Jonny Flynn, Bust?
by Jerwol on Jun 1, 2010 5:19 PM CDT
Email
PrintIt seems like there is a lot of chatter on this site that Flynn might be bust. That may end up being the case, but I'm not one to rush to judgment. I decided to look up Jonny's numbers in comparison to other rookie PGs that have made their way through the league.
As far as I can tell Flynn was 1 of only 11 PGs since 1980 to average 28+ minutes as a 20 or under rookie. Here is the list sorted by minutes per game.
Tyreke Evans
Derek Rose
Magic Johnson
Chris Paul
Mike Bibby
Stephon Marbury
Isiah Thomas
Brandon Jennings
Russell Westbrook
Tony Parker
Jonny Flynn
That's pretty nice company to belong in, so how did he stack up? Well he struggled with assists and turnovers. His 1.53 Assist/TO ratio ranked him dead last among this group (Westbrook 1.59 was the next worst). Flynn was also 4th worst in TO per minute. And his assists per minutes were 2nd worst only better than Tony Parker.
In terms of scoring Flynn ranked right in the middle at 16.8 points per 36 minutes. Evans was 1st at 19.5, Parker was last at 11.2. His 41.5% shooting from the floor ranked him 8th, although only Magic, Rose, and Evans shot better than 43%. His 35.8% 3 point shooting was 2nd, behind only Jennings. He was also 4th in FT%.
He was 2nd worst at rebounding, and 3rd worst in steals (per minute).
So take what you will out of these numbers. By no means am I suggesting that Flynn will be as good as the rest of the names on this list, I just wanted to put his rookie year into some context.
And while I'm here, just a little more food for thought regarding Flynn last year.
Wolves record when Flynn played 29+ minutes 10-34 (.227), record when Flynn played less than 28 or fewer minutes 5-32 (.135). record when Flynn played 36+ minutes 4-4.
Wolves record when Flynn scored 16+ points 11-19 (.367), record when Flynn scored 15 or fewer 4-47 (.078).
Wolves record when Flynn attempted 12+ shots 11-33 (.250), record when Flynn attempted 11 or fewer shots 4-33 (.108), record when Flynn attempted 16+ shots 6-2 (.750).
95 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
"Flynn was 1 of only 11 PGs since 1980 to average 28+ minutes as a 20 or under rookie"
All this statistic tells me is that, not only is Flynn a bust, but Rambis is too.
by vjl110 on Jun 1, 2010 5:27 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
A bit misleading about points per game
Should publish too his abysmal shooting percentage and number of BA (blocks against).
I did
he shot 41.5% from the field, which was better than Jennings (37.1), Westbrook (39.8), and Marbury (.408)
Wait, I found it
Jonny’s FG% was second to last amongst 2009-10 rookies (per NBA.com)
1
- Taj Gibson , CHI
.494
2 - Darren Collison , NOH
.477
3 - Stephen Curry , GSW
.462
4 - Tyreke Evans , SAC
.458
5 - Marcus Thornton , NOH
.451
6 - Omri Casspi , SAC
.446
7 - Jonny Flynn , MIN
.417
8 - Brandon Jennings , MIL
.371
The irony being
that the one person who shot worse is mentioned by most as a player who is supposed to be better than Flynn.
A Darko Fan since 2010!
by TheEvilProfessor on Jun 1, 2010 10:36 PM CDT up reply actions
True
Jennings came out second in the ROY voting behind Evans.
Jonny was number 7.
In fairness to Jennings his Assist to turnovers ratio was: 2.4 versus 1.52 for Flynn
I thought Curry came in second in the ROY?
Jennings a distant 3rd, and Flynn was 5th. Although Jennings wasn’t a great shooter, he scored more than Jonny and made his team better. He had a greater impact than Flynn. The real issue is Curry. Passing on him was a blunder of McFailure proportions, and could come back to haunt Khan, and be compared to the Roy for Foye and Allen for Marbury debacles. Flynn will be a better player than either of those mistakes, but Khan had better get it right this year, for our first successful draft since 1985, to finally break the curse.
2009-10 T-Mobile NBA Rookie of the Year Award
Voting results
Rookie, Team 1st 2nd 3rd Total
Tyreke Evans, Sacramento 67 50 6 491
Stephen Curry, Golden State 43 50 26 391
Brandon Jennings, Milwaukee 12 22 78 204
Darren Collison, New Orleans 1 1 9 17
Jonny Flynn, Minnesota – - 2 2
Taj Gibson, Chicago – - 2 2
Cue the excuses
1. it’s the triangle
2. it’s the lousy team
3. it’s not his fault
4. Asking too much of Jonny
etc.
etc.
Not a bust
It’s way over the top to call Flynn a bust, at this point. He had a decent-enough rookie season. He’s just not looking as good as Jennings or Curry, and we took him right after a different point guard. There are reasons to hate the draft selection, but he’s not a bust.
Exactly. It's way, way too soon to say.
"No experience has been too unimportant, and the smallest event unfolds like a fate..." RMR
Pretty decent company you're comparing him too
"Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please."
Mark Twain
Jonny
isn’t the problem with this team. Inexperience is the problem. There’s no reason taht Jonny won’t be a great PG for us, especially once the team is settled and more comfortable with each other. He may not ever be as good as Curry, but he should still be a good player. Plus he’s a nice compliment to what Rubio is going to bring.
The most interesting thing here is the last couple paragraphs
As much as we complained about him, and as crappy as his plus/minus numbers are, the Wolves actually won at a higher clip the more he played, and won more the more shots he took.
I agree, on the whole, that it’s pretty ridiculous to call him a bust. But you can call him a disappointment if you like. Now Will Avery, that guy was a bust.
A better comparison: same team
Ramon Sessions:
FG% 45.6 v. Flynn 41.5
Assists to TO Ratio: 1.82 Sessions
1.52 Flynn
Well then
You may have also been arguing in 2002 about
Antonio Daniels:
FG % 44.0 v. Parker 41.9
Assist to TO Ratio: Daniels 3.26 v Parker 2.21
ouch, that hurt!
Good post. I think one rookie season on a bad team isn’t enough information to make a call on Flynn. Quick question for everyone. What would his assist to turnover ratio look like if somebody could knock down an open shot?
by Achilles Fang 1 on Jun 1, 2010 6:52 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
Better question
How many top 15 lottery picks played for the better teams who “look like if somebody could knock down an open shot?”
You apparently aren't that familiar with the Wolves' roster.
Not that we don’t appreciate all the unsparing tone and whatnot, but I’ve asked several times if anyone can think of an NBA team with worse wing talent than the Wolves this season. You know – Corey Brewer, our main outside threat (mostly because the defense begs him to shoot)?
The expansion Timberwolves in 1989 had two, two wings who would easily have started over last year’s edition at the same positions. Tony Campbell and Tyrone Corbin were both better options than Brewer and Gomes/Wilkins, and it wouldn’t be that close.
As much as the outlines of “they all went to bad teams” are easy to recite, the Wolves were a special case last year. A ’specially bad one, at the SG and SF positions.
"No experience has been too unimportant, and the smallest event unfolds like a fate..." RMR
You are trolling at some point.
"No experience has been too unimportant, and the smallest event unfolds like a fate..." RMR
And then it follows that we've been trolled along the way.
"Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please."
Mark Twain
Admittedly this is a stretch
but Sessions had a 3.08 A/TO ratio in 96 games as a Buck. He dropped to 1.88 last year with the Wolves. That’s a 39% drop. If we dropped Jennings A/TO ratio 39% he’d be at 1.45, which is worse that Flynn’s 1.52.
Excuse me but
Where was Sessions drafted? No where need where Jonny was drafted.
Moreover, Sessions didn’t come off the bench much of his last season with the Bucks.
Still, as a back-up to Jonny, he out performed him in every category.
Did you check that shot in the dark??
Sessions started less than HALF the games he played in for the Bucks in 2008-2009.
EVERY Category?? did you even check?? From NBA.com -
Sessions:
PPG 8.2
RPG 2.6
APG 3.1
SPG 0.7
BPG 0.1
FG% 0.456
FT% 0.717
3P% 0.067
MPG 21.1
Flynn:
PPG 13.5
RPG 2.4
APG 4.4
SPG 1.0
BPG 0.0
FG% 0.417
FT% 0.826
3P% 0.358
MPG 28.9
Looking that over, I’d say that Jonny outperformed Sessions in prctically every category. Check your “facts” before stating them
Timberwolves - NBA champs 2013!
(used with permission - Wolf in MO)
by frankenhoops on Jun 2, 2010 11:57 AM CDT up reply actions
you made my point for me, thanks
Sessions was not a top 10 draft choice, spent time in the D-League before returning to the Bucks in 2008-09, and moved into a starting role.
Based upon those humble beginnings, Ramon still had a better shooting percentage, a better assist:turnover ratio.
Parker was
a young (19) starting rookie PG who didn’t match the statistics of his veteran backup PG. Sounds like a similar argument to the one you just made.
The stats
show that he helps the team most when scoring, a liability when not. And that’s the problem with Flynn. How does he impact the game when not scoring and are these facets of the game easy to improve upon?
Don’t the facts also show that triangle offenses don’t need a facilitating point guard, so in effect, his ability to score as a PG while not being a facilitator makes him a perfect fit.
right
I think he would look nice next to Turner who could run the offense from the wing. (I almost said much like Kobe but then everyone would jump all over me saying he’s no Kobe which isn’t the point I was trying to make)
by Achilles Fang 1 on Jun 1, 2010 7:39 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
or
He would make a great sixth man coming off the bench with some instant O.
by Achilles Fang 1 on Jun 1, 2010 7:43 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
Well, not sure about perfect
Perfect fit would be a PG that can knock down the 3 at an elite rate, protect the basketball, and generally make quick decisions. I think he can eventually be a very good 3-point shooter (not sure about elite), but he doesn’t protect the basketball and doesn’t make quick decisions. You want more of a floor spacing, mistake-free PG in the triangle that can also play some defense. Kahn seems to have claimed that they made adjustments to the triangle to fit Jonny’s knack for dribble-drive penetration, but as long as there are two posts and their defenders clogging up the paint, Jonny’s primary strength is largely mitigated. I rarely saw the type of spread offense that would best suit Jonny’s game.
by Rascal Flatts on Jun 1, 2010 10:49 PM CDT up reply actions
thats because
we don’t have any shooters to space the floor for any one.
Will the Real Thor Please Stand Up ... ?
by the Real Thor on Jun 2, 2010 7:14 AM CDT up reply actions
He's a bust unless and until proven otherwise
Face it, folks, the kid stunk in 2009-10. Make all the excuses you want, but he should be on a short leash in 2010-11 if not traded for a bag of screws.
Yes, guilty until proven innocent
It’s the American way after all. (Please note the lack of excuses in this post.)
when is it a good idea
to trade a second year point guard? I just do not get this mentality when it comes to Jonny.
And Jonny did not stink, by rookie standards.
Well, actually he did stink relative to other rookies
Did you see where he stood comparatively with other rookies? Yep, he stunk.
Wait, so you don't think he was good?
We get your point. Some don’t agree with you. This issue isn’t settled yet, and you’re not smarter than everyone else just because you have that opinion and others don’t.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jun 2, 2010 5:19 PM CDT up reply actions
He's a disappointment thus far but far from a bust
I’m not a huge Flynn supporter but you have to fair to the guy. His production was respectable with the exception of defense and turnovers. If he can correct those deficiencies, then I think he will become a valuable NBA player whether for us or another team.
For a site...
that prides itself on using stats to make arguments… you sure are negative on flynn… there is some pretty good evidence that when he was on the wolves were quite a bit better… he’s still young… and will only improve… Get off the flynn hate-wagon… this kid’s going to be solid.
there is some pretty good evidence that when he was on the wolves were quite a bit better
I’m sure exactly what you mean here. Do you mean “when Jonny Flynn was on the court the Wolves were better” or “when Jonny Flynn was playing good basketball the Wolves are better”? If you mean the first one, the evidence actually disagrees with you (Flynn had the 5th worst plus/minus on the team, ahead of only Pavlovic, Cardinal, Hollins and Tucker—not exactly a star studded cast), and if you mean the second, it doesn’t really mean anything because obviously when a player plays well, it helps the team, and of course, Flynn wasn’t playing well very often last year.
He’s young and learning a new system, might get better, etc, etc, but the fact of the matter is, he needs to get better. A lot better. And he wasn’t even a very good player at the college level, so we’re asking him to make a move into unprecedented territory. All that skill has never translated to winning basketball. Let’s see if he can make that happen.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
Part of what will be fun next year
is to see if Jonny Flynn has improved at all. I know it’s hard for players in general to improve – at best I’d say, what, 50% of all NBA players only improve slightly or actually regress throughout the first 5-8 years of their careers (if they make it that far)? Sometimes improvement an be attributed to growing into a body and sometimes just acquiring skills (or both). For Flynn it mostly comes down to acquiring skills – defense and decision making. If he even became just an average defender in the NBA he’s got a 10 year career at least ahead of him as a scoring point who can drive and drain the the three. Otherwise he’s career backup man, again a 10 year career but at a lower salary bracket.
I can see Flynn as being one of those guys who ends up being a great veteran catalyst for a playoff team no matter what – a guy who after 8-10 seasons has learned a lot, seen a lot, and knows how to play within his game. The kind of guy who can go off for 10 points in 4 minutes off the bench when his team is down in the Finals, know what I mean?
"Styx might be the mullet of bands."
I think I agree with that. Of course, if your last paragraph is Flynn’s career arc, does that make the answer to this fanpost’s question “Jonny Flynn, Bust?” yes or no? If that’s the most plausible path for him (a reasonable assumption), doesn’t that constitute a bust at pick #6? For now, it’s too early to call him a bust—he definitely might make the necessary adjustments—but I don’t think it’s unfair to say that when his career’s done, we’ll probably look at him that way.
Also, how likely do you think it is that he develops the necessary defense and decision making to be a starter in the NBA? I’m not sold, though I wouldn’t call it impossible. I think he’s a six foot spark plug, coming off the bench for 15 minutes a game and some quick buckets, but if he can figure out how to run a team, he’s certainly got a brighter future ahead of him.
As someone who roots for the Wolves in most situations, but isn’t really a “Wolves Fan” per se, figuring out Flynn’s future will be part of the fun for me, though I can’t say I’d call it fun if the Wolves really were my team. Being a “sorta-fan” is way easier than being a real fan.
(While I love my Warriors fandom, the aesthetic roller coaster is murder. Watching other teams from afar emotionally is a welcome respite)
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
If either of those
carreer arcs manifest for Jonny then he can not be called a “bust.” “bust” is reserved for teh guys who are out of the league in 3 years. Jonny will almost certainly still be in the league 5 years from now. what his role will be is an other question.
Hasheem thabeet is more likely to be a bust then jonny at this point.
Will the Real Thor Please Stand Up ... ?
by the Real Thor on Jun 2, 2010 7:31 AM CDT up reply actions
I think the issue with Flynn for many fans is not that he was terrible as a rookie point guard in a very unfamiliar system, but that this was a strong point guard class and several other players appear to be better NBA players, some of whom we could have selected. It is his opportunity cost rather than his performance that has led to the frustration.
He seems to work hard, and clearly has good speed and talent. I doubt he will be out of this league in a few years or anything like that. He will be a quality NBA player. But it appears unlikely at this point that he will be a superstar. That is unfortunate. But I suppose most players picked in the lottery do not become superstars.
I was with you until
“It is his opportunity cost rather than his performance that has led to the frustration.”
This is not an either/or but an AND situation. There were several who performed better than Jonny AND there existed an opportunity to have drafted better.
Who knows how little Jonny will turn out? But the Wolves can’t wait too much longer to find out. Not with his dismal performance during 2009-10.
"The Wolves can't wait much longer"
In general, while I’m fine with your contrarian response to what you probably see as boosterism, I think you’re having a knee-jerk response. “Our rookie point guard looked lost: trade him for a bad of screws” is not exactly the thinking of a general manager who’s going to do more than spin wheels in the mud.
"No experience has been too unimportant, and the smallest event unfolds like a fate..." RMR
The excuses...
are not excuses, that are just facts.
There are a lot of reasons why the Jonny we saw this year is not the player he is going to be, and to be quite frank, it would be an absolutely horrible idea to trade him without at least giving him his full rookie contract to develop.
He obviously has tremendous skill, and aside from the incredible amount of productive (albeit in very open, free offenses) point gaurds from this year, it normally takes a long time for a point guard to be able to actually run a team.
How and the hell would any of us know?
On what basis can you say that he is “not the player he is going to be….?”
The only vantage point any of us have is his 2009-10 season which for all the reasons previously stated were substandard.
Yes, there are the all too frequent defenses or excuses, but his excessive turnovers, his relatively poor shooting percentage, and his low assists are all on him.
More, he showed no improvement from start to season’s end.
And on what basis
do you say he will only be the player he is now? back some of your statemenst up. you say he is a bust, but don’t say what you use to back that up. you say that any thing that is said contrary to your belief is an excuse, but again provide nothing to back that up. people have provided meny stats to back up the coun ter argument that Jonny is a bust, but you have provided non ot support your position. the draft value is a much better argument then just saying Jonny is a bust bust bust, all day long.
Jonny is not a bust. he was drafted too high. had he been drafted in the late lotto instead of at the top then he would be looking a lot better. PG are to the NBA what QB’s are to the NFL. it is a demanding position that often takes a long time to learn. last years class of PG was uber good, and so Jonny’s performance looks bad by comparison. and some of that is draft position, and the fact that Curry was there and we took Jonny instead. will Curry be a better NBA player then Jonny? probably. I am of the opinion that he will be, and I was before the draft. but I don’t let that could my judgement on Jonny and cry Bust because we didn’t take Curry instead.
Jonny has upside still. passing is a skill that often improves with seasoning and experience. and Jonny’s temperment is one that does not lead itself to flaming out. Jonny likely has a long career in the NBA, and that by definition makes him not a bust.
Will the Real Thor Please Stand Up ... ?
by the Real Thor on Jun 2, 2010 8:27 AM CDT up reply actions
I don't know.... *You* seem to know.
In particular, the low assists rap is one that is amenable to the comparison between Sessions in Milwaukee and here, isn’t it?
"No experience has been too unimportant, and the smallest event unfolds like a fate..." RMR
What a minute!
Comparing Jonny’s rookie season to Sessions rookie season with a different club is not logical.
First off, Ramon did poorly in his rookie year and helps explain why he was sent down to the D-League for a good portion of his last year with the Bucks. When he returned, he ended up starting for them and winning some games for them.
The better comparison is using the same team, as in last season. We then neutralize the excuses that Jonny would have done better had he had better team mates (same), etc. etc.
And, as is evident, Sessons (drafted 56th out of 60 in 2007) outplayed Jonny last season.
I made the comparison between Sessions in Milwaukee and here, and I meant it.
You’re making other mistakes as well, here. Sessions didn’t “perform poorly in his rookie year.” He was the 26th pick in round 2, wasn’t expected to make any roster at all, and played so well in the D-league that he forced people to pay attention. He made the Bucks roster in March and never looked back. By the last 7 games of the year they were starting him over Mo Williams to see what they had, and he responded with the eye-popping 24-assist night that put him on fans’ radar in places like Minnesota Web boards. Here, look for yourself.
But getting back to the comparison between the two systems and settings:
Sessions, during his two years in Milwaukee, put up almost 8 assists per 36 minutes (.221 A/min). Move that same player to last year’s setting on the Wolves – roster, system – and he recorded .149 A/min, or 5.36 assists every 36 minutes. One can make a decent argument that the situation in Minnesota this season wasn’t particularly amenable to point guards putting up big assist numbers, based on that change in Sessions’ lines over time.
"No experience has been too unimportant, and the smallest event unfolds like a fate..." RMR
one knock on Tyreke
maybe will be that he gets into trouble. First, Driving the car that his cousin shot out of and now getting caught driving a 100 mph. Jonny could develop a good fan base if he develops. He is young, it makes more sense to me to wait another year. Point guards especially, seem to improve their second year with a team.
Doesn't like to pass + no one to pass to
Flynn is a scoring pg and will improve in value once we get Rubio.
He’s not a good passer right now. He had trouble on entry passes to Al. Predictably, he started off real bad with assists/turnovers. Here’s the number of more turnovers than assists games by month:
Oct/Nov — 6 of 17
Dec — 2 of 16
Jan — 3 of 16
Feb — 2 of 12
March — 1 of 14
April — 0 of 6
While he did pass up open players for crazy 1 on 5 drives, he didn’t have a lot of great guys to pass to, either. You get more assists (and probably try to pass more) when you have reliable options.
Let’s see what he can do with a scoring talent at wing or a healthy Al (or other) down low. I give him one more year before you pass any decent judgment. Last year was a mess (minus some Brewer improvement).
He started and finished the same way
Lousy.
The “Jonny doesn’t have good players to play with” excuse is lame.
Several of the rookies joined substandard teams yet had better stats than Jonny.
Name the four teams
that had as bad or worse wing play then us with rookie point guards that played better then Jonny? ohh wait, we had the worst wing play in the league and it was by a wide margin.
Will the Real Thor Please Stand Up ... ?
by the Real Thor on Jun 2, 2010 7:36 AM CDT up reply actions
Why is it Ramon Sessions didn't do as poorly?
Ramon “doesn’t have good players to play with” excuse to. But his numbers were an improvement over Jonny start to finish of season.
But Ramon's numbers were not as good as expected
Ramon was a disappointment. Yes, relative to Flynn he was the better PG, but I expected a lot more from Ramon based on his prior year with Milwaukee. This is where the critics of the triangle can really make a good case. Sessions put out career lows in PER and Win Shares/48. And it’s not like he was with a juggernaut in Milwaukee the prior two seasons. They were a struggling team as well while he was there.
by Rascal Flatts on Jun 1, 2010 10:57 PM CDT up reply actions
True
Sessions was quite a disappointment compared to what he did with the Bucks. His points per minute and assist per minute both dropped while his turnovers increased.
I think this would at least partially infer that the Wolves system/personnel was less conducive to PG production compared to the (07-09) Bucks.
Also I can’t entirely agree that Sessions played better than Flynn did last season. Flynn’s points per 36 minutes were better (16.8 vs 14.0), Flynn edged out Sessions in assists per minute, eFG, & PER. Flynn also shot much better from the line. While Sessions had fewer turnovers per minute and more rebounds per minute.
But defensively it wasn't even close
and just the general offensive flow seemed to work better since Sessions was more crisp with his decision making. That to me gives Sessions the edge, even if they were pretty much the same in PER/Win Shares type metrics.
by Rascal Flatts on Jun 2, 2010 11:24 AM CDT up reply actions
I tried to limit my analysis to purely statistical data. Unfortunately there aren’t great defensive measurables available. I’m not a fan of +/- stats, since backups have an inherent advantage of typically playing against other backups.
I’m not saying Sessions wasn’t better defensively, just that we can’t really prove it (at least I can’t).
Yes, defense is more subjective and the measurements that are out there
have a lot of “noise” in them. I was equally disappointed in Sessions and Flynn. While I think Sessions was the better overall PG, I think he had ample opportunity to clearly seize the moment and make it impossible for Rambis to continue starting Flynn…..But he never really differentiated himself to the point where it would have become embarassing for Rambis to keep bringing him off the bench. Of course, Rambis was never embarassed about starting Hollins ahead of Love, so I suppose Sessions was in a no-win situation in that regard. Still, I expected more from Ramon….
by Rascal Flatts on Jun 2, 2010 12:48 PM CDT up reply actions
Also,
Ramon is a 4 year vet. he is expected to do better because he has been around. I would be surprised if his rookie numbers were better then flynns if he had played as much as flynn. (or even with out the play time.)
Will the Real Thor Please Stand Up ... ?
by the Real Thor on Jun 2, 2010 7:38 AM CDT up reply actions
Sessions
Was drafted number 56 out of 60 in the 2007 draft!
He spent part of his 2008-2009 season in D-League!
He outperformed number 6 in the draft Jonny Flynn!
By that comparison
Garnett was a bust and Damon Stoudamire was a stud yet one is out of the league and the other is a future Hall of Famer. Give Johnny a little time before the criticism is warranted.
Here's the problem for Jonny
Jonny fashions himself a scorer foremost. It didn’t take opposing teams long to figure that out.
They knew that Jonny liked the ball in his hands, that he likes to dribble the ball too much. So, they would trap him on the offensive end. If he went left they would trap him against the sidelines. If he went right, they would trap him there.
Unfortunately for Jonny, he is too small to see over trapping defenders. So he would cough the ball up.
Moreover, Jonny has a penchant for driving the ball to the rim. That probably worked okay in college on a pick and roll with help defense wasn’t there. But it didn’t work in the NBA. More often than not, Jonny would get the ball blocked and he would land on his rear end.
Jonny has yet to develop a floater, a 10- to 12-foot pull up jumper off the elbow to counter his lack of size. Over an 82-game season you would think he would have developed some counter moves.
Kahn was right all along!!!
When (and if) Rubio enters Target Center, he will be the starting point guard.
Finaly
you will get no arguments.
Will the Real Thor Please Stand Up ... ?
by the Real Thor on Jun 2, 2010 7:41 AM CDT up reply actions
Agreed. Best post of this whole thread.
The topic of Johnny Flynn is really starting to get beat to death. He is a shot creating point guard on a team with little threats…It was gonna be hard for him. We will have better assets next season so he will improve as well.
NEXT!
by Timberwolf i.e. Albatross on Jun 2, 2010 8:07 AM CDT up reply actions
You guys are too hard on Jonny
Give him a couple years and then start to evaluate him as an NBA player. It takes most good NBA players a couple years to get adjusted to the league. Plus, let’s not forget the team that Jonny is playing with. It’s harder to accumulate large assist totals when the guys you are passing to cannot hit open jump shots with any consistency whatsoever. Also, it’s a completely new system for the kid. Now, with a year under his belt, and hopefully some new assets added to the team this offseason, we’ll see how his performance is this year. If he regresses, then I think it’s fair to say that he isn’t much better than a backup PG coming off the bench, but if his numbers improve, then I think it’s fair to say that he will continue to improve over the next few years.
Rookie numbers
Here are some comparable per 36 minute numbers of a few previous rookie PGs
Flynn – 28.9 MPG – 5.5 Ast – 16.8 Pts – 3.6 TO – 42 FG%
Westbrook – 32.5 MPG – 5.9 Ast – 16.9 Pts – 3.7 TO – 40 FG%
Parker – 29.4 MPG – 5.3 Ast – 11.2 Pts – 2.4 TO – 43 FG%
D.Williams – 28.8 MPG – 5.6 Ast – 13.5 Pts – 2.3 TO – 42 FG%
Billups – 27.7 MPG – 5.1 Ast – 14.5 Pts – 2.8 TO – 37 FG%
Rondo – 23.5 MPG – 5.8 Ast – 9.9 Pts – 2.7 TO – 42 FG%
great find!
we cannot label jonny as a bust when its only his rookie season. imo, if both jonny and jennings swich teams, jonny would have been producing better #s and everybody would call jennings a bust.
thank you
It amazes me how many people on CH are willing to throw in the towel on a 21 year old PG after one season. It’s one thing to lament not picking Curry, but it’s another to label Flynn a bust when his rookie numbers compare favorably to some of the league’s best PGs.
by TWolvesFanInLA on Jun 2, 2010 11:03 AM CDT up reply actions
I think there is a small, but vocal
minority (i.e. Flagrant) that actually believes Flynn is a bust. I think the majority of us are simply disappointed with the pick relative to the other options that were available in a very deep PG class.
by Rascal Flatts on Jun 2, 2010 11:28 AM CDT up reply actions
Really? I’d like to believe that’s true, but feel like it’s more widespread than a vocal minority who make pretty harsh assessments of Kahn based on this disappointment.
Clearly Curry was the better option, but I’m not convinced Jennings would have performed any better in Rambis’ offense and the only other, realistic non PG option was DeRozan, who hardly had a stellar rookie season.
by TWolvesFanInLA on Jun 2, 2010 12:32 PM CDT up reply actions
Harsh, yes
but if you were to ask even some of the most ardent critics straight-up: Is Jonny Flynn a bust? Most would say no. They, including me, are harsh because Kahn made his judgement seemingly based on an interview and a workout, while ignoring many of the advanced stats and scouting reports that suggested that Flynn is a ball-dominant, turnover-prone point guard. I think most people would like nothing more than to see Flynn turn into a great PG, but there was nothing he did throughout the season to ever indicate that he had a firm grasp of the position. Until he shows that he “gets it”, people will continue to remain critical of the pick. That doesn’t make him a bust, just a disappointment. Hopefully he proves us wrong!
by Rascal Flatts on Jun 2, 2010 12:41 PM CDT up reply actions
Fans are just plain fickle.
"No experience has been too unimportant, and the smallest event unfolds like a fate..." RMR
Excellent perspective
It shows that Johnny has had a good rookie season, especially as his numbers were logged with the Wolves, with shooters that sucked.
His assists would have certainly been higher if he were playing with Kevin Durant, for example.
Let’s start celebrating Jonny’s rookie year instead of tearing down him and the rest of the team. Good job, Mr. Kahn!
But these are examples of players that started off with similar numbers to Flynn
and then took off from there. Aren’t there a host of other PGs that also started off with similar numbers and then never really got much better? The point Jerwol makes is a good one: You can’t write-off Jonny because look at all of these other great PGs that started off with similar rookie years. On the other hand, we can’t just assume Flynn is going to take a huge leap forward in his development.
by Rascal Flatts on Jun 2, 2010 12:35 PM CDT up reply actions
Well if age matters
and perhaps it doesn’t. I widened my search to include all PGs to play at least 2000 minutes as a 21 or younger rookie (since 1990). I found 14 – Iverson, Rose, Curry, Paul, Evans, Jennings, Kidd, Westbrook, Felton, Flynn, Marbury, D.Williams, Parker, and Billups. Not counting the 4 rookies from last year, only Felton and Westbrook haven’t made an all-star game (yet).
I’m not trying to speculate that Flynn’s career will resemble any of these players, I’m just pointing out the company he was in last year as a young PG getting an NBA trial by fire. Did he pass his trial? I guess we’ll have to wait and see about that. But from a statistical standpoint he didn’t embarrass himself in comparison to his peers.
The big difference between those players
Is that they’re way bigger than Flynn. I don’t think Jonny is going to develop into Rondo or Westbrook anytime soon. Hey, I’d be happy to be wrong though.
If Flynn was a bust then....
so were ….
Blake Griffen
Hasheem Thabeet
James Harden
Jordan Hill
Demar Derozan
Terrence Williams
Gerald Henderson
Tyler Hansborough
Earl Clark
Austin Daye
James Johnson
Jrue Holliday
Ty Lawson
Jeff Teague
Eric Maynor
you get my point?
No question Jonny was a bust 2009/10
As were several other rookies in the ’09 draft.
It is highly unfair to consider Blake Griffen a bust when he was out the entire season. (OMG)
It’s amusing to see all the excuses for Jonny’s poor rookie year performance.
Can he eventually turn it around in subsequent years? Possibly, but he has a steep climb.
1. He will need to pass the ball more than dribble into traps only to cough the ball up.
2. He will need to develop a reliable floater instead of getting the ball mugged from him under the basket
3. He will need to need to improve his pull up jumpers from the elbow and in the key
4. And he will need to drastically decrease his turnovers and give the ball up more
5. He will need to improve from his zone defense mentality (swinging gate) to better m2m
Here’s wishing him well. It better happen the first half of 2010/11 or he should go join the D-League for a while.
Part of this is historical, isn't it?
Here’s the guys picked #6 in the past 15 years: Danilo Gallinari, Yi Jianlian, Brandon Roy, Martell Webster, Josh Childress, Chris Kaman, Dajuan Wagner, Shane Battier, DerMarr Johnson, Wally Szczerbiak, Tractor Traylor, Ron Mercer, Antoine Walker, Bryant Reeves, and Sharone Wright.
I count
1 perennial All-Star (Roy);
3 depends-on-the-scheme All-Stars (Wally, Kaman, ’Toine);
1 injury-related bust who was a rotation-level player (Reeves);
3 injury busts who never proved whether they were rotation-quality players (Wagner, Johnson, Wright);
1 outright bust (Traylor);
and 6 rotation players who might start depending on who their teammates are (Gallinari, Yi, Webster, Childress, Battier, and Mercer)
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jun 2, 2010 5:44 PM CDT reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Canis Hoopus
Related FanShots on Canis Hoopus
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Create-a-Caption: Tim Duncan puts some stank on it
- LeBron James won’t even give Lance Stephenson half a bar
- Let’s all hate the Oklahoma City Thunder shirts that take a needless shot at the team’s move from Seattle (PHOTO)
- The Golden State Warriors will likely move to San Francisco in 2017
- Chris Paul goes off the top of the backboard for one last Clipper highlight before losing to Spurs (VIDEO)
