Draft Profiles: Rodney Hood, 6’8, SF, Duke, 205 lbs., Sophomore

Draft Profiles: Rodney Hood, 6’8, SF, Duke, 205 lbs., Sophomore

Athletic Ability

Athletically, Hood's an above average athlete with sneaky athleticism.   He has good vertical, moves his feet well, has good lateral quickness and straight line speed.


At 6’8, Hood is probably slightly above average height-wise for a small forward, however, at below 210 pounds and a small wingspan, he is going to have a major adjustment to the physicality and length at the NBA level.  If defending shooting guards, he'll have a height advantage but may struggle fighting through screens.  He'll have the height at small forward, but will have a deficit in terms of strength and possibly length.   Hood also struggles finishing through contact when getting to the rack.

Basketball IQ

Basketball IQ wise, Hood is well-versed in understanding of the game.  He plays to strengths and understands his weaknesses.   He also understands spacing on the offensive side of the floor.  As a small-forward, Hood created many times and set-up teammates at a solid 2 assists a game while averaging below 2 turnovers a game.  Hood also does a solid job at backdoor cuts, knows where to be on the floor, and makes the extra pass.


Hood is one of the more skilled players offensively in this draft and as a lefty, brings a unique skill-set.  While he is not dominant at any trait, he is very good at many traits.  He's an excellent shooter as he knocked down 42% of his threes on nearly five attempts per game.  While being a very good three point shooter, he shoots from all over the court including the lost art of the mid-range jumper.

While not someone that will be a great 1-on-1 player, Hood does have very good handles for a small forward and create opportunities in moderate dosages.   Hood, unlike most left-handers, likes to create with his off hand and get to the mid range area for a pull up, fade-away, kick out, or spin move to the basket.

While Hood has some very useful skills that should translate to the next level, he also has many weaknesses that will hinder him at least initially.  He lacks the strength to finish at the rim or play through contact.

Defensively, while Hood plays hard, he's not aggressive.  At 6’8, he only averaged around four rebounds per game, less than a steal per game, and less than a half block per game even though Duke lacked size.   While he plays solid defense in terms of positioning, those numbers are concerning.  Will added strength make that much of a difference?


While Jabari Parker got most of the accolades for Duke this past season, Hood was the most consistent in my opinion.  Hood is a very good scorer, shooter, and distributor offensively.  While he is all those things, can he become more aggressive and can he make the strength increases he needs?  He's also 21 already with an October birthdate which puts his age closer to an old Junior or young Senior traditionally as he lost a year when transferring to Duke.

Hood will likely be a solid all-around player as he plays hard, is unselfish, has a good understanding of the game, is a solid athlete, and skilled.  Most likely, he'll go anywhere in this draft from late lottery to early 20’s.  I also feel he is a good system player that will fit in well with many teams that value shooting, court spacing, and team play such as the Spurs, Hawks, Bulls, etc….

How does he fit with the Bulls?

While I would rather draft Kyle Anderson or Nik Stauskas if available, Hood is one of the players that I would assume would be a Bulls-style fit.  Hood is a smart player, has the potential to do many things well, works hard, is a selfless teammate, has some skill, and most importantly, he played at Duke (seems to be a Bulls criteria – not mine).

Midway through the season, if you told me we have a chance to draft Hood, I would have thought you were crazy.  However, because of Hood’s easy going demeanor and lack of muscular build, there is a possibility he could be available at around pick 16.

I would gladly take Hood and do think he is one of those players that Coach Thibs would play pretty regularly due to his ability to not hurt you and bring some solid skills that the Bulls need in general.  While he is a shooter, his ability to create some for other players is a bonus.

It is possible he might slide to the Bulls or be just out of reach.  I would definitely take Hood over more raw products such as James Young, Zach LaVine, etc…  I think he is going to be a solid player for years to come and make key baskets at key times.   I would be intrigued to trade up slightly to get Hood if a pick is available without giving up way too much.  I think he will be a steal if drafted in late lottery or after.


Leave a comment
  • If Bulls are going to "trade up" slightly for a shooter, I'd like to see them go get Stauskas. Stauskas performed well as the alpha dog this year - many forget that Glenn Robinson III was supposed to be Michigan's alpha dog. Stauskas did the job and steps up in big moments. (See final four as a Frosh...) They guys works hard and competes.

    I would think that packaging picks 16 and 19 in order to trade up to around pick 11 or 12 or 13 would save on cap space, too. Hell, throw in Dunleavy and you probably open up another $5 mil or so... (If Bulls are hearing from Melo's camp that he'll come...)

  • In reply to Granby:

    What about McDermott instead of Stuaskis? or are we afraid of the Adam Morrison affect.

  • In reply to Granby:

    Stauskas while I really like might be a lot to move up to get. It will take more than Dunleavy!

  • I would doubt that Hood would fall to 16, but if he does the Bulls should snap him up without a second thought. I agree that Hood was often overlooked because of Parker's presence. This guy is a solid player. Reminds me somewhat of a young Tayshaun Prince with his stroke and thin build. This guy is a lock to be a starting small forward in the league. To get him at 16 would be something. Don't expect it to happen though.

  • In reply to hgarbell:

    If both Hood and Payne are there at 16, who do you grab. Hood is more of a need position, but who is the best player available.

  • In reply to BigWay:

    That's tough. Based on shooting and need offensively, I would say Hood. If we know we are trading Taj, I might be inclined to go with Payne!

  • In reply to hgarbell:

    I don't think Hood will nearly be as good defensively as Prince. I think he is just a smooth scorer (don't really have a comparison).

  • Nice review. Not much time, so let me cut to the chase. As a draft/basic stat junkie it is troubling that no wing(SG/SF) I can find who's a good player in the league has such low steals numbers(0.4, 0.7) for two seasons. Wes Matthews comes close. Nit picky I know. Also, his 3/4 court speed(which if you check hugely/often translates) at the combine was very slow(3.38). Again, I know that sounds picky/is explainable.

    That said, Rodney Hood is a very good shooter/scorer with good size for a wing, albeit short wingspan, good athleticism, and he has solid presence that bodes well for NBA success IMO. Plus his freshman rebounds at 4.8 is excellent.

    While knocked by some as rather clueless defensively, he seems like an overall bright/solid kid. If he is available at 16 I'd have to say... hell yeah! Only better would be possibly Nik Stauskas. James Young could prove to be the best player in a couple of years though. And despite physical limitations so could Jordan Adams. But I would be very amped if we got Rodney Young, weak stomach/pre-game hurls, and all. Good pick-up by a team that shows they value offensive players. And that would be... the Bulls?? Kidding.

  • In reply to RoadWarrior:

    Bulls will probably draft him cause he went to Duke. I agree with you on Stauskas, not as much on James Young. I am high on Adams later because he can be had probably later!

  • Side note: It is entirely possibly Rodney Hood is available at 16. It certainly would not be a miracle/long shot. He's been around 14ish in mocks to early 20's as he's fallen from the 10 area of the lottery he previously occupied due to concerns about: lack of free throws/unwillingness to drive, skinny/can he add weight, older for his class, overall lack of assertiveness both offensively and defensively. I'd say 60/40 gone/there at 16. He's no sure thing, but IMO definitely worth a shot if your serious about adding offense, particularly shooting.

  • Sounds like he might be the second coming of Luol Deng with a 3 point shot or better shooting in general.

    Interesting that you would take Anderson over him. After the combine I saw an in depth analysis of him quoting a bunch of NBA scouts and GM's. Basically they said that Anderson is either a point guard or power forward offensively, but cannot play either position defensively. In fact every single person quoted, said that it will take a genius of a coach to figure out how to hide him defensively, that he simply cannot guard any position on the floor. On top of that he is a passive player. Anderson sounds like a worse(even softer) version of Toni Kukoc.

    My fear is that both Hood and Payne will go in the few picks just ahead of the Bulls. Like you said he could be there at 16 but might not, why does it feel like this is turning into a 15 player draft.

  • In reply to BigWay:

    If we are returning the same roster, I feel Anderson is so skilled that he can do many things. Some of the things I would want to know about Anderson is his ability to work on his game and stay in shape. However, Hood is really good. Someone should fall to us and if we make the right choice, get a really good player!

  • I will start by saying that I didn't see a single Duke game this year, so I never say Hood play in person. What I've read of him in scouting reports and scouting videos, though, do not impress me very much. I do not doubt that he will be a good shooter, but I question if he is a passive player and how much effort he gives on defense. One of the videos said that he plays hard on defense for a while, but if he is screened or has to run out to a shooter that the effort is not there. I can't help but wonder if he is another Tony Snell. I won't be to upset if they draft him at 19, but I'm hoping for someone better at 16. I think there is a real shot for Gary Harris to be available at 16. I believe LaVine and Payne are going to rise to the Lottery and Stauskas may go as high as #5 to Utah.

  • In reply to PaBullfan:

    Yes, Hood may be too Snell-ish. I want a guy with a motor.

  • In reply to Granby:

    He didn't say that he plays in a permanent somnambulant state. But I agree, having a high motor might be the most important factor to me.

  • In reply to Granby:

    We could use a guy with a motor, but he is nowhere as hesitant to shoot a 3 ball as Snell. He is more consistent from 3 ball than Snell too.

  • In reply to PaBullfan:

    You're right, he kind of sounds like the opposite of TJ Warren. I'm starting to think that Warren and Ennis may end up being the guys that are available when the Bulls pick.

  • I doubt with Hood's production he'll be another Tony Snell. That is if you've given up hope on Snell which I for one never had any to begin with. Maybe more interesting to ponder is whether Kyle Anderson and Doug McDermott translate to the NBA despite their athletic limitations? Answer: who knows? McDermott's numbers at the combine were surprisingly good including lat quickness/defense. Anderson for a good portion of the season looked all the part of a future quality NBA starter. Then he kind of hit the skids as so many college players due even successful future NBA pros. I'd have to bet against both of them being starter types, but either or both could end up being nice rotation guys. Hmmm?(<OK that was just lame)

    As for a draft loaded at the top 15-16 that might be true in players, but some of the guys in that group will not be drafted in the first 15-16 slots that is almost guaranteed. One or two will make it at least to 16 and probably one or two even to 19. Payne I doubt rises to 16, but could get taken before 19. So do you value him highly enough to use your 16 on him? Is Mirotic coming over? Are they trying to trade for a big name as in moving Taj? Will they amnesty Boozer? I'd think they are going to take a wing at 16, and at 19 who knows maybe another euro stash if a guy they like falls to them(though I hope not).

    Me, if it's agreed the Bulls are a few years away, a big IF according to some, I know, but if so then why not take two wings in an undoubtedly loaded upper to mid first round draft? How would it feel taking Hood and Jordan Adams say? Probably people would knock that idea.. unless it happens then I bet a fair amount would be stoked. I still think Hood/Adams at 16 and Payne at 19 would look awful good to me. We'll see. C.J. Wilcox is another quality shooter on the rise/possible dark horse to keep an eye on.

  • In reply to RoadWarrior:

    Yes Wilcox has his share of flaws, but so do a lot of these other guys. His combine numbers were really very good in many ways and he's regarded as a character/quality type also. Could be the best shooter in this draft - though hard to pass Stauskas.

  • In reply to RoadWarrior:

    As I have posted previously I was totally bummed when Snell was announced as the Bulls pick. I have followed the draft closely for many years and I could never recall a college player with such mediocre production ever succeeding at the NBA level. What made the pick doubly worse is that the Bulls passed on two bigs who IMO were, at the very least, bona fide back-up 5s who could have really helped the Bulls over many years.

    In fact, I believe Plumlee will eventually start in the league. Those who saw Brooklyn's last regular season game heard Shaq state at half-time that Plumlee would be a "star" and that he reminded him of Noah. Whether that proves right or wrong about him, the point is that all the data available to the Bulls at the time of the draft would indicate that either Plumlee or Dieng would be a better pick than Snell. I know the Bulls were looking for shooting, but one rule you should never break is to draft the best available player. The Bulls had Nazr locked up at the minimum and drafted for perceived need instead. A mistake.

  • In reply to hgarbell:

    Yep, a big was the way to go, I think Dieng was the favorite among Bulls fans, but I would have been happy with Plumlee. After seeing him play some toward the end of the year, I might be inclined to agree with Shaq. The only question I still have about Dieng is size, in the Bulls last game against the Wolves, he was matched up with boozer a couple of times, and looked smaller/shorter than the Hole, who is no more than 6'8".

  • In reply to RoadWarrior:

    I'd be stoked to get Payne at 19, but I'd be more stoked(flabbergasted) to get Dario Saric at 16.

  • In reply to RoadWarrior:

    Wilcox is definitely someone to keep an eye on; especially if we traded down in the late first/early 2nd.

  • Some interesting thoughts from random internet postings on the amnestitization of the Hole.

    "Boozer And The Bulls: As mentioned above, as much as Bulls fans would like to see the team write Boozer a check and be done with him, there is a real sense that is not going to happen. It might, but the sense among teams is the Bulls would be far more willing to give up a young guy on their roster or the lesser of their two first round picks in the 2014 Draft as a sweetener to trade Boozer rather than eat his contract.
    There just does not seem to be a willingness to pay Boozer off. As much as Chicago would like to get into free agency, using the Amnesty provision on Boozer seems to be the last option and that almost everything else will be considered before paying him off.
    Boozer’s production this season plummeted, so finding a taker for his remaining $16.5 million is not going to be easy, but given how many teams project to have cap space the question becomes would someone like Philadelphia or even Orlando trade a roster player for Boozer and the 19th pick?
    The 76ers may likely find themselves stuck with Jason Richardson’s $6.6 million player option this summer; would swapping him for Boozer work for Chicago?
    The Orlando Magic have the partially guaranteed $8 million contract of Jameer Nelson and shooting guard Arron Afflalo, who would be a perfect addition for the Bulls. It’s doubtful the Magic trade Afflalo for so little in return, but the Magic do have the means to be a player in this department if the return is right.
    Unlike some of the bad contracts that get moved, Boozer is in the final year of his deal, so it may not be nearly as hard to find a trade partner as some of the other Amnestied contracts and with the Bulls seemingly adverse to a buyout, it’s more likely the Bulls make a trade than write a check unless there is simply no other recourse, even then it seems 50/50 at best."

    Read more at http://www.basketballinsiders.com/nba-am-whats-real-with-kyrie-boozer-and-melo/#01AweSEpQVzakK0H.99

    So it sounds like we are looking at a Kirk Hinrich 2010 situation, with the Bulls giving up assets(#1 pick or players) to get rid of boozers salary. Although, I'd take Aflallo and Nelson off of Orlando's hands if all that it cost us was the 19th pick or Snell. It would probably cost both picks to get them to take peiceofshitzer.

  • In reply to BigWay:

    Also in that same article, Houston is supposedly willing to trade anything(besides Howard and Hardin) to get rid of Asik and Lin so that they can offer the max to Melo. If the Bulls can't get Melo themselves maybe they should take Lin and Asik from Houston and see what else that they can get, like say Chandler Parsons and their #1 pick. We would have to amnesty the Hole and include all those unguaranteed contracts to make the cap math work.

  • In reply to BigWay:

    That could be interesting, but does that help get Kevin Love? Because that's what the Bulls need to do if they can't get Melo. All the proposed trade with Houston really does for the Bulls is create Bench Mob 2.0 plus a draft pick, who would have to be a really good player, or could be packaged for a really good player. I think this Bulls team plus those three guys from Houston on the bench, AND Kevin Love would be a good team.

  • In reply to BigWay:

    I just can't see any team paying that much for Boozer even if it is for one year. If he is amnestied, I could see teams trying to get him but at a much lower price. Maybe if a bad team is waiting for a PF to come from overseas or a very young, developing player needs to watch a veteran for a year. 16 million is a lot of money for a guy who can't play defense, can play in an up-tempo offense, and only plays on the perimeter. It would be great for the Bulls if they could trade him, but I can't imagine anyone would give up more than a second round pick for him. Maybe Memphis would be interested in Boozer for a future first (I don't think they would give it up this year) and Tayshaun Prince? They play a slow paced offense and may be in danger of loosing Randolph.

Leave a comment