How Awesome is Ty Lawson?
Ty Lawson is coming of a very impressive college season in which he lead his team to an NCAA championship and won the Bob Cousy award (which goes to the best college PG in the country). How amazing was Lawson this year?
Out of all the college players in Draftexpress’s database (dating back to 2001/2002), Ty Lawson this year was the highest in both A/TO ratio and pure point rating. The amazing part is that Ty Lawson accomplished this feat with a game that is a mixture of scoring and passing rather than being the type of PG that racks up a ton a assists because they never shoot themselves. Speaking of scoring, Lawson’s 1.15 points/play and 1.30 points/possession are both the best of any college PG in the nation this year. In other words, Lawson was both the most efficient passer and the most efficient scorer out of all of the college PGs this year.
Lawson has also done pretty well in the complete statistical metrics (like PER, EFF, Win Score). In terms of PER (which puts a heavy emphasis on volume scoring), Lawson was only the 4th best PG nation this year, but the 3 players ahead of him (Stephen Curry, Lester Hudson, and Been Woodside) all played against much weaker competition than Lawson. In terms of WS/40 (I don’t like to use WS/40 as an evaluation for NBA players but is decent for evaluating college players since it puts a low value on volume scoring which is one of the things that often does not translate well to the NBA anyway) Lawson is the best PG this year and 2nd best in the database (behind Lester Hudson’s 2007-2008 season, which was against much weaker competition). In EFF/40, Lawson is the 5th best player in the DXdatabase (behind Stephen Curry, Lester Hudson, Dwayne Wade, and Rodney Stuckey, all of whom faced weaker competition than Lawson. The next player on that list after Lawson would be Brandon Roy).
Lawson isn’t just about the numbers though. Lawson is also a good athlete who is very quick and has a versatile and well-rounded game. I was very impressed by Lawson’s passing ability. Lawson routinely makes spectacular passes (full-court outlet passes, alley-oops, post entry passes through traffic), yet somehow manages to do all that while maintaining a very low turnover rate. I was also impressed with Lawson’s defense. His lack of height is a disadvantage, but Lawson is quick and strong, plus he has a good sense of when he needs to rotate and he forces a lot of turnovers by choosing the right time to double team opponents.
Perhaps the best aspect of Lawson’s game is that he does not have any major weaknesses (other than his height). A year ago Lawson did have some significant weaknesses, the biggest of those weaknesses being lack of a consistent 3-point shot, poor shooting when pulling up off the dribble, and a perception that he was only good in a run-and gun system and would struggle in the half court. This year, Lawson hit 47.2% of the 3-point shots he took, many of which were from beyond NBA range. Draftexpress also had this to say about Lawson’s scoring efficiency this year:
Ty Lawson looks as good as anyone from this perspective, regardless of position.
As we put this data together, we weren’t surprised that Ty Lawson excelled from a situational perspective, as he did play for the most potent offense in all of college basketball, but we didn’t expect him to look this good. He ranks first in a number of key categories, including overall FG% (52%), Points Per Possession [PPP](1.13), pull up jump shot FG% (47%), and %shots he was fouled on (16.1%). Though his teammates did a lot of scoring as well, Lawson functioned seamlessly as a complementary scorer. Looking past his efficiency as a shooter off the dribble, he was second in catch and shoot field goal percentage at 48%. From a purely statistical sense, no player on this list scored more efficiently than Lawson.
We thought that UNC’s transition offense might have given Lawson a decided advantage over some of his counterparts in terms of efficiency, but that wasn’t entirely true. He did get 10% more offense in transition than any of the other players we looked at (an outrageous 38.6%), but his transition PPP of 1.2 is the same as his PPP in spot up situations and not as far above the average as his PPP in pick and roll situations (1.19 PPP, +.29) or on isolations (1 PPP, +.16). Lawson was an incredibly prolific transition player (which is quite an advantage in itself today’s NBA), but he was comparatively better in other areas as well. When you consider that he only turned the ball over on 13.8% of his half court possessions (5th best) and can drive left and right equally well, it seems like Lawson could be an excellent offensive fit on virtually any team, regardless of tempo.
So Lawson is not just good at running the break, he is also the most efficient scorer of any of the PGs in the draft in half court situations and he is the best at hitting pull-up jumpers. Basically, the 3 biggest “weaknesses” that Lawson had last year are all significant strengths for him this year.
If Lawson is so great why isn’t he projected to go higher in the draft? The only real answer that I can think of is because he is short, which really isn‘t that good of a reason when you consider that the consensus best PG in the NBA (Chris Paul) actually has a slightly shorter standing reach than Lawson does. Lawson looks like he could be a steal if falls to the middle of the first round as most mock drafts project him to.
0 recs |
36 comments
Comments
not as awesome as Eric Maynor!1!1!!!!!
:)
Best of Senator Clay Davis: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TI4-QyAzY64&feature=related
by cloudydays on May 22, 2009 12:29 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I like em both
Just for different reasons.
Maynor’s got great swagger and a nice mix of scoring and dishing, but Lawson is a pretty impressive little fireplug and definitely comes across as a pass first guy … it doesn’t hurt that he’s become a lights out shooter either.
by nikolokolus on May 22, 2009 9:15 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
sheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeet
Best of Senator Clay Davis: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TI4-QyAzY64&feature=related
by cloudydays on May 22, 2009 1:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
um, yeah Lawson is better than Maynor FYI
by rip_city_swagger on May 22, 2009 11:02 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i was being sarcastic....
Best of Senator Clay Davis: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TI4-QyAzY64&feature=related
by cloudydays on May 22, 2009 1:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
and i disagree
Maynor > Lawson. IMO
Best of Senator Clay Davis: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TI4-QyAzY64&feature=related
by cloudydays on May 22, 2009 1:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I like Ty
I am not opposed to the Blazers taking him. I’m also not opposed to Kirk Hinrich, Mike Conley and even Andre Miller.
by jksnake99 on May 22, 2009 12:46 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
If im not mistaken . . .
Over at blog a bull they are talking like Kirk Hinrich is gonna be out of there soon. They keep talking about trading him . I know they aren’t the gm , but they might as well be. Chicago management are a bunch of idiots. And didn’t Gordon say that he might want a change of scenery, since hes not starting anymore?
by YikesItsCameron on May 22, 2009 1:15 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It'd be silly not to trade him
Kirk is a starting quality point guard making starting point guard money (9.5 million this coming year), so if the Bulls were to keep him as Rose’s backup they aren’t getting great value out of him.
From the sounds of things the Bulls would like to have the cap flexibility to offer Gordon a deal, salary dumping Kirk (for maybe a guy like Sergio for example) would give them a net gain of about 8 million dollars off of their cap figure to turn around and offer Gordon.
by nikolokolus on May 22, 2009 9:18 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
If he can be had
for a combination of Outlaw and Sergio. Can we move up to somewhere between 5-10 with those two, our 1st rounder 2nd rounder and cash/cap space? Honestly I don’t think he will last past 10 with as weak as the draft appears to be.
"B-Roy is the best shooting guard I have played against"
-Ron Artest
If Artest can say it, so can I. Broy>Kobe.
by premthegrem on May 22, 2009 1:04 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
too short
At 5’-11 or 6’ he will be a defensive liability in the NBA, according to draftExpress. His lack of height, plus his unorthodox way of shooting the ball from his chin will not work against bigger guards. He is fast, he is a one man fast break, pass first, stop on a dime and shoot guard, but not good in the half court offense. This will not work for the Blazers.
Eric maynor is our man. Look who they compare him to :)
by blazerbill on May 22, 2009 1:13 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
He's taller than Brooks
He’s the same height as Chris Paul.
by baduk on May 22, 2009 8:37 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He is short but ...
He’s got a low center of gravity and a strong body. He would struggle to contest jumpers on the perimeter, but I’m guessing he’d make up for it by not being able to be posted up and not being rubbed off of picks quite as easily as a slighter guard.
As for Maynor being like Sergio, nothing could be further from the truth. Maynor can finish at the rim and can actually hit mid-range shots.
by nikolokolus on May 22, 2009 9:21 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Bayless could too against college players
Look how well he does it in the NBA.
by Zaig on May 22, 2009 11:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
plus Maynor is clutch
and is a leader
Best of Senator Clay Davis: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TI4-QyAzY64&feature=related
by cloudydays on May 22, 2009 1:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd rather stick at #24
and pick up Darren Collison. Ty Lawson is an inept defender and I think that alone might invalidate him as a guy you trade up for. Don’t we want point guards that, if nothing else, can defend some people. Darren Collison is a proven defender, with excellent 3 point shot, that also can run a teams offense, a teams methodical offense even, as he was taught to do at UCLA. Ty Lawson is a fine offensive player, no one can deny that, but unless you’re going to be running, I don’t think you’re properly utilizing him as a player. The defensive issues scare me off enough to know I wouldn’t want to trade up for him. There are 8 point guards that you’d be mighty happy with at #24, and I believe at least one of those guys (hopefully Collison) makes it there.
The 8: (Rubio/Jennings/Holiday/Lawson/Collison/Curry/Maynor/Teague)
I also really don’t like the idea of for the second year in a row giving up assets for the right to acquire a 3rd string point guard. Don’t get me wrong, last year it was the best possible move for this team, and getting Bayless where we did was a steal, but, if for that reason alone, we don’t have to do it again. I’d be much happier moving up 3-5 spots more and answering an actual need, one that requires minutes from our drafted player (LMA’s backup). Getting DeJuan Blair far exceeds what getting a 3rd string point guard would do for this team. If you’re going to use assets to move on up, IMO it should be for Ricky Rubio, Brandon Jennings (UPgrades at PG) or DeJuan Blair (pure beast).
by as11osu on May 22, 2009 1:22 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Lawson has looked very good on defense all of the times that I have watched him
Obviously his lack of size limits his defensive potential somewhat, but Lawson is a smart player who isn’t lacking in strength or quickness. He may not be an elite defensive player, but Lawson is definitely an above-average defender by college standards.
by trk on May 22, 2009 1:47 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He may not be lacking any physical tools...
but on the court he was a poor defender. And to be honest, he does lack some physical tools required to be an adequate NBA defender. His size and length are big detriments, but it’s not just that. In college he wasn’t in the game mentally on that end, as he was always trying to gamble for a steal, or thinking of how we was going to be running the next break. His mental lapses in the NBA will cost him even more. His inability to challenge outside shooters (because of his lack of length) could kill this team, along with how badly he could potentially get posted up. If we were going to pressure teams full court, that’d be one thing, but that’s not how you survive in this league. Don’t get me wrong, Lawson is a great player, probably better overall than the guy I’d prefer (Collison), but his inferior defense is exactly what this team doesn’t need from the position. I think I speak for most here when I say defense ought to be the first thing we look for when identifying the finishing touches of this team, not the last.
by as11osu on May 22, 2009 2:05 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
He was NOT a poor defender on the court in college
Or at least he wasn’t in the games when I was watching him (which, admittedly wasn’t every game that he has played). Maybe he only tries on defense in the “big games” or something, but the Ty Lawson that I was watching was someone who did not make a lot of mistakes and could single-handedly destroy an opposing team with his pressure defense. Lawson was 6th in voting for the all-ACC defensive team (which isn’t outstanding, but certainly isn’t an indication of poor defense) and did very well defensively in the NCAA tournament, setting the record for most steals ever in the national championship game.
by trk on May 22, 2009 2:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I guess a lot of people forget about how bad he was defensively for 3 years at UNC
because of how good he was that last game. Steals are great, but a certain amount of gambling has to be done to collect them. I’m not for that type of defender at the point guard position, at least I’m not right now for various reasons, some of which include Greg Oden’s foul troubles. You leave your guy, and that forces GO into an as of yet, unenviable position. NBA players are quicker faster and smarter than those he faced at UNC, and the job he did there wasn’t even all that great. His mental lapses as a defender, his eagerness to gamble, and his lack of size and more importantly length, make him a poor individual and team defender in the half court. I love him a lot more this year than I did last year because it looks like he finally found his 3 point stroke, but that isn’t enough to make me forget about his defensive woes over his career at UNC.
Again, this is partially about him, but more just about my reluctance to use up assets in trading up for the guy. You don’t do that to improve your 3rd string PG in my opinion. Someone whom you hope DOESN’T see the court. A guy like Blair will play 12-18 minutes per game and thus I can see trading up for, not the case with a 3rd guy at a position. All this seems to be somewhat hypothetical too, as we currently have three point guards on our roster. If you assume that right now Sergio is ahead of Bayless, something Nate must’ve, then that would put a rookie even further out than those guys.
by as11osu on May 22, 2009 3:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
you are all about Collison huh?
you posted about him on another string too….where are you getting that Lawson is an “inept” defender? he was good enough to get Carolina all the way to the title wasn’t he? He might not be lengthy but his low center of gravity and speed are more than enough to keep opposing PGs out of the lane, all he has to do is keep his man in front of him and direct drives to our shot-blockers, I think he is more than capable of that.
And stop quoting SIZE!!!!! Collison is like 1-2 inches taller than Lawson, but ONLY WEIGHS 160lbs!!! You don’ tthink he’s gonna get pushed around? Paul and Parker are both like 180lbs+……Lawson weighs 195lbs with the same speed
And we won’t be drrafting a 3rd string PG, we’re drafting our eventual starter
by rip_city_swagger on May 22, 2009 11:11 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
it almost rhymes!
awesome…lawson
close enough
"It’s a good ol’ fashioned Rip City beat down!"
by Magnum on May 22, 2009 2:22 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
He's Ty Lawsome.
VENTURA: It's drowning. It gives you the complete sensation that you are drowning. It is no good, because you -- I'll put it to you this way, you give me a waterboard, Dick Cheney and one hour, and I'll have him confess to the Sharon Tate murders.
by 22baylor on May 22, 2009 2:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
O.K., you convinced me . . .
Now. Could you take care of the details of getting Lawson signed to a Blazers contract?
by monkeysuncle on May 22, 2009 2:39 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Lawson wouldnt have even been drafted in the first round last year
by WildlyRamified on May 22, 2009 4:22 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
he was projected in the teens, actually.
Fearthesword.com: "There is no doubt that the long layoff, combined with the ease of the first two rounds had the Cavaliers a bit tired in the 4th quarter."
by Cablinasian on May 23, 2009 2:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i would LOVE lawson
but i would rather get a verteran like bibby, not another rookie point guard
bayless leaves over my dead body
by thomasikehara on May 22, 2009 8:18 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
i think lawson will be a terry porter caliber pg in the NBA
if brandon roy played for toronto he'd be brandon waaaaah
by R1cEbUrNeR on May 22, 2009 8:21 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Q: How Awesome is Ty Lawson?
A: Half as awesome as Tyler Hansbrough.
"Hey Beavis, let's rock!"
by tominhawaii on May 22, 2009 9:05 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Maynor
I think Maynor would be a great fit for us. Super clutch and reminds me of CP3 but alot slower. He dosen’t have the speed that Lawson has but is very good.
by quezadaz on May 22, 2009 4:44 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

by 




















