Who is the Best 3 + D Wing in the Draft?

22 Thursday Mar 2018

Posted by deanondraft in NCAA, Scouting Reports

Tags

The 2018 draft has some good 3 + D wings outside of the top 10 such as Mikal Bridges, Miles Bridges, Troy Brown, and Jacob Evans. But nobody is talking about Josh Okogie, who is only ranked #46 on ESPN and may be the gem of the class

Why Does He Have No Hype?

Because he plays for an awful Georgia Tech team. He didn’t get many high major offers as he wasn’t a top 100 recruit, so he settled for the major conference team close to home.

It’s easy to see why he wasn’t a top 100 recruit. He is super young for his class, and was less developed than his high school peers. He is only 6’4″, not super athletic, and not a big time shot creator. He doesn’t check the most easily discernible boxes, so it makes sense that recruiting services would overlook him.

Before his freshman year, Georgia Tech was considered a threat to go 0-18 in ACC play by stat models, common narratives, and yours truly. But 18 year old Okogie and junior Ben Lammers led them to the #6 kenpom defense, a respectable 8-10 ACC record, and a trip to the NIT finals. They deserve a parade for this, as the Yellow Jackets were one of the biggest overachievers in the 16-17 NCAA season.

As a sophomore the Jackets took a small step back, but that can be in part blamed on his coach, cast, and bad luck. Overall Okogie’s two years at Georgia Tech were a huge success given the circumstances.

Defense

Okogie’s physical profile is overall terrific, as he has a 7’0″ wingspan and a strong frame to go along with above average athleticism and good quickness.

His length and strength give him ability to guard NBA wings, and his quickness gives him the ability to defend guards. With the tools to hold his own against any position 1-4, he has elite versatility in heavily switching defenses that are prevalent in the modern NBA.

He is also disruptive as a team defender, as he uses his length effortlessly to deflect passes and block shots.

Granted, he is not guaranteed to be a lockdown defensive player. He is mistake prone as he makes unnecessary gambles and sometimes gets beat due to mental lapses. He’s not a Marcus Smart or Justise Winslow level defensive wizard. But he atones for this with an excellent motor, and often hustles his way back into the play after he is beat.

Okogie offers a rare intersection of switching versatility, disruptive playmaking, and non-stop motor. Most of his mistakes stem from being too aggressive, and could be reduced over time with more experience and better coaching. Okogie has excellent defensive potential, and is firmly in the conversation for best defensive wing prospect in the draft.

Offense

Offensively Okogie is a work in progress, but one area where he shines is shooting. He made 78% of his FT’s (82% as a sophomore) and 38% of his 3’s during his two years at Georgia Tech. This is really good for an 18/19 year old wing who is younger than freshmen Michael Porter Jr. and Mo Bamba.

He has a rudimentary handle and can get to the rim on straight line drives, but is mostly limited as a creator. He led the Yellow Jackets in usage (27% both years) because the rest of the team is so dreadful they don’t have any better options. Because of his limited handling and athleticism, he struggles to finish near the rim on these occasions and had just a 43% 2P as a sophomore (45% overall).

He showed good potential as a cutter as a freshman, scoring 82nd percentile PPP as per synergy on 1.8 possessions per game. As a sophomore he declined to 0.9 cuts per game with 24th percentile PPP. To my eye he moves off the ball well and the sophomore decline is possibly attributable to his sub-optimal environment.

He has a long way to go to become more than a guy who can move the ball, make 3’s, score off the ball, and attack closeouts. But at 19, he has enough physical advantages to have some creation upside if he develops better than expected.

3 + D

Josh Okogie is the quintessential 3 + D prospect. His 3 and free throw stroke are decisively good, and he has upside to be a great shooter. The same can be said for his defense. He is not GOATish in either area, but offers a rare intersection of good at both,

His creation upside spices up his prospect value with a nice upside scenario. Even if he seems like a boring non-creator who will likely not peak higher than players such as Kentavious Caldwell-Pope, Wes Matthews, or Danny Green, there is some potential for more. Nobody talked about Donovan Mitchell or Kawhi Leonard’s upside pre-draft, so why will Josh Okogie not surprise like them?

Kawhi Not?

Kawhi’s DX profile notes similar weaknesses to Okogie (non-elite athlete, struggles to finish off the dribble) and the only major difference is that Okogie is 3″ shorter in both height and length. This is a significant disadvantage, but Kawhi minus 3 inches would nevertheless be a great player.

This is not to say Okogie WILL be Kawhi minus 3 inches. He may not be on the same level cerebrally, and likely will not match Kawhi’s NBA defensive and creation value. But based on current information the possibility cannot be ruled out, and he at least has a small chance of becoming mini-Kawhi. The same cannot be said for Mikal Bridges, as his creation limits are far more significant given his meager 15% usg at ages 19/20.

Bottom Line

The only other prospect who offers similar 3 + D value is Mikal Bridges. But Bridges is a bit more than two years older, not clearly better in either category, and does not have the same sneaky star potential as Okogie. Further, Bridges’ low freshman + sophomore usage may indicate subtle flaws that give him a lower floor than Okogie.

There are reasons to like Bridges, as he is hyperefficient in his low usage role and Villanova has been the #1 or #2 kenpom team in all three of his seasons there. He knows how to win, has solid Trevor Ariza potential, and is a fine choice in the 15-20 range.

But in terms of NBA upside, Okogie shines as the superior talent. He is the best 3 + D wing prospect in the draft, and is clearly worth a lottery selection. I expect Okogie to rise up draft boards as he outshines higher rated scrubs such as Chandler Hutchison and Aaron Holiday throughout the draft process.

Could Shai Gilgeous Be the Best PG in 2018?

19 Monday Mar 2018

Posted by deanondraft in NCAA, Scouting Reports

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Shai Gilgeous-Alexander

Shai Gilgeous-Alexander is rising on draft boards, as the Kentucky point guard has ascended to #14 in ESPN’s top 100 with his hot recent play. He is currently rated as the #3 PG in the class behind Collin Sexton (#8) and Trae Young (#9).

Shai’s main selling point is that he is a lead guard who can create for himself and others while defending multiple NBA positions, as he is 6’6″ with a 7’0″ wingspan. His primary concerns are average athleticism and limited shooting range, as these arguably prevent him from being more than an intriguing role player. Let’s explore the nuances of his game to determine which side carries more gravity.

Can Shai run an NBA offense?

The most significant anti-Shai point is he is an average athlete posting a mere 23% usage rate. There is no public narrative that he could be an elite point guard, as he is not even in the conversation as best PG in the class with Trae Young and Collin Sexton.

But his recent performance suggests that he may have more lead guard potential than common narratives suggest. After carrying a 22% usage rate for the first 29 games, it has spiked to 27% in the past 7 and the results have been excellent (stats are per 40 minutes):

	FGA	FTA	2P%	AST	TOV
First 29 gms	11.9	4.6	49.4%	5.8	3.2
Last 7 gms	13.0	8.2	54.9%	7.2	2.9

He is clearly performing at a different level than early in the season. And this is in spite of a slightly tougher average defense over the recent span than the earlier one.

And it’s not just Shai– the entire Kentucky offense has completely transformed with his emergence:

	2P%	3P%	TOV%	Pts/Poss
First 29	50.9%	34.3%	19.1%	1.082
Last 7	53.2%	42.5%	15.5%	1.189

Kentucky is clearly a different beast from early in the season. They are an incredibly young team that was a dumpster fire for most of the regular season, and this obscured much of Shai’s goodness.

Now that the Wildcats have found their groove with Shai leading the way, they are performing as efficiently as any Calipari offense is capable. This offers a good argument that Shai has the IQ to run an efficient offense, and that his early season performance vastly undersells his upside on this end.

How Will This Performance Translate?

There are inevitably doubts that a non-elite athlete can translate scoring from NCAA to the NBA. But it could translate well, as Shai has an elite euro-step to compensate for his average athleticism. He is incredibly shifty and is deft at stepping his way around defenders to atone for his inability to explode past them.

In this regard he is similar to James Harden who is also an average athlete that has thrived on dimensions, instincts, skill, and outlier coordination. Shai is clearly an inferior prospect to Harden, as he is a clearly much worse shooter and likely has other nuanced disadvantages. But Harden was considered a clearly inferior prospect to the more athletic Blake Griffin, and even Hasheem Thabeet was taken ahead of him due to athleticism concerns.

Dejounte Murray is another average athlete who appears to be a late 1st steal due to good dimensions and shake. I rated Murray as a lottery pick at the time, and perceive Shai as superior.

The tall, long, and shifty lead guard mold is rare, but Murray and Harden show that it is a type that has been wildly underrated in the past. This may be a signal that it is underrated once again with Shai.

Defense

Shai is not a lockdown defensive player at this stage, but his potential is clear. His dimensions and solid quickness give him potential to switch onto multiple positions. Also he has shown ability to use his length to make plays on D– here is how his steal, block, and rebound rates stack up vs other Kentucky guard prospects under Calipari:

	ORB%	DRB%	BLK%	STL%
Shai	3.1	10.1	1.7	2.9
John Wall	2.6	10.2	1.5	2.9
De’Aaron Fox	2.1	12.2	0.7	2.7
Eric Bledsoe	1.9	8.6	1.1	2.6
Tyler Ulis	1.7	7.1	0.3	2.3
Archie Goodwin	5.6	10.4	1.4	2.1
Andrew Harrison	2.4	8.1	0.8	1.7
Marquis Teague	1.6	6.7	0.8	1.7
Malik Monk	1.1	7.2	1.5	1.6
Jamal Murray	4.9	11.1	0.9	1.6
Devin Booker	2.6	7.8	0.3	1.3
Brandon Knight	2.1	10.4	0.6	1.1

His rates are nearly identical to John Wall. Although Shai is not nearly as explosive as Wall, his other advantages help compensate. No other Kentucky guard prospect matches Shai’s steals and blocks, and nobody outrebounds him by a significant margin. There is a good argument to be made that he has as much defensive potential as any Kentucky guard prospect in recent memory.

There is no guarantee that Shai will be a positive defensive player, but he has clearly attractive upside on this end.

Summary

At a glance, it is not obvious that Shai has two way potential. He is not a super athlete, he doesn’t score a boatload of points, he is not considered an elite passer, he is prone to getting beat on defense, and he is not a reliable 3 point shooter. Thus it is understandable why he has yet to garner top 10 attention.

But when he is given a closer look, he is dripping with two way upside. His length and coordination give him slashing potential, Kentucky’s recent offensive performance shows his playmaking potential, his defensive stats and length show his defensive potential, and the only significant concern is his shooting. But even that has hope between his 81.5% FT and 71st percentile off the dribble shooting per synergy.

There are enough questions to rule him out as a possible top 3 selection, but there are enough answers to arguably give him as much upside as anybody once Doncic, Jackson, and Ayton are off the board.

If nothing else he should be in the conversation for best point guard prospect in the class. It would be an unequivocal error to draft Collin Sexton ahead of him. Sexton is more athletic and talented at scoring, but is too small and one dimensional to have as much upside as Shai and has significantly more bust risk.

It’s not as clear who is superior between Shai and Trae Young, as Trae is too weird to assess with high confidence. But almost every guard with Trae’s physical tools outside of Steph has failed, and Shai is about as likely to be Harden as Trae is to be Steph. Shai at least has the success of Dejounte Murray to suggest a solid floor without the best possible NBA translation and development, which is a good reason to give him the edge.

In my eyes Shai has cemented himself as a clear top 10 pick. It will be interesting to see if he can continue his recent level of play into the Sweet 16, but as of now I’d rate him as the #1 PG in the class with a solid case for a top 5 selection.

2018 Preview: Is Michael Porter a Future NBA Star?

24 Saturday Jun 2017

Posted by deanondraft in Big Boards, Scouting Reports

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

Collin Sexton, Luka Doncic, Michael Porter Jr.

58cac7f806e3e-image

Now that the 2017 draft is over, attention shifts to 2018 where Michael Porter Jr. is battling Luka Doncic for #1 overall, where league executives are allegedly split. I decided to get a taste of Michael Porter Jr. by watching the Nike Hoop Summit where he led team USA with 19 points.

Michael Porter Jr. Scouting Report

Porter is a 6’10” knockdown shooter who rebounds well and has decent athleticism. So it is easy to see why he is labeled as a possible #1, as that baseline of skill makes it sound like he has Kevin Durant upside.

But his warts are apparent in watching him play. He is not particularly smooth, explosive, or advanced with the handle so he struggled to get by defenders and often drove directly into the crowd and hoisted some awkward looking shots. On several occasions he was able to flail and draw free throws, but it appears that and pulling up for jumpers are the only creation he can muster off the dribble.

He does not have good passing instincts, as while he is a willing passer it is with the objective of moving the ball rather than setting up a teammate. For all of the goodness that his shooting presents on offense, his shaky instincts shown in his slashing and passing are going to detract from his shooting goodness.

Defensively he has the size and mobility to make an occasional play, but his awareness is not great as he had lapses where he got caught watching the ball or out of position. On the upside has has great height and moves well and was able to use his tools be useful at times, so it is difficult to judge his defense as either good or bad based on this game. But based on his limited instincts he does not appear to be a stopper on this end and has clear downside.

Overall Sentiment

Porter strongly reminisces of my first time viewing Andrew Wiggins, where it stunned me that people viewed him as a tanking candidate. They have a number of marked similarities as prospects, as Porter essentially has two inches of height and better shooting in lieu of Wiggins’ otherworldly athleticism.

This was just one game, and I cannot yet rule out that he will be good. But elite stars normally stand out to my eye immediately: Joel Embiid and Lonzo Ball were love at first sight, and Karl Anthony Towns, Ben Simmons, and Markelle Fultz were extremely attractive at first blush (even if I have my doubts about the latter two, their talent is undeniable).

Porter is in a class with Andrew Wiggins of putting me in shock that people can look at a prospect like this and somehow believe he is better than prospects like Luka Doncic or Lonzo Ball. I would bet every dollar I own that he is not.

I am not going to call him a likely bust based on a one game eye test, as Andrew Wiggins could have been pretty good if he was able to develop better from his rookie year. But it is difficult to argue that the hype machine be given any benefit of the doubt to treat Porter as anything remotely special this early.

No Proof of Goodness Means More Downside

1251047

The fact of the matter is that the draft hype machine has not exactly been nailing NCAA top 3’s a year ahead of time lately

2014: Andrew Wiggins, Jabari Parker, Julius Randle
2015: Jahlil Okafor, Emmanuel Mudiay, Stanley Johnson
2016: Ben Simmons, Skal Labissiere, Jaylen Brown
2017: Harry Giles, Jayson Tatum, Josh Jackson

8 of those 12 have playing at least one NBA season, and all look disappointing relative to hype. Simmons, Tatum, and Jackson are the only ones with clear star potential, and none of them are guarantees.

If you randomly select a player from this pile, he is more likely than not to be an ordinary, meh NBA player. It is extremely difficult to predict NBA success without observation vs. NCAA or professional competition. Intuitively Porter, Ayton, and Bamba do not seem any better than prior early top 3’s, and are each more likely to be below average NBA players than good starters.

How Does Porter Compare to 2017?

Everybody who thinks Porter should go #1 in 2017 is crazy. It would be terrible if any of Porter, Ayton, or Bamba were chosen in this year’s top 6, as it was a especially good top 6 (Fultz, Ball, Tatum, Jackson, Fox, Isaac) who all showed strong potential vs. NCAA competition compared to 19 y/o’s who have been feasting on 17 and 18 y/o’s.

I would also take Real Madrid star Luka Doncic over all 3 prospects combined, as he has been one of the best players in the second best professional league behind the NBA, all at a younger age than these guys as high school seniors. It may seem crazy now, but in a few years it will not.

I know these are many piping hot takes at once, but if nothing else they will be fun to re-visit in a few years. On to the rankings:

Tier 1: Basketball God

1. Luka Doncic 6’8″ Real Madrid

lukadoncic

I still need to watch him before singing his praises too loudly, but he is 6’8″, athletic, super skilled, and smart and has clear GOAT potential. It is difficult to see him failing, and there is no reasonable argument that anybody else should even sniff #1.

Tier 2: Regular Basketball Players

2. Collin Sexton, 6’2″ Freshman, Alabama

Sexton is the only player in the Hoop Summit who glowed to my eye. He is incredibly athletic, smooth, and shifty, and has strong potential as a slasher. He also showed legitimate passing and vision, and can be a pest on defense and was willing to battle with bigs for rebounds.

It is difficult to get too excited for a 6’2″ player this far from the draft, and Sexton does seem to be a risk of taking poor shots and over gambling on defense. But he is the only player in the Hoop Summit who looked like a possible future star, so he gets my #2 slot.

3. Wendell Carter, 6’10” Freshman, Duke

Carter was more quiet than I had hoped in the Hoop Summit, but it is still easy to see him being good. He has a 7’3″+ wingspan which gives him potential to play center in the NBA, and he seems to be above average at everything.

The main thing holding him back from top 3 hype is lack of elite explosiveness, but he is a good, well rounded basketball player who is almost a year younger than each of Ayton, Bamba, and Porter.

4. DeAndre Ayton, 7’0″ Freshman, Arizona

Ayton did not play in the Hoop Summit, so my eyes have yet to qualify him. I have my doubts about him as he has a reputation for not caring a ton, but he has monster height and a 7’5″ wingspan with real talent, so I will see how he looks for Arizona before passing firm judgment.

5. Mohamed Bamba, 7’0″ Freshman, Texas

Bamba has a 7’9″ wingspan and projects to be a force defensively, and he did look impressive on that end at the Hoop Summit. Unfortunately, he looked like a zero offensively as he cannot handle and his touch around the rim looked bad.

On the upside he can make FT’s and the announcers were saying his touch is normally good, so if he can at least make shots offensively he has upside to be a Rudy Gobert or Tyson Chandler type.

6. Michael Porter Jr., 6’10” Freshman, Missouri

As I have detailed, I do not believe he is great. Maybe he is nevertheless good, but at this juncture there is no compelling reason to believe that he is anything other than an ordinary top 10 prospect.

That said this is a low confidence opinion, and it will be easier to have a grasp on him when he plays for Missouri. By draft time it is possible I will move him up into the top 3, or he may be out of the top 10. It could go either way.

7. Ethan Happ, 6’9″ Junior, Wisconsin

Happ hardly has any draft hype, as he is only ranked 36th on DraftExpress. The knock on him is that he is a traditional white PF who cannot shoot and lacks explosive athleticism, so he is getting overlooked as a draft prospect.

But people are wrong to overlook him, as he is a stud at everything but shooting. He may not be a leaper but he moves his feet well, and at 6’9″ he is an elite handler, passer, rebounder, and defensive player who excels at everything except scoring from a distance. At age 21 with a 57% FT you have to be worried about his shot, and it is genuinely a major wart.

But given how elite the rest of his profile is, I would happily gamble on it all working out.

8. DeAnthony Melton, 6’4″ Sophomore, USC

DeAnthony Melton completely stuffed the statsheet as an 18 year old freshman, as he racked up rebounds, assists, steals, and blocks. He has exceptional instincts to go with great length and quickness, and has the foundation to be a star combo guard.

The downside is that he still has a long way to go to fit in offensively as he posted just a 33rd percentile half court efficiency on low usage as a freshman. He still is not a reliable 3P shooter at 28% and he cannot yet create against a set defense.

If Melton makes a major offensive leap as a sophomore he has star upside, otherwise he is an intriguing role player.

While Melton and Happ have their share of flaws, they also have unique strengths to help them overcome. Don’t be surprised when one of the duo is a better pro than Michael Porter Jr.

9. Robert Williams, 6’9″ Sophomore, Texas A&M

The Aggies had no point guard this past season and all of their returners badly regressed. Now that they have help at the position, Williams who excels at moving off the ball and finishing may see a big sophomore breakout.

10. Miles Bridges, 6’6″ Sophomore, Michigan St.

Bridges is smooth and athletic, and coming off a good freshman season for Michigan State where he did a bit of everything.

The only worry with Bridges is that his dimensions are a bit weak as he last measured 6’6.25″ with a 6’8.75″ wingspan. Given that he also had a mediocre efficiency, he will have extra worry about his ability to be an efficient NBA player without better combine measurements.

11. Jarred Vanderbilt, 6’9″ Freshman, Kentucky

Vanderbilt was the surprise star of the Hoop Summit, and he has strong feel for the game with excellent rebounding and passing. He also is able to make plays on defense and is one of the younger members of the class having recently turned 18.

His downside is that he is a poor shooter, and does not look like an elite defensive stopper to make his shot worth stomaching. But I would nevertheless not be surprised if he emerges as the best freshman in the class.

12. Jaren Jackson Jr., 6’10” Freshman, Michigan St.

Jackson is still just 17 and has good physical tools for a big, and made a number of impressive finishes and defensive plays in the Hoop Summit. He also has traces of an outside shot, and is another player who has potential to climb my board by the draft. While the freshman class lacks a likely star, there is a significant cluster of players that have a chance of shining in NCAA.

I only have Jackson 12th because he appears to be a role player with questionable instincts, but he could just as easily be argued to be much higher.

13. Troy Brown, 6’6″ Freshman, Oregon

Brown is the super role player of the class, as he has a 6’11” wingspan and made some impressive passes for a wing in the Hoop Summit. He also competed and moved his feet well defensively and at 17 is one of the youngest players in the class.

He is a prototypical 3 + D wing, as his only weaknesses are lack of elite athleticism and scoring ability. This does inhibit his upside, but if teams pay this too much attention he could be a steal in the back end of the lottery.

Overall I believe the freshman class should be seen as 5 good but not great prospects battling for #2 (Sexton, Carter, Ayton, Bamba, Porter) with Vanderbilt, Jackson, and Brown right behind them as role players with sneaky potential.

Tier 3: The Rest
14. Mikal Bridges, 6’8″ Junior, Villanova
15. Bruce Brown, 6’4″ Sophomore, Miami FL
16. Andrew Jones, 6’4″ Sophomore, Texas
17. Hamidou Diallo, 6’5″ Freshman, Kentucky
18. Emmanuel Akot, 6’8″ Freshman, Arizona
19. Mitchell Robinson, 6’11” Freshman, Western Kentucky
20. Markis McDuffie, 6’8″ Junior, Wichita St.
21. Jacob Evans, 6’6″ Junior, Cincinnati
22. Rawle Alkins, 6’5″ Sophomore, Arizona
23. Tyler Hall, 6’4″ Junior, Montana St.
24. Shamorie Ponds, 6’0″ Sophomore, St. John’s
25. Gary Clark, 6’7″ Senior, Cincinnati
26. Trent Forrest, 6’5″ Sophomore, Florida St.
27. Bryant Crawford, 6’3″ Junior, Wake Forest
28. John Petty, 6’6″ Freshman, Alabama
29. Kevin Huerter, 6’6″ Sophomore, Maryland
30. Kevin Hervey, 6’7″ Senior, UT Arlington

2016 Final Big Board With Writeups

23 Thursday Jun 2016

Posted by deanondraft in Big Boards, Scouting Reports

≈ 4 Comments

I am fairly confident that the draft outcome is rife with inefficiencies. With pristine analysis of all available information, the resulting ranking of the true EV’s of each prospect should heavily vary from the actual draft order. I tend to reflect this in my historical big boards because being an extreme contrarian is fun, but I am now coming to grips with the facts that 1) I lack complete information and 2) my analysis is neither thorough nor pristine. Consequently I am left with extremely contrarian opinions based on limited confidence, and the overall efficiency of my final rankings suffer.

For my final board, my intent is to embrace my lack of knowledge and accept that the actual decision makers do not always differ from my opinion based on completely invalid information. I also am weighing in the perspectives of other draft writers that I respect. This will make my board less boldly anti-consensus but also should make it more efficient.

Tier 1 : Possible Stars

1. Brandon Ingram (DX: 1, ESPN: 2)

Ingram’s main concern is that he may not be that good, which is somewhat understandable since he is excellent at nothing and is not an explosive athlete either. But I believe he’s better than implied by his stats.

Ingram has multiple outs to create offense, as his extremely long arms give him the ability to shoot over most defensive players, and his handle and long strides provide him an ability to create off the dribble in spite of non-elite burst. He complements this with solid vision and passing as well as good defense and versatility to switch onto a wide range of matchups.

The fear is that he never develops into a great shooter, and his lack of athleticism prevents him from being a stud creator or defender and he is merely a decent role player rather than somebody who justifies a top 2 overall selection. This is a plausible outcome, which is why I rate him as a below average #1 overall choice. But he is super young with reportedly elite intangibles, and if he works on his skills and body diligently he can become a star. It is unlikely he lives up to the Kevin Durant comparison, but I see him as a player who has a strong balance of strengths with no real weaknesses in the vein of Millsap. And there is clear potential to pass Millsap as he offers superior height, length, and shooting.

2. Ben Simmons (DX: 2, ESPN: 1)

Simmons is clearly more talented than Ingram, and if he had Ingram’s intangibles he would be an above average #1 pick. But between LSU’s dismal team performance and reports that his intangibles are sorely lacking, there is sufficient evidence to devalue him to an average or worse #1 pick. Frankly it is sheer guesswork to determine much he should be devalued without full information and thorough analysis. My guess is more bearish than consensus, but it could be wrong if Simmons locks in defensively in the pros. And if he develops an 3 point shot this ranking could look especially silly in retrospect. But LSU’s defense was just so bad without much of an offensive spike with an alleged stud PG playing center, that I err on the side of pessimism and rate him behind Ingram.

3. Dragan Bender (DX 3, ESPN: 6)

As much as I want to love Bender and put him #1 on my board, there is simply not enough available information to put him above Simmons and Ingram who would both have viable cases for top 2 picks in an average draft. But there is nevertheless much to love here.

–He can guard all 5 positions
–He is an elite passer
–He appears to have a strong chance of developing into an acceptable NBA 3P shooter

The only other player in the NBA who fits these qualifications is Draymond Green, and he nearly just won finals MVP. And while it is dangerous to read too heavily into his 16 year old 9 game FIBA sample, they don’t just imply that he fits in with the top 3– they imply he may be better than Ingram and Simmons combined.

Since he appears to be a real threat of falling out of the top 5, I am erring on the side of caution and ranking him #3. But it is a strong #3 ranking, and I believe it is an unequivocal error to draft any player other than Simmons and Ingram ahead of him.

Tier 2: Pretty Good Prospects That Should Not Be Top 5 in a Normal Draft

4. Kris Dunn (DX: 4, ESPN: 3)

Dunn provides a baseline of great defensive upside to defend either guard position and elite floor vision to make him the default choice at #4 overall. But there are some pink flags regarding his ability to score. He shot 37% from 3 as a senior on low volume, and he took a number of long 2’s a step inside the arc. It seems he is more comfortable inside the arc, and he may not have a reliable shot from NBA 3 point range.

Further, for such a toolsy and experienced point guard, he created a surprisingly middling volume of layups for himself in the half court. If he struggles to get to the rim vs. NBA defenses he may be relegated to a mid-range chucker who cannot score efficiently enough to capitalize on his vision.

If Dunn can create layups and make NBA 3’s, he should become a nice 2 way player. But if neither happens he is merely a defensive specialist, which is why he is such a weak option at #4 overall.

5. Jaylen Brown (DX: 5, ESPN: 7)

Statistical models are not particularly fond of Brown, neither are most writers in the draft nerd community. But there are a number of factors that mitigate his lackluster statistics:

–He shot much better than his 29% 3P% and 65% FT% at Cal, as DX has him at 39% from 3 and 70% FT in 1,144 pre-NCAA minutes
–He is a better defender than his steals and blocks suggest, as Cal had the #17 kenpom defense with an anemic team steal rate and no elite shot blockers
–He has elite physical tools and the versatility to defend all positions 1-4
–He can create his own shot at the rim, just not at an efficient clip

He still is just an average rebounder and passer, and an inefficient chucker on offense. He may never become good at NBA basketball. But if he becomes a solid 3P shooter, a good and versatile defensive player, and he cleans up his shot selection and decision making on offense, he has as much star potential as anybody outside the top 3.

There’s a good chance I regret ranking Brown this high, but with such meh other options why not gamble on the scarce upside.

6. Wade Baldwin (DX: 14, ESPN: 17)

Nearly every draft nerd loves Wade Baldwin, and his monster 6’11.25″ wingspan gives him great defensive upside. He also has good floor vision and is a good shooter, and is a strong bet to become a useful NBA player. But he lacks the burst and handle to create his own shot at the rim, and his slow trigger resulted in a bizarrely low 3PA rate at Vanderbilt. While he is a strong bet to become a useful NBA player, he may not have the offensive upside to become a 2 way star. But his PG skills, shooting, and switching upside provide enough to be valuable without scoring much, and he is a flat out steal outside the top 10.

7. Deyonta Davis (DX: 11, ESPN: 16)

Deyonta Davis is tall, athletic, and defensively versatile, with efficient garbage man skills on offense. He has a good assist:TOV rate for a young big and an acceptable mid-range/FT shot, and has nice 1.5 way potential as a valuable piece for switching defense that is not a complete liability on offense.

8. Marquese Chriss (DX: 6, ESPN: 5)

Chriss is slippery, as his youth, size, athleticism, and shooting offer promising upside while his poor rebounding, vision, and defense counter with frightening downside.

I tend to be bearish on players who cannot pass, rebound, or defend. But Chriss was actually a better offensive rebounder than Ben Simmons or Henry Ellenson, and DRB% can be a bit funky to predict (see: Andre Drummond who has ~doubled his NCAA DRB% in the NBA). His lack of vision and defensive fundamentals loom as concerns, but he is too young for his limitations to condemn him at such a young age. He may never overcome them, but the behind the scenes feedback doesn’t seem to deter teams from wanting to gamble on him.

Overall I feel there is more risk than upside, but there’s enough to like such that he is a fine gamble as a boom or bust player in the mid-lotto.

9. Jakob Poeltl (DX: 9, ESPN: 12)

I have written about Poeltl as an undervalued piece, and I still like him. He has been likened to the 3rd Zeller brother, which is a reasonable comparison. It does make it hard to see his upside, but if he emerges with better defense, rebounding, and passing than your average Zeller those can add up to make a difference.

10. Timothe Luwawu (DX: 12, ESPN: 26)

Luwawu strikes me as the French Jaylen Brown. He’s older and not quite as toolsy, but he offers a similar package of defensive versatility and offensive upside if his skills progress smoothly.

11. Chinanu Onuaku (DX: 38, ESPN: 37)

There are some pink flags chipping away at his prospect value– he’s slightly short, cannot shoot, is not an explosive athlete, and he has a minor heart condition. But collectively these do not add up to a ton in comparison to how awesomely good he is for such a young player. He still projects to slide to round 2 but I’m not hedging on this one– Onuaku is my clear favorite to be the steal of the draft.

12. Jamal Murray (DX: 7, ESPN: 4)

He’s a stud shooter, but his limited height, length, and quickness makes him project to be a significant liability as an NBA defensive player. The key question for him as a prospect is whether he can complement his shooting with his PG skills. He has a decent handle and good vision, but in college he struggled to get past quicker matchups and was relegated to a spot up shooter with Tyler Ulis running the offense.

There is wiggle room for him to justify his early lotto projection if he develops into a good shot creator and passable defensive player, but with just one proven dimension I believe he is slightly overrated.

Tier 3: Let’s Get Deep

13. Dejounte Murray (DX: 30, ESPN: 9)

Murray is a boom or bust candidate, as his profile is highlighted by his slithery slashing ability, good vision, and SG size. He also offers solid rebounding and defensive potential, and if his shooting, decision making, and strength improve he could be a home run selection.

14. Furkan Korkmaz (DX: 20, ESPN: 13)

Korkmaz offers a compelling combination of shooting, youth, passing, and solid wing height and athleticism. The concern is that he is a bit one dimensional as a shooter, and is too skinny to ever not be a liability on defense.

15. Zhou Qi (DX: 36, ESPN: 47)

We live in a world where Clint Capela was selected 25th, Rudy Gobert 27th, and Nikola Jokic 41st. It seems clear that NBA teams are scared by funky international big men, and Qi is as funky as it gets with monster height and length which is complemented with mobility and shooting ability rarely seen in giants. He is plagued by an outlier rail thin frame and lack of aggressiveness to scare off scouts and keep him out of round 1.

I have no idea if he can stick in the league or not– he could easily be a complete flop. But how many players have been failed with his combination of reach, mobility, and shooting? I assume the answer is none because I cannot think of any with his intersection of strengths. Once the lottery is done, why not gamble on the outlier prospect with an outlier upside over another vanilla 3 + D prospect? There is no reason that a player with an unprecedented intersection of strengths such as Qi should slide to round 2.

Frankly it seems conservative to rank him 15th, but without much information or hype I believe my point is made by placing him here.

16. Domantas Sabonis (DX: 18, ESPN: 10)

He’s young, he can rebound, he can score, and he has a good chance of having an NBA career. But he has such short arms, limited athleticism, and limited defensive versatility that I just don’t see the star potential to justify his rise to a possible top 10 pick.

17. DeAndre Bembry (DX: 27, ESPN: 20)

Bembry offers a little bit of everything between his athleticism, passing, rebounding, defense, shot creation. His shot is below average, but if it improves to average he should provide a nice return on any non-lotto pick.

18. Skal Labissiere (DX: 10, ESPN: 14)

Part of me feels compelled to call Skal a lock bust, but he allegedly has serious Channing Frye shooting potential as a hyper athletic 7’0″. How bearish can you be on a player like that? Whatever the answer is, mine is the maximum. He is an anemic rebounder, non-passer, has bad instincts, and is exceptionally foul prone because he tries to block everything on defense. In spite of his tools he could manage to match Frye’s shooting and still be a worse overall player. Conversely he could also manage to be a rich man’s Frye because of his tools, so I am tempering my desire to sell. My inkling is that he offers more boom than bust, but without many (or any?) prior prospects with his combination of burst, height, and shooting this cannot be stated with certitude.

19. Henry Ellenson (DX: 13, ESPN: 11)

Ellenson has been slowly sliding down draft boards, and it is hard to disagree. He offers a compelling offensive package for a 7’0″ player, but still is not yet particularly good at anything. He is average at passing and shooting and shot a hair under 50% from 2P%, so he still has a ways to go to put it together on this end. And even if he does he sounds like a strong bet to be a defensive liability. Ellenson’s upside scenario remains attractive but it requires such a parlay of good development that my optimism for his NBA prospects remains tempered.

20. Ivica Zubac (DX: 16, ESPN: 25)

Zubac is a funky prospect highlighted by his great size, hands, and touch which provides elite interior scoring upside. He’s only 19 and also has solid potential as a passer, shooter, and rebounder as well. Defense is his biggest concern, but if he becomes decent on this end he could provide a load of goodness without any gaping weaknesses.

21. Taurean Prince (DX: 19, ESPN: 34)

Prince is a prototypical 3 +D prospect, as he offers the versatility to guard either forward position, an acceptable 3 point shot and passing ability, and not much else. He won’t become a star but he could easily become a useful cog that fits in any NBA lineup.

22. Patrick McCaw (DX: 29, ESPN: 32)

McCaw is a 3 +D prospect similar to Prince but smaller– he has versatility to defend either guard position and possibly SF’s once he adds bulk. He complements this with adequate passing and shooting but lacks the creation ability to become a star.

23. Brice Johnson (DX: 30, ESPN: 29)

Brice Johnson is Jeremy Evans Deluxe, as his profile is highlighted by his elite leaping and finishing ability. He is a bit bigger and was much more productive at North Carolina than Evans was at North Carolina. If Evans’ finishing translated to such respectable NBA production, Johnson’s analogous upside is tantalizing.

Of course there is a reason why Evans is not a regular rotation player, and Johnson has similar concerns. He is a prone to bullying from other PF’s but lacks the defensive fundamentals to adequately guard the perimeter, and also lacks perimeter skills offensively. This makes him an awkward fit into NBA lineups, and it may prevent his statistical production from translating into positive value for his team.

Johnson is another slippery prospect, but he is in the conversation for most athletic player and most productive NCAA player in the draft (kenpom’s algorithm rated him as player of the year) and is still just 21. Those are inarguably nice check marks for a late 1st gamble.

24. Buddy Hield (DX: 8, ESPN: 8)

I have written about Hield as my clear choice for most overrated top 10 pick. He brings elite shooting volume and accuracy, but even if he replicates Klay Thompson’s shooting (which is close to his absolute upside since Klay converted most 3P of all time for any non-Curry in 15-16), he still lacks Klay’s size, court vision, defensive aptitude, and defensive versatility. This would be enough to make him a useful rotation piece. But unless his slashing game develops into a legitimate weapon, it is hard to see an upside tail that justifies his top 10 hype.

25. Denzel Valentine (DX: 25, ESPN: 22)

I want to love Denzel Valentine– it is rare that a player with his intersection of passing, shooting, and rebounding is available outside of the lottery ever. But at the same time he projects to be a major liability defensively and is inept at getting to the rim on offense.

26. Gary Payton Jr. (DX: 48, DX: 56)

The Mitten turns 24 in December, but his elite rebound, steal, and block rates cannot be ignored and he offers just enough offensively to have upside as a 1.5 way PG. His PG skills are not great, but he used his athleticism to get to the rim with regularity and complemented this with a good assist to turnover ratio. His biggest wart is his shot, as he shot 30% on limited 3PA volume and 65% FT, and he may be too old to improve this to an adequate rate. But if his shot experiences a mini-leap forward, he could be highway robbery in round 2 given his athleticism, ability to defend either guard position, and PG skills.

27. Malik Beasley (DX: 23, ESPN: 21)

Beasley is an athletic shotmaker and slasher who offers surprising rebounding and competes enough on defense to amount to a useful NBA guard. His intangibles appear to have elevated his stock to the 12-20 range. But he is an undersized SG without much PG skills, so I do not see a tempting enough upside tail for him to be near the top of my list in that range.

28. Cheick Diallo (DX: 24, ESPN: 24)

Diallo is an exceptionally smooth and coordinated big, and after dominating the high school all star circuit I was sky high on him entering NCAA season. Then he spent the year buried on Kansas’s bench, he still is too short to play center, and he lacks the passing and shooting to play on the perimeter. This makes him slippery to peg, but he could be a bigger and better Faried and he is an intriguing fringe 1st round gamble.

Tier 4: I Wish I Could Rank All Of These Guys Higher

29. Paul Zipser (DX: 26, ESPN: 57)

Zipser is the European Taurean Prince, as he offers defensive versatility as a combo forward and enough shooting and passing to fit in on the perimeter as a solid 3 + D type.

30. Rade Zagorac (DX: 33, ESPN: 45)

Zagorac provides an interesting offensive blend of creation, passing, and shooting for a 6’9″ athlete. There are questions about his defense given his weak frame and limited quickness, so I am not quite as high on him as other intelligent people. But it is easy to see how he strengths could sum into a nice NBA piece for a late 1st/early 2nd flier.

31. Caris LeVert (DX: 46, ESPN: 41)

LeVert is a consummate role player, as he does a little bit of everything among passing, shooting, defense, rebounding, and secondary creation. He lacks strength, athleticism, and durability as his past two seasons ended prematurely due to separate leg and foot injuries. But if he can stay healthy, his small strengths could stay into a surprisingly positive role player and he is consequently one of my favorite 2nd round sleepers.

32. Demetrius Jackson (DX: 17, ESPN: 31)

Jackson’s package is highlighted by athleticism, shooting, and PG skills. But he is almost 22, excellent at nothing, and too small to guard SG’s. He is good enough to justify a late 1st or early 2nd selection, but too bland to be an exciting choice.

33. Juan Hernangomez (DX: 15, ESPN: 18)

Hernangomez is a late riser based on his PF size, non-stop motor, great intangibles, and ability to space the floor. I am skeptical of this rise as I believe talent evaluators are expecting him to fit on the perimeter due to his shooting when his awful assist to turnover rate is the more important signal for swing forwards to translate to the next level. Further he is not a lock stud defensive player, as he is a non-rim protector and has mediocre reach for a PF. My inclination is that he lacks the ball skills for SF and size or burst to defend PF, but perhaps his quickness, shooting, and motor enable him to find an NBA niche nevertheless.

34. Ante Zizic (DX: 22, ESPN: 23)

Zizic is a 19 year old with decent center tools and tantalizing scoring, rebounding, and shot blocking stats in the Adriatic league. The downside is that his steal and assist:TOV rates suggest seriously flawed instincts. He appears to be a pure garbage man which limits his upside, but he is so good at his role it is easy to envision him finding a niche in the NBA.

35. Robert Carter (DX: 44, ESPN: 54)

One of the draft nerd darlings of the 2nd round, Carter does a little bit of everything. With his 7’3.25″ wingspan and balanced game, he has a tiny sliver of equity to be a Millsap level steal.

36. Isaia Cordinier (DX: 39, ESPN: 44)

Cordinier is a mystery box but his scouting report resembles one that may possibly contain a boat: athleticism, vision, shooting, competitive defense, intangibles. He is an intriguing early 2nd gamble.

37. Damian Jones (DX: 21, ESPN: 27)

Toolsy centers with good bodies and athleticism require little skill to succeed in the NBA. DeAndre Jordan and Andre Drummond offer examples of players who slid in the draft and then translated better than expected. But Jones does not match their levels of athleticism and offers nearly nothing in terms of skill and feel. In spite of his tools he has weak rebounding stats and shockingly low steal and block rates. If he could defend Vanderbilt’s defense would rank much better than #34 as he had the privilege of playing alongside Wade Baldwin and Luke Kornet.

His best skill is his scoring, but he is a poor FT shooter, lacks 3P range, and is a poor passer even if he has become a more willing one. He doesn’t turn 21 until shortly after the draft and is still salvageable, but I do not believe he’s enough of an athletic freak to become a quality starter in spite of his basketball playing limitations.

38. Thon Maker (DX: 40, ESPN: 19)

He is 7’1″ and has some semblance of a skill level, but in the 2015 Hoop Summit he looked nothing near an NBA prospect as it appeared he had hands for feet and feet for hands. Being uncoordinated and unathletic is a tough pair of weaknesses to overcome, and he was outshined by a number of players who struggled as NCAA freshman.

He apparently interviewed well and it may be easy to talk yourself into his upside without proof that he is bad, but there is even less proof that he is good. It is possible he’d be firmly in the undrafted ranks with a full NCAA season, so he likely belongs somewhere in round 2.

39. Stephen Zimmerman (DX: 40, ESPN: 40)

Zimmerman looked like he had decent potential in the 2015 Hoop Summit, but then he was a disappointment for UNLV. He battled through injuries and two bad coaches so perhaps he is still salvageable, but there’s not much to love about his freshman performance.

40 Kay Felder (DX: 56, ESPN: 49)
41. Tyler Ulis (DX: 28, ESPN: 23)

Ulis’s high stock seems to be an overcorrection to Isaiah Thomas’s success as the #60 overall pick, but this neglects that Isaiah Thomas is likely the best player < 6′ in NBA history and he still commanded limited FA and trade value after early successes. Further, IT’s success is predicated on elite speed to get to the rim and crafty finishing as he carried a monster usage for good efficiency in Boston. Neither are part of Ulis’s repertoire, as he created a low volume of layups for himself at Kentucky.

Ulis is going to be a harmful player defensively, and it is hard to see how he atones without creating a high volume of offense on the other end. His great floor general skills and outside shooting create an ounce of intrigue, but he has such extreme limitations to overcome I do not believe he deserves to get selected in round 1.

Kay Felder may be the diminutive PG with slightly better odds of success as his superior athleticism and creation ability give him a clearer path to a big offensive impact.

42. Isaiah Whitehead (DX: 57, ESPN: 52)

Whitehead is an incredibly erratic offensive player, as evidenced by his 39% 2P% and poor turnover rate. But he has some PG skills, 3P shooting, and defensive upside, and has sneaky potential if he can find a real coach and clean up his decision making on offense.

43. Diamond Stone (DX: 31, ESPN: 33)

Stone grades decently well according to some statistical models, but I just don’t think his tools are good enough for him to fit in defensively in the NBA. At 6’10.25″ he is too short to play center and without much burst or quickness he does not figure to find a niche in modern NBA defenses.

44. Guerschon Yabusele (DX: 32, ESPN: 30)

Yabusele has a good PF body, athleticism, and shooting. But he lacks the quickness to guard the perimeter and is neither a rim protector or generally regarded as good on defense, and there is too much disaster potential on this end to consider him in round 1.

45. Malachi Richardson (DX: 35, ESPN: 15)

My most disliked green room invite, I’m softening my anti-Malachi stance on the premise that he might be better than his on paper scouting report. If he has good intangibles it is not impossible to envision him sticking in the NBA. He can slash to the rim and possibly be a solid 3 point shooter and decent wing defender. His assist to turnover ratio wasn’t terrible, and if he can clean up his awful mid-range shot selection he may become a serviceable 3 +D wing after all.

I still don’t see how he merits a first round selection, but it is easy to argue that he is solidly draftable.

46. Georgios Papagiannis (DX: 50, ESPN: 46)

It is hard to keep up with all of these late emerging internationals, but Papagiannis is huge, 18, and not obviously super bad so let’s just stash him here on my board and be happy with it.

47. Malcolm Brogdon (DX: 42, ESPN: 38)

Brogdon is super old and unathletic, but he was one of the best players for one of the best NCAA teams. His length, BBIQ, and shooting give him some hope of sticking as a 3 +D player.

48. Prince Ibeh (DX: 51, ESPN: 88)

Ibeh is a complete zero offensively, but he is draftable based on his stunning tools and defensive potential alone.

Tier 5: Fliers
49. Derrick Jones Jr. (DX: 70, ESPN: 86)
50. Troy Williams (DX: 73, ESPN: 75)

I am not sure how these guys are rated so lowly. They are both super athletes with potential to be good defensive pieces. Williams does enough things on offense to possibly fit in on the perimeter, and Jones is young enough to have time to figure things out.

The behind the scenes information on these players must be ugly because on paper they are both easily worth a 2nd round flier. With good intangibles they are both 1st rounders to me.

51. Pascal Siakam (DX: 52, ESPN: 43)

Nothing jumps off the page about Siakam, but he does enough things well to merit a shot in round 2.

52. AJ Hammons (DX: 43, ESPN: 45)

A number of intelligent people seem bullish on Hammons based on his body and stats, but I believe he is too old, indifferent, and lacking in instincts to be much of a sleeper.

53. Jake Layman (DX: 49, ESPN: 48)

He has good size, athleticism, shooting and not much else.

54. Alex Caruso (DX: 84, ESPN: NR)

One of the most underrated players in NCAA this past season, Caruso doesn’t have great length or athleticism but he has great PG height, vision, and defensive instincts. He has a chance of being a reliable NBA 3P shooter, and I believe he’s too good to not merit a late 2nd flier.

55. Petr Cornelie (DX: 37, ESPN: 50)

Cornelie seems bleh to me, but DX and ESPN think he is draftable so why not include him in my top 60.

56. Jameel Warney (DX: 100, ESPN:78)

Warney strikes me as a Spurs-ian type who thrives on feel and skill to post monster stats for Stony Brook as an undersized PF. He is probably too short and slow to cut it in the NBA, but his measurables are identical to Millsap so his sliver of poor man’s Sapquity requires mentioning.

57. Daniel Ochefu (DX: NR, ESPN: NR)

Ochefu isn’t that athletic and projects to have struggles defending the PnR, but he was so so good as a college senior I believe he deserves late 2nd consideration.

58. Fred VanVleet (DX: 83, ESPN: 61)
59. Ron Baker (DX: 78, ESPN: 60)
60. Jared Uthoff (DX: 59, ESPN: 36)

Some more super productive seniors who I like more as NCAA players than NBA prospects

Just Missed the Cut: Josh Scott, Isaiah Cousins, Dorian Finney-Smith, James Webb, Elgin Cook, Anthony Barber, Joel Bolomboy, Josh Adams, Michael Gbinije, Tyrone Wallace, Thomas Walkup, Wayne Selden

75ish. Ben Bentil (DX: 45, ESPN: 36)

Bentil is the player consensus to be drafted that I like the least. He has meh athleticism, meh rebounding, meh passing, no defense, and just doesn’t offer a whole lot outside of medium efficiency volume scoring when he was consistently set up by Kris Dunn.

Teenage Mutant Ninja Poeltl

03 Friday Jun 2016

Posted by deanondraft in NCAA, Scouting Reports

≈ 11 Comments

NCAA Basketball: Washington State at Utah

After Brandon Ingram and Ben Simmons go off the board, there are a myriad of possible choices at #3 overall. Dragan Bender is the good choice, and if the Celtics correctly select him, the 4th overall pick is a mess of players who should never be chosen in the top 5 of any draft. Kris Dunn is the only choice that is reasonable to both draft nerds and scouts, which is good argument for him being the best choice. ESPN and DX offer Jaylen Brown, Jamal Murray, Marquese Chriss, and Buddy Hield as alternate possibilities. Draft nerds (such as myself) may argue that Wade Baldwin or Chinanu Onuaku deserve consideration. I would like to make an argument for a player which neither crowd considers to belong in the top 5.

Jakob Poeltl is a 20 year old center from Austria. He is 7’1″ and mobile, he scores efficiently with elite rim touch, passes well, and rebounds decently. He does not attempt jump shots, but he did improve his FT% from 44% as a freshman to 69% as a sophomore.

He fails to arouse excitement in the lottery because he is not an explosive leaper, he does not make jumpers, and there are questions about his defense. His lack of bulk and toughness makes him prone to bullying, and he was most recently seen getting dominated by Domantas Sabonis in an NCAA tournament blowout loss. Further, his lackluster steal and block numbers prevent the statistically aware crowd from embracing him as a two way center. In world where big men are losing utility, it is natural to feel meh toward one who can neither shoot nor defend.

A Defense Of Poeltl’s Defense

He measured 7’1″ with a 7’2.75″ wingspan 239 pounds. This is similar to Willie Cauley-Stein who is 7’0.5″ with 7’3″ wing 242 pounds. Poeltl lacks the athleticism and quicks of Cauley-Stein, but he is not a slouch in these areas. WCS has elite tools and is an elite defensive prospect, and comparatively it is fair to say that Poeltl has good enough tools to be a good defensive prospect.

I do not read heavily into the Sabonis matchup because he can physically match up and it was just one game. There’s no reason to believe that Poeltl will be routinely dominated by Sabonis types. In the 2015 tournament against Jahlil Okafor DX says “Poeltl won the head-to-head battle in almost every aspect of the game.” And Okafor is theoretically Poeltl’s kryptonite since getting he was draft 3rd overall largely for his ability to bully weaker players in the post. The Gonzaga loss was likely just a bad game for Poeltl at the wrong time, especially since I had loads of moneys on the Utes.

The Okafor example proves that Poeltl can handle bullies no more than Sabonis proves that he is a sieve. But proneness to bullying is not the most debilitating weakness as post-up attempts are rapidly vanishing from the NBA. It is a blip in his profile, but not a death knell.

His low steal rate is another blip, and then his block rate suspiciously dropped from 8.6% as a freshman to 5.0% as a sophomore. There are two possible explanations for this :

He lacks some level of burst/reach/instincts to protect the rim at an elite level
He does not attempt to block as many shots as his giant peers

#1 is true to at least some extent and adds another blip, but let’s explore #2 for a moment

Non Block Party

Jumping at every shot in the paint to try to swat it into the 4th row is not optimal defense. It leaves the attempting blocker susceptible to pump fakes and fouls, and even when shots are blocked they are rebounded by the defense at a lower rate than normal. It is often preferrable to contest without blocking, which Poeltl seems to prefer.

Utah finished #131 of 351 in defensive block rate, but #32 in defensive 2P%. In Pac-12 play they were #9 in Blk%, #2 in 2P%. Utah also had the lowest defensive FT rate in the entire NCAA, with Poeltl’s impressively low 4.5 fouls per 100 possessions playing a factor. He is the anti-Skal Labissiere who posted double the block rate and committed 11.2 fouls per 100 in the process.

This aligns with DraftExpress’s scouting report which praises Poeltl’s fundamentals for his discipline, competitiveness, and ability to switch pick and rolls.

One concern may be that Utah’s defense slipped from #6 to #69 following the departure of Delon Wright and 7’0″ backup Dallin Bachynski. Of course any defense will miss Delon Wright, but much of the decline is attributable to variance. Utah’s defensive 3P% slipped from 31.2% to 37.1% and opponent FT% increased a few points as well. This has nothing to do with Poeltl, a little to do with Wright, and a lot to do with variance. If opponents missed shots against Utah like they did the prior year, the Utes could have easily had another top 25 defense. This is not amazing, but is solidly good for a roster that does not feature much size or athleticism outside of Poeltl.

This does not mean that his block rate should be entirely ignored. Even his freshman block rate was slightly less than most stud defensive big prospects post. But his freshman rate did not raise flags, and his low sophomore rate correlates with positive aspects of his defensive profile

In Summation

+Good physical tools
+Good fundamentals
+Anchored good team defense
+Solid defensive rebounder

-He lacks strength and is prone to bullying
-He is not an explosive playmaker with both steals
-Nothing about his defensive profile is amazing

His profile is founded on good intersection of macro indicators with a few blips that cut into his upside and create a downside tail. He may be good defensively, or he may be soft and mediocre. But nobody is as worried about the defense of Deyonta Davis who also had issues with steal rate, is 2.5 inches shorter, and has no indicator that he should be better outside of a being slightly more athletic. Poeltl should be treated similarly, as a good but not great defensive prospect.

But centers are a dying breed!

As the game drifts beyond the arc, centers are being used less frequently in favor of small lineups with superior shooting. This dents the value of bigs, especially ones that cannot make threes such as Poeltl. But this will not necessarily trend until centers are extinct– it is generally helpful to be extremely tall at the game of basketball, and it is possible the league will take measures to counteract the 3 point bombing fest that the game has become (i.e. move the 3 point arc back).

Further, while Poeltl is not a 3 point shooter, he does offer the other key small person traits of passing and ability to switch onto smaller matchups. I doubt that a mobile 7’1″ player with multiple skills will become totally obsolete, so it is not reasonable to condemn him based on recent anti-big trends.

Bottom Line

Scouts like Poeltl, stat models like him, and he is much better defensively than his stat sheet suggests. The intersection of these qualities tends to suggest that a prospect is good.

Poeltl has an awesome offensive package of rim touch, passing, hands, and improved FT%. He may never be able to make 3’s, but his FT% implies a fair chance of developing a mid-range game and he could be solidly good on both ends. He could also be soft on defense and limited offensively, or he could be a player who is productive but can only be played situationally as the NBA evolves. But everybody outside of the top 3 has serious bust risk and non-elite upside.

His NCAA statistics in many ways parallel to fellow Ute and former #1 overall pick Andrew Bogut, who also had a curiously low NCAA block rate and provided a rare case of a higher NBA block rate from age 25 onward. He also has shades of Al Horford and Marc Gasol who are above average at a wide range of things to sum to a solidly good player. Those are optimistic outcomes that require him to develop a jump shot and hit his upper bound defensively, but they are nice upside scenarios for a weak #4 slot.

I am not certain that he belongs at #4 overall. Kris Dunn and Wade Baldwin may be safer choices in a world where two way perimeter players who can guard multiple positions trade at a premium. But beyond them there are not many names who offer notably fewer flags or higher upside, so I have Poeltl locked into the #4-7 range in my big board.

I’m Not Your Friend, Buddy

02 Thursday Jun 2016

Posted by deanondraft in NCAA, Scouting Reports

≈ 5 Comments

buddy-hield
This past season Buddy Hield (DX: 7, ESPN: 6) captured the basketball world’s heart as the fast talking Bahamian delivered a break out season at Oklahoma. He thrived on his sharp shooting, as he led Oklahoma to the Final 4 while elevating his stock from 2nd round to a possible top 5 pick.

Why his stock is high

Hield’s two strongest selling points are his shooting accuracy and ability to get off a high volume of 3PA. He put on a Steph Curry-ish shooting display as a senior, averaging more 3P per game than any other NCAA player while converting a staggering 46%, backing this up with 88% FT. Many of these shots came off the dribble, as only 68% of his 3P were assisted. Combine this with adequate tools for an NBA SG, no debilitating weakness in his game, and the work ethic to continue to progress at an above average rate and it is easy to see why he is regarded as a strong candidate to be an ideal floor spacing SG.

Hield is often compared to a more athletic JJ Redick, and a possibly superior version of Redick is certainly an adequate upsisde for a mid-lottery pick in this draft.

Is Redick really a fair comparison?

I have skepticism regarding Hield’s ability to attain that Redick’s of goodness. Redick is a better shooter who has picture perfect form and shot 40% from 3 and 92%+ FT in each of his first 3 NCAA seasons. Hield shot a mere 35% from 3 and 80% FT over his first 3 seasons, which casts significant shade on his senior shooting numbers (although in fairness they were superior to Redick’s senior %’s). While there was clearly genuine progression in his senior season shooting ability, shooting percentages are heavily plagued by variance and it’s exceptionally unlikely that Hield’s senior percentages are indicative of his true shooting ability. He is nevertheless a very good shooter, but not likely to be an outlier shooter on par with Redick, Steph Curry, Kyle Korver, etc.

Other than his shooting, Buddy does not have many notable strengths in his profile. His tools are roughly average for an NBA SG, which can be viewed as a strength for a great shooter. He can score in transition and has enough handle and athleticism to create his own shot off the dribble. If there is a second feature to his game, it is that he created an excellent volume of his own shots at the rim this past season and increased his FT rate. With 55% 2P to complement his great 3P% and FT%, his offensive game appears to maximize the sweet spots of 3’s, layups, and FT’s similar to James Harden.

But as his scoring improved, he saw a spike in turnovers while his assists stagnated, resulting in an atrocious assist to turnover rate for a senior guard. Any team drafting him should be extremely worried that his lack of vision will prevent his slashing game from efficiently translating to the NBA, especially since he is not the shiftiest player. He should be able to attack closeouts and finish in transition, but I doubt he can efficiently penetrate NBA defenses with regularity given his poor vision.

Defensively he lacks the quickness to guard PG’s and the size to guard SF’s. And he is not good at guarding his only competent position of SG. It is conceivable that he could become average a guarding NBA SG’s, but a low floor, low upside, and limited versatility on this end makes it difficult to get excited over an old guard with a 1.5 dimensional offensive game.

Hield’s work ethic inspires some optimism to overcome his flaws, but he turns 23 in December and has limited time to improve before he reaches his peak. Perhaps his career will mirror that of Redick, who didn’t become a useful rotation player until his 4th season at age 25. But JJ Redick is an outlier example of a one dimensional shooting senior becoming a solid starter, and choosing him as a Hield comp undersells nuances to Redick’s skill, feel, basketball IQ, and pro development that enabled his success. Hield is more likely to be a compare to Doug McDermott or Jimmer Fredette than Redick.

Bottom Line

My favorite Hield comparison is Anthony Morrow. He can easily populate his game outside of shooting to be a rich man’s Morrow (most readily by not being awful on defense). Also he can make a greater shooting impact by getting off a higher volume of 3’s, even if he 3P% will likely be lower. A more complete Morrow is a useful rotation player, and if his work ethic leads to surprising leaps in his game, Hield will become a starting caliber SG.

Buddy is worth a 1st round selection, but his equity to be an above average starter is slim, and he isn’t going to become an all-star. It is possible that I am underrating the value of his massive 3PA rate, his slashing ability, and his odds of becoming competent defensively, but I simply do not see the upside to justify a lottery selection.

Fortunately, there are healthier alternatives for teams starved for wings:

Wade Baldwin (DX: 15, ESPN: 20)

baldwin

This is every draft nerd’s free space for SG to rate above Hield. Baldwin is a much better passer and defensive player than Hield while being 2.3 years younger. Given that he also has a better career 3P% with 80% FT and a similar physical profile, it is a layup that he is better than Hield.

Hield’s key edge is that he attempts more than twice as many 3’s as Baldwin, who struggles to shoot off the dribble and has a slower trigger. It seems that Baldwin should be able to increase his 3PA rate in the NBA as he plays more off the ball, but it is a noteworthy flaw in his profile. And while Baldwin doesn’t have the burst or handle to regularly penetrate to the rim, his youth and passing nevertheless place his slashing upside far above that of Hield.

It is arguable that Hield is a slightly better offensive prospect due to his edge in 3PA rate, but once you factor in defense it is no contest: Baldwin is clearly the superior overall prospect.

Baldwin should become something on a scale of Delonte West to George Hill a significant % of the time. He’s a solid 3 + D prospect with a hint of PG skills and versatility to defend either guard, and deserves to be picked in the top 10.

Dejounte Murray (DX: 32, ESPN: 12)

NCAA MENS BASKETBALL, STANFORD AT WASHINGTON

Murray is younger and has higher risk of busting completely, but he also has a sliver of star upside that Hield lacks.

Murray’s best selling point is his slashing potential, as he posted an excellent assist rate for a freshman wing and pairs this with a slithery ability to penetrate through defenses. If he adds strength and improves his skills at a good rate, he could become a weapon offensively as a James Harden lite. While Murray won’t be nearly as good, Harden exemplifies how vision and shake can sum to elite slashing without an explosive first step.

Murray’s biggest wart is his shooting (29% 3P, 66% FT), which makes him far more likely to resemble Monta Ellis, Michael Carter Williams, or 50 year old Kobe than Harden. But unlike Hield who will never have adequate PG skills, Murray could conceivably improve to an average 3 point shooter.

Murray’s defense is a mystery box. ESPN labels him as a good defender, DX labels him as indifferent albeit with upside. His steals, blocks, and rebounds indicate good potential on this end. He could be as poor as Harden or solidly good on this end.

Murray is a slippery prospect. There is a high upside, but it requires a long parlay of conditionals to be reached. He provides an example where behind the scenes evaluation would be particularly helpful. With personality green flags he’s a tantalizing sleeper that belongs in the lottery, without them he’s a long shot in the dark. I cannot say that he’s a definitively better prospect than Hield, but he has a much clearer path to stardom and a more attractive gamble from afar.

Caris LeVert (DX: 46, ESPN: 43)

635652287629113380-levert

LeVert’s stock has been harmed by having his past two seasons prematurely ended by injury, and he has fallen from possible mid-1st rounder all the way to round 2.

LeVert offers a balanced package as a role playing wing, as he is 8 months younger, 2 inches taller, better defensively, more defensively versatile, better at passing, and has a better career 3P% than Hield. That’s a whole lot of goodness that he brings to the table that Hield lacks.

Hield’s advantages are his 3PA rate and his lack of an injury history. He is also stronger and perhaps slightly more explosive, but it’s difficult to see his trigger and ability to shoot off the dribble as more valuable than LeVert’s more well rounded package. LeVert’s versatility offers a prototypical role player who fits in any lineup, and his summation of many small strengths can add up to more upside than meets the untrained eye.

Hield still may be the better overall prospect depending on your optimism (or lack thereof) regarding LeVert’s ability to stay healthy, but the two prospects are close. Why use a lottery pick on Hield when you can nab LeVert in the late 1st or early 2nd?

Malachi Richardson (DX: 37, ESPN: 14)

Just kidding! Somebody has to explain to me why he is even top 50. In spite of being a freshman, he is sophomore aged and his most notable statistic is 39% 2P. His big selling points are that he is an average shooter and has a 7’0″ wingspan. Other than that he’s an average athlete and unspectacular rebounder and passer. Nobody knows if he’s good on defense because he played in Syracuse’s zone, but he posted curiously low steals and blocks for a wing with 7’0″ length.

According to Chad Ford he interviewed well, but it is hard to see that mattering when the position he seeks is “NBA basketball player.” I would like a hit of whatever Ford is smoking to rate him as a lottery pick.

2015 Pre-season Rookie Update: #’s 13-40

25 Sunday Oct 2015

Posted by deanondraft in NBA, Scouting Reports

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Cameron PAyne, Devin Booker, Frank Kaminsky, jordan mickey, Norman Powell, rashad vaughn, rj hunter, Rondae Hollis-Jefferson, Sam Dekker, terry rozier, Trey Lyles, Tyus Jones

13. Rondae Hollis-Jefferson (Final Big: 9th, Drafted: 23rd)

RHJ has the best overall tools of any wing in the draft, as he boasts elite athleticism with a 7’2″ wingspan and elite frame. As expected, he badly struggled offensively in SL and pre-season as he’s nowhere near an NBA 3 point threat and doesn’t have the handle to do much off the dribble. After shooting 5/21 from 3 in summer league, he didn’t attempt a single 3 in 85 pre-season minutes, which is a bad sign.

His strengths stood out as much as his weaknesses though: he racked up loads of steals, blocks, and rebounds while posting slightly more assists (27) than turnovers (25) in the combined summer league and pre-season sample. He’s such an elite and versatile defensive player he has awesome upside if he somehow develops a 3 point shot. As it is, he looks like he will be an MKG type with less inside the arc scoring. He has a long way to go to fit in offensively, and Brooklyn is not the sharpest team to put him in a position to succeed on that end.

His tools and defense are so outlier good I remain fond of him. Any level of passable offense can make him a highly useful NBA player.

14. Devin Booker (Final Big: 22nd, Drafted: 13th)

Booker is a weird player to evaluate. He’s one of the youngest players in the draft and could become one of the most accurate shooters in NBA history. But he has not gotten off a huge volume of 3PA in college, SL, or pre-season. He has short arms and his trigger isn’t the fastest, so his volume of 3PA may always be light.

The most interesting comparison for Booker is Arron Afflalo, as they share similar surprisingly low output in 3PA rate, rebounds, steals, and blocks. Booker is a superior draft prospect to Afflalo, and a rich man’s Afflalo is obviously a useful player. It’s just not teeming with upside, and Booker needs to find his calling card to exceed that.

Booker has a surprisingly decent handle, moves reasonably well, and is super young (doesn’t turn 19 until Oct 30) so he has potential to develop a much more diverse and efficient offensive repertoire than Afflalo. Phoenix’s hope is that if he works diligently, he has a sliver of equity to become a Ray Allen or Reggie Miller type down the road. It seems like a long shot since he is currently so far away, but it cannot be completely ruled out since time is on Booker’s side.

15. Frank Kaminsky (Final Big: 10th, Drafted: 9th)

Frank the Tank had a disappointing pre-season, converting just 34% of his 2PA (13/38). This follows a decent but unspectacular 46% (21/46) in summer league. His most common comparison of Kelly Olynyk dominated both samples shooting 67% in SL (34/51) and 57% PS (28/49) as a rookie. These small samples do not mean that Kaminsky cannot be as good or better than Olynyk, but it dims his upside as he should be held to a higher standard than his younger, rawer, and more athletic peers.

16. Sam Dekker (Final Big: 19th, Drafted: 18th)

Dekker struggled to make outside shots in his 148 pre-season minutes, but otherwise performed decently. He should be a nice fit in Houston, as he can play both SF/PF and pairs well with both Howard and Capela as a stretch 4. Also, being surrounded by shooters should help his slashing game as he has the athleticism to get to the rim and the size to finish.

Dekker’s parallels to Chandler Parsons are hard to ignore, as they have similar size and college shooting %’s (Dekker: 59%/35%/70% two/three/FT vs Parsons 58%/34%/61%). The key advantage for Parsons is his PG skills, as he had more advanced handles and a much higher NCAA assist rate. But Dekker is a bit more athletic, and if he develops into a reliable NBA 3 point shooter like Parsons he could become a decent offensive weapon in his own rite.

17. Trey Lyles (Final Big: 15th, Drafted: 12th)

Lyles showed some positive signs pre-season (14/29 2PA and 6 AST vs. 4 TOV), but he struggled in his larger summer league sample and was dragged down by his inability to make 3’s in both samples. After shooting 4/29 from 3 in college, he made just 6/27 in pre-season and summer league and needs significant improvement to justify his lottery selection.

In the instance that Lyles does become an adequate 3 point shooter, he’s an interesting piece. He has a nice first step and handle, and a stretch 4 who can also slash from the perimeter is an intriguing piece. But since he’s not that explosive, he often pulls up for floaters when his drives get cut short. He has good offensive upside, but he still needs a fair amount of polish on that end for a player who will likely be a defensive liability.

18. Cameron Payne (Final Big: 23rd, Drafted: 14th)
19. Tyus Jones (Final Big: 17th, Drafted: 24th)

In the high skill low tools PG category, I could never reconcile how Payne’s stock rose so much higher than Jones. Jones was the #4 RSCI recruit, he won MOP of the final 4, and almost every stat model rated him higher than Payne. Yet Payne went 14th to a team that normally drafts well, and Jones was passed on by a number of good GM’s as he slid all the way to 24th. Payne has slightly better physical tools with 2 inches great length and superior quickness, but he still doesn’t have the body or burst of a prototypical NBA PG.

I believe Payne vaulted ahead of Jones simply because he stylistically looks more impressive. He has a better handle and has more shake to overcome his lack of burst. He can also make a number of difficult shots of the dribble from pull-ups between pull ups, stepbacks, and floaters. Payne also plays with a swagger that is intoxicating to watch when he is running well. In contrast, Jones is more of a steady hand guiding an offense that surrounded him with elite talent. Stylistically he was much more boring, as he thrived off of avoiding mistakes and making open shots.

On one hand, Payne has a bit more meat in his game to build around as a primary ball handler, so his advanced standing may be justified. On the other hand, Jones is 1 year 9 months younger and has time to catch up, and it is possible that Payne earned more attention simply because he has a fun factor to his game that will not translate into NBA success. I am not sure which side of the argument is truer, and neither player received enough playing time in pre-season to shed much light on the subject. This comparison will be interesting to re-visit in a few years.

20. Justin Anderson (Final Big: 18th, Drafted: 21st)

After a terrific summer league, Anderson had a horrid pre-season on the Mavericks’ depleted roster. With a lack of shot creation on the team, Anderson struggled to make 3’s (4/25) and had a poor assist to turnover ratio of 7 to 16. He gets a bit of a pass because the entire team struggled, and he does fit the 3 + D archetype rather well. He isn’t the defensive beast that Rondae Hollis-Jefferson is, but he nevertheless has good D potential and is a much easier fit into NBA offenses with his superior shooting.

21. Kevon Looney (Final Big: 13th, Drafted: 30th)

His injury means no instant gratification but rookies are terrible anyway. He should be worth the wait for the value he provides at 30th overall. His main concern is that his lack of explosiveness and ball handling prevent him from living up to his statistical adoration.

22. RJ Hunter (Final Big: 25th, Drafted: 28th)

Hunter struggled to score in pre-season, but other than that he crushed the eye test. He has a great passing ability, and played good defense for a rookie showing solid fundamentals and using his length to create a whopping 11 steals in 132 pre-season minutes. He racked up impressive steal and block totals playing in Georgia Stat’s zone defense, and it’s encouraging that he has transitioned nicely to man to man at a higher level. Hunter should have a career in the NBA as a prototypical 3 + D wing, and could end up finding rotation minutes as a rookie for the Celtics.

23. Jordan Mickey (Final Big: 38th, Drafted: 33rd)

Mickey has been one of the biggest surprises of the pre-season, leading all rookies in PER. Granted, his 68 minutes largely came against garbage units of the Knicks, 76ers, Nets, and foreign teams, but he looked good and earned praise from Brad Stevens.

Mickey is one of the funkier prospects in the draft– he has excellent quickness, athleticism, and length, and is a good shot blocker. He is extremely versatile and has loads of defensive upside in a scheme that switches heavily.

His problem is that at 6’8″ he lacks height to play center, and he lacks the passing ability and shooting range to play PF. He didn’t show much promise in these areas with 6 assists and 1 3PA in 293 combined minutes between summer league and pre-season. But he did show potential as a pick and roll finisher with surprisingly smooth footwork and finishing, and he also has a respectable mid-range shot. Consequently he scored with better volume and efficiency than expected in both summer league and pre-season.

Given trends toward smaller lineups and heavy switching, perhaps he can be a great defensive center in spite of his height. His other tools help compensate, and there aren’t many centers who can really punish shorter matchups. His lack of passing and range inhibit his offensive upside and ability to fit in a wide range of lineups, but his strengths are unique and strong enough to overcome his warts. Pair him with a PF like Kelly Olynyk and give him a coach like Brad Stevens and his impact could be surprisingly good. I didn’t think much of him before the draft, but he is quickly winning me over as a second round steal.

24. Jerian Grant (Final Big: 21st, Drafted: 19th)
25. Delon Wright (Final Big: 16th, Drafted: 20th)

As the oldest players drafted in round 1, these players have more pressure to contribute immediately to maintain their value as prospects. Grant was mediocre and Wright was bad, playing a meager 72 minutes while posting more turnovers (8) than assists (7) or 2 pointers made (7).

I liked both pre-draft, but with so many younger players outperforming them they get ticked down a few slots.

26. Terry Rozier (Final Big: 50th, Drafted: 16th)

Rozier is an undersized SG who atones with good length and athleticism to be a pesky defender at both guard positions. He doesn’t have much in the way of PG skills, but he has been more than competent making 3’s at 46% (18/39) between SL and PS. In other words, he’s roughly an Avery Bradley doppelgänger which makes him a puzzling selection at 16th overall.

Danny Ainge gambled on him working hard enough to leverage his great first step into shades of a real slashing game, giving him theoretically high upside. His first step enables him to get past his man, but he doesn’t have the handle or shake to consistently get past the help defense and he often pulls up for mid-range shots when his drive gets cut short. Incidentally his efficiency suffers, as he shot just 33% inside the arc in SL (19/58) and 43% in a smaller pre-season sample (9/21).

This sets him behind Avery Bradley, as he may match Bradley’s mid-range volume at a much lower efficiency. A less efficient Bradley is not a useful player, so Rozier needs to drastically reduce his pull-up attempts and increase his layups to become a more useful player. In theory this is possible, but he looks very unnatural navigating through the teeth of a defense for a 21 year old. It’s hard to envision a good work ethic being enough to turn this weakness into a strength.

I can see Rozier having a decent career in the league, but I just don’t see the upside to merit a 16th overall selection.

27. Norman Powell (Final Big: 33rd, Drafted: 46th)

I rated Norman Powell as one of my top 2nd round sleepers before the draft, and he justified that rating with a great summer league and pre-season. He is a freak athlete with long arms who can get to the rim and play defense. If he ever develops an NBA 3 point shot he’ll be a big time steal.

28. Nikola Milutinov (Final Big: 28th, Drafted: 27th)

I still haven’t seen him play, but the Spurs drafted him– how bad could he be?

29. Larry Nance (Final Big: 32nd, Drafted: 27th)

I’m one of the few people who had him as acceptable value in the late first round, and this is why.

30. Josh Richardson (Final Big: 30th, Drafted: 40th)

I pegged Richardson as a 2nd round sleeper based on his defense, and he was a steal and blocks machine in SL/PS. He’s not much of a scorer, but he moves the ball and if he learns to make NBA 3’s he will have a career as a rotation player.

31. Chris McCullough (Final Big: 27th, Drafted: 29th)

This guy hasn’t played in forever bc of a torn ACL but he was a 5 star recruit who got loads of stocks as a freshman so let’s not forget him.

32. Rashad Vaughn (Final Big: 26th, Drafted: 17th)

The Good: He is super young and can get buckets.

The Bad: He doesn’t do anything else. In 139 pre-season minutes tallied just 9 rebs, 6 assists, 0 steals, and 0 blocks.

His tools are pedestrian with a 6’7″ wingspan and not great athleticism, so it’s hard to get too excited about his one dimensional scoring.

33. Jarell Martin (Final Big: 34th, Drafted: 25th)

Martin missed the entire pre-season with a broken foot. He didn’t seem like a great value at 25th overall to begin with, so it’s hard to feel excited for him. He is athletic and his LSU teammate Jordan Mickey looked better in an NBA system, so maybe Martin translates better than expected too.

34. Montrezl Harrell (Final Big: 36th, Drafted: 32nd)

Harrell was an effective garbage man in SL and pre-season, I’m just not sure how much it matters. He only attempted 1 three in spite of wearing a Houston uniform, and he doesn’t have the defensive aptitude to play center. I don’t see how he he fits next to Howard or Capela, so this was a semi-odd pick to me. I suppose Morey just decided to draft his top player and sort out the details later.

35. Richaun Holmes (Final Big: 37th, Drafted: 37th)
36. Pat Connaughton (Final Big: 44th, Drafted: 41st)
37. Cedi Osman (Final Big: 48th, Drafted: 31st)
38. Arturas Gudaitis (Final Big: N/A, Drafted: 47th)
39. Christian Wood (Final Big: 25th, Drafted: undrafted)
40. Branden Dawson (Final Big: 27th, Drafted: 56th)

Here are some guys to round out the top 40 since 34 is a weird amount of prospects to rank. Christian Wood might make the 76ers’ roster to the delight of draft nerds, as bad interviews caused him to go undrafted in spite of a profile that made him a clear 1st rounder.

2014 Prospect Defensive Cliff Notes

28 Monday Jul 2014

Posted by deanondraft in Scouting Reports

≈ 15 Comments

Elite Rim Protector

As usual Joel Embiid has sole custody of the stud tier of my draft rankings. Center is the position with the highest leverage defensive impact, and Embiid’s upside does not appear to be limited on this end. His primary advantage is that he is enormous, as he measured 7’1″ with a 7’5.75″ wingspan and also has a good frame and strength for his age. Further he’s mobile, athletic, coordinated, and has good shot blocking timing in spite of his limited experience. He also is good at using his length to get in the passing lanes to generate steals.

His only weakness is his lack of experience, as he is still getting a feel for defensive fundamentals. He looks like an awesome learner who plugged the leaks in his defensive game as the season progressed, and I feel that it’s only a matter of time before he catches up to speed and becomes one of the top rim protectors in the NBA. That said, I am not certain that a lack of repetitions during his developmental years won’t hold him back in some capacity. And given that he is likely to miss most or all of his rookie season and likely won’t have the durability to rack up big minutes once he’s healthy, it is worth pondering the possibility that he may not get the necessary repetitions to become truly great on this end. Embiid’s defensive development will be an interesting case study regarding the importance of experience since it’s his sole limiting factor outside of health.

Elite Perimeter Defenders: Aaron Gordon, Andrew Wiggins, Marcus Smart

These three all have as much defensive upside for their relative positions as Embiid does at center, they merely play less important positions. On paper, Gordon and Wiggins are fighting for the #2 defensive prospect in the draft. They have nearly the same dimensions (same height, Wiggins 1/4″ longer), and similar steal and block rates in college. Wiggins is more athletic, as he can jumper higher and is faster and quicker and was the superior NCAA on ball defender. Gordon is stronger and a much better defensive rebounder (part of this is that he was used as a small ball PF more often, but he also rebounds out of his zone more frequently). Gordon is also 7 months younger and his impact was more apparent in his team’s bottom line efficiency on that end as he played a significant role in the #1 NCAA defense. Gordon is smarter and more competitive, which may have contributed to the team discrepancy (although the discrepancy in each player’s surrounding talent also played a role).

Smart is 5.5 inches shorter than Wiggins and Gordon as well as the least explosive of the trio, so on the surface he is clearly the weakest of the trio. But he has awesome length and unique strength for a guard, as he weighs even more than Gordon. Further he has razor sharp instincts that led to a higher steal rate than that of Gordon and Wiggins combined. He is intensely competitive on defense and it shows in the team’s bottom line, as Oklahoma State was good defensively in both of Smart’s seasons without any obvious help from either the coach or surrounding talent. Even though he’s short for a SG, Smart’s strength and length enables him to play bigger and he defended PF’s in college. He should be able to defend both guard positions in the NBA.

Smart’s defense is unrelenting and he will do whatever it takes to scoop up as many pennies of edge as he can. Wiggins vacillates between disruptively active and passive, as sometimes he appears to be in position to make a play and doesn’t. In college this wasn’t costly because his athleticism alone enabled him to make plays and be nearly unbeatable off the dribble. But now he won’t be able to lean as heavily on his physical tools, some leaks may start to arise in his D. A good example comes when there was no physical reason why Isaiah Canaan should be able to beat Wiggins off the dribble and finish over him in such a crucial juncture of the game. It looks like Canaan simply caught Wiggins off guard.

The fact that Wiggins was able to perform well defensively in college and make it look almost effortless is indicative of his immense defensive upside. He can afford to have an occasional lapse and still be an good defender because he has a unique ability to cover a ton of ground on D. Smart’s defensive processes inspire more confidence and make him feel safer on that end, although he is aided by being a year older and more physically developed. In terms of what each prospect can do physically, they rank Wiggins > Gordon > Smart. But based on what they actually do it wouldn’t surprise me if they peak in the opposite order in the pros. Smart is my personal favorite of the trio, but maybe I’m crazy for loving him as much as I do. All three are great defensive prospects in their own right, and it’s difficult to rank them with certainty.

Good Perimeter Defenders

KJ McDaniels was a one man wrecking crew defensively for Clemson. He was a SF that led a top 20 defense by tallying 45% of their total blocked shots and 24% of their steals, but only 14% of their total fouls. He’s long, explosive, has great instincts and timing, and looks like he can be a good defensive role player in the pros. But he is only 6’6″, and much of his shot blocking will be lost in translation. He only weighs 196 so his height/strength combo isn’t ideal for a SF, and his skill and quicks are not ideal for a SG. Also he’s a 21 year old junior so his defensive dominance is less impressive than that of the young guns. My take is that his tools are good enough and the man knows how to play defense, but there are reasons to temper expectations for his NBA impact.

Jerami Grant has the tools to guard both forward positions, he rocked in the back of the Syracuse zone, and he apparently has done well in man to man coverage in the past. Whether we get to witness his defense over a large NBA sample hinges on his ability to fit in offensively.

Elfrid Payton is quick with good height, length, and instincts defensively. He competes hard and generated a good steal rate in college. He appears on track to becoming an above average NBA defensive PG. I rate him in a tier below Marcus Smart due to Smart’s superior instincts and vastly superior strength.

It’s worth noting that Sam Hinkie seems to share my affinity for defense, as he drafted all 3 players in this tier (he traded Payton but he was likely comfortable keeping him if necessary) as well as my top defensive prospect in the entire draft. Considering that Nerlens and MCW were his 2013 lotto picks, it’s clear that Hinkie places a premium on defense in the draft.

Solid Perimeter Defenders

Nick Johnson is the one player in this tier who might belong in the tier above this. He is an explosive athlete who played a huge role in Arizona’s #1 defense along with Aaron Gordon. But he is also 21, limited to defending PG’s and small SG’s, and he appears to be beatable on this end from what I saw in summer league.

Gary Harris was a good college defensive player, and he has the instincts to become a good NBA defensive player. But he also has poor size for a SG and isn’t exceptionally quick or athletic to offset this. It’s hard to envision him becoming a high impact NBA defensive player given his mediocre physical tools.

Russ Smith is old and tiny and may not even be good enough to have an NBA career. But he is quick with quick hands and I think he has some deceptive defensive potential in spite of his size disadvantages. He reminds me of a Kyle Lowry lite.

Spencer Dinwiddie isn’t athletic enough to have great defensive upside, but he has acceptable SG size and quicks and is smart enough to become above average on this end. I am interested to see how much his intelligence can overcome his average physical package playing for an awesome defensive coach in Stan Van Gundy.

Weird Defensive Prospects

Jusuf Nurkic isn’t that long and can barely jump off the ground, but he has a surprisingly solid Adriatic and Eurocup block rate anyway. His real appeal is that he has exceptionally quick feet for a man of immense girth and he racked up loads of steals in the Adriatic. He certainly isn’t your traditional rim protector, but that can add up to something.

Mitch McGary is more athletic than Nurkic, but because he’s shorter with shorter arms he managed to get barely more than 50% of the NCAA block rate as Nurkic’s Adriatic/Eurocup average. That may be a statement regarding Nurkic’s shot blocking instincts more than anything. McGary shares Nurkic’s strength, quick feet, and high steal rate for a center. Both of these guys are also foul prone, and the steals may have to diminish with the fouls. But they are a similarly unique brand of defensive center and are worth tracking as a tandem.

Jordan Adams and Kyle Anderson at this point are renowned for being partners in draft weirdness. They both do their damage defensively by being smart and long and present concerns by being slow and lazy. Anderson is exceptionally slow and it seems really important that he adds enough strength to defend PF’s, because it’s hard to see him not getting badly burned defending the perimeter on the regular. But he’s so long and smart, maybe he can find a way to make it work playing for the best coach ever. Adams is smaller but looks more natural on the perimeter as he is quicker and has exceptionally quick hands. That said, I’m not sure if he quite has the quicks or the interest to stay in front of his man. Both of these guys are really difficult to project.

Zach LaVine is the UCLA player who is weird in the opposite way. He’s skinny without great length or instincts, and this caused him to have a poor steal rate in both high school and college. He atones with elite athleticism and quickness, and based on summer league he looks like he wants to be good on this end. He has the ability to contain penetration, but he needs to add enough weight to avoid getting picked off on every screen and getting bullied a la Kevin Martin. He is better suited to defending PG’s, which is disappointing since SG’s in such greater demand and he’s not really a PG offensively.

Mystery Box Defensive Prospects

Clint Capela has elite upside on paper, as he has great physical tools to go along with great rebound, steal, and block rates playing for France. He still needs to add strength but he seems to be a strong rim protector prospect. Of course that is forgetting that everybody who ever sees him in person hates him (I have only seen glimpses), so maybe he is bound for disappointment.

Walter Tavares is a giant who seems like a good rim protector prospect to nab in the middle of round 2, as it sounds like he did quite well in the ACB. But he also has limited experience for his age and this might hold him back as a pro.

Damien Inglis seems like a swell defensive prospect since he’s exceptionally strong for his age with good height and length and acceptable athleticism. DX believes he performs well on defense, and I see a lot to like. But he did have a surprisingly low block rate in his France sample, indicating a bit of athletic limitation. Since I have only seen him play in short stretches, I can’t make any strong statements. But I like the way he sounds on paper.

TJ Warren has the instincts and good enough physical tools to become a good perimeter defensive player. But it seems that he didn’t play up to his potential defensively for NC State, probably because he was busy rocking a 35.5% usage. He is likely going to be racing up and down the floor in transition trying to rack up buckets as a pro, so his defense largely depends on whether he has enough energy to become good on that end while still scoring a bunch.

Dante Exum has elite upside on paper. He’s bad defensively now, but his combination of size, length, and quickness is awesome and he appears to have quick hands and the instincts to develop into a good defensive guard who can defend positions 1-3. I believe that if he committed to becoming a defensive specialist, he would succeed. But he is an offense creator first, and given his questionable physical conditioning, it’s worth wondering if it’s realistic for him to become good on defense. He still needs work to learn to fit in offensively, and he may be inclined to focus on mastering that end first. And if he becomes good enough to carry an NBA offense, will he have enough remaining energy to make an impact on defense as well? I’m not sure, he seems like a candidate to follow the James Harden school of no defense.

Bruno Caboclo looks pretty clueless on defense and the Raptors summer league team was a mess with him on the floor. But he is young and has a 7’7″ wingspan so maybe he learns to do something with that.

Questionable Defensive Prospects

Jarnell Stokes is full of limitations, as he is undersized and underathletic, and it shows in his steal and block rates. He also doesn’t have the best awareness, but he works hard, rebounds well, and provides a big body to match up with bullies. I suspect he’ll be below average defensively but not a complete sieve.

Tyler Ennis doesn’t have the quicks or athleticism to be an impact defensive player on the perimeter, but he does bring solid length, intelligence, and quick hands. It’s possible that he leverages these to become a respectable defensive PG in spite of his athletic deficiencies.

PJ Hairston‘s physical profile and college steal and block rates suggest that he could go either way as a positive or negative defensive NBA wing. Based on my observations of him (which admittedly aren’t as plentiful as others) I’m betting on him being below average. He doesn’t have the best awareness and seems more interested in getting buckets than playing D.

Jabari Parker isn’t completely hopeless on defense: he has the size to match up vs NBA PF’s as well as decent athleticism and instincts as shown by his NCAA rebound, block, and steal rates. But he still wasn’t a good defensive player as an NCAA freshman, and his block and rebounds were padded by him playing as an undersized center. Also he was willing to gamble for steals. His laser focused passion on getting buckets + not great freshman performance points in the direction of liability much more often than not.

Noah Vonleh and Adreian Payne are the same exact mold. Both stretch 4’s with really great wingspans, solid athleticism, and surprisingly not great steal and block rates in spite of their length. They also have bad assist:TOV ratios suggesting poor feel for the game, and both struggled big time in summer league. They key difference is that Vonleh is 4.5 years younger and has a much longer window to improve his feel. I’m not optimistic for either defensively, but at least Vonleh has a chance of becoming alright. Payne really feels like bad value at 15th overall.

James Young does not appear to have much defensive upside based on his college performance. He’s not exceptionally quick or athletic and he had disappointing steal and block rates. He wasn’t good defensively and his instincts appear to be limited. I have a hard time envisioning him as a useful defensive pro, but he is young with good length and strength and landed with a good defensive coach. Maybe he shows considerable improvement during his developmental years.

Glenn Robinson has the tools to be good defensively and his steal rate isn’t bad, but whenever I watch him he doesn’t appear to have much in the way of defensive IQ or awareness. Like most 40th overall picks, he’s probably a bust.

Dario Saric doesn’t sound like he has the physical package to fit in defensively as a pro, but he is 6’10 and maybe he makes it work in his own weird way. I haven’t watched him and he is a mystery to me. Hinkie taking him might bode well for his defensive projection, or maybe he really is a lock to get traded before he ever wears a 76ers uniform.

Bad Defensive Prospects:

Shabazz Napier has a good steal rate, as he has quick hands and good anticipation skills and he might not be completely terrible as a defensive player in the NBA. But he’s both unathletic and diminutive, and that is a crippling combination of weaknesses. It’s hard to see the abuse he takes defensive not handily outweighing the value of the steals he creates.

Julius Randle is strong with quick feet, and he competes on defense. I think he has solid potential as a man to man defender. But his lack of length, athleticism, and woefully slow reactions resulted in low steal and block totals for Kentucky that indicate his immense struggles as a team defender. I believe his poor team defense will outweigh whatever positive he brings in man to man and rebounding, but maybe he develops well enough such that he’s not a horrible liability.

Doug McDermott is smart and tries hard, but his physical limitations are extreme. He has solid height for a SF at 6’8″, but his length, strength, athleticism, and quickness are all below average. It’s hard to do much in the NBA when your physical tools are bad across the board. Given his lack of strength and length I think he’s drawing dead to defend NBA PF’s at any acceptable level. It would be comical to watch him try to stop Blake Griffin or Zach Randolph. SF is the position where he has a chance of fitting in, but he’s slow to rotate, can’t affect the passing lanes, and is below average at containing penetration even though he moves his feet better than you’d expect. He may be smart enough to not become an all-time bad defensive player, but defense is going to be an expensive cost to get his offense on the floor.

Nik Stauskas is smart with surprising leaping ability, but his body and length are both lackluster and he is neither fast nor quick. Like McDermott he might manage to limit his impact with smarts and effort, but it’s hard to see him peaking as anything other than a clear liability on D.

Rodney Hood is quicker and more athletic than Stauskas and McDermott, but he also appears to have worse instincts than either. He was easily faked out and beaten off the dribble playing for Duke, and he also is limited in terms of length and strength so he can’t playing the passing lanes, block shots, or fight through screens. The Jazz are clearly gambling on his defense improving to a more respectable level by taking him in round 1, but since he’ll be 22 at the start of his rookie season it’s hard to feel too optimistic.

Summer League Observations: Orlando

17 Thursday Jul 2014

Posted by deanondraft in Scouting Reports

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

Aaron Gordon, Elfrid Payton, Jarnell Stokes, Jordan Adams, Marcus Smart, Mitch McGary, Shabazz Napier, Tyler Johnson

While it’s not wise to read heavily into 5 game samples of play vs. sub-NBA competition, summer league is an interesting scouting experience. All of the rookies who dominated NCAA opposition are now thrown onto rosters full of big, long athletes, and we get to see who can still do things on the court against more physically fit competition. It becomes harder to get to the rim in the half-court, easy transition buckets start to wane, and there aren’t any 6’8″ centers to be bullied. Consequently, most rookies look like rookies as their flaws are on full display.

The clearest trend I have noticed is that many rookies become jump shot taking machines. It naturally follows that summer league most heavily favors shooters, especially when they get hot. Josh Selby won summer league MVP by hitting 27/42 from 3, and then went on to post a 2.7 PER in 296 NBA minutes before washing out. Thus far among rookies, the biggest single game point totals have all come from shooters who heated up from distance: Gary Harris (33 pts), Doug McDermott (31), and Rodney Hood (29). While it’s nice when these guys get off and make a bunch of shots rather than not doing anything, they were also posted against horrible perimeter defense (at least McDermott and Hood were, I missed the Harris game).

This perception is reinforced by the list of all time worst PER’s tweeted out by Jonathan Givony. The players who performed poorly during summer that became something in the NBA: Serge Ibaka, Nicolas Batum, Eric Bledsoe, Larry Sanders, George Hill, Greivis Vasquez, Josh McRoberts. Vasquez is the only player who thrives on neither defense nor athleticism that became something, and he only became a quality bench player. This is likely in part due to the fact that athletic types tend to enter the draft sooner than non-athletes, and rawer athletes have a longer window to improve their skill level. Players who are some combination of old, unathletic, and poor defensively all face extra pressure to produce in summer league.

Note that I believe rookies and only rookies are worth scouting in summer league. The 2nd and 3rd year players with NBA experience no longer suffer from the shock factor of the upgraded physicality compared to NCAA, so their performances can safely be ignored.

Since Las Vegas games are not yet complete, I will start by sharing my thoughts from the Orlando games. I’m not writing about Nerlens Noel or Nick Johnson since I didn’t watch enough to generate any unique perspective, but from what I have seen I agree with the consensus that they both look good and Noel should have gone #1 in 2013.

Marcus Smart
Smart started off summer league playing off the ball with Phil Pressey running the offense, and he spent most of his time bricking jump shots. When he did get the ball, it was a work in progress trying to get off shots at the rim as his first few attempts off the dribble were blocked. Eventually he was able to find daylight and have a few nice drive and finishes, but it’s clear that he’s going to struggle as a scorer early in his career. His handle, quicks, and athleticism are all solid but not great, and it’s going to be a work in progress for him to get to the rim with any sort of frequency. Until he solves that, he will likely be relying on his not so great jump shot so don’t expect a good rookie year eFG%. His summer league eFG% was a paltry 36.0%. The silver lining is that he correctly favors 3 pointers over long 2’s, which limits the damage that will be caused by his bricklaying ways.

But his summer league wasn’t all bad. As expected he provided good defense and solid rebounding. And the good news is that his TS% shouldn’t be as bad as his eFG% since he has the strength to draw FT’s and is able to knock them down at a solid rate. Most importantly Smart showed surprisingly good ability to both distribute and protect the ball. Whenever he did get the chance to run the offense, he did a good job of making the simple pass to set his teammates up for quality shots. Occasionally he showed off impressive vision and made a great pass. He is so good at reading the opposition on defense to play the passing lanes, it’s worth wondering if that translates to the offensive end for his ability to see the floor and find open teammates. One of the knocks on him was that he isn’t a true PG, but he didn’t play PG in high school and is still developing his floor general skills. Based on his summer league performance, his upside as a distributor seems better than advertised.

Also encouraging was his ability to protect the ball. Smart’s strength is a major advantage for his ability to operate in traffic. Even though he couldn’t quite get where he wanted on offense, he wasn’t at much risk of having the ball ripped away in the process since he’s so strong. He finished summer league with 21 assists and 9 turnovers, which is especially impressive considering his high volume of shot attempts.

Overall Smart played roughly as well as I expected. The development of his shot and ability to get to the rim should determine whether he becomes an all-star or plateaus as a PG version of Tony Allen. But that’s still the range of outcomes I expect from him, and I deem it to be a happy range for a #6 overall pick.

Aaron Gordon
Gordon’s summer league was a slight disappointment, but not a meaningful one. Given the importance of shooting, it stands to reason that the player with the most broken shot in the class would struggle the most. And while he has a good handle for an 18 year old SF, he can’t yet create much off the dribble to shine in spite of this.

I was a bit disappointed to see him not accrue a single steal in Orlando, but that could easily be a sample size fluke. Steals have a much lower correlation (.29) with regular season success than assists (.77), blocks (.80), and rebounds (.63 off, .70 def). Given how good he was defensively in college and FIBA, it’s probably not worth fretting over.

I didn’t watch a ton of Orlando, so I didn’t generate any new observations on Gordon. He just isn’t ready to do much offensively and probably won’t have a great rookie year statistically. He is a strong candidate to eventually join the list of players who became great in spite of poor summer leagues, as he has youth, athleticism, and defense all on his side as well as the excuse of poor shooting. It would have been nice if he surprised with more polish than expected, but I’m not significantly docking Gordon for his performance.

Elfrid Payton
Payton is a player for whom summer league counts a bit extra since much of his college production entailed dominating weak competition in transition. I don’t think he could have looked much better. After a shaky initial outing, Payton turned on the good stuff and started aggressively flirting with triple doubles. He was able to penetrate through the defense, finish at the rim, create for his teammates, and rack up rebounds. He didn’t score a ton since he didn’t settle for many jumpers, but he is also a rare rookie with a high 2p% as he shot 15/25 (60%) inside the arc. This is indicative of the fact that he’s also a rare rookie with the ability to create high quality shots at the rim.

He also posted fantastic rebound and assist rates, which are two of the categories that correlate best with rookie regular season statistics. It’s possible that he has much more passing ability than he was able to show at Louisiana Lafayette with Shawn Long as his only teammate that could score at a competent level.

I regret ranking him behind Tyler Ennis, as I probably over-thought that one. The bottom line is that Payton can defend, he can pass, he can rebound, and he can get to the rim, and that adds up to pretty nice upside. I was concerned how much being a skinny, non-elite athlete would hurt him but it if nothing else it doesn’t seem like it will impede his ability to get where he wants to go on the floor since he has a good blend of quicks and handles. It may make it difficult to finish at the rim and protect the ball in traffic in the NBA, but I don’t believe that these are fatal flaws. The bottom line is that he has a good combination of strengths (quickness, length, ball handling, passing, rebounding, defense) and his weaknesses are all improvable (poor shooting, turnover prone, lacks strength).

My current perception is that this draft has a clear top 5 (the top 6 picks minus Jabari) and then Elfrid has as good of an argument as anybody for 6th best prospect in the draft. Hennigan overpaid to move up 2 slots, but it may not look all that bad through the results oriented lens once we get to see what Elfrid can do at the next level.

Mitch McGary
McGary was hurt early in the season before Michigan played their tougher competition, so he was somebody who I didn’t scout as much as I would have hoped. Now that I actually was able to watch him in summer league, he looks awesome. He is a center with poor height (6’10.5″) and length (7’0″) for the position, but he atones with strength, quickness, and athleticism. The athleticism is what surprised me, I was expecting a below the rim player but he showed a bit of explosiveness. This contributed to his 7 blocks in 4 games averaged 26 minutes. He’s not exactly an above the rim athlete, but he can get up enough to sometimes make athletic plays at the rim.

The other quality that I wasn’t expecting is that McGary has a fantastic handle for a big man. He looks completely comfortably pulling down a defensive rebound and then taking it all the way to the rim on the other end in transition. He is also impressed with his handling ability as he overdribbled a bit at times, but he didn’t get himself into too much trouble and finished with a solid 5 assists vs 8 turnovers while scoring with good volume and efficiency.

He is a health risk as he has back problems and ankle problems on his record, but he looked 100% healthy in Orlando. If he can stay that way, he should combine with Steven Adams to form a significant upgrade over Kendrick Perkins. He looks like great value at 21st overall. I am not sure precisely how much to weigh injuries, but if I could re-rank but I would place McGary in the back end of the lottery.

Jordan Adams and Jarnell Stokes
From my Grizzlies watching experience, I still have no idea what to think of Jordan Adams. He doesn’t look natural when attacking off the dribble, and occasionally his defense is lazy and bad. But he still has quick hands to be disruptive in the passing lanes, he doesn’t make a ton of mistakes, and when you add up all of the garbage buckets he gets the bottom line doesn’t look too bad. I feel like he will be an OK but not great role player, but I need to see him at the NBA level to feel comfortable with any assessment. He is a slippery one.

Stokes looks like a solid NBA role player with some sneaky upside to be a bit more than that. He beasted the glass and showed enough skill level and smarts to fit in offensively. He roughly performed as well as I expected and is probably going to be a good 2nd round value.

My perception of both prospects is largely unchanged by summer league.

Shabazz Napier
Napier was the sole first round draft pick in Orlando who looks like a complete bust. His physical tools have been as bad as expected, and he just doesn’t fit in athletically. He is not be quite as bad as his stats indicate, as he seems to be suffering from poor variance on his outside shot. But his shooting struggles may be in part due to his poor size and length combined with his low release. He is struggling to get to the rim, he is struggling to finish, and he struggles protecting the ball with more turnovers than assists. The one positive is that he has shown quick hands and good anticipation skills to rack up steals, but his poor tools will likely cause him to be a liability defensively anyway. For a point guard who also isn’t a great passer and is already 23, I’m not sure what his calling card is in the NBA. Given that he fits the intersection of old, unathletic, and suspect defensively his summer league is highly worrisome. He may still have an NBA career, but I doubt it will be a particularly good one. In spite of being one of the most intelligent players in the NBA, LeBron James is not a good GM.

Tyler Johnson
The Heat might have atoned for their former star’s poor scouting ability by uncovering this gem of an undrafted free agent. At a glance, it’s obvious why he didn’t get drafted: he’s 6’4″ with a 6’6″ wingspan and weighs 177 pounds. That’s really poor size for a SG, as he’s Gary Harris sized minus half an inch of length and 28 pounds in spite of being 2 years and change older. So maybe he’s just a summer league hero who can’t do anything in the NBA because he’s too small. And as a 22 year old player, he should look better than most of the younger guys.

But I can’t stress enough how awesome he has looked. He makes the plays you’d hope that 1st round picks would make, and he makes them over and over again. He has been getting to the rim, finishing, making plays on defense, and avoiding mistakes. Thus far he has played 172 minutes in 8 games, and here are his per 30 stats: 16.7 pts, 4.4 rebs, 1.7 asts, 1.4 steals, 0.9 blocks, 0.7 TOV’s. The turnover number is astounding considering is shooting 30/42 (71.4%) inside the arc and has 31 FTA to boot– he’s doing almost all of his damage by getting to the rim and finishing athletically. The only thing he’s not doing well is making 3’s, as he is only shooting 4/15 behind the arc. But as a college senior he shot 43.2% from 3 and as a junior he shot 40.2%. While he may still be adjusting to NBA range, it’s not like outside shooting is a weakness.

If Johnson was a 2nd or 3rd year player, it would be easy to shrug off his performance. But he’s a rookie who spent this past season playing mid-major NCAA basketball. When the Heat played the Wizards, it felt like he never went longer than a minute without making an athletic, NBA caliber play. It seemed that he could get to the rim and get his shot off whenever he wanted whereas Napier had no prayer of slashing through the defense. Against the Clippers, he cut off a Delonte West drive attempt and then blocked West’s mid-range jumper. Johnson fits in athletically and knows how to use his athleticism for his team’s benefit.

I’m not sure what to expect from Johnson in the NBA, but I’m on the bandwagon. He is the one undrafted free agent I have seen who clearly deserves a roster spot, and I am rooting for him to succeed.

	Tony on Could Shai Gilgeous Be the Bes…
	pietje on Did The Celtics Overpay for Ky…
	Ecahn on Is Luka Doncic The Best Prospe…
	Peachbucket on Did The Celtics Overpay for Ky…
	Jeremiah J Hill on Did The Celtics Overpay for Ky…

Dean On Draft

~ Forget what you assume. Remember what you see.

Category Archives: Scouting Reports

Who is the Best 3 + D Wing in the Draft?

Could Shai Gilgeous Be the Best PG in 2018?

2018 Preview: Is Michael Porter a Future NBA Star?

2016 Final Big Board With Writeups

Teenage Mutant Ninja Poeltl

I’m Not Your Friend, Buddy

2015 Pre-season Rookie Update: #’s 13-40

2014 Prospect Defensive Cliff Notes

Summer League Observations: Orlando