As draft night rapidly approaches, the rush is on for teams to finalize their draft boards, work out players, and try and flesh out their own trade possibilities. One of the players many teams are looking at and considering is the crafty point guard from Virginia Commonwealth, Eric Maynor.
Maynor is flying a bit under the radar on this draft board and in draft chatter in general, as teams and scouts continue to try and quantify how his game will translate to the next level. Judging point guards is somewhat an art form anyway, so Maynor is likely one player there will be some disagreement on throughout the league, and perhaps on this board.
I've spent some extra time getting prepared for this analysis, as I had only 2 games of his from this past season prepared to watch. Thankfully, I had some good help from a couple of friends in the coaching world who helped me get some extra film of him. For those 2 guys, who by request are remaining anonymous (but will be reading this sometime in the next few days), I say thank you!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I want to share with you some of the things I look for when evaluating point guards in order to explain to you properly how I feel about Eric Maynor.
1. Does he have legitimate size to play the position defensively, and if he doesn't does he have overwhelming quickness or some other attribute to offset a lack of size?
2. Does he understand how to play the position the proper way? Does he "get it"?
3. Is he truly a point guard, or a shooting guard in a point guards body? How does he THINK on the court?
4. Can he fit in to different styles, and what style would best fit him?
5. Can he give you what I call "opportunity points"? Not necessarily looking to score, but able to score when an advantage exists or the situation calls for him to do so?
6. Does he make his teammates better, and do players like playing with him?
I'll try to hit on those points as I continue this analysis.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Athletically, Maynor is not a physical freak of nature like a Rajon Rondo with his length and quickness, or Derrick Rose with his athleticism, or Chris Paul with his blinding speed.
Maynor seems to have average quickness, straightline speed, mediocre reach, and pedestrian leaping ability. He doesn't appear to me to be a guy who is going to overwhelm anyone in a workout situation, and I can see where teams would think he has a lack of extreme upside. In fact, I think that is exactly right, likely Eric Maynor will not be a top 5 NBA point guard in his career, due to some athletic limitations.
This doesn't mean he can't play an athletic game however. It just means he isn't a candidate for XMen like some of the truly stud specimens playing the position currently. He will be somewhere between slightly above average athletically overall to right at the median of all the NBA point guards currently playing.
The one concern I do have with him is his slight build. Weighing in at 165lbs or so is about 15 too few for him to successfully play in the league long term at, so a team will need to fill him out some with a nutritionists and diet probably. In this case playing at a small school like VCU hurts him a bit, as he wasn't exposed to all the opportunities for stuff like that the way a player from North Carolina or Kentucky would be.
But athletically, I think it is clear that Maynor hits the prerequisites in being able to play the game from a physical and athletic standpoint.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Analyzing a point guard is more art than science, particularly when you add in the circumstances that Maynor played under at VCU, playing basically by himself against good teams. VCU didn't have much talent to work with, yet still managed to win 20 plus games and make the NCAA field, largely due to Maynor.
Maynor largely stood out to me on film with his ability to already understand the nuances of playing the position. Maynor did so many things as a point guard well that coaches who really emphasize the minute details stress.
In point guard play, "pace of play" is something you always talk to them about. Many young guards have only 2 speeds: Super fast, or walk it up. In this draft, guards like Jonny Flynn and Ty Lawson look great when the pace is furious, and they had the teammates to run with them! Lawson particularly had a bunch of weapons to choose from, with Wayne Ellington being an outstanding shooter and Tyler Hansborough being an exceptional college big man running the floor. Lawson and Flynn are extremely good when pushing the tempo, attacking the defense with their speed. But, when the game slows down, the effectiveness goes away, particularly as a true half court lead guard. Their gas pedal was always pushed to the floor.
Usually you can somewhat teach a guard who plays too fast to play somewhat slower if you want to. But there are other guards who play too slow, walking the ball up, letting the defense (and themselves) rest. This tendency is exactly why, even though he was drafted high, that I never thought Bobby Hurley all those years ago would be a good pro. Hurley liked to walk the ball up the floor, a bad indicator of future abilities. There are others who have this tendency as well, usually a team struggles when these type players are at your helm.
But Maynor plays exactly the way you want a point guard to play in terms of pace....he plays at varying speeds! It is so difficult to fathom how important that is to a teams overall play, but it is a crucial thing in a true lead guard, and Maynor does it naturally. He pushes the ball when it is available, slows it down when situation dictates, and seems to be able to react well to the game situations.
It isn't so much that Maynor has quickness....in fact he is slower than some other guards in this draft with the ball.....but Maynor has "burst" with the ball....the ability to go quick in short areas to get where he needs to go. Maynor is the type of guard who doesn't blow by you, but he does beat you nevertheless. You don't see many false steps, and he plays with excellent balance. He isnt the strongest, but he is wiry and his excellent balance helps him finish plays when you don't think he will.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Maynor on film showed me some other positive attributes as an offensive point guard that I really like, and that are more rare than you think.
One of those is that Maynor seems to understand the rhythm and flow of the game. How many times have you seen a Pacer player hit 3 or 4 shots in a row, and really begin to get in a groove, only to see our point guard take 2 or 3 quick jumpers of their own in the upcoming possessions for no good reason? A teammate getting "hot" from the field is something a player like Maynor instinctively understands and doesnt need to be taught. Maynor understands things like "we havent gone inside for three straight possessions, this time I'm going to call a set play and make sure we get it to the mismatch in the post". These are types of things I see from Maynor that I don't think yet cross the minds of some of the other more gifted athletically point guards available to be picked.
Maynor had almost no help at VCU from teammates, but you can tell he has been coached very well. His coach at VCU, Anthony Grant, is widely considered to be one of the best in the country, and you can see some of the solid fundamentals and maturity that he helped Maynor develop.
Maynor seems to have the ability to make very accurate passes. This may seem like a small thing, but it isnt. It isn't enough to just make a great decision on where to pass the ball, you need to deliver the ball to your teammates in rhythm, on time, and where they want it. Maynor takes that further even and is able to read his teammates cuts, and how his teammates are being defending coming off screens earlier than most, so he makes passes AWAY from the defender better than any point guard in this draft EXCEPT for Stephon Curry, who is probably even better than Maynor at this skill.
Accurate passes are so key. Let's say you have a player spotting up and is open on the right wing, as your point guard drives to the lane. Some point guards in this draft will see where to pass, and yet lack the concentration or body control to throw it perfectly....they will throw it slightly too high or too low, messing up the rhythm of the shooter perhaps, or allowing the defender to recover that extra split second. Maynor is better at this little nuance than other point guards he is competing against, with the possible exception again of Stephon Curry.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've profiled alot of point guards already it seems in this point guard deep draft. Many of them will be really good players either as starters or as off the bench energy types, I think that is fair to say. But ALL of Teague, Lawson, Flynn and the like will be much much better in a more uptempo system. Currently, the Pacers do play a pretty fast tempo (3rd I think last year in "pace factor", someone can correct me if I am wrong), so any of these uptempo point guards might be fine right now.
But I am of the opinion that Larry Bird sees the game in a much more traditional way than Jim O'Brien does. I think it is likely that Larry will value a point guard who can actually play better in the HALF COURT, traditional play calling style than some of the waterbug guards. Now, Bird I assume will always want to be opportunistic to be able to run, but I suspect he will long term want us to be more "efficient" than "explosive".
Maynor ranks high to me in his ability to play the half court game. Another great skill I see Maynor having more than many young guards is the ability to "take the ball to the action". In coaching perlance, this means having the ball in your hands, reading the entire floor, then taking the ball to the side where you have the best offensive stuff happening. Maynor isn't Mark Jackson in this (the best I've ever seen in this one skill) but he is very good at this.
Here is an example of "taking it to the action": Your best shooter is on the baseline (Granger), and your best screener (Hibbert) is coming down the floor to his side getting ready to deliver a quick downscreen. On the other side you have Marquis Daniels cutting out gimpily to the wing area, and Jeff Foster trying to post up early.
Obviously, you'd want your point guard to take the ball from up top and get it in a position to where he can feed Granger off a screen in rhythm. But do you realize how many guards can't think like that? In our current guards, Ford would probably drive and try to score himself, Deiner would see the play but be unable to get the ball there while being guarded tightly, and Jack would see it too late and get the ball a half a heartbeat too late to Granger.
A guard like Maynor would see it BEFORE it happens, and read Grangers man as Granger was cutting, and deliver an accurate pass to an in rhythm shooter. And if Hibberts guy would hedge hard and leave Roy open, Maynor would see that too and deliver a strike to the big fella. Our other guards might be dribbling with their heads down, or already circling the ball back out since their first option was thwarted.
This is true in fast breaks as well. For years, the Pacers point guards have been terrible on 3-2 fast breaks. Tinsley had no timing at all here, either keeping the ball and taking it way too deep, or more often passing the ball way too early and/or passing it to the wrong lane filler. How many times have we seen Foster or someone like him get the ball way too early, have to dribble, and end up missing the shot/charging/turning it over. Maynor seems to stop in exactly the right place in this situation, which is right at the foul line to slightly above it. He will never wow you with a great spectacular pass, but he usually will make the simplest one.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Maynor scored alot in the college game, but I don't see him as a high volume scorer in the NBA. He does have the one signature move of being able to hit the little "teardrop" in the lane. Maynor isn't a guy who gets overly deep into the paint in penetration, instead he smartly stops a few feet further than other guards in this class to keep his passing angles available to him. He lacks the blow by speed to get all the way to the basket, so he developed a very nice in between floater shot that is probably his biggest weapon to score. He also will shoot free throws pretty well.
To be as good in the NBA as I think he might end up being, he will have to learn what a really good shot for him is and what it isn't. He already is a very smart player, so I don't see that being a problem. Maynor doesnt have text book form as a perimeter shooter, and I bet the NBA three pointer is a problem for him early in his career. His release is a bit slower than you would like, his hand position isn't ideal, and he doesn't get much elevation....he isn't going to rise up and shoot over anyone even remotely close to him.
Having said that, I think he can develop as a shooter, especially with a team who is good at developing shooters, which we happen to be. Billy Keller seems to be a good teacher of shooting and is on staff, and many Pacer players on this roster seem to be becoming much better in this area to my eye. And I also have in my mind how much improvement Mark Jackson had as a shooter later in his career when "coached up" by Larry Legend. Clearly, to ever be an effective starter and truly maximize his potential, Maynor needs to develop as a three point shooter, and I think he likely will in time, although it isn't a sure thing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because of all the positive attributes he brings to the table, I do think a point guard like Maynor is a really good weapon to have on a team. Offensively he really helps his teammates. He plays at great rhythm, understands the game, is a leader, is vocal, and seems to be very coachable. He also has the little extra bonus of seemingly rising to the occasion in the biggest moments, and making big shots. His best signature games were in the tournament this year against UCLA, and against Duke in the tournament a couple of years ago. Maynor shows the coolness and mojo to take big shots when he has to, and is able to deliver in the bigger moments, at least he was at the college level. He didn't shrink from the moments, he shined.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I mentioned way up above that I think Maynor does have the requirements physically to play defense at this level, if he is able to put on some weight without losing quickness and speed. But let me say that I worry about Maynor as an individual defender somewhat. He clearly saved himself for offense at the college level, and at the stick like frame he has now he can be just engulfed by screens. Currently, I think he will be able to stay in front of most NBA point guards, but clearly as they do to everyone else, the elite ones will be able to score on him. Also, currently he would have a tough time muscleing up against the Chauncey Billups/Deron Williams types.
I think eventually Maynor will develop into an average individual defender, but one who plays well within a team concept. I think he will become the type of conservative, "keep you in front" , don't gamble defender that you at least can rely on to be where he is supposed to. I of course wish he would be come a Heywoode Workman like ballhawk pressuring attack dog, but that isn't in the cards here I don't think. I don't think Maynor ever really HELPS you defensively a great deal, but I don't think he KILLS you either. His value to me is most certainly on the offensive end and in the lockerroom and huddle.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
So how does he fit with us?
Maynor in some ways gives some flexibility to you in the future. I think he can play well in multiple systems under different coaches. I think he can play up tempo, and play even better as a half court "medium tempo" point guard. I think Maynor can play as a backup to either Ford OR Jack, as he doesn't exactly duplicate either one.....I think he fits BETTER as a back up to Jack, but it isn't a major issue either way.
Maynor to me looks like a solid backup in years 1 and 2 perhaps, growing into a starters role at about age 24 or 25, much like Jarrett Jack has here. He isn't strong enough to play big minutes as a starter yet, and he will need some time to get adjusted to the pace/travel/jump in competition/athleticism that he will experience.
So short term, an excellent back up who makes your team better. Long term, an excellent but limited starting point guard who may not have great highlights or big numbers, but who can really help your team win games in the regular season and into the playoffs. Eric Maynor is going to be an important player on some really good teams I think into the future, whether it be with us or elsewhere.
Maynor makes a ton of sense for teams lacking point guards, like Philadelphia, Minnesota, Atlanta, etc. But I think it would be better for Maynor to go to a team where he can back up a really good player for year or 2 and develop his game, size, and strength. I don't think he is an immediate starter, more of a 2 year, work him in slowly type. I think Detroit is a good fit for him at #15 perhaps, and Utah would be a nice fit as well as an upgrade to caddy for Deron Williams.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The paragraph right above that assumes the Pacers aren't taking him at #13 of course, which I do not necessarily think you can assume at this point. In fact, I'll go ahead and say that IF THE PACERS CHOOSE TO TRADE FORD somewhere and don't get a point guard back, that Maynor will very possibly be our selection. 4 year starter, solid character guy, plays more of a half court oriented game that I think Larry Bird covets, plays with a smoothness and maturity....I can definitely see Maynor being a Pacer. If the Pacers don't trade a point guard and DO bring Jack and Ford both back, then picking Maynor probably doesn't make any sense.
In an ideal world, you would trade down just a few spots, gain a big guy/extra pick and pick Maynor slightly below our current selection. If Maynor is truly your guy, you'd need to drop no further than Chicago's selection at #16, as the teams all right below them all are likely Maynor fans.
Some trade with our hated rival Detroit might make sense, involving players like Aaron Afflalo and Amir Johnson and the #15 in exchange for the #13 and something else. In fact, I would love a move like that.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
So who can we compare Maynor to?
Currently playing in the NBA I think are 2 very good comparables to how I think Maynor projects long term if he pans out like I think he will.
ANDRE MILLER is a non spectacular point guard who seems to really help his team win while not compiling giant statistics, although he is a bit better defender and a bit worse offensive player than I think Maynor will be.
I think the best NBA comparable to Maynor's long term possibilities is:
JAMEER NELSON. Both small school kids, without alarming athleticism. Nelson is very popular with his teammates and is an excellent offensive player. He is tough minded, heady, and smart although not supremely talented. He rode his teammates to an all star berth this year, so he is probably being overrated a tad at this point. But irregardless, he is a really good point guard who inspires his teammates to play well, who plays smart, and who scores when the opportunity presents itself. A pass first, heady, winning player.
Maynors career path looks pretty clear to me. Effective back up early as he learns the game and gets stronger. Good NBA starter on very good teams for a few years, then a fine back up and mentor and savvy veteran as his athleticism fades in his early thirties.
The Pacers could do a whole lot worse in this draft....Eric Maynor is going to be a very good selection for someone in the mid to late first round I think. Don't be surprised if someway somehow that Eric Maynor is a Pacer in a couple of weeks.
.................................................. ................................................
As always, the above is just my opinion.
Tbird
Maynor is flying a bit under the radar on this draft board and in draft chatter in general, as teams and scouts continue to try and quantify how his game will translate to the next level. Judging point guards is somewhat an art form anyway, so Maynor is likely one player there will be some disagreement on throughout the league, and perhaps on this board.
I've spent some extra time getting prepared for this analysis, as I had only 2 games of his from this past season prepared to watch. Thankfully, I had some good help from a couple of friends in the coaching world who helped me get some extra film of him. For those 2 guys, who by request are remaining anonymous (but will be reading this sometime in the next few days), I say thank you!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I want to share with you some of the things I look for when evaluating point guards in order to explain to you properly how I feel about Eric Maynor.
1. Does he have legitimate size to play the position defensively, and if he doesn't does he have overwhelming quickness or some other attribute to offset a lack of size?
2. Does he understand how to play the position the proper way? Does he "get it"?
3. Is he truly a point guard, or a shooting guard in a point guards body? How does he THINK on the court?
4. Can he fit in to different styles, and what style would best fit him?
5. Can he give you what I call "opportunity points"? Not necessarily looking to score, but able to score when an advantage exists or the situation calls for him to do so?
6. Does he make his teammates better, and do players like playing with him?
I'll try to hit on those points as I continue this analysis.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Athletically, Maynor is not a physical freak of nature like a Rajon Rondo with his length and quickness, or Derrick Rose with his athleticism, or Chris Paul with his blinding speed.
Maynor seems to have average quickness, straightline speed, mediocre reach, and pedestrian leaping ability. He doesn't appear to me to be a guy who is going to overwhelm anyone in a workout situation, and I can see where teams would think he has a lack of extreme upside. In fact, I think that is exactly right, likely Eric Maynor will not be a top 5 NBA point guard in his career, due to some athletic limitations.
This doesn't mean he can't play an athletic game however. It just means he isn't a candidate for XMen like some of the truly stud specimens playing the position currently. He will be somewhere between slightly above average athletically overall to right at the median of all the NBA point guards currently playing.
The one concern I do have with him is his slight build. Weighing in at 165lbs or so is about 15 too few for him to successfully play in the league long term at, so a team will need to fill him out some with a nutritionists and diet probably. In this case playing at a small school like VCU hurts him a bit, as he wasn't exposed to all the opportunities for stuff like that the way a player from North Carolina or Kentucky would be.
But athletically, I think it is clear that Maynor hits the prerequisites in being able to play the game from a physical and athletic standpoint.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Analyzing a point guard is more art than science, particularly when you add in the circumstances that Maynor played under at VCU, playing basically by himself against good teams. VCU didn't have much talent to work with, yet still managed to win 20 plus games and make the NCAA field, largely due to Maynor.
Maynor largely stood out to me on film with his ability to already understand the nuances of playing the position. Maynor did so many things as a point guard well that coaches who really emphasize the minute details stress.
In point guard play, "pace of play" is something you always talk to them about. Many young guards have only 2 speeds: Super fast, or walk it up. In this draft, guards like Jonny Flynn and Ty Lawson look great when the pace is furious, and they had the teammates to run with them! Lawson particularly had a bunch of weapons to choose from, with Wayne Ellington being an outstanding shooter and Tyler Hansborough being an exceptional college big man running the floor. Lawson and Flynn are extremely good when pushing the tempo, attacking the defense with their speed. But, when the game slows down, the effectiveness goes away, particularly as a true half court lead guard. Their gas pedal was always pushed to the floor.
Usually you can somewhat teach a guard who plays too fast to play somewhat slower if you want to. But there are other guards who play too slow, walking the ball up, letting the defense (and themselves) rest. This tendency is exactly why, even though he was drafted high, that I never thought Bobby Hurley all those years ago would be a good pro. Hurley liked to walk the ball up the floor, a bad indicator of future abilities. There are others who have this tendency as well, usually a team struggles when these type players are at your helm.
But Maynor plays exactly the way you want a point guard to play in terms of pace....he plays at varying speeds! It is so difficult to fathom how important that is to a teams overall play, but it is a crucial thing in a true lead guard, and Maynor does it naturally. He pushes the ball when it is available, slows it down when situation dictates, and seems to be able to react well to the game situations.
It isn't so much that Maynor has quickness....in fact he is slower than some other guards in this draft with the ball.....but Maynor has "burst" with the ball....the ability to go quick in short areas to get where he needs to go. Maynor is the type of guard who doesn't blow by you, but he does beat you nevertheless. You don't see many false steps, and he plays with excellent balance. He isnt the strongest, but he is wiry and his excellent balance helps him finish plays when you don't think he will.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Maynor on film showed me some other positive attributes as an offensive point guard that I really like, and that are more rare than you think.
One of those is that Maynor seems to understand the rhythm and flow of the game. How many times have you seen a Pacer player hit 3 or 4 shots in a row, and really begin to get in a groove, only to see our point guard take 2 or 3 quick jumpers of their own in the upcoming possessions for no good reason? A teammate getting "hot" from the field is something a player like Maynor instinctively understands and doesnt need to be taught. Maynor understands things like "we havent gone inside for three straight possessions, this time I'm going to call a set play and make sure we get it to the mismatch in the post". These are types of things I see from Maynor that I don't think yet cross the minds of some of the other more gifted athletically point guards available to be picked.
Maynor had almost no help at VCU from teammates, but you can tell he has been coached very well. His coach at VCU, Anthony Grant, is widely considered to be one of the best in the country, and you can see some of the solid fundamentals and maturity that he helped Maynor develop.
Maynor seems to have the ability to make very accurate passes. This may seem like a small thing, but it isnt. It isn't enough to just make a great decision on where to pass the ball, you need to deliver the ball to your teammates in rhythm, on time, and where they want it. Maynor takes that further even and is able to read his teammates cuts, and how his teammates are being defending coming off screens earlier than most, so he makes passes AWAY from the defender better than any point guard in this draft EXCEPT for Stephon Curry, who is probably even better than Maynor at this skill.
Accurate passes are so key. Let's say you have a player spotting up and is open on the right wing, as your point guard drives to the lane. Some point guards in this draft will see where to pass, and yet lack the concentration or body control to throw it perfectly....they will throw it slightly too high or too low, messing up the rhythm of the shooter perhaps, or allowing the defender to recover that extra split second. Maynor is better at this little nuance than other point guards he is competing against, with the possible exception again of Stephon Curry.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've profiled alot of point guards already it seems in this point guard deep draft. Many of them will be really good players either as starters or as off the bench energy types, I think that is fair to say. But ALL of Teague, Lawson, Flynn and the like will be much much better in a more uptempo system. Currently, the Pacers do play a pretty fast tempo (3rd I think last year in "pace factor", someone can correct me if I am wrong), so any of these uptempo point guards might be fine right now.
But I am of the opinion that Larry Bird sees the game in a much more traditional way than Jim O'Brien does. I think it is likely that Larry will value a point guard who can actually play better in the HALF COURT, traditional play calling style than some of the waterbug guards. Now, Bird I assume will always want to be opportunistic to be able to run, but I suspect he will long term want us to be more "efficient" than "explosive".
Maynor ranks high to me in his ability to play the half court game. Another great skill I see Maynor having more than many young guards is the ability to "take the ball to the action". In coaching perlance, this means having the ball in your hands, reading the entire floor, then taking the ball to the side where you have the best offensive stuff happening. Maynor isn't Mark Jackson in this (the best I've ever seen in this one skill) but he is very good at this.
Here is an example of "taking it to the action": Your best shooter is on the baseline (Granger), and your best screener (Hibbert) is coming down the floor to his side getting ready to deliver a quick downscreen. On the other side you have Marquis Daniels cutting out gimpily to the wing area, and Jeff Foster trying to post up early.
Obviously, you'd want your point guard to take the ball from up top and get it in a position to where he can feed Granger off a screen in rhythm. But do you realize how many guards can't think like that? In our current guards, Ford would probably drive and try to score himself, Deiner would see the play but be unable to get the ball there while being guarded tightly, and Jack would see it too late and get the ball a half a heartbeat too late to Granger.
A guard like Maynor would see it BEFORE it happens, and read Grangers man as Granger was cutting, and deliver an accurate pass to an in rhythm shooter. And if Hibberts guy would hedge hard and leave Roy open, Maynor would see that too and deliver a strike to the big fella. Our other guards might be dribbling with their heads down, or already circling the ball back out since their first option was thwarted.
This is true in fast breaks as well. For years, the Pacers point guards have been terrible on 3-2 fast breaks. Tinsley had no timing at all here, either keeping the ball and taking it way too deep, or more often passing the ball way too early and/or passing it to the wrong lane filler. How many times have we seen Foster or someone like him get the ball way too early, have to dribble, and end up missing the shot/charging/turning it over. Maynor seems to stop in exactly the right place in this situation, which is right at the foul line to slightly above it. He will never wow you with a great spectacular pass, but he usually will make the simplest one.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Maynor scored alot in the college game, but I don't see him as a high volume scorer in the NBA. He does have the one signature move of being able to hit the little "teardrop" in the lane. Maynor isn't a guy who gets overly deep into the paint in penetration, instead he smartly stops a few feet further than other guards in this class to keep his passing angles available to him. He lacks the blow by speed to get all the way to the basket, so he developed a very nice in between floater shot that is probably his biggest weapon to score. He also will shoot free throws pretty well.
To be as good in the NBA as I think he might end up being, he will have to learn what a really good shot for him is and what it isn't. He already is a very smart player, so I don't see that being a problem. Maynor doesnt have text book form as a perimeter shooter, and I bet the NBA three pointer is a problem for him early in his career. His release is a bit slower than you would like, his hand position isn't ideal, and he doesn't get much elevation....he isn't going to rise up and shoot over anyone even remotely close to him.
Having said that, I think he can develop as a shooter, especially with a team who is good at developing shooters, which we happen to be. Billy Keller seems to be a good teacher of shooting and is on staff, and many Pacer players on this roster seem to be becoming much better in this area to my eye. And I also have in my mind how much improvement Mark Jackson had as a shooter later in his career when "coached up" by Larry Legend. Clearly, to ever be an effective starter and truly maximize his potential, Maynor needs to develop as a three point shooter, and I think he likely will in time, although it isn't a sure thing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because of all the positive attributes he brings to the table, I do think a point guard like Maynor is a really good weapon to have on a team. Offensively he really helps his teammates. He plays at great rhythm, understands the game, is a leader, is vocal, and seems to be very coachable. He also has the little extra bonus of seemingly rising to the occasion in the biggest moments, and making big shots. His best signature games were in the tournament this year against UCLA, and against Duke in the tournament a couple of years ago. Maynor shows the coolness and mojo to take big shots when he has to, and is able to deliver in the bigger moments, at least he was at the college level. He didn't shrink from the moments, he shined.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I mentioned way up above that I think Maynor does have the requirements physically to play defense at this level, if he is able to put on some weight without losing quickness and speed. But let me say that I worry about Maynor as an individual defender somewhat. He clearly saved himself for offense at the college level, and at the stick like frame he has now he can be just engulfed by screens. Currently, I think he will be able to stay in front of most NBA point guards, but clearly as they do to everyone else, the elite ones will be able to score on him. Also, currently he would have a tough time muscleing up against the Chauncey Billups/Deron Williams types.
I think eventually Maynor will develop into an average individual defender, but one who plays well within a team concept. I think he will become the type of conservative, "keep you in front" , don't gamble defender that you at least can rely on to be where he is supposed to. I of course wish he would be come a Heywoode Workman like ballhawk pressuring attack dog, but that isn't in the cards here I don't think. I don't think Maynor ever really HELPS you defensively a great deal, but I don't think he KILLS you either. His value to me is most certainly on the offensive end and in the lockerroom and huddle.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
So how does he fit with us?
Maynor in some ways gives some flexibility to you in the future. I think he can play well in multiple systems under different coaches. I think he can play up tempo, and play even better as a half court "medium tempo" point guard. I think Maynor can play as a backup to either Ford OR Jack, as he doesn't exactly duplicate either one.....I think he fits BETTER as a back up to Jack, but it isn't a major issue either way.
Maynor to me looks like a solid backup in years 1 and 2 perhaps, growing into a starters role at about age 24 or 25, much like Jarrett Jack has here. He isn't strong enough to play big minutes as a starter yet, and he will need some time to get adjusted to the pace/travel/jump in competition/athleticism that he will experience.
So short term, an excellent back up who makes your team better. Long term, an excellent but limited starting point guard who may not have great highlights or big numbers, but who can really help your team win games in the regular season and into the playoffs. Eric Maynor is going to be an important player on some really good teams I think into the future, whether it be with us or elsewhere.
Maynor makes a ton of sense for teams lacking point guards, like Philadelphia, Minnesota, Atlanta, etc. But I think it would be better for Maynor to go to a team where he can back up a really good player for year or 2 and develop his game, size, and strength. I don't think he is an immediate starter, more of a 2 year, work him in slowly type. I think Detroit is a good fit for him at #15 perhaps, and Utah would be a nice fit as well as an upgrade to caddy for Deron Williams.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The paragraph right above that assumes the Pacers aren't taking him at #13 of course, which I do not necessarily think you can assume at this point. In fact, I'll go ahead and say that IF THE PACERS CHOOSE TO TRADE FORD somewhere and don't get a point guard back, that Maynor will very possibly be our selection. 4 year starter, solid character guy, plays more of a half court oriented game that I think Larry Bird covets, plays with a smoothness and maturity....I can definitely see Maynor being a Pacer. If the Pacers don't trade a point guard and DO bring Jack and Ford both back, then picking Maynor probably doesn't make any sense.
In an ideal world, you would trade down just a few spots, gain a big guy/extra pick and pick Maynor slightly below our current selection. If Maynor is truly your guy, you'd need to drop no further than Chicago's selection at #16, as the teams all right below them all are likely Maynor fans.
Some trade with our hated rival Detroit might make sense, involving players like Aaron Afflalo and Amir Johnson and the #15 in exchange for the #13 and something else. In fact, I would love a move like that.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
So who can we compare Maynor to?
Currently playing in the NBA I think are 2 very good comparables to how I think Maynor projects long term if he pans out like I think he will.
ANDRE MILLER is a non spectacular point guard who seems to really help his team win while not compiling giant statistics, although he is a bit better defender and a bit worse offensive player than I think Maynor will be.
I think the best NBA comparable to Maynor's long term possibilities is:
JAMEER NELSON. Both small school kids, without alarming athleticism. Nelson is very popular with his teammates and is an excellent offensive player. He is tough minded, heady, and smart although not supremely talented. He rode his teammates to an all star berth this year, so he is probably being overrated a tad at this point. But irregardless, he is a really good point guard who inspires his teammates to play well, who plays smart, and who scores when the opportunity presents itself. A pass first, heady, winning player.
Maynors career path looks pretty clear to me. Effective back up early as he learns the game and gets stronger. Good NBA starter on very good teams for a few years, then a fine back up and mentor and savvy veteran as his athleticism fades in his early thirties.
The Pacers could do a whole lot worse in this draft....Eric Maynor is going to be a very good selection for someone in the mid to late first round I think. Don't be surprised if someway somehow that Eric Maynor is a Pacer in a couple of weeks.
.................................................. ................................................
As always, the above is just my opinion.
Tbird
Comment