The Case for Jase Richardson

Michigan State's Jase Richardson will have to confront the Small Guard Stigma as the 2025 NBA Draft approaches, but the ultra-productive freshman has the goods to overcome the odds.

Last year, I wrote a piece examining the NBA’s “Small Guard Crunch.” In recent years, teams have been significantly less likely to draft guards standing 6’3” and under. On top of that, the 6’3” and under position group produced the lowest hit rate and highest whiff rate of any size grouping over the past five years. Looking around the league, this shouldn’t be a surprise. Of the 569 players who appeared in an NBA game this past season, only 31 were 6’1” or below. As a result, drafting a small guard is a dicey proposition. You’re trying to thread a narrow needle.

That brings us to Jase Richardson. The Michigan State freshman is coming off a fantastic one-and-done college season. However, at the NBA Combine, he measured in at 6’0.5” barefoot. This raises two questions. The first is simply whether or not Jase Richardson can be a part of “the 5%” in the long run—players who stand 6’1” and below. The second question is whether or not Richardson can provide value for the team drafting him as a part of the 5%. When small guards don’t hit fast, teams are ready to move on. Players like Kennedy Chandler and TyTy Washington were quickly shown the door when they didn’t provide immediate value. There are undeniably some real small guard success stories, but there is also an abundance of shorter players who are stuck in the G-League/Two-Way/10-day contract doom loop. Let’s get into Jase Richardson’s game and the specifics of his small guard case.

Elite Efficiency

A big part of what makes Jase Richardson so intriguing is his efficiency as a three-level scorer paired with his ability to draw fouls. To start with the big picture, Richardson posted a sky-high 62.4 TS% and ranked in the 96th percentile in offensive efficiency per Synergy. Simply put, he’s really good at putting the ball in the basket regardless of where he is on the floor.

Let’s start with his perimeter shooting. Richardson’s ability to relocate prior to catching and firing in a hurry is my personal favorite element of his game. He has fantastic instincts when it comes to where to be on the court. He consistently finds holes in the defense. Obviously, the on-ball element of his game as a point guard-sized player is going to be important, and we’ll get into that, too. But Richardson really knows how to play within a team concept. All the better, he actually makes his shots. Richardson nailed 45.7% of his catch-and-shoot threes for the Spartans. While his spot-up mastery is wonderful, he’s also a better movement shooter than he gets credit for. He went 8-for-18 on transition threes and 6-for-13 on threes off screens. He decelerates well from high speed and goes up with tremendous balance. His positional understanding comes into play with how he runs off screens, too. He does a great job of maximizing his openings and making defenders take arduous, winding routes in order to get a contest. This potent off-ball element to his game should scale well to the next level in a non-heliocentric role.

The next major “efficiency zone” is the rim, and Richardson managed to thrive there, too. Per Synergy, 24.8% of his halfcourt shots came at the basket, which is a solid mark for a guard. He made those attempts at an absurd clip, though, converting 63.8% of those opportunities. The biggest thing to understand here is that Richardson is always in complete control. He keeps his handle tight, he dictates the tempo well, and he has masterful touch at the rim. Even when he doesn’t get an ideal angle at the rim, Richardson’s overall coordination still gives him a chance to convert inside.

He’s best with a head of steam. Michigan State loved setting him up coming off handoffs, where he could use misdirection prior to receiving the ball to set up his advantage. When it’s Richardson with a runway and a big man has to switch onto him, his ability to shake them with his handle at high speed before getting a touch finish is top of the line. He also has an unusual pairing of slither and grit. Richardson is slippery in traffic when dicing through the defense and getting to his spots, but at the basket, he’s more than content to throw his body into a big man to draw a foul. This contributed to his .418 free throw rate, and drawing fouls at a great clip is an awesome skill when you make 83.6% of your free throws.

I do have a few more concerns about scalability on this front. To be blunt, Richardson isn’t a high-level athlete. He’s not super explosive north-south, nor is he a big-time leaper. There’s a reason that Michigan State loved to get him moving prior to giving him the ball. But at the NBA level, when he’s having to shake longer, more explosive defenders, and then shoot over bigger, more imposing big men with better timing, the margins get slimmer. Someone like Landry Shamet pressured the rim well and finished efficiently in college, but he struggled to do so in the NBA. It’s not a guarantee that rim efficiency will carry over. Additionally, Richardson needs to get more comfortable going to his right and using his right hand. He can finish with his right at times, but he’s generally looking to go left, and an added layer of unpredictability could go a long way.

Lastly, there are the “star shots,” which are a good area to look at to identify potential upside. If you look back at most lead options in the NBA, they had to be the guy who made tough, bailout shots pre-draft. Richardson thrived in that respect for Michigan State. He hit 47.5% of his pull-up twos this past season. A lot of it has to do with his dribble polish. Richardson does a great job of keeping his dribble alive, stringing together multiple counters, and still maintaining complete control over his body. His movement patterns are exceedingly difficult to anticipate. Defenders struggle to keep pace with his consistent misdirection, and that allows Richardson to carve out space for himself before his touch takes care of the rest. I’m optimistic that Richardson can expand this out beyond the arc, where he only made 29.4% of his pull-up attempts. Again, scalability concerns regarding size and athleticism could come into play here, but Richardson’s so cerebral in this respect that it’s hard to write him off. It just feels like he always finds a way to get a clean look, and when he does, it usually goes in.

Playmaking

There’s good news and bad news when it comes to Richardson’s table setting ability. Let’s get the negatives out of the way first. As it stands, his playmaking process is quite simple. He’s not going to go deep through his playmaking progression or make mesmerizing passes after finding an open teammate on an ultra-advanced read. Additionally, his lack of ambidexterity limits how and where he can create on the floor. As a result, Michigan State primarily used him as an off-ball player. Given his suboptimal size, the fact that he isn’t a dynamic creator for others as he prepares to enter the NBA in its most talented and tactically advanced era yet is definitely scary.

The good news is that Jase never seems to screw up. He’s a comically low-mistake player who registered an ultra-low 7.9 TOV% while registering a 2.38 assist-to-turnover ratio. In some respects, his off-ball comfort level will give him a leg up over ball-dominant guards as they adapt to lesser NBA roles. Richardson doesn’t stop and survey or monopolize the ball. He’s ready to make quick, sharp, .5 connective passes. His floor mapping while spotting up is great. Downhill, his simple recognition is great. He understands help principles and readily punishes defenders who have to abandon their man in order to impede his path. While Richardson’s highlights won’t generate flashbacks to Magic Johnson, his ability to make the right play and avoid frustrating errors gives him a good baseline to work with.

Defensive Projection

Let’s start purely with what we saw on the tape this year, and then we’ll dig into what challenges may arise at the next level. On the positive front, Richardson has showcased solid lateral agility. He can mirror the ball pretty well and get around screens, and he’s not afraid to get physical when it helps him to stifle a drive. While he may not be the most explosive leaper, he is quick off his feet and delivers potent contests when his man goes for a pull-up jumper. That, paired with a great motor in transition, led to him posting a 1.4 BLK%, which is a strong mark for a guard. I also love how he simply takes the ball away any time players dangle it in front of them while waiting for their teammates to run through an action. He thrives off-ball in both the gray areas and against stagnation, generating steals by telegraphing the play in transition and off inbound passes. His engagement helps him to get to loose balls and bobbled passes.

Still, there are some concerns as it pertains to scaling up. The first is that at the point of attack, he tends to play too aggressively and take negative steps, opening up a driving lane for his man. Given his size and tools, he’s going to need to shore that up to consistently stay in front at the next level. Off-ball, while attentive, he’s not much of a disruptor. He doesn’t have the burst to be a persistent threat in passing lanes. Then, there are the problems that stem from his frame. At 178.4 pounds, he’s going to be one of the lightest players in the league next year. He’s prone to getting rocked by screens, and he’ll be targeted for his size far more frequently. In the NCAA tournament, Earl Timberlake bullied him for two super-easy buckets inside. NBA teams will make him a hunting target, especially early in his career. It’s imperative that Richardson maximize his frame, athleticism, and technique to stay as close to neutral on this side of the ball as possible.

Conclusion

When evaluating prospects, I think it’s really important to look at what has worked in the past, what is working currently, and where the league is going, particularly in terms of a given prospect’s player type. Given that Richardson is undersized for the modern game, he’s going to be facing an uphill battle. It’s not easy for smaller guards, especially if they can’t make something happen right away. The fact that Richardson isn’t an exceptional playmaker or hyper-productive defender makes things all the more complicated.

Still, despite all of my own personal small guard skepticism, I can’t help but like Jase Richardson. Ultimately, he has a lot of things in common with the younger guards who stuck around in the NBA. He’s younger, ultra-productive, boasts a high block rate, and has a 6’6” wingspan. Looking at the “whiff group” guards in recent years, they’ve been older, stubbier, less comfortable operating inside the arc, and blocked fewer shots.

Richardson has excellent touch at all three levels, he competes, he always knows where to be, and he doesn’t turn the ball over. It’s hard for me to envision him reaching a super high-end outcome because of the issues we’ve touched on, but I think he’s a far better bet to make it work than most smaller guards. I don’t think he’ll achieve a Jared McCain-style impact out of the gate, as he doesn’t quite have the shooting range or bulk that McCain brought to the table. If you told me that he eventually reaches an Immanuel Quickley-level of impact, though, I could buy that. Even on a base level, I think we’re dealing with a player who’s a little too savvy, tenacious, and talented to be kept out of the league.

The question then becomes where you feel comfortable drafting this type of player. It’s going to be team-dependent. From a front office perspective, I’d feel most comfortable with Jase in an environment like Orlando’s, where he would have a good amount of defensive insulation and an offense that already runs through bigger players. That would give him an easier path to getting on an NBA floor and positively contributing earlier in his career. In this class, the latter part of the first round feels right. You’re already dealing with a higher level of risk once you get into that range, and there are multiple situations where it’s easy to envision Richardson both finding a place to contribute and having his developmental needs met.