Today my draft threads continue on with an examination of the point guard and hero from the national championship game, Mario Chalmers from Kansas.
Chalmers is very obtainable in my view near the end of the first round, sometime after about pick #20. There will be some teams willing to trade out of the late first round for peanuts, to avoid having to pay a guaranteed contract to someone who will have only a marginal chance to make their team. A trade into the late first round for the Pacers remains for me a very likely scenario, with the only question being who to trade up FOR. This thread will be an examination of the advantages and disadvantages of obtaining the sharp shooting point guard from Kansas.
I view Chalmers as being more of a fit for Indiana than D.J. Augustin would, due to his longer wingspan and superior size. Add that fact to his superior outside shooting, and I view Mario Chalmers as perhaps one of the favorites to be end up in a Pacer uniform on June 26th, after a draft night deal. To get him, I think our main competition will be the Houston Rockets, who pick #25. Examining the lay of the land, I think it is very likely Chalmers ends up with one of these 2 franchises.
Chalmers is not a perfect player. As a point guard, he lacks "imagination" and creativity. He is not going to be a clever passer in broken play situations, creating a play where none really exists. Instead he is more of your classic "system" point guard. What I mean by that is he is very capable of running your plays correctly and getting you into your set offense, but he isn't going to be able to be isolated often and told to create a scoring opportunity. He will be a prototypical "half court" point guard, with the added ability to be a quality spot up shooter in fast break situations.
Athletically, he isn't as quick or as flexible as the smaller point guards like Augustin or Tony Parker, and he may struggle to defend the super quick guards in the league. However, he will be a willing and hard working defender, especially if he shares the position with a quality back up to limit his minutes. He will be able to defend post ups well as a point guard, so teams that feast against us posting up Travis Deiner will not be able to do that against Chalmers....they'll have to find another way. His length and strength and physical nature will help him against the bigger point guards however, and will at least give the Pacers a fighting chance against players like Chauncey Billups, Rajon Rondo, and even the lost-a-step Jason Kidd.
Much like the point guard we have now in Jamal Tinsley, Chalmers has really good instincts defensively. He seems to get his hands on a lot of balls to deflect them, and he tends to gamble at times to get steals, and at the college level he has been very good at it. In fact, in terms of body build and style, he reminds me alot of Tinsley defensively, except that Chalmers plays with incredibly more passion, energy, and drive. Where Tinsley quits defensively sometimes, Chalmers gets more intense and plays harder when the chips are down. He is much more "relentless" defensively, and plays with quality hustle and effort, if not always effectiveness.
He differs a bit I believe from Tinsley defensively in that my impression is that Jamal relies almost completely on instincts, where I have the impression that Chalmers relies more on scouting reports and intelligence. That is subjective analysis on my part though, and I would assume that the Pacer scouts have interviewed his college coaches by now and got a god idea of his habits in this regard. Chalmers "traces" the ball well, and keeps his long arms active and in the passing lanes, causing trouble for the man he is guarding to make accurate, on time passes when his man has lost his dribble.
I saw some other positive traits defensively from Chalmers that I really liked away from the ball. I felt like on tape Chalmers really played physical defense under the basket when asked to guard a cutter. He bodied people, made them work hard to cut and get open against him. He seemed in the games I watched to be, again, "relentless" in chasing people around screens, going full speed to chase his man around them. Of course, occasionally that meant he lost vision and ran very hard INTO a screen, taking a physical beating in the process from teams like Texas Tech, who use many more screens than most. Still, I like the fact that Chalmers would at least attempt to recover to get to his man, and his longer wingspan and effort meant that taking a jump shot over Chalmers wasn't an easy task. Because I believe that contesting jump shots is one of the most important keys to defense, and because I believe Chalmers has the desire and wingspan to do that consistently, I rate him as a plus NBA defender potentially even though he won't be a pure "pressuring" defender on the ball, and will play more "positional" and conservative and within a half court defensive structure.
Being asked to share some responsibilties with others in ballhandling duties at Kansas I think helped Chalmers be able to go all out when he was in the game. I don't have exact numbers, but my guess is that Coach Self thought that Chalmers played his best when limited to about 23-26 minutes per game (in a 40 minute college game). One of the things I think Chalmers will have to do to be an effective point guard in the NBA is to get in much better physical condition and shape, because I don't think he played in college as cut and in condition as he will need to be here. Because of this, I think Chalmers will likely be a prototypical player who hits that "rookie wall" at about game 50 next season, and will have to learn how to manage his body and diet so that improves in year 2.
While I see limited similarities with Tinsley defensively, there are almost none with JT on the other end of the floor, which is both good and bad.
Chalmers is very protective and careful with the ball by nature I think, and the relatively easy and conservative "Iba High/Low" scheme I described in my earlier threads that Kansas ran made the game easier for him from a decision making standpoint. Because he wasn't really asked to beat his man off the dribble anyway, the fact that he struggles with that aspect of play wasn't exposed as much as it might be in the more open O'Brien system. Really high quality on the ball pressure defense can give Chalmers trouble, as he dribbles too high sometimes for my taste, and if you really watch with a close eye, you'll see that he also dribbles with his palms too much instead of his fingertips. This doesnt enable him to handle the ball "on a string" and make quick moves to beat people when pressured like you'd like to see him do. Instead, to keep from turning it over against pressure, he will instead turn his back to the defender to keep the defender away from the ball.
This didnt matter much at Kansas, because where he was supposed to take the ball was predetermined anyway, and the first pass to initiate their offense was easy to make. But at the pro level, that could be a problem if he is in the wrong system, or not used correctly.
Basically, as a ballhandler, Chalmers is a "Pass A to Pass B" point guard. That is not a fatal weakness, but it is one that needs to be both "coached up" and planned around by whichever team ends up with him. Since I am of the opinion that Houston could use him, I am sure the deciding factor for the Rockets will be if Chalmers fits their "Hybrid Princeton" offensive scheme better than a Ty Lawson or some other style of point guard.
Chalmers is a good shooter, who has great shot selection. He can make the standstill wide open jump shot/3 point shot very well, which in my opinion will make him coveted by Jim O'Brien and his staff. He isn't going to have the athleticism or lift to jump up and shoot a guarded three off the dribble, but that is a bad shot anyway most of the time. I project Chalmers to be a really good fit for Indiana in the eyes of O'Brien because he will play extremely efficiently, and will play as he is asked to play without too much freelancing.
When he is trying to line up of a patented open three, and his defender recovers to him, it is in this area where Chalmers is going to have to improve to be a legitimate NBA really good starting quality player. At this point, Chalmers puts his feet a bit close together in his set up for my taste, which doesnt let him "explode" with a big first step. He often while attempting to drive past a closing out defender take a little false step first, which slows him just enough to be guarded and headed off. Because he is slow at this move, he doesnt as of yet have much of a mid range game, because he never gets past his man to need one! He either has such an open easy drive he goes all the way, or he shoots the open jump shot. Thats ok, because he plays within his limits better than any player I have reviewed so far, but by being such a safe player he has limited his own potential to master the little floaters that are such a part of most high quality point guards talents. I think Chalmers can be taught all of this as he gains experience, but he will need to be prodded to do so and taught well by the assistants on whatever team he ends up on. It is not a sure thing, but I think he will improve in this area over time.
On most teams, I think Chalmers would make an ideal backup point guard. He is conservative and plays mistake free. He is a plus defensively, has a great attitude, willingness to run the plays called from the bench, is coachable, level headed and intelligent, and can make the open jump shot. That is most likely where his career would take him in most circumstances.
However, I think with our franchise and in Houston (and maybe others.....Denver perhaps?) that he becomes a starter early in his career. I think it is somewhat possible/ probable that Chalmers improves to the point that he is a top 10-15 point guard in the league in time, while giving you every intangible that you would want from your lead guard.
What you need to help him is another player you can play with him who can handle the ball some when he is in the game (For us, that is Mike Dunleavy and Marquis Daniels, for Houston it is McGrady and Battier), you need a backup who can play some (Deiner for us hopefully, Alston for the Rockets), and you need a coaching staff who can recognize what he is as a player and what he isn't. (I think his unique skills in different areas will make both O'Brien and Bird independently reach the conclusion they really like him). Chalmers will likely seem like a breath of fresh air to franchises who have been so bereft of talent and leadership at that position, while at the same time leaving you with a knawing question : Can you win a championship with him as your starter? I think the answer is yes, if you had superior players at other positions....which we don't but might have someday, right?
But those questions are far away for the Pacers, who need a point guard from this draft to pair with Travis Deiner and who can fit this system. Chalmers is a much better fit long term I think than Augustin or Lawson, so I think it is very likely that Mario Chalmers somehow ends up in a Pacer uniform next season, if the Pacers can pull it off with a trade/purchase of a pick in the 20-25 area, or perhaps slightly earlier if the need to.
There are several good comparisons from the past to what I think Chalmers can become. I think Anthony Johnson is a good modern day comparable, even though I know many of you reading this didn't like his style of play. But, since I have in this series when I could to use players from the 80's and 90's just for fun, I have three comparisons I think are spot on.....interestingly, 2 of which are still involved in the league and in your conscience:
3. Gerald Henderson of the early 80's Celtics.
2. Avery Johnson of many teams, including the Spurs as a player.
1. Doc Rivers of the Hawks, clearly the best, most likely comparable player I could think of. Rivers was an excellent player playing for the Mike Fratello coached Hawks, with Dominique Wilkins as their star. Thats the type of point guard I think Chalmers can be.
Time will only tell if anything I have written turns out to be correct, but if it is, we should all be prepared to be happy on draft night.
As always,, the above is just my opinion.
Tbird
Chalmers is very obtainable in my view near the end of the first round, sometime after about pick #20. There will be some teams willing to trade out of the late first round for peanuts, to avoid having to pay a guaranteed contract to someone who will have only a marginal chance to make their team. A trade into the late first round for the Pacers remains for me a very likely scenario, with the only question being who to trade up FOR. This thread will be an examination of the advantages and disadvantages of obtaining the sharp shooting point guard from Kansas.
I view Chalmers as being more of a fit for Indiana than D.J. Augustin would, due to his longer wingspan and superior size. Add that fact to his superior outside shooting, and I view Mario Chalmers as perhaps one of the favorites to be end up in a Pacer uniform on June 26th, after a draft night deal. To get him, I think our main competition will be the Houston Rockets, who pick #25. Examining the lay of the land, I think it is very likely Chalmers ends up with one of these 2 franchises.
Chalmers is not a perfect player. As a point guard, he lacks "imagination" and creativity. He is not going to be a clever passer in broken play situations, creating a play where none really exists. Instead he is more of your classic "system" point guard. What I mean by that is he is very capable of running your plays correctly and getting you into your set offense, but he isn't going to be able to be isolated often and told to create a scoring opportunity. He will be a prototypical "half court" point guard, with the added ability to be a quality spot up shooter in fast break situations.
Athletically, he isn't as quick or as flexible as the smaller point guards like Augustin or Tony Parker, and he may struggle to defend the super quick guards in the league. However, he will be a willing and hard working defender, especially if he shares the position with a quality back up to limit his minutes. He will be able to defend post ups well as a point guard, so teams that feast against us posting up Travis Deiner will not be able to do that against Chalmers....they'll have to find another way. His length and strength and physical nature will help him against the bigger point guards however, and will at least give the Pacers a fighting chance against players like Chauncey Billups, Rajon Rondo, and even the lost-a-step Jason Kidd.
Much like the point guard we have now in Jamal Tinsley, Chalmers has really good instincts defensively. He seems to get his hands on a lot of balls to deflect them, and he tends to gamble at times to get steals, and at the college level he has been very good at it. In fact, in terms of body build and style, he reminds me alot of Tinsley defensively, except that Chalmers plays with incredibly more passion, energy, and drive. Where Tinsley quits defensively sometimes, Chalmers gets more intense and plays harder when the chips are down. He is much more "relentless" defensively, and plays with quality hustle and effort, if not always effectiveness.
He differs a bit I believe from Tinsley defensively in that my impression is that Jamal relies almost completely on instincts, where I have the impression that Chalmers relies more on scouting reports and intelligence. That is subjective analysis on my part though, and I would assume that the Pacer scouts have interviewed his college coaches by now and got a god idea of his habits in this regard. Chalmers "traces" the ball well, and keeps his long arms active and in the passing lanes, causing trouble for the man he is guarding to make accurate, on time passes when his man has lost his dribble.
I saw some other positive traits defensively from Chalmers that I really liked away from the ball. I felt like on tape Chalmers really played physical defense under the basket when asked to guard a cutter. He bodied people, made them work hard to cut and get open against him. He seemed in the games I watched to be, again, "relentless" in chasing people around screens, going full speed to chase his man around them. Of course, occasionally that meant he lost vision and ran very hard INTO a screen, taking a physical beating in the process from teams like Texas Tech, who use many more screens than most. Still, I like the fact that Chalmers would at least attempt to recover to get to his man, and his longer wingspan and effort meant that taking a jump shot over Chalmers wasn't an easy task. Because I believe that contesting jump shots is one of the most important keys to defense, and because I believe Chalmers has the desire and wingspan to do that consistently, I rate him as a plus NBA defender potentially even though he won't be a pure "pressuring" defender on the ball, and will play more "positional" and conservative and within a half court defensive structure.
Being asked to share some responsibilties with others in ballhandling duties at Kansas I think helped Chalmers be able to go all out when he was in the game. I don't have exact numbers, but my guess is that Coach Self thought that Chalmers played his best when limited to about 23-26 minutes per game (in a 40 minute college game). One of the things I think Chalmers will have to do to be an effective point guard in the NBA is to get in much better physical condition and shape, because I don't think he played in college as cut and in condition as he will need to be here. Because of this, I think Chalmers will likely be a prototypical player who hits that "rookie wall" at about game 50 next season, and will have to learn how to manage his body and diet so that improves in year 2.
While I see limited similarities with Tinsley defensively, there are almost none with JT on the other end of the floor, which is both good and bad.
Chalmers is very protective and careful with the ball by nature I think, and the relatively easy and conservative "Iba High/Low" scheme I described in my earlier threads that Kansas ran made the game easier for him from a decision making standpoint. Because he wasn't really asked to beat his man off the dribble anyway, the fact that he struggles with that aspect of play wasn't exposed as much as it might be in the more open O'Brien system. Really high quality on the ball pressure defense can give Chalmers trouble, as he dribbles too high sometimes for my taste, and if you really watch with a close eye, you'll see that he also dribbles with his palms too much instead of his fingertips. This doesnt enable him to handle the ball "on a string" and make quick moves to beat people when pressured like you'd like to see him do. Instead, to keep from turning it over against pressure, he will instead turn his back to the defender to keep the defender away from the ball.
This didnt matter much at Kansas, because where he was supposed to take the ball was predetermined anyway, and the first pass to initiate their offense was easy to make. But at the pro level, that could be a problem if he is in the wrong system, or not used correctly.
Basically, as a ballhandler, Chalmers is a "Pass A to Pass B" point guard. That is not a fatal weakness, but it is one that needs to be both "coached up" and planned around by whichever team ends up with him. Since I am of the opinion that Houston could use him, I am sure the deciding factor for the Rockets will be if Chalmers fits their "Hybrid Princeton" offensive scheme better than a Ty Lawson or some other style of point guard.
Chalmers is a good shooter, who has great shot selection. He can make the standstill wide open jump shot/3 point shot very well, which in my opinion will make him coveted by Jim O'Brien and his staff. He isn't going to have the athleticism or lift to jump up and shoot a guarded three off the dribble, but that is a bad shot anyway most of the time. I project Chalmers to be a really good fit for Indiana in the eyes of O'Brien because he will play extremely efficiently, and will play as he is asked to play without too much freelancing.
When he is trying to line up of a patented open three, and his defender recovers to him, it is in this area where Chalmers is going to have to improve to be a legitimate NBA really good starting quality player. At this point, Chalmers puts his feet a bit close together in his set up for my taste, which doesnt let him "explode" with a big first step. He often while attempting to drive past a closing out defender take a little false step first, which slows him just enough to be guarded and headed off. Because he is slow at this move, he doesnt as of yet have much of a mid range game, because he never gets past his man to need one! He either has such an open easy drive he goes all the way, or he shoots the open jump shot. Thats ok, because he plays within his limits better than any player I have reviewed so far, but by being such a safe player he has limited his own potential to master the little floaters that are such a part of most high quality point guards talents. I think Chalmers can be taught all of this as he gains experience, but he will need to be prodded to do so and taught well by the assistants on whatever team he ends up on. It is not a sure thing, but I think he will improve in this area over time.
On most teams, I think Chalmers would make an ideal backup point guard. He is conservative and plays mistake free. He is a plus defensively, has a great attitude, willingness to run the plays called from the bench, is coachable, level headed and intelligent, and can make the open jump shot. That is most likely where his career would take him in most circumstances.
However, I think with our franchise and in Houston (and maybe others.....Denver perhaps?) that he becomes a starter early in his career. I think it is somewhat possible/ probable that Chalmers improves to the point that he is a top 10-15 point guard in the league in time, while giving you every intangible that you would want from your lead guard.
What you need to help him is another player you can play with him who can handle the ball some when he is in the game (For us, that is Mike Dunleavy and Marquis Daniels, for Houston it is McGrady and Battier), you need a backup who can play some (Deiner for us hopefully, Alston for the Rockets), and you need a coaching staff who can recognize what he is as a player and what he isn't. (I think his unique skills in different areas will make both O'Brien and Bird independently reach the conclusion they really like him). Chalmers will likely seem like a breath of fresh air to franchises who have been so bereft of talent and leadership at that position, while at the same time leaving you with a knawing question : Can you win a championship with him as your starter? I think the answer is yes, if you had superior players at other positions....which we don't but might have someday, right?
But those questions are far away for the Pacers, who need a point guard from this draft to pair with Travis Deiner and who can fit this system. Chalmers is a much better fit long term I think than Augustin or Lawson, so I think it is very likely that Mario Chalmers somehow ends up in a Pacer uniform next season, if the Pacers can pull it off with a trade/purchase of a pick in the 20-25 area, or perhaps slightly earlier if the need to.
There are several good comparisons from the past to what I think Chalmers can become. I think Anthony Johnson is a good modern day comparable, even though I know many of you reading this didn't like his style of play. But, since I have in this series when I could to use players from the 80's and 90's just for fun, I have three comparisons I think are spot on.....interestingly, 2 of which are still involved in the league and in your conscience:
3. Gerald Henderson of the early 80's Celtics.
2. Avery Johnson of many teams, including the Spurs as a player.
1. Doc Rivers of the Hawks, clearly the best, most likely comparable player I could think of. Rivers was an excellent player playing for the Mike Fratello coached Hawks, with Dominique Wilkins as their star. Thats the type of point guard I think Chalmers can be.
Time will only tell if anything I have written turns out to be correct, but if it is, we should all be prepared to be happy on draft night.
As always,, the above is just my opinion.
Tbird
Comment