Russell Westbrook (207 views)

[jhb]

Russell Westbrook
PG
6'3"
190
19
UCLA

A textbook late bloomer who is still one of the several teenagers in this class despite now having spent two years at UCLA, Westbrook comes to TMBSL with a major chip on his shoulder and he's prepared to make it everyone's problem. One of the biggest things scouts point out about him is that he is a gym rat and his desire to prove himself and a bit of a petty streak that will likely fuel him to blossom to his very high ceiling.

He is athletic and explosive and has a lot of length for a 6'3" guard. He is one of the fastest players in the world with the ball in his hands and handles the ball fairly well. He has good court vision and his point guard skills are still developing and have improved a lot in his sophomore year, so he'll likely be able to stick as a lead guard in TMBSL. Scouts do point out that he'll have to learn how to actually facilitate an offense rather than just hunt for assists. His tenacity is evident with the way he plays the game, but that aggressiveness also gets him trouble, as he gets himself into sticky situations quite a bit trying to force the issue (especially when defenses bring the pressure to him and trap).

Though he can get to wherever he wants on the floor with little resistance from even good defenders, he doesn't always leave himself in the best position to score, often taking off-balance and forced shots. However, when he does compose himself and play under control, he can score at will in the paint and from the mid-range. His pull-up jumper is coming along and he has a ton of confidence in it (even well out into three point range), but he's a naturally lefty who has taught himself to shoot righty, so the mechanics are still a bit...mechanical. He's very streaky with the jumper (especially from distance) and is definitely a heat check type of player.

Defensively, Westbrook's quickness and athleticism means he will have the tools to defend point guards and smaller wings fairly well, if he stays focused on that end. We've seen that he tends to rely on his instincts and looks to spend most of his time on defense trying to anticipate forays into the passing lane to try and create transition opportunities, where he is nigh unstoppable. His instincts there are great, but will get exploited at the next level if he doesn't learn to play within a system when opponents are prepared for that aggressiveness. Unlike many guards, Westbrook wasn't a liability on the boards for the Bruins, and if he puts his mind to it, could probably be a real asset there at the next level with his athleticism and aggressiveness.

[20s]

I’d be stronger with the rebounding praise. That is something that should be built as a strength compared to his PG peers. And the profile just reads as “not a liability”.

[TinyTimPig]

Apr 20, 2021 14:18:44 GMT -5 20s said:

I’d be stronger with the rebounding praise. That is something that should be built as a strength compared to his PG peers. And the profile just reads as “not a liability”.

I prefer it as its written, personally. He didn't put up great rebounding numbers at UCLA and I just went through a couple of scouting reports, none of which mentioned it as a strength (or weakness).

[20s]

Apr 20, 2021 14:27:41 GMT -5 TinyTimPig said:

Apr 20, 2021 14:18:44 GMT -5 20s said:

I’d be stronger with the rebounding praise. That is something that should be built as a strength compared to his PG peers. And the profile just reads as “not a liability”.

I prefer it as its written, personally. He didn't put up great rebounding numbers at UCLA and I just went through a couple of scouting reports, none of which mentioned it as a strength (or weakness).

Don’t we base this somewhat off NBA success though? Otherwise why is JHB picking out the most successful NBA guys for profiles instead of just the top 15 draft picks?

6 of the top 14 picks don’t have profiles and 3 guys from the mid 20s do. That isn’t based on scouting reports entering the draft. 

[jhb]

Apr 20, 2021 14:50:07 GMT -5 20s said:

Apr 20, 2021 14:27:41 GMT -5 TinyTimPig said:

I prefer it as its written, personally. He didn't put up great rebounding numbers at UCLA and I just went through a couple of scouting reports, none of which mentioned it as a strength (or weakness).

Don’t we base this somewhat off NBA success though? Otherwise why is JHB picking out the most successful NBA guys for profiles instead of just the top 15 draft picks?

6 of the top 14 picks don’t have profiles and 3 guys from the mid 20s do. That isn’t based on scouting reports entering the draft. 

I pick the ones we highlight based on a combination of who was a high pick and who had a good career so people stay interested.

But the profiles are built (mostly) based on how they were viewed coming out.

Westbrook's rebounding wasn't something that really took off until he decided to hunt triple doubles after KD left...I made an exception and mentioned it even though if I was just building based on what he did in college and the available scouting reports I probably wouldn't have mentioned it at all since it wasn't noteworthy either way.

[Deleted]

Apr 20, 2021 14:50:07 GMT -5 20s said:

Apr 20, 2021 14:27:41 GMT -5 TinyTimPig said:

I prefer it as its written, personally. He didn't put up great rebounding numbers at UCLA and I just went through a couple of scouting reports, none of which mentioned it as a strength (or weakness).

Don’t we base this somewhat off NBA success though? Otherwise why is JHB picking out the most successful NBA guys for profiles instead of just the top 15 draft picks?

6 of the top 14 picks don’t have profiles and 3 guys from the mid 20s do. That isn’t based on scouting reports entering the draft. 

ew no

[bankz]

I would say Rose was known as the better rebounder coming out of college vs Westbrook.

With that said I do tend to agree that some liberty should be taken with the profile when factoring what a elite rebounder for a PG he became in the NBA

I don’t have a issue with the profile either way

[jhb]

Apr 20, 2021 18:36:33 GMT -5 bankz said:

I would say Rose was known as the better rebounder coming out of college vs Westbrook.

With that said I do tend to agree that some liberty should be taken with the profile when factoring what a elite rebounder for a PG he became in the NBA

I don’t have a issue with the profile either way

Exactly. There’s some players who people remember one way that would not match what came out of college and I may sneak something in there where I otherwise would not.

But most of the time my goal is we’re trying to replicate scouting reports that would be available for these players coming out (but translated to fbb2.0) and focus on players that will interest league members most based on their pro careers and hype coming out.

So this way things are close to replicating real life but obviously the software has some say in making things different