Tag Archives: Aaron Gordon

Summer League Observations: Orlando

17 Thursday Jul 2014

Posted by in Scouting Reports

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , ,

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.

Advertisements

Aside

Who Wants To Gamble On Aaron Gordon?

30 Friday May 2014

Posted by in NCAA

≈ 20 Comments

Tags

Early in the season I was offput by a number of Aaron Gordon’s deficiencies such as his broken shot, his willingness to launch long 2’s, and his mediocre size to defend NBA PF’s.  But he had a strong close to the season and I started perceiving him in a new light.  His shot remains a glaring wart, but let’s cast that aside for a moment and analyze his strengths.

Defense

Two of the hurdles to loving Gordon mid-season were his lackluster steal and block rates.  There aren’t many players who become top end defensive wings in the NBA without posting a good steal rate in college.  Arizona plays a non-gambling defense, but he nevertheless had a lower steal rate than his top defensive teammates such as Nick Johnson, Rondae Hollis-Jefferson, and TJ McConnell.  This made it hard to feel great about him as a defensive prospect, especially when his block rate offered little hope for his potential as a rim protecting PF.  But then he closed the season with a flurry of stocks to render his overall rates respectable, all while I decided that steals and blocks were an unfair way to evaluate his defensive potential in the NBA.

The Wildcat System

Arizona dominated the defensive end in a unique way: they led the NCAA in defensive eFG% without great rim protection, as their starting 7’0″ center Kaleb Tarczewski posted a measly 3.6% block rate.  For reference, the best defensive eFG% teams in each of the prior 3 seasons were anchored by NBA draft picks with monster block rates: Jeff Withey (13.7%), Anthony Davis (13.7%), and Bernard James (13.5%).  Arizona as a team had a mere 11.5% block rate.

Instead of protecting the rim, Arizona simply refused to let opponents get there.  They closed out on 3 point shooters and used their quickness to contain penetration and funnel everything to the mid-range.  And they weren’t giving up open mid-range shots, as they used their size and athleticism to contest everything.  According to hoop-math.com, Arizona forced opponents to attempt a whopping 48.8% of their shots from mid-range (NCAA average: 29.3%), which were made at a paltry 32.0% (NCAA avg: 35.7%).  They then would clean up the defensive glass with the 13th best DREB% in the NCAA.  They rarely fouled with the 55th best defensive FT rate and managed to force an above average turnover rate at 118th in spite of steals being their lowest priority.  Naturally they finished with the #1 defense in the NCAA, and it came in a flavor geared toward stopping quality competition since they took away everything that good offenses tend to value.

Let’s assess how Gordon fared at contributing to Arizona’s defensive goals:

-Containing penetration: Gordon rarely was beaten off the dribble as he moves well laterally and did well at cutting off opponent drives.  When he faced Duke, Jabari Parker never came close to getting by Gordon when matched up and finished shooting 7/21 FG with 5 TOV’s.  He also contested shots well as he rarely failed to closeout.

-Defensive rebounding: in spite of playing a fair amount on the wing, Gordon led his team in defensive rebounding rate at 19.1%, with 7 footer Kaleb Tarczewski finishing second at 16.9%.

-Not fouling: Gordon posted the lowest foul rate of all Arizona forwards, and was closer to Arizona’s guards than the bigs that he outrebounded:

Player Height PF/40
Brandon Ashley 6’8 4.6
Rondae Hollis-Jefferson 6’7 3.8
Kaleb Tarczewski 7’0 3.6
Aaron Gordon 6’9 3.0
TJ McConnell 6’1 2.7
Gabe York 6’3 2.7
Nick Johnson 6’3 2.4

It’s hard to argue that he did anything other than thrive defensively, as he excelled at all of his team’s primary objectives in spite of being the youngest player on the team.  Not only did this help Arizona to the #1 defense in the NCAA, it was only Sean Miller’s first top 40 defense in 5 seasons at Arizona.  Miller is one of the top coaches in college basketball and I love how he built his defense, but this is not a defense that can be readily replicated without a unique collection of talent.  Gordon gets big time credit for his role here.

FIBA u19 Defense

Billy Donovan coached team USA to full court press where they used their physical advantages to force turnovers, generate easy buckets in transition, and blow the competition out of the water.  Here is how each player’s respective steal rates compare to what they posted in the 2013-14 NCAA season:

Player Mins Stls Stl% NCAA Stl%
Marcus Smart 142 22 7.9% 5.0%
Elfrid Payton 170 21 6.3% 3.6%
Aaron Gordon 169 18 5.4% 1.8%
James Robinson 127 10 4.0% 3.0%
Justise Winslow 169 10 3.0% N/A
Jahlil Okafor 128 7 2.8% N/A
Jarnell Stokes 114 6 2.7% 1.4%
Montrezl Harrell 162 8 2.5% 2.0%
Nigel Williams-Goss 206 7 1.7% 2.0%
Rasheed Sulaimon 181 6 1.7% 1.9%
Michael Frazier 151 5 1.7% 2.3%
Mike Tobey 81 2 1.3% 0.9%

Gordon racked up far more steals than a number of players who posted similar or better steal rates this past NCAA season. He only finished behind Marcus Smart and Elfrid Payton, who were two of the best ball hawks in all of college basketball.  Even if the sample is small, Gordon is the only player who heavily strayed from expectation based on his NCAA steal rate.

If his performance at Arizona isn’t convincing that Gordon is a great defensive prospect, his FIBA stats should drive a nail in that coffin.  Not only does this suggest that he may have been able to compile a much higher steal rate if he had been asked, but it also hints at a high level of coachability.  At Arizona he was asked to contain penetration, rebound, and not foul, and he did all of the above.  In Prague he was asked to apply pressure to force turnovers and he complied as he went on to win MVP of the tournament at age 17.

Based on the eye test, his physical profile, and all statistical indicators, I rate him as top end defensive wing prospect with a high floor and a high ceiling.  There is a strong case to be made that he is the best defensive wing prospect in this year’s draft ahead of KJ McDaniels and Andrew Wiggins.

Offense

In my recent post dispelling common draft myths, I shared this tweet from draft statistical modeler Layne Vashro:

 ·  May 22

Handles + court-vision is what separates 3s from tweeners. Gordon easily beats most tween failures in AST/TOV

Gordon can handle and pass exceptionally well for an 18 year old of his size.  He especially shined down the stretch, as he posted 46 assists and 42 turnovers in his first 30 games before finishing with 29 assists and 13 turnovers in his final 8 games.  His PG skills were reputed to be strong entering the season, and it appears they  improved a decent bit over the course of the season.

Gordon’s explosiveness made him a highly effective rim finisher, as he converted 72.9% of his rim attempts on the season.  This is vastly superior to his similarly sized lottery peers such as Andrew Wiggins (63.6%), Jabari Parker (62.7%), and Noah Vonleh (59.3%).  This will help keep his scoring efficiency afloat as he (hopefully) learns to score away from the hoop and improve his shot selection.  He also is a strong offensive rebounder as he corralled 10.4% of his team’s misses.

In spite of his shooting deficiencies, there are multiple ways in which Gordon contributes on offense.  His shooting might be a drag on spacing, but it does not condemn him to being a decisively bad offensive player as a whole.

The Shooting Conundrum

Earlier this season I wrote that Gordon’s shot is irreparably broken, and I would like to now take that back.  It is broken, but not necessarily irreparable.  He is only 18 and his form looks OK enough, his just shots don’t go in.  This creates a few problems:

1) He will not space the floor cannot reliably make NBA 3 pointers
2) A willingness to attempt long 2’s can tank his efficiency
3) An inability to make free throws will prevent him from padding his TS% by drawing fouls

The glimmer of hope for his shooting is that he made 17/45 (35.6%) 3 pointers at Arizona.  The unpleasant news is his FT shooting (76/180 = 42.2%) and non-rim 2PA’s (44/160 = 27.5%) are much larger samples at abysmal percentages.

Overall his shooting prospects seem grim, but he is not completely hopeless since shooting is the most volatile skill that occasionally lends itself to surprising levels of improvement.  Given that he is the youngest prospect in the draft, we can open the door for a bit of extra optimism.  As a college freshman Trevor Ariza shot 18/76 (23.7%) from 3 and 57/113 (50.4%) from FT.  If you combine his age 27 and age 28 NBA seasons, he shot 39.7% from 3 on 707 attempts and 78.7% FT on 315 attempts.  It took him 9 seasons, but he became a genuinely good shooter.  That level of 180 simply isn’t possible with respect to basketball IQ, athleticism, or defensive instincts.

Gordon loosely compares to another poor shooting tweener who was undervalued in the draft– Kawhi Leonard.  Leonard shot 25% from 3 in two seasons at SDSU, and then went on to shoot between 37.4% and 37.9% in each of his first 3 NBA season at San Antonio.  Perhaps the Spurs saw something in Leonard’s form that they tweaked in a way that can be replicated with Gordon.  Given the recent rise of analytics, it is worth wondering if new information can help teach players to make outlier-y leaps in their shooting ability.

In his pre-draft interview, Gordon expressed confidence that he will have his shot fixed by the start of his rookie season and even provided a detailed explanation of his recent adjustments. I have no idea whether his approach will make a meaningful difference, but it at least sounds more promising than taking a bunch of directionless practice reps and hoping for the best.  On the downside, he calls the mid-range “a great shot,” which is a serious leak in his BBIQ that badly needs fixing.

It’s not difficult to envision a scenario where Gordon learns to hit 37%+ on corner 3’s and is coached into exercising discipline with respect to attempting long 2’s (just don’t unite him with Randy Wittman).  In the scenario that his big wart is reduced to a smaller wart, he can easily become an impact player.  Even if this fails to happen the majority of the time, the mere possibility is highly valuable for his draft stock.

Conclusion

I am flipping my story from Gordon’s shot being a debilitating wart to one that is less bad than the warts displayed by other top prospects such as Jabari Parker and Andrew Wiggins.  Given the volatile nature of shooting, I believe Gordon has the most upside of the trio.  And I am not convinced that he has a lower median outcome than either, as spacing the floor is not a prerequisite to becoming a useful wing and neither Parker nor Wiggins are guaranteed to be starting caliber.  It seems that there is a cognitive bias that being slightly above average shooters gives Wiggins and Parker a safeness to their draft stock, when in reality shooting is a) the most volatile trait and b) doesn’t guarantee offensive success on its own.  Gordon can close the gap on the shooting discrepancy, but Wiggins will not catch Gordon in court vision or feel for the game and Parker will always lag in explosiveness and quickness that aid Gordon’s finishing and defense.

My preference is now to gamble on Gordon’s shot, as I have elevated him to #4 on my big board behind Joel Embiid, Dante Exum, and Marcus Smart.

Who Is The Andre Drummond Of This Draft Class?

04 Friday Apr 2014

Posted by in NCAA

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

, , ,

Andre Drummond is quickly becoming a classic example of a player whose RSCI rating seems to be more indicative of his pro value than his freshman performance.  Whenever a highly touted freshman underwhelms and his draft stock drops, it’s fair to posit whether that player might experience a career arc similar to that of Drummond.  Drummond is an outlier in that his circumstances that caused him to become so undervalued will likely not be replicated, but it is worth trying to learn from his situation to look for signs in 5 star recruits before souring on them too quickly.  So first I’ll walk through the qualities of Drummond that caused him to slide and how that changed in the NBA.

1) Unfavorable Circumstances
Drummond joined his UConn team late, and then coach Jim Calhoun was suspended for the first 3 games of the Big East season and later had to take a leave of absence for health reasons.  It is difficult to estimate the level of impact these circumstances had on Drummond’s performance, but it is easy to see how they may have been harmful.  Perhaps he would have gotten off to a hotter start if he had more time to prepare with his team in the offseason, perhaps he would have had a stronger finish if Calhoun was healthy and present to offer feedback on Drummond’s non-conference performance.

2) Trimming The Fat
One of Drummond’s greatest warts was his 50.9% TS, which is appallingly low for a man with his size and athleticism.  Yet as an NBA rookie he was able to skyrocket his TS to 57.8% without seeing a drastic drop off in his usage rate (21.7 > 17.2).  How is such a thing possible in a single season after the huge increase of level of competition?  Drummond simply stopped trying to score away from the hoop.  As a college freshman he shot 130/185 at the rim and 27/107 away from the rim.  As an NBA rookie he shot 204/318 at the rim and 4/24 away from the hoop.  This simple tweak had a huge impact as it increased Drummond’s eFG from 53.8% to 61.0%.

3) College Defense
UConn entered the season ranked #4 in the polls and 6th by kenpom.com, then losing in the first round of the tournament as an 9 seed.  They finished as just the #41 kenpom team with the #65 defense.  So it is easy to blame some of the disappointment on Drummond and assume that he did not make the expected defensive impact.  But at a closer look, he seemed to do quite well.  He had more than twice as many blocks as any of his teammates, and UConn finished the season with the lowest opponent FG% at the rim in the country.  They finished with the 3rd lowest 2p%, and the 5th lowest FT:FGA rate, all of which are excellent and largely attributable to Drummond who finished with more blocks than fouls.  UConn did have plenty of other size and athleticism, but their weaknesses came from poor perimeter defense, as they finished with the 319th defensive TOV% and opponents hit 34.4% of 3’s on above average volume.  Of course sacrificing in these areas makes it much easier to dominate paint defense, but the fact remains that the team succeeded in the areas where Drummond was expected to make an impact barring one:

4) Defensive Rebounding
Defensive rebounding is much more difficult to predict than offensive rebounding since it is largely context dependent, but Drummond’s turnaround is astonishing.  UConn had the 276th best defensive rebound% in the country and Drummond corralled just 15.5% of d-rebs, and then went on to rip down 27.2% of defensive rebounds as a pro.  Given his 14.2% o-reb rate in college, we shouldn’t be surprised that he upticked defensively as a pro but I am not sure that there was any signal that he would start pulling them down at nearly double the rate.  Perhaps this can be attributed to good scouting by the Pistons, perhaps it can be attributed to bad luck or bad assistant coaching at UConn.  But it is nevertheless an outlier event that gave Drummond a nice value spike as a pro.

5) Passion Questions
After Drummond’s somewhat underwhelming freshman year, scouts started to question his passion for basketball.  His explanation was that he simply was not the type to go out and beat his chest, but he nevertheless loved the game of basketball.  Whether it was a poor inference from observers or NBA money ignited his passion, it seems to not be a problem as a pro.

Now let’s look at some of the top freshman and see whether any similar circumstances may apply.

Andrew Harrison: Do any of these conditions apply to Harrison?  No, they do not – he is merely horrendous at the game of basketball.  We can safely move along.

Jabari Parker: He was likely in the best scenario of all freshman as he was able to play the 4/5 for Duke.  This was healthy for him in almost every regard since he was constantly surrounded by ball handlers and shooters and finished with more blocks and rebounds that he would have surrounded with more size.  That said he exceeded expectations so it is difficult to gripe.

Julius Randle: His coach normally sets up players for the pros quite well, his defense was horrendous, his defensive rebounding was top notch, and his passion seems to be present.  The one area where he may gain is from (literally) trimming his fat and slimming down physically.  Also he has trimmed a bit of turnover fat down the stretch which is encouraging.

Zach LaVine: None of these conditions apply to him, although his circumstances were unfavorable in a different way since he was buried behind superior players and seemed to have a poor relationship with his coach.  Perhaps he has more to flaunt than he was permitted to show at UCLA, so he may exceed expectations in a different way than Drummond.

Andrew Wiggins: People want to blame Wiggins’ lack of dominance on Bill Self, which is silly.  What is most important for Wiggins is that Kansas played an up tempo style and capitalized on his sole offensive strength: transition scoring.  The only unfavorable aspect for Wiggins is that he was surrounded by mediocre guards and spacing, which was certainly sub-optimal.  But I do not believe that this had a high leverage impact on his performance given his lack of offensive skills in the half-court.  And it is worth noting that Self has made past players such as Ben McLemore, Thomas Robinson, and Cole Aldrich look like college studs and consequently over-inflated their draft stock.

Kansas had their worst defensive season under Bill Self’s tenure, and that seems to be everybody’s fault but Wiggins.  Embiid was inexperienced and played a lower minute total than prior rim protectors Jeff Withey and Cole Aldrich.  The defense suffered with Embiid out and Wiggins appeared to be the only good defensive guard/wing on the roster.  I believe his NBA defensive projection is often overstated but he did perform well on this end in college.  And since all of his competent teammates were bigs, he was rarely used as a small 4 and may be slightly underrated by his d-reb% among other stats.

Wiggins does have questions with respect to his passion.  According to DraftExpress, from age 17 to 18 he grew an inch without gaining a single pound.  This would not be a big deal if he had instead focused on developing his skills, but they too are less developed than scouts had hoped they would be by now.  In tandem these are red flags that call his work ethic into question.  But the flip side is that perhaps he will put passion questions to rest by significantly improving his work ethic given the allure of NBA money.  This is the area in which he has the most potential to mirror Drummond.

Overall I do not believe that Wiggins has a boatload of Drummond equity, but he isn’t completely bereft of it either.

Aaron Gordon/Rondae Hollis-Jefferson: I am grouping these two together because all conditions apply identically to them.  These two players likely have the most fat to trim offensively because they threw up so many bricks from midrange.  Gordon shot 129/177 at the rim and 44/160 on non-rim 2’s.  RHJ shot 83/113 at the rim and 36/124 on non-rim 2’s.  I am fond of Sean Miller and think he is one of the best college coaches in the country, but he has an curious willingness to permit his players to fire away from midrange.  Their top 6 rotation players all took at least 40% of their FGA from midrange, well above the NCAA average of 29.3%.  I have questioned Gordon’s BBIQ for his shot selection, but at a closer look it may simply be a byproduct of coaching.  Granted, this doesn’t entirely parallel to Drummond as it is much easier to operate strictly around the rim as a center than it is as a forward, but both players can see nice efficiency upticks by passing up long 2’s more frequently.

Gordon and Hollis-Jefferson also deserve a ton of credit for Arizona’s leap defensively.  After swapping Mark Lyons, Solomon Hill, and Kevin Parrom for them and TJ McConnell, Arizona spiked from the #47 kenpom defense to #2.  And while the departed players were better offensively than defensively, Arizona only dropped from the #10 offense to #20.  It helps that players such as Nick Johnson and Kaleb Tarczewski had an additional year of seasoning, but Gordon and Hollis-Jefferson played large roles in Arizona having one of the more dominant defenses in recent memory.  They simply did not allow easy shots, boasting the best defensive eFG% in the country.

I would rate Gordon as superior to Wiggins in terms of NBA defensive potential, as he anchored a truly dominant defense.  Give Sean Miller credit for maximizing his talent, but this was by far his best defensive team ever.  Gordon appears to play defense with more intensity than Wiggins does, and while he may not be as fast or quick, he is much stronger.  It is simply much easier to feel great about the player(s) who led a coach’s all-time best defense over one who led a coach’s all-time worst defense.

Overall I’d say Gordon (and on a slightly smaller scale, Hollis-Jefferson) clearly has the most Drummond equity of any freshman in the class.  It isn’t a perfect parallel as shooting is more important for wings and defense is more important for centers.  Even if he mirrors Drummond’s arc, the impact will be lower leverage.  Again, this goes to show that Drummond is a unique case, so optimism for 5-star freshmen making huge rookie rebounds should always be tempered.  But considering both his strong finish to the season and his potential for further upticks, I am quickly reversing my stance on Gordon and once again believe he merits a top 10 pick.

S16/E8 Recap: Arizona Upset By Frank Kaminsky’s Face

31 Monday Mar 2014

Posted by in NCAA

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , ,

images

This past weekend a number of players improved their draft stock, but nobody skyrocketed their value like Frank Kaminsky did.  After scoring 19 points against Oregon’s mediocre defense to help Wisconsin advance to the sweet 16, he faced off with Baylor’s twin towers: 6’9 Cory Jefferson and 7’1 Isaiah Austin.  Baylor plays a zone defense that is not particularly effective as a whole considering their talent (77th best defense in the country according to kenpom.com).  But they do have the 20th highest block rate which posed a prospective challenge for a player like Frank Kaminsky who has questionable tools and is most effective in the paint.  After all, Baylor did limit Doug McDermott to just 15 points in a 85-55 shellacking of his Creighton team.  Kaminsky had a nearly mistake-free game with 19 points, 4 rebounds, 3 assists, 6 blocks, and 0 turnovers on 8/11 shooting en route to a 69-52 Wisconsin victory.  All 8 of his FG’s were made at the rim, and 4 of them came with the 7’1 shot blocker Austin guarding him.

The amusing part is that I had mentioned in my podcast with Brew Hoop that Kaminsky was a player I valued above Doug McDermott, and then their results vs. Baylor emphatically supported that claim.  Baylor beat Creighton by 30 and lost to Wisconsin by 17. While there is a fair bit of variance involved (for instance: Baylor shot 11/18 from 3 vs Creighton and 2/15 vs Wisky), the different results are indicative of the disparity between Kaminsky and McDermott’s NBA values.  Baylor shot just 16/42 from 2 vs Wisconsin and 19/29 vs Creighton.  Kaminsky made a clear impact on this end by blocking 6 shots.  That exceeds McDermott’s season total of 5 blocks, which is also his career high.  Height matters, and Kaminsky being 7’0 to McDermott’s 6’8 makes an enormous difference on both ends.

After disposing of Baylor, Kaminsky faced a tougher test vs. Arizona.  I had picked Arizona to win it all in my bracket because I am in love with their defense.  They simply do not allow easy baskets – they play elite transition defense, they close out on 3 point shooters, and they use their quickness and athleticism to cut off drives to the rim and funnel everything to the mid-range.  According to hoop-math.com, 48.8% of their opponents’ shots are non-rim 2 pointers, the best mark in the NCAA. Putting this in perspective, the NCAA average is 29.3% and the second best team, UNC, is forcing teams to take 46.8% of their shots from mid-range.  But what is truly amazing about Arizona is that they do not cede high quality looks, as opponents shoot just 32% on these non-rim 2 point attempts whereas UNC opponents hit 40.9% (NCAA average: 35.7%).  They are custom built to expose any players who pad their stats vs inferior competition, and provide a matchup nightmare for most good college offenses.

In the end, though, the only person who is going to have nightmares from this matchup is Wildcats’ coach Sean Miller.  In spite of his facial deficiencies, Frank Kaminsky could not be stopped in Anaheim.  7’0 center Kaleb Tarczewski struggled to guard him out to the perimeter due to Kaminsky’s quickness, and 6’9 Aaron Gordon struggled to bother his interior shot attempts due to Kaminsky’s height.  Arizona’s defensive goal of forcing difficult shots could not be achieved against Kaminsky because he can score from anywhere and is tall enough to shoot over all of their players. He finished with 28 points, 11 rebounds, and 1 turnover on 11-20 FG while his teammates were limited to just 34 points on 13-41 FG and 8 turnovers.  He singlehandedly put the Badgers in a position to upset Arizona, and in my opinion this was the most impressive individual performance of anybody this NCAA season.

His offensive game is reminiscent of Dirk Nowitzki – they are both 7’0 players who can score efficiently from 3, the mid-range, and the low post and are nearly indefensible once they catch the ball.  Which is not to say that he will ever be nearly as good as Dirk, but his performance vs. Arizona speaks strongly in favor of his ability to translate to the pros.

The primary concerns for Kaminsky’s pro prospects lie on the defensive end, where he does not project to be good.  That said, he is not necessarily going to be a sieve either.  Much like Michigan, Creighton and Duke, Wisconsin values floor spacing and prefers to play with at least 4 shooters.  Incidentally, these are also the top 4 offenses in the country.  Wisconsin starts 6’7 Sam Dekker as a small ball PF, and Kaminsky is their only true starting big man with 6’7 Nigel Hayes backing him up.  Yet Wisconsin’s defense (97.1 adjusted d-rtg as per kenpom.com) is much more effective than that of Michigan (102.1), Duke (102.3) and Creighton (104.1).  They do have the weakest offense of the quartet by 2.5 to 3.8 points, but Kaminsky nevertheless deserves some credit for keeping their defense respectable as the sole rim protector.  The Badgers are barely worse defensively than Kentucky (96.6) in spite of Kentucky’s elite size and athleticism.

Kaminsky’s monstrous tourney performance has enabled him to finally crack ESPN and DX’s top 100, but they still only rate him 52nd and 48th respectively.  It seems certain that their rankings reflect a general bias against his physical appearance.  While he may look like an uncoordinated accountant, he is an exceptionally smooth and skilled basketball player.  I have him locked in as a 1st round value and believe he may merit late lottery consideration, even in the face of this loaded draft.

Other Risers
Aaron Gordon
I have written about his warts as both a horrific shooter and a tweener in the past, but his performance down the stretch and in the tourney has caused me to warm up to him.  While his warts remain present and enigmatic, his strengths are so appealing that they may be nevertheless worth stomaching in the top 10.  Gordon’s tournament included two excellent performances against top 15 defenses, shooting 8/10 vs Gonzaga and 7/9 vs San Diego State.  He struggled vs. Wisconsin shooting just 3/11, but he still managed to tally 18 rebounds, 2 assists, 1 steal, and 2 blocks all while competing hard on defense.  He may not have epic steal and block rates, but he deserves a healthy portion of credit for helping Arizona rise from the #47 to #2 kenpom defense.  And he even offered a glimmer of hope for his shooting ability, finishing the season 35.6% (16/45) from 3.  I will be writing about him in more detail going forward – he is one of the more fascinating prospects in this draft.

Rondae Hollis-Jefferson
For all intents and purposes, Hollis-Jefferson is a slightly older and shorter doppelganger of Aaron Gordon.  He shares Gordon’s shooting woes on non-rim 2’s (29.0% vs 27.5%), is much better on FT’s (68.2% vs 42.2%), and made fewer 3’s (2/10 vs 16/45).  Otherwise their stats are frighteningly similar, and Hollis-Jefferson also deserves some credit for Arizona’s defensive leap.  He had a solid tourney showing, playing well in all 4 games and boosting his FT% by shooting 20/23 at the line.

Nik Stauskas
This shouldn’t be a surprise since Stauskas played well against solid defenses throughout the regular season, but he continued to do so against three solid, athletic defenses in the tournament.  Against Texas, Tennessee, and Kentucky, he cumulatively racked up 55 points and 13 assists while turning it over just 4 times.  He also showed off his intelligence and creativity by making this pass vs. Tennessee:

nikpass

Shabazz Napier
Napier turns 23 in July, and a player of his age should dominate 18-21 year old competition if they are going to become a quality pro.  In the tournament Napier has done precisely that, racking up 93 points on 63.9% TS vs. four top 75 defenses.  UConn’s strength has been in their half-court defense, as on offense they do not seem exceptionally well coached.  They have plenty of shooting surrounding Napier, but their half-court offense seems to entail standing around and hoping Napier figures something out.  Thus far it has worked for them.  I am still not sure that Napier merits 1st round consideration, but if nothing else he is piecing together a reasonable argument in his favor.

Fallers
Gary Harris
Harris largely vanished vs. Virginia’s exceptional transition defense, finishing with just 6 points and 3 assists on 2/5 FG in 29 minutes.  He redeemed himself vs UConn with 22 points on 8/14 shooting, but he scored largely off of jumpshots which mostly came in transition.  While I still have him as a mid-1st round pick, his tourney performance casts doubt on his potential as a half-court slasher in the NBA.

Adreian Payne
Payne is a 23 year old 6’11 man, and while he dealt with injuries throughout the season he was finally healthy for the tournament.  This was his opportunity to crush the younger competition he faced in the same way that Napier did, and he came up underwhelming.  He had his best performance vs 15 point underdog Delaware, scoring 41 points highlighted by his 17/17 FT shooting.  But then in the real matchups, he never shined.  Against Harvard, Virginia, and UConn he finished with just 41 total points on 13/36 shooting.  While he offers some prospective value as a role-playing stretch 4, it’s hard to get excited about a player of his age that isn’t flat out dominating the opposition.  I do not believe he belongs in round 1.

Sam Dekker
Dekker has been rated as the consensus top prospect on Wisconsin all season long, but this acclaim now appears to be unjustified since he has been badly outshined by his teammate Frank Kaminsky.  He scored just 7 points in each of his games vs. Arizona and Baylor, and that includes a banked in 3 pointer vs. Arizona.  Perhaps he merely happened to go cold at the wrong time, but it would be encouraging if he could step it up with a strong Final 4 performance or two.

What about Kentucky?
Now that the Wildcats have finally pulled themselves together and vanquished 3 top 10 teams that all made last year’s Final 4, it seems inevitable that somebody must have improved their stock.  Their most consistent performer has been Aaron Harrison, who has averaged 16.6 points in his past 7 games scoring at least 12 in every game.  This largely stems from him hitting 22/44 3 point shots, including the game winners vs. both Louisville and Michigan.  His 3p% has jumped from 30.6% to 35.7% during this stretch, but the other aspects of his game have not followed suit.  He is averaging just 1.4 rebounds, 1.1 assists, and shooting 14/35 inside the arc in those same 7 games.  His taking and making more 3’s has helped the team immensely, but I had already assumed he was suffering from bad variance on 3’s so this does not significantly alter my perception of him as a prospect.

Julius Randle has been steadily inching back up my board, as he seems to have cut down on his turnover issues by posting up less frequently.  He has posted a double-double in every tournament game averaging 15.8 points, 12.0 rebounds, and just 2.0 turnovers.  This sample includes solid games vs top 11 defenses Louisville and Wichita State, but he also drew favorable matchups in Michigan and Kansas State as their lack of size and shotblocking is directly in his wheelhouse.  He has made the greatest genuine improvement of all Kentucky players, and has boosted his draft stock in my eyes more than any of his teammates.  I stand by my central critiques of his game, but he will likely end up in the top 20 of my final big board.

Marcus Lee might be the player who helps his stock more than anybody if he turns in a strong Final 4 showing with Willie Cauley-Stein doubtful to play.  He made a huge impact vs. Michigan, finishing with 10 points, 8 rebounds, and 2 blocks in 15 minutes largely stemming from his 4 putback dunks.  This should be taken with a grain of salt against Michigan’s undersized defense, but Kentucky would not have won without Lee’s effort.  If he builds on this opportunity, he could bolt for the NBA instead of staying another season at Kentucky battling for minutes in a crowded frontcourt.

Dakari Johnson had a big game vs. Louisville but has otherwise been quiet.  James Young has been alternating between good and bad games.  While Andrew Harrison had a decent game vs. Louisville, his 20 point game vs. Wichita State included 6 turnovers and he was nothing short of atrocious vs. Kansas State and Michigan.  He has improved, but I still do not believe he is going to become a useful NBA player and would not draft him.

NCAA Tourney First Weekend: Risers and Fallers

24 Monday Mar 2014

Posted by in NCAA

≈ 12 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , , ,

Now that it’s March and the tourney is full swing, many people get their first look at prospects.  There will be plenty of overreactions to players who happen to have good or bad days.  That said, the tournament still should carry an extra degree of weight due to the increased relevance of games and quality of competition.  Coaches will pay extra attention toward exploiting the weaknesses of opposing stars, and some bad performances will show a glimpse of struggles to come in the NBA.  It is worth taking every game in context and deciding whether there is any particular meaning to be gleaned.  Since I haven’t updated my big board in over a month, I figure I should clue everybody in on my thoughts regarding recent play:

Hypotheses Confirmed
Andrew Wiggins: Wiggins likely hurt his stock more than anybody else in the tourney.  He simply had the worst stat line of any expected 1st rounder en route to his team getting upset.  4 pts 1-6 FG 4 rebs 2 assists 4 TOV’s is not what people want to see out of a top 3 pick.  Stanford did a great job of getting back in transition and showing a variety of defensive looks to take away Wiggins’ driving ability, and Wiggins predictably disappeared.  If anybody has wondered why I have been harping on his half-court splits and poor skill level so loudly this is why.  Wiggins leans heavily on transition opportunities and free throws to get his points, and those both translate poorly to higher level of defenses.  Once Stanford took those away, Wiggins was relegated to an OK but not great jump shooter, and Kansas finished with just 57 points on 67 possessions in the loss.

Aside from his deficiencies being on full display, this also dispels the notion that he suddenly discovered how to fulfill his potential around the West Virginia game.  Further, Kansas struggled mightily without Joel Embiid.  They blew out hapless TCU and mediocre Texas Tech at home, but those were their only good performances without their starting center.  They lost @ West Virginia by 6 as 5.5 pt faves, they needed OT beat a banged up + tired Oklahoma State team as 3 pt faves, they lost by 11 to Iowa State as 5 point faves, they struggled a large portion of the Eastern Kentucky game and only won by 11 as 13 pt faves, and they lost to Stanford by 3 as 6.5 pt faves.  Overall they went 1-3 against KenPom top 70 teams in spite of being clear faves in all 4 games, with the sole win coming in overtime.  Joel Embiid was comfortably the best player on that team, and his team’s performance without him helps cement that notion.

Doug McDermott: Truthfully, his box score vs. Baylor wasn’t that bad.  He shot 7/11 on 2 pointers and only turned it over once.  But when you factor in that he only finished with 15 points due to 0/3 3 point shooting and 1/2 FT shooting and contributed in no other areas as per usual, it’s easy to see how Creighton was blown out.  A large part of this is that Baylor made every shot imaginable and Creighton only shot 5/24 from 3, but this nevertheless illuminates concerns about Ougie’s NBA future.  This is the 3rd year in a row in which McDermott has failed to exceed tourney expectations, losing by 16 to Duke last year and 14 to UNC as a sophomore (both after winning in round 1).  The fact of the matter is that in spite of his gaudy scoring numbers, it did not translate to winning high leverage games vs teams with NBA prospects.  This is because defense matters, and it’s much easier to have your dad draw up play after play for you effectively against mid-major competition than it is against future NBA talent.

Rodney Hood: Does anybody still think he’s a good prospect?  I gave consideration to the idea that he may justify a late 1st round pick, and now I am quite confident that he is not.  He flat out does not bring enough to the table other than shooting to make his horrible defense worth keeping on the floor, and I don’t see how he’s better than a mid-late 2nd round value.

Late Risers
Jarnell Stokes: He is a 6’9 PF who is a bully in the paint, and while I am not particularly fond of the mold his current level of play cannot be ignored.  He has played exceptionally well as of late as Tennessee is destroying every team that crosses its path.  He is not much of a shot blocker, but he does have solid length and an exceptional combination of speed and strength.  Between his rebounding, passing, finishing, ball handling, and improved FT%, he is showing enough skill to merit late 1st round consideration.

Jordan Adams: The statistical beast of the draft that is sure to translate poorly keeps making a case that he just may bring enough to the table to be worth something as a pro.  He lacks athleticism, he gets a ton of his points in transition, his steals are padded by UCLA’s zone, and he is a questionable defensive prospect, so inevitably it’s best to not get too carried away with his numbers.  But at a certain point you need to start wondering whether his skill level and feel for the game are good enough to become a good pro nevertheless.  He had an excellent Pac-12 championship game vs Arizona and followed it up with 2 strong showings vs Tulsa and Stephen F. Austin.  Now Adams and his teammate Anderson get another big test vs Florida to further boost their stock.  Even if he doesn’t have a good game Adams has likely done enough to establish that he’s worth a 1st round selection.

Frank Kaminsky: He keeps failing the face test and passing the basketball playing test.  After a big game vs Oregon’s soft defense, he gets to match up with Baylor’s beasts Isaiah Austin and Cory Jefferson.  If Wisconsin can get past them, he gets another big test as Arizona or San Diego State lies next and they both have elite defenses.

Rock Solid Performance
Nik Stauskas: Pop quiz for Rick Barnes: how do you slow down an elite shooter and passer with questionable speed and quickness when you have a roster full of athletes?  If you answered “zone defense” (spoiler alert: you did!) it’s no wonder why you are regarded as a horrible coach and your team got sent home early.  Stauskas’s big day vs. Texas comes as no surprise, as he finished with 17 points, 8 assists, and 0 turnovers in Michigan’s 14 point win.   On one hand he didn’t hit a single 2 point shot, but on the other hand he didn’t need to because he was so dominant with his shooting and passing, as he was making exceptional deliveries to his teammates all game long.  This game was definitely good for his draft stock, but I don’t believe it proves anything about him that wasn’t already known.  A big game vs Tennessee would be more meaningful, as their defense is tailored to take away Michigan’s strengths.

Question Marks
Jabari Parker: His game vs. Mercer certainly doesn’t help his standing, but I do not believe that it is necessarily anything more than a bad game.  Mercer is not a particularly strong defense, and he had plenty of good games vs better competition so I do not believe Mercer exposed any new flaws.  Also it’s worth noting that Duke hit 15/37 3 pointers against Mercer’s zone, which was the hefty price paid by Mercer to slow down Jabari in the paint.  But it does illuminate some translation concerns that I have been monitoring, as his rim finishing has been lackluster against good competition.  He isn’t particularly athletic but is aggressive nevertheless, and often runs into trouble trying to finish against players who can physically match up.  While I greatly enjoyed watching him dunk all over Boston College’s woefully soft defense, that performance is less predictive toward his NBA success than other games and need be given limited weight.  It looked like he may have been ready to turn a corner with a big performance vs North Carolina in Duke’s regular season finale.  But then he struggled in the ACC tourney against Clemson and UVA’s stout defenses followed by the Mercer game, which largely dispels that theory.  He still has the skills and attitude to become a great NBA scorer, but he is a bit more reliant on bullying smaller players in the post than people realize.  I am going to keep him as the #3 prospect for now, but this is why I had him below Exum to begin with, and I now feel particularly good about ranking Exum higher.

Montrezl Harrell: He is an exceptionally fun college player, but what does he bring to the table other than dunking?  He hasn’t shown much in the first two rounds of the tourney, as Manhattan and Saint Louis both limited his dunking opportunities and he struggled to produce in both games.  To his credit he finished the weekend with 24 rebounds and 5 blocks so he wasn’t completely taken out of the games, but it would be nice to see him do some damage in the half-court this tourney.

Aaron Gordon: His shot is still a major, major wart, but he is trending in the positive direction nevertheless.  His steal and block rates have seen big upticks lately, with 11 and 10 respectively in the past 5 games.  This makes it a bit easier to feel good about him as a defensive stopper, as they were surprisingly low entering the Pac-12 tournament.  He’s so young and brings so many positive qualities to the table, I really don’t feel comfortable writing him off entirely due to his poor shooting.  He will still be a pain to fit into NBA lineups, and he badly needs to ditch the long 2’s, but he still makes for an interesting project nevertheless.

Greatest Failure to Solidify himself as a Prospect
Taylor Braun: He had two chances to show the world that he can do more than style on inferior Summit league competition, and he failed twice.  Taylor Braun finished the weekend with 18 points on 5/25 FG with 4 assists and 5 turnovers against Oklahoma and San Diego State.  It is possible that he just happened to have bad games, but he turns 23 in July and his upside did not appear to be exceptionally high to begin with.  He still does have 21 points vs Ohio State earlier in the season to hang his hat on, but this clearly hurts his odds of getting drafted.

Bittersweet Weekend
Julius Randle: I have to give Randle credit- he has cut down on his grotesque turnover rate big time down the stretch, and it has vastly improved his team’s play as Kentucky is finally starting to play as well as everybody hoped that they would.  But he cut his turnover rate by drastically cutting down on his post-up attempts, when that was intended to be his main appeal as a prospect.  If he is at his best not posting up, then what purpose does he serve to an NBA team?  He still does have an interesting blend of passing, handling, and shot making ability to work with, but he is also still prone to defensive lapses.  He needs to make a significant impact on the offensive end to make his defense worth stomaching, and it is difficult to envision him achieving that goal if he is only going to be a medium usage player for his college team.  I still have him as a 1st rounder and perceive his adaptation as a positive development, but I won’t be skyrocketing him too far up my board because of it.

The Meaning Of Tweener

21 Friday Feb 2014

Posted by in International, NCAA

≈ 5 Comments

Tags

, , , ,

The word “tweener” has become a common draft lexicon to describe players who are stuck between positions.  It normally carries a negative connotation, but is not always fleshed out.  And not all tweeners are created equally, in some cases it can be a strength.  It largely depends on how each player’s offensive fit meshes with his defensive fit.  I’ll run through some examples from this draft to demonstrate my interpretation of a few players’ tweener relevance:

Good Tweener: Jabari Parker

Parker’s concern is that he is too small to play PF and too slow to play SF.  This is valid to an extent, but nobody is projecting him to be a positive defensively.  He only needs to not be a sieve so teams can get his offense in the lineup, and I believe he certainly has the tools for that.  I quite like him as a PF, he’s 6’8 235 lbs with a 7’0 wingspan.  He plays like he weighs 300 lbs, as he doesn’t mind getting physical in the post and rebounds well for his size.  Further, his length enables him to average 1.7 blocks per 40 minutes.  Playing at PF mitigates the impact of his lack of quickness, as he will spend less time defending wings on the perimeter.  He is listed as having an 8’8 standing reach at DraftExpress, which is lower than you’d expect for a player with his height + length and is a mild concern.  But I’d like to see how he measures at the combine before harping on this too loudly, as reach measurements are not always done with precision.  For reference Carmelo Anthony is half an inch shorter with the same wingspan and measured with a 8’9.5 reach, and he has performed extremely well as a small PF paired with Tyson Chandler at C.  Parker shows similar potential to be an elite stretch 4, as if you surround him with a strong defensive center and three shooters, you have a synergistic NBA lineup.

While I would err on the side of giving Jabari PF minutes, he also does have the capacity to play SF.  He has the perimeter skills to play on the wing offensively, and his size and length may atone to prevent his quickness issues from holding him back too much.  Further, it is possible that he proves to be more adept at defending the perimeter than the post, so this gives an alternative means of success if his lack of reach causes him to struggle to defend bigger PF’s.

Although he’s not a perfect fit at either position, the fact that Parker can fit in well enough at either position to get his offense into the lineup is a bit of a bonus.  And even if he doesn’t find a niche where he can play solid defense, his offense still may outweigh his defensive shortcomings as is the case for his upside comparison Carmelo Anthony.

Bad Tweener: Aaron Gordon.

Earlier I wrote about Aaron Gordon’s shooting woes.  He almost certainly will not be able to play the wing offensively in the pros, and needs to focus on adding strength and developing a post game.  PF is clearly going to be his niche offensively, but his main appeal is the defensive upside that his tools offer.  And as far as I can tell, he has much better tools to be a perimeter stopper than a post presence.  He is listed at 6’9 with a  6’11.5 wingspan and an 8’10.5 reach, which is adequate to play PF, especially with his athleticism.  But he only weighs 212 pounds, and being below average in all of length, reach, or strength it makes it a bit more daunting of a proposition.  Further, using him at SF does not capitalize on his lateral quickness that offer promise for his potential as a perimeter defender.  His ideal situation would be to pair him with a perimeter shooting PF such as Ryan Anderson, and play him in the post offensively and on the perimeter defensively.  But that makes it a pain to build around him as an integral part of your core, as it disqualifies the majority of starting PF’s as plausible pairings and precludes an offense from ever being perfectly spaced with 4 shooters.  His synergy between his offensive and defensive skill sets are quite messy, and frankly he doesn’t offer enough upside promise to be worth the hassle as a top 20 pick.

Tweener comparison: Kyle Anderson vs Dario Saric

I have mentioned that these players strike me as similar, as they are both tall ball handlers who lack burst.  They also both have questionable outside shots, and offer much more appeal playing as primary ball handlers than complementary pieces on offense.  They are both best served to play PF, since it is easier to pair them with a SF who can shoot than it is to find a floor spacing PF.  It also is ideal to mitigate the defensive issues caused by their lack of quickness.  There is quite a bit of value to these two players fitting into NBA lineups at PF.  Saric is 1.5 inches taller (6’10 vs 6’8.5) and DX lists him as a possible SF/PF whereas Anderson is listed as a possible SF, so one may initially be inclined to give the edge to Saric.  But Anderson has a much longer wingspan at 7’2.25 vs 6’10, and his 9’0 standing reach is likely greater than that of Saric as well.  Further he is listed at 233 vs 223 and is possibly slightly stronger.  It’s not by an enormous margin, but if Anderson does indeed have the edge in all of length, strength, and reach it is a significant advantage over Saric.  Ability to defend bigger positions is always a bonus, but it is especially helpful for players in their offensive mold.

Bad Tweener That Isn’t Too Bad: Nick Johnson

Johnson is the classic SG in a PG’s body.  He has good tools and defensive acumen defending the perimeter for the best defense in the nation, but he is just a bit small to regularly defend SG’s.  DraftExpress lists his height at 6’2.5″ with a 6.5.5″ wingspan, which makes him big enough to only situationally defend SG’s.  But since he doesn’t have the PG skills to run an offense, he will likely be available in the 2nd round.  But that doesn’t make him necessarily difficult to fit into NBA lineups.  If his outside shot develops well he can be a 3 + D PG in a lineup where a taller player runs the offense.  A team with a big PG such as John Wall, Deron Williams, Michael Carter-Williams, Marcus Smart, or Dante Exum could pair him with their bigger point guard and cross match accordingly.  He also fits well alongside ball dominant stars such as Dwyane Wade and LeBron James, as he could fill the Mario Chalmers role in Miami.  There is a common perception that the smaller player on the court should necessarily run the offense, and this isn’t true.  He’d be a significantly more appealing prospect if he was 2-3 inches taller + longer, but he remains an appealing 2nd round flier for a team that has a bigger ball-handler to pair him with.

If Aaron Gordon Is So Smart, Why Does He Play Like Josh Smith?

07 Friday Feb 2014

Posted by in NCAA, Personalities and Intangibles

≈ 12 Comments

Tags

, , , ,

As an advocate of prospect intelligence, I would like to clarify that the optimal measurement should not derive from a player’s ability to give an impressive interview or ace an IQ test.  It should stem from how well the player implements his intelligence on the basketball court.  There are plenty of intelligent people who allow their intelligence to be undermined by whatever wants they have as a human being, and consequently do dumb things.  Conversely, PJ Hairston’s intelligence could be questioned given his inability to stay out of trouble this summer.  But he is smart enough to grasp that when he has enough space to get off a 3 pointer, it is a good decision to pull the trigger.  Consequently he scores with a combination of volume and efficiency that is reserved for high IQ players, so his basketball IQ deserves credit for this aspect of his game.

Aaron Gordon often gets lauded for his intelligence, and I do agree that he conveys such in interviews when he speaks with poise and confidence.  But he also has a reputation as an intelligent basketball player, as his coach declared “Aaron’s greatest intelligence lies in his mind” and DraftExpress lists “Very intelligent and mature player, despite his age” as a strength.  I take exception to these assertions based on his shot selection:

Split Makes Attempts %
Rim 73 97 75.3%
Non-Rim 2’s 26 107 24.3%
3’s 7 26 26.9%
FT 46 109 42.2%

He is averaging 5.8 shots per game away from the rim with an eFG of 27.4%, as well as a historically bad FT% of 42.2%.  Consequently, he has a putrid TS% of 47.0% in spite of his scintillating rim finishing ability.  For reference the next lowest TS% among projected 1st rounders is James Young @ 53.5%.  He idolized Magic Johnson as a kid, and he values versatility as he does not want to get pigeonholed to one spot.  Unfortunately for him, there is only one spot on the floor from which he scores effectively, so perhaps he should warm up to the possibility of self-pigeonholing.

It could be argued that he’s young and he is trying to develop his shooting ability to become a more complete player, such that he is an effective shooter in his prime.  I would counter that he should abandon all hope of ever becoming a useful long range shooter in the NBA, because his shot is irreparably broken.  I cannot find any past prospect who shot < 50% at the free throw line as a college freshman and went on to become a successful NBA shooter.  40something FT%’s are reserved for the most woefully inept shooters of all time.  Even Josh Smith shot 68.8% from the line as an NBA rookie.  Dwight Howard shot 67.1% and Shaq shot 55.6% as a college freshman.  Ben Wallace is the worst NBA free throw shooter of all time (min 500 attempts) and he barely had a lower freshman FT% than Gordon at 40.7%.  The 2nd through 5th worst shooters: DeAndre Jordan (43.7%), Chris Dudley (46.7%), Eric Montross (61.2%), and Steven Hunter (70.7%) all sported better FT%’s than Gordon.

Given how historically inept Gordon’s shooting ability is, consider how insane it is that he attempts nearly 6 jump shots per game.  If any of the aforementioned bricklayers ever attempted a jump shot they likely would have been benched, yet Gordon includes it as a regular part of his game.

Blake Griffin is often cited as his upside comparison, but Gordon’s propensity to launch bricks away from the hoop leaves his production miles below that of Griffin as a freshman.  Note that SOS is kenpom.com’s average defensive rating of opponents:

Player Usage O-Rtg eFG% FT% AST% TOV% SOS
Blake 28.6 109.5 56.7 58.9% 16.6 17.4 98.6
Gordon 22.6 102.5 47.6 42.2% 10.4 12.3 101.8

Not only did Griffin convert a higher % of his shots, he got off a higher volume of quality looks.  Gordon is light years behind freshman Blake, and that’s before Blake made a huge leap as a sophomore and went on to be selected #1 overall.  And even though Blake is not regarded as much of an NBA defensive player, he did get more blocks (3.3% vs 3.0%) and steals (2.1% vs 1.2%) than Gordon.

To offer a more realistic comparison, Gordon’s freshman stats are eerily similar to those of Josh Smith as an NBA rookie.  Note that usage and turnover calculations vary at different sources.  Earlier I compared Gordon to Griffin based on statsheet.com stats, now I will compare him to Smith based on sports-reference.com stats for the sake of maintaining like comparisons.

USG% TOV% TS% ORB% DRB% AST% STL% BLK%
Gordon 22.8 10.2 47.0 11.4 19.0 10.4 1.2 3.0
Smith 18.4 16.0 50.6 7.9 18.6 10.2 1.5 5.4

This comparison should absolutely frighten GM’s interested in Gordon.  While being just 9 months older, Smith posted a better TS% on not much worse usage + turnovers considering the competition rift.   While Gordon is lauded for his passing ability, it is also the strength of Smith’s perimeter game.  This does not bode well, seeing that Smith was playing vastly superior competition and still is a major drag offensively today.  In my recent podcast with Robert Eckstut and Seth Partnow, I mentioned Smith as a Gordon comparison and Robert astutely noted that does not sound good.  Smith is only a useful player because of his elite defensive playmaking ability, without a significantly positive impact on that end he would be worthless.

Gordon has contributed toward Arizona having the best defense in the country (as per kenpom.com), and he has the physical tools to be a positive defensive player in the pros.  But in spite of the credit Gordon deserves for his role in Arizona’s awesome defensive scheme of funneling opponent shot attempts to the midrange, this is not enough to project him as a Josh Smith level difference maker, as both his steal and block rates are inferior to that which Smith posted as an NBA rookie.  If Gordon becomes a neutral or slight positive defensively in the NBA, that will not nearly make his offense worth stomaching at any draft slot, let alone a top 10 one.

Gordon’s prospective value lies in the possibility that his NBA coach convinces him to abandon his appalling shot and operate strictly in the post.  He needs to let go of his desire to be Magic Johnson, accept his role as an elite rim finisher, and start adding muscle and working on his post moves.  It is difficult to assess the likelihood of such an outcome, as it has been a common perception that Josh Smith would be great if he fell out of love with his shot for his entire career.  Yet here we are in his 10th NBA season, and Kirk Goldsberry is making Smith shot charts that are as hilarious as ever.

Teams interested in Gordon will need to explore his coachability and flexibility via interview and feedback from his coach.  But without an expressed willingness to abandon his perimeter pursuits, I simply wouldn’t draft him.  For now it’s worth wondering what he brings that other toolsy dunkers lacking range such as Montrezl Harrell and Jerami Grant do not.  Their lack of range may be problematic for their NBA value, but at least they don’t exacerbate it by insisting on being perimeter players.  The world already has one Josh Smith, and I don’t see the particular need to add another.