Monthly Archives: June 2014

Parsing through the NCAA Prospects: Part 1

23 Monday Jun 2014

Posted by in NCAA

≈ 10 Comments

Tags

, , , ,

I spent the weekend combing through the international draft class.  Now I may as well get my final thoughts on the NCAA prospects in the draft.  I believe I have said all I need to regarding Marcus Smart, Aaron Gordon, Andrew Wiggins, and Julius Randle.  But there are other players I have written about who I would like to make follow up commentary, and other prospects who have been nothing more than a blip on my big board.

Joel Embiid
I am a huge fan of Embiid’s talent and upside, so I was disappointed to hear that he injured his foot.  Further, this makes pinpointing his draft value a painful experience, as I have no medical expertise and do not believe I have any edge whatsoever when it comes to predicting health.  But I will share my thoughts nevertheless.

From the sound of it, this particular injury is a worse than his back injury but not condemning on its own.  Zydrunas Ilgauskas made a strong recovery from the condition early in his career in spite of being 2 inches taller than Embiid.  Yao Ming didn’t recover, but the Rockets’ doctor came out and noted that Yao was a 7’6 monster with uniquely high arches on his foot, and the injury is unlikely to affect Embiid as badly as it did Yao.  Further, it seems that the early prognosis is a favorable point for Embiid as past cases have been exacerbating by going undiagnosed in their early stages.  While the injury on its own seems like it could derail Embiid, it sounds like he has a good enough chance of full recovery to not have his draft stock torpedoed by it.

What sits less well than me is that in 647 minutes, Embiid managed to hurt his knee and back and then he somehow managed to injure his foot in the offseason.  As much as I’d like to believe that he simply has the worst injury luck ever, it’s hard to shake the notion that he’s simply bad at staying healthy.  I have no idea how predictive a myriad of injuries at a young age are regarding future ability to stay healthy, but it feels a bit scary.

Embiid now has to fade his foot injury, general durability issues, and the fact that he’s going to miss out on sorely needed competitive reps to make up for lost time with respect to playing experience.  This definitely deflates his draft stock, but I have no idea how much.  For all I know he’s doomed and we should be slashing his draft stock by like 75%.  Or maybe we are all over-reactive to injuries and this only depresses his stock by 15%.

What I do know is this: once health is assumed, Embiid is miles more valuable than any other prospect in the draft.  He was in a tier of his own before the injury concerns popped up, and super upside should be valued on an exponential curve.  If I was given the choice of healthy Embiid at #1 or the #2 and #3 picks, I would have chosen healthy Embiid rather confidently.  It’s fair to say that healthy Embiid has approximately twice the draft value of healthy Exum (my #2 prospect), so instantly dropping him below #1 is not necessarily correct.  It is well within the realm of possibility that his stock should not be slashed by 50%+, in which case he is still worth the #1 pick injury risk and all.  There’s also a chance that it should be slashed by more than 50%, which would slide him down multiple slots.

So the short answer is I have no idea what to think about his injury, but I can say that his talent is so awesome he is going to remain at or at least near the top of my big board.

Jabari Parker
I covered most of the reasons why I believe he is comfortably inferior to Melo as a prospect, and now I can’t stop feeling sour toward him.  It keeps nagging at me that he was a world beater vs. bad defenses and cancerous vs good defenses, and Layne Vashro pointing out that he had less than half the assist:TOV ratio of Melo is a smoking gun to me.

Given that his tools are at best average and he projects to be a liability defensively, this is a sign that he may not be nearly what he’s cracked up to be.  The problem is that bulk scoring is vastly overrated and ball movement is vastly underrated.  Jabari might me the least Spurs-like prospect in the draft, which can’t bode well for his future.

Jabari’s glimmer of hope is that he did display good feel for the game in non-conference blowouts, when he was a willing and competent passer.  I imagine his issue is that he lives in a world where he is expected to score every high leverage bucket, and this caused him to play sub-optimally once the conference schedule began.  He still has hope to become a good player if he can be re-wired to always play as if it’s a blowout and he needs to get his teammates involved.  But his conference and tournament performance is still possibly indicative of some fundamental flaw (i.e. he doesn’t strike me as particularly perceptive), and at his current rate he has some risk of becoming the next Derrick Williams.  Frankly I wouldn’t use a top 5 pick on somebody with an upper bound of the next Carmelo anyway since he’s such a ball stopper and defensive liability.  Jabari’s ticket to success is definitely going to be developing in the Paul Pierce direction of a more balanced player who doesn’t stop the ball and chuck away.

I have dropped Jabari out of my top 5, but I still have him ahead of Wiggins on my big board.  He has enough red flags for me to disagree with the narrative that he’s a top 2 pick, but none of his flaws are necessarily fatal and he still has enough skill to be molded into something nifty.  And I have to admit I’m a bit frightened to fade him too aggressively him since he’s such an intense competitor.  He has a wide range of possible outcomes and I am fascinated to see how he develops as a pro.

Noah Vonleh
I don’t think I have written anything about Vonleh yet in spite of him perpetually being on the top 10 of my big board.  He has good stats, solid tools, enough skills, and is super young so this earns him a top 10 slot.  But he’s overall a fairly bland prospect.  He’s not a rim protector, he’s a weak finisher, he has bad hands, and he has a horrible assist to turnover ratio.  His main appeal lies in his small sample 3 point shooting where he made 16/33 attempts.  It’s nice to get a stretch 4 who can rebound and possibly play solid defense, but I struggle to see how he becomes a top 15 player and he has plenty of bust risk.  In my eyes his upside is David West with 3 point range.  That’s not a bad upside, and I like Vonleh considerably more than Julius Randle. But I think it would be a big mistake to take Vonleh over Marcus Smart or Aaron Gordon, and I also favor international bigs Jusuf Nurkic and Clint Capela.

Tyler Ennis
Earlier in the season, I wrote about Ennis’s amazing statistical splits where he is at his best against good defenses, in the halfcourt, and in close and late situations.  These are situations that provide the best tests for NBA translation, and he aced all of them.  This along with his fantastic assist:TOV rate define Ennis to me– the man simply knows how to navigate through a set defense.  It is especially impressive coming from a freshman, as I believe PG’s have the toughest transition from high school to college.  They are constantly navigating through bigger and more athletic opposing players than they are accustomed to as the smallest player on the floor, and it is common for players to struggle at first.  I am attracted to prospects who display some level of outlier positive quality, and Ennis seems to possibly have unique feel for the game.

The downside of Ennis is that his great steal rate is completely fraudulent playing in Syracuse’s zone.  He posted a mediocre steal rate in the FIBA u19 games playing for team Canada, and given his mediocre athletic package he projects to be a liability as a man to man defender in the NBA.  He is not certain to be below average defensively, but it is the most likely outcome.

Overall I rather like Ennis, as his unique feel for the game merits a sliver of John Stockton or Steve Nash equity.  His value is somewhat depressed by the current PG depth in the NBA, so my final ranking may not reflect exactly the extent to which I like him.  But after typing this up I feel inclined to at least move him ahead of Noah Vonleh.

Elfrid Payton
I have had Payton as a mid-1st round pick all season long and now everybody is finally catching up ranking him as a fringe lotto pick.  Chad Ford even has him ahead of Ennis, and I think the two players are in a close race for 3rd best point guard in the draft.

Payton’s big advantage over Ennis is his defense.  The two have similar steal rates, except Payton’s was accrued by being a genuinely good ball hawk as opposed to playing in a gimmicky zone and is far more meaningful.  He has good height (6’3.75″) and length (6’8″) for a PG and moves well laterally.  I believe he’s a clear favorite to be an above average defensive PG which is his big selling point over Ennis.  That said it is excessive to try to compare him to Marcus Smart, as he does not have the outlier level of defensive performance that Smart does.  Smart has a higher steal rate against tougher competition, an obviously huge impact on his team’s defense, and has better tools as he is much stronger than Payton.  Payton is a good defensive prospect but he is not on Smart’s level of elite.

Offensively is where Payton is a bit of a mystery.  Layne Vashro’s EWP model ranks him as the 9th best NCAA prospect with John Wall and Derrick Rose included among his top comparisons.  But Kevin Pelton’s WARP model ranks him as just an early 2nd rounder, as he has less faith in his ability to translate offensively.  Suffice it to say that his future on the offensive end is polarizing.

I do not believe the Wall or Rose comparisons are entirely fair.  Those guys all had some level of freakish speed and/or athleticism to accentuate their offensive upside.  Payton is a solid athlete but his physical tools are not enough to carry a guard who cannot shoot to offensive stardom.  They are good enough to dominate Sun Belt defenses in transition, but much of that production will be lost in translation as he moves on to the NBA.  So his 54.1% 2p% on high volume likely overstates his upside, as he was horrible from mid-range and there are questions about his ability to finish against NBA help defense given his sub-par strength and non-elite athleticism.

That said, I’m not completely sour on his offensive package.  In my sample of watching him, his ball handling ability stood out as particularly impressive.  He got to the rim unassisted in the half-court more than any other PG prospect. Even if it was in a weak conference, his combination of handling and quicks give him solid upside as an NBA slasher.  He also fared well as a dependent scorer, tallying 31 assisted half-court FG’s made at the rim as per hoop-math.com.  Among point guards in the class he only trailed Semaj Christon (with 35) who only played PG part-time as he shared duties with Dee Davis.  This offers a bit of hope for his ability to play off the ball in case he doesn’t develop his shot. He also has solid potential as a playmaker and is a good offensive rebounder for a point guard.  And who knows, maybe he improves his shot to an outlier extent and becomes a better than break even 3 point shooter.

Overall he may struggle to translate offensively, but he does have enough positives to have hope of becoming solid on that end.  Ultimately I favor Ennis because he brings more outlier appeal to the table that may result in stardom, as Payton doesn’t have a clear calling card to become great offensively.  But there’s nothing wrong with a point guard who is decent on offense and good on defense, and like other prospects he can always surprise with an outlier rate of development.

I like Payton and have him as a late lottery value right behind Vonleh and Ennis.  Since so few teams need PG’s, one of him or Ennis will inevitably slide and provide fantastic value to the team that pulls the trigger.

Anyway, those are lots of words on Elfrid so now is a good time to cut off part 1.  I’m going to try to squeeze in as much last minute analysis as I can get pre-draft and then I’ll post my updated big board.

How Good Is This International Class? Part 2

22 Sunday Jun 2014

Posted by in International

≈ 5 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

Yesterday I wrote about Dante Exum, Jusuf Nurkic, and Clint Capela in part one of my international analysis. Now onto the next tier of international players in part 2:

Damien Inglis
Inglis checks in at the 6th highest international WARP and 23rd overall, and he offers reasons to be liked beyond the box score.  At the Nike Hoop Summit, he measured 6’8.5″ with a 7’3″ wingspan and 240 pounds.  For comparison, LeBron James measured 6’8″ 7’0.25″ wingspan 245 pounds pre-draft.  For a 19 year old SF prospect, Inglis has an absolutely stellar body.  Weight is not precisely descriptive of strength, but based on his defense of Jahlil Okafor who is 6’10.75″ 272 pounds, it appears that his strength is good.  His combination of strength, height, and length advantage give him the flexibility to comfortably defend PFs.

The area where he trails LeBron physically is his athleticism, which is only average as opposed to freakish. But if your tools all range from average to great, you net have good tools.  Further, DraftExpress believes that he moves well laterally and has good defensive fundamentals.  I wouldn’t take this as an absolute truth, but DX is accurate more often than not.  Leaving some margin for error on his lateral movement and defensive acumen, Inglis still has quite a bit of intrigue.  Size, length, quicks, and defensive instincts collectively offer a ton of upside and versatility defensively. He has the tools to guard either forward position and seems custom built to match up 1 on 1 with star wings such as LeBron.  Before getting too excited it’s worth noting that his steal rate was solid but not great (1.6 per 40 pace adjusted) and his block rate was surprisingly low (0.4 per 40 pace adjusted), so he’s far from a guarantee to be a stud defensively.  But based on his physical tools and scouting, there is quite a bit more to like about his D than stats suggest, and WARP already likes him as a 1st round pick.

Offensively Inglis shows why he is not receiving 1st round consideration, as he only averaged 4.6 pts per game in 15.3 minutes and is turnover prone.  But he doesn’t appear to be a complete zero offensively.  He shot well in a small sample making 12/31 3P (38.7%) and 21/29 FT (72.4%).  The small samples likely overstate his shooting ability as he is reportedly streaky and his form needs work, but he appears competent enough for his age to be a solid bet to develop into a capable NBA floor spacer.  He also has a good assist rate, posting 2.7 assists per 40 pace adjusted.

Layne Vashro has hypothesized that assist:turnover ratio is especially important for projecting 3/4 tweeners to translate to the NBA, and I find that hypothesis to be compelling.  Undersized PF’s such as Michael Beasley and Derrick Williams have dominated undersized NCAA competition, and then lacked the basketball IQ to thrive vs. NBA competition that can physically match up versus them. Here are some examples of assist:turnover rate from that mold, and Inglis checks in at a solid 0.84.  Note that not all of the players listed were freshmen, and Inglis is the age of an NCAA freshman playing in a tougher league.

Inglis is a bit of mystery box because of his age and limited sample, but add everything up and you have a toolsy 3/4 who offers plenty of defensive upside and versatility as well as the ability to likely space the floor and move the ball.  Even though he likely won’t be a big time scorer, his pace adjusted scoring is only a shade under Nic Batum’s first season in France (12.1 vs 12.3).  It seems his handles are a work in progress but he has some handling ability to work with nevertheless.  If he develops well, he could become an awesome 3 + D role player who fits into almost any lineup.  His physical profile and skill set are similar to those of Kawhi Leonard.  Even though he is a clear underdog to become as good as Kawhi, he is not drawing dead and is a painfully obvious 1st round value to me.

So why is he rated as a 2nd round pick (36th DX, 37th ESPN)?  As far as I can tell it’s because bulk scoring is overrated and French prospects are underrated.  If the San Antonio Spurs showed us anything in their demolition of the Heat, it’s that off the dribble scoring isn’t all that important when you move the ball, space the floor, and play intelligent team basketball.  Incidentally, the Spurs have drafted three French players in round 1 since 2000 (Tony Parker, Ian Mahinmi, Livio Jean-Charles) as well as Nando de Colo in round 2. They also signed Boris Diaw as a FA after he was released by the Bobcats. Damien Inglis appears to be completely in their wheelhouse. With the Spurs picking last in round 1, I believe he is an underdog to slide past them into round 2.

Nikola Jokic
The 4th member of the super statistical international quartet, Nikola Jokic is an exceptionally skilled, but slow and unathletic big man.  His lack of mobility or explosiveness mean that his stats should be de-valued as he projects to become a defensive liability and poor athleticism casts doubt on his ability to translate offensively, but there is still plenty to like.

Jokic is 6’11” with a 7’3″ wingspan and weighs 253 pounds, which gives him acceptable size to play center.  What stands out about Jokic is his incredible assist to turnover ratio at 3.0 vs 2.3 pace adjusted per 40.  That is absolutely stellar for a 19 year old center playing in a professional league.  In Marc Gasol’s final season of European play, he turned 23 midseason and posted 3.0 pace adjusted assists vs. 2.4 turnovers in the ACB and 3.7 vs 3.4 in a smaller Eurocup sample.  ACB is a tougher league than the Adriatic, but the discrepancy between leagues is completely dwarfed by Gasol’s 4 year age advantage at the time, and Gasol is arguably the best passing big man in the NBA.  Nikola Jokic’s passing is an outlier level of good for a big prospect, and it gives him his own unique form of upside.

Beyond his passing, Jokic is a capable shooter although it didn’t show in his Adriatic sample as he only converted 15/68 3PA (22.1%).  By all accounts this is not reflective of his shooting ability and the low % should be chalked up to poor variance.  He seems to have a solid shot of becoming a competent NBA floor spacer.  His struggles from 3 were atoned for by his dominance from 2, where he converted 63.6% of his attempts.  I am not sure he necessarily projects to be a great interior scorer in the NBA since he lacks the explosiveness to finish around the rim with dunks, and it is possible that his 2p% is padded by good variance on mid-range and short jumpers.  But he also may have succeeded due to high IQ, good post moves, and touch around the rim.  I imagine his interior scoring is translatable to some extent based on his size and skill level, but his lack of athleticism also casts some doubt.

The problem for Jokic is that his poor tools outside of size will likely cause him to struggle defensively. Nate Duncan confirms this narrative with his eye test, although I am not nearly as bearish as Duncan on the implications of Jokic’s physical deficiencies.  The fact of the matter is that size is a tool, and a prospect with center height and length and guard skill level cannot be written off due to poor athleticism.  He doesn’t need to jump a mile in the air to get his shot or passes off over the defense.  When I see DX and ESPN both rate him as 42nd on their big boards, I can’t help but think of Brad Miller who was a statistical beast in college but went undrafted due to being slow, white, and unathletic.

I buy that his poor athleticism drops Jokic out of the top 10 in spite of having top 5 stats.  I do not buy that it pushes him out of round 1, as I have him as a clear top 20 value.  And frankly I can’t fathom why anybody should rather have Julius Randle than Jokic.  Randle is just as slow mentally as Jokic is physically, except instead of being center sized he’s an undersized PF.  It shows in steal + block rates, with Jokic’s per 40 rates crushing Randle’s (1.1/1.4 vs 0.6/1.0) in spite of playing in a tougher league.  Randle is a much better rebounder (13.5 vs 9.5 per 40), but that is clearly less important than Jokic’s edges in size, skill, and basketball IQ.  Randle’s outlier skill is bullying players who are too small to play in the NBA, Jokic’s is one that correlates strongly with NBA success.  A similar comparison would also demonstrate that Jokic has superior potential on both sides of the ball to Doug McDermott, yet both McDermott and Randle are projected as lotto picks and Jokic is slated to go in round 2.

Dario Saric
I don’t have much to say about Saric.  His translated stats are solid but not great as they put him 20th in the WARP rankings.  That’s roughly what I anticipated, and outside of his 6’10” height he doesn’t have a single tool that is average or better.  I simply don’t see how he has the physical package to thrive as a primary ball handler in the NBA.  The scouting narrative is that he has a virtuoso passing ability that gives him unique upside, which doesn’t strike me as quite enough to override his deficiencies.  I could see him being a Boris Diaw stretch 4 type who can move the ball and occasionally knock down 3’s or create a little of his own offense.  Or he could be an Evan Turner who cannot translate his ball dominant ways to the NBA as he faces tougher defenses.  He seems like a fine flier in the late 1st round, but I don’t see how he’s worth a gamble in the lottery.  It appears that Nate Duncan agrees with my assessment, which is enough to make me feel comfortable that I’m not missing any details of integral importance with my assessment from afar.

Even though Saric is hyped as the 2nd best international prospect in this class, I believe he’s only the 6th or 7th best in the class.

Vasilije Micic
Micic only rates as an early 2nd rounder according to WARP, but based on Duncan’s scouting report WARP may underrate him.  Duncan is especially impressed with Micic’s handling and passing ability, and those skills are not always fully captured by statistics.  That is the primary reason why I am comfortable rating Nik Stauskas higher than statistical models, so I do not see any reason why it should not apply to Micic.  Also WARP appears to value high assist rates less so than other models, as Kyle Anderson ranks as the 14th best NCAA prospect by WARP whereas he ranks 2nd according to Layne Vashro’s EWP model.

The biggest strike against Micic is that he’s not exceptionally athletic which inhibits his upside.  But he has a solid 2p% and DX notes that he finishes surprisingly well in their situational stats.  Also his jump shot is mediocre, as he shot 22/76 (28.9%) from 3 and (60/86) 69.8% on FT’s.  But shooting is also a skill where prospects are capable of making significant leaps, and that sample hardly seems condemning of Micic’s upside.

Defense is also a concern, but given his strong steal rate (2.1 per 40 pace adjusted), good size (6’5.75″ height 6’7″ wingspan 202 pounds), and the fact that he is not woefully slow or unathletic, I wouldn’t say he’s guaranteed to be a sieve.  Also he has the size to guard SG’s at least part time, which opens the door for a wide range of back-court pairings and mitigates the fact that he plays the current deepest position in the NBA.

People tend to associate athleticism with upside, but certain skill sets can buck that trend.  I doubt anybody pegged John Stockton or Steve Nash as high upside prospects when they were drafted in the mid 1st round, but they went on to become two of the best offensive players of all-time.  That level of greatness may not be within grasp for Micic, but if he’s as crafty as Duncan suggests it’s fair to say he has an outside shot of becoming great.  Even if it’s only 2% that’s worth enough to make him a 1st round value.  There are so many good PG’s in the draft and the league already that it naturally depresses the value of players at the position, but I buy Micic as somebody who should get drafted in the 20’s instead of the 30’s as consensus suggests.  I also believe there is a fair case to be made that he’s a more valuable prospect than Saric.

2nd rounders
Walter Tavares has appeal as an Omer Asik type of prospect who thrives off size, defense, and rebounding, and is a complete zero offensively.  He is already 22 and still making up for a late start, and I wouldn’t be surprised if he simply started playing too late to make a big impact.  I think he’s likely worth an early 2nd or maybe even a late 1st based on his body and mobility, but he’s going to be a drag offensively no matter what so I’ll likely rate him in the 30’s on my final big board.

Bogdan Bogdanovic rates as an early-mid 2nd rounder according to DX and ESPN, and a mid-late 2nd rounder based on most statistical models.  I don’t have a strong opinion on him one way or the other– he seems like a fairly balanced prospect without any sharp strengths or weaknesses that make me inclined to doubt models or scouting.  He’s a 2nd round flier who might become a decent role player or might not.

Artem Klimenko is a complete and utter mystery box who doesn’t have any translatable stats.  If nothing else his physical profile and the fact that he made 74% of his FT’s seems to make him worth an early-mid 2nd round flier.  Maybe he has no clue how to play basketball, or maybe he turns out to be a good defensive piece who isn’t a trainwreck offensively.  It’s difficult to assign probabilities without a baseline performance against legitimate competition, but I think it’s correct to err on the side of pessimism and gamble on him once the available known quantities are unlikely to amount to anything of substance.

Ioannis Papapetrou also seems draftable as a skilled role playing SF who will likely be a defensive liability.  Beyond that I’m not sure if anybody merits a pick– perhaps Alessandro Gentile but he sounds like more of a undrafted FA.

Conclusions
While WARP rating internationals as 4 of the top 5 players in the draft slightly overstates the goodness of this international class, I believe it is closer to correct than the scouting consensus.  In my estimation, there are 7 internationals who are worthy of a 1st round selection. 6 of those players are underrated by ESPN and DX big boards, most of them by comfortable margins. Dario Saric is the lone overrated international. There are another 3-5 players who merit a look in round 2 who all seem rated roughly appropriately by DX and ESPN. This international class is loaded, and with enough luck it may measure up to the 2008 class that included Danilo Gallinari, Serge Ibaka, Nicolas Batum, Nikola Pekovic, Omer Asik, and Goran Dragic.

The funny thing is that the draft at first was pitched to be the best NCAA class ever.  But then Wiggins, Randle, and Parker all started to look like possible busts, and the class was salvaged by the emergence of Joel Embiid as a possible superstar.  Now Embiid has a frightening injury narrative, and there may not be a single player in the class who makes for an above average #1 overall pick.  At this point, the NCAA crop has a number of solidly good prospects but overall is unspectacular, and the international class is responsible for keeping this draft afloat.  While Jabari Parker and Andrew Wiggins are currently projected as the top two picks in the draft, I would not be at all surprised if a handful of internationals end up developing into better pros than one or both of them.

I believe that colossal international busts like Darko Milicic and Nikoloz Tzkitishvili frightened scouts into taking a more conservative approach in evaluating internationals, but after the success of the 2008 class and Giannis Antetokoumpo appearing to be the steal of the 2013 draft it’s worth wondering when that trend is due to reverse.  Given the strong statistical crop this year as well as the increased emphasis on analytics across the NBA, I am fascinated to see how many of the top internationals go above their expected slot this season.

How Good Is This International Class? Part 1

21 Saturday Jun 2014

Posted by in International

≈ 26 Comments

Tags

, ,

The most challenging aspect of the draft for me is evaluating the international crop.  NCAA players are easy for me to work with since I’m intimately familiar with all of the players, coaches, and systems.  On the other hand, I am lacking in expertise in overseas leagues so solving the internationals involves quite a bit of thin slicing and guesswork.  But as I have tried to piece together the value of the respective internationals in this class, I have become increasingly high on the crop being especially strong.  This was reinforced when Kevin Pelton released his WARP ranking with 4 of his top 5 prospects being internationals.  Further, Dario Saric, Damien Inglis, and Walter Tavares rank as late 1st rounders and Vasilije Micic is an early 2nd according to WARP.  This not only aligns with my suspicion that the class is strong, but suggests that it is historically good.  That said his WARP formula also ranks Jordan Adams ahead of Joel Embiid, which is a friendly reminder that stats do not tell the entire story.  So let’s dive in to each player and discuss how scouting narratives may affect their value implied by statistical performances.

Dante Exum
I have already raved about Exum’s FIBA performance, where his statistics ranked him 4th according to WARP.  This seems correct to me, and WARP may even underrate his performance.  Most of the players used for translation analysis played in USA’s pressing defense, where they posted high steal rates which weighs heavily into the WARP formula.  Aaron Gordon looks significantly better according to his FIBA stats than he did playing in Arizona’s non-gambly shot prevention defense.  He had significantly better steal rate in the press (and suggests that he is underrated by his NCAA stats).  On the other hand, Tyler Ennis’s statistical performance was much weaker than his at Syracuse.  This is the most apples to apples comparison as he had to carry team Canada the same way Exum was forced to carry Australia.

On the other hand, Dario Saric was forced to carry team Croatia and performed on Exum’s level whereas he is ranked far lower according to his translated Adriatic stats.  This is a reminder that FIBA stats are only a 9 game sample, which is far too small to take at face value.  But Exum nevertheless posted a significantly better assist:turnover ratio (34:21 vs 44:43) in spite of having a bad game vs team USA, who Saric never faced.  His ability to carry the offense while protecting the ball so well at such a young age is both highly impressive and less prone to sample size variance than shooting percentages, for instance.  If nothing else, his vision and ability to protect the ball while creating loads of offense offer enough promise in tandem with his physical profile to justify the top 4 hype.

What the stats don’t show is that Exum hardly moves off the ball.  I don’t know if this is because he lacks stamina, competitiveness, or simply hasn’t been pushed to develop this aspect of his game yet.  It’s not a fatal flaw since he clearly has enough offensive upside to become an all-star even if he subscribes to the James Harden school of defense.  And with his tools and personality, it wouldn’t be shocking to see him eventually develop into a good defender anyway.  But this does give me enough pause to not instantly elevate him to #1 now that Joel Embiid’s injury concern has been heightened, and it does open the door for an argument that Marcus Smart is a superior prospect since Smart is such a safe commodity on defense.  I still have Exum locked in as a top 3 prospect and am considering him as the #1 prospect in the draft, but if there is a subtle reason to be skeptical of him this would be it.

Jusuf Nurkic
I wrote about Nurkic’s impressive Adriatic stats earlier in the season, and now that is supported by Pelton ranking him #3 in terms of WARP.  Nate Duncan (who seems to have a good eye test) recently shared a great scouting report on Nurkic, which I find encouraging for his prospect value beyond the stats for 2 reasons:

1) Duncan claims that Nurkic passes well out of double teams.  This bodes well for his ability to score efficiently against higher levels of competitions and not be a black hole of turnovers.
2) His quick feet allowed him to stop Dario Saric in their 1 on 1 matchups on multiple occasions.  The concern with Nurkic is that he doesn’t have the length or athleticism to be a traditional shot blocking rim protector.  But given his quick feet, strength, and size, it sounds like he can certainly be a defensive presence in his own rite.

Between his stats, physical profile, and scouting reports, I feel comfortable locking Nurkic in as a top 5 prospect.  There aren’t any scouting narratives that cast doubt on his potential outside of his poor leaping ability, which doesn’t seem particularly debilitating given his strengths.

Clint Capela
Capela ranks as the top international in the class according to WARP, ranking #2 behind only Marcus Smart.  Every statistical model I have seen ranks Capela exceptionally high, and he often appears ahead of Nurkic.  Further, he has good tools to translate his abilities to the NBA as he offers good length, athleticism, and quicks.  His weak tool physically is strength as he only weighs 222, but that shouldn’t preclude him from being a top end defensive center.  How his pre-draft measurements compare to those of other players who have recently served as good defensive centers:

Player Height Length Weight
Chris Bosh 6’11.5″ 7’3.5″ 225
Tyson Chandler 7’0.5″ 7’3″ 224
Joakim Noah 7’0″ 7’1.25″ 223
Clint Capela 6’11” 7’4.5″ 222
Kevin Garnett 6’11 ? 217

The fact of the matter is that once you have great height, length, athleticism, and mobility, you don’t need a world of strength to make a big impact defensively. After all, there aren’t any Shaq level bullies at center that must be stopped in order to win a title these days.  DX and ESPN list him as a PF, and I vehemently disagree: Capela is a center all the way.

Capela thrives as a shot blocker, rebounder, and finisher, as his skill set seems similar to that of Tyson Chandler.  Further, he posted 2.2 assists vs 2.6 turnovers pace adjusted per 40 this past season in French play (it was only 0.6 vs 2.9 in the smaller Eurocup sample where he had an excuse to not pass w/ his whopping 71.8% FG%), which is excellent for a center of his age and implies that he may be able to develop into a Joakim Noah level playmaker.  If nothing else he should be able to move the ball within the offense as opposed to being a Bismack Biyombo who never touches it.  Assist to turnover also correlates with feel for the game, and in tandem with his finishing ability it seems like he offers enough offensively to make it worth getting his defense and rebounding on the floor.

Based on his stats and tools Capela seems to offer a world of upside.  If scouts loved him and ESPN/DX were clamoring for him to go #1 overall, I don’t think I’d take a strong stance against that sentiment.  But in reality the sentiment is quite the opposite, DX ranks him 17th, ESPN 27th, and Nate Duncan thinks he belongs in round 2 after watching him at the Nike Hoop Summit (I like Duncan’s scouting reports but he is drastically underselling Capela’s strengths with that conclusion).

The common scouting narratives are that Capela has poor basketball IQ, poor feel for the game, and is lazy.  It is hard for me to reconcile how these narratives may be completely true in spite of the stats he posted, but they likely aren’t completely made up either.  So let’s start by examining Duncan’s critiques.  He starts by mentioning Capela’s poor jump shot (which is a viable flaw) and goes on to note:

He looks like his skill level is always going to be more center than power forward, and that is a problem given how thin he is.

I agree that his skill set mandates that he plays center. Do not agree it’s a significant problem given his weight with so many thin players succeeding as defensive centers.

Most concerning is Capela’s lack of feel overall. He was the most likely World player to make mental errors, although there may have been a bit of a language barrier involved there as well. During the game, he picked up four fouls in the first half with some silly over the backs. Throughout the week he did not prove particularly adept at finding creases for guards to give him dumpoffs, and his few postups invariably resulted in wild misses or turnovers.

I would have found this disconcerting if his lack of feel resulted in a number of defensive lapses. Let’s tackle each critique point by point:

-A few over the back fouls for a young big hardly sound indicting.
-DX noted in their situational stats that Capela finished an amazing 73.8% of his shot attempts off of cuts. Perhaps this is a minor indictment for his feel, but a larger indictment on the lack of structure of a hastily whipped together all-star team.
-He’s bad at posting up: who cares? It’s not part of his repertoire and he likely should never be used as a post-up player in the NBA.

Duncan then mentions that his strength is lacking and he struggled to even post up guards in 2 on 2 drills. It is unclear whether this is a greater indictment on his lack of strength or post up skill, but I assume it’s a bit of both.

And that’s all Duncan has to offer.  There’s nothing there that strongly pokes holes in my hypothesis that he may be Tyson Chandler 2.0.  I believe the worst than can be concluded is that Capela is a deeply dependent scorer, and he will suffer if he plays in a poorly coached offense with poor ball movement.  French teams typically have good ball movement (which is why the Spurs always draft French players) so it is likely that playing in France accentuated his offensive production.  His 2 point scoring stats are not that different from those of Joel Embiid.  But in terms of footwork, shooting touch, and offensive upside Embiid completely blows him away.  Stat models cannot fully detect the disparity in footwork and overall skill level, so this is one reason to take his stats at less than face value.

DX shares similar critiques with his feel for the game and also notes that he has questionable intangibles and defensive fundamentals.  I’d say there are enough red flag narratives from people who are competent at scouting to throw some cold water on his upside implied by tools and stats.

Overall, scouting narratives strike me as less discouraging than his positives are encouraging.  If there is one position where skill and intelligence flaws can be overcome to produce at an elite level, it’s center.  Nobody ever accused Dwight Howard of having good basketball IQ or feel for the game, but he was the 2nd most valuable player in the league when he had Stan Van Gundy coaching him. Everybody questioned Andre Drummond’s passion and basketball IQ and he slid too far and instantly smashed expectations as a rookie.  I have no idea how DeAndre Jordan slid to the 2nd round with his physical tools, but he didn’t even have good stats in college and he’s become a useful NBA player anyway.  Even Javale McGee convinced Masai Ujiri to gamble on him at 4/44, and he is responsible for some of the most inexplicably dumb plays in NBA history.  Athletic bigs are capable of such a significant defensive impact that they have quite a bit of margin for error in their skill and basketball IQ in order to still be productive.

My closing caveat is that I have compared Capela to two groups of athletic bigs: skinny and smart (KG, Bosh, Noah, Chandler) and strong and not smart/skilled (DAJ, Dwight, Drummond, Javale).  There are not many examples of skinny and not smart/skilled, so it’s possible that he simply does not become good at all.  But his French stats suggest that he has some “je ne sais quoi” that gives him his own form of unique upside (it wouldn’t be surprising if he’s smarter than scouts think he is), and I believe that’s worth gambling on in the 6-10 range.

Capela is a truly fascinating prospect given his polarizing features, and it makes me a bit sad that I’m closing by citing his “je ne sais quoi,” because that was a really long writeup to conclude with “I don’t know” in French.

That’s all for part 1.  I’m going to split this up into 2 or 3 pieces in order to address the international class in its entirety.

Which Prospects Get To The Rim The Most?

05 Thursday Jun 2014

Posted by in NCAA

≈ 28 Comments

Hoop-math.com has some pretty awesome statistical splits for the past 3 years, and I decided to take advantage of that to look at a certain angle for all prospects in this draft: who can get to the rim in the half-court the most frequently?  Not that getting to the rim is everything– Austin Rivers excelled at penetrating defenses in the half-court and was bad at finishing and everything else, so he’s looking like a bust to start his career in spite of this skill.  But the reason why I feel this has value is because Otto Porter was exceptionally bad at penetrating through the defense unassisted, and this is likely correlated with him underperforming draft models, scouting reports, and his actual draft position as a rookie.  He was such a solid and well balanced player that almost every school of thought graded him as a surefire future starter, but that hypothesis now appears to be in doubt.  It’s likely that his lack of handle or burst were both underplayed warts and this was the signal that forecasting his downside risk.

So I looked at a narrow split of half-court unassisted rim FG’s that are not putbacks.  This is going to approximate creation ability, as it offers a glimpse of who can penetrate best through a set defense.  Granted, these numbers should all be taken with a grain of salt since they are scraped from play by play and they are far from precise.  They are all at the whim of assist scorers and play by play timestamps to approximate whether a basket came in transition or not. Also these are unadjusted for strength of schedule, and I measured these per minute instead of per possession since I figure up tempo teams have more transition possessions on average.  I split the sample into point guards, wings, and bigs, and also included assisted HC rim FG’s on the side.  Let’s start with wings:

Player UA FG Mins UA FG/40 Assisted
Isaiah Sykes 61 958 2.55 13
Jordan Clarkson 68 1228 2.21 7
Austin Rivers 51 1129 1.81 5
TJ Warren 54 1238 1.74 47
Doug McDermott 40 1181 1.35 81
Lamar Patterson 34 1174 1.16 17
KJ McDaniels 33 1212 1.09 14
Okaro White 27 1084 1.00 36
Markel Brown 28 1201 0.93 18
Rodney Hood 24 1150 0.83 13
Spencer Dinwiddie 32 1602 0.80 4
Deandre Daniels 22 1103 0.80 27
Andrew Wiggins 22 1148 0.77 17
Roy Devyn Marble 19 995 0.76 14
Nik Stauskas 24 1281 0.75 11
Jordan Adams 18 1082 0.67 31
Aaron Gordon 18 1187 0.61 59
Glenn Robinson 17 1194 0.57 28
PJ Hairston 11 804 0.55 4
James Young 17 1296 0.52 9
Gary Harris 13 1131 0.46 11
CJ Wilcox 12 1116 0.43 12
Otto Porter 11 1097 0.40 20
Nick Johnson 12 1257 0.38 20
Cleanthony Early 9 986 0.37 22
Zach LaVine 7 904 0.31 4

It’s nice to see Isaiah Sykes up at the top since he’s one of my favorite deep sleepers in the draft. He had a high volume role where he likely attacked too much given his ultimate efficiency, but the ability to penetrate is clearly present and it’s one of his multiple skills to work with in the pros.

I had wondered why everybody was so high on Jordan Clarskon, and this largely explains it. The guy can get to the rack! He’s probably just an older Austin Rivers, but he seems like a fine round 2 flier nevertheless.

In spite of all of Dougie’s McBuckets, many of them came assisted. He’s still left with solid unassisted volume, but a fair amount of these are likely post-ups over bigs that are too small to play in the NBA. He’s going to have a difficult time translating his inside the arc scoring to the pros.

Andrew Wiggins grades out in the middle of the pack, which is pretty good for a freshman. In spite of his limited handle, he still had the tools to get to the rim on occasion which is something to work with. His vision and finishing over length are the bigger holes in his slashing game.

Nik Stauskas played PG part-time at Michigan and his rate of getting to the rim is less impressive through that lens, but this isn’t too bad for his limited tools. He has slick handles and the athleticism to finish, and it’s nice to see him with nearly double the rate of Otto Porter.

I am a bit disappointed that Aaron Gordon rated this low, but the entire Arizona team had a curiously low % of rim attempts and high % of assisted FG’s at the rim. Nick Johnson’s unassisted FG per 40 was much better as a sophomore (0.69), for instance. Given Gordon’s youth, tools, handle, finishing ability, and incredibly gaudy assisted total I’m not reading much into this.

I included PJ Hairston’s 2012-13 numbers, and they show how heavily dependent he is on his jump shot. I am starting to cool on him a decent bit, as I’m not sure his shot alone is enough to become a good player.

James Young grades disappointingly for a player who is going to depend so heavily on scoring to succeed. Either he needs to improve his handle significantly or he is going to be leaning hard on his jumper.

Gary Harris was better as a freshman (0.63 per 40) but this illuminates how bland he is as a prospect. He’s a jack of all trades and master of none, and if he’s too small to guard SG’s he isn’t going to make much of an impact. He’s not going to be much of a slasher in the pros and if you measure his creation rate vs. PG’s he is completely blown out of the water. I don’t believe there is any justification for drafting him in the lottery.

If there was any doubt that Cleanthony Early is a worthless prospect, this should eradicate it. He played in the Missouri Valley conference where he was taller than most bigs and this was all of the creation he could muster. For a 23 year old whose main value lies in scoring, that is pathetic.

Zach LaVine finishes in dead last. If there is any statistical signal that the guy is good at basketball, I have yet to find it. His creation stats, his assist rate, and his steal rate are all bad. Perhaps he could have done more with more ball handling responsibilities, but I am highly skeptical of the narrative that he has superstar upside. In all likelihood the guy is not good enough at basketball to be a useful NBA player.

Now let’s move on to point guards, who have a higher frequency of getting to the rim due to greater ball handling responsibility:

Player UA FG Mins UA FG/40 Assisted
Elfrid Payton 65 1258 2.07 31
Deonte Burton 53 1236 1.72 2
Aaron Craft 45 1204 1.50 3
Russ Smith 38 1084 1.40 10
Jahii Carson 38 1168 1.30 13
Tyler Ennis 37 1215 1.22 6
Kendrick Perry 32 1168 1.10 11
Marcus Smart 27 1014 1.07 19
Shabazz Napier 37 1404 1.05 2
Semaj Christon 31 1200 1.03 35
Scottie Wilbekin 25 1150 0.87 0
Kendall Williams 24 1200 0.80 5
Kyle Anderson 23 1196 0.77 5

Elfrid Payton was expected to top this list given his Sun Belt dominance without a jump shot.

Marcus Smart ranks a bit lower than I had hoped. I don’t think this is a serious red flag, but he will need to really tighten his handle to become a star.

On the upside, Kyle Anderson finished with roughly double the creation rate of Otto Porter. On the downside, he finished dead last for PG prospects. While he is going to play SF/PF in the pros, he ran the UCLA offense full-time so he should have made frequent trips to the rim. So this offers a glimmer of hope while also demonstrating his lack of burst all in one.

On to bigs:

Player UA FG Mins UA FG/40 Assisted
Dwight Powell 39 1167 1.34 19
Noah Vonleh 25 794 1.26 21
Javon McCrea 29 937 1.24 71
Julius Randle 37 1233 1.20 29
Jarnell Stokes 34 1199 1.13 50
Adreian Payne 23 870 1.06 34
Jabari Parker 28 1074 1.04 42
Patric Young 25 1019 0.98 43
Jerami Grant 22 1005 0.88 32
Joel Embiid 14 647 0.87 53
Mitch McGary 20 967 0.83 43
Isaiah Austin 20 1065 0.75 36
Khem Birch 10 1037 0.39 41

Jabari Parker’s rate is a disappointment to me. For a guy who was so selfish and took so many shots, he didn’t get to the rim on his own that much. And without knowing the precise splits, I imagine many of these came from bullying small big men anchoring poor defenses. For somebody so dependent on scoring, it looks like he will have to lean hard on his jump shot in the pros. But he is not currently a great shooter and he doesn’t have Melo’s quick release or Durant’s go go gadget arms to get off a high volume of looks, so there is some doubt as to whether he can score efficiently enough to justify a top 3 selection.

Joel Embiid’s rate is not a concern to me. Given his size, rim touch, and footwork, he obviously has quite a bit of creation ability to build upon. Also a fair amount of his assisted FG’s entailed him catching the ball with his back to the basket and doing the brunt of the work.

Khem Birch exemplifies why he isn’t as good as his statistical ranking. The guy has nearly no skill whatsoever but doesn’t even have good size for a PF. I believe he’s going to have a tough time amounting to much as a pure garbage man in a PF body.

Marcus Smart vs. Andrew Wiggins: Who Was The Best Big 12 Perimeter Defender?

01 Sunday Jun 2014

Posted by in NCAA

≈ 27 Comments

Tags

,

Draft consensus is that Andrew Wiggins is likely to be an elite defensive wing in the NBA, as in theory his stellar physical tools ensure lock down D. But there is more to defense than running fast and jumping high, so I am going to use available NCAA data to measure him against my favorite defensive guard prospect in the draft: Marcus Smart.  Let’s starting by assessing the inventory around them.

Coaching: Bill Self vs. Travis Ford

Coaching has a huge impact on team defense, so let’s get a feel for which coaches historically built the best defenses prior to landing their respective stars.  The table notes each team’s NCAA rank (out of ~350) in adjusted defensive rating as per kenpom.com:

Season Ford Team Ford D Rank Self Team Self D Rank
2013 Ok State Smart Kansas 5
2012 Ok State 111 Kansas 3
2011 Ok State 47 Kansas 11
2010 Ok State 60 Kansas 9
2009 Ok State 74 Kansas 9
2008 UMass 58 Kansas 1
2007 UMass 47 Kansas 1
2006 UMass 40 Kansas 3
2005 E Kentucky 126 Kansas 25
2004 E Kentucky 230 Kansas 16
2003 E Kentucky 301 Illinois 8
2002 E Kentucky 274 Illinois 19

In a nutshell: Self always builds elite defenses whereas Travis Ford doesn’t.  Self’s worst defense pre-Wiggins was 15 slots higher than Ford’s best pre-Smart.  Of course, this doesn’t prove that Self is a smarter defensive coach than Ford, it only suggests it at a loud volume.  But Kansas is a name brand school and it stands to reason that Self should have some advantage given his access to superior talent.  Fortunately, Dan Hanner shared his process for making NCAA projections (which he does well) and included coaching as a significant portion of defense projection.

In Step 15 of his article, Hanner notes that he makes projections for defensive statistics (block rate, steal rate, D-Reb rate), prices in recruiting rankings, and gives a boost for players that mysteriously play high minute totals with poor stats (since these types are often are defensive specialists).  He also notes that these factors alone do a poor job.  Using a 10 year sample from 2003-2012, he measured the greatest impact coaches after adjusting for the aforementioned factors and shared his top 15 defensive coaches.  Bill Self rated #1 on his list.  Travis Ford didn’t crack the top 15 because he offers no value beyond the ability to attract enough talent to make himself seem competent to athletic directors.

It is common for people to blame Bill Self for Wiggins’ shortcomings, but this is misguided.  Self consistently gets stellar regular seasons from players who do not go on to NBA stardom, as his teams tend to outperform their talent before disappointing in the tournament.  It is safe to declare that Bill Self completely waffle crushes Travis Ford at building NCAA defenses.

The Bigs

After coaching, the highest impact players on defense are the tall ones.  They provide rebounding and rim protection, so it should be no surprise that height correlates with defensive success.  Good college defenses are often anchored by good rim protection, so let’s compare the two sets of bigs.  Note that total includes each stat’s minute-weighted average for the collection of bigs.

Kansas:

Player Minutes Height D-Reb% Stl% Blk%
Joel Embiid 647 7’0″ 27.3 2.3 11.7
Tarik Black 446 6’9″ 21.3 1.3 4
Jamari Traylor 549 6’8″ 18.5 1.5 5.3
Perry Ellis 973 6’8″ 18.2 1.7 2.2
Total 2615 6’9.2″ 21.0 1.7 5.5

Oklahoma State:

Player Minutes Height D-Reb% Stl% Blk%
Kamari Murphy 855 6’8″ 18.3 1.1 5.1
Mike Cobbins 256 6’8″ 15.3 1.8 7.9
Le’Bryan Nash 1017 6’7″ 14.6 1 2.8
Leyton Hammonds 230 6’7″ 12.3 1.8 0.5
Total 2358 6’7.5″ 15.8 1.2 4.0

Oklahoma State’s bigs were undersized and unfit to do good things on defense. The Cowboys were rated as the #5 kenpom team with a 12-1 record when Mike Cobbins went down for the year due to injury. Without him they were forced to play small, as Hammonds was largely worthless and when Murphy was on the bench 6’7″ Le’Bryan Nash played C and Marcus Smart was often forced to defend opposing PFs. I’d wager that Smart spent more time as a defensive PF than Wiggins in spite of being a PG who is 5.5 inches shorter.  Not only did the small lineup make it exceptionally difficult to protect the rim, but Smart was forced to be used as an undersized post defender instead of putting pressure on the ball on the perimeter.  Consequently, Oklahoma State went 9-12 without him and dropped from #5 to #26 in kenpom’s overall rankings.

Meanwhile, Kansas had the defensive player of the year in Joel Embiid whose his size and mobility made him an interior force.  He only played 23 minutes a game and missed a handful due to injury, but Tarik Black and Jamari Traylor offered more value as defensive replacements than OKC’s small bigs without Cobbins.  This is another clear advantage for Kansas.

Guards

Let’s see how each team compares in terms of guard and wing impact on defense outside of Smart and Wiggins.

Kansas:

Player Minutes Height D-Reb% Stl% Blk%
Wayne Selden 1023 6’5″ 6.4 1.4 1.1
Naadir Tharpe 1001 5’11” 7.4 1.4 0
Frank Mason 565 5’11” 7.3 1.9 0.2
Total 2589 6’1.4″ 7.0 1.5 0.5

Oklahoma State:

Player Minutes Height D-Reb% Stl% Blk%
Markel Brown 1201 6’3″ 12.9 1.6 3.1
Phil Forte 976 5’11” 5.6 1.7 0.1
Brian Williams 793 6’5″ 11.5 2.6 1.5
Stevie Clark 256 5’11” 7.2 3.4 0.4
Total 3226 6’2″ 9.9 2.0 1.6

Finally, an area where the Cowboys have an advantage. Non-Smart Oklahoma State guards did not offer a ton of value on D, but at least Brian Williams and Markel Brown had the athleticism to occasionally make a play and Stevie Clark generated some steals in limited minutes before getting kicked off the team. Meanwhile, Kansas trotted out two small PG’s and Wayne Selden, who has an elite body but has yet to figure out how to use it for good on the basketball court.  Kansas’s guards were certainly weak links on defense.

This advantage for Oklahoma State is less significant than each of Kansas’s advantages in big men and coaching.  Forte was an undersized and unathletic, and Brown and Williams aren’t defensive stoppers, just athletes who sometimes make athletic plays.  Kansas’s guards were bad, but guard defense isn’t high enough leverage to weigh this discrepancy more than others given that Oklahoma State didn’t have a second perimeter stopper.

Overall

Kansas has a much better coach and better bigs, whereas Oklahoma State has less leaky guards alongside their star.  If the two players made similar impacts, Kansas should have a much better overall defensive rating.  Yet they barely finished with a higher defensive rating, as Kansas finished with the 31st adjusted D-Rtg (out of 351) at 96.3 and Oklahoma State finished 37th at 96.6.  The two defenses were roughly dead even, and once you remove the 3 games missed by Smart (Oklahoma State went 0-3), Oklahoma State was a shade better than Kansas.

If we look at Big 12 games only (noting that Smart missed 3 games, Cobbins missed all 20, and Embiid missed 5), Oklahoma State had an adjusted defensive rating of 95.9 vs Kansas’s 96.2.  If we throw out the 3 games that Smart missed, the Cowboy D-Rtg drops to 94.9 to widen the gap by a point.  By all measures these two defenses were similarly effective over the course of the season, and if anything it appears that Oklahoma State had the edge when Marcus Smart was in the lineup.  Given the advantages that Wiggins had with respect to coach and cast, this strongly suggests that Marcus Smart was the better and more impactful defensive player.  Let’s look at individual stats to check to see how it aligns with the longwinded route.  Note that adjusted D-Rtg is individual D-Rtg (as per sports-reference.com) adjusted for team SOS:

Player Minutes DRB% STL% BLK% Adj DRtg
Andrew Wiggins 1148 12.3 2.1 3.1 96.6
Marcus Smart 1014 14.9 5 1.9 88.9

In spite of all of Wiggins physical advantages, Smart accumulated more than twice the steal rate.  Instincts and aggressiveness are key traits on defense, and this is where Smart shines the most.

Individual D-Rtg takes team D-Rtg and adjusts for individual steal rate, block rate, and defensive rebounding rate.  Because Kansas gets so much production out of their bigs and Oklahoma State gets so little out of everybody other than Smart, Smart destroys Wiggins.  This is the short hand version of my analysis, except it doesn’t account for coaching disparity as there is more team level credit to distribute for well coached teams.  Bearing this in mind, there is an argument to be made that individual D-Rtg actually understates the difference between Smart and Wiggins.

What About Age?

It is fair to point out that Smart is a year older than Wiggins and perhaps should make a greater impact given his additional year of experience.  But if we look at Smart’s freshman year, the defense was even better as Cobbins was healthier only missing 5 games and contributing 728 minutes total.  Many of Brian Williams minutes went to 6’10” Philip Jurick, and Le’Bryan Nash was able to swing between the 3 and 4 instead of being asked to be a full time 4/5.  Smart was able to spend all of his time hawking the ball on the perimeter, and the Cowboys finished with the #15 defense in the country.

Smart’s freshman individual adjusted D-Rtg was 85.6, showing that the gap between him and Wiggins widened once he actually played with serious big men.  The Cowboy defense should have been a joke this year, and it’s quite the feather in Smart’s cap that they were able to keep pace with Kansas with such little size.

The Coaches’ Perspective

Big 12 coaches vote on the best defensive players in the conference after each season.  As both a freshman and sophomore, Marcus Smart was a unanimous selection to the 6 person team.  He was the only non-Kansas big to be chosen unanimously (Jeff Withey and Joel Embiid each shared the honor) over these 2 years.  Wiggins was left off the team altogether, which surprised me given the level of hype and attention he received.  I suppose the Big 12 coaches weren’t as impressed with his defense as draft narratives would suggest, even though he was a unanimous selection to the All-Big 12 first team for his overall play.

Conclusions

Based on every piece of information available and every angle from which it may be analyzed, Marcus Smart was a vastly superior NCAA defensive player to Andrew Wiggins.  He was a one man wrecking crew on defense, whereas Wiggins was merely a solidly good defensive player.  Given the predictive power of steal rate and the fact that Smart has the tools to become an impact defensive player in the NBA, this should weigh heavily into Smart’s NBA defensive projection.

On the other hand, this should dispel the myth that Wiggins is a guaranteed defensive stud.  Hype does not equate to truth, but people seem to treat it as such.  It is common for people to seek narratives to justify Wiggins’ hype instead of looking for the actual truth in data that is free of bias.  I believe the hype was justified: a 16 year old kid with his size, mobility, and explosiveness is a rare commodity, and it’s worth getting excited over him.  But when at age 19 he has shown zero signs of development or impact that were projected, it’s time to scrap the hype and brace for the likely scenario that the person inside the body doesn’t have what it takes to convert the potential into reality.

If Wiggins was truly a high impact defensive player, there would likely be data supporting it.  There is data supporting Smart’s impact and there is data supporting Aaron Gordon’s impact, which is why I have them as the top two perimeter defensive prospects in the draft.  Wiggins believers can have their 44″ vertical snapshots, I’d rather get Smart and take the guy who produces results.