Small Forwards - 1997 Usenet Draft

                  G  MIN  FG  FGA  3P 3PA  FT FTA  REB  PF AST  TO BLK STL  PTS
95-96 Kentucky   36  675 107  234  23  68  51  65  104  51  50  36   8  34  288
96-97 Kentucky   40 1299 297  603  49 141  82 105  210  95  97  68  10  66  725
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS           76 1974 404  837  72 209 133 170  314 146 147 104  18 100 1013
 

                  MIN   FG%   3P%   FT%  RPG  APG  TPG  BPG  SPG   PPG
95-96 Kentucky   18.8  45.7  33.8  78.5  2.9  1.4  1.0  0.2  0.9   8.0
96-97 Kentucky   32.5  49.3  34.8  78.1  5.3  2.4  1.7  0.3  1.7  18.1
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS           26.0  48.3  34.4  78.2  4.1  1.9  1.4  0.2  1.3  13.3

Mercer is the best non-big man available in the draft.

Mercer has several characteristics that make him attractive to NBA 
teams.  First, he has the ability to create his own shot.  He uses 
screens well and has an assortment of fakes.  Mercer can also shoot off 
the dribble.  Ron has extremely good leaping ability and body control as 
evident in his highlight film dunks.  He is one of the fastest small 
forwards with the ball I've seen.  When he decides to go coast to coast 
other players rarely catch up to him.

Mercer has a few areas of his game he must work on.  Like all draft 
picks he must improve his defense.  He will notice guarding NBA players 
is much more difficult.  Mercer should also work on his passing skills. 
He makes routine passes but he must learn to be more creative.  Mercer 
is a strong mid-range shooter but he must work on his range.

Mercer will play small forward early in his career.  He may eventually 
move to shooting guard once he adjusts his game to suit the 2 guard 
position.  Mercer has Scottie Pippen potential.

Mercer will be a top 5 pick, and may go as high as number 2.

Ron Mercer  (SF, Kentucky)
     Ron Mercer has a wealth of potential that has yet to be seen, due
largely to the fact that in his two seasons at Kentucky, he only
recevied significant playing time during his second season, as he
deferred to his elders during his freshman season on a team with
tremendous depth, though he gaev a picture of things to come in last
season's national championship win over Syracuse, in which he scored 20
points.  Mercer went from being "one of several contributors" to being
the main man, especially after Derek Anderson went down for the season
with an injury in January.
     Mercer is an excellent athlete, and is fundamentally sound.  He
runs the floor very well and is a great leaper, and he has learned quite
well how to come off of picks and shoot.  He rebounds well for his size,
and has improved defensively over his time at Kentucky.  He is
comfortable shooting it from the outside or driving to the basket,
though he would be almost unstoppable if his outside shot becomes a
little more consistent.  If he can make his outside shot more
consistent, he may also play some shooting guard in the NBA.  Even if he
cannot do that, he will be a star at small forward.
     Ron Mercer should be one of the top three picks in this NBA Draft;
any lower, and the team that drafts him will have a steal.  He has a
good career ahead of himself.

                  G  MIN  FG  FGA  3P 3PA  FT FTA  REB  PF AST  TO BLK STL  PTS
93-94 Utah       25  741 161  312  35  79 100 129  208  60  21  54  41  19  457
94-95 Utah       33  994 246  451  59 153 143 167  280  69  45  77  25  25  694
95-96 Utah       32  990 236  439  54 132 160 188  283  63  31  72  23  21  686
96-97 Utah       32 1008 248  504  58 150 151 167  303  61  45  79  37  22  705
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS          122 3733 891 1706 206 514 554 651 1074 253 142 282 126  87 2542

                  MIN   FG%   3P%   FT%  RPG  APG  TPG  BPG  SPG   PPG
93-94 Utah       29.6  51.6  44.3  77.5  8.3  0.8  2.2  1.6  0.8  18.3
94-95 Utah       30.1  54.5  38.6  85.6  8.5  1.4  2.3  0.8  0.8  21.0
95-96 Utah       30.9  53.8  40.9  85.1  8.8  1.0  2.3  0.7  0.7  21.4
96-97 Utah       31.5  49.2  38.7  90.4  9.5  1.4  2.5  1.2  0.7  22.0
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS           30.6  52.2  40.1  85.1  8.8  1.2  2.3  1.0  0.7  20.8

Keith Van Horn has great size to be an NBA small forward (6'9", 230 lbs.)
 and the rebounding and shot blocking skills to give some time at the 4 spot.
 Many have drawn comparisons to Larry Bird.  I don't feel he's as talented as
Bird was but he definitely has the potential.  His all around game would be a
valuable asset to any team.  He has proven in his four years at Utahthat he
is a great leader by taking them to the NCAA' tounament four times.  I feel
that if Tim Duncan were not in this draft that he would be the first one
selected and even though Duncan is don't look for him to go any lower than 2
or 3.

                  G  MIN  FG  FGA  3P 3PA  FT FTA  REB  PF AST  TO BLK STL  PTS
93-94 Tulane     27  836 153  378  35 123  82 120  180  71  51  91  31  48  423
94-95 Tulane     33 1161 204  457  43 138 120 182  246  76 112 129  36  54  571
95-96 Tulane     32 1099 214  532  45 154 103 161  229  72 120 118  46  55  576
96-97 Tulane     31 1002 212  491  68 204 126 178  201  80 131 137  49  75  618
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS          123 4098 783 1858 191 619 431 641  856 299 414 475 162 232 2188
 

                  MIN   FG%   3P%   FT%  RPG  APG  TPG  BPG  SPG   PPG
93-94 Tulane     31.0  40.5  28.5  68.3  6.7  1.9  3.4  1.1  1.8  15.7
94-95 Tulane     35.2  44.6  31.2  65.9  7.5  3.4  3.9  1.1  1.6  17.3
95-96 Tulane     34.3  40.2  29.2  64.0  7.2  3.8  3.7  1.4  1.7  18.0
96-97 Tulane     32.3  43.2  33.3  70.8  6.5  4.2  4.4  1.6  2.4  19.9
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS           33.3  42.1  30.9  67.2  7.0  3.4  3.9  1.3  1.9  17.8

Honeycutt is one of the most versatile players
available in this year's draft. He's capable of averaging
20 ppg, 10 rpg, and 5 apg. However, Jerald tends to be
perimeter- oriented, and he commits a lot of turnovers.
He reminds me of Glen Robinson.

     Jerald Honeycutt is the antithesis of Tim Duncan in a sense.  He
might be the most talented player available in this draft.  However, he
will not be the number one pick, and no one is sure how good an NBA
career he will have, due to his style of play.  In some sense, he was
the epitomy of his Tulane team over his last three seasons: plenty of
talent, but not nearly enough consistency, and as a result,
underachievement.
     Honeycutt can play either forward spot, but is probably better off
at small forward, where all of his talents can be better utilized.  He
can do a little bit of everything offensively.  He can score from inside
or outside.  He can handle the ball very well, and is a good passer.  He
rebounds and runs the floor well, and can steal the ball.
     The problem with Honeycutt is getting him to play with desire. 
When he played with desire during his college years, he was almost
unstoppable, and could carry his team.  He can take over a game
offensively, making spectacular plays, and while not a great defender,
he will make plays as well.  However, he too often plays without heart,
and gets careless with the ball, takes bad shots, and/or is a defensive
liability.  He has a tendency to have high turnover games, as he also
has a tendency to try too much to make the highlight reels instead of
winning a basketball game.
     In short, Honeycutt is a flash in the pan.  If he can play hard on
a full-time basis, and be more consistent, he could be a big star in the
NBA, as he certainly has the talent to do just that.
     Jerald Honeycutt is a late lottery pick at best.  I see him going
in the bottom third of the first round.  What kind of NBA career he has
is entirely up to him.

Honeycutt is certainly one of the most talented players in the draft.
That having been said I have doubts as to how effective he will be in
the NBA.  He can shoot, pass, and rebound.  Unfortunately he also misses
a lot of shots (42.1% field goal, 67.2% free throw), turns the ball over
(3.9 per game), and plays lazy defense much of the time.  He also hasn't
shown any real improvement since his sophmore year.  To me he is a
heavier, slower Cliff Robinson.

                  G  MIN  FG  FGA  3P 3PA  FT FTA  REB  PF AST  TO BLK STL  PTS
93-94 Providence 25  233  38   95  10  31  29  40   55  26   3  21   8   5  115
94-95 Providence 30  570 106  231  29  85  66  85  147  50  33  50  16  17  307
95-96 Providence 30  863 151  359  47 141 109 128  173  79  33  64  27  44  458
96-97 Providence 36 1192 200  440  61 175 182 205  270  92  54  95  25  38  643
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS          121 2858 495 1125 147 432 386 458  645 247 123 230  76 104 1523
 

                  MIN   FG%   3P%   FT%  RPG  APG  TPG  BPG  SPG   PPG
93-94 Providence  9.3  40.0  32.3  72.5  2.2  0.1  0.8  0.3  0.2   4.6
94-95 Providence 19.0  45.9  34.1  77.6  4.9  1.1  1.7  0.5  0.6  10.2
95-96 Providence 28.8  42.1  33.3  85.2  5.8  1.1  2.1  0.9  1.5  15.3
96-97 Providence 33.1  45.5  34.9  88.8  7.5  1.5  2.6  0.7  1.1  17.9
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS           23.6  44.0  34.0  84.3  5.3  1.0  1.9  0.6  0.9  12.6

I was lucky enough to witness Croshere's 39 point game against 
Marquette and his 20 point output against Duke in the 1997 NCAA
tournament.  I must say that I was impressed.  Croshere has a very
quick release for his jump shot.  Many time I thought he was well
covered and he still got off a good shot.  He can even hit the
long lost 15 footer.  He is a decent rebounder (although and can
be better) and a decent defender.  He is also a very smart player
(playing a large part of the Duke game with 4 fouls).  He is not
very quick and will have problems playing against the quick SF's
in the NBA.  He also needs to get stronger to handle the PF's.
Still he has a good work ethic and should get better throughout
the years.  

Croshere is a mid-late first round pick.

                  G  MIN  FG  FGA  3P 3PA  FT FTA  REB  PF AST  TO BLK STL  PTS
                 22  681  90  172  19  60  70 101  117  58 26   46 ?   45   307 
 

                MIN   FG%   3P%   FT%  RPG  APG  TPG  BPG  SPG   PPG
                30.9  52.3  31.7  69.3 5.3  1.2  2.1  ?    2.0   14.0

Probably the most explosive player in Europe ever, he is best known for his
high flying dunks (including one over Honda convertible at an all-star game
at the tender age of 17 and a broken backboard glass at this years  European
final four). His outside shooting isn't nearly as good. He's a very good
defender (for European standards), but he tends to play a bit wildly on
offense, so he comitts a lot of turnovers.
I think he has something like two years left on his contract to Olimpija
Ljubljana, but may have a clause about going to the NBA early.

IMHO, Milic could be a late first round draft pick this year. However, I
think it would be better for him if he waits for a year and maybe get among
the lottery picks.

Milic is a 19 year-old from Slovenia, who's an emerging star
in Europe. He demonstrated his athletic ability when he leaped
over an automobile to dunk a basketball at the European Cup
All-star game. 

Marko Milic is not NBA type of basketball player. At least for now. 
Despite of his strenght and explosivity, he can't penetrate against
middle class european defensive player. His style of shoting doesn't
promise any improvement in his long-distance shooting percentage, which
is needed to even think about playing shooting guard in NBA. And worst
of all is his ball handling and thinking during the game. For example in
game against Sevilla coach put him on a playmaker position and he
comited 3 consecutive turnovers before he got to the mid-court line. The
team who will draft him will have to put a lot of work in him because he
lacks in fundamental basketbal skils. Besides his extraordinary phisical
abilities I could even say that he is at the moment only average player
if I compare him with other Slovenian players.
Regards          

                  G  MIN  FG  FGA  3P 3PA  FT FTA  REB  PF AST  TO BLK STL  PTS
93-94 UCLA       28  797 132  257  18  47  44  68  189  84  46  65  38  31  326
94-95 UCLA       33 1002 179  323   6  29  85 115  201  73 110  51  38  41  449
95-96 UCLA       31  976 166  315  23  62  89 116  186  72  80  95  19  34  444
96-97 UCLA       32 1128 207  376  26  75 125 158  221  71  77  74  23  36  565
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS          124 3903 684 1271  73 213 343 457  797 300 313 285 118 142 1784
 

                  MIN   FG%   3P%   FT%  RPG  APG  TPG  BPG  SPG   PPG
93-94 UCLA       28.5  51.4  38.3  64.7  6.8  1.6  2.3  1.4  1.1  11.6
94-95 UCLA       30.4  55.4  20.7  73.9  6.1  3.3  1.5  1.2  1.2  13.6
95-96 UCLA       31.5  52.7  37.1  76.7  6.0  2.6  3.1  0.6  1.1  14.3
96-97 UCLA       35.3  55.1  34.7  79.1  6.9  2.4  2.3  0.7  1.1  17.7
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS           31.5  53.8  34.3  75.1  6.4  2.5  2.3  1.0  1.1  14.4

With older brother Ed having two disappointing
seasons in the N.B.A., Charles' stock seams to have
slipped. However, he had a solid, fairly consistent
senior season, and followed that up with a good showing
at the Nike Desert Classic. He's a very good athlete,
with good all-around skills. I think he'll be a first
round draft pick.

Charles is a potential NBA starter who gets by mostly on athletic
ability.  He has improved his jump shot considerably over the past two
years, and is deadly within 15 feet of the basket with an array of
shots.  He is an average rebounder, relying upon jumping ability at his
height.  Charles is a consummate team player, having good fundamental
passing skills, and is an above average defender (his long arms
certainly help).  The major negative on Charles is his inability to
dribble, especially with his off hand.  His scoring came mainly from
short range jumpers and, of course, the dunks that the UCLA offense
generated. Charles has trouble beating defenders off the dribble, who
have learned in the past several years to cheat greatly to his left hand
side.  
The upside on Charles is nice however, more so than his acclaimed
brother.  If Charles can receive some good coaching, especially with his
dribbling, he can develop to be a good starter or sixth man at the off
guard position.

                  G  MIN  FG  FGA  3P 3PA  FT FTA  REB  PF AST  TO BLK STL  PTS
93-94 Knoxville  26  ... ...  ... ... ... ... ...  182 ... ... ... ... ...  260
94-95 IndHillsCC 19  ... 139  211   8  23  60  84  154  54  32  41 ...  17  346
95-96 UTC        27  799 181  355  39 102  90 123  192  84  49  78  19  21  491
96-97 UTC        35 1070 214  440  28  97 123 185  255 102  74  72  29  43  579
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Div I TOTALS     62 1869 395  795  67 199 213 308  447 186 123 150  48  64 1070
 

                  MIN   FG%   3P%   FT%  RPG  APG  TPG  BPG  SPG   PPG
93-94 Knoxville   ...   ...   ...   ...  7.0  ...  ...  ...  ...  10.0
94-95 IndHillsCC  ...  65.9  34.8  71.4  8.1  1.7  2.2  ...  0.9  18.2
95-96 UTC        29.6  51.0  38.2  73.2  7.1  1.8  2.9  0.7  0.8  18.2
96-97 UTC        30.6  48.6  28.9  66.5  7.3  2.1  2.1  0.8  1.2  16.5
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Div I TOTALS     30.1  49.7  33.7  69.2  7.2  2.0  2.4  0.8  1.0  17.3

Tennessee-Chattanooga had one of it's best seasons ever due in large part to
Johnny Taylor.  This 6-8 athletic small forward took them to the sweet
sixteen where they were beaten by Providence.  Taylor was the conference's
player of the year after averaging 16.5 ppg and 7.3 rpg.  He has a lot of
potential, but it is necessary that he develop an outside shot, most of his
scoring came within 10 feet of the basket, and improve his foul shooting, he
went 5 for 14 against Providence in the NCAA's.  Taylor would be a good
pickup for any team in the second round, but don't look for him to be an NBA
all star.

                  G  MIN  FG  FGA  3P 3PA  FT FTA  REB  PF AST  TO BLK STL  PTS
94-95 Washington 26  711 155  362  24  99  44  73  216  92  27  68  18  26  378
95-96 Washington 28  809 179  389  32 102  73 112  171  84  31  84  22  39  463
96-97 Washington 28  927 185  382  24  72  83 119  225  71  61  77  26  30  477
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS           82 2447 519 1133  80 273 200 304  612 247 119 229  66  95 1318
 

                  MIN   FG%   3P%   FT%  RPG  APG  TPG  BPG  SPG   PPG
94-95 Washington 27.3  42.8  24.2  60.3  8.3  1.0  2.6  0.7  1.0  14.5
95-96 Washington 28.9  46.0  31.4  65.2  6.1  1.1  3.0  0.8  1.4  16.5
96-97 Washington 33.1  48.4  33.3  69.7  8.0  2.2  2.8  0.9  1.1  17.0
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS           29.8  45.8  29.3  65.8  7.5  1.5  2.8  0.8  1.2  16.1

Mark Sanford was one of the most spectacular players in the Pac-10 last
season, a high-flyer who ran the court exceptionally well.  On the other
hand, there was obvious room for development.  In particular, he lacked a
consistent shooting form and upper-body strength. Once these weaknesses
are eliminated, he could become quite a good player, but who is prepared 
to wait until then?

                  G  MIN  FG  FGA  3P 3PA  FT FTA  REB  PF AST  TO BLK STL  PTS
93-94 Boston U   27  881 199  358   6  16 107 163  283  63  40  85  86  38  511
94-95 Boston U   31 1083 230  460   2   9 153 224  365  60  43  75  88  39  615
95-96 Boston U   29 1019 253  435   3  23 149 211  314  72  49  64  58  54  658
96-97 Boston U   27  940 189  376   5  18 142 188  275  50  47  66  71  40  525
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS          114 3923 871 1629  16  66 551 786 1237 245 179 290 303 171 2309

 

                  MIN   FG%   3P%   FT%  RPG  APG  TPG  BPG  SPG   PPG
93-94 Boston U   32.6  55.6  37.5  65.6 10.5  1.5  3.1  3.2  1.4  18.9
94-95 Boston U   34.9  50.0  22.2  68.3 11.8  1.4  2.4  2.8  1.3  19.8
95-96 Boston U   35.1  58.2  13.0  70.6 10.8  1.7  2.2  2.0  1.9  22.7
96-97 Boston U   34.8  50.3  27.8  75.5 10.2  1.7  2.4  2.6  1.5  19.4
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS           34.4  53.5  24.2  70.1 10.9  1.6  2.5  2.7  1.5  20.3

     Hidden in the shadows of the emerging AMERICA EAST Conference,
Tunji Awojobi starred for four years at Boston University.  He is
perhaps the best player that has ever played at Boston University, as a
four-time first team All-Conference, and the school's all-time leading
scorer and rebounder.
     Tunji is a tremendous athlete.  He runs the floor well, and often
beats opposing big men down floor for fast break baskets.  He can sky
off the ground, and he is also quick to get off the ground, which made
him a good shot-blocker.
     Tunji also knows how to use his athleticism, as he used that as
well as his strength to be the nation's fourth-best rebounder two
seasons ago despite standing just 6'5" (he is now listed at 6'7").  In
his junior season, he became a big gun at the offensive end for the
Terriers, and continued it into his senior season.
     Offensively, Tunji is at home on the low post.  He is quick, and
his great leaping ability allows him to shoot over many defenders. 
However, he seemed to take a step backward in developing a more diverse
offensive game this past season.  By the end of his junior season, he
had developed a good game facing the basket from the elbows of the foul
line, either driving to the basket, or shooting it.  He looked like he
had a decent jump shot.  However, this season, he stayed home on the low
post, as the Terriers had other players do the damage from the outside. 
It is not known if he lost some of what he gained, or if he still has
the elements he developed before this season- in that sense, he is a
sort of wild card.
     The diversity of his offensive repertoire is crucial because he is
a tweener.  He is listed in most places as 6'7", 235, which is smaller
than most NBA power forwards in both areas, and he would need a game
beyond the low post in order to play small forward in the NBA.
     Defensively, Tunji was a terror this past season, as an excellent
rebounder, and a great shot-blocker.  There are fewer questions about
his defense than his offense.
     Tunji stepped up and played like a star during some of BU's big
games this past season, but some still wonder what kind of a clutch
player he is- whether or nor he is the type who will want the ball when
the game is on the line.  He is not very vocal or emotional on the
court.
     Tunji is at best an early second-round pick, but that is not very
likely, unless he impresses in post season workouts.  He will probably
go no higher than the middle of the second round.

                  G  MIN  FG  FGA  3P 3PA  FT FTA  REB  PF AST  TO BLK STL  PTS
93-94 Maryland   30  867 113  249  11  27  87 149  183 108  65 108  18  45  324
94-95 Maryland   34  950 126  277   8  22 114 164  247 106  76 102  13  43  374
95-96 Maryland   30  955 145  328   7  34 162 214  233 100  73  92  23  41  459
96-97 Maryland   32 1100 205  437   1  21 213 297  253  93  82 101  19  64  624
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS          126 3872 589 1291  27 104 576 824  916 407 296 403  73 193 1781
 

                  MIN   FG%   3P%   FT%  RPG  APG  TPG  BPG  SPG   PPG
93-94 Maryland   28.9  45.4  40.7  58.4  6.1  2.2  3.6  0.6  1.5  10.8
94-95 Maryland   27.9  45.5  36.4  69.5  7.3  2.2  3.0  0.4  1.3  11.0
95-96 Maryland   31.8  44.2  20.6  75.7  7.8  2.4  3.1  0.8  1.4  15.3
96-97 Maryland   34.4  46.9   4.8  71.7  7.9  2.6  3.2  0.6  2.0  19.5
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS           30.7  45.6  26.0  69.9  7.3  2.3  3.2  0.6  1.5  14.1

Background: Keith Booth comes out of his senior season with 3rd team
AP All-American and 1st team All-ACC honors.  After playing
in Joe Smith's shadow for his 1st two seasons Keith had
become the unquestionable main man for the Terps this year.

Strengths:  Keith has good athleticism, which has enabled
him to play as an undersized power forward for most of his
college career.  His inside moves coupled with quick leaping
ability and good verticality and body control have enabled him 
to put up 19 ppg this season.  His quickness has enabled him to do
a decent job defensively against bigger guys.  He is a pretty good
rebounder and ball-handler for his size; he can put it on the floor,
take it to the hoop and finish, and he's good on the break. He has good
strength for his height, which is probably 6-5. The intangibles are
nice: toughness, desire to help the team win, unselfishness.  Keith will
create a shot for others as well as himself if necessary.

Weaknesses:  Extremely poor outside shooter with little range.
His college 3 pt. shooting has regressed each season, ending
with a pathetic 1-for-21 performance this season.  Anything more
than an open 15 footer seems to be a challenge for Keith.
Does not appear to be good at making outside shots off-the-dribble or 
with a hand in his face.  Also lacks experience defending
quick perimeter players, although probably has the tools
to do it.

Projection:  Too small to play the kind of game he did in college.
Size would indicate a move to SG, which would require a radical
improvement in his outside shooting.  Might be on the short side
or borderline for significant minutes at SF.  Even being a slasher
in the NBA requires some kind of outside threat; defenders will
simply play off him.  There is some value here due to athleticism,
reasonable ball-handling, passing and rebounding skills for his size
as well as intangibles, so a roster spot is not totally out of the
question, after all, guys like Darrin Hancock have gotten them; however,
will have to improve shooting to get anything beyond garbage minutes.
Probably a mid-to-late 2nd round pick at best.  May be better off
in Europe where he can get PT while practicing his shot for a few years.

Keith Booth--  Wonderful attitude, wonderful hustle.  Not big enough to
play inside and not skilled enough to play the perimeter.  Shot range is
15-17 feet, and not a terrific ball-handler.  A leader among men, for
what it's worth.

	I suppose someone could like his attitude and pay him 247,500 to
practice hard.  But he's better off in some league in Europe where he
could play inside against some 6'11" softies.

                  G  MIN  FG  FGA  3P 3PA  FT FTA  REB  PF AST  TO BLK STL  PTS
93-94 UAB                         Did Not Play - Ineligible
94-95 UAB        14  420  93  193   5  24  45  67   98  25  18  29  13  19  236
95-96 UAB        30 1088 223  525  49 151 112 158  253  73  51  79  26  30  607
96-97 UAB        32 1142 230  564  24  81 145 218  318  75  54  92  24  40  629
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS           76 2650 546 1282  78 256 302 443  669 173 123 200  63  89 1472
 

                  MIN   FG%   3P%   FT%  RPG  APG  TPG  BPG  SPG   PPG
93-94 UAB                   Did Not Play - Ineligible
94-95 UAB        30.0  48.2  20.8  67.2  7.0  1.3  2.1  0.9  1.4  16.9
95-96 UAB        36.3  42.5  32.5  70.9  8.4  1.7  2.6  0.9  1.0  20.2
96-97 UAB        35.7  40.8  29.6  66.5  9.9  1.7  2.9  0.8  1.3  19.7
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS           34.9  42.6  30.5  68.2  8.8  1.6  2.6  0.8  1.2  19.4

Carlos Williams was a very good college player.  As a pro, though, he
will need a few years in the CBA to become an NBA player.  He is a very
creative scorer who also seems to find a way to get a shot off (left
handed) in the paint.  The downside is that he just isn't a very
consistent shooter, resulting in low field goal percentages.  As a
collegian he used his excellent quickness and tenacity to grab his share
of rebounds.  His thin frame will probably prevent him from doing the
same thing in the pros.  If he gets selected it will be late in the
second round.  A more probable result is second round in the CBA draft.

Carlos Williams put up decent scoring and rebounding numbers
for UAB this season.  This will not translate to the next level --
Williams is too small for SF, not nearly skilled enough for SG.
Although listed at 6-7, based on a naked eye comparison with
Jerald Honeycutt (who measured out at 6-6 3/4) he is no more
than 6-5 -- a skinny 6-5.  I project he's a late 2nd rounder
at best, but it is more likely that he won't be drafted at all
and go to the CBA or Europe.

                  G  MIN  FG  FGA  3P 3PA  FT FTA  REB  PF AST  TO BLK STL  PTS
93-94 Marquette  18  116   9   25   6  13   9  13   11  26   3   7   5   1   33
94-95 Marquette  33  611  72  163  17  45  43  67   89 108  16  47   6  15  204
95-96 Marquette  31  798 118  280  29  84  83 116  126  86  29  52  10  20  348
96-97 Marquette  31  961 165  352  33  86 100 130  165  89  45  69  22  33  463
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS          113 2486 364  820  85 228 235 326  391 309  93 175  43  69 1048
 

                  MIN   FG%   3P%   FT%  RPG  APG  TPG  BPG  SPG   PPG
93-94 Marquette   6.4  36.0  46.2  69.2  0.6  0.2  0.4  0.3  0.1   1.8
94-95 Marquette  18.5  44.2  37.8  64.2  2.7  0.5  1.4  0.2  0.5   6.2
95-96 Marquette  25.7  42.1  34.5  71.6  4.1  0.9  1.7  0.3  0.6  11.2
96-97 Marquette  31.0  46.9  38.4  76.9  5.3  1.5  2.2  0.7  1.1  14.9
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS           22.0  44.4  37.3  72.1  3.5  0.8  1.5  0.4  0.6   9.3

                  G  MIN  FG  FGA  3P 3PA  FT FTA  REB  PF AST  TO BLK STL  PTS
93-94 Va Tech    28  862 127  243   0   5  52  75  255  80  60  62  15  43  306
94-95 Va Tech    35 1225 215  403   5  16 119 178  369  88  88  79  23  53  554
95-96 Va Tech    29  984 155  306   6  21  74 110  275  71  70  66  30  50  390
96-97 Va Tech    31 1093 163  357  11  41 119 166  278  68  63  70  22  53  456
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS          123 4164 660 1309  22  83 364 529 1177 307 281 277  90 199 1706
 

                  MIN   FG%   3P%   FT%  RPG  APG  TPG  BPG  SPG   PPG
93-94 Va Tech    30.8  52.3   0.0  69.3  9.1  2.1  2.2  0.5  1.5  10.9
94-95 Va Tech    35.0  53.3  31.3  66.9 10.5  2.5  2.3  0.7  1.5  15.8
95-96 Va Tech    33.9  50.7  28.6  67.3  9.5  2.4  2.3  1.0  1.7  13.4
96-97 Va Tech    35.3  45.7  26.8  71.7  9.0  2.0  2.3  0.7  1.7  14.7
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS           33.9  50.4  26.5  68.8  9.6  2.3  2.3  0.7  1.6  13.9

ACE CUSTIS a high school center arrived at virgina tech with a 
determined outlook after an auto accident nearly took his life. A knee 
injury prevented him froom playing in the 1992-93 season. This is a self 
made player. Effort is one of his best strengths he has learned how to 
play facing the basket and now offers a reliable medium-range jumper. But 
 is still more confortable with his back to it. He is unstoppable on the 
offensive glass at times. Curtis isn't the kind of athlete who can create 
scoring opportunities merely by the putting the basketball on the floor. 
His perimeter is still not where it should be and small forwards on 
defense give him problems defensively with there speed. Overall it's hard 
to imagine that this guy will be drafted in the draft. Cba or oversea's 
hold the key and opportunities to be in the nba.

                  G  MIN  FG  FGA  3P 3PA  FT FTA  REB  PF AST  TO BLK STL  PTS
93-94 Memphis    28  902 160  344  18  67  45  75  142  76  52  77  29  30  383
94-95 Memphis    34 1061 174  395  23  77  67 115  172  84  48  81  37  40  438
95-96 Memphis    30  877 146  297  30  77  57  93  120  74  38  68  16  45  379
96-97 Memphis    31 1069 184  442  25  95 104 151  203  90  43 101  32  60  497
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS          123 3909 664 1478  96 316 273 434  637 324 181 327 114 175 1697
 

                  MIN   FG%   3P%   FT%  RPG  APG  TPG  BPG  SPG   PPG
93-94 Memphis    32.2  46.5  26.9  60.0  5.1  1.9  2.8  1.0  1.1  13.7
94-95 Memphis    31.2  44.1  29.9  58.3  5.1  1.4  2.4  1.1  1.2  12.9
95-96 Memphis    29.2  49.2  39.0  61.3  4.0  1.3  2.3  0.5  1.5  12.6
96-97 Memphis    34.5  41.6  26.3  68.9  6.5  1.4  3.3  1.0  1.9  16.0
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTALS           31.8  44.9  30.4  62.9  5.2  1.5  2.7  0.9  1.4  13.8

    Cedric Henderson is first and foremost an athlete.  Henderson can
run and jump with the very best and puts this tremendous athletic
ability to good use on the defensive end.  When properly focused,
Henderson is a flat-out defensive stopper with the ability to come up
with a ton of steals and blocks.  This athletic ability was on display
against Michigan in December of '96, when Henderson went up and rejected
a Maceo Baston dunk attempt.  It should be noted that Baston is an
excellent leaper with an 87 inch wingspan.

    Unfortunately, Henderson's offensive skills are not as advanced as
his defensive abilities.  Henderson is at best, an erratic shooter from
the perimeter and gets most of his points in transition and when
slashing to the hoop.  Although he did average 16.6 ppg last season,
Henderson has never become the consistent scoring machine that people
thought he would be when he was selected for the McDonald's All-America
team as a high school player.  Henderson also does not have terribly
advanced ballhandling or passing skills.

    Cedric Henderson should consider himself very fortunate if he gets
drafted at all.  Despite his NBA caliber body and athletic ability, his
inability to consistently hit perimeter jumpers make him a very iffy pro
prospect.