Article on Mike Scott

[PSSSHHHRRR87]

ATLANTA — Humbling.

That’s the word that Atlanta Hawks forward Mike Scott used to describe his rookie season.

A year ago, he was a First-Team All-Atlantic Coast Conference player for the University of Virginia, runner-up for its player of the year award and capable of dominating games. In the final regular-season game of his collegiate career against Maryland, the 6-foot-8 Scott posted 35 points and 11 rebounds in powering his team to a 75-72 overtime victory.

As a second-round pick last year for the Hawks, he has registered a “did not play – coach’s decision” 34 times, unable even to get on the court. He has spent two different stints in the NBA Development League, four games in early December and three games as recently as late March.

Through it all, Scott has persevered and he has worked – traits for which he was richly rewarded on Saturday in a 99-97 loss at San Antonio when he posted career highs in field goals (eight), attempts (15), minutes (36) and points (22) to go with six rebounds.

“Mike is a worker, man,” teammate Al Horford said. “I think, for him, he really hasn’t been able to showcase his ability because Josh (Smith), myself -- there’s a lot of guys ahead of him (on the depth chart). But he’s a great kid. He’s a worker. He’s in here every day, every morning -- even before me, he’s in here working and what you guys saw doesn’t surprise me.

“He works on his game so much that that’s what I expected of him. Hopefully, that shows coach and gets him confidence he can put him in there and he can contribute for us.”

To Scott’s credit, he did not crow about the performance against the Spurs. He felt in some ways he could have done more.

“I don’t know if I would say satisfying,” Scott said. “I only had six rebounds. I had to fight off DeJuan Blair and (Hawks center Johan) Petro. Petro was taking all the rebounds (15).

"When your name is called, you’ve been on the bench watching, you’ve got to be productive, no matter if it’s scoring, rebounding or playing defense. Making sure you’re productive in your minutes out there.”

Scott’s development – necessarily gradual as it has been – is an encouraging sign for the Hawks, as it also serves as a window to illuminate general manager Danny Ferry’s first draft. It’s been a long time since a second-round pick made any sort of impact for the franchise. Perhaps the most recent example is Salim Stoudamire in 2005. Stoudamire, the first pick in the second round that year, averaged 8.0 points in 17.0 minutes over 157 games in three seasons with the Hawks.

When the Hawks took Scott 43rd overall, they knew he would be something of a project. He’s too small to play power forward – possessing the kinds of skills for that position – but, at 237 pounds, not quick enough to play on the wing. Much of his work this season has focused on trying to become the quintessential NBA “tweener” – a player who can find a niche despite that mix of size and skills.

“I know people labeled him as a tweener,” Hawks coach Larry Drew said, “and I really feel that I think some day he will get there, as far as being a true tweener. Right now, I think he’s kind of finding his way with some guys.

“Obviously, there are some guys, from a matchup standpoint, he might have some problems with (defensively), but they might have some problems with him down on the other end (of the court), as well, because he’s a good post-up player. But I think he has finally begun to find his niche and, when he’s in there, he plays with a lot of confidence, which I really like.”

As Horford noted, Scott is earning trust in Drew, who said that Scott “is a real pro.” Perhaps some of that is maturity. At 24, Scott is considerably older than most NBA rookies, having played five seasons at Virginia, including a medical redshirt year. In comparison, fellow rookie John Jenkins is three years younger.

“His attitude, the way he approaches everything,” Drew said. “He has not played a lot of minutes but in that time he has he has made the most of his minutes. I’ve always said this guy’s got some NBA skill to his game and that’s the ability to pick and pop. Chances are I’m going to be using him probably more down the stretch, given what our injury situation is, but I thought he did a magnificent job the other night.”

Scott credited working with Hawks’ first-year assistant coach/player development Kenny Atkinson and strength and conditioning coach Jeff Watkinson. He said a lot of practice days have been like Monday’s, which he called more of a “mental day,” lower intensity with some players like Smith and Petro not participating.

With little game action, that has left Scott to try and simulate game action himself and in one-on-one sessions with the assistants. He also credited his teammates like Horford, Smith, Ivan Johnson and Anthony Tolliver for helping him out. He said they have told him how to use his speed to defend bigger players.

“It’s a lot different defending in the post in the NBA than it is in college,” he said. “… I’m still learning but they’re definitely helping me.”

In addition to liking Scott’s confidence, Drew said he was proud of how the forward played on Saturday. Scott said he is feeling that confidence right now and ready for any role.

“Whatever they need me to do,” he said. “Most times, it’s defensive rebounding. You know, score whenever my teammates give me the ball or whenever it’s time for me to score, but the first mentality I’ve got to think of when I’m coming into the game is rebound, defense. Just running, playing with energy.”

He seems on his way to figuring it all out.

http://www.foxsportssouth.com/nba/atlanta-hawks/story/Hawks-Scott-goes-from-humbled-to-confide?blockID=890139

[Guest]

Scott’s development – necessarily gradual as it has been – is an encouraging sign for the Hawks, as it also serves as a window to illuminate general manager Danny Ferry’s first draft. It’s been a long time since a second-round pick made any sort of impact for the franchise. Perhaps the most recent example is Salim Stoudamire in 2005. Stoudamire, the first pick in the second round that year, averaged 8.0 points in 17.0 minutes over 157 games in three seasons with the Hawks.

But but but but, aren't all 2nd rounders supposed to be super productive? WHY DIDN'T WE TAKE THE NEXT DURANT??? PERRY JONES I MISS YOUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU!!!!!

Season ▴ Age Tm Lg Pos G GS MP FG FGA FG% 3P 3PA 3P% FT FTA FT% ORB DRB TRB AST STL BLK TOV PF PTS 2012-13 21 OKC NBA SF 36 0 240 32 83 .386 0 2 .000 10 14 .714 10 43 53 10 4 6 14 21 74

[Guest]

But but but but, aren't all 2nd rounders supposed to be super productive? WHY DIDN'T WE TAKE THE NEXT DURANT??? PERRY JONES I MISS YOUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU!!!!!

I think the debate was between John Jenkins (23rd) and Perry Jones (28th) both 1st rounders.

[AHF]

I think the debate was between John Jenkins (23rd) and Perry Jones (28th) both 1st rounders.

Correct. It is also an apples to oranges comparison to look at a raw 21 year old and compare them to someone who is nearly 25. Neither Jones nor Scott made anything more than a negligible impact this season (37 games versus 36 games and insignificant minutes for both).

[Guest]

I think the debate was between John Jenkins (23rd) and Perry Jones (28th) both 1st rounders.

There was a debate of trading up.Swap out Perry Jones with anyone else there was a debate for. Mike beats everyone picked after him at this point. I believe Darius Miller was a fancy suggestion and it looks like Mike dominates him on everything except assists. Raw, per game, per minute, everything. And Darius does not have the same level of competition ahead of him that Mike does.Sure, we could give it some time. But all the complaints that our draft chat had about Mike (tweener! cant shoot! no post game! undersized rebounder! soooo old! unathletic!!) have turned out wrong. And those complaints were from people who never even saw him play.

[AHF]

Scott looks great in his 7 mpg over 37 games although those minutes show that one of the main criticisms of the pick was 100% on point: he didn't remotely fill a position of need. Both Scott and Ivan seem to have been shorted minutes this season in favor of Tolliver (for reasons I can't explain).

He needs more minutes next season for development because he has been productive in limited time and is entering his prime. I am not sold on him yet since he has had so little opportunity but I am very encouraged that my other fears will hopefully be proven wrong (primarily that he had limited growth potential, suspect tools and a history of injuries).

I will put my hand in the air as being someone who was frustrated by the pick but is looking forward to seeing a lot more from Scott next season.

[Guest]

There was a debate of trading up.Swap out Perry Jones with anyone else there was a debate for. Mike beats everyone picked after him at this point. I believe Darius Miller was a fancy suggestion and it looks like Mike dominates him on everything except assists. Raw, per game, per minute, everything. And Darius does not have the same level of competition ahead of him that Mike does.Sure, we could give it some time. But all the complaints that our draft chat had about Mike (tweener! cant shoot! no post game! undersized rebounder! soooo old! unathletic!!) have turned out wrong. And those complaints were from people who never even saw him play.

OK. I just remember some complaining about taking Jenkins instead of Jones. I remember the debate about trading up in 2nd round.

[Guest]

Scott looks great in his 7 mpg over 37 games although those minutes show that one of the main criticisms of the pick was 100% on point: he didn't remotely fill a position of need. Both Scott and Ivan seem to have been shorted minutes this season in favor of Tolliver (for reasons I can't explain).

Conveniently your forget about who else was offered up. Such as...Darius Miller. Yawn.

[AHF]

Conveniently your forget about who else was offered up. Such as...Darius Miller. Yawn.

The bottomline impact for this year with Miller or Scott is the same: Yawn, no impact.

Bear in mind that Miller has earned more than twice the minutes that Scott has playing behind max salaried Eric Gordon and developmental lottery pick Austin Rivers. His 40% shooting from 3pt range bodes well for a career as a role player in the league (he has shot better than Rivers or Gordon this season in his very limited minutes).

This isn't to say that Scott won't be the better player - because I hope that he will and he has been more efficient so far so the arrow is pointing that directoin. It is just to say that Scott had a slightly bigger impact on this year's team than I did due to his limited minutes and that was a function of playing with Horford, Smith, Ivan and others who were ahead of him in the power forward pecking order and his perimeter oriented game did nothing to distinguish him (a post-up player might have had a chance to earn more minutes as a contrast to these face up, jump shooting PFs).

Hopefully Scott will be given a chance to do something meaningful next season, but I agree that he really stands out for his efficiency in his limited minutes. Scott's WS/48 ranks 15th in the entire class (ahead of Damian Lillard, Bradley Beal, and others but behind #48 Kyle O'Quinn). Miller (.549 TS%) ranks 27th (ahead of guys like Dion Waiters .491 TS% and Terence Ross .493 TS%) due primarily to TS% but his rating is 1/2 that of Scott's.

Bottomline is that there is no reason to think that Scott can't be the best player picked at his spot or later in last year's draft and that is very good news but the sample size is quite small and we are looking at year 1. So let's enjoy more from Scott next season.

Edited April 11, 2013 by AHF

[Guest]

The bottomline impact for this year with Miller or Scott is the same: Yawn, no impact.

Bear in mind that Miller has earned more than twice the minutes that Scott has playing behind max salaried Eric Gordon and developmental lottery pick Austin Rivers. His 40% shooting from 3pt range bodes well for a career as a role player in the league (he has shot better than Rivers or Gordon this season in his very limited minutes).

Hopefully Scott will be given a chance to do something meaningful next season, but I agree that he really stands out for his efficiency in his limited minutes. Scott's WS/48 ranks 15th in the entire class (ahead of Damian Lillard, Bradley Beal, and others but behind #48 Kyle O'Quinn). Miller (.549 TS%) ranks 27th (ahead of guys like Dion Waiters .491 TS% and Terence Ross .493 TS%) due primarily to TS% but his rating is 1/2 that of Scott's.

Darius Miller plays SF (http://www.82games.com/1213/12NOH11.HTM) while Eric Gordon (who has been injured for over half of the year) plays SG (http://www.82games.com/1213/12NOH6.HTM). How can Miller back Gordon up? Miller backs up the illustrious Al-Farouq Aminu who doesn't seem to contribute much outside of rebounding. You are grasping at straws and talking about a player that you clearly haven't seen play, but that seems par for the course.

The takeaway is to not comment on players you do not know and also to recognize the value of the Mike Scott pick. By berating the pick now because "he is old (at 24)" you need to justify "compared to what?" At the time, I recall the draft chat saying we should jump up to get Perry Jones III, either of the Quincys would be a good pick, we could try and get Doron "negative win share" Lamb, Darius Miller would be great (and he is 23 already, so uh...that year must be a BIG factor), or uhhh...frankly no one else really mattered. Frankly, anyone with a bad comment on the Mike Scott pick just doesn't know what they are talking about. I thought it at the time, and everything he has done so far has lived up to my expectations (and I even voiced those expectations on the board/chat!).

[coachx]

Miller played mostly SG at Kentucky with MKG playing SF.

I'm suprised a 6'5'' guy gets that many minutes at "SF" in the NBA. I think that has more to do with the Hornets lack of depth at "SF" compared to "SG." Some lineups just consider them 2 wings. Wing 1 and Wing 2.

I would not consider that grasping at straws. When Miller is in the game I would consider that more of a 3 guard lineup then having to pigeon hole every one into traditional positions.

Some teams run lineups with 2 PGs and a big SF.

Heck, Michigan ran a 4 guards offense most of the season.

Pigeon holing people into traditional lineup names is overrated. There are more then 1 way to play the game. I know statistical analysis folk who like to look at everything on spread sheets see it another way then I do.

Edited April 11, 2013 by coachx

[AHF]

he takeaway is to not comment on players you do not know and also to recognize the value of the Mike Scott pick.

I'll focus on the fact that I am thrilled that Scott has shown every sign of validating that pick this season and that I think he needs minutes next season because he is in his prime and if his per minute numbers translate to larger time he will be deserving of those minutes. He has been buried on the bench but if he can get meaningful minutes next season that stands to change.

I will continue to offer my opinion on players based on what I have seen and what I have read and would rather see the Hawks strike out on 3 2nd rounders and hit a home run on one (Paul Millsap, Manu Ginobili, Carlos Boozer, etc.) than get a handful of replacement level role players. My biggest issues with Scott were (a) age and injury history limiting his developmental upside; (b) depth on the team at the only position he can play with the same perimeter oriented playing style; and © projections indicating he didn't have the size or athleticism to make an impact. I hope none of these prove to be concerns over the long term (i.e., he stays healthy, keeps developing, he isn't trapped behind others on the bench, and he proves to have the tools to make a real impact against starters over significant minutes).

(As coachx mentioned, I don't trust the position numbers on Miller if you are reading them to tell you that Miller has been playing anything other than a swingman guard role. He was the team's best perimeter defender in most of his minutes and matched up against the opponent's best perimeter swingman. I have seen him play only guard minutes for New Orleans in multi-guard lineups and never with Gordon [i do see he has played about 10 minutes with Gordon this season]. Anyone who believes he has played 2% of the teams total minutes in the post at PF as the link you provided states needs to have their head examined).

Edited April 11, 2013 by AHF

[lethalweapon3]

2012 Second-rounders' Points per 48 Minutes (thru last night, of course):

MIKE SCOTT (LOS HAWKS, 43rd Pick) 22.7 Pts per 48 [7th among all drafted and undrafted NBA rookies]

Kyle O'Quinn (El Magic, 49th Pick) 18.1 [16th]

Tyshawn Taylor (Los Nets, 41st Pick) 18.0 [19th]

Orlando Johnson (Los Pacers, 36th Pick) 16.0 [26th]

Will Barton (Los Blazers del Trail, 40th Pick) 14.9

Jeff Taylor (Los Gatos del Roberto, 31st Pick) 14.8

Jae Crowder (Los Mavericks, 34th Pick) 14.4

Kim English (Los Pistons, 44th Pick) 14.1

Bernard James (Los Mavericks, 33rd Pick) 13.7

Tornike Shengelia (Los Nets, 54th Pick) 13.6

Doron Lamb (El Magic, 42nd Pick) 12.8

Draymond Green (Los Warriors, 35th Pick) 10.3

Darius Miller (Los Hornets, 46th Pick) 8.3

2012 Second-rounders' Rebounds per 48 Minutes:

Kyle O'Quinn 15.7 Rebs per 48 [3rd among all drafted and undrafted NBA rookies]

Bernard James 13.9 [6th]

MIKE SCOTT 12.9 [9th]

Draymond Green 11.7 [13th]

Tornike Shengelia 8.6 [20th]

Orlando Johnson 8.5 [21st]

Will Barton 7.6 [25th]

Jae Crowder 6.7

Darius Miller 5.4

Jeff Taylor 4.7

Tyshawn Taylor 4.7

Kim English 4.6

Doron Lamb 4.1

Now if you'll excuse me, after my summer-league commentary on Mike, I'm off to go find some good crow recipes!

~lw3

[Randy]

Heck - there were a lot of years when the Hawks first round pick ddin't even make the team. So Scott is doing great. Sending him over to Bakersfield must have done a lot for his confidence, since he's had a couple of really good games lately.

[Guest]

The synergy between him and Jenkins is really good. Jenkins had some nifty passes to him last night.

[Plainview1981]

Maybe he can be this teams Haslem? I really like what I've seen of him so far.

[Plainview1981]

Scott looks great in his 7 mpg over 37 games although those minutes show that one of the main criticisms of the pick was 100% on point: he didn't remotely fill a position of need. Both Scott and Ivan seem to have been shorted minutes this season in favor of Tolliver (for reasons I can't explain).

He needs more minutes next season for development because he has been productive in limited time and is entering his prime. I am not sold on him yet since he has had so little opportunity but I am very encouraged that my other fears will hopefully be proven wrong (primarily that he had limited growth potential, suspect tools and a history of injuries).

I will put my hand in the air as being someone who was frustrated by the pick but is looking forward to seeing a lot more from Scott next season.

The only reason for coach to realistically take Tolliver over Scott or Ivan is personal or the fact that he has been around longer. Which don't mean anything to me if you're not the better player. I don't think anyone wants to truly count on Tolliver's jumper. I know I don't.

[Guest]

Miller played mostly SG at Kentucky with MKG playing SF.

I'm suprised a 6'5'' guy gets that many minutes at "SF" in the NBA. I think that has more to do with the Hornets lack of depth at "SF" compared to "SG." Some lineups just consider them 2 wings. Wing 1 and Wing 2.

Darius Miller measured 6'6" without shoes and 6'7.5" with shoes and is listed at 6'8" on all media guides.

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/darius-miller-5260/

You can also look at his top 20 most played line-ups at 82games.com. (http://www.82games.com/1213/12NOH11.HTM#5man) None of his top 20 lineups have him at the 2. He either plays at the 3 or the 4. I have no idea what y'all are looking at that gives you the impression he is a 2-guard, but there is no data that indicates that. At Kentucky, Darius was only a 2-guard there because of necessity and not because that was his position. Last years Kentucky team had Marquis Teague and Doron Lamb who could play the point and that is it. Plus Doron was the starting 2 so of course Darius had to get some burn at that position. That is also purely irrelevant, in the NBA Darius is a 3 and he backs up Al-Farouq Aminu with awful results so far. To claim "he has to back up Eric Gordon and that is why he hasn't gotten enough PT..." is wrong, just wrong.

I will continue to offer my opinion on players based on what I have seen and what I have read and would rather see the Hawks strike out on 3 2nd rounders and hit a home run on one (Paul Millsap, Manu Ginobili, Carlos Boozer, etc.) than get a handful of replacement level role players. My biggest issues with Scott were (a) age and injury history limiting his developmental upside; (b) depth on the team at the only position he can play with the same perimeter oriented playing style; and © projections indicating he didn't have the size or athleticism to make an impact. I hope none of these prove to be concerns over the long term (i.e., he stays healthy, keeps developing, he isn't trapped behind others on the bench, and he proves to have the tools to make a real impact against starters over significant minutes).

You will also offer up an opinion on things that you have not seen as well as give a false option (where is the Millsap/Ginobili/Boozer? if they aren't there then you can't use it as an example. Darius Miller sure as hell isn't that). I don't know where you get injury history from when he had one fluke injury that cost him a season. You are also short-sighted on your depth concerns, Mike is locked into a low 3-year contract while Ivan, Josh, and Zaza are all free agents. It is important to have depth for the future and not necessarily the immediate.

As for your 3rd point, well it would be obvious those were unfounded issues if you had seen Mike Scott play.

[benhillboy]

I've enjoyed watching these rookies progress and gain confidence. Even better, they're just good, team-oriented guys. They would easily start on some of these bottom feeders off of IQ and work alone.

Edited April 11, 2013 by benhillboy

[coachx]

As you know AHF is a diehard Kentucky fan. I doubt any of us watch the Hornets on a regualr basis. I was simply illustrating why he, and others, can be see Miller as a SG.......particularlly though the eyes of a Kentucky fan.

Kyle Korver has logged minutes as a SF and SG. Its not uncommon for players to play multiple positions. Devin Harris has been a PG most of his career but finds himself in a 2 PG rotation often this year.

Ivan is almost a physical clone of Scott. The reason I preferred Miller on draft night is b/c we had a need for defense on the wing........and ended up trading Morror for Jones to fill that need.

Mike Scott is has a non guaranteed contract. I agree it is good to have cheap options to fall back on for depth.

The reason Scott was available deep in the 2nd round is b/c he is undersized and lacks atheltic ability. The worry on getting by on hustle and craftiness is what made be a late 2nd round pick.

Darius Miller measured 6'6" without shoes and 6'7.5" with shoes and is listed at 6'8" on all media guides.

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/darius-miller-5260/

You can also look at his top 20 most played line-ups at 82games.com. (http://www.82games.com/1213/12NOH11.HTM#5man) None of his top 20 lineups have him at the 2. He either plays at the 3 or the 4. I have no idea what y'all are looking at that gives you the impression he is a 2-guard, but there is no data that indicates that. At Kentucky, Darius was only a 2-guard there because of necessity and not because that was his position. Last years Kentucky team had Marquis Teague and Doron Lamb who could play the point and that is it. Plus Doron was the starting 2 so of course Darius had to get some burn at that position. That is also purely irrelevant, in the NBA Darius is a 3 and he backs up Al-Farouq Aminu with awful results so far. To claim "he has to back up Eric Gordon and that is why he hasn't gotten enough PT..." is wrong, just wrong.

You will also offer up an opinion on things that you have not seen as well as give a false option (where is the Millsap/Ginobili/Boozer? if they aren't there then you can't use it as an example. Darius Miller sure as hell isn't that). I don't know where you get injury history from when he had one fluke injury that cost him a season. You are also short-sighted on your depth concerns, Mike is locked into a low 3-year contract while Ivan, Josh, and Zaza are all free agents. It is important to have depth for the future and not necessarily the immediate.

As for your 3rd point, well it would be obvious those were unfounded issues if you had seen Mike Scott play.

Edited April 11, 2013 by coachx