Previously: Oden v. Durant, First-Round Point Guards, Second-Round Point Guards, First-Round Shooting Guards, Lottery Small Forwards, Second Tier Small Forwards, Wilson Chandler, Lottery Post Players, Second Tier Post Players, Hollinger's Collegiate Evaluation
Just like the last two years, I break the (non-International) players down into the following categories:
Best players (I've seen) in the draft
1. Greg Oden
2. Kevin Durant
3. Al Horford
4. Joakim Noah
5. Corey Brewer
6. Mike Conley, Jr.
7. Jeff Green
8. Julian Wright
Safe, useful picks to fill needs (some even with upside)
1. Al Thornton
2. Acie Law IV
3. Reyshawn Terry
4. Aaron Gray
5. Zabian Dowdell
6. Arron Afflalo
7. Glen Davis
Worth a flyer if you can afford it (good role players and/or high-risk talents)
1. Brandan Wright
2. Daequan Cook
3. Nick Young
4. Javaris Crittenton
5. Thaddeus Young
6. Jason Smith
7. Morris Almond
8. Rodney Stuckey
9. Derrick Byars
10. Jared Dudley
11. Nick Fazekas
12. Gabe Pruitt
13. Marcus Williams
Hoping your team doesn't waste a valuable pick on a bust
1. Sean Williams
2. Spencer Hawes
3. Wilson Chandler
4. Josh McRoberts
5. Taurean Green
6. Alando Tucker
Tuesday, June 26, 2007
Hollinger's Collegiate Evaluation
Previously: Oden v. Durant, First-Round Point Guards, Second-Round Point Guards, First-Round Shooting Guards, Lottery Small Forwards, Second Tier Small Forwards, Wilson Chandler, Lottery Post Players, Second Tier Post Players
Hollinger went and took some of the wind out of my sails this afternoon. It's impressive and interesting work which appears (the formula he uses isn't published with the article) to have all the benefits and drawbacks of one, true number formulas.
To take one example, I have a hard time seeing how Wilson Chandler's statistical profile scores slightly better than Julian Wright's.
Their 06-07 seasons:
And their freshman seasons:
Going down Hollinger's six factors indicative of pro success
1. Age: Wright is 12 days younge than Chandler. I'd guess that makes them even.
2. Steals: Wright averaged 3 steals/100 possessions as a sophomore and 2.9 S/100 as a freshman. Chandler averaged 1.3 S/100 as a sophomore down from 1.7 S/100 as a freshman. That's a significant, consistent advantage to Wright.
3. Blocks: Wright averaged 2.7 blocks/100 possessions as a sophomore and 3.4 BS/100 as a freshman. Chandler averaged 2.7 BS/100 as a sophomore and 3.3 BS/100 as a freshman. I would assume this one is even also.
4. Rebounds: Quoting Hollinger, "Boards, especially offensive boards, are a good indicator of future pro success as well." Wright got 159% as many offensive boards per opportunity as did Chandler last year and 115% as many offensive boards per opportunity as did Chandler in their freshman seasons. Chandler did have significant defensive rebounding edge in their freshman seasons (144%) but Wright was the better defensive rebounder last year (109%). Wright is a significantly better offensive rebounder. That the formula likely doesn't take into account Wright's improvement as a rebounder between his freshman and sophomore seasons is a limitation.
5. 3-Pointers: The formula would be really helpful here as this could be where Chandler must make up a lot of ground on Wright. Chandler has made 41 more three-pointers than Julian Wright in their college careers. Of course, Chandler needed 137 attempts to make 41 threes. Julian Wright can't make three-pointers. This is a fact. At least he has the good sense not to attempt them.
6. Pure Point Ratio: Whatever ground Chandler doesn't make up with his three-point shooting is made up here. Pure point ratio = (((A*2/3)-TO)*100)/Min. Wright and Chandler both played 1048 minutes last year. Chandler had 48 assists and 54 turnovers. Wright had 82 assists and 91 turnovers. Chandler's PPR is -2.1. Wright's is -3.5.
I would have guessed that Wright's extra assists and slightly better A:TO would be an advantage. I do not, however, write basketball analysis for a living. This is something I obviously need to study.
That I find it difficult to imagine a world where Wilson Chandler has roughly equal potential to Julian Wright as basketball players doesn't diminish the usefulness of Hollinger's formula. (Again, I'd like to know what the formula is but I understand why might not want to publish it.)
I don't think that Thaddeus Young, Nick Fazekas, Josh McRoberts, and Jared Dudley have more potential than Joakim Noah (Noah, Julian Wright, and Brewer really look bad in this formula. They are also three of the best defensive players in the draft in that they were good defensive players in college and they figure to be physically able to guard at least one position well in the NBA.) but I'm also the guy who thought that PJ Tucker deserved to be taken in the lottery last year. I'm used to being wrong some of the time and I like learning new things.
Here's hoping Hollinger continues to discuss the particulars of his formula and that he's wrong and I'm right about some of these players.
Hollinger went and took some of the wind out of my sails this afternoon. It's impressive and interesting work which appears (the formula he uses isn't published with the article) to have all the benefits and drawbacks of one, true number formulas.
To take one example, I have a hard time seeing how Wilson Chandler's statistical profile scores slightly better than Julian Wright's.
Their 06-07 seasons:
| Year | %Min | eFG% | FT% | PPWS | Pts | A | TO | BS | S | OR% | DR% |
| Chandler | 79.1 | 48.8 | 65.1 | 1.03 | 28.8 | 2.9 | 3.3 | 2.7 | 1.3 | 6.9 | 18.3 |
| J Wright | 68.3 | 55.3 | 61.3 | 1.14 | 25.2 | 4.5 | 5.0 | 2.7 | 3.0 | 11.0 | 20.0 |
And their freshman seasons:
| Year | %Min | eFG% | FT% | PPWS | Pts | A | TO | BS | S | OR% | DR% |
| Chandler | 70.0 | 45.7 | 66.2 | 0.98 | 23.6 | 2.0 | 4.0 | 3.3 | 1.7 | 8.0 | 20.4 |
| J Wright | 50.3 | 57.8 | 55.7 | 1.17 | 24.3 | 5.1 | 5.7 | 3.4 | 2.9 | 9.2 | 14.2 |
Going down Hollinger's six factors indicative of pro success
1. Age: Wright is 12 days younge than Chandler. I'd guess that makes them even.
2. Steals: Wright averaged 3 steals/100 possessions as a sophomore and 2.9 S/100 as a freshman. Chandler averaged 1.3 S/100 as a sophomore down from 1.7 S/100 as a freshman. That's a significant, consistent advantage to Wright.
3. Blocks: Wright averaged 2.7 blocks/100 possessions as a sophomore and 3.4 BS/100 as a freshman. Chandler averaged 2.7 BS/100 as a sophomore and 3.3 BS/100 as a freshman. I would assume this one is even also.
4. Rebounds: Quoting Hollinger, "Boards, especially offensive boards, are a good indicator of future pro success as well." Wright got 159% as many offensive boards per opportunity as did Chandler last year and 115% as many offensive boards per opportunity as did Chandler in their freshman seasons. Chandler did have significant defensive rebounding edge in their freshman seasons (144%) but Wright was the better defensive rebounder last year (109%). Wright is a significantly better offensive rebounder. That the formula likely doesn't take into account Wright's improvement as a rebounder between his freshman and sophomore seasons is a limitation.
5. 3-Pointers: The formula would be really helpful here as this could be where Chandler must make up a lot of ground on Wright. Chandler has made 41 more three-pointers than Julian Wright in their college careers. Of course, Chandler needed 137 attempts to make 41 threes. Julian Wright can't make three-pointers. This is a fact. At least he has the good sense not to attempt them.
6. Pure Point Ratio: Whatever ground Chandler doesn't make up with his three-point shooting is made up here. Pure point ratio = (((A*2/3)-TO)*100)/Min. Wright and Chandler both played 1048 minutes last year. Chandler had 48 assists and 54 turnovers. Wright had 82 assists and 91 turnovers. Chandler's PPR is -2.1. Wright's is -3.5.
I would have guessed that Wright's extra assists and slightly better A:TO would be an advantage. I do not, however, write basketball analysis for a living. This is something I obviously need to study.
That I find it difficult to imagine a world where Wilson Chandler has roughly equal potential to Julian Wright as basketball players doesn't diminish the usefulness of Hollinger's formula. (Again, I'd like to know what the formula is but I understand why might not want to publish it.)
I don't think that Thaddeus Young, Nick Fazekas, Josh McRoberts, and Jared Dudley have more potential than Joakim Noah (Noah, Julian Wright, and Brewer really look bad in this formula. They are also three of the best defensive players in the draft in that they were good defensive players in college and they figure to be physically able to guard at least one position well in the NBA.) but I'm also the guy who thought that PJ Tucker deserved to be taken in the lottery last year. I'm used to being wrong some of the time and I like learning new things.
Here's hoping Hollinger continues to discuss the particulars of his formula and that he's wrong and I'm right about some of these players.
Second Tier Post Players
Previously: Oden v. Durant, First-Round Point Guards, Second-Round Point Guards, First-Round Shooting Guards, Lottery Small Forwards, Wilson Chandler, Lottery Post Players
In alphabetical order, the 2006-07 seasons of Glen Davis, Nick Fazekas, Aaron Gray, Josh McRoberts, Jason Smith, and Sean Williams:
Points, assists, turnovers, blocks, and steals listed per 100 individual possessions
Taking these guys alphabetically...
If you take out three games Davis missed through injury, he played 86.8% of the LSU's minutes last year. If he doesn't get any bigger then conditioning will be less of a concern than his shooting percentage. To be fair to Davis he hasn't played with good guards. I would not be surprised if he could be more efficient for an NBA team as he's unlikely to carry a similar offensive load.
Fazekas illustrates my concerns about Spencer Hawes. Fazekas turned into an outstanding college player (he should have been the National Player of the Year in '05-'06) but because of his lack of athleticism he's a probable second round pick as a 22-year-old. Fazekas couldn't even get a guarantee in last year's weak first round.
Whatever happens in the NBA, Fazekas's college career was truly outstanding. (Against slightly lesser opposition) for three straight years he scored at a similar level of volume and efficiency as Durant did last year.
No matter how (relatively) up-tempo the NBA gets the ability to rebound will always have value. Aaron Gray is unlikely to ever see significant minutes but I bet he's productive in the minutes he earns.
The back surgery between his freshman and sophomore years really appeared to limit his mobility. McRoberts was an efficient scorer his freshman year but he didn't take on much of the scoring load. As a sophomore, he attempted to do so and failed, losing much of his efficiency in the process.
Right now he's a bigger Luke Walton without a jump shot or the offensive rebounds. (Shelden Williams graduated and McRoberts actually managed to grab fewer offensive rebounds per opportunity.)
He is a pretty good shot blocker from the weak side but he won't be able to keep any one in front of him if forced to guard on the perimeter.
I've never seen Jason Smith play. The numbers show offensive improvement during his time at Colorado State though he turns the ball over an awful lot especially when one considers the level of his competition. The rebounding and shot blocking is encouraging, but it's almost impossible to average less than 1 steal per 100 possessions which makes me question his overall defensive ability at this point.
Sean Williams is not a good defensive player, he's a great shot blocker. He shows little interest in anything else (At least on the court. He seems quite committed to his off-court regimen.) as his defensive rebounding numbers attest. I put the odds at 50-50 that he's still in the league by Summer 2010.
Post player rankings, in full:
1. Greg Oden
2. Al Horford
3. Joakim Noah
4. Brandan Wright
5. Spencer Hawes
6. Aaron Gray
7. Jason Smith
8. Nick Fazekas
9. Glen Davis
10. Josh McRoberts
11. Sean Williams
In alphabetical order, the 2006-07 seasons of Glen Davis, Nick Fazekas, Aaron Gray, Josh McRoberts, Jason Smith, and Sean Williams:
Points, assists, turnovers, blocks, and steals listed per 100 individual possessions
| Name | %Min | eFG% | FT% | PPWS | Pts | A | TO | BS | S | OR% | DR% |
| Davis | 78.8 | 50.7 | 71.3 | 1.13 | 31.2 | 4.0 | 5.0 | 1.7 | 2.0 | 13.4 | 20.8 |
| Fazekas | 71.0 | 59.2 | 84.1 | 1.28 | 39.5 | 3.3 | 4.0 | 3.0 | 1.5 | 12.0 | 28.4 |
| Gray | 67.7 | 56.5 | 54.8 | 1.15 | 31.3 | 3.8 | 3.4 | 3.9 | 0.9 | 14.8 | 25.4 |
| McRoberts | 87.2 | 50.9 | 66.4 | 1.10 | 22.5 | 6.0 | 4.2 | 4.3 | 2.0 | 7.6 | 19.4 |
| Smith | 74.8 | 57.9 | 77.0 | 1.29 | 32.5 | 3.8 | 6.6 | 3.0 | 1.0 | 14.3 | 26.7 |
| Williams | 36.3 | 54.8 | 70.0 | 1.21 | 23.1 | 2.3 | 4.4 | 9.5 | 2.7 | 9.6 | 15.7 |
Taking these guys alphabetically...
Glen Davis
| Name | %Min | eFG% | FT% | PPWS | Pts | A | TO | BS | S | OR% | DR% |
| FR | 71.5 | 51.9 | 69.8 | 1.16 | 27.7 | 2.1 | 3.4 | 2.8 | 2.0 | 14.4 | 21.1 |
| SO | 78.9 | 50.1 | 67.6 | 1.09 | 34.0 | 2.5 | 4.9 | 2.1 | 2.4 | 14.8 | 19.0 |
| JR | 78.8 | 50.7 | 71.3 | 1.13 | 31.2 | 4.0 | 5.0 | 1.7 | 2.0 | 13.4 | 20.8 |
If you take out three games Davis missed through injury, he played 86.8% of the LSU's minutes last year. If he doesn't get any bigger then conditioning will be less of a concern than his shooting percentage. To be fair to Davis he hasn't played with good guards. I would not be surprised if he could be more efficient for an NBA team as he's unlikely to carry a similar offensive load.
Nick Fazekas
| Year | %Min | eFG% | FT% | PPWS | Pts | A | TO | BS | S | OR% | DR% |
| FR | 67.0 | 56.7 | 77.1 | 1.21 | 26.4 | 1.0 | 2.0 | 2.8 | 1.1 | 9.1 | 22.0 |
| SO | 78.5 | 53.9 | 78.9 | 1.21 | 39.1 | 1.8 | 4.1 | 3.0 | 1.2 | 7.3 | 24.8 |
| JR | 79.0 | 55.9 | 84.6 | 1.23 | 41.2 | 3.9 | 3.4 | 2.8 | 2.1 | 11.1 | 24.4 |
| SR | 71.0 | 59.2 | 84.1 | 1.28 | 39.5 | 3.3 | 4.0 | 3.0 | 1.5 | 12.0 | 28.4 |
Fazekas illustrates my concerns about Spencer Hawes. Fazekas turned into an outstanding college player (he should have been the National Player of the Year in '05-'06) but because of his lack of athleticism he's a probable second round pick as a 22-year-old. Fazekas couldn't even get a guarantee in last year's weak first round.
Whatever happens in the NBA, Fazekas's college career was truly outstanding. (Against slightly lesser opposition) for three straight years he scored at a similar level of volume and efficiency as Durant did last year.
Aaron Gray
| Year | %Min | eFG% | FT% | PPWS | Pts | A | TO | BS | S | OR% | DR% |
| FR | 6.0 | 55.0 | 57.1 | 1.13 | 19.4 | 4.5 | 2.2 | 2.2 | 0.0 | 14.5 | 15.4 |
| SO | 28.7 | 57.6 | 60.9 | 1.20 | 23.4 | 3.7 | 5.6 | 3.0 | 0.9 | 12.9 | 16.2 |
| JR | 69.2 | 52.6 | 63.4 | 1.13 | 30.3 | 4.0 | 5.8 | 3.2 | 1.4 | 15.7 | 27.0 |
| SR | 67.7 | 56.5 | 54.8 | 1.15 | 31.3 | 3.8 | 3.4 | 3.9 | 0.9 | 14.8 | 25.4 |
No matter how (relatively) up-tempo the NBA gets the ability to rebound will always have value. Aaron Gray is unlikely to ever see significant minutes but I bet he's productive in the minutes he earns.
Josh McRoberts
| Year | %Min | eFG% | FT% | PPWS | Pts | A | TO | BS | S | OR% | DR% |
| FR | 61.1 | 61.8 | 66.4 | 1.29 | 20.4 | 3.5 | 3.3 | 3.0 | 2.7 | 8.1 | 14.2 |
| SO | 87.2 | 50.9 | 66.4 | 1.10 | 22.5 | 6.0 | 4.2 | 4.3 | 2.0 | 7.6 | 19.4 |
The back surgery between his freshman and sophomore years really appeared to limit his mobility. McRoberts was an efficient scorer his freshman year but he didn't take on much of the scoring load. As a sophomore, he attempted to do so and failed, losing much of his efficiency in the process.
Right now he's a bigger Luke Walton without a jump shot or the offensive rebounds. (Shelden Williams graduated and McRoberts actually managed to grab fewer offensive rebounds per opportunity.)
He is a pretty good shot blocker from the weak side but he won't be able to keep any one in front of him if forced to guard on the perimeter.
Jason Smith
| Name | %Min | eFG% | FT% | PPWS | Pts | A | TO | BS | S | OR% | DR% |
| FR | 55.9 | 56.2 | 68.4 | 1.20 | 26.2 | 4.3 | 5.0 | 3.4 | 1.0 | 11.3 | 16.3 |
| SO | 71.4 | 52.5 | 76.3 | 1.18 | 32.8 | 4.6 | 7.3 | 4.3 | 1.3 | 10.6 | 19.5 |
| JR | 74.8 | 57.9 | 77.0 | 1.29 | 32.5 | 3.8 | 6.6 | 3.0 | 1.0 | 14.3 | 26.7 |
I've never seen Jason Smith play. The numbers show offensive improvement during his time at Colorado State though he turns the ball over an awful lot especially when one considers the level of his competition. The rebounding and shot blocking is encouraging, but it's almost impossible to average less than 1 steal per 100 possessions which makes me question his overall defensive ability at this point.
Sean Williams
| Name | %Min | eFG% | FT% | PPWS | Pts | A | TO | BS | S | OR% | DR% |
| FR | 38.2 | 65.2 | 52.0 | 1.27 | 14.8 | 2.1 | 3.0 | 8.3 | 0.9 | 10.6 | 12.5 |
| SO | 31.9 | 55.2 | 51.4 | 1.12 | 11.2 | 1.3 | 3.2 | 7.4 | 1.9 | 8.4 | 15.1 |
| JR | 36.3 | 54.8 | 70.0 | 1.21 | 23.1 | 2.3 | 4.4 | 9.5 | 2.7 | 9.6 | 15.7 |
Sean Williams is not a good defensive player, he's a great shot blocker. He shows little interest in anything else (At least on the court. He seems quite committed to his off-court regimen.) as his defensive rebounding numbers attest. I put the odds at 50-50 that he's still in the league by Summer 2010.
Post player rankings, in full:
1. Greg Oden
2. Al Horford
3. Joakim Noah
4. Brandan Wright
5. Spencer Hawes
6. Aaron Gray
7. Jason Smith
8. Nick Fazekas
9. Glen Davis
10. Josh McRoberts
11. Sean Williams
Lottery Post Players
Previously: Oden v. Durant, First-Round Point Guards, Second-Round Point Guards, First-Round Shooting Guards, Lottery Small Forwards, Wilson Chandler
In alphabetical order, the 2006-07 seasons of Spencer Hawes, Al Horford, Joakim Noah, Greg Oden, and Brandon Wright:
Points, assists, turnovers, blocks, and steals listed per 100 individual possessions
In alphabetical order, the 2006-07 seasons of Spencer Hawes, Al Horford, Joakim Noah, Greg Oden, and Brandon Wright:
Points, assists, turnovers, blocks, and steals listed per 100 individual possessions
stats glossary
I've discussed Greg Oden in a previous post so I'll skip ahead to the third and fourth best players in this draft.
I have Horford slightly ahead of Noah because I think that Horford's post game, though not a huge part of the Florida offense, is NBA-ready. Even if I'm wrong and Horford will not be any more of a scorer than he was in college part of his established level of effectiveness as a post player lies in his being a fine passer who also takes good care of the basketball. He's a year younger than Al Jefferson and I'm not sure that Horford's not the better player right now. I think the Atlanta Hawks have to take Horford with the third pick.
That I rate Horford ahead of Noah says far more about how much I admire Horford than any reservations I have about Noah. I expect Noah, like Shane Battier, to post a beneficial plus/minus on both offense and defense year in and year out regardless of team. Statistically, Noah had a better individual sophomore than junior season. However, Florida's second National Championship season was much better than their first, and, though Noah's scoring slipped, he increased his assist rate by over 20%. To me, this suggests that Noah both recognized the value of and was able to create open shots for Horford, Taurean Green, and Lee Humphrey.
Noah's desire to set up his teammates sometimes causes him to pass up a simpler, available option (in this respect he's not dissimilar to Julian Wright) as his turnover numbers point out. A fair number of those turnovers, though, are the result of sloppy footwork or setting overly enthusiastic screens rather than poor decision-making. Noah is similarly active defensively (He'll be the defensive presence Anderson Varejao could be if he preferred playing basketball to falling down.) and could endure some foul trouble while he and the NBA referees adjust to each other.
Brandan Wright's a distant fourth in this group but he's far ahead of any other big man in the draft. Wright is the one player in this draft who, though he won't contribute immediately, has enough reasonable potential for improvement so as not to be a waste of a lottery pick.
Wright was an extremely successful offensive player in his freshman year at North Carolina despite an extremely raw offensive game. (Seriously, on the spectrum of shooting strokes, Julian Wright's would sit closer to Kevin Durant's than Brandan Wright's. While I'm making Wright-to-Wright comparisons, the similarly skinny Julian Wright had a disappointing freshman year as a rebounder but demonstrated dramatic (19.5% in OR% and 40.8% in DR%) improvement in his sophomore year. The team that drafts Brandan Wright must hope for something similar to occur because, as a freshman Brandan Wright was as mediocre a rebounder as Spencer Hawes.)
In addition to developing a game outside of four feet, Wright will need to adjust to not getting the volume of easy looks Roy Williams creates for his big men. It should remembered that both Drew Gooden and Nick Collison won National Player of the Year Awards at Kansas and both are less effective NBA players than Kirk Hinrich, that Raef LaFrentz was an All-American twice as often as Paul Pierce when they played alongside each other, and Tyler Hansbrough is a tremendously effective college post player despite being widely (and probably correctly) perceived to have little chance of starting, much less starring, in the NBA.
Wright's athleticism could enable him to become a highly effective defensive player should he be so inclined. To be blunt, Wright's athleticism is the primary difference between his projected future value and Spencer Hawes's. Wright will almost certainly fill out to some degree and can sacrifice some athleticism for increased strength. Unless Hawes's illness limited him more severely than I understand, he's already fighting an uphill battle in terms of quickness, a battle that could only become more futile as he ages.
Hawes is a skilled post player and passer. His offensive game did suffer due to Washington's poor guard play and he did play alongside an excellent rebounder in Jon Brockman. However, I have doubts about Hawes's ability to get shots off against NBA defenders (and if he can't do that a lot of passing ability will be negated), Horford and Noah (or even LaMarcus Aldridge and PJ Tucker last year) show that playing alongside an excellent defender need not deflate one's own rebounding rates, and Hawes is not yet a good defensive player. Any upside Hawes is perceived to possess has more to do with where he's starting from than with where could go. That being said, I still like him more than any of the players discussed in my next post.
Post player rankings:
1. Greg Oden
2. Al Horford
3. Joakim Noah
4. Brandan Wright
5. Spencer Hawes
| Name | %Min | eFG% | FT% | PPWS | Pts | A | TO | BS | S | OR% | DR% |
| Hawes | 69.0 | 53.3 | 75.5 | 1.14 | 29.5 | 3.8 | 5.0 | 3.5 | 1.0 | 8.1 | 18.1 |
| Horford | 66.1 | 60.8 | 64.4 | 1.27 | 28.5 | 4.7 | 3.9 | 4.0 | 1.6 | 12.2 | 27.0 |
| Noah | 64.6 | 60.7 | 66.3 | 1.28 | 27.8 | 5.2 | 5.8 | 4.2 | 2.6 | 13.3 | 24.6 |
| Oden | 58.2 | 61.3 | 62.8 | 1.27 | 33.1 | 1.4 | 4.3 | 6.9 | 1.2 | 15.2 | 23.3 |
| B Wright | 66.3 | 64.6 | 56.7 | 1.29 | 29.4 | 2.0 | 3.2 | 3.5 | 2.0 | 8.8 | 15.8 |
It's a great year to be at the top of the draft because there's almost no chance a team can make the most common draft mistake: taking size over talent. Three of the top four players in the draft are post players and the fourth (Durant, natch) is already an excellent defensive rebounder and shot blocker who also has decent, if undeveloped, post game.
I've discussed Greg Oden in a previous post so I'll skip ahead to the third and fourth best players in this draft.
I have Horford slightly ahead of Noah because I think that Horford's post game, though not a huge part of the Florida offense, is NBA-ready. Even if I'm wrong and Horford will not be any more of a scorer than he was in college part of his established level of effectiveness as a post player lies in his being a fine passer who also takes good care of the basketball. He's a year younger than Al Jefferson and I'm not sure that Horford's not the better player right now. I think the Atlanta Hawks have to take Horford with the third pick.
That I rate Horford ahead of Noah says far more about how much I admire Horford than any reservations I have about Noah. I expect Noah, like Shane Battier, to post a beneficial plus/minus on both offense and defense year in and year out regardless of team. Statistically, Noah had a better individual sophomore than junior season. However, Florida's second National Championship season was much better than their first, and, though Noah's scoring slipped, he increased his assist rate by over 20%. To me, this suggests that Noah both recognized the value of and was able to create open shots for Horford, Taurean Green, and Lee Humphrey.
Noah's desire to set up his teammates sometimes causes him to pass up a simpler, available option (in this respect he's not dissimilar to Julian Wright) as his turnover numbers point out. A fair number of those turnovers, though, are the result of sloppy footwork or setting overly enthusiastic screens rather than poor decision-making. Noah is similarly active defensively (He'll be the defensive presence Anderson Varejao could be if he preferred playing basketball to falling down.) and could endure some foul trouble while he and the NBA referees adjust to each other.
Brandan Wright's a distant fourth in this group but he's far ahead of any other big man in the draft. Wright is the one player in this draft who, though he won't contribute immediately, has enough reasonable potential for improvement so as not to be a waste of a lottery pick.
Wright was an extremely successful offensive player in his freshman year at North Carolina despite an extremely raw offensive game. (Seriously, on the spectrum of shooting strokes, Julian Wright's would sit closer to Kevin Durant's than Brandan Wright's. While I'm making Wright-to-Wright comparisons, the similarly skinny Julian Wright had a disappointing freshman year as a rebounder but demonstrated dramatic (19.5% in OR% and 40.8% in DR%) improvement in his sophomore year. The team that drafts Brandan Wright must hope for something similar to occur because, as a freshman Brandan Wright was as mediocre a rebounder as Spencer Hawes.)
In addition to developing a game outside of four feet, Wright will need to adjust to not getting the volume of easy looks Roy Williams creates for his big men. It should remembered that both Drew Gooden and Nick Collison won National Player of the Year Awards at Kansas and both are less effective NBA players than Kirk Hinrich, that Raef LaFrentz was an All-American twice as often as Paul Pierce when they played alongside each other, and Tyler Hansbrough is a tremendously effective college post player despite being widely (and probably correctly) perceived to have little chance of starting, much less starring, in the NBA.
Wright's athleticism could enable him to become a highly effective defensive player should he be so inclined. To be blunt, Wright's athleticism is the primary difference between his projected future value and Spencer Hawes's. Wright will almost certainly fill out to some degree and can sacrifice some athleticism for increased strength. Unless Hawes's illness limited him more severely than I understand, he's already fighting an uphill battle in terms of quickness, a battle that could only become more futile as he ages.
Hawes is a skilled post player and passer. His offensive game did suffer due to Washington's poor guard play and he did play alongside an excellent rebounder in Jon Brockman. However, I have doubts about Hawes's ability to get shots off against NBA defenders (and if he can't do that a lot of passing ability will be negated), Horford and Noah (or even LaMarcus Aldridge and PJ Tucker last year) show that playing alongside an excellent defender need not deflate one's own rebounding rates, and Hawes is not yet a good defensive player. Any upside Hawes is perceived to possess has more to do with where he's starting from than with where could go. That being said, I still like him more than any of the players discussed in my next post.
Post player rankings:
1. Greg Oden
2. Al Horford
3. Joakim Noah
4. Brandan Wright
5. Spencer Hawes
Monday, June 25, 2007
Wilson Chandler
I left Wilson Chandler out of my second-tier small forwards post on purpose. He's not one of the 10 best small forwards in the draft. However, Chad Ford's reporting/speculating that Chandler has a first round promise from someone, possibly the Knicks, so I can't/won't stay mum on Chandler.
Chandler is basically a younger, bigger version of Renaldo Balkman with less of an understanding of his weaknesses. If he's drafted in the first round bu the Knicks I would have to think that it's in the anticipation of trading Balkman or Jared Jeffries (though I can't imagine what either one would get in a trade).
Chandler projects as either a very good defensive rebounder as a small forward or a decent-to-good rebounder as a power forward. His primary defensive skill is blocking shots which may largely disappear whether he's used as an undersized power forward or as a slow small forward. As the latter, I guess he could block some shots from behind after he's beaten off the dribble.
Offensively, Chandler didn't score a lot at DePaul but those points he did score used up a lot of possessions. To his credit he did not compound the inefficiency of his poor shooting by turning the ball over very often. In that respect, he's the inverse of Eddy Curry. Also, he improved his shooting between his freshman and sophomore seasons though he's still below average inside and outside the college three-point line and is a sub-66% free throw shooter not that he gets to the line very often.
Chandler could be a reasonable mid-to-late second-round pick (though teams would be better served by signing the criminally underrated PJ Tucker). I wouldn't be surprised if he became a competent ninth or tenth man in the next couple of years and his athleticism could tempt enough teams into giving him enough chances that he could stay in the league long enough to improve enough to become more than a spare part.
Either I'm missing something significant or taking Wilson Chandler in the first round is monumentally foolish.
Chandler is basically a younger, bigger version of Renaldo Balkman with less of an understanding of his weaknesses. If he's drafted in the first round bu the Knicks I would have to think that it's in the anticipation of trading Balkman or Jared Jeffries (though I can't imagine what either one would get in a trade).
| Year | %Min | eFG% | FT% | PPWS | Pts | A | TO | BS | S | OR% | DR% |
| FR | 70.0 | 45.7 | 66.2 | 0.98 | 23.6 | 2.0 | 4.0 | 3.3 | 1.7 | 8.0 | 20.4 |
| SO | 79.1 | 48.8 | 65.1 | 1.03 | 28.8 | 2.9 | 3.3 | 2.7 | 1.3 | 6.9 | 18.3 |
Chandler projects as either a very good defensive rebounder as a small forward or a decent-to-good rebounder as a power forward. His primary defensive skill is blocking shots which may largely disappear whether he's used as an undersized power forward or as a slow small forward. As the latter, I guess he could block some shots from behind after he's beaten off the dribble.
Offensively, Chandler didn't score a lot at DePaul but those points he did score used up a lot of possessions. To his credit he did not compound the inefficiency of his poor shooting by turning the ball over very often. In that respect, he's the inverse of Eddy Curry. Also, he improved his shooting between his freshman and sophomore seasons though he's still below average inside and outside the college three-point line and is a sub-66% free throw shooter not that he gets to the line very often.
Chandler could be a reasonable mid-to-late second-round pick (though teams would be better served by signing the criminally underrated PJ Tucker). I wouldn't be surprised if he became a competent ninth or tenth man in the next couple of years and his athleticism could tempt enough teams into giving him enough chances that he could stay in the league long enough to improve enough to become more than a spare part.
Either I'm missing something significant or taking Wilson Chandler in the first round is monumentally foolish.
Second Tier Small Forwards
Previously: Oden v. Durant, First-Round Point Guards, Second-Round Point Guards, First-Round Shooting Guards, Lottery Small Forwards
These are the guys that could go anywhere from the middle of the first round to the middle of the second round. Taking any of them at the upper boundary is probably a stretch. Taking any of them at the lower boundary is almost certainly a good value.
In alphabetical order, the 2006-07 seasons of Derrick Byars, Jared Dudley, Reyshawn Terry, Alando Tucker, and Thaddeus Young:
Points, assists, turnovers, blocks, and steals listed per 100 individual possessions
Thaddeus Young is projected to be the first of this group drafted, which, barring information to which I don't have access (spectacular workouts or other demonstrations of potential not displayed during his time at Georgia Tech) strikes me as a huge gamble if not an outright mistake.
Young was an extreme finesse player as a college freshman, failing to make half of his two-point attempts, making just 14 free throws for every 100 field goal attempts, and putting up a defensive rebounding percentage that would acceptable for a point guard but is embarrassing for a frontcourt player.
There are positive attributes to Young's game. He made 41.9% of his three-point shots (while taking just 25.1% of his field goal attempts from beyond the arc) and was active on the offensive glass. Were he able to consolidate these strengths while adding other positive contributions he would (obviously) become quite a good player. Like Spencer Hawes, however, Young's projectable improvement has a lot to do with how (relatively) little he contributed as a college freshman.
Offensively, I see Young, like Donyell Marshall, concentrating his value in making jump shots and getting offensive rebounders. Because he's smaller than Marshall, Young will have to find a position he can defend if he wants to match Marshall's overall value or playing time.
Teams looking at Young in the mid-to-late first-round would be better off (at least in the short term) taking Derrick Byars who is a superior scorer, ball-handler, passer, and defender. I don't see Byars getting much better than he is now but he should be able to contribute fairly quickly.
Of course, Byars is four years older than Young so a team that is not drafting for immediate help could have reason to gamble on Young who is more likely to improve. However, Young would have to improve fairly significantly to be as good as Byars is now.
I have little doubt that Reyshawn Terry is the best player in this group. In his senior season at North Carolina he checked off every item on the list of "Ways to Be a Good Basketball Player Without Being Noticed" with the exception of don't turn the ball over.
Terry played limited minutes on a very good team. He scored efficiently but not often. He played good defense. He rebounded (defensively) extremely well for his position.
Terry will join an NBA team and immediately be asked to the things he did so well at North Carolina. His junior season, where he scored over 33 Pts/100 possessions and was a significant factor on the offensive glass only makes him more intriguing.
It's tempting to look at a useful, unspectacular NBA player like Ryan Gomes and project such a future for good, similarly-sized collegiate prospects. Because we now watch Ryan Gomes carry water for players better-suited for NBA basketball it's easy to forget that he was not a pretty good college player, he was a great college player.
Jared Dudley was not a great college player. He was a very good scorer in college but he was a fairly indifferent rebounder and defender (though the latter is symptomatic of Al Skinner's Boston College players and teams and may not be chronic in Dudley's case). Dudley's offensive game is rather unique whichshould make it easier for to find (and hold onto) a role in an NBA team's rotation. He's an effective player in the paint (both making shots and getting to the free throw line) and as a perimeter shooter. His value will be closer to Clarence Weatherspoon or Lee Nailon than it will be to Ryan Gomes.
Alando Tucker had an outstanding career at Wisconsin but I have almost zero faith that he can be an effective offensive player in the NBA. He was a poor shooter throughout his college career:
To stay in the league I suspect he'll have to transform himself into an Adrian Griffin-style player. I don't think there's a market for a smaller Antoine Walker even if this version were to be smarter, harder-working, and more likely to miss shots from 18- rather than 25-feet.
Small forward rankings, in full:
1. Kevin Durant
2. Corey Brewer
3. Jeff Green
4. Julian Wright
5. Al Thornton
6. Reyshawn Terry
7. Derrick Byars
8. Thaddeus Young
9. Jared Dudley
10. Alando Tucker
These are the guys that could go anywhere from the middle of the first round to the middle of the second round. Taking any of them at the upper boundary is probably a stretch. Taking any of them at the lower boundary is almost certainly a good value.
In alphabetical order, the 2006-07 seasons of Derrick Byars, Jared Dudley, Reyshawn Terry, Alando Tucker, and Thaddeus Young:
Points, assists, turnovers, blocks, and steals listed per 100 individual possessions
| Name | %Min | eFG% | FT% | PPWS | Pts | A | TO | BS | S | OR% | DR% |
| Byars | 77.6 | 54.1 | 71.1 | 1.14 | 32.0 | 6.4 | 4.5 | 0.2 | 2.5 | 5.9 | 12.3 |
| Dudley | 86.6 | 61.8 | 74.3 | 1.32 | 30.4 | 4.8 | 4.1 | 0.5 | 2.2 | 10.2 | 15.2 |
| Terry | 53.4 | 58.0 | 73.9 | 1.23 | 24.8 | 4.2 | 4.6 | 1.6 | 1.8 | 6.6 | 20.2 |
| Tucker | 81.7 | 50.6 | 65.9 | 1.09 | 38.7 | 3.9 | 3.2 | 0.5 | 1.8 | 8.2 | 12.1 |
| Young | 71.1 | 53.1 | 74.3 | 1.09 | 27.3 | 3.9 | 4.2 | 0.8 | 2.5 | 9.4 | 10.4 |
Thaddeus Young is projected to be the first of this group drafted, which, barring information to which I don't have access (spectacular workouts or other demonstrations of potential not displayed during his time at Georgia Tech) strikes me as a huge gamble if not an outright mistake.
Young was an extreme finesse player as a college freshman, failing to make half of his two-point attempts, making just 14 free throws for every 100 field goal attempts, and putting up a defensive rebounding percentage that would acceptable for a point guard but is embarrassing for a frontcourt player.
There are positive attributes to Young's game. He made 41.9% of his three-point shots (while taking just 25.1% of his field goal attempts from beyond the arc) and was active on the offensive glass. Were he able to consolidate these strengths while adding other positive contributions he would (obviously) become quite a good player. Like Spencer Hawes, however, Young's projectable improvement has a lot to do with how (relatively) little he contributed as a college freshman.
Offensively, I see Young, like Donyell Marshall, concentrating his value in making jump shots and getting offensive rebounders. Because he's smaller than Marshall, Young will have to find a position he can defend if he wants to match Marshall's overall value or playing time.
Teams looking at Young in the mid-to-late first-round would be better off (at least in the short term) taking Derrick Byars who is a superior scorer, ball-handler, passer, and defender. I don't see Byars getting much better than he is now but he should be able to contribute fairly quickly.
Of course, Byars is four years older than Young so a team that is not drafting for immediate help could have reason to gamble on Young who is more likely to improve. However, Young would have to improve fairly significantly to be as good as Byars is now.
I have little doubt that Reyshawn Terry is the best player in this group. In his senior season at North Carolina he checked off every item on the list of "Ways to Be a Good Basketball Player Without Being Noticed" with the exception of don't turn the ball over.
Terry played limited minutes on a very good team. He scored efficiently but not often. He played good defense. He rebounded (defensively) extremely well for his position.
Terry will join an NBA team and immediately be asked to the things he did so well at North Carolina. His junior season, where he scored over 33 Pts/100 possessions and was a significant factor on the offensive glass only makes him more intriguing.
| Year | %Min | eFG% | FT% | PPWS | Pts | A | TO | BS | S | OR% | DR% |
| JR | 60.5 | 54.7 | 80.0 | 1.21 | 33.1 | 3.1 | 6.1 | 2.0 | 2.2 | 9.5 | 18.5 |
| SR | 53.4 | 58.0 | 73.9 | 1.23 | 24.8 | 4.2 | 4.6 | 1.6 | 1.8 | 6.6 | 20.2 |
It's tempting to look at a useful, unspectacular NBA player like Ryan Gomes and project such a future for good, similarly-sized collegiate prospects. Because we now watch Ryan Gomes carry water for players better-suited for NBA basketball it's easy to forget that he was not a pretty good college player, he was a great college player.
Jared Dudley was not a great college player. He was a very good scorer in college but he was a fairly indifferent rebounder and defender (though the latter is symptomatic of Al Skinner's Boston College players and teams and may not be chronic in Dudley's case). Dudley's offensive game is rather unique whichshould make it easier for to find (and hold onto) a role in an NBA team's rotation. He's an effective player in the paint (both making shots and getting to the free throw line) and as a perimeter shooter. His value will be closer to Clarence Weatherspoon or Lee Nailon than it will be to Ryan Gomes.
Alando Tucker had an outstanding career at Wisconsin but I have almost zero faith that he can be an effective offensive player in the NBA. He was a poor shooter throughout his college career:
| Year | %Min | eFG% | FT% | PPWS | Pts | A | TO | BS | S | OR% | DR% |
| FR | 79.4 | 56.7 | 68.5 | 1.21 | 24.2 | 2.1 | 2.6 | 0.6 | 1.8 | 10.5 | 13.0 |
| SO | 72.3 | 51.9 | 68.3 | 1.14 | 30.5 | 3.4 | 3.9 | 0.1 | 1.4 | 8.4 | 15.0 |
| JR | 82.7 | 47.0 | 54.5 | 0.99 | 34.6 | 3.1 | 3.7 | 0.4 | 1.1 | 8.0 | 11.7 |
| SR | 81.7 | 50.6 | 65.9 | 1.09 | 38.7 | 3.9 | 3.2 | 0.5 | 1.8 | 8.2 | 12.1 |
To stay in the league I suspect he'll have to transform himself into an Adrian Griffin-style player. I don't think there's a market for a smaller Antoine Walker even if this version were to be smarter, harder-working, and more likely to miss shots from 18- rather than 25-feet.
Small forward rankings, in full:
1. Kevin Durant
2. Corey Brewer
3. Jeff Green
4. Julian Wright
5. Al Thornton
6. Reyshawn Terry
7. Derrick Byars
8. Thaddeus Young
9. Jared Dudley
10. Alando Tucker
Friday, June 22, 2007
Lottery Small Forwards
Previously: Oden v. Durant, First-Round Point Guards, Second-Round Point Guards, First-Round Shooting Guards
In alphabetical order, the 2006-07 seasons of Corey Brewer, Kevin Durant, Jeff Green, Al Thornton, Julian Wright:
Points, assists, turnovers, blocks, and steals listed per 100 individual possessions
Unlike the guards I've discussed earlier this week, each of these guys should be able to contribute immediately and the key question about their peaks is "all-star or not?" rather than "can he start on a good team?"
Kevin Durant is both the youngest and best player in the group and will almost certainly be taken with the second pick of the draft.
It would be perfectly reasonable for a team to take either Brewer or Green with a top five pick. Brewer should have the easier transition to the NBA as he played exclusively on the perimeter at Florida. Though I think Brewer was somewhat overrated as a defender in college that was do more to him relying (at times) on his superior athleticism instead of always utilizing his excellent defensive technique. He should respond well to the challenge of guarding NBA players on nightly basis.
I don't expect Green's transition to becoming a predominantly perimeter player to be any more difficult than, say, Luol Deng's but there will likely be an adjustment period. Green's three-point range should alleviate whatever amount of rebounding and shot blocking value he loses by playing further away from the basket.
Green is likely the better offensive player of the two, but if someone wanted to deflate his 06-07 offensive numbers because of the general excellence and efficiency of Georgetown's offense, I think that would be fair, but I suspect there are elements of his offensive game that will reveal themselves more fully in the NBA game.
I see both Julian Wright and Al Thornton as a cut below Green and Brewer but still above almost everybody else in the draft. Thornton is a little more one-dimensional than the other four players considered here but his production is skewed toward the most valuable contribution one can make to a basketball team: scoring.
Thornton showed tremendous improvement over his four years at Florida State:
He won't be the focus of an NBA offense to the degree he was at Florida State but I think he has the ability to contribute enough on the glass and defensively (not to mention that he was an efficient scorer at FSU) to be a very good supporting player.
Julian Wright is the hardest player of the five to project as he has yet to harness his talents. There are Kansas fans that attacked Wright for turning pro, and in doing so attempted to deny the selfishness of their motives by claiming he hadn't improved between his freshman and sophomore seasons. That claim is patently false:
Had Wright simply maintained his rate stats while playing that many more minutes in his sophomore season he would have been a better player. By reducing his turnovers and increasing his rebounding Wright was a key contributor to Kansas's improvement over the 05-06 season. It should not be dismissed that the last two Kansas teams have been outstanding defensively due, in no small part, to Wright's ability to both block shots and be active in the passing lanes.
Having seen nearly all of Wright's games at Kansas (and here's his game log should anyone be interested), it's my opinion that there are two things limiting Wright's production at this point. The first is a consistent jump shot. He improved that facet of his game during his time at Kansas but still has significant room for further improvement. Secondly, many of Wright's turnovers occur after he has put the defense in a disadvantageous position. There are a lot of things Wright can do on the basketball court but he does not yet grasp how and when to use his various skills. Should Wright either simplify his game or learn how to make use of all of his talents he will become a more effective passer and ball-handler.
Even with his existing weaknesses, Wright is a useful, if frustrating, player. He's young and the glimpses of greatness outnumbered the moments of indecision and confusion last season.
Small forward rankings:
1. Kevin Durant
2. Corey Brewer
3. Jeff Green
4. Julian Wright
5. Al Thornton
In alphabetical order, the 2006-07 seasons of Corey Brewer, Kevin Durant, Jeff Green, Al Thornton, Julian Wright:
Points, assists, turnovers, blocks, and steals listed per 100 individual possessions
| Name | %Min | eFG% | FT% | PPWS | Pts | A | TO | BS | S | OR% | DR% |
| Brewer | 66.4 | 53.1 | 72.3 | 1.16 | 27.6 | 6.1 | 5.2 | 0.8 | 3.9 | 5.1 | 13.5 |
| Durant | 87.2 | 53.6 | 81.6 | 1.19 | 41.6 | 2.1 | 4.6 | 3.1 | 3.0 | 9.2 | 23.6 |
| Green | 83.0 | 56.0 | 77.5 | 1.20 | 28.8 | 6.4 | 5.2 | 2.3 | 1.6 | 7.3 | 16.3 |
| Thornton | 77.7 | 57.0 | 79.0 | 1.25 | 37.4 | 1.3 | 4.7 | 2.2 | 2.9 | 12.7 | 16.4 |
| J Wright | 68.3 | 55.3 | 61.3 | 1.14 | 25.2 | 4.5 | 5.0 | 2.7 | 3.0 | 11.0 | 20.0 |
Unlike the guards I've discussed earlier this week, each of these guys should be able to contribute immediately and the key question about their peaks is "all-star or not?" rather than "can he start on a good team?"
Kevin Durant is both the youngest and best player in the group and will almost certainly be taken with the second pick of the draft.
It would be perfectly reasonable for a team to take either Brewer or Green with a top five pick. Brewer should have the easier transition to the NBA as he played exclusively on the perimeter at Florida. Though I think Brewer was somewhat overrated as a defender in college that was do more to him relying (at times) on his superior athleticism instead of always utilizing his excellent defensive technique. He should respond well to the challenge of guarding NBA players on nightly basis.
I don't expect Green's transition to becoming a predominantly perimeter player to be any more difficult than, say, Luol Deng's but there will likely be an adjustment period. Green's three-point range should alleviate whatever amount of rebounding and shot blocking value he loses by playing further away from the basket.
Green is likely the better offensive player of the two, but if someone wanted to deflate his 06-07 offensive numbers because of the general excellence and efficiency of Georgetown's offense, I think that would be fair, but I suspect there are elements of his offensive game that will reveal themselves more fully in the NBA game.
I see both Julian Wright and Al Thornton as a cut below Green and Brewer but still above almost everybody else in the draft. Thornton is a little more one-dimensional than the other four players considered here but his production is skewed toward the most valuable contribution one can make to a basketball team: scoring.
Thornton showed tremendous improvement over his four years at Florida State:
| Year | %Min | eFG% | FT% | PPWS | Pts | A | TO | BS | S | OR% | DR% |
| FR | 17.8 | 54.3 | 50.0 | 1.10 | 20.9 | 1.5 | 3.7 | 1.7 | 1.7 | 8.4 | 17.3 |
| SO | 41.8 | 55.4 | 53.8 | 1.13 | 29.6 | 2.2 | 4.5 | 2.0 | 1.6 | 11.4 | 17.6 |
| JR | 71.4 | 54.8 | 74.4 | 1.20 | 31.7 | 2.4 | 4.8 | 0.6 | 1.9 | 12.6 | 16.7 |
| SR | 77.7 | 57.0 | 79.0 | 1.25 | 37.4 | 1.3 | 4.7 | 2.2 | 2.9 | 12.7 | 16.4 |
He won't be the focus of an NBA offense to the degree he was at Florida State but I think he has the ability to contribute enough on the glass and defensively (not to mention that he was an efficient scorer at FSU) to be a very good supporting player.
Julian Wright is the hardest player of the five to project as he has yet to harness his talents. There are Kansas fans that attacked Wright for turning pro, and in doing so attempted to deny the selfishness of their motives by claiming he hadn't improved between his freshman and sophomore seasons. That claim is patently false:
| Year | %Min | eFG% | FT% | PPWS | Pts | A | TO | BS | S | OR% | DR% |
| FR | 50.3 | 57.8 | 55.7 | 1.17 | 24.3 | 5.1 | 5.7 | 3.4 | 2.9 | 9.2 | 14.2 |
| SO | 68.3 | 55.3 | 61.3 | 1.14 | 25.2 | 4.5 | 5.0 | 2.7 | 3.0 | 11.0 | 20.0 |
Had Wright simply maintained his rate stats while playing that many more minutes in his sophomore season he would have been a better player. By reducing his turnovers and increasing his rebounding Wright was a key contributor to Kansas's improvement over the 05-06 season. It should not be dismissed that the last two Kansas teams have been outstanding defensively due, in no small part, to Wright's ability to both block shots and be active in the passing lanes.
Having seen nearly all of Wright's games at Kansas (and here's his game log should anyone be interested), it's my opinion that there are two things limiting Wright's production at this point. The first is a consistent jump shot. He improved that facet of his game during his time at Kansas but still has significant room for further improvement. Secondly, many of Wright's turnovers occur after he has put the defense in a disadvantageous position. There are a lot of things Wright can do on the basketball court but he does not yet grasp how and when to use his various skills. Should Wright either simplify his game or learn how to make use of all of his talents he will become a more effective passer and ball-handler.
Even with his existing weaknesses, Wright is a useful, if frustrating, player. He's young and the glimpses of greatness outnumbered the moments of indecision and confusion last season.
Small forward rankings:
1. Kevin Durant
2. Corey Brewer
3. Jeff Green
4. Julian Wright
5. Al Thornton
Thursday, June 21, 2007
First-Round Shooting Guards
Previously: Oden v. Durant, First-Round Point Guards, Second-Round Point Guards
Differentiating between shooting guards and small forwards is equal parts difficult and foolish. I'm including Corey Brewer with the small forwards primarily because that puts him amongst the players whom NBA front offices will be comparing Brewer when considering who to take early in the draft. If you, dear reader, consider Brewer to be a shooting guard, know this: he's a far better basketball player than anyone discussed in this post.
One further note: I am not qualified to discuss the relative merits of Marco Belinelli or Rudy Fernandez and thus, will not.
In alphabetical order, the 2006-07 seasons of Morris Almond, Daequan Cook, Rodney Stuckey, Marcus Williams, and Nick Young:
Points, assists, turnovers, blocks, and steals listed per 100 individual possessions
stats glossary
Nick Young is the best of this lot all of whom are helped (in terms of draft position) by Brandon Rush blowing out his ACL and returning to Kansas. Young had an outstanding season at USC, a season so much better than the two that preceded it that I suspect it was the result of a hot stretch as much as it was the result of improvement.
Young improved his two-point field goal percentage by 17.5%, his three-point field goal percentage by 32%, and his FT Rate by 30.9%. His true talent is almost certainly closer to his career averages, so my guess is that if he improves he could put up another season like last year's. That would make him a hell of a player and one sure to appreciated by his organiztion and its fans, assuming of course that they aren't expecting him to improve upon his (to date) career year.
Almond and Stuckey have both demonstrated the ability to score against lesser competition. I think both have the ability to be useful complementary players. Almond is the far better shooter and rebounder but Stuckey can (probably) play some point guard. Depending on team need, either would good use of a mid-to-late first-round pick.
Daequan Cook has tremendous potential. Despite being largely useless throughout the final month of the season he posted extremely impressive numbers for a college freshman. (Compare his freshman season with Nick Young's sophomore year. Then compare their ages and extrapolate relative development. Unless he's a real asshole there are reasons to be very optimistic about Cook relative to the other draft options at this position.) He could very good very soon. His combination of scoring ability and rebounding ability puts me in mind of the young, healthy Quentin Richardson.
Marcus Williams looks like he should be better than his performances have been through two years of college basketball. I wouldn't be surprised if he turned into a good player, but, as of right now, he's a guy who doesn't quite make enough shots or take good enough care of the ball to be a good offensive player and was part of a hugely disappointing college team last year. The likelihood that contributes immediately at the NBA level is fairly slight. His four worst games last year were against Louisville, Memphis, UNC, and @UCLA.
Shooting guard rankings:
1. Daequan Cook
2. Nick Young
3. Morris Almond
4. Rodney Stuckey
5. Marcus Williams
UPDATE: There aren't enough interesting candidates to do an entire post on second-round shooting guards. Russell Carter and DJ Strawberry are awfully generic. Again, I'll cover them should they get drafted.
So here's Arron Afflalo's 06-07 numbers:
If someone wanted to take him ahead of Marcus Williams I wouldn't be surprised. In the right situation, Afflalo could come in and contribute some decent bench minutes immediately. The one concern I have w/r/t Afflalo stems from the difficulty he had getting open looks against Brandon Rush in the Regional Final. If he struggles to get open he won't continue to make difficult shots with the frequency he did that afternoon.
Complete shooting guard rankings:
1. Daequan Cook
2. Nick Young
3. Morris Almond
4. Rodney Stuckey
5. Marcus Williams
6. Arron Aflalo
Differentiating between shooting guards and small forwards is equal parts difficult and foolish. I'm including Corey Brewer with the small forwards primarily because that puts him amongst the players whom NBA front offices will be comparing Brewer when considering who to take early in the draft. If you, dear reader, consider Brewer to be a shooting guard, know this: he's a far better basketball player than anyone discussed in this post.
One further note: I am not qualified to discuss the relative merits of Marco Belinelli or Rudy Fernandez and thus, will not.
In alphabetical order, the 2006-07 seasons of Morris Almond, Daequan Cook, Rodney Stuckey, Marcus Williams, and Nick Young:
Points, assists, turnovers, blocks, and steals listed per 100 individual possessions
stats glossary
| Name | %Min | eFG% | FT% | PPWS | Pts | A | TO | BS | S | OR% | DR% |
| Almond | 82.9 | 55.4 | 84.6 | 1.26 | 47.0 | 2.1 | 6.1 | 1.3 | 2.1 | 5.0 | 17.8 |
| Cook | 49.9 | 53.0 | 69.7 | 1.10 | 30.8 | 3.2 | 4.5 | 0.8 | 2.2 | 4.5 | 20.4 |
| Stuckey | 83.2 | 49.6 | 84.6 | 1.16 | 39.7 | 8.9 | 5.5 | 0.5 | 4.0 | 4.4 | 11.4 |
| Williams | 79.0 | 52.3 | 69.5 | 1.11 | 29.4 | 4.0 | 4.7 | 1.4 | 2.0 | 7.9 | 15.2 |
| Young | 81.3 | 57.4 | 78.6 | 1.23 | 31.5 | 2.4 | 4.4 | 0.5 | 1.3 | 4.7 | 11.2 |
Nick Young is the best of this lot all of whom are helped (in terms of draft position) by Brandon Rush blowing out his ACL and returning to Kansas. Young had an outstanding season at USC, a season so much better than the two that preceded it that I suspect it was the result of a hot stretch as much as it was the result of improvement.
| Year | %Min | eFG% | FT% | PPWS | Pts | A | TO | BS | S | OR% | DR% |
| FR | 64.0 | 49.1 | 64.4 | 1.03 | 23.5 | 2.8 | 3.5 | 0.7 | 1.6 | 7.0 | 11.2 |
| SO | 84.0 | 49.5 | 80.1 | 1.10 | 30.0 | 2.8 | 3.9 | 0.4 | 1.8 | 8.7 | 14.5 |
| JR | 81.3 | 57.4 | 78.6 | 1.23 | 31.5 | 2.4 | 4.4 | 0.5 | 1.3 | 4.7 | 11.2 |
Young improved his two-point field goal percentage by 17.5%, his three-point field goal percentage by 32%, and his FT Rate by 30.9%. His true talent is almost certainly closer to his career averages, so my guess is that if he improves he could put up another season like last year's. That would make him a hell of a player and one sure to appreciated by his organiztion and its fans, assuming of course that they aren't expecting him to improve upon his (to date) career year.
Almond and Stuckey have both demonstrated the ability to score against lesser competition. I think both have the ability to be useful complementary players. Almond is the far better shooter and rebounder but Stuckey can (probably) play some point guard. Depending on team need, either would good use of a mid-to-late first-round pick.
Daequan Cook has tremendous potential. Despite being largely useless throughout the final month of the season he posted extremely impressive numbers for a college freshman. (Compare his freshman season with Nick Young's sophomore year. Then compare their ages and extrapolate relative development. Unless he's a real asshole there are reasons to be very optimistic about Cook relative to the other draft options at this position.) He could very good very soon. His combination of scoring ability and rebounding ability puts me in mind of the young, healthy Quentin Richardson.
Marcus Williams looks like he should be better than his performances have been through two years of college basketball. I wouldn't be surprised if he turned into a good player, but, as of right now, he's a guy who doesn't quite make enough shots or take good enough care of the ball to be a good offensive player and was part of a hugely disappointing college team last year. The likelihood that contributes immediately at the NBA level is fairly slight. His four worst games last year were against Louisville, Memphis, UNC, and @UCLA.
Shooting guard rankings:
1. Daequan Cook
2. Nick Young
3. Morris Almond
4. Rodney Stuckey
5. Marcus Williams
UPDATE: There aren't enough interesting candidates to do an entire post on second-round shooting guards. Russell Carter and DJ Strawberry are awfully generic. Again, I'll cover them should they get drafted.
So here's Arron Afflalo's 06-07 numbers:
| Name | %Min | eFG% | FT% | PPWS | Pts | A | TO | BS | S | OR% | DR% |
| Afflalo | 81.0 | 54.8 | 79.5 | 1.18 | 31.0 | 3.8 | 3.3 | 0.4 | 1.2 | 1.6 | 8.9 |
If someone wanted to take him ahead of Marcus Williams I wouldn't be surprised. In the right situation, Afflalo could come in and contribute some decent bench minutes immediately. The one concern I have w/r/t Afflalo stems from the difficulty he had getting open looks against Brandon Rush in the Regional Final. If he struggles to get open he won't continue to make difficult shots with the frequency he did that afternoon.
Complete shooting guard rankings:
1. Daequan Cook
2. Nick Young
3. Morris Almond
4. Rodney Stuckey
5. Marcus Williams
6. Arron Aflalo
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
Second-Round Point Guards
Previously: First-Round Point Guards, Oden v. Durant
The posts dealing with potential second-round picks will be far more superficial than those that deal with first-round picks.
In alphabetical order, the 2006-07 seasons of Aaron Brooks, Zabian Dowdell, Taurean Green, Jared Jordan, and Ramon Sessions:
Points, assists, turnovers, blocks, and steals listed per 100 individual possessions
Dowdell appears to be the best bet to have a substantial NBA career among potential second-round point guard draftees. Through his combination of size, scoring ability, defensive potential, and ball-handling there's a good chance he can find some way to be a useful player off the bench.
I don't take Taurean Green's college career lightly, but I struggle to see how his game will translate to the NBA. He took tremendous advantage of college defenses tendency to guard only out to about 20 feet. 58.5% of Green's field goal attempts last season were from beyond the three-point line and he made 40.4% of those shots. I doubt that he'll find another such easily exploitable tendency in the NBA. He does have NBA three-point range and showed the ability to get to the foul line in college (40.5 FT Rate). Taking him in the second round would not be a wasted pick, but his future might be in Europe.
As for the other three, Ramon Sessions will have to make defense his priority if he wants to stay in the league, Aaron Brooks will have to find a team looking for another Earl Boykins, and Jared Jordan's NBA chances appear hopeless to me. There's no doubt Jordan plays hard and is an excellent passer but he's neither a good shooter (he made less than 33% of his three-point shots, and barely 70% of his free throws at Marist nor) scorer and he's likely to be exposed defensively.
The '07 point guard rankings in full:
1. Mike Conley, Jr.
2. Acie Law IV
3. Javaris Crittenton
4. Gabe Pruitt
5. Zabian Dowdell
6. Taurean Green
7. Ramon Sessions
8. Aaron Brooks
Should Bobby Brown, DaShaun Wood, JamesOn Curry, Mustafa Shakur, or Jamaal Tatum get drafted on the 28th, I'll address their college profiles at that time.
Shooting guards up next.
The posts dealing with potential second-round picks will be far more superficial than those that deal with first-round picks.
In alphabetical order, the 2006-07 seasons of Aaron Brooks, Zabian Dowdell, Taurean Green, Jared Jordan, and Ramon Sessions:
Points, assists, turnovers, blocks, and steals listed per 100 individual possessions
| Name | %Min | eFG% | FT% | PPWS | Pts | A | TO | BS | S | OR% | DR% |
| Brooks | 86.4 | 54.7 | 83.8 | 1.19 | 29.1 | 7.0 | 4.1 | 0.3 | 2.2 | 4.5 | 11.6 |
| Dowdell | 83.9 | 51.7 | 81.0 | 1.17 | 31.9 | 5.8 | 3.7 | 0.4 | 3.7 | 2.9 | 9.9 |
| Green | 83.0 | 56.2 | 84.9 | 1.26 | 24.0 | 6.6 | 4.8 | 0.0 | 1.9 | 0.9 | 7.1 |
| Jordan | 90.7 | 48.5 | 69.0 | 1.05 | 27.0 | 13.6 | 5.2 | 0.1 | 2.1 | 4.2 | 13.8 |
| Sessions | 75.7 | 47.2 | 83.0 | 1.10 | 23.9 | 9.1 | 5.0 | 0.4 | 1.7 | 4.8 | 12.7 |
Dowdell appears to be the best bet to have a substantial NBA career among potential second-round point guard draftees. Through his combination of size, scoring ability, defensive potential, and ball-handling there's a good chance he can find some way to be a useful player off the bench.
I don't take Taurean Green's college career lightly, but I struggle to see how his game will translate to the NBA. He took tremendous advantage of college defenses tendency to guard only out to about 20 feet. 58.5% of Green's field goal attempts last season were from beyond the three-point line and he made 40.4% of those shots. I doubt that he'll find another such easily exploitable tendency in the NBA. He does have NBA three-point range and showed the ability to get to the foul line in college (40.5 FT Rate). Taking him in the second round would not be a wasted pick, but his future might be in Europe.
As for the other three, Ramon Sessions will have to make defense his priority if he wants to stay in the league, Aaron Brooks will have to find a team looking for another Earl Boykins, and Jared Jordan's NBA chances appear hopeless to me. There's no doubt Jordan plays hard and is an excellent passer but he's neither a good shooter (he made less than 33% of his three-point shots, and barely 70% of his free throws at Marist nor) scorer and he's likely to be exposed defensively.
The '07 point guard rankings in full:
1. Mike Conley, Jr.
2. Acie Law IV
3. Javaris Crittenton
4. Gabe Pruitt
5. Zabian Dowdell
6. Taurean Green
7. Ramon Sessions
8. Aaron Brooks
Should Bobby Brown, DaShaun Wood, JamesOn Curry, Mustafa Shakur, or Jamaal Tatum get drafted on the 28th, I'll address their college profiles at that time.
Shooting guards up next.
Tuesday, June 19, 2007
First-Round Point Guards
Previously: Oden v. Durant
Now that we know for certain who is in and who is out of the 2007 NBA Draft, I can begin to break down the players in question without spending time on briefly relevant issues (such as the now pointless Roy Hibbert v. Spencer Hawes post). I'll start with the four point guards projected to go in the first round. Potential second-round point guard draftees will be the focus of a subsequent post.
In alphabetical order, the 2006-07 seasons of Mike Conley Jr., Javaris Crittenton, Acie Law IV, and Gabe Pruitt:
Points, assists, turnovers, blocks, and steals listed per 100 individual possessions
Foxsports.com's Jeff Goodman pointed out during the season that Acie Law's assist numbers are (almost certainly) inflated by the stat-keepers in College Station.
For the year, Law was credited with 11.73 assists per 100 possessions in home games and 5.99 assists per 100 possessions in road and neutral games. As a team, Texas A&M were credited with assists on 78% of their made field goals at home compared with 45% of their made field goals in road and neutral games.
I'd guess that, in general, players benefit from their home-court statisticians to some degree. Even if they don't, the economic realities of college basketball make it far more likely that a good player on a good team will face hopelessly overmatched opposition at home and boost their rate stats thusly.
I haven't the time or data to do a proper study of the average home-court advantage, but I did run the same numbers for Mike Conley as Ohio State, like Texas A&M, played a weak non-conference slate at home. Conley averaged 13.3 assists per 100 possessions at home and 10.9 assists per 100 possessions in road or neutral games. Ohio State was credited with an assist on 60% of their made field goals at home compared with 54% of their made field goals in road and neutral games.
I don't see any evidence in the table above that encourages me to buck consensus and argue that anyone other than Conley is the top point guard in the draft. Only Acie Law has comparable numbers but Conley is almost three years younger than Acie Law and is already the better ball-handler, passer, and defender. Even if Conley isn't able to significantly improve his shooting (30.3 3PT%, 68.8 FT%), he showed the ability to finish in and around the basket by making 57.8% of his two-point field goal attempts last season. (In comparison, Law made 51%, Pruitt 49.6%, and Crittenton 48.8% of their two-point attempts.)
I rate Law as the second-best point guard available, especially for a team that wants/needs an immediate contribution. I don't know if Law is going to get much better as a player, but I wouldn't be surprised if his performance took a different shape in the NBA. It's highly unlikely he'll be asked to carry an NBA team offensively to anything approaching the degree he carried Texas A&M. Thus, his ability as a volume scorer will have less value necessitating that he remain an efficient scorer and that he limit his turnovers.
I think Jameer Nelson is a reasonable comp for Law with the stipulation that Law's size (6-3 1/2, 186 vs. 6-0 1/4, 199 for Nelson) should prevent him from being the defensive liability Nelson has proven to be in certain situations.
If a team is looking to add a point guard through the draft but is not seeking an immediate contribution from that player, a case can be made for taking Javaris Crittenton ahead of Acie Law. The risk is that, whereas Law has demonstrated improvement (at Texas A&M's cost) between the ages of 18 and 22...
...the drafting team must assume the risk that Crittenton will develop enough over the course of his initial contract to make a contribution in the NBA. Crittenton had a promising freshman season in college but he does not look, either to my eye or by the numbers, ready to contribute to a NBA team at this point in time.
Crittenton's scoring volume and efficiency were certainly acceptable for a college freshman. Especially encouraging was his ability to score inside the three-point line (48.8 2PTFG%, 78.3 FT% with a FT Rate of 30.8) as it may take a couple of years (at minimum, would be my guess) for Crittenton to develop NBA three-point range. Crittenton's rebounding numbers (3.3 OR%/10.9 DR%) are quite good for a college guard.
That he averaged 7.1 turnovers per 100 possessions is the greatest indication that Crittenton is not ready to play point guard in the NBA immediately. Watching him last year, it was obvious that he struggled to make good decisions. However, I would not be surprised if some of Crittenton's turnover problems were systemic to Georgia Tech. The Yellow Jackets turned it over on 21.9% of their possessions last year which (despite ranking at 208th in the country, per kenpom) was a significant improvement upon their 2006 turnover rate of 24.7% and not that far off the 2005 National Runner-Up team's 20.9 TO% led by point guard Jarrett Jack (5.7 TO/100 for Jack that season).
If Crittenton gets drafted by a team that is able/willing to bring him along slowly, I wouldn't be surprised if turned out to be a quality starter in three or four years. If he's drafted by a team that gives him an inordinate amount of responsibility immediately his weaknesses could well overwhelm his potential. Which is to say that I hope, for his sake, that he is not drafted by the Atlanta Hawks.
Like Kyle Lowry last year (this is a comparison I make strictly in terms of potential value as they're not that similar in how they produce value), Gabe Pruitt appears set for a substantial NBA career as a very good backup or capable starter. Should he be able to combine the efficient shooting of his freshman season, the volume scoring of his sophomore season, and the assist-to-turnover ratio of his junior season he could be something greater. It's unlikely that he'll make his various career-to-date bests his annual norms but the basis for optimism exists in his numbers.
Thus, the '07 draft class point guard rankings:
1. Mike Conley, Jr.
2. Acie Law IV
3. Javaris Crittenton
4. Gabe Pruitt
Consideration of Aaron Brooks, Bobby Brown, Zabian Dowdell, Taurean Green, Jared Jordan, Ramon Sessions and others to follow.
Now that we know for certain who is in and who is out of the 2007 NBA Draft, I can begin to break down the players in question without spending time on briefly relevant issues (such as the now pointless Roy Hibbert v. Spencer Hawes post). I'll start with the four point guards projected to go in the first round. Potential second-round point guard draftees will be the focus of a subsequent post.
In alphabetical order, the 2006-07 seasons of Mike Conley Jr., Javaris Crittenton, Acie Law IV, and Gabe Pruitt:
Points, assists, turnovers, blocks, and steals listed per 100 individual possessions
| Name | %Min | eFG% | FT% | PPWS | Pts | A | TO | BS | S | OR% | DR% |
| Conley | 78.5 | 55.1 | 68.8 | 1.18 | 21.7 | 12.0 | 4.3 | 0.5 | 4.3 | 2.7 | 9.8 |
| Crittenton | 77.8 | 50.1 | 78.3 | 1.10 | 25.8 | 10.5 | 7.1 | 0.1 | 3.8 | 3.3 | 10.9 |
| Law | 84.2 | 54.4 | 77.8 | 1.20 | 32.8 | 9.0 | 4.7 | 0.1 | 2.1 | 0.9 | 10.1 |
| Pruitt | 57.0 | 51.2 | 80.0 | 1.13 | 22.5 | 7.9 | 3.3 | 0.5 | 3.3 | 2.1 | 7.4 |
Foxsports.com's Jeff Goodman pointed out during the season that Acie Law's assist numbers are (almost certainly) inflated by the stat-keepers in College Station.
For the year, Law was credited with 11.73 assists per 100 possessions in home games and 5.99 assists per 100 possessions in road and neutral games. As a team, Texas A&M were credited with assists on 78% of their made field goals at home compared with 45% of their made field goals in road and neutral games.
I'd guess that, in general, players benefit from their home-court statisticians to some degree. Even if they don't, the economic realities of college basketball make it far more likely that a good player on a good team will face hopelessly overmatched opposition at home and boost their rate stats thusly.
I haven't the time or data to do a proper study of the average home-court advantage, but I did run the same numbers for Mike Conley as Ohio State, like Texas A&M, played a weak non-conference slate at home. Conley averaged 13.3 assists per 100 possessions at home and 10.9 assists per 100 possessions in road or neutral games. Ohio State was credited with an assist on 60% of their made field goals at home compared with 54% of their made field goals in road and neutral games.
I don't see any evidence in the table above that encourages me to buck consensus and argue that anyone other than Conley is the top point guard in the draft. Only Acie Law has comparable numbers but Conley is almost three years younger than Acie Law and is already the better ball-handler, passer, and defender. Even if Conley isn't able to significantly improve his shooting (30.3 3PT%, 68.8 FT%), he showed the ability to finish in and around the basket by making 57.8% of his two-point field goal attempts last season. (In comparison, Law made 51%, Pruitt 49.6%, and Crittenton 48.8% of their two-point attempts.)
I rate Law as the second-best point guard available, especially for a team that wants/needs an immediate contribution. I don't know if Law is going to get much better as a player, but I wouldn't be surprised if his performance took a different shape in the NBA. It's highly unlikely he'll be asked to carry an NBA team offensively to anything approaching the degree he carried Texas A&M. Thus, his ability as a volume scorer will have less value necessitating that he remain an efficient scorer and that he limit his turnovers.
I think Jameer Nelson is a reasonable comp for Law with the stipulation that Law's size (6-3 1/2, 186 vs. 6-0 1/4, 199 for Nelson) should prevent him from being the defensive liability Nelson has proven to be in certain situations.
If a team is looking to add a point guard through the draft but is not seeking an immediate contribution from that player, a case can be made for taking Javaris Crittenton ahead of Acie Law. The risk is that, whereas Law has demonstrated improvement (at Texas A&M's cost) between the ages of 18 and 22...
| Year | %Min | eFG% | FT% | PPWS | Pts | A | TO | BS | S | OR% | DR% |
| FR | 54.7 | 41.5 | 75.9 | 0.93 | 18.9 | 9.7 | 4.9 | 0.0 | 3.2 | 1.5 | 9.5 |
| SO | 75.9 | 54.2 | 71.6 | 1.15 | 23.9 | 9.9 | 5.5 | 0.0 | 2.1 | 2.6 | 10.7 |
| JR | 83.7 | 49.6 | 76.4 | 1.09 | 28.4 | 7.0 | 4.4 | 0.1 | 2.9 | 2.3 | 9.8 |
| SR | 84.2 | 54.4 | 77.8 | 1.20 | 32.8 | 9.0 | 4.7 | 0.1 | 2.1 | 0.9 | 10.1 |
...the drafting team must assume the risk that Crittenton will develop enough over the course of his initial contract to make a contribution in the NBA. Crittenton had a promising freshman season in college but he does not look, either to my eye or by the numbers, ready to contribute to a NBA team at this point in time.
Crittenton's scoring volume and efficiency were certainly acceptable for a college freshman. Especially encouraging was his ability to score inside the three-point line (48.8 2PTFG%, 78.3 FT% with a FT Rate of 30.8) as it may take a couple of years (at minimum, would be my guess) for Crittenton to develop NBA three-point range. Crittenton's rebounding numbers (3.3 OR%/10.9 DR%) are quite good for a college guard.
That he averaged 7.1 turnovers per 100 possessions is the greatest indication that Crittenton is not ready to play point guard in the NBA immediately. Watching him last year, it was obvious that he struggled to make good decisions. However, I would not be surprised if some of Crittenton's turnover problems were systemic to Georgia Tech. The Yellow Jackets turned it over on 21.9% of their possessions last year which (despite ranking at 208th in the country, per kenpom) was a significant improvement upon their 2006 turnover rate of 24.7% and not that far off the 2005 National Runner-Up team's 20.9 TO% led by point guard Jarrett Jack (5.7 TO/100 for Jack that season).
If Crittenton gets drafted by a team that is able/willing to bring him along slowly, I wouldn't be surprised if turned out to be a quality starter in three or four years. If he's drafted by a team that gives him an inordinate amount of responsibility immediately his weaknesses could well overwhelm his potential. Which is to say that I hope, for his sake, that he is not drafted by the Atlanta Hawks.
Like Kyle Lowry last year (this is a comparison I make strictly in terms of potential value as they're not that similar in how they produce value), Gabe Pruitt appears set for a substantial NBA career as a very good backup or capable starter. Should he be able to combine the efficient shooting of his freshman season, the volume scoring of his sophomore season, and the assist-to-turnover ratio of his junior season he could be something greater. It's unlikely that he'll make his various career-to-date bests his annual norms but the basis for optimism exists in his numbers.
| Name | %Min | eFG% | FT% | PPWS | Pts | A | TO | BS | S | OR% | DR% |
| FR | 74.7 | 61.0 | 70.3 | 1.26 | 22.4 | 5.8 | 4.6 | 0.1 | 3.5 | 2.3 | 7.5 |
| SO | 71.0 | 51.1 | 80.3 | 1.13 | 28.9 | 5.3 | 4.6 | 0.5 | 3.8 | 1.9 | 12.1 |
| JR | 57.0 | 51.2 | 80.0 | 1.13 | 22.5 | 7.9 | 3.3 | 0.5 | 3.3 | 2.1 | 7.4 |
Thus, the '07 draft class point guard rankings:
1. Mike Conley, Jr.
2. Acie Law IV
3. Javaris Crittenton
4. Gabe Pruitt
Consideration of Aaron Brooks, Bobby Brown, Zabian Dowdell, Taurean Green, Jared Jordan, Ramon Sessions and others to follow.
Thursday, May 24, 2007
Oden v. Durant
Catching up with Henry Abbott's celebratory posting from yesterday, I was most taken with this entry, specifically this portion:
Points, assists, turnovers, blocks, and steals listed per 100 individual possessions
Caveats and Analysis
Rick Barnes is not a good defensive coach. Despite being putative rivals, I'm still irritated that TJ Ford never learned how to use his speed and quickness to become a useful defensive player. Durant, entering the NBA, is closer to Ford (though with far, far superior physical gifts) than to last year's anomalously defensively accomplished Longhorn draftees LaMarcus Aldridge and PJ Tucker. Kevin Durant is 18 years old, has not received good defensive instruction and, still, unique among comparable potential top-20 draftees he averaged 3 blocks and 3 steals per 100 possessions.
Portland will have their pick of one of the two best prospects to enter the league in the last four years to consolidate their accomplishment in acquiring the two best college players from last year's draft. Despite Durant's prodigous scoring ability and his tremendous potential to develop into an excellent rebounder and defender, I rate Oden slightly ahead. Oden already is an excellent rebounder and defender and is much closer to Durant as a scorer than common perception would indicate.
Which isn't to say that Seattle's going to be distraught about drafting Portland's leftovers.
"Durant can be a big man too. He outrebounded Oden handily in college, and can defend a lot of bigs."Let's (re-)inaugurate Hoopinion's 2007 Draft coverage (now that the previous inaugural entry has lost most of its relevance) by looking at the 2006-07 numbers from draft entrants 1A and 1B.
Points, assists, turnovers, blocks, and steals listed per 100 individual possessions
| Name | %Min | eFG% | FT% | PPWS | Pts | A | TO | BS | S | OR% | DR% |
| Durant | 87.2 | 53.6 | 81.6 | 1.19 | 41.6 | 2.1 | 4.6 | 3.1 | 3.0 | 9.2 | 23.6 |
| Oden | 58.2 | 61.3 | 62.8 | 1.27 | 33.1 | 1.4 | 4.3 | 6.9 | 1.2 | 15.2 | 23.3 |
Caveats and Analysis
- Once healthy, Oden played 71.2% of Ohio State's minutes.
- Oden had higher FT Rate ((FTM*100)/FGA) on the year than did Durant (40.4 v. 32.3). I don't know the exact number of free throws that Oden shot left-handed, but I believe it's safe to say (assuming he can shoot better than 62.8% from the line right-handed) that the value inherent in his ability to get to the line is not fully reflected in last year's scoring volume or efficiency numbers.
- Henry's not entirely correct in his characterization of Durant as a rebounder relative to Oden. Durant did (slightly) outrebound Oden on the defensive glass, but Oden was a significantly stronger offensive rebounder (per opportunity). Per 40 minutes, Texas averaged 5 more possessions than Ohio State (not to mention the 7 extra overtime periods Texas played), thus the discrepancy between per game and per opportunity comparisons.
- Henry is entirely correct in stating that Durant has tremendous potential as a defensive player.
| Name | BS/100 | S/100 |
| Durant | 3.1 | 3.0 |
| Green | 2.3 | 1.6 |
| Horford | 4.0 | 1.6 |
| McRoberts | 4.3 | 2.0 |
| Noah | 4.2 | 2.6 |
| Thornton | 2.2 | 2.9 |
| B Wright | 3.5 | 2.0 |
| J Wright | 2.7 | 3.0 |
| T Young | 0.8 | 2.5 |
Rick Barnes is not a good defensive coach. Despite being putative rivals, I'm still irritated that TJ Ford never learned how to use his speed and quickness to become a useful defensive player. Durant, entering the NBA, is closer to Ford (though with far, far superior physical gifts) than to last year's anomalously defensively accomplished Longhorn draftees LaMarcus Aldridge and PJ Tucker. Kevin Durant is 18 years old, has not received good defensive instruction and, still, unique among comparable potential top-20 draftees he averaged 3 blocks and 3 steals per 100 possessions.
Portland will have their pick of one of the two best prospects to enter the league in the last four years to consolidate their accomplishment in acquiring the two best college players from last year's draft. Despite Durant's prodigous scoring ability and his tremendous potential to develop into an excellent rebounder and defender, I rate Oden slightly ahead. Oden already is an excellent rebounder and defender and is much closer to Durant as a scorer than common perception would indicate.
Which isn't to say that Seattle's going to be distraught about drafting Portland's leftovers.
Friday, April 27, 2007
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
Inaugural 2007 NBA Draft Post
From Chad Ford's blog yesterday (Insider) regarding Jeff Green and Roy Hibbert declaring for the draft:
Points, assists, turnovers, blocks, and steals listed per 100 individual possessions
Last year, Hibbert was a better shooter, a more efficient scorer (This despite his lower FT%--Hibbert's FT Rate was 37.9 vs. 20.4 for Hawes. Hibbert got to the line far more often.), per possession, Hibbert scored more often, committed fewer turnovers, blocked more shots (in fewer opportunities--Georgetown's opponents attempted 37.7% of their field goals from behind the three-point line, Washington's opponents took just 32.8% of their shots from beyond the arc), and had slightly more steals. Per opportunity, Hibbert grabbed an offensive rebound almost twice as often as Hawes and had a slight edge on the defensive glass.
The numbers are not the place to make the case that Hawes is a better player.
The case for Hawes over Hibbert lies in his age (18 vs. 20), his stamina (Hawes played a higher percentage of his team's minutes despite missing a game), and the relative competence of the two offenses they played in last year (though, if you give credit to Hawes for overcoming poor guard play, I think you'd also have to debit him some for Washington's abysmal team defense).
Ford makes a good point that Hibbert's (relative) lack of athleticism may mean that he tops out as an excellent role player in the NBA. I'm skeptical that Hawes offers even that in terms of upside. It's hard for a half-way decent big man in college basketball to get just 1 steal per 100 possessions or an OR% of just 8.1.
Does a team really want to draft a player in the hopes that, by the time they have to make a decision about his second contract, he's able to contribute what Raef LaFrentz did as a rookie?
"[Hibbert] is a legit 7 feet, 2 inches tall and has proven to be quite skilled around the basket. He has good footwork, is a good passer and seems to have a good basketball IQ in the paint. So what keeps him from being ranked as a top 5 pick? He's not a great athlete, was just a so-so rebounder in college and isn't a great shot blocker."So let's look at the numbers...
"And for those of you who ask why Washington's Spencer Hawes is rated ahead of Hibbert, look at the numbers. Hawes is doing as a freshman what Hibbert is just now beginning to do as a junior. And while Hibbert has the height advantage by a couple of inches, Hawes is a better player in just about every other area of the game."
Points, assists, turnovers, blocks, and steals listed per 100 individual possessions
| Name | %Min | eFG% | FT% | PPWS | Pts | A | TO | BS | S | OR% | DR% |
| Hawes | 69.0 | 53.3 | 75.5 | 1.14 | 29.5 | 3.8 | 5.0 | 3.5 | 1.0 | 8.1 | 18.1 |
| Hibbert | 65.7 | 67.1 | 68.6 | 1.39 | 32.9 | 2.7 | 3.2 | 6.2 | 1.2 | 15.0 | 18.3 |
Last year, Hibbert was a better shooter, a more efficient scorer (This despite his lower FT%--Hibbert's FT Rate was 37.9 vs. 20.4 for Hawes. Hibbert got to the line far more often.), per possession, Hibbert scored more often, committed fewer turnovers, blocked more shots (in fewer opportunities--Georgetown's opponents attempted 37.7% of their field goals from behind the three-point line, Washington's opponents took just 32.8% of their shots from beyond the arc), and had slightly more steals. Per opportunity, Hibbert grabbed an offensive rebound almost twice as often as Hawes and had a slight edge on the defensive glass.
The numbers are not the place to make the case that Hawes is a better player.
The case for Hawes over Hibbert lies in his age (18 vs. 20), his stamina (Hawes played a higher percentage of his team's minutes despite missing a game), and the relative competence of the two offenses they played in last year (though, if you give credit to Hawes for overcoming poor guard play, I think you'd also have to debit him some for Washington's abysmal team defense).
Ford makes a good point that Hibbert's (relative) lack of athleticism may mean that he tops out as an excellent role player in the NBA. I'm skeptical that Hawes offers even that in terms of upside. It's hard for a half-way decent big man in college basketball to get just 1 steal per 100 possessions or an OR% of just 8.1.
Does a team really want to draft a player in the hopes that, by the time they have to make a decision about his second contract, he's able to contribute what Raef LaFrentz did as a rookie?
Thursday, March 15, 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)