capable of hitting the Mid range J
Rebounding and defense-first players.
I think that Laimbeer comes to mind first when trying to find a comparable player to Jorts because of skin color. :2cents:
From Draft express:
In order to really enhance his appeal to NBA coaches on the offensive end, Harrellson will likely need to prove that he's capable of knocking down mid-range jump shots, which would keep defenders more honest and make him more of a pick-and-pop threat. He's taken less than one jump shot per game so far this season, and has only connected on 28% of those attempts, but he has a decent release and looks to have the potential to be a serviceable mid-range shooter if he puts in the work.
Can we let him get up a few more attempts per game before we call him a poor midrange j-shooter?
Again, I like his stroke. He shoots it easily and his mechanics look as if they can be relied upon consistently. He needs more attempts though, which he'll get in MDA's system. Trust me we wouldn't have drafted him if he couldn't shoot.
Kenny walker of kentucky.scout.com said this about him:
Josh Harrellson is a guy that can make an open jump shot, get a couple of putbacks and go out there and get you 10 or 11 rebounds. Thatís who he is.
Stop for now guys.. Wait til you can see a little more of him and then you'll agree w me.
It's useless to even put that 28% in the report if he's only taking one jumper per.. Ridiculous.
And where does any of what I linked say he's a poor jump shooter??
How can you claim he is a good jumpshooter at all RIGHT NOW? You're basically saying "Oh he doesn't shoot enough to prove it and I'm sure if he took 5 a game he would shot he has a great midrange shot!". That's all speculation, based on the facts shown he's not a good shooter.
That'd be like saying a baseball player is terrible because he goes hitless in a 3-game homestand, that a quarterback is terrible because he had one game where he got picked 4 times, or that a basketball player is terrible because he wasn't able to score in 2 minutes of playing time. It's called a SMALL SAMPLE SIZE.
What he's trying to say is that YOU CAN'T REALLY EVALUATE HIS JUMP SHOT AT ALL! Jorts took maybe 30 jumpers on a team where he was probably the 3rd scoring option, in a style of play that has much less scoring overall in the first place, and you're ready to evaluate his jumper? Again, all we know about his jumper right now is that he doesn't use it much (because he's not the primary or even secondary scorer on his team which in college means he's probably getting 5 or 6 shots a game at best, most of those layups near the basket) and that he has decent form on it.
That's ALL we know. You cannot say his jumper is GOOD (because he hasn't used it enough) or that it is BAD (again, because he hasn't used it enough). All you can say is that there is POTENTIAL for it to be GOOD, but that's basically the highest you can give him.
He actually shot 58.9pct his final year. I'll give him credit, he came up big in his workouts and impressed enough to get drafted. I didn't think him or Matt Howard were going to play in the NBA, too slow and unathletic. I was right about Howard, he's headed to Europe. Jorts is a low risk guy, he's not as good as the Gov but we're not paying him 8M either. If he can give us 10-15 mpg, 5rpg and play solid D he'll be worth it.
Knicks see him as a Kevin Love type of player. Not a whole lot of mobility, but has a knack for rebounding and put backs. Good team player, not flashy, has a decent outside touch.