Tag Archives: jalen green

Let’s Talk About All of the Little SG’s

19 Monday Jul 2021

Posted by in NCAA, Scouting Reports

≈ 18 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

This draft seems to have an inordinate amount of undersized shooting guards in round 1, so let’s sort through them:

Jalen Green (#2 ESPN)

2021 NBA Mock Draft 8.0: Jalen Green No. 2, Evan Mobley No. 3 if picks based on highest upside - CBSSports.com

Green is the headliner of the class, currently projected to go #2 overall with outlier elite athleticism and highlight reel scoring ability.

His big flaw is that he is tiny for a shooting guard. He is listed at 6’6″ for G League Ignite, but so is Jonathan Kuminga. Based on any image of them standing next to each other, Kuminga is at least 2″ taller.

The most recent measurements available from Green came 2 years ago from Nike Skills Academy.

For a quick and dirty estimate, we can compare these measurements of a number of these players to their combine measurements to see how much these prospects grew on average:

If we use the laws of averages from this sample, Green would be 6’4.25″ in shoes with 6’7.5″ wingspan and weigh 180 pounds. That is a small player.

He is 3 months younger than the average player age in the sample, but he is also smaller and it seems less common for little guys to big growth spurts at this age. Further, the only two non-lotto picks from this sample to opt out of measurements were Sharife Cooper and Cam Thomas who measured 5’11.5″ and 6’1.5″ respectively, which indicates that they likely did not have significant growth spurts to show off to NBA teams.

His G League Ignite teammate Daishen Nix measured 6’4.25″, and in photos where they are next to each other it is difficult to tell who is the taller player.

If Green measured a fraction of an inch above 6’5″ in shoes, that would give him the biggest growth spurt in the class, which doesn’t seem likely. And he certainly doesn’t look like he filled out much in terms of strength.

Let’s err on the side of generosity and give him an extra half inch relative to his law of averages dimensions and his listed weight at 180. Here are the NBA players who he is most physically similar to:

HeightLengthWeight
Jalen Green6’4.756’8180
Devin Booker6’5.756’8.25206
Zach LaVine6’5.756’8.25181
Bradley Beal6’4.75″6’8202

He even skews slightly smaller on this scale, as LaVine is 1″ taller and Beal + Booker are significantly beefier. Beal also played much bigger in college, with 4.7% and 18.2% offense and defense rebound rates and 2.6% block rate compared to Green’s 1.9%/11.6% OR/DR and 0.8% BLK.

This trio also indicates approximately the peak of goodness for smaller SG’s. All time greats like Michael Jordan, Kobe Bryant, and Vince Carter were all listed at 6’6″ with 6’11” wingspans and clearly stronger frames than Green. It doesn’t seem like ~1″ height, ~3″ length, and ~15 pounds of muscle should make the different between all-time great and low end all-star like Zach LaVine, but based on NBA history it seems to have a substantial impact on attainable upside.

James Harden measured 6’5.25″ with 6’10’75” wingspan and 222 pounds, and was a megastud college player who is essentially a point guard in a SG body.

Dwyane Wade measured 6’3.75″ without shoes with 6’10.75″ wingspan and 212 pounds. He was a better college rebounder than 6’11.5″ Kai Jones and is the best shotblocking SG in NBA history, and functioned as much bigger than his size.

Ray Allen was 6’5, and there is no information on his wingspan but he rebounded similarly to Bradley Beal in college and became one of the greatest shooters in NBA history.

Essentially almost every great non-PG at 6’4 or 6’5 both was functionally bigger due to frame + length and played bigger in terms of rebounding and/or shotblocking, and Green fills none of these boxes. This makes his size a major red flag, even with his 99th percentile athleticism.

It makes sense, as these small guys can be bullied and hunted on defense, and by not being a floor general they often need another ball handler on the floor who tends to skew small. And it is difficult to consistently score over bigger players, so there is a cap on scoring efficiency for these little guys.

Athleticism is an extremely important physical tool, but it can only do so much for a player whose size and mold essentially caps his upside at low end all-star such as LaVine or Booker. The optimistic argument would be that Green is better than Zach LaVine at the same age, so maybe he can be better than LaVine longterm and be the best player in NBA history in this mold.

Yet that can all come to fruition and he can still not be a hall of fame caliber player, which is why it is difficult to see the case for him as a top 3 pick.

How Good are LaVine and Booker?

This is especially true when players like LaVine and Booker are extremely difficult to build around. Take the Phoenix Suns for instance–they have built around Booker perfectly, with Chris Paul finishing 5th in MVP voting, former #1 overall DeAndre Ayton blossoming into a quality NBA big this playoffs, and a cast of quality role players with no weak link. Yet they needed heavy injuries to opposing stars to even make the finals, and now that they are here they are down 3-2 with their game 2 win being massively luck driven shooting 20/40 from 3 vs 9/31 from the Bucks in a 10 point win. Game 2 could have easily been a double digit loss with neutral shooting luck.

And while Milwaukee is likely the 2nd best team in the NBA and a worthy champion, Phoenix was able to avoid playing the best team in Brooklyn after injuries to James Harden and Kyrie Irving caused them to fall short to the Bucks in 7.

Phoenix is around the 5th or 6th best team in the NBA and good enough to sniff a title with enough luck on their side. And if they win this year, it will have been due to extreme luck and they will be one of the weakest champions in NBA history.

On the bright side, you could say that Booker is good enough to be the 2nd best guy on a fringe NBA contender that isn’t exactly loaded with star power, and if they had correctly taken Luka Doncic over DeAndre Ayton, they would have enough star power to win it all.

But if they had Doncic and Paul, what is the value of having Booker? If they have the option of a Doncic or CP3 pick and roll, Booker’s ability to score in isolation and make difficult shots is not particularly useful as it is the least efficient option and comes with by far the weakest passing. And it is not worth paying him a max deal to stand in the corner and play like a glorified Anthony Morrow in a 3 minus D role.

This is the problem with this mold. Being small enough to get hunted on defense without being a natural floor general on offense is a massive double hit to a player’s value. Booker is talented enough to be perhaps the 3rd best player on a good NBA champion, but to maximize his value he needs to be taking the most shots, which makes him incredibly difficult to build around. He essentially needs to be surrounded with the perfect blend of role players, and it is difficult to offer him a much better cast than Phoenix has without having star(s) that render his creation ability redundant.

Having a Booker type makes it easier to win 50+ games and be a threat to win a playoff series or two. But if you are picking top 3 and looking to change your franchise’s fortunes and maximize future championship odds, how can you justify taking somebody who maxes out somewhere in the vicinity of Devin Booker’s level? This badly caps your upside with a flawed player who is difficult to build around, while having bust risk just like anybody else.

Are We Sure he is not an Outlier?

One final sanity check for Green is to compare his G League #’s to Kobe Bryant’s NBA rookie season. They are essentially the same player, except Kobe is 6.5 months younger and playing in the NBA instead of the G-League. And that is forgetting Kobe being in the minimum tier of dimensions and strength to be a hall of fame SG while Green misses the cut across the board.

Even if they seem close enough physically, Kobe has a sneakily significant size advantage. And that 6.5 month age gap is not trivial either at such a young age.

If Green is an undersized G League knockoff of Kobe, it is difficult to see how that amounts to a top 3 pick.

Granted, he could seem like a fine choice in retrospect if he becomes as good as Booker and LaVine and becomes a low end all-star. And perhaps he develops into a slightly better passer and defensive player than either and is the GOAT score first little guy. There aren’t that many stud athletes who are competent at the G League level at a young age such that we can completely write him off.

But given the limited value of the mold and its difficulty to build around, Green is not a favorable valuable proposition relative to prospects like Evan Mobley, Cade Cunningham, Scottie Barnes, Jalen Suggs, Franz Wagner, or Alperen Sengun.

Green is still likely the best small SG in the draft, but it is not by as significant of a margin as his consensus rating will have you believe.

The Tennessee Boys: Jaden Springer (#29 ESPN) and Keon Johnson (#9 ESPN)

Tennessee's Keon Johnson, Jaden Springer project as first-round talents

These two share a number of striking similarities. Johnson measured 6’4.75″ with 6’7.25″ wingspan, Springer 6’4.25″ with 6’7.75″ wingspan. Springer is beefier weighing in at 202 vs 185 pounds, while Keon has nuclear powered calves as he smashed the combine record for standing vertical leap by 2″ at 41.5″ with Nick Young and Kenny Gregory being 2nd at 39.5″. This is inflated due to him tanking his standing reach measurement by 3-4″, but the guy can nevertheless jump.

Statistically they also are near twins in many ways:

AgeUSGOR%DR%AST%TOV%STL%BLK%FTr
Keon18.826.84.810.920.722.42.520.409
Jaden18.326.14.610.92420.62.720.44

Springer is 6.5 months younger and had slightly more assists and fewer turnovers, but otherwise they are twins. And if that’s not enough, check their distribution of shots per 100 possessions:

2PA2P%3PA3P%FTAFT%
Keon16.80.4924.10.2718.50.703
Jaden16.30.4754.10.43590.81

Both guys also love to pull up for mid-range shots. It is almost eerie how they are nearly the same exact player, except Springer has more offensive polish, strength, and youth while Keon can jump to the moon.

They should be likely be valued in the same tier, and it is outright crazy that ESPN mocks Springer at #29 currently. He will likely get picked higher in reality.

Springer

Intuitively, the younger guy with more polish seems like he should trade over, but Springer’s creation is very ugly as he relies on heavy dribbling as he bullies his way for incessant mid-range jumpers. Johnson’s creation is ugly too, but if he develops his skills over time, he has the athleticism to blow by his opponents for more easy buckets.

Springer’s ideal path as an NBA player will likely be as a 3 + D role player like Gary Harris who plays as a secondary handler rather than a lead guard. They are similar physically with the only difference being Springer 1″ longer, so let’s make Springer sandwich with Gary Harris’s two college seasons:

AgeUSGOR%DR%AST%TOV%STL%BLK%FTr
Harris18.320.63.76.29.815.22.80.70.298
Springer18.326.14.610.92420.62.720.44
Harris19.325.4410.216.812.73.41.60.312

Springer was the better FT shooter making 81% as a freshman vs Harris 78.8% over two years. But Gary Harris attempted more 3’s at 9.7 per 100 as a freshman and 12.3 as a sophomore, making 37.6%, compared to a measure 4.1 3PA/100 for Springer.

Harris started as a good NBA 3 + D role player until he was plagued by injuries and stopped making 3’s. Ideally, Springer wants to cut out his dribbling for mid-range jumpers and replace them with spot up 3’s, which he should be able to do given his excellent FT% and youth.

Then the question is whether Springer can be better than Harris due to playing slightly bigger at a young age in terms of rebounds and blocks, and if his creation ability amounts to any substantial advantage. It is difficult to have much confidence in his creation, but he is so young it has to be valued as worth something.

In retrospect, Harris was a decent return on a 19th overall pick, and Springer is a slightly suped up version of Harris and it would make sense to value him as a late lottery choice

Johnson

Keon is more complicated to evaluate. Simple logic would be that a small guard with bad offense should not work out most of the time. The bad comp for him is Archie Goodwin:

Goodwin was 0.5″ taller and 2.25″ longer, and a good athlete in his own rite albeit not on Keon’s level of elite athleticism.

AgeUSGOR%DR%AST%TOV%STL%BLK%FTr
Keon18.826.84.810.920.722.42.520.409
Archie18.427.55.610.416.8212.110.594

Granted, Archie slid to the late 1st at 29th overall and perhaps there was good reason for that. He shot 26.6% from 3 and 63.7% FT in college so perhaps GM’s thought his shot was irreparably broken, maybe his athleticism did not inspire enough upside excitement, or maybe they did not believe he was committed enough to work and improve his game to invest a better pick.

If we look at lottery picks, Kris Dunn or Emmanuel Mudiay may seem like reasonable downside comps. Except Mudiay didn’t have a college sample to compare to, and Kris Dunn was an even more limited offensive player than Johnson at the same age posting a similar efficiency (96 ORtg vs 95.5) on a far lower usage rate (16.3 vs 26.8). Dunn was a more natural PG, but because he couldn’t score he wasn’t a much more prolific passer than Johnson with a relatively minor advantage in AST% at 22.8 vs 20.6. Dunn improved substantially from his freshman to junior and senior seasons, but perhaps an elite athlete like Keon Johnson would have as well.

Now if we shift to positive comps, we can start with arguably the most nuclear athlete in the NBA: Russell Westbrook. Westbrook measured 1.25″ shorter but 0.5″ longer. Let’s take his career per 100 possession stats at UCLA because his minute weighted age is similar to Johnson’s:

Age2PA2P%FTAREBASTTOVSTLBLK
Keon18.816.80.4928.585.762.51
RWB1915.20.4916.96.97.34.52.90.3

Russ is clearly a more natural point guard, with a better assist rate, lower turnover rate, and more steals. This is with sharing the load with Darren Collison, and he likely could have done even more playmaking if he had complete control of the offense during his sophomore year.

But Keon played slightly bigger, with more rebounds and blocks, and scored a slightly higher volume, had a slightly higher 3PA rate (4.1 per 100 vs 3.8) and FT% (70.3 vs 68.5). These are relatively small advantages compared to Westbrook’s more natural floor general skills, and it is difficult to imagine a version of Westbrook that is less point guardy but slightly better in other areas would look like. But it would be something, to say the least.

Another comparison may be surprising. Brandon Roy was not drafted until he made significant leaps as a junior and senior, and he measured 1.5″ taller and 0.75″ longer than Johnson. But he had a surprisingly rocky start to his NCAA career that parallels to Johnson. His 224 minute freshman sample was really bad, so let’s compare his sophomore season to that of Keon:

Age2PA2P%FTAREBASTTOVSTLBLK
Keon18.816.80.4928.585.762.51
Roy19.415.80.5057.89.55.94.92.20.7

Roy’s shooting signal looked similar as well, as he made just 9/37 3’s and 72.1% FT in his first two seasons at UW.

His extra SG size cannot be ignored, nor can his massive leap over the two following seasons as well as a better than expected NBA translation. But Johnson is the clearly better athlete between the two, and it’s probably worth something to note that how similar they were at a young age.

The other elite athlete to pop up as a statistical comp is Zach LaVine. LaVine is 1″ taller and longer, and played a different role in college as more of a spot up shooter with Kyle Anderson, Norman Powell, and Jordan Adams leading the UCLA offense. LaVine was arguably the worst player in the NBA as a rookie, but through hard work and elite athleticism he made an all-star team.

Ultimately, it’s complicated for Keon Johnson. On one hand, it seems that his offense is far too inefficient to fit in the NBA as a little guy. But then when you dig through past examples, the high tier athletes who fill up the stat sheet decently enough in all categories like Keon tend to make greater progressions than expected. But there isn’t one truly satisfactory comp to look back on, and it is difficult to envision his NBA role. His size limits his defensive versatility, and while he has some PG skills it is difficult to see him blossoming into a true floor general.

It is difficult to get excited by the idea of drafting him, but it is similarly difficult to criticize the idea of drafting him once the top tier guys are off the board.

Springer is more simple because he has more polish and fits more of a role player mold, and it is easier to see him fitting into an NBA lineup. But he likely doesn’t have the same upside tail as Johnson.

These guys are both fairly weird. It is difficult to say which one should be valued higher with any confidence, as both belong in a similar tier. It seems fair to value them in the back end of the lottery as the 2nd and 3rd best small SG’s in the draft.

James Bouknight #8 ESPN
Quentin Grimes #28 ESPN

Houston's Quentin Grimes Named Finalist for Jerry West Award - American Athletic Conference

Grimes is 0.5″ taller at 6’5.25″ vs 6’4.75, Bouknight is 0.25″ longer at 6’8.25 vs 6’8, and Grimes has an extra 15 pounds of beef at 205 vs 190 pounds.

Bouknight is rated much higher for his superior off the dribble creation ability, whereas Grimes is more of a pure spot up shooter.

Grimes has had a particularly interesting career arc. He started his NCAA career in Kansas as the #8 RSCI recruit, and after a dreadful freshman year transferred to Houston where he had a solid sophomore season. After shooting a pedestrian 33.3% 3P and 64% FT to start his career, his shooting completely blasted off as a junior making 40.3% of his 3PA on a massive 15.3 3PA per 100 possessions, and backed it up with a 78.8% FT. He also saw significant leaps in rebounds, steals, and blocks.

It is generally prudent to be wary of taking major NCAA leaps at face value due to small sample noise, but then Grimes proceeded to be the best player on the floor in the two combine scrimmages by a comfortable margin.

In two games, he was able to make 9/16 from 3 in 50 minutes of play, as he showed off a lightning fast release to go with good off ball movement and a good step back 3. He also showed off impressive athleticism, a bit more drive and dish game than he did at Houston, and he abused Austin Reaves off the dribble on a couple of occasions. His defense looked solid, he moves his feet well, his frame makes him difficult to push around, and he seems to have decent awareness. Everything about him looked good, and he should find a role in the NBA as a 3 + D role player.

Granted, this was only two games of unorganized basketball, but it appears that Grimes is finally living up to his top 10 recruiting hype. Between his combine performances and RSCI, it seems relatively safe to take his breakout junior season at face value.

Bearing this in mind, Grimes and Bouknight have some interesting similarities in terms of box score production this past season:

AgeOR%DR%AST%STL%BLK%FT%
Grimes20.75.414.112.72.61.10.788
Bouknight20.35.415.112.82.20.90.802

Defensively they both do fairly well for their position, but Grimes eye tests as slightly better and his stronger frame makes him difficult to push around. If one prospect gets a slight edge for defense, it is Grimes.

This brings us to the more complicated offensive comparison per 100 possessions, where we will include Grimes’ sophomore season to get a feel for his junior transformation:

Age2PA2P%3PAFTAASTTOV
Grimes ’2019.711.30.5389.27.45.55
Grimes ’2120.710.90.4115.373.63.4
Bouknight20.318.30.5289.510.33.45.3

As a sophomore, Grimes was more of a playmaker who created more for his teammates and drew more free throws, but still had a fairly high turnover rate for a guy who did not create Bouknight’s scoring. As a junior, he fully embraced his role as a spot up guy and focused on getting as many 3PA as possible.

Bouknight may be best served to make a similar adjustment to his offensive approach. While he is capable of creating his own shot at the rim and finishing, he is not particularly efficient at it as he has a rudimentary handle and is prone to playing slightly out of control.

He nevertheless creates an impressive volume of 2PA that he converts at a good %, but this is largely due to cuts, putbacks, and transition play. If he is collectively creating an extra 7 2PA and 3 FTA compared to Grimes at a higher %, but at the cost of ~2 TOV and ~6 3PA without any additional assists is that really a favorable tradeoff? Do you really want your tunnel visioned and slight framed 6’5″ guard consistently trying to score inside arc against NBA defenses instead of playing within the flow of the offense and getting off a massive volume of 3PA?

It’s a difficult question to answer. Bouknight still is a more natural scorer with a better career FT% than Grimes (80% vs. 70%). And he does play well off ball. If he is willing to transition to more of an off ball player in the NBA, and finds a way to get off a big volume of 3PA, he should surpass Grimes offensively.

Bouknight could also make his shot creation work, but that is an extremely dicey proposition for a guy who had such a poor assist:TOV ratio at age 20 and is merely a good athlete as opposed to nuclear like Jalen Green or Keon Johnson. At this stage, his on ball play is more likely to be a bug than a feature.

Bouknight is a confusing guy, as he does a number of things well and it is easy to see him being useful to an NBA team. But it is hard to see a big upside tail for him, and things can go wrong if he tries to force the issue too much against bigger and more athletic NBA defenders.

Summary

Grimes gets a tiny edge on defense, and has figured out how to play an offensive style tailor made for an NBA role player which makes him a safer bet on offense. Bouknight has more longterm upside on offense, but is currently a chaotic ball of energy that needs to be refined and could prove to be frustrating on that end.

Ultimately, Bouknight is a weird guy who is difficult to pin down. It is difficult to know how his offense will translate to the NBA, and how good he can really be in his best case. But it is tough to see his star upside, and it is unclear whether he is actually a better prospect than Grimes.

The safest thing to say here is– why pick Bouknight in the mid-lottery when you can have Grimes in the late 1st?

I would currently rank these two not too far behind Springer and Johnson as the #4 and #5 SGs in the draft that belong somewhere in the mid-1st.

Josh Christopher (#34 ESPN)

ASU basketball: Josh Christopher declares for 2021 NBA draft

Christopher is the discount version of Jalen Green, as he was the #10 RSCI freshman this past season.

He is not quite the athlete, passer, or shooter that Green is, but he is an impressive athlete in his own rite. You can see the offensive disparity with Green being better across the board in spite of playing the tougher schedule in the G League:

Age2PA2P%3PA3P%FT%ASTTOV
Green18.99.90.5507.30.3580.7863.83.4
Christopher19.110.50.4965.30.3050.82.63.2

Christopher atones by being functionally larger with ~1.5″ more length and ~35 pounds more muscle, and functionally playing bigger:

OR%DR%STL%BLK%
Green1.911.62.40.8
Christopher2.416.22.71.9

Again, not a perfect comparison in terms of league difficulty, but NCAA and G League are close enough such that it seems fair to give Christopher the edge here.

Green’s superior offense and athleticism should weigh significantly heavier than Christopher’s size advantage. But this doesn’t seem like such a blowout to justify the difference between a top 3 overall choice and a 2nd round pick.

Christopher should be valued somewhere in the back end of round 1.

Ayo Dosunmu #32 ESPN

3 best teams suited to pick Ayo Dosunmu in the 2021 NBA Draft

Ayo is a good handler and passer for a SG, and could pass for a big PG as much as a small SG at 6’5″ with 6’10.25″ wingspan.

His limitation is that he is not the quickest or most explosive guard, and could end up getting beat often on defense while struggling to get to his spots offensively.

But he has a nice intersection of size, skill, and athleticism, and it wouldn’t be surprising to see him develop into a Spencer Dinwiddie caliber role player. He is worth a shot in the late 1st.

Bones Hyland #30 ESPN

Bones Hyland breaks VCU freshman 3-point record | Plus | richmond.com

Bones is a unique guy. He is an excellent shooter, and is capable of getting off shots at high volume and efficiency. In his two years at VCU, he averaged 13.8 3PA per 100 possessions making 39.9% while backing it up with 82.7% FT, and he also was effective scoring in his one game at the draft combine.

He measured only 6’3.5″ in shoes and weighs 169 pounds, which makes his size a significant concern. But he has a 6’9.25″ wingspan, and excels at making plays with his length to give himself a chance of hanging defensively.

His other concern is that he is not the most natural with the ball for a little guy. When he was asked to increase his usage rate from 21.1 to 28.6%, his assist to turnover ratio took a dive from 1.58 to 0.68. And he did not look particularly better off the dribble in the NBA combine scrimmage.

His flaws are scary, but he has some unique strengths to make him an interesting flier in the late 1st or early 2nd.

David Johnson (#40 ESPN)

Louisville G David Johnson declares for NBA Draft - Card Chronicle

Johnson is only 6’4.75″, but he has a nice 6’10.5″ wingspan to go with a solid frame and good athleticism.

He showed loads of promise as a freshman bench player, including a monster game at Duke. He looked like he may be in the discussion for a lottery pick entering his sophomore season, but he just couldn’t figure out how to do offense as his usage dropped and he saw major declines in his 2P% (54.5% to 42.6%), assist rate (35.9% to 18.8%), and FT rate (.278 to .183).

If there was a glimmer of hope, he did show a capable outside shot making 38.6% from 3 and 70% from FT after looking relatively busted as a freshman.

In the combine scrimmage he showed off impressive passing in his first game but was hesitant to attack off the dribble, and then he didn’t play the second game.

There’s a good chance he can’t handle well enough to make it in the NBA. But if his sophomore season was some fluke affected by COVID, and he figures out his handling, and his shooting comes around, he has a tantalizing combination of physical tools and vision for round 2.

He is a bit of a longshot, but there is some nice home run upside for a 2nd rounder. He is arguably even worth considering in the late 1st.

Cam Thomas #25 ESPN

LSU's Cameron Thomas, Trendon Watford, Javonte Smart earn All-SEC acclaim – Crescent City Sports

Thomas is a unique guy, as he is exceptionally good at scoring without contributing anything else to the team. He might have the record for the highest ratio of points per game to the sum of rebounds, assists, blocks, and steals of any player who has ever been drafted. Based on a quick and dirty search that is probably not comprehensive, here is a list for comparison from the past 20 years:

ProspectYearPtsRebAstStlBlkRABSRatio
Cameron ThomasFR233.41.40.90.25.93.90
John JenkinsJR19.92.91.20.80.35.23.83
John JenkinsSO19.531.20.80.35.33.68
Jodie MeeksJR23.73.41.81.30.16.63.59
Seth CurrySR17.52.51.50.90.25.13.43
Salim StoudamireSR18.42.32.20.80.15.43.41
Malik MonkFR19.82.52.30.90.56.23.19
Joe YoungJR18.92.81.91.3063.15

There’s a clear brand here– little guys who can shoot and do not much else. Meeks and Curry have had careers as NBA role players so he can be something. But overall this list is fairly weak, and Thomas may not buck the trend as he is probably 6’2 or 6’3″ and one of the worst defensive players in the draft.

His closest comparison is Malik Monk, and he is a slightly worse pull than Monk who was ranked a bit higher RSCI at #9 vs #22 and at least had the excuse that maybe John Calipari was suppressing his numbers, as he showed more hope as a passer and shot blocker.

Thomas does have good wingspan (measured 6’6″ in 2019) and frame and if he does start caring about defense and becomes passable, he can fit in some NBA lineups that have a bigger shot creator as a more athletic Seth Curry. There is something to be said for him to have scored so much as a freshman, and he did so with a microscopic turnover ratio while making 88.2% FT. So he may be a justifiable choice around the turn of round 1.

But it’s just so hard to win with this brand, as historically it either ends in complete bust or flawed bench player, so he probably belongs moreso in early round 2 than late round 1.

Chris Duarte #22 ESPN

Why the Memphis Grizzlies should avoid Chris Duarte with No. 17 pick

Duarte is the senior citizen of the draft, having turned 24 in June.

He fits a nice 3 + D archetype, and he can possibly give whoever drafts him a rotation player for cheap for 4 years as his rookie deal will essentially cover his prime.

But he is so limited with the ball and so low upside, it is difficult to see how he is adequate value for round 1. His best comp is likely Damion Lee who went undrafted and was acquired on the cheap by Golden State, and still was cheap to retain after finding a rotation role.

Searching for a cheap 8th man is such a suboptimal use of a late 1st round pick when there are guys who can be better right away and solid for years to come still on the board.

Duarte did do really well for Oregon and can be a bit better than Lee, and is likely fine in round 2. But capping your upside this badly in round 1 is just wrong. You can find similar caliber pulls to fill out the bench on the scrap heap and aim higher with your first round pick.

Josh Primo #26 ESPN

Primo is very young, not turning 19 until December. But he is also very bad at basketball, and his first round hype is not justified.

Advertisement

Jalen Green vs. Franz Wagner: How Much Should Creation Be Valued?

03 Saturday Jul 2021

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 11 Comments

Tags

,

Shot creation is a vital part of basketball, as any NBA offense needs at least one guy who can be relied on to create offense for the team off the dribble.

But at the same time, it is prone to being overrated by casual fans who can discern scoring more easily than nuanced abilities such as passing, defense, and efficiency.

Let’s explore the topic through the lens of two polar opposite prospects– Jalen Green whose value largely centers around shot creation, and Franz Wagner who offers everything but volume scoring.

Jalen Green

Green’s appeal can be summarized with this one highlight where he crosses his defender and then dunks on 3 help defenders shortly after turning 19. He is exceptionally athletic and shows scoring potential rarely seen that young. He also showed promise as a jump shooter, making 35.8% 3P and 78.6% FT in his small shooting sample for G League Ignite.

But otherwise he is full of warts. He did not officially measure, but is likely around 6’5″ with a 6’8″ wingspan and a thin frame. He is a small SG who can only guard 1.5 positions, and not particularly well as his effort and fundamentals are both lackluster. And since he is being drafted to score and most of his energy will be devoted to doing so, he is not a strong bet to make major improvements on defense. He isn’t drawing dead to be a neutral or better defensive player in the NBA, but he is a clear underdog.

Further, he is not much of a passer averaging barely more assists (2.8) than turnovers (2.7), as he is clearly a score first guard. Passing is a significant part of creation, and being a non-elite passer puts a cap on his offensive upside. It also likely necessitates that he plays next to another distributor, which tends to skew small and further hurts the defense.

In terms of comps, Zach LaVine or Devin Booker are the guys that Green matches the most closely. Perhaps there is wiggle room for him to be slightly better than those guys, but it is difficult to find a clear example historically.

Vince Carter would be the highly optimistic comp, but he was approximately 1″ taller, 3″ longer, and much stronger and more capable of matching up with a wider range of opponents. That’s a significant enough difference in size such that it’s not a reasonable comparison to make.

Historically there is a cap on the upside of little guys who aren’t great passers, and it’s right around the Booker or LaVine level.

Franz Wagner

Franz lacks the explosive athleticism of Green as well as the volume scoring, as he posted a pedestrian 19.2 usage rate as a sophomore for Michigan.

But otherwise he is absolutely dripping with goodness. This lottery is loaded with good passers, but Franz has the best assist:TOV of the entire crop:

ProspectHeightAgeAST%AST:TOV
Franz6’919.317.32.33
Davion6’122.327.72.26
Giddey6’818.236.32.25
Barnes6’819.431.71.66
Suggs6’419.623.71.55
Mobley7’019.514.21.07
Green6’518.913.51.05
Cade6’819.320.40.86

He is better than Giddey who is a historically good passing prospect. He is above Davion who is 3 years younger, 8 inches shorter, and inexplicably projected to get picked higher than him. He is about 50% higher than Barnes and Suggs who are the same age and very good passing prospects. And he nearly 3x’s the rate of Mr. Cunningham, the consensus #1 overall point forward.

He has a lower volume of creation for both himself and teammates than most of these guys, but his turnover rate is microscopic. And this embodies Franz in a nutshell– the guy almost *never* makes mistakes. And even though his volume is low, he is not racking up easy assists– he often finds the big for a layup with an impressive wraparound pass off the dribble.

His lack of mistakes is also apparent in his defensive play. He moves his feet about as well as any 19 year old prospect ever, which is especially valuable given his excellent dimensions at 6’9″ with 7’0″ wingspan. He is also a highly intelligent defender and rarely makes mistakes on this end, and it shows in his ridiculous on/off splits:

Michigan had the #4 defense in the NCAA, and Franz was a heavy driving force behind their success.

This doesn’t necessarily mean he will be a generational NBA defensive player, as his lack of strength and athleticism led to pedestrian rebounding. But he is going to be good on this end and possibly excellent.

He only made 32.5% from 3 in NCAA, but he shot a decent rate of 3PA and made 83.5% FT. He should develop NBA 3 point range in due time.

And he isn’t a slouch at creating. He has a competent handle, and uses smooth footwork to step through seams in the defense and finish. Now let’s get on to comps:

Otto Porter

Porter and Franz are physically similar hyper-efficient wings with a similar statistical profiles in college:

AgeUSGORtgORB%DRB%AST%A:TOSTL%BLK%FTr
Franz19.319.2119.52.919.617.32.332.33.20.304
Otto19.623.4118.86.71918.51.793.330.449

At a glance, Otto seems slightly better across the board. But if we dig deeper, he has a few fake advantages over Franz. He has a significantly better steal rate, except everybody on Georgetown racked up steals whereas Juwan Howard massively suppresses steal rates of everybody who comes to Michigan:

PlayerStl% for Other CoachStl% for JuwanDifference
Zavier Simpson2.91.7-41.4%
Isaiah Livers1.61-37.5%
Mike Smith2.30.9-60.9%
Chaundee Brown1.10.4-63.6%
Eli Brooks1.81.7-5.6%
David DeJulius1.71.2-29.4%
Jon Teske22.15.0%
Average1.91.3-33.3%

Collectively Franz got 29.1% of his team’s steals vs 23.8% for Otto in spite of playing a slightly lower % of his team’s total minutes (15.8% vs 16.9%). He likely would have had a 3%+ steal rate playing for an ordinary college defense.

Otto has a slightly higher assist rate, but Georgetown ran the Princeton offense where *everybody* gets a boost to assists. He had a lower assist rate than starting center Nate Lubick (20.1%) while fellow frontcourt mates Nate Lubick (14.7%), Mikael Hopkins (13.7%), and Greg Whittington (13.2%) weren’t too far behind.

Meanwhile Franz had a higher assist rate than everybody but PG Mike Smith, and among frontcourt players only Isaiah Livers (11.6%) was in double digits. In tandem with his higher assist:TOV ratio, it seems reasonable to say that Franz was the better passer at the same age.

While Otto did have the slightly higher usage, Franz created his own shot at the rim in the halfcourt more frequently (0.99 per 40 vs 0.40). And while Franz ORtg doesn’t fully justify the the usage gap, Michigan did face better defenses by 3.6 pts per 100 and Otto shot 42.2% from 3 vs 34.3% from Franz. But if you look at their sum shooting stats from both years in school, Franz has the slightly better signal:

2P%3PA/1003P%FT%
Otto0.554.70.3550.751
Franz0.58380.3250.835

Eventually Otto developed into a 40%+ 3 point shooter and Franz is a clear underdog to catch him here, but he clearly has upside based on his FT% and 3PA rate.

Physically, Franz is ~0.5″ taller and Otto is ~1.5″ longer, and neither are explosive athletes. Franz was listed 15 pounds heavier (220 vs 205), and didn’t measure at the combine while Otto measured underweight at 197. In spite of that, Otto showed more willingness to mix it up on the offensive glass and drew more free throws, which is his one clear advantage over Franz based on the numbers.

Otto was an incredibly rare prospect, but after digging in Franz is similarly rare with a similar distribution of strengths and weaknesses. Both guys showed a unique ability to dominate with dimensions and outlier avoidance of mistakes. Porter is THE comp for Franz.

The next best comp is likely Mikal Bridges:

AgeUSGORtgORB%DRB%AST%A:TOSTL%BLK%
Franz19.319.2119.52.919.617.32.332.33.2
Mikal19.314.4125.25.712.47.51.463.13.6

Make no mistake about it– Franz is just better than Mikal at the same age as he is 3″ taller with better defense and more creation ability and no substantial advantages for Mikal.

Mikal eventually developed into a good shooter which is not guaranteed for Franz, but it is difficult to see how his shooting is bad enough to such that he is not at least as good as Mikal based on his passing, defense, creation, and size advantages.

Bridges is a good floor comp, although ultimately Franz is clearly better and closer to Otto Porter.

Otto Porter vs Devin Booker

If we assume that Franz is the next Otto and Green is the next Booker, then who should be valued higher?

The casual fan likely will say Booker because you need a star who can create to be an elite team. But there are a few reasons to believe otherwise

Lineup Friction

Once you have one undersized, one dimensional isolation scorer, there is no value in having another. Whereas you cannot have enough Otto Porters. You can comfortably play a lineup with 3 Otto Porters or maybe even 4 in certain occasions, as long as there is one star playmaker to facilitate the offense.

Further, if you have an actual superstar like LeBron or Luka or Giannis, you are better off pairing them with an Otto Porter than a Booker or LaVine. LeBron has shown that he provides maximum value surrounded by efficient role players. Then when he teamed up with Chris Bosh and Dwyane Wade in Miami, adjusted plus minus essentially said that they were going to break NBA basketball. But because of their poor synergy, they were not even better than LeBron’s final 2 years in Cleveland in their first season together.

The 73 win Golden State Warriors were great because they had one elite creator in Stephen Curry and 3 excellent role players in Klay Thompson, Draymond Green, and Andre Iguodala who provided significant value without needing the ball. Harrison Barnes was a decent enough 5th wheel to round out the death lineup since he is big enough to match up physically with most opponents and capable of making open shots.

Let’s say we replace Barnes with a LaVine or Booker. That screws the defense, because it gives opponents 2 little guys to hunt and makes the overall lack of size weigh heavier. Second, it is questionable how much it helps the offense, because do you really want an isolation scorer taking away 3PA from Steph and Klay? Devin Booker’s career high eFG% is 54.4%, and the Warriors as a team shot 56.3% when they won 73.

But if you replace Barnes with Porter, you get a guy who fits the system and makes the team even more overpowered by doing everything Barnes did with much greater efficiency.

If you really want to break the NBA, you need to load up on elite well rounded role players. Isolation scorers provide diminishing returns and cap team level upside with too many of them

Creation is important but it is not scarce

There are diminishing returns to having too many shot creators, but it is still necessary to have at least one guy to be competitive. There is some value to having a Russell Westbrook keep your team out of the basement even if it results in a round 1 playoff loss.

But how many teams are sorely missing a shot creator and need a Booker type more than a Porter type? Looking at this year’s playoffs, the obvious answer is Philadelphia as they were sorely missing a perimeter creator which played a large role in their upset loss to the Hawks. After that, the Knicks could have used somebody other than Julius Randle to get buckets, although a Devin Booker still likely would not be enough to get them out of round 1.

But other than that? Forgetting injuries, the Nets obviously need a Porter type role player more than another star scorer. Ditto for the Bucks with Giannis, Middleton, and Jrue. Hawks already have Trae. You could argue that the Heat need more than Bam and Jimmy, but they were good enough to make the finals last year. Celtics have Tatum and Brown to create and a lineup with 3 big wings can create some interesting defensive possibilities. Wiz clearly need a role playing wing with two small creators in Russ and Beal.

Utah has Conley + Mitchell but could use an upgrade on Bojan or O’Neale. Suns already have 1 Devin Booker, no room for another. Nuggets already have Murray and Jokic. Clippers have PG and Kawhi to create and could use a Morris/Mann upgrade. Mavs have Luka. Blazers have Dame and CJ. Lakers have LeBron and AD. Grizzlies have Ja Morant.

Essentially 14 of 16 playoff teams already have sufficient creation and could use an elite role playing wing more than an undersized volume scoring SG. And even going slightly lower. The Warriors already have Steph and Klay, Spurs have Dejounte and DeRozan, Kings have Fox, Buddy, and Haliburton, Pelicans have Zion and Ingram, Hornets have LaMelo, Bulls have LaVine.

The Pacers could use a shot of creation to help Sabonis and Brogdon. But there are just such few teams like this that qualify outside of the really terrible bottom feeders like Orlando, Detroit, and Houston.

Why is creation valued so highly?

The fact of the matter is that creation is not that hard to find, and there are diminishing returns on it, yet teams often pay a massive premium to acquire it. Why?

The answer is likely because the best players are all elite shot creators, and it is an important part of team building to find a star who can do it efficiently. But the premium should be placed on finding a well rounded shot creator who provides value in the form of passing and/or defense, as that is what makes a superstar.

As good as Devin Booker has become, he is clearly not the best player on his team. The Suns didn’t have their breakout until adding MVP candidate Chris Paul. They also built around him perfectly with efficient guys who do not demand touches in DeAndre Ayton, Jae Crowder, and Mikal Bridges. Yet they are still a 2nd tier contender who needed massive injury luck to reach the finals.

Booker is a clearly good player and the Suns would not be as good without him. But he not some special prize that makes team building easier the way it would to land a hyper-efficient and versatile role playing wing like Otto Porter.

Back to Green vs. Franz

Bearing in mind that Franz is the more scarce commodity who fits into a wider range of lineups stylistically, let’s discuss who is more likely to provide raw value between him and Green.

It is not difficult to estimate Jalen Green’s offensive upside. Players of his size without elite passing typically cap out around +4 to +5 points per 100 offensively. Looking at 538’s RAPTOR, Bradley Beal is the gold standard with +4.3, +5.2, +5.4 in the past 3 seasons. LaVine is +1.3, +1.2, +3.9, Booker is +3.6, +4.8, +3.1, CJ McCollum is +3.3, +2.5, +3.7, Jamal Murray is +2.3, +3.0, +3.2. And all of these seasons range from like 0 to -3 defensively.

Even though his athletic scoring ability looks highly impressive, it is much more difficult to replicate consistently than somebody like Kevin Durant who can shoot over the defense with ease whenever he wants. There is a limit to the usage and efficiency a guy like him can realistically post. And he just is not going to be a Harden level passer to put him in the top tier of offensive upside.

Defensively, perhaps there is a chance he is average. He did lead his G League team in steal rate. But he is undersized with bad IQ and effort right now, and he is being drafted top 3 to get buckets. Most of his energy has historically gone toward developing his offense, why would that change now?

Green’s realistic upside is approximately +4/-1, and his optimistic upside is +5/0. But that’s REALLY optimistic since the more energy that goes into offense, the less likely he is to have acceptable defense.

Otto Porter peaked around +2 to +3 offensively during his best seasons according to RAPTOR– specifically +2.1/+1.2 and +2.9 /+1.5 which seems reasonable for him. It may be tough for Franz to match this given that Otto shot 43.4% and 44.1% from 3P in those seasons, but it was on low-ish rate of attempts and Franz may be the better creator and passer. And while I never scouted Porter’s defense in college, Franz is essentially pristine on that end and is only limited by his lack of strength and explosiveness.

So it’s really tough to say with Franz. He needs very little to go right to be +1 on either end, and +2 is clearly attainable as well. Being +3 on either end is a difficult ask for him, but he is so uniquely well rounded and good at avoiding mistakes you cannot rule it out.

Intuitively, these guys project to have similar raw values given an ideal lineup in their best cases…and it seems that Franz becoming +3/+2 is slightly more realistic than Green becoming +5/0, since he only needs to be half a point better on D than peak Otto, and when Beal and Booker get to +5 offense it tends to come attached with -2 to -3 defense.

Creation is a significant part of upside, but it is not everything. When it comes in an undersized and one dimensional player it does not necessarily create more upside than a perfectly well rounded role player.

And as another sneaky bonus– if they hit their boring outcomes, and Franz ends up as 0/+1 and Green +3/-2, Franz can be extended for a reasonable price whereas Green still likely commands a max deal for a player who isn’t that good and creates a TON of lineup friction.

Bottom Line

The narrative that shot creation yields big upside needs to be overhauled into being well rounded and versatile is important for high upside.

While creation is very important, there is only a finite amount that can fit onto any team. At any given moment, 90% of the players on the floor are not touching the ball, and to truly build an overpowered lineup like the Warriors’ death lineup, you need to load up on players who provide value outside of scoring.

Franz Wagner is uniquely good at defense, passing, avoiding turnovers, and is still a passable handler and creator. Jalen Green is the inverse player. This creates all sorts of subtle advantages for Franz.

He sneakily may have more upside than Green, he is easier to fit into a wider range of lineups, he is the more scarce commodity, and you simply have more potential to build an elite team with Franz.

Their overall values are still fairly close, and it is fairly likely that Franz will be the more useful player while casual fans believe that Green is better. Green will always have sexier highlights, and may end up with more all-star selections and jersey sales.

But if you want to build an NBA team that wins, Franz would be my choice and it would not be a particularly difficult one. Green being valued so much higher by consensus as a top 3 pick vs Franz currently at #11 is not just an inefficiency in the draft– it is an inefficiency in the common perception of basketball.

2021 Draft Lottery Guide

22 Tuesday Jun 2021

Posted by in Big Boards, International, NCAA

≈ 9 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , ,

With the lottery order being determined tonight, let’s run through the prospects at stake

Tier 1: Likely star

  1. Evan Mobley 7′ PF/C USC

Mobley has good dimensions for a big at 7′ and 7’4 and has a unique combination of fluidity and passing for his size.

He is one of the best passing bigs in recent memory, as he averaged more assists (2.4) than turnovers (2.2). He is physically similar to Chris Bosh (1.2 vs 2.3) and has Joel Embiid’s fluidity (1.4 vs 2.4), but is a much better passer than both as NCAA freshmen. He isn’t quite Nikola Jokic who averaged 2.5 vs 1.5 in the Adriatic league while being 8 months younger, but he is a much better athlete than Jokic.

Given that he is able to play with precision both physically and mentally, he has an easy path to becoming a highly efficient NBA player.

Passing and height pair particularly well because he can pass over the defense, and because passing has a strong correlation with defensive ability. He was a very good rim protector for USC, anchoring the 6th best defense in the country with 2nd lowest 2P%.

His team massively overachieved overall, as he led a team of mediocre transfers that probably should have missed the tournament to the elite 8 and #6 kenpom ranking. This was by far Andy Enfield’s best team ever, as he peaked at #49 in 7 prior seasons at USC.

His shooting is acceptable for a big at 69.4% FT and 30% 3P, but a bit of a question mark.

His biggest weakness is his thin frame makes him a mediocre rebounder and prone to getting bullied by stronger bigs. He will often work as a 5 in the NBA, but may need to slide to the 4 when he faces a stronger big like Jokic or Embiid. This is the flaw that likely prevents him from being a generational prospect and Kevin Garnett level hall of famer, but it’s really the only thing to dislike.

Overall Mobley is loaded with unique strengths with limited flaws in his game, and has an easy path to stardom. He is not quite a lock star but since he is more well rounded and less flawed than everybody else in the draft, he should be the easy choice at #1 overall.

Tier 2: Possible stars with a few warts to work through

2. Scottie Barnes 6’8″ PG FSU

I have written an extensive analysis of Barnes, but the cliff notes are that he checks every box for upside in a way that we have rarely seen before. He is 6’8″ with a 7’2.75″ wingspan, and while not the most explosive athlete is fluid and agile with a good handle. He also is an exceptionally good passer for his dimensions and plays under control making good decisions with the ball.

He also had a good assist to turnover rate for any height at 1.66. For perspective, this was higher than Steve Nash’s assist:TOV ratio for his first 3 seasons at Santa Clara until his senior season edges out Barnes at 1.69.

He used his length to be disruptive defensively, and often guarded opposing PG’s, although not always well as he was prone to getting beat off the dribble and defensive lapses. He has excellent upside on defense but is currently a work in progress on that end.

His biggest question mark is his shooting as he only made 62.1% FT and 27.5% 3P for FSU. But he had a tiny sample of FTA at 41/66, and in a much bigger pre-NCAA sample he shot 67.5% (166/246) and his form doesn’t look too bad.

If he can eventually become a reliable NBA 3 point shooter and improve defensively, Barnes essentially has an uncapped upside and can make teams feel awfully bad for passing on him.

3. Jalen Suggs 6’4 PG Gonzaga

Suggs is slippery to pin down, as there have not been many prospects to similar to him. The scary angle is that he is a 6’4″ combo guard who recently turned 20 and does not have the best shooting or handle, which is not the ideal archetype to take in the top 3.

But the upside is that he seems to be good at basketball, and may be a big athletic PG who can do it all. He did not play point guard full time for Gonzaga as they often played 3 guards capable of running an offense, and everybody’s assist rate suffered for it. Andrew Nembhard dropped from 33.1% at Florida to 20.2% for Gonzaga, Joel Ayayi dropped from 16.6% the prior season to 12.6%, and Aaron Cook dropped from 27.2% at Southern Illinois to 17.5% for Gonzaga.

Suggs led the team with 23.7% assist rate, and had a solid 1.55 assist to turnover ratio. Given that he also showed exceptional instincts defensively with a 3.5% steal rate, he likely has the vision and instincts to be a good decision maker with the ball as a full time handler.

The question is exactly how much he will be able to create offensively. He is a good athlete but not elite, and his handle can stand to improve as well.

He can get to the rim and finish against set defenses proficiently enough to have a big upside on that end, but whether he hits his upside largely hinges on how much his handling and shooting improve, as he is a capable but not great shooter at 76.1% FT 33.7% 3P.

It’s difficult to come up with a satisfactory comp for him, but he is something like a John Wall or Derrick Rose hybrid with Marcus Smart, where he trades a notch of athleticism for better instincts and IQ.

Perhaps it is crazy to rank a prospect who is so much smaller and worse at shooting above Cade, but Suggs smashes the eye test as a guy who knows how to play and doesn’t have any major weaknesses outside of some minor questions about his skill level.

4. Cade Cunningham 6’8 PF Oklahoma State

It is going to be controversial to rank the consensus #1 this low, but there are serious question marks about Cade.

It is easy to see why he has so much hype, as he has excellent wing dimensions at 6’8″ with a 7’1″ wingspan and is a great shooter for any size as he made 40% 3P and 84.6% FT as freshman for Oklahoma State. He also has a point forward skill set with a 20.4% assist rate and showed competent switch-ability on defense, and it’s just not common to see a prospect with this intersection of strengths.

But before getting too excited with his strengths, Cade has some serious flags to address. First, his assist to turnover ratio was awful at 3.5 vs 4.0. From watching film, his passing just isn’t on the level of the other guys in this tier. He often makes bad decisions, throwing turnovers into traffic or feeding teammates in unfavorable positions that lead to them getting blocked or turning it over.

Further, his self creation was inefficient as he has a somewhat loose handle and was prone to getting stripped. And he was more of a bulldozer who tried to run over defenses instead of finding seams in the defense for easy buckets. Consequently, he shot a pedestrian 46.1% inside the arc and his team performed equal to slightly better with him off the floor.

He also has a suspect motor, as he is sometimes lackadaiscal on defense and has an anemic offensive rebounding rate for his size at 2.3%. This makes it questionable how good he will really be on defense.

If he improves his effort, decision making, and handling, then he has an excellent upside based on his strengths. But these are some nasty warts for a guy to be consensus #1 overall, as he currently has quite a bit of fat to be trimmed from his game.

Tier 3: Quality Prospects with Difficult Paths to Stardom

5. Franz Wagner, 6’9″ SF/PF Michigan

Wagner does not share the high upside of the prospects rated above him, but he fits a mold for being an elite role player that fits into any NBA lineup.

While he doesn’t have the typical strength or athleticism of an NBA stopper, he was an elite defensive player for Michigan based on his unique intersection of dimensions at 6’9″ with 7’0″ wingspan, intelligence, quick hands, and exceptional lateral movement. He is outlier good at containing penetration, and moves his feet laterally better than any wing prospect in recent memory.

He played a huge role in Michigan having the 4th best NCAA defense, as the defense was elite with him on the floor and turned to mush when he went to the bench:

The team was significantly better in each of the four factors with him on the floor, and notably the turnovers. On paper his 2.3% steal rate looks good but not exceptional for a wing, until you realize that Juwan Howard massively suppresses steals in a defense that heavily emphasizes forcing difficult shots over forcing turnovers. Most Michigan players who played for other coaches saw their steal rates fall off a cliff. When you consider that Franz was responsible for 29.1% of his team’s steals, his steal rate is much more impressive.

Further, he did this without heavily gambling, as he was very rarely beaten off the dribble and had a significantly positive impact on his team’s defensive eFG%.

His weakness is that he is not the most athletic or physical player, and had a mediocre rebound rate, which likely sets him below Kawhi and Draymond as an outlier defensive player. But he nevertheless is very good on this end.

Offensively he had a limited 19.1% usage rate. But he was able to create off the dribble in doses as he has a capable handle and is coordinated enough to step through seams in the defense. He shined with his lack of mistakes, as he had an excellent 3.8 assists vs 1.6 turnovers per game. His shooting is a work in progress, as he only made 32.5% from 3 in two years at Michigan and his form needs improvement, but his 83.5% FT offers hope for his ability to develop into a good shooter longterm.

He is not in the top tier without the athleticism or creation upside to have all-NBA upside. But in spite of being a sophomore, Franz is younger than Mobley, Suggs, and Barnes and is only a month older than Cade, and has an awesome role player skill set with a very low rate of making mistakes.

He fits a similar mold to Mikal Bridges and Otto Porter of hyperefficient role player, fits into any NBA lineup, and has very low odds of busting.

Once the possible stars are off the board, it’s difficult to see how taking Franz will be a regrettable choice.

6. Josh Giddey 6’8″ PG Australia

If the intersection of 3 indicators could be used to predict upside, the best choices would likely would be age, height, and passing. And Giddey smashes all 3. Here’s a list of teenage 6’7+ prospects who posted the highest pre-draft assist rate in the past 20 years:

AgeAST%STL%HeightWingspanYearPk
Josh Giddey18.236.31.86’86’7.52021?
Scottie Barnes19.431.73.46’97’32021?
Luka Doncic18.830.52.46’8?20183
Ben Simmons19.427.43.16’107’020211
Khris Middleton19.423.72.56’86’10.5201139
Andre Iguodala19.923.72.66’76’11.520049
Draymond Green19.823.32.96’77’1201035
Tomas Satoransky19.222.52.66’76’7201232
Paul George19.722.43.96’96’11201010
Corey Brewer19.822.43.26’76’920067
Ronnie Brewer18.822.43.66’86’11200414
Julius Hodge19.121.92.16’77’0200520
Nic Batum1921.52.76’87’1200825
Kyle Anderson19.320.43.46’97’2201430
Cade Cunningham19.320.42.56’87’0.52021?
Jalen Johnson19.120.53.16.96’112021?

Giddey doesn’t just edge out the competition– he posted *by far* the highest assist rate at by far the youngest age. His passing also eye tests as elite, as he seems to always make the right decision, and even on non-assists often puts his teammates in a strong position to score.

Unfortunately, almost everything else is a weakness for him. Among prospects in the table, he has the lowest steal rate of the group without length to be as disruptive on defense as the typical point forward. He also doesn’t have particularly good frame or athleticism, and isn’t the best shooter (29.3% 3P 69.1% FT) or shot creator.

This gives Giddey one of the most polarizing distributions in draft history, and makes his NBA future extremely difficult to predict. The obvious comparison for him is Lonzo Ball, who is only 2″ shorter at 6’6″ with 1.5″ more wingspan and has similarly overpowered passing and underpowered everything else.

Lonzo had a solidly better steal rate at 2.8% vs 1.8% as well as blocks at 2.1% vs 1.4%, so the prospect of drafting a Lonzo with less defensive impact is not exceptionally thrilling, and there is no doubt Giddey has some non-trivial bust risk.

But Giddey is much more fluid than Lonzo, who may be the most awkward lottery prospect of all time. If he can parlay his fluidity into a capable scoring ability and develops a decent outside shot to boot, that may be enough to be a weapon offensively with such excellent passing. And he did have better usage (19.6 vs 18.1) and assist rate (36.3 vs 31.4) for Adelaide than Lonzo did at UCLA while being a full year younger, so the greater potential for creation is clearly there.

And even though they are completely different players, it is worth considering how badly Nikola Jokic smashed expectations. Being the best passer of all time at your height range is an overpowered ability when everything else develops well, and Giddey is likely the best passing prospect of all time at 6’7+.

There’s definitely risk in a prospect with such limited skills and physical tools. But if he develops well, Giddey has excellent upside and could be the NBA player that everybody hoped Lonzo Ball would be when he was chosen #2 overall.

7. Alperen Sengun 6’10” PF, Turkey

Sengun does not fit the ideal for a modern NBA archetype, as he is a post-up PF that has become completely obsolete.

At 6’10” with 7’1″ wingspan and limited vertical explosion, he can play as a small center in some situations but lacks the rim protection to be ideal for the role consistently. And it’s not clear if he has the mobility to defend the perimeter, although he has a chance as his feet seem decent enough.

But once you get past the physical limitations, Sengun has a rare combination of skill and IQ. He has a capable handle, and is a sharp passer for his size, averaging more assists than turnovers (2.7 vs 2.4). He is also an exceptional offensive rebounder at 17.5% and shot maker with 63.2% 2P and 79.4% FT. He only made 7/35 from 3, but given his FT% at age 18 it seems likely he should be able to develop into an above average NBA 3 point shooter in time.

And what he lacks physically defensively, he helps atone with high IQ with good steal (2.6%) and block (5.9%) rates. If he proves capable of lateral movement and sharp decision making, he may not be a defensive sieve as feared.

The obvious comparison for him is Kevin Love. Which raises an interesting question– if you knew for sure you would get Kevin Love, where do you draft him in this modern era? It’s difficult to say, but there is a limit to how bearish you can be on such a statistically productive player. And Sengun’s statistical output smashes everybody else in the draft– even Mobley. So there is some wiggle room for him to be even better than Love.

While the prospect of drafting such an archaic mold with a high pick is scary for a modern GM, this mentality could also lead to Sengun being a steal with such a rare combinaton of youth, skill, and intelligence.

8. Jalen Green 6’5″ SG, G League Ignite

Green is universally considered to be a top 4 pick, as he is an exceptional athlete and scorer who was decent in the G League while only turning 19 years old in February.

The downside is that he is an undersized SG at 6’5″ or 6’6″ with a 6’8 to 6’9ish wingspan, and is somewhat one dimensional as a scorer. He has clear all-star upside in the Devin Booker or Zach LaVine mold, and largely deserves his hype.

But he may be slightly overrated with so many bigger and well rounded players slated to go above him. Everybody else ranked above him is a clearly better passer, and he is only slightly bigger than Jalen Suggs. This makes his goodness far from guaranteed and puts a healthy dent in his upside, as he is clearly the weakest link the consensus top 4 along with Cade, Mobley, and Suggs.

9. Jalen Johnson 6’9″ PF, Duke

Johnson is one of the most enigmatic players in the draft. He is a huge point forward at 6’9″ with 7’0″ wingspan and is a great athlete, stuffing the statsheet with bulk output in every category.

But his game is somewhat erratic, as he averaged more turnovers (2.5) than assists (2.2) and is not a good shooter with 63.2% FT and a low 3PA rate.

Also, he quit Duke’s team midseason. His team performed better with him off the floor, and it is not common to see top prospects leave their team midseason, which may suggest that his personality is erratic as his game. I really don’t know what to make of it, perhaps he had valid reasons and it does not deserve a significant reaction in light of his talent. But it is an odd point that makes him a bit uncomfortable to draft over the other talented prospects who do not have any similar nagging question marks.

It’s tough to know where to rank Johnson. His intersection of strengths is very rare, but to be comfortable drafting him a team should want to gather intelligence on what happened at Duke and whether he is worth betting on fulfilling his potential or not.

10. Jaden Springer, 6’4″ SG Tennessee

Springer is a funky guy with funky upside. He is one of the youngest prospects in the draft, turning 19 in September. And he does quite a bit well, as he can handle, pass, shoot, and defend.

On the downside, he is very small for SG at 6’4.25″ with 6’7.75″ wingspan, and is a decent but not great athlete. And he tends to overdribble and live in the mid-range which is a turn off for most scouts. Through this lens, it is easy to understand why he is only ranked 27th at ESPN currently.

But he made 81% FT at Tennessee, and while he shot a low volume of 3PA, there is no reason why he cannot develop his shooting to NBA 3 point range given his age. He can also get to the rim in a pinch, and if he develops his handling and passing he has some potential to operate as a big PG. And he is defensively very good for his size.

There’s not a great comp for him, but there is a lot to like. And he has more PG skills than Gary Harris and overall offensive polish than DeAnthony Melton, so he may have more upside than a mere quality role player.

Frankly it’s not clear that he is a weaker prospect than Jalen Green– he is about 1″ shorter and definitely less athletic and proficient at scoring, but much more well rounded.

11. Isaiah Jackson 6’10” C, Kentucky

Jackson offers an impressive 7’5″ wingspan to go with explosive athleticism, as he was an excellent rebounder and shot blocker with potential for switching at Kentucky.

Offensively he seems fairly raw, but does have hope for shooting with 70% FT and John Calipari is an expert at making futurue NBA stars look like ordinary college players. So if he has more offense than he has shown at Kentucky and his skills develop well, he has potential to be an Al Horford type which would be an outright steal in the late lottery.

The downside is that there’s only one Al Horford and he is much more likely to be a Willie Cauley Stein dime a dozen big. The upside makes him clearly worth a lottery pick, but its likelihood of hitting is less clear which makes somewhere in the late lottery seem like a fair slot for Jackson.

12. Moses Moody, 6’6 SG/SF, Arkansas

Moody is a prototypical 3 + D prospect, as he made 35.8% 3P and 81.2% at age 18, as he turned 19 recently in late May. He complements this with a 7’0.75″ wingspan that should help him hang defensively in the pros.

He is fairly limited as a shot creator, but he does have some interesting perks to his game. He is a good offensive rebounder (6.3%) for a SG, he has low turnover rate and about a 1:1 assist:TOV. And he has a surprisingly high FT rate for a non-creator at 0.482– higher than all of Cade Cunningham (.39), Jalen Suggs (.367), and Scottie Barnes (.339). This makes him both an effective spacer and efficient overall offensive player.

If there is one gripe to be had is that he uses his length surprising not well to generate steals, as he had a disappointing 1.6% steal rate– easily the lowest of Arkansas’s top 6 players. This leaves some questions about how much D he actually comes equipped with, but nevertheless he has an easy path to useful role player.

Tier 4: Now the Draft Gets Boring

13. BJ Boston, 6’7″ SF Kentucky

This may seem like an odd choice to rank this high since Boston is currently ranked 37th at ESPN after a dismal freshman season where he chucked brick after brick shooting 38.4% from 2 and 30% from 3.

But the draft gets horribly uninteresting after the aforementioned 12 go off the board, and there are reasons to be high on Boston.

For starters, he as #4 RSCI and seemed like a top 5 pick entering the season, and playing for John Calipari whose prospects routinely underperform in college, see their draft stock slip, and then overperform in the NBA. And the pandemic added extra randomness and weirdness to the season, which may give Boston further excuse for his relentless bricklaying.

Further, his season was not all *that* bad. He had more assists (1.6) than turnovers (1.4) and shot 78.5% FT, and led his team with 2.5% steal rate. For a wing prospect who is 6’7″ with 6’10.25″ wingspan, that is a solid foundation for 3 + D player who should attempt higher quality shots once he swaps his bad NCAA coach for a competent NBA coach.

His horrible shotmaking is a flag to be sure, but it seems excessive to drop Boston to round 2 just for that when he otherwise fits such a strong role player mold with such strong priors. Especially considering how bland this draft gets post-lottery.

14. Keon Johnson 6’5″ SG Tennessee

The good news for Johnson is that he is young, athletic, and capable of making plays on both sides of the ball.

The bad news is that he is highly inefficient for a small SG, as. he measured 6’4.75″ with 6’7.25″ wingspan with more turnovers (2.6) than assists per game (2.5). He also isn’t much of a shooter, making just 13/48 from 3. His 70.1% FT offers a ray of hope

Personally I would have a tough time getting excited drafting a tiny and inefficient SG, but he is really young and athletic which is more than can be said for most players available at this stage

15. Sharife Cooper 6’1″ PG Auburn

Cooper has an odd profile as a sort of Trae Young lite, which isn’t the most attractive mold since it needs to either hit hard or it is a miss since he is likely going to be a sieve on defense and needs to offer a huge amount of offensive creation to atone for that wart.

But he had an insane 34.3% usage and 51.5% assist rate for Auburn, and that level of shot creation cannot be ignored.

What sets him well behind Trae is that his jump shot is mechanically poor and likely needs to be completely re-worked, as he only made 13/57 (22.8%) 3P on the season. On the upside he did make 82.5% FT, so it’s a reasonable gamble that if he correct his mechanics he may have the natural touch to be a good shooter and realize his upside.

Overall he is a strange value proposition, but Cooper has enough home run upside to be more interesting than most post-lottery, and even if he doesn’t hit his upside perhaps he can be a bench microwave.

16. Jared Butler, 6’3″ PG/SG Baylor

Butler is somewhat of a boring role player, as he is not particularly athletic or adept at getting to the rim, which is a worrisome flaw for a SG in a PG body.

But he is a very good shooter, defensive player, and passer, and was clearly the best overall player on Baylor’s championship team. And he is a young junior at age 20, not turning 21 until August.

He doesn’t have much of an upside as a 3 + D PG who makes intelligent decisions, but he does figure to be an effective role player especially if he plays alongside a bigger ballhandler like Luka Doncic or Giannis.

One note that may dampen his stock is that he was allegedly playing with a heart condtiion for Baylor, and it’s not clear. how significant of a risk it is moving forward. It is plausible that NBA teams deem it to be an unnecessary risk to take and it causes him to slide in the draft.

17. Jonathan Kuminga 6’8″ SF/PF G League Ignite

Kuminga is the epitome of mystery box, as he has an excellent physical profile at aprpoximately 6’8″ with 7’1″ wingspan and good athleticism. For all intents and purposes he is a slightly bigger Jaylen Brown, and if he develops his skill level the sky is the limit for him.

The challenge for him is twofold. First, his skill level is not very good right now. He made just 24.6% 3P 62.5% FT in his G League stint, and has a loose handle that needs improvements.

He is listed as 18 not turning 19 until October. Based on that, he has reasonable odds of improving his skill set enough to be a Jaylen Brown-esque player in due time given his excellent physical tools.

But the second challenge is that it is not clear that he is actually 18 years old. He was born in Democratic Republic of Congo where only 25% of kids are born with birth certificates, and didn’t move to America until 2016 when he should have received advice to lie about his age to maximize his odds of an NBA future.

And there is a HUGE difference between 18 vs 19 vs 20, especially for a kid like Kuminga who you are betting on to make a major leap in skill level. So if he is 18, it is completely reasonable to take him in the #5-7 range as he is currently projected. But if he is 19, he takes a hit to his stock and perhaps belongs in the mid-1st. And if he is 20, he likely belongs in round 2. And if he is 21+, then he arguably does not deserve to be drafted.

Personally, I have no idea what the odds of each outcome actually are. Whatever NBA team that drafts him needs to be diligent on their intelligence regarding his age, because being wrong is very costly. For a quick and dirty estimate, let’s use Kevin Pelton’s draft pick value chart

If we say he should go #6 if 18, #15 if 19, #35 if 20, and #60 if 21+, and give 25% odds to each possibility, his respective values are 2110, 1240, 300, and 50 which average out to 925, or approximately the 21st pick in the draft.

Given that this draft is weak after the top 12, perhaps he can be bumped to the #15-20 range as a reasonable estimate. But that is pure guess work, as I have no clear info regarding his true age.

I don’t want to drop any hot takes about how he is not deserving of being drafted high, because it is unfair to him if his age is real and he gets punished for being born into a terrible situation that nobody would want to live through.

But at the same time, it would have been wise for him to lie about his age upon arrival in America, and if an NBA team is going to invest a top 10 pick in him, they should have a higher confidence in his youth than can be had based on available information.

Ultimately Kuminga is exceptionally difficult to value without any clear evidence regarding his age, and all that can be said is that he is extremely risky to take high lotto without any special intelligence that his age is likely accurate.

Overrated

Davion Mitchell 6’1″ PG, Baylor

Currently projected to go #8 overall at ESPN, he is being sold as the next Patrick Beverley as he is a good defensive PG with the nickname “off night” for his reputation of shutting down his matchup defensively.

Offensively he has a quick first step and can get to the rim often enough, averaged 5.5 assists vs 2.4 turnovers, and made 44.7% from 3. So at a glance it would seem that he offers enough to be decent on that end and justify his defense.

But when we dig deeper, there are some flags. First he is 22 years old turning 23 in September, which is fairly old. Second, he was dismal offensively as a 21 year old sophomore, posting an anemic 100.5 ORtg on 19.1 usage. It’s very difficult to be that limited offensively that old as a little guy and thrive in the NBA.

He did clearly improve as a junior, but the biggest part of his leap was increasing his 3P% from 32.4% to 44.7%. But his FT% did not improve, and was actually slightly worse declining from 66.2% to 64.1%. This makes it unclear how much he actually improved his outside shooting vs happened to make more due to small sample size variance.

He did improve his 2P% and passing as well, as his handle likely did improve. But his handle remains fairly weak for his age, as he does not look particularly comfortable doing anything off the dribble in traffic, and moreso is capable of finding opening that present himself due to his quickness.

Most likely he is a mediocre shooter and mediocre ball handler who is too old to progress these skills to an NBA starter level, especially not for a 6’1 guy with 6’4″ wingspan where skill is paramount to success.

Yes he is very good defensively, but defense cannot be the main skill for somebody taht small with so many offensive warts. Especially when he comes with an anemic 1.7% ORB, 8.0% DRB rate and a low FT rate and isn’t the most physical player, it’s worth wondering if he is truly as good as his reputation on that end.

Most likely he will be an outright bust or an ordinary bench player, and it is difficult to see how his lottery hype is justified.

This is espcially true when he has a teammate who was better at just about everything while being 2 years younger and 2″ taller. Mitchell is more athletic and slightly more proficient at creating his own shot at the rim, but that’s a small advantage compared to Butler being outright better.

It is difficult to say exactly where to rank him because entering the season he did not even vaguely resemble a prospect and now his hype is out of control.