Draft Tourney Bonus Group E: Terry, Nembhard, Houstan, Rollins
By popular demand, we added a group for these players
Results will be updated at the master index for the 2022 Dub Nation HQ Draft Tournament.
Your task is to select ONE of the four. There is no option to “select no one” or “trade the pick” because OF COURSE everyone prefers a great trade and OF COURSE every prospect this low in the draft will be flawed. We’ve moved beyond that.
These prospects were not in the original field, but each of them was brought up as options for #28 by multiple DNHQers and at least one public mock draft.
Because they were not in the original field, and because Twitter only lets me poll four options maximum, I am not including the winner of this bonus round in our Final Round. But they can be winners in our hearts.
Here is my absurdly oversimplified summary, followed by some film and longer scouting reports.
In theory, could be a playmaking, 3 shooting, defending pro; but he was a complement in college so the theory remains very theoretical
Steady Old Reliable point guard who won’t make mistakes in PNR and won’t excite you
Hyped out of HS, a good catch-and-shoot 3 man with some defense, but his stock fell when he disappointed with actual results in college.
Bucket getter who does everything except 3 and D, which are two important aspects of pro play.
Longer Scouting Reports
Andre Iguodala, Will Barton
HEIGHT 6'6"WEIGHT 195
AGE 19.9YEAR Sophomore
Brings energy to the court with his defense and passing, but his shooting needs to improve.
Feel for the Game
Quirky ball handler with a tight enough dribble to run some point. He has a knack for locating cutters and shooters. He played lots of point guard for Arizona and would similarly benefit from a multi-creator NBA offense.
Projects as a good spot-up shooter. He made progress from his first to second year in college. This past season, he made 36.8 percent of spot-up 3s. Though he isn’t a knockdown guy, he’s good enough to warrant respect.
Turns defense into offense with deflections and help blocks. His activity is a contagious attribute that could allow him to earn early minutes. Even if he’s not the one grabbing the ball, he’ll always be running hard up the floor.
Projects as a highly versatile defender thanks to his long arms, mindset, and awareness. He was an All-Defensive player in the Pac-12. As a bonus, he’s an attentive rebounder.
Unproven shooter, especially off the dribble, due to a small sample size.
Needs to learn when and when not to take risks, whether it’s as a playmaker forcing the ball into the paint or helping off a shooter on defense.
Eastern Conference Executive No. 1: My opinion, Dalen Terry would have been better off going back to school, personally. But somebody’s telling him he’s going to be a first-round pick. I don’t see that. I think he’s gotten better. I think he’s got a lot of upside. But offensively he’s still challenged a little bit. Having said that, he’s turned himself into a guy that can make a shot, but he isn’t a shooter. He’s more of a wing passer, so it almost fits in perfect with Mathurin.
#18. Here’s a name you maybe weren’t expecting. Terry is still on the fence about whether to stay in the draft, but I have him rated as a first-rounder if he stays because of his ability to handle the ball, defend multiple positions and … hopefully … shoot? Terry’s stroke isn’t overtly terrible — he made 35.0 percent from 3 on low volume and 68.0 percent from the line across his two seasons at Arizona — but he’ll need to be a more persistent perimeter threat as a pro.
The good news is tall wings who can handle the ball and defend almost always find themselves in an NBA rotation, even if they aren’t high-wire athletes or electrifying scorers. Terry operated as Arizona’s de facto point guard this year, handing out nearly three assists for every turnover, while on the defensive end he ripped 2.5 steals per 100 possessions. One would have liked to see him play a more prominent and aggressive scoring role; between Mathurin (above) and Arizona’s two quality big men, at times one could forget Terry was on the floor.
The tape shows a defender who is more “good” than “remarkable.” Some of his best stuff came against smaller players, where he could give a bit more cushion with his length but still had the quickness to keep the play in front of him. Against bigger players, he gave the same cushion but couldn’t affect the shot as well, and he shuns physicality a bit because of his skinny frame.
Adam Spinella (excerpts)
Arizona swingman Dalen Terry played a complementary role on one of college basketball’s best teams last season. He took six shots a game, played fewer than 30 minutes a night and left very few scouts buzzing about his star potential. But at 6’7” with a 7’0” wingspan and point guard skills, Terry is a do-it-all kind of role player who has a clear impact on winning. He was Arizona’s best perimeter defender, passer, and by the end of the season, turned himself into a competent 3-point threat.
That aforementioned shooting was always the missing piece of the puzzle for Terry. He thrived with the ball in his hands in transition, was slimy enough to get to the rim off the bounce, knew how to cut without the ball and provided a much-needed dose of energy on the offensive glass. Few guards were as impactful at chasing second-chance points as Terry. But the shooting… the shooting was never there. He shot 14-43 (32.6%) as a freshman, an incredibly small volume given his position and minutes played.
Midway through the season, he made a slight change to his shooting base, getting his feet wider apart and more square to the rim.
From that game to the end of the season (14 games), Terry went 16-32 (50%) from deep. While that is a small sample — and far too small to call him an elite shooter — it’s linked to a legitimate mechanical change, one that should be sustainable in the future to make him at least a sturdy spot-up threat.
A lot will change for Terry as he adds that shooting consistency and opponents start to guard him differently. The time he needs for those shots will disappear, and the form will need to get faster. He’ll also have the ability to get to the rim more, blowing past closeouts that now have urgency to get a contest, where both his finishing and playmaking will pop. We saw the finishing improve during that stretch of games, going from 53.3% from 2-point range to 63.3% after February 11th.
That scoring efficiency pairs well with a low-usage role that Terry can thrive in at the pros. He’s able to earn minutes despite not being a high-volume scorer because, frankly, he’s a really damn good defender. He’s super long, quick on his feet, and engaged on-ball and off-ball. By our measure, he was the most important defender for the Wildcats this year, and definitely their best. Cross-matching Terry against smaller point guards created havoc; he’s so good at chasing over the top of ball screens and contesting pull-up jumpers that his NBA future comes in providing the same frustration to smaller guys in the pros.
Terry is the first player since the NCAA started recording advanced stats in 2007 to play 1000 minutes in a season with his level of an assist rate, low of a turnover rate, Defensive Box Plus-Minus, and shoot 50% from the field. His combinations of playmaking without mistakes, defensive impact and efficient scoring makes him scalable as an elite role player.
What’s going to be necessary for Terry is adding any sort of scoring threat off the bounce, both from the mid-range and from 3. He’s devoid of that right now. Long and crafty enough to get to the rim, Terry didn’t need such a game to be effective at Arizona. But if he’s going to play with the ball in his hands as more of a creator in the half-court, he’ll need to be able to score his own created shots outside of five feet.
One of our pet peeves in play style is a guy who needs the ball in his hands a lot that doesn’t seem like a threat to score it when he has the ball. No matter how good of a passer he is, defenses can sag off and apply pressure elsewhere without fear of reprisal. That is a detriment during a playoff series.
So why are we so high on Terry?
The final rule of our Ten Commandments of NBA Draft Scouting is to remember that, at the end of the day, a draft selection is a bet on and investment in the person, not just the player. From that standpoint, everything points in a positive direction about Terry. He’s incredibly vivacious in interviews, an energy-giving teammate on the court, celebrates the successes of others and isn’t afraid of rolling up his sleeves and getting his hands dirty. He’s realistic and coachable, comes from a family with a ton of positive intel, and will thrive in any role given to him.
Compared himself to:: Tyus Jones Why: “I think that’s someone I can emulate early in my career off the bench as a secondary point guard. He just wins games. Has a high assist-to-turnover ratio. He’s solid.”
There is plenty of evidence teams put stock in combine scrimmages. Nembhard's 26-point, 11-assist performance in Chicago caught everyone's attention given the freedom he had compared to the facilitator role he played for Gonzaga. He's generating buzz as an option in the 20s. Playoff teams could see an NBA-ready backup they can trust to run offense and make good decisions and enough open shots.
#53. Nembhard rocketed up draft boards after dominating the final day at the combine, but let’s not get crazy here. We also have four years of game tape from Florida and Gonzaga to see what he is and what he isn’t.
Nembhard can run a team and makes few mistakes, but offensively, his 34.3 percent career shooting and lack of blast-off quickness are unlikely to turn him into a plus weapon. Relative to a player like Tyus Jones, for instance, his college stats are far more underwhelming at both sides of the floor, although Nembhard did boost his steals rate last season and become a more respectable shooter. It’s not crazy to squint and see a Monte Morris-type upside here, but I still think the more likely endgame is as a third point guard.
Late in the draft process, Gonzaga point guard Ryan Nembhard is starting to turn heads as a steady, reliable backup option for the NBA. There’s very little that is flashy about Nembhard’s game. He’s been a consistent perform for four years in college; two at Florida and two at Gonzaga.
The Zags guard played the combo last year next to Jalen Suggs, a role he was less equipped for. He shot only 32.3% from deep, but his impressive assist to turnover ratio really popped in Mark Few’s ball screen hi-lo system. This year was much different. Nembhard played with the ball in his hands much more, creating as the primary guard and his assist numbers rose a tad.
So did his 3-point shooting. Nembhard, for the first time in his career, cracked the 35% mark from deep, jumping all the way up to 38.3%. A polished, poised, patient ball screen creator, there’s something nice about the consistent production he provides, especially if that shot falls.
The list of players to average 5.5 assists, fewer than two turnovers and shoot 38% from 3 is pretty thin, and is highlighted by smaller guards like Ty Lawson and Fred VanVleet. Nembhard is a bit bigger at 6’5”, but the ability to control the game (out of ball screens and in general) without turning the rock over is incredibly appealing. Size, which could combine with multi-positional defensive upside, pushes him into very solid territory.
Nembhard is a solid defender in a ton of ways. He’s long as a point guard and has shown the ability to slither around ball screens. Those are two attractive traits for a point of attack defender: length to smother smalls and the neutralization of an advantage gained by screens. Nembhard finishes drives at the rim with verticality, using his length and mature, developed chest (he’s already 22 years old) to wall up and make it difficult to score on.
The defense isn’t all rosy, though. Nembhard doesn’t play low enough, meaning quicker or more decisive guys can go past him without a screen. The best offensive players he faced had their way with him a bit (he was good in the Texas Tech game against bigger drivers but struggles with speed). When he’s beat, he reaches for back tips — a pet peeve of ours.
While his defensive impact may come out in the wash, the offense is really the appeal. We understand the instant injection of steady PNR production he can provide a team, though we’re skeptical of both the upside to accomplish the traits he flashed at Gonzaga on an NBA floor, and of the consistency of his shooting.
#29. One of the big mysteries of the 2022 NBA draft is where Houstan, once a projected top-10 pick, ends up. Houstan declined his invite to the NBA combine, indicating there might be something to the rumors of a first-round promise, or that Houstan has a landing spot with which he's comfortable in the form of a "soft promise," which would only prevent him from working out for teams outside a certain range. Houstan's positional size, defensive awareness and perimeter shooting gives him a high floor as a prospect, despite his disappointing freshman season at Michigan.
#44. Houstan is the more tolerable version of Patrick Baldwin in some respects, a theoretical big wing shooter who played better basketball than Baldwin this past season but perhaps offered fewer hints of upside.
While Houstan wasn’t actively lighting things on fire the way Baldwin did, he failed to make an impression as a shooter (35.5 percent from 3, 78.3 percent from the line), rebounded like a guard and shot 44.4 percent on 2s in Big Ten games. There were some nights when he was just completely invisible, such as his zero-point, zero-assist, “just cardio” night in the first round of the NCAA Tournament.
That said, the pieces here are probably worth taking a shot on late in the draft. Houstan is big and his shot isn’t broken. He has just enough perimeter skill to talk yourself into him developing more and becoming a real weapon with his pull-up game. He’s not a plus defender but he’s not toast either; he can stay solid, fight through screens and use his size.
Houstan declined an invite to the combine, so we don’t know his real height and length measurements, but his listed height of 6-8 is believable. That combine refusal also created buzz that he has a promise from some team.
Michigan freshman Caleb Houstan had high expectations coming into his lone year in Ann Arbor. Houstan was part of a superteam at Montverde, joining Cade Cunningham, Scottie Barnes, Moses Moody and Day’Ron Sharpe on an unreal combination of talent for the high school level. Houstan’s game was complementary there: spotting up in the corners and on the perimeter, using his length to play in the open floor, and thriving off the talent of everyone else.In trying to figure out Houstan almost a year after those U-19 games, the Michigan film reveals a lot of flaws about his all-around game. Houstan struggles as an athlete, has a great deal of length but doesn’t always use it functionally. He’s a poor finisher at the rim, has slow and heavy feet, doesn’t have any touch in the mid-range and lacks any sort of playmaking for others.
If Houstan were to have one definitive skill that could mask all of those concerns, it would be his shooting. It’s the skill that Michigan certainly believed in the most and leveraged his game to be built around. Houstan was solid there: he made 40% of his catch-and-shoot 3-pointers from a spot-up situation.
When surrounded by other great talents, Houstan is good in that role. He’s a big wing who can shoot it standing on the perimeter. But there’s a good deal of evidence, mounting from his play before his time at Michigan, that hanging his hat on 3-point shooting might be questionable for an NBA future. But it is clear that he’ll need that skill to be where he makes his money.
The uncertainty around Houstan’s major skill being enough to carry him to success in the NBA mirrors the clouded pre-draft process he’s undergone. Caleb did not go to the NBA Draft Combine — to test, interview or play. There aren’t official measurements out there, he has disappeared and altered his schedule on the fly… it’s been a strange process.
Nailing down what that means is tricky. It could be a promise from a team super early in this process, or it could be his team trying to be selective about individual workouts for teams, selectively placing him in settings where his athleticism won’t be exposed and his shooting can succeed.
Outside of the strong spot-up shooting numbers, there was very little from Houstan’s freshman season that was redeeming. Our scouting report features some movement shooting upside, but he made less than 25% of his shots off screens. We still believe there is a little bit of movement upside, but the track record from what he proved at Michigan makes that really hard to fully buy into.
The hype coming out of high school (or early in their college careers) garnered first-round or lottery intrigue at one point for a half-dozen guys: Houstan, Kendall Brown, Patrick Baldwin Jr., JD Davison, Peyton Watson.
Houstan’s upside is so much more limited than all of them. While it might be easy to get a scalable role out of him as a 3-and-D prospect in comparison to the others, the athleticism hinders him in ways that are really troubling. We’d rather take a second-round risk on a guy whose athleticism isn’t in question and swing for the fences on any of those names first.
Western Conference Executive 3: His size, his offensive skill set and his ability to shoot, even though he didn’t shoot it great at Michigan this year, he has in the past at many other events. So, he has that to hang his hat on. … I saw Caleb at USAB events. There’s no reason why he could not (shoot better on 3s in the NBA). He has size, and he knows how to play. I don’t think he’s going to get worse, because he’s going to be playing with and around better players to get him even better shots.
Ryan Rollins has, quite frankly, fluctuated a bit on our board this year. We value a lot of what he does well: smooth scoring, good length, three-level potential. But he plays a little to slow and clunky of a game for us, isn’t as explosive as we’d like, and we don’t love the translatability of his catch-and-shoot game. His freshman year was pretty rough defensively, and that’s stuck in our head as a means for dampening some of his upside if he isn’t an elite scorer. We’d like him a little better if we bought into the catch-and-shoot impact.
On the hunt for a sleeper, many eyes are drawn toward Toledo combo guard Ryan Rollins. For a while, he was a popular guy on our radar. With long arms and a good frame at 6’4”, Rollins flashes three-level scoring potential and a knack for self-creation in the mid-range. He’s your typical high-volume mid-major guard in that regard.
In order for Rollins to be a major NBA contributor, he’ll need to be a much more consistent shooter to 3-point range. There are some concerning issues with his C&S form — particularly in the lateral nature of his misses — that lead us to believe he won’t gain that trait eventually.
If Rollins were quicker and more of a slick change-of-gears athlete, we may say screw it and go all in on the self-creation. But we aren’t there and think Rollins is more of a late-second guy if anything.
There are rumors that Rollins can sneak into the first round. If that’s to be done, it will be because he shoots the leather off the ball in workouts and performs very well at the combine. Until then, he strikes us more as a high-volume guard who is a good basketball player but lacks a key trait for NBA role playing success and doesn’t have the athleticism necessary to stand out as a clear top option.
A tweener in every sense of the word, Rollins may wind up outside our top-60 when all is said and done.
In a sea of blah shooting guard prospects after Ivey and Wesley, Rollins is the one at whom I’d take the first crack. He won’t turn 20 until July and was the best player in the Mid-American Conference, and his weaknesses (3-point shooting, on-ball defense) are the type of things that seem fixable in a development program. With high rates of steals and rebounds, nearly two dimes for every turnover and a 53.6 percent mark inside the arc, he checks a lot of boxes in categories that correlate with pro success.
I originally had him much higher than this, but his defensive tape was a crushing disappointment. As I noted above, players tell on themselves by how far off the ballhandler they play; the more comfortable they are with their own lateral quickness, the closer they guard the ball. (As a human traffic cone back in the day, I perhaps internalized this lesson more than most.)
Rollins concedes acres of space, frequently allowing no-dribble 3s from the triple threat position, and yet had a lot of trouble beating his man to the spot and cutting off penetration. If this was happening in the MAC, one shudders to think what NBA guards might do to him one-on-one. Rollins’ athletic indicators and plus feel make one think this is fixable, but there’s a chance he’s just so flammable on defense that he can’t stay on the court.
College Head Coach 4 (his team played Toledo): Can shoot the 3, moves without the ball, always solid, high basketball IQ. We double-teamed him. His number didn’t look the best against us, but we had to double team him to get the ball out of his hands. They run more sets, a ton of sets, and a lot of wide pins, pindowns, to get him moving. They run him around a little bit to get him going downhill. Hard to find a little bit. He moves well without the ball, and he’s an exceptional passer. That’s what made him hard to guard. He made the right decisions. That’s where the IQ comes in. He was able to put guys in good positions. Wouldn’t say he’s the best defender, but he’s decent. He’s not horrible. And he tries and competes at the defensive end.
Western Conference Executive No. 4: Let’s see how this plays out. I could see him be the climber, the sweetheart, after Chicago. And maybe I could be completely wrong. But Bones (Hyland) came out of there and shut it down after one day.
Rollins measured a slightly disappointing 6’3.25″ height, but atoned with an excellent 6’9.75″ wingspan.
He only played in one scrimmage where he had a number of plays that popped including an athletic putback and being pesky with deflections on defense. But he was very sloppy with 5 turnovers on a relatively limited offensive load of 9 FGA and 3 assists, and missed all three of his 3’s including a couple of bad bricks on wide open looks.
This makes it difficult to know where to place him in the draft. He has potential in a number of ways, as he has good defense for his size and decent offensive skills for a guard who doesn’t turn 20 until shortly after the draft.
But the question with him is: does he have enough offensive skill to get excited over at 6’3? In his two NCAA seasons he made a solid 79.6% FT, but only 31.7% 3P on moderate volume. For a little guy, it needs to be a concern whether he can ever make NBA 3’s with consistency.
The other question is whether he can be a lead guard, as he can get to the rim decently enough and had more assists (3.6) than turnovers (2.2) as a sophomore but is not a true point guard. The turnover issues in the scrimmage were not encouraging on this front.
So he is on the fringe of good in almost every category. It is plausible that with his length and instincts he is a + defensive player and has enough skill to develop into a + offensive player in time. Or it’s plausible that he is a buck short in everything across the board for a little guy and isn’t an NBA player.
He is projected as undrafted in ESPN’s pre-combine mock which seems harsh, as it is tough to see 50 prospects ahead of him in this draft. But he did not show quite enough to get hyped on him as a top 30 guy who belongs in round 1.
He is a difficult one to rank, but early-mid round 2 seems reasonable based on what he has shown these past few days.