draft isn't as deep as you think it is. He is going to be a first rounder for sure. Grant makes some sense for Dallas at #21, perhaps for Toronto at #20, and maybe for Cleveland at #24. But ultimately I think he ends up close to home and is picked the Washington Wizards at pick #19.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I simply don't have a great comparable for Grant. I've read other people say Bobby Jackson, or Reggie Jackson. I don't really like those guys that well for him, because they all played off defense better or played off the ball some.....and in my case I think Grant only has value as a point guard.
I'm open to suggestions on a comparable. Maybe a poor man's Jarrett Jack? I don't know.
Less than 4 weeks to draft night now!
As always, the above is just my opinion. Others should feel free to disagree if they choose, and I hope we can have intelligent discussion about it because I know I am much more down on Grant than most of you. If we end up with him, I hope you can convince me I am wrong to think he is a mediocre backup at best.
Tbird
Why so SERIOUS 
Comment