Paul George draft profile

paulgeorgepic.jpg

Paul George (Fresno State, sophomore)
6'7, 200 lbs., Age: 20
SF/SG

George is a long and lengthy small forward at 6'7 with range extending past NBA three point line.  While known for his shooting, George's speed and long stride create havoc on the fast break.  Defensively, his length creates problems for both shooting guards and small forwards, prevents players from shooting over him, and allows him to play the passing lanes.

While known for his shooting and range, George uses his athletic ability to excel in transition finishing at the rim or taking pull up jumpers.   He attempts to shoot mid-range jumpers off the dribble, but this aspect of his game needs work still..  Although underutilized, he can post up shorter guards/forwards with his length and either shoot over them, or pass the ball to an open shooter.

Defensively, George creates problems with his uncanny quickness and length.  He is hard to shoot over when in position and as a team defender, generates sneaky steals by playing the passing lanes.  However, George must improve strength and stamina in order to fight through picks or go around them more quickly.   At times, he also needs to play with more discipline and maintain his position.

How will George's Game Translate to the NBA?

Overall, George has two particular skills that really translate in the NBA.  His ability to shoot from anywhere and his athletic ability to play in transition and defense.  He is still very raw, but with added strength, his game emulates the retired, Sean Elliot.  If he does not get close to reaching his talent, his floor is a Trevor Ariza type player.   George should at least be a solid role player at the next level.

Compared to James Anderson and Xavier Henry, he already has the shooting, and the added skill of being taller, longer, and more disruptive on defense.  Since George is only scratching the surface of his potential, I feel that he could go anywhere from around pick 10-25.  When G.M.'s start seeing more of his game in workouts, I feel his draft status will rise.  

How does his game fit for the Bulls?

Even though, George is a natural small forward, I feel he has the athleticism to defend shooting guards in stretches.   His game fits better next to Rose than Deng and he would be one of my favorites to pick at 17 if available.  The Bulls need three point shooting and defense on the perimeter, and George might provide both while still having some upside down the road.

Comments

Leave a comment
  • Is he a SG or a SF?

    I tend to think he is more of a SF, which means the Bulls don't need him, unless they plan on getting rid of Dickey Johnson or Luol Deng.

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    Mr. Happy,

    Bulls needs skilled players outside of Rose; especially offensively. He has the talent to play both positions. Right now, he is a natural 3, but he definitely can play the 2 and in the long term could be a 2 if he adds ball handling. I'm not a big James Johnson fan, but don't get the Dickey comment. He has skill, but just needs to work on conditioning and polishing of skills.

  • In reply to kevinstates:

    The Bulls need a SG.

    I'm just questioning if Paul George is a SG or a SF, which everyone else on the web as him listed as.

    I certainly don't want a re-peat of the BS that went on last year when the Bulls selected Dickey Johnson knowing full well they had the SF position covered.

    They need a true SG, not a third SF.

  • He is my number three if Both Henry and Anderson are gone. His shot is quick and high and he has shown to be athletic and smart.

    Mr. Happy, your hatred for JJis unparalleled.

  • In reply to 1096ballenf:

    Biggestbullsfan,

    All I'm saying is the Bulls don't need another SF with Deng and Johnson already on the roster. If they want Paul George, then they should trade Dickey Johnson.

  • In reply to 1096ballenf:

    When is the Quincy Pondexter review coming?

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    Hey man, you will get one in the next week. I am only doing one a day until draft day! As for Anderson, his is also coming soon. My question is you keep saying you want a shooting guard. At what point is Pondexter a good shooting guard next to Deng and Rose? He can't shoot outside of 10 feet.

  • In reply to 1096ballenf:

    Chad Ford on his recent workout:
    "Paul George, G/F, Fresno State
    If you want the upside sleeper of the first round, look no further than George. He is a 6-foot-8 wing whose silky smooth play has drawn comparisons to everyone from Tracy McGrady to Wilson Chandler.

    George is closer to Chandler than McGrady at the moment, but it's clear that he's the type of player who could explode with a little coaching. He's been in the gym with former NBA big man Don MacLean for the past three weeks working on the little things that separate the good wings from the great wings. Specifically, he's working on creating his own shot -- ball handling, first step and getting separation off the dribble.

    In the workout we saw, George was terrific. He showed deep range on his jump shot, exploded to the rim and had terrific quickness. Scouts have had questions about his consistency and toughness. They've also worried about his love affair with the 3-pointer. But it was also clear that he was rarely pushed at Fresno State.

    In this environment, playing alongside other NBA prospects, he looked much sharper and more focused. He needs to get stronger and improve his motor (something he admitted to me when we chatted) but MacLean told me George has been a sponge since coming into the gym.

    George believes he may be more of a 2-guard than a 3. Some NBA teams agree. In fact his first workout is in San Antonio on Thursday. His workout partner: Kansas shooting guard Xavier Henry."

  • In reply to mucha819:

    Thanks for this; I like this report!

  • In reply to mucha819:

    I like this guy the more I hear about him. I think we should consider him just as high as Anderson and Henry if he has the footspeed to play the 2. He has a height and the jumper we need. Also, we can run small ball with him. If we took him over one of Henry or Anderson I wudnt be mad but it better be the best option. He could be.

  • In reply to 1096ballenf:

    Biggestbullsfan,

    Am I in the right to call James Johnson, Dickey Johnson?

    http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=1&p1=simpkdi01&y1=1995&p2=johnsja01&y2=2010

    Check the numbers. The nickname fits.

  • In reply to 1096ballenf:

    I can respect that. Anderson to me is going to be more of a sure safe pick in that he can score the ball. I just like George's upside.

  • Kevin, Paul George has the look of someone who could be a very good player in the NBA. Outstanding athleticism, exceptional speed, fluid long range stroke, and shot 90% from the line. He's long and rangy and just looks like an NBA player/possible stud in waiting. Though I think he's going to be a SF due to his handles which is why he's not instant Lotto.

    Two reasons I didn't see him more then I did(one game). Because George played in the WAC I only had two opportunities to watch him play as opposed to Luke Babbitt and Nevada of the same conference who were televised many times for obvious reasons(Babbitt and Armon Johnson).

    He wasn't on my targeted list of prospects however due to scouting reports about his very limited handle. That may have been overstated, but I simply didn't get enough out of that one game to confidently place him on my final list. Most guys I targeted I saw at least three or four times. Not hard to watch the games if you fast forward through free throws etc. I can watch a game in about an hour and 20 minutes. Sometimes it takes longer if there are telling plays or a lot of shots of the player/personality check.

    Reports also say he's nonchalant, and that's kind of what I took out the game I watched him play. In that conference tournament game on a breakout cherry pick he was all alone driving to the basket, yet he fumbled the ball away. There were a lot of scouts at that game so nerves could have been a factor.

    Bottom line as a SF without an advanced handle, a somewhat nonchalant attitude that settles for threes early in the offense, and mostly because I have not seen him play enough I do not have him in my final draft list.

    However, I think there's a very real chance he could become a solid pro. Any guy with his size, athleticism, and shooting, again 45% for a whole season on a solid volume of threes and 90% from the line(and this year minus the jacked/settled for threes he's 48% field goal percentage on 2-pointers) he could end up being a good player. He's just at the cut off line for me, and I wish I could have seen more of his games. And I don't know his coaches history, but he didn't seem to be a big help. And attitude can me misjudged/unfairly labeled.

    If the Bulls drafted Paul George I would be excited, but also wary of at the nonchalant attitude questions. Maybe I'm just spoiled by Derrick, Joakim, and Taj or leary after the Tyrus years and James Johnson despite Doug thinking he's a nice guy/not an attitude problem because to me he looks like one at least on the court way overconfident/cocky to the extreme with little if any mature self-awareness/restraint.

    If his attitude is OK(competitor and teachable) then I'd have to be excited if they drafted him though that would definitely mean JJ is traded/out the door. And in my mind we do need a SG a lot more.

    But again nice job Kevin. I'm not a butt-kisser(ask Doug), and I take my hobby/drafting seriously, but your top guys have impressed me.

  • In reply to MarkNorman:

    Thanks for the feedback/comments! He definitely has that report of shaky ball-handling and non-chalent emotion. However, it has been reported that he is very coachable also. I just love this guy's upside and I feel he is very versatile.

  • Look at the measurables and the stats.

    I rest my case.

  • Why is everyone sleeping on Quincy Pondexter?

    Didn't he put up 19ppg and 7rpg in the shadow of Brandon Roy at UW?

    There is more to a good NBA shooting guard, than 3pt. shooting.

  • Funny, I mentioned the other day that I like Paul George and then the profile comes out. I think his three point shooting and athleticism fit great next to Rose, and while he needs to tighten up his handle in Chicago Rose would be creating a lot of his shots anyway. He's better when spotting up from three and excels in transition, both of which fit great next to Rose. I think he's got enough skills to be a good fit on the team IF he has the foot speed to guard the 2, which we'll find out in workouts. But I think he brings the shooting that the team needs and fits well next to the guy who he needs to fit well next to. The other stuff can be developed, but he's got two big skills with his shooting and athleticism.

    Mr. Happy, Pondexter is more of a 3 in the NBA in all likelihood He may be able to guard the 2 in spurts but the shooting is a big thing, especially on this team that has shooting as such a big need. I haven't seen Pondexter listed as a 2 anywhere, I'd be interested if you can find a link to somewhere where he is listed as such, particularly on a site that is projecting him to the NBA. I've seen 3 and 4, not 2.

  • In reply to derza222:

    Quincy Pondexer is built like Kelenna Azubuike.

    Azubuike is a SG/SF in the NBA. That's what I see QP as.

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    Pondexter gets his points in the paint. Azubuike can shoot. Both are good defenders.

  • Doug,

    The stats and measurables don't lie.

    Outside of Dickey Johnson putting up more blocks and more 3pt shots, their stat- lines are almost identical.

    I know you wanted the Bulls to draft him, but this kid looks like a BUST. His numbers are as good as Dickey Simpkins were when he was a 6'9" rookie SF/PF drafted in the mid-first round at 22 years of age.

    It what it is.

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    I don't know what games you were watching back in the day, but Dickey Simpkins played both SF and PF for the Bulls.

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    Dude you lost already, give it up.

  • In reply to 1096ballenf:

    What did I lose exactly?

    The stats and measurables don't lie.

    Doug is in denial.

  • In reply to 1096ballenf:

    I like Paul George alot. He can knockdown the spot up three, and he's really long and athletic. He didn't shoot the three as well this year because he took alot of bad shots. But that's to be expected for a kid that's learning the game. James Anderson is a older player, and he suffered from the same problem this past season.

    I don't think George will have a problem swinging to the shooting guard position. I think he'll be a better defender than James Anderson guarding the position from day one. If you match both guys skill for skill, there is no doubt in my mind George will come out on top. He's a good shooter, should be a good lane filler and finisher in transition, and he have the ability to be a very good defensive player. If George is a pure small forward, then you have to say the same thing about Anderson or Pondexter.

    Come draft day, and Paul George is available at 17, he could be too good to pass up. If he's not there, I think the Bulls should try to trade down to pick up a late first and early second round pick.

  • In reply to JimmyBulls:

    JimmyBulls,

    Is George a SF or a SG? He's a SF on the NBA level. They Bulls don't need another SF. So, unless they plan on trading Doug's favorite player, Dickey Johnson, I would say they should pass on Paul George.

    It wouldn't be fair to him, if he wasted away on the Bulls bench.

  • I keep seeing Anderson and Henry's name being brought in this post and others, even by Kevin.

    Has Anderson been reviewed yet?

    By the way, I did talk about Paul George. I think he is a skilled SF, which the Bulls don't need unless they trade your favorite player, Dickey Johnson.

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    Um Pondexter isnt a shooter. George is. George is longer, better defender and a better overall talent than pondexter. Pondexter isnt even in the first round in most mock drafts. Also, George has been proven he can be moved down to the two. Ponderxter cant since he doesnt have the handles, shot or defense needed to.

  • In reply to 1096ballenf:

    Was DWADE a shooter coming out of Marquette? No.

    QP doesn't need to be a great shooter, yet, as long as he knows how to play the SG position in the NBA.

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    Biggestbullsfan,

    George is a SF on the NBA level.

    Do the Bulls need another SF?

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    if they don't need another small forward why do you keep suggesting they draft another small forward

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    George has the handles and the footspeed to shift over. He also has the shot that we need and his height will work great as a defender and rebounder. Pondexter cannot do these things. He doesnt have handles or the shot that we need. He would be a mistake at our pick. And we are not in a position to draft by need. We draft BPA unless we are getting Anderson or Henry.

  • This is actually the guy that I figured the bulls will take, but I'm scared that he'll be gone before the bulls get to choose, how many other teams ahead of us need a defensive three point scorer? I'm on the Paul bandwagon, now lets see what happens?

  • The question still remains. Is Paul George a SF or a SG?

    NBADRAFT.net lists him as a SF.

    http://www.nbadraft.net/players/paul-george

    DRAFTEXPRESS.com lists him as a SF/PF.

    http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Paul-George-5688/

    Paul George is built like Rudy Gay, if you as me. Rudy Gay is a SF, not a SG.

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    Both of them also list Pondexter as a SF. Go figure.

  • In reply to msalivar:

    But given the fact that QP is built like Kelenna Azubuike, QP can translate into a SG/SF.

    Paul George is built like Rudy Gay. I see him as a SF on the next level.

    How many SF's do the Bulls need on their roster? TWO is enough.

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    George is also built like reggie miller, who was a guard. look, if you accept quincy as a guard for reasons of build and athleticism, why not george? because hes skinny?

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    Paul George is also built kind of like T-Mac and Kobe. Build has only so much to do with what position a guy is going to play in the NBA. Scottie Reynolds has a similar build to Deron Williams, no way he's playing PG in the NBA. George has a far superior skill set to play SG, and has a much better chance to play there than Pondexter in the NBA.

  • In reply to msalivar:

    Paul George is a swingman.

  • In reply to JimmyBulls:

    Is Rudy Gay a swingman?

    I think this kid can be Rudy Gay good. Both are SF's.

    The Bulls need a SG, unless they trade away one of their SF's.

  • In reply to JimmyBulls:

    LOOK-A-LIKES (in playing style and build):

    Paul George = Rudy Gay
    Quincy Pondexter = Kelenna Azubuike
    Xavier Henry = Tracy McGrady
    James Anderson = Mike Miller

  • In reply to JimmyBulls:

    Rudy Gay is about 20 pounds (if not more) heavier than Paul George, and George is a much better shooter when compared to Gay. I don't think matching those players make a whole lot of sense. But if you look at Pondexter's lack of ball handling skills, and the fact that he can't shoot the three. I would compare him to Loul Deng, and say out of the three (George, Anderson, and Pondexter) he's more likely to be the pure small forward. I even think QP can swing to the shooting guard position, but he will be more of a Mickael Pietrus type swingman.

  • In reply to JimmyBulls:

    Their measurables and playing style match-up quite nicely.

    Paul George = Rudy Gay (in build and playing style)

    * George will put on weight.

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    george can shoot really well and is athletic/long enough to defend guards. so he can play SG. who cares if you think he looks like rudy gay?

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    Heres my argument for george if the bulls go SG in the draft:

    Whichever SG is drafted by the Bulls, he will be like the 5th scoring option on the court. he will largely operate by standing, catching and shooting. this means he will be a relatively low usage player, so this SG is going to have to find ways to be productive without scoring. now neither anderson nor henry are projected as even decent defenders of SGs. this is ok if they are making up for it on the offensive end, but they are unlikely to be in a position to do that given how few offensive possessions they will use. add in george's superior upside and his documented ability as a playmaker (something the bulls can always use), I would like to see the bulls draft him.

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    Oops. I wanted to say, "George has the length, athleticism and college steal/block stats of a player with nice defensive potential. add in george's superior upside and his documented...."

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    Good profile...i like this guy a lot. Tons of length and athletic ability. Deff. can shoot the rock with range and would be great next to Rose. Also, at that spot in the 1st round, to be able to grab a guy with upside like his would be great for us. I think of him as a Trevor Ariza type player with better shooting touch. And i also think he can play Shooting Guard and Small Forward for us.

    And if LeBron does come to Chicago...having a big Guard/Forward like this would be great to have on the defensive end.

  • In reply to JimmyBulls:

    Go watch highlight videos of Azubuike and compare them to ones of Pondexter.

    Their measurables and playing style match-up quite nicely.

    Quincy Pondexter = Kelenna Azubuike (in build and playing style)

    * Pondexter can shoot the 3-ball, he just doesn't take alot of them. He likes to penetrate to the basket, just like Azubuike does.

  • In reply to JimmyBulls:

    SONG OF THE DAY:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A68j28KQaik&feature=related

    That's a good arena song.

  • In reply to JimmyBulls:

    Actually it's only 10lbs.

    Paul George - 210lbs.
    Rudy Gay - 220 lbs.

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    I thought that the question that remains and that the Bulls have to answer right this second is, is he a Batman or a Robin, or is it the Green Hornet or the incredible Hulk or the six million dollar man, or?

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    Are any of these guys better than Anthony Morrow?

  • In reply to BigWay:

    Hey man, this guy has more athleticism and can play D!

  • In reply to BigWay:

    LOTTERY PICK?

    He seems to be climbing the Draft boards, according to some media outlets.

    http://www.hoopsworld.com/Story.asp?story_id=16289

    I admit, I'm starting to fall in love with this kid as a prospect.

    The Bulls might want to trade up (Indiana #10), if possible.

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    I'm all about trying to trade up for him or Udoh. As for you question below, he needs to improve ball-handling, but I think he will!

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    I have been sold on the fact that this kid can play SG on the next level.

    Here's my new comparison.

    PAUL GEORGE = A cross between Reggie Miller (build) and Larry Hughes (athleticism).

    I think he'll be able to shoot and drive the ball. That's what Miller and Hughes can do.

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    sorry sir, cannot compare him to a hall-of-famer. He will be a good player of his own style.

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    reminds me of Danny Granger

  • In reply to boogernights:

    they have some similarities; will be interesting. I think that George might have more of a natural touch and is more raw coming in!

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    Can Paul George be Thabo with a consistent shot? I think from the Bulls perspective, he moves up their draft board if he shows he has enough lateral footspeed to stick with twos defensively. But in some ways he fits the profile of guys our front office seems to covet: length, plus size for his position (as a 2). And to commit the cardinal sin of comparing across racial lines, the first time I saw video of his shot with its high release it really reminded me of Peja.

    Given the type of player he projects to be (big wing, spot up shooter/slasher), like a James Posey, being an elite shooter is a really nice thing to have at that skillset. Those guys always seem to come in handy on good teams: their ability to help you go big and small by floating between positions lets their team exploit matchups and spread the floor.

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    Heres my comparisons...tell me what you think

    Xavier Henry- Bigger, More Athletic Michael Redd...Tmac was a lot thinner and more athletic then Henry is. But I could see a little bit of Micheal Redd in Henry. Sweet lefty jumper...Henry is way more athletic and also alot bigger then Redd is though.

    Paul George- Trevor Ariza...Im going to be as realistic as i can here. Best Case Scenerio could be Rudy Gay but i doubt that happens because in most cases that rarely happens. George is a solid player who is long and could have a same impact on a game that Ariza can. Play tough defense on other teams 2 Guards. Plus he is a solid shooter...i like him...but he still has work to do. Weight to gain also.

    James Anderson- Nick Anderson....He is a tough competitor that can nail 3 pointers. Kind of on the small side, so he doesnt have the potential that the others have. Id say more of a bench player in the NBA then anything else.

  • In reply to Csharp:

    csharp,

    Could be.

    What's funny is that all 3 of those guys said they pattern their games after Joe Johnson.

  • In reply to Csharp:

    TOP CONCERNS:

    - Is he more of a SF?

    - Can he get the HIGH TURNOVER issue figured out?

  • Yea, he really wants the worst guy out of the four.

    And Paul George can play the George is a shooter with extreme length, Pondexter is a 3 with no handles.

    IDK who mr Happy is wathcing but he isnt better than George at all and isnt a shooter.

  • In reply to 1096ballenf:

    I didn't say I wouldn't like to see Paul George on the Bulls, but in case you guys want to TAKE THE BLINDERS OFF, the Bulls have two SF's (deng and dickey) on their roster already.

    Furthermore, before you bash Quincy Pondexter you might to re-look at his stats. If he SUCKS like Doug and Biggestbullsfan seems to think, then why is averaging 19ppg and 7rgp in the shadow of Brandon Roy?

    Do your research!!!

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    First off, Doug said it best earlier. We have bith JJ and Deng but if George is the best player on board you dont pass on him. Not making the comparisons but if you have kobe you dont pass jordan becuase you already have a solid starter at that position. The Nets wont pass on Wall becuase they have Harris. Goerge is and should be our third option even with JJ on the team. I like JJ and think he can be good but he hasnt been consistent and if Geoge can come in and outplay him then so be it.

    And stats dont mean anything. Adam Morrison did crazy numbers in college. So did Marvin Williams who has a similar body type to George. Beasily put up numbers. That doesnt make them good NBA prospects or good fits for us. We need shooters. Like a lights out shooter. Not someone who can take the shot. Pargo CAN take the shot.

    And About his numbers, he basically carried the team. When you are the only offensive option you have to put up numbers. And they're numbers are relativly similar.

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    What the Fuck does Brandon Roys shadow have to do with anything. Last I checked Roy has been in the NBA since just about the time that we drafted Aldrich and traded him for Tyrus Thomas.

  • In reply to 1096ballenf:

    Here's my tip for Doug.

    Try WATCHING college basketball games before you assess the talent.

    Afterall, you were the one who wanted Dickey Johnson last year, while I thought DeJuan Blair, Terrence Williams or Sam Young made for the better choice.

    I think my evaluation of college and/or NBA talent is just fine.

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    Here's my tip for you:

    Give this a read
    http://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Logic-13th-Irving-Copi/dp/0136141390/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1273706981&sr=8-1

  • In reply to msalivar:

    Funny, but not really.

  • In reply to msalivar:

    Good Analysis...He looks like somebody who will do well with the Bulls. One thing we all agree is whatever the skills are, we need length. One thing which concerns me is how John Salmons fared at the SG when he was moved from SF? I still don't know why he struggled so much

  • In reply to schaumburgfan:

    Thanks man, but George is more athletic!

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    Doug,

    Are these not Tracy McGrady-type moves?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BApMJPNCfPk

    Also, who is Mike Miller? He's a bigger SG/SF that rebounds and hits 3pt shots.

    That's James Anderson on the NBA level.

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    Doug would never come out and say it, but go fuck yourself happy. You read a mock draft or two on nbadraft.com and draftexpress and you think that you have a deeper understanding of the players than someone who has forgotten more about basketball than most of us here will ever know. So if you still think that we value your opinion, let me make this utterly clear in a manner you'll understand: WE ABSOLUTELY DO NOT VALUE YOUR OPINION ON BASKETBALL OR ANYTHING.

    That is all.

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    Wow, you guys must really be bored, 73 comments on a post about a player that most people have never heard of, and no one will ever remember in about 2 years.

    I think that you guys just like banging your heads against the brick wall that is Mr. Happy.

    Bang On.

  • I didn't say they would turn into those guys. They just LOOK like them.

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    I did. George is better and a better fit. End of story.

  • Physical build and style, I would say yes.

    Henry doesn't look as athletic though.

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    Keep in mind, Henry is only a freshman.

    What did McGrady do in his 1st year in the NBA?

    Not much.

    7ppg.

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    Don't OVER-THINK IT Doug.

    I'm talking physical build and style.

    Those comparisons are pretty spot on. Feel free to offer up your own, if you don't like mine.

  • In reply to MrHappy:

    Henry isn't nearly as athletic as McGrady nor are their games very similar to each other. In fact they don't even look similar in any significant way. Can't say the other comparisons are that much better.

Leave a comment