New Raptor Patrick O’Bryant is no threat to Roko’s minutes - on the contrary, he helped - but what about our other rookie, Big Nate Jawai? Inquiring minds want to know. Again, I dare to ask the blogosphere for scouting reports:

The Basics:

• Full name: Patrick Fitzgerald O’Bryant (hey, another stereotypical Irish cop, Brendan!)
• Position: Centre
• Measurements: 7 ft, 250 lbs
• Born: June 20, 1986

(Note: Key statements below are bolded.)

Some Wikipedia notes of interest:

O’Bryant was a late bloomer who was not heavily recruited out of high school. [...] he led the Missouri Valley Conference in blocks for two straight years, and is also a solid rebounder. He has a 7′6″ wingspan. His offensive game also features a skyhook.

Says Hollinger:

2007-08 season: O’Bryant only played 104 minutes for Golden State, but unlike his rookie year he actually put up decent numbers. He shot 55.2 percent from the floor and blocked nine shots in his limited run, and his rebound rate was solid. O’Bryant also played eight D-League games and performed quite well, with his shot-blocking again being a major weapon.

Scouting report: O’Bryant was drafted as a project center but has struggled to defend the post at the NBA level due to a lack of strength. However, he’s long and has great timing on blocks, and he’s a decent athlete. Offensively, he has a jump hook move that he can use down low, though he struggles to get position. But mostly, he needs game experience to improve his court awareness.

So is it a skyhook or a jump hook? Forum Blue and Gold tells us what the difference is. DX tells us that O’Bryant uses a “Kareem-esque skyhook,” but we’ll have to see in game action one day whether it fits the criteria.

More from Hollinger:

2008-09 outlook: Boston signed O’Bryant to a two-year deal for $1.7 million after Golden State failed to pick up his option, an outstanding risk-reward play by Boston. Warriors coach Don Nelson never took a shine to O’Bryant, but he’s only 22 and showed real progress in his limited minutes last season. He doesn’t figure to get a lot of time right away in the Celtics’ deep frontcourt, but considering the potential and the price this was an underrated offseason pickup.

Details on that contract, courtesy The National Post’s Eric Koreen:

O’Bryant is in the first year of a two-year deal that will pays him just more than US$1.6-million. However, only US$500,000 of O’Bryant’s contract is guaranteed for next season.

“Outstanding risk-reward play” indeed.

Back to you, Don Nelson: Is it true you “never took a shine to O’Bryant”?

I told him if he goes down to the D-League and isn’t a dominant player, there should be red flags all over the place, and he should be the first to notice. He’s not only not dominating, he’s not playing very well. He’s a long-term project. I really liked him the first week of training camp, but I assumed there would be great progress. [...] He hasn’t gotten better one bit. I’d like to go to dinner with him, but I wouldn’t like to put him in the game I’m coaching. [courtesy of The Oakland Tribune]

Josh Frankel of the Garbage Time All-Stars is also a Golden State Warriors observer. What do you remember about O’Bryant?

The only thing I really remember about that guy is that the local announce team would mercilessly question his desire every time he appeared on camera.  He didn’t get a lot of minutes.   I do remember one game where he played about 20 minutes for some reason and he actually looked really good, went 4/5 or something, and the TV guys were getting excited but the tone was like, “Whoa, is it possible he’s finally gotten his head out of his [backside]?”

And then Golden State didn’t pick up his option, and Boston pounced on this promising, promising young prospect. What did you see, Justin Poulin (Celtics Stuff Live)?

He has no lower body strength to speak of, but I wouldn’t put too much stock in my scouting report since I seriously only saw him play like 14 minutes this season.  Despite his inability to hold position in the post on defense, his length and sense of timing would make him an excellent help defender/weakside shotblocker if his rotations were quicker.  He has obvious athletic skills, but anytime a lottery pick who is over 7 feet (despite the obvious athletic gifts) can’t manage to find a way onto the court for any substantial time you have to suspect there are concerns with work ethic and a lack of consistency.  He’s still young though.  I know that he likes Chinese food if that helps?!

Yeah, if you mean “help” as in “to kick one in the gut.”

UPDATE: There’s this little gem from our own Michael Grange (From Deep), watching the big man warm up during halftime:

He strolled out on the court early for warm-up, but did very little in the way of warming up. He kind [of] half-assed some jumpers, like you would if you were kind of tired and goofing around on your own. I thought that was odd because given all he’s got between him and some playing time is Jake Voskuhl, I’d think he’d be quick to get out there and get a light sweat on, or at least pretend he had a purpose. Not that at all. Some relaxed shooting. Then, when the layups started, some kind of goofy finger-roll. What happens next though, is the killer: he takes off for a wicked windmill; and then throws down some other pretty rare dunks.

And right away you get a sense for why he’s still trying to find his niche in the NBA: he’s obviously got some pretty significant athletic talent; and he can shoot – they may have been lazy shots, but they were going in – but he just radiates “Not only do I not work that hard, I don’t have a clue how to work that hard.” This could be an incredible opportunity for O’Bryant and to that end every minute the floor – in games or not – should be devoted to showing he’s ready to earn it.

So, to sum up…

Pros:

• good shotblocker
• solid rebounder
• decent athlete with physical tools
• has good offensive skills
• still has potential as a late bloomer (sound familiar?)
• got his own highlight package
• fun dinner date

Cons:

• lacks game experience
• can improve conditioning
• questionable work ethic

Analysis: If he ever decides to care - look out, Nate!