As a freshman at LSU, Cam Thomas poured in 23.0 points per game. It was a number higher than anyone else in the SEC that season. It was a number higher than other freshman stars before him like Kyrie Irving (17.5 PPG), Derrick Rose (14.9), John Wall (16.6), Anthony Edwards (19.1), or Cade Cunningham (20.1).

Unlike the others, Thomas didn’t parlay that success into the # 1 pick. Instead, the NBA looked at him with some skepticism and allowed him to fall down to # 27. He had scoring chops, to be sure, but teams weren’t about to hand over the keys to their offense to him.

But as soon as they did and the coaches flashed the “green light,” Cam Thomas took off racing like Go Mifune. During the 2024-25 season, Thomas (then only 23 years old) averaged 27.6 points per 36 minutes, a mark that matched Allen Iverson’s career high (in points per 36). No doubt, there’s a difference between scoring in the 2000s and the 2020s, but Cam Thomas’ 57.5% true shooting percentage was also a tick higher than the league-average guard for that season.

For his troubles, Thomas struggled to get a contract extension from Brooklyn and got tossed over to Milwaukee instead. The Bucks briefly tried to turn him into a microwave scorer off the bench (which was always his most-likely destiny), and had some even-briefer flashes of success with that endeavor. In the only game that he played more than 25 minutes, he scored 34 points. However, the franchise washed their hands of Thomas and waived him before the season ended. He spent less than two months in a Bucks uniform.

Right now, Cam Thomas is 24 years old, and doesn’t have an NBA contract.

Clearly, there’s more at play with him than we know. Thomas has always gotten flak for his attitude and mentality, and that may be even worse than advertised. Teams don’t just dump young talent (one-dimensional or not) for nothing. No one wants to touch this kid with a ten-foot pole or a ten-day contract.

But while the personality may be poisonous in this case, it highlights a larger trend across NBA rosters. Old-school “iso” scorers are less in demand than ever.

Like Cam Thomas, some of these players have found this out the hard way. At one time, Jonathan Kuminga had been seen as a rising star. He also flashed some scoring ability when given the chance. In 2024-25, Kuminga averaged 22.6 points and 6.8 rebounds per 36 at the age of 22. Unlike Cam Thomas, Kuminga also had a big-bodied frame for a wing and some defensive potential. In fact, he was so high on his own potential that he turned down a reported \(90M contract offer from the Warriors. That growth potential hasn't fully blossomed or evolved yet. Kuminga's momentum has stalled to the point where he had to accept a 2 year, \)12M deal from the Timberwolves this summer.

Kuminga’s contract is a similar one to the terms agreed to by former Pacers/Clippers scorer Bennedict Mathurin (2 years, $15M). 10 or 20 years ago, it’d be a surprise that a player like Mathurin would be ignored by the marketplace. Like Kuminga, Mathurin was a recent lottery pick who has shown to be a capable scorer. And like Cam Thomas, Mathurin knows how to hammer his way to the free-throw line. In his brief stint with the Clippers last year, he averaged 9.4 FT per 36 (and hit 85.8% of them). Mathurin’s market may have been deflated some by restricted free agency, but that excuse couldn’t apply to UFA Kuminga anymore.

Unfortunately, Cam Thomas, Jonathan Kuminga, and Bennedict Mathurin all have something else in common besides their scoring ability. Their tunnel vision. Their unwillingness to share. Cam Thomas has averaged 3.4 assists per 36, which is an abysmal mark for a small guard. Kuminga and Mathurin aren’t much better, with A/TO rates that near 1:1. For their careers, Kuminga has averaged 1.8 assists and 1.5 turnovers, and Mathurin has averaged 1.9 assists and 1.9 turnovers.

When you consider the players through that lens, it makes more sense that teams have been cool on them. They’re not good passers. They’re not great spacers. They can score, but not well enough to hand your offense over to them. “Smart” and analytically-inclined teams would be in agreement on that.

What’s perhaps most interesting is that EVERY team appears to be in agreement on that. In the modern NBA, we don’t have many rogue actors who are still operating on old-school scoring stats and gut instincts. Almost every front office worships at the altar of analytics.

While our three highlighted scorers may operate at the fringes of that argument, it can perhaps even apply to a major star: Jaylen Brown. The media and fandoms were stunned that the league didn’t value Brown in the trade market as much as the stats (28.7 PPG, 6th in MVP) suggested they should. But in a way, Brown shows some of the same concerns as our other scorers do. His deep shooting is only OK (32%, 35% the last two seasons) and his court vision and passing is average for a star. He’s improved at it, but his career average sits at 2.9 assists versus 2.3 TO.

Going forward, it’ll be interesting if this culture shift impacts younger players coming up through the ranks. A decade or so ago, prospects realized that they needed to develop a 3-point shot to survive and thrive in the NBA. Perhaps now, A/TO ratio will take more precedence and be more of a point of emphasis.