Draft Prospect: Quincy Pondexter

[Darkwaters]

If we could grab a second first rounder late I would say ok but this guys reminds me alot of James White.;

James White!

[AFBlue]

From DX SF situational statistics...

http://www.draftexpress.com/article/...ward-Crop-3503

•Quincy Pondexter ranks as the third most efficient overall scorer on our rankings at 1.066 PPP. He was the second ranked isolation scorer at 0.972 PPP, and scored roughly 1.3 PPP off of 4.4 possessions per-game off of basket cuts and offensive rebounds. He proves well above average as a finisher, and his 42% shooting on pull up jump shots ranks him fourth in this group.

Gets points off iso and cuts to the rim, decent pull up j...sounds like a good RJ replacement at 1/15th the cost.

[Chieflion]

I don't really like how we need to reach for Pondexter to get him at this point. He looks to even slip into the 2nd round.

[lurker23]

I may have already said this in this thread (I really don't feel like going back and reading), but if the Spurs had their typical #25-30 pick in the draft, I would put pretty decent money on Pondexter being the pick. He just seems like a great pick for the system, and a solid role player. (As I know I've said before, less upside, but likely more NBA longevity). However, at #20, he might be a bit of reach, especially since it's likely that someone currently projected in the 10-15 range will drop. However, if the Spurs see Pondexter and fall in love with him, he can relatively easily be had by trading down from #20 or trading up from #49.

[AFBlue]

I don't really like how we need to reach for Pondexter to get him at this point. He looks to even slip into the 2nd round.

Not sure if he's the right guy at 20, but it depends who is on the board. I'm convinced Q will be one of the better SFs to come out of this draft, and IMO he's an upgrade over either Hairston or Gee.

If the Spurs are unable to trade up and miss out on Henry, George, Hayward or Babbitt, I'd definitely be okay with them "reaching" for Pondexter.

[lurker23]

A couple of interesting tidbits from the Washington D.C. media:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...060304739.html

The Washington Wizards continued to evaluate NBA hopefuls on Thursday during a fourth straight day of workouts at Verizon Center, and several second-tier forwards were among those who participated in the approximately hour-long session on the auxiliary court.

With the Wizards expected to select point guard John Wall at No. 1 overall to join Gilbert Arenas in the back court, the team figures to perhaps fortify the front line with its other two picks, at 30th and 35th overall. That could be good news for either Quincy Pondexter or Stanley Robinson, the two highest-rated small forwards who worked out for Washington as a part of a six-player group Coach Flip Saunders called the best this week.

Pondexter, a first-team all-Pacific 10 selection from the University of Washington, is a projected late first-rounder and probably will be gone by the time the Wizards make their second pick. The way Pondexter sees it though, mock drafts predicting where he'll be taken are not exactly reliable.

"Those mock drafts are inaccurate sometimes, you know," said Pondexter, who is 6 feet 6 and averaged 19.3 points and 7.4 rebounds per game as a senior. "From the NFL draft to the NBA draft, you could look at those mock drafts, print them out, and on the day of the draft they are completely different. I would love to play for the Wizards. It would be a great dream come true, but at the same time, who knows what's going to happen."

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/sp...-95585804.html

Quincy Pondexter worked out for the Wizards on Thursday -- and then showed up in a mock draft projected as the 30th overall pick in the NBA Draft to Washington.

What a coincidence.

It has been like that all week, with one late-first round, early-second round prospect after another parading through Verizon Center -- Greivis Vasquez, Jarvis Varnado, Keith "Tiny" Gallon, Devin Ebanks, Stanley Robinson and Pondexter -- and getting connected with the Wizards on the interwebs.

"Those mock drafts are inaccurate sometimes, " reminded the mature and poised 6-foot-6 Pondexter, who off the court might have been the most impressive. He was better than Robinson, who had as much trouble with his saggy shorts as he did with Wizards coach Flip Saunders' final shooting drill -- and that was a lot.

"I would love to play for the Wizards," Pondexter said. "But who knows what's going to happen."

Not the mock drafts, that's for sure.

[Chieflion]

Not sure if he's the right guy at 20, but it depends who is on the board. I'm convinced Q will be one of the better SFs to come out of this draft, and IMO he's an upgrade over either Hairston or Gee.

If the Spurs are unable to trade up and miss out on Henry, George, Hayward or Babbitt, I'd definitely be okay with them "reaching" for Pondexter.

If this is the case, I want Anderson over Pondexter for sure. That is my opinion. I am sure there are many posters here who have hyped Pondexter a little and are sticking with their guns. I don't think many GMs are enamored with a guy like Pondexter due to age, potential and upside, with the addition of him missing out on the combine, measurements and athletic tests. He did not get to impress scouts, coaches and GMs as a whole to prove he is better than his peers at the SF position at the combine, where teams usually look at the prospects as a whole to get a feel of what they can do for their team.

[AFBlue]

I may have already said this in this thread (I really don't feel like going back and reading), but if the Spurs had their typical #25-30 pick in the draft, I would put pretty decent money on Pondexter being the pick. He just seems like a great pick for the system, and a solid role player. (As I know I've said before, less upside, but likely more NBA longevity). However, at #20, he might be a bit of reach, especially since it's likely that someone currently projected in the 10-15 range will drop. However, if the Spurs see Pondexter and fall in love with him, he can relatively easily be had by trading down from #20 or trading up from #49.

Agreed about acquiring picks (trade down, trade up or straight up pay cash) in the late first round. The Grizzlies, T-Wolves and Thunder are all teams with multiple picks that are unlikely to need/want all of them.

Of those, the Grizzlies remain the most intriguing. They could be trade partners up (#12 for #20 and future first) or back (#20 and #49 for #25 and #28).

I'll still say that I wouldn't mind Q being the selection if those others were off the board, but if it worked out that they could draft him later I wouldn't be upset at all.

[Chieflion]

After reading the part about Pondexter and the Wizards, I think that pick has a high chance of possibility. The Wizards need a sense of maturity on their team, Pondexter should help with that cause and they also fill their rotation spot at SF. It looks like it is a flawless fit and I almost feel sorry that a team could spoil it all in the 1st round for the Wizards, luckily for them, they will have John Wall.

Fixed for ing up U.S geography.

[lurker23]

After reading the part about Pondexter and the Wizards, I think that pick has a high chance of possibility as Pondexter played 4 years in college for Washington, so he has to be a hometown favorite or something. The Wizards need a sense of maturity on their team, Pondexter should help with that cause and they also fill their rotation spot at SF. It looks like it is a flawless fit and I almost feel sorry that a team could spoil it all in the 1st round for the Wizards, luckily for them, they will have John Wall.

Can't remember if you're from the United States or not, but...

University of Washington = Seattle, west coast of U.S.
Washington Wizards = Washington, D.C., east coast of U.S.

[Chieflion]

Can't remember if you're from the United States or not, but...

University of Washington = Seattle, west coast of U.S.
Washington Wizards = Washington, D.C., east coast of U.S.

Oh , my bad.

[AFBlue]

After reading the part about Pondexter and the Wizards, I think that pick has a high chance of possibility as Pondexter played 4 years in college for Washington, so he has to be a hometown favorite or something. The Wizards need a sense of maturity on their team, Pondexter should help with that cause and they also fill their rotation spot at SF. It looks like it is a flawless fit and I almost feel sorry that a team could spoil it all in the 1st round for the Wizards, luckily for them, they will have John Wall.

Q played ball at UW, which is in the state of Washington. The Wizards play in Washington D.C. So there's no "hometown" angle.

About missing the combine, I think it probably had a negative effect on the number of workouts and interviews from teams, but I'm not sure it lowered his stock any.

The individual workouts and interviews is where teams will get a feel for his development as a player and how he is as a person. It seems as if he carries himself in a very professional manner.

[Blackjack]

Yeah, I was just about to help Chieflion out. He's from Singapore, IIRC. I'm sure he's much more knowledgeable about the States than most of us are vice-versa, so I think we can let him slide.

[lurker23]

Yeah, I was just about to help Chieflion out. He's from Singapore, IIRC. I'm sure he's much more knowledgeable about the States than most of us are vice-versa, so I think we can let him slide.

Yeah, no problems here. It's actually a mistake people in the United States make on a regular basis. Kind of annoys me when Americans do it, considering I went to the University of Washington.

[Chieflion]

Q played ball at UW, which is in the state of Washington. The Wizards play in Washington D.C. So there's no "hometown" angle.

About missing the combine, I think it probably had a negative effect on the number of workouts and interviews from teams, but I'm not sure it lowered his stock any.

The individual workouts and interviews is where teams will get a feel for his development as a player and how he is as a person. It seems as if he carries himself in a very professional manner.

Problem with the bolded part being that, if Pondexter had less interviews and individual workouts from another team, because they want to see Pondexter more after the combine, if he shows something intriguing, that increases Pondexter's chances of being picked in the 1st round. Unfortunately, the above scenarios didn't happen, and he didn't get to impress more teams than he should. The analogy here being that if you buy more lottery tickets with different sets of numbers (duh, who would buy the same numbers), you would have more chances to win the lottery, but you also have less chances of knowing which lottery ticket you are going to cash in on. So, considering that Pondexter went for less interviews and individual workouts, he is only going to impress a couple of teams. But he would sure know which team he would most likely get drafted by come draft night.

[Chieflion]

Yeah, I was just about to help Chieflion out. He's from Singapore, IIRC. I'm sure he's much more knowledgeable about the States than most of us are vice-versa, so I think we can let him slide.

Thanks for helping my pitiful weak Geography Asian ass out.

[lurker23]

Thanks for helping my pitiful weak Geography Asian ass out.

No worries, mate. Americans are generally horrible at geography, by some combination of ignorance and arrogance. I'm bad at geography, but it's more so that my mind just doesn't process it well for some reason or another. Ironic, considering my profession requires decent geography as a secondary skill; I have to work quite hard at it.

[SenorSpur]

Yeah, no problems here. It's actually a mistake people in the United States make on a regular basis. Kind of annoys me when Americans do it, considering I went to the University of Washington.

People in the U.S. make that mistake more than we may realize.

Back to Pondexter, I thought he'd be a possible target of the Spurs, assuming the other SF types (George, Henry, Babbitt) are gone.

[SenorSpur]

Im starting to warm up a bit on this guy, he has some ruff edges but I like the improvement he showed over the last 2 years. Im not sure hes worth taking at 20 but he is climbing into my first round mock.

How's his 3-pt stroke?

[AFBlue]

How's his 3-pt stroke?

The short answer is that it's not really a part of his game at this point...he attempted less than 1 1/2 per game. He shows the ability to hit the mid-range shot consistently and his form is good, so the potential to increase his range appears to be there.

[benefactor]

As I said earlier I've softened on Pondexter a little bit, but I'd still be pretty happy with the Spurs taking him.

For me it comes down to what player can in theory make the most impact the soonest despite their flaws. Even with some uncertainty surrounding his 3pt shot, he is still less flawed than many players that the Spurs could take at 20. I feel strongly that this years first round pick should be someone that has developed their all around game enough to play now to help keep the Big 3's minutes down during the season. Pondexter, IMO, is much closer to being that type of player on both ends of the floor than most of the other players that will be available.

[benefactor]

From a Memphis column today:

Quincy Pondexter (Washington): I didn't have Pondexter on my list of Grizzlies draft prospects based on the idea that the team can't afford to add another wing player who isn't a shooter, but based on his strong workout with the team, I'll definitely be adding Pondexter to the list on the next update. A sturdy 6'6" swingman (built similarly to Sam Young), Pondexter was solid in pretty much every aspect of the workout and really surprised with his dynamite mid-range shooting. I'm not sure if he can stretch that shot out to NBA three-point range but he looked okay from that distance in drills. Pondexter duplicates a lot of what the roster already has in the form of Young and Ronnie Brewer, but if you're looking for someone in the late first who's a reasonably safe bet to be able to play in the NBA, teams will have a hard time doing better than Pondexter.

http://www.memphisflyer.com/Beyondth...itt-born-ready

[mountainballer]

I really wonder where Pondexter would be ranked if he didn't carry this can't shoot stigma. in every other aspect he is one of the better if not top 5 SF prospects.
(and btw. the 3pt shooting of Aminu isn't in fact better than Pondexters. they just don't belabor this point all the time)

but one thing confuses me. the Spurs didn't invite him yet. (or we didn't hear about it?). the did invite Ebanks though. can anyone understand that you invite Ebanks, but not Pondexter?

[Chieflion]

I really wonder where Pondexter would be ranked if he didn't carry this can't shoot stigma. in every other aspect he is one of the better if not top 5 SF prospects.
(and btw. the 3pt shooting of Aminu isn't in fact better than Pondexters. they just don't belabor this point all the time)

but one thing confuses me. the Spurs didn't invite him yet. (or we didn't hear about it?). the did invite Ebanks though. can anyone understand that you invite Ebanks, but not Pondexter?

Ebanks is younger than Pondexter, so he has more perceived upside. In addition, people would want to interview Ebanks more to understand his off-court problems and to confirm whether his character is suitable for their team. With Pondexter, he doesn't have that perceived upside or the perceived off-court problems and is quite mature so teams generally know what they have in Pondexter.

[mountainballer]

all true. but isn't it still confusing a bit? seems as if he is the only SF prospect in their draft range they didn't at least have a look at. (Hobson and Robinson they saw at the group workout in NJ and James they had last year).
I hope that we just didn't hear about a work out. otherwise I would be very confused why they don't bring him in. outside the 3pt shooting issues Pondexter looks as much Spurs material as any player in this draft. (defense, work ethic, maturity, toughness, clutchness, role player potential, scoring efficiency etc.)