I don't understand how the same people who once doubted J.J. Redick are now praising Stephen Curry. I don't understand why anyone thinks Curry will be anything more than a role player in the NBA. I don't see Curry being anything more than the next Redick -- a very good scorer in college and bit player as a pro.

This isn't meant to be a personal attack on Curry, a 6-foot-3 junior guard for little Davidson College, the sweetheart of last season's NCAA Tournament. Curry seems like a nice kid, handling himself with class after Davidson's loss to St. Mary's in this year's NIT. He is the son of former NBA sharpshooter Dell Curry and led the nation in scoring with an average of 28.7 points per game.

But how Curry's game will hold up in the NBA ... well, sorry, but I'm not seeing it. He's not especially quick, he's not a great penetrator (far from it), he's a shooting guard in a point guard's body, and he sure as heck won't be able to guard Kobe Bryant or Chris Paul. And those are the types of players Curry will be asked to defend -- the game's fastest, most athletic players who tend to reside in the backcourt.

Curry also played in the Southern Conference, which includes programs such as Furman, Elon and The Citadel. Not exactly Maryland, North Carolina or Duke.

And speaking of Duke, that's where Redick played his college ball. That's where he became the ACC's all-time leading scorer. And that's where displayed an outside shooting touch that had NBA scouts drooling and comparing him to pros like Ray Allen when it came to form and range.

Today, Redick is a member of the Orlando Magic and his fans are excited every time he plays half the game and gets to take six or seven shots. Neither happens very often.

And I will say it 1,000 times over -- Redick was a better college player than Curry. Considerably better. It's not even close. But Redick played for a major college program that everyone hates. So it was OK for everyone to make him Public Enemy No. 1.

It's been the opposite for Curry, the good-looking kid from the mid-major school. For whatever reason it seems like the mass majority of basketball writers, fans and (especially) people around Curry want you to believe he's The Next Big Thing.

I don't get it.

But for the sake of argument, let's say you're of the opinion Curry is a better player than Redick was at Duke. It's laughable, but I'll concede only to make a better argument.

There's NO WAY Curry is a better college player than guards like Jordan Farmar (L.A. Lakers), Rashad McCants (Sacramento) or Raymond Felton (Charlotte). All are solid pros, nothing more. Heck, Curry isn't as good of a college player as Mateen Cleaves was back in the day at Michigan State. And Cleaves has never been able to cut it in the NBA.

Again, this isn't intended to say Curry has no shot to be a contributor in the pros. I think he does have a chance. I think he could produce in the right system, and become a Charlie Bell-type -- a guard who comes off the bench behind a star and contributes between five-to-10 points a night.

Not bad, but certainly not worthy of a top 10 pick. Yet that seems to be where all the draft gurus are saying Curry will (and should) be drafted.

But don't be fooled. Curry is merely the flavor of the month. I hope I'm wrong, because I truly have nothing against the kid. I just get a little irked that certain guys' draft stock often rises and drops based on what so-called experts WANT to happen.

But I'm basing it on what I've SEEN. And when it comes to Curry, I've seen a very good college guard -- but one who's definitely not better than Redick. So what's all the fuss about?

Sam Amico is the editor of Pro Basketball News. He can be reached at amico@probasketballnews.com.