Blog Archives

Video

Scouting The Hoop Summit: Can Mudiay Go #1?

30 Monday Jun 2014

Posted by in NCAA

≈ 7 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , ,

After writing my way too early 2015 preview, I received some commentary on my exclusion of Emmanuel Mudiay. I didn’t realize that he was being hyped as the 2nd most likely #1 overall pick, but Chad Ford says his Hoop Summit performance has him in the equation breathing down Okafor’s neck. Fortunately the Hoop Summit can be watched on youtube, so I decided to pick apart his performance and assess the extent to which I agree with the hype.

Offense
Mudiay played for the World Team and was given the keys to the offense as their only player cut out for heavy ball handling duties. It was clear that his objective was to push tempo in transition, where he is at his best. Also USA Team did quite a bit of pressing and trapping which opened up lanes for Mudiay to attack when the World Team beat the press. He didn’t do much attacking of a set defense, so this was the optimal type of game for him to thrive. Note that this is not completely unabridged, based on box score I’m missing a couple of missed 3’s and maybe a turnove. Then again maybe the box score is wrong.

Passing
3:32 Beats Johnson off the dribble and kicks it out to create an open 3 which is missed.
7:08 Attacks in transition, gets cut off by Oubre, passes to Inglis
7:50 Rises up for shot, changes mind at last second and throws ball away for turnover
22:35 Gets dual pressure from Johnson + Oubre in backcourt, almost turns it over, eventually world team gets called for 8 seconds.
24:47 In transition interior pass gets tipped away by Tyus Jones for turnover
27:50 Attacks on PnR, Oubre pokes away pass for turnover
34:05 World team beats press, Mudiay attacks and makes good decision to pass to Birsen for easy layup.
39:07 Beats press, kicks it out for missed open 3 attempt
39:48 Inbounds to Brandone Francis who makes long 2.
1:22:12 Threads the needle to Towns on the pick and roll, but the bounce pass is knee level and Towns can’t catch it.
1:24:42 Nicely passes the ball off to Lyles in transition who gets rejected by Oubre
1:27:54 Passes to a cutting Lyles who lays it in

Transition Scoring
3:55 Misses transition layup
10:54 Attacks in transition, gets cut off by Oubre on perimeter
23:22 Dunks on transition breakaway
31:03 Attacks and draws FT’s in transition
33:09 After world team beats press, Mudiay catches ball with open lane and explodes to hoop for made layup.
51:29 Beats Johnson in transition for made layup
54:06 Gets to hoop in transition, gets blocked from behind by Cliff Alexander
1:20:38 Rips strong rebound, pushes the ball in transition, dishes the ball to Murray, gets it back and misses layup.
1:22:54 Makes layup in transition
1:28:25 Draws FT’s in transition

Halfcourt Creation
19:39 Spots up for open jumper, blows by overly aggressive Pinson closeout and converts finger roll.
20:45 Two US defenders converge on Birsen who swings to Mudiay. Mudiay attacks open lane to hoop and misses layup.
52:38 Tries to attack Oubre off the dribble, can’t get all the way to the rim, kicks it out to perimeter
55:59 Blows by Alexander after shot fake, misses layup
1:17:25 Blows by Travis, misses layup
1:17:51 Gets crafty inbounding to himself off of Turner’s behind, almost turns it over when Winslow is ready for him at rim.
1:25:29 Jukes Johnson, blows to the rim and finishes +1
1:27:15 Gets matched up vs Okafor on the switch, can’t blow by. Gives ball up, gets it back, still can’t get past Okafor and badly bricks floater.

Jumpshooting
6:25 Hits mid-range shot off the dribble
35:28 Badly bricks transition 3 attempt
41:00 Makes pull up 3 pointer
44:24 Misses pull up jumper with shot clock winding down

Defense
The World played quite a bit of zone and I couldn’t find much foot of Mudiay’s man to man mettle. His length caused problems as he finished with 3 steals. Note that I couldn’t find the timestamp for one of his steals where he deflected a Stanley Johnson inbounds pass and then saved it to his teammate, and it was his most impressive steal. The occasions a USA player ventured into his zone defensively he was somewhat lazy, which is partially understandable given his big role on offense.

5:09 Lazy swipe in transition
6:09 Lazy help
9:01 In zone, makes little effort to cut off Johnson drive
20:00 Doubles myles turner, comes up with steal when turner attacks and loses the ball
24:52 Plays matador defense as he lazily swipes vs Oubre in transition
57:28 Uses length to pick off Tyus Jones’s pass in transition, draws foul going back the other way
1:27:05 Just watches as Jones attacks his area of zone and banks in floater

This may be kind of a mess for anybody who wants to re-watch, but at least it organizes the things that he did in the game for my synopsis.

Strengths:
-Great size for PG. 6’5″ 200 lbs 6’8.5″ wingspan
-Strong athletic package: quicks, speed, and explosiveness all present
-Good ball handler
-Solid court vision
-Didn’t make any appalling decisions. Passed the ball when he was unable to get his shot off. Does not appear to have Andrew Harrison-ish blinders. Only blocked once from behind, was a great athletic play by Alexander and not a bad decision from Mudiay.
-Showed ability to be disruptive defensively with steals. Hard to accurately assess his instincts w/o bigger sample, however.
-Beast in the open court. He pushed pace diligently and attacked every time he had an opening.

Weaknesses
-Sloppy with the ball. Threw away a number of passes
-Missed 5 clean looks at the rim. Can he finish in the half-court?
-Overall shot poorly at All-Star games. Between McDonald’s, Hoop Summit, Jordan Brand tallied 1/11 3’s 7/16 FT’s. DX says he shot 6/41 from 3 in EYBL. Is his shot broken?
-Somewhat lazy on defense. Will he capitalize on his tools on this end?
-Appears to be a work in progress in the half-court. This is where he needs to develop to successfully translate to tougher competition.
-Doesn’t have either an outlier tool or an outlier skill. What makes him a special snowflake?

Conclusion
Overall, there’s a lot to like and not much to hate, but what is there to truly love about Mudiay? First let’s start with his physical tools. They are definitely good, as he is a clear positive across the board. His body is similar to that of John Wall, who measured 6’4″ 196 lbs with a 6’9.25″ wingspan at the combine, only Mudiay was 1.5 years younger when he was measured. But I watched their high school mixtapes on youtube to compare their athleticism, and Mudiay is nowhere near as explosive as John Wall. Granted, he’s clearly a very good athlete and Wall is the gold standard for physical tools for a PG. But if we are talking about #1 overall for a PG with a pedestrian skill package, it’s hard to get too excited if he’s not going to be among the creme de la creme of athletes at his position.

The good news for his skill package is that nothing seems necessarily fatal. To me having blinders (this needs to become a scouting word, it is so descriptive of a common + important flaw) is the worst weakness a prospect can have. It was the reason why scouts so quickly soured on Andrew Harrison, he is awful at making crisp decisions. Once he puts the ball on the floor, he does often not changing his mind and frequently gets stuffed at the rim or turns it over. I was impressed with Mudiay’s ability to pass the ball when he didn’t have a clean look at the rim. Mudiay is also more athletic than Harrison, and with these two tidbits in mind I just don’t see Mudiay plummeting quite as hard as Harrison did.

But there are nevertheless reasons to be concerned. His shot might be broken, his passes were often off target, and he bricked 5 easily makeable layups. It seems that his fine motor skills are not good at delivering the ball where he intends it, and this is something that needs to improve. But if a player is going to be turnover prone, I’d rather it be due to sloppiness than blinders as the former is more fixable.

Also he didn’t seem to take a world of pride in his defense, which is never a good sign for a prospect you are banking on to become good defensively. I’d say he’s a major mystery box on this end. Even DX doesn’t take a stance on his defense in their scouting report, only noting that he has excellent potential without commenting either way on where he is now.

Overall it’s hard to know what to expect. I don’t believe he has as much risk of sliding the same way that Marquis Teague or Andrew Harrison did, as his tools are so universally strong across the board and his instincts appear competent enough such that I can’t envision giving up hope on him so early. I’d say even if he disappoints he has a strong chance of remaining in the lottery. But the reason why I didn’t list him in my top 5 most intriguing prospects is confirmed by his Hoop Summit performance: I don’t see the extreme level of upside that makes him worth the #1 pick at the deepest position in the NBA. Sure, he can become a top 5 NBA PG if he develops well enough, but what’s his ticket to the top 2? He doesn’t have crazy explosiveness, he doesn’t have any super skills or feel, he’s just a toolsy guy who does PG things well enough to be an appealing prospect. I don’t get the same sense of boundless upside that I got from watching Dante Exum’s signature performance vs. Spain.

I feel that after his freshman season, best case he looks like a toolsier Elfrid Payton. That is good, since Payton went 10th in a deeper draft and I liked the pick. In a thinner draft, that puts Mudiay in the conversation for #1 if neither Towns nor Okafor shines. Even if he doesn’t hit his upside he has a strong chance of ending up in the top 5 of my final big board. I suspect I’ll like him alright enough, but without a clear scenario where I truly love him as a prospect I’m marginally more excited for a handful of other freshmen. Best guess is that he ends up somewhere in the 3-10 range on my final big board, although he probably has a better shot of actually getting picked #1 than he does of ranking #1 according to me.

One last note– I don’t think it’s great that he is going to play for Larry Brown. Larry Brown to me is a dinosaur, in that he was probably awesome like 65 million years ago but is obsolete these days and may as well be extinct. His hatred of 3 point shots goes to show how stubbornly unsharp he is (check SMU 3PA’s vs 3PA allowed). He was a great hire for SMU since he quickly attracted enough talent to revitalize the program, and most college basketball coaches aren’t sharp minds anyway. But let’s not act like he’s going to teach Mudiay the right way to play basketball (although limiting his 3PA may not be the worst thing in the world for him).

Other Prospects At The Hoop Summit:
-The two prospects who guarded him the most were Stanley Johnson and Kelly Oubre. Johnson is quick for a prospect of his size, but I think asking him to stay in front of Mudiay was a bit too much as he had a hard time cutting off his drives. Also Johnson struggled to create off the dribble vs. the world zone. It could easily have just been a bad game, as it seems like it was a bad matchup for Johnson on a number of levels. But it woulda been nice if he did more to stand out.

-Oubre on the other hand showed awesome quicks as he seemingly cut off Mudiay’s drives at will. Literally every time Mudiay crossed paths with Oubre he had a bad time (7:08, 10:54, 22:35, 27:50, 52:38). Also Oubre’s block on Trey Lyles was pretty awesome (1:24:45). DraftExpress thinks Oubre has questionable defensive fundamentals, and I’m not yet ready to say that they are wrong but I’m starting to question their questions. Also from my mix tape studying Oubre might be the most explosive guy on the floor and he finished with 3 assists and 1 turnover, so he’s checking off all of the boxes for me. It’s possible that he’s like Wiggins but slightly less athletic and way better at basketball. Again, maybe just a good game/good matchup but my intrigue is growing.

-Jahlil Okafor is kind of a black hole. His final box score looks alright if you focus on the 14 points and 10 rebounds, but 0 assists and 4 turnovers are less impressive. Historically his assist stats are not good, so I hope he’s not just a bigger Jabari (which is an astute comparison that was made in the comment section of my prior post). The good news is that he showed some quick feet to stay in front of Mudiay twice in a row (1:27:15) which can somewhat mitigate his lack of rim protection.

-Tyus Jones is like 90% to be a boss. He might be my favorite college player in this class. He is small and lacks elite athleticism however, so this places a damper on his ability to have high NBA draft stock.

-Justise Winslow had a good game, although it was mostly from scoring points in transition, finishing a nifty lob from Jones, and hitting a buzzer beating 3 to end the 1st half. So I don’t think he proved he can fit in offensively at higher levels, he just had a good game. I still like him and remain hopeful for his Duke performance.

-Myles Turner was there but I believe he was combatting an injury that prevented him from shining. Based on his profile he seems to have at least some #1 overall equity, although he carries a slippery raw label which to me implies that he is bad at converting his physical strengths into production.

-Trey Lyles is completely meh to me. As far as I can tell he racks up points and rebounds without actually doing anything that will be exceptionally useful at the NBA level.

-Karl Towns had a disappointing game. 17 minutes, 6 points, 0 assists, 4 turnovers, 4 fouls. If he has too many games like this at Kentucky he’s not going #1. But he did have a great block + rebound + outlet pass sequence at 8:22 that stood out to me.

-Cliff Alexander has a small slice of #1 equity, with the emphasis on small. He has a great PF body and is an explosive athlete, but he appears to have a center skill level which places a damper on his upside. He didn’t do too much this game, although he had an impressive block on Mudiay and a couple of tough goaltending calls went against him.

If I had to guess who would end up #1 on my big board among the players in the game, my rankings go Towns > Okafor > Oubre > Johnson > Turner > Winslow > Mudiay > Alexander > Jones. It’s the thinnest of thin slice predictions, so these rankings may look totally bananas a year from now. But I’m addicted to making predictions, so I may as well give it a whirl.

Advertisement

Video

Marcus Smart: An Intelligent Defensive Player

28 Friday Feb 2014

Posted by in NCAA

≈ 9 Comments

Tags

, , ,

After Marcus Smart shoved a fan and received his 3rd technical foul of the season, I wrote about the correlation between technical fouls and defense in the NBA.  As tempting as it was to anoint him as a future defensive star on this alone, playing good defense in games is still important, too.  I compiled a video of his performance vs. DeAndre Kane and Iowa State, which will surely be the toughest matchup he faces all year.  Kane is a 6’4 200 PG who turns 25 in June and is having a great season under Fred Hoiberg, as he is vying with Smart and Andrew Wiggins for Big 12 Player Of The Year.  Also this should shed some light on why Oklahoma State has struggled so much with Mike Cobbins’s injury, as Smart has been forced to play minutes as an undersized PF instead of permanently wreaking havoc as a great perimeter defender.

I believe this game exemplifies what Smart brings to the table on defense.  It seems that nobody wants to discuss him as a defensive superstar because he doesn’t have the super quicks and athleticism of a prospect like John Wall, but everything else about him is so elite that he may be great anyway.  He is listed as 6’4 220 with a 6’8 wingspan, and it may not be long before he is the physically strongest PG in the league.  Each of Iowa State’s bigs tried backing him down, and none of them could push him too deep.  DeAndre Kane is strong for a college PG and was hopeless trying to post up Smart.  Smart’s strength will aid him in fighting through screens in the NBA, and he has the size to match up with PG’s, SG’s, or even the occasional SF.  While he is considered a bit of a tweener, his defensive versatility and ability to cross match automatically makes him one of the good variety.  He makes an excellent pairing with guards such as George Hill or Avery Bradley, as either would create a dynamic defensive duo with awesome matchup flexibility.

Even though he only had one steal this game, it may be the most impressive steal I have witnessed this season.  I do not believe anybody else in the 2014 draft class can both make the lightning quick mental reaction and have the tools to close out and intercept the pass.  Smart is a steal generating machine, and there is no gimmicky press or zone defense involved, just honest to goodness defensive domination.  Oklahoma State plays mostly man to man defense, and prior to Smart’s arrival Travis Ford has never coached a defense that forced many turnovers.  His best rank in defensive TOV% prior to Smart’s arrival is 160th in 2008-09, and they have ranked 77th and 87th in each of the past 2 years respectively.  This is entirely due to Smart, as he has 31% of his team’s steals in 14% of their minutes played, and as a freshman he had 40% (!!!) of his teams steals in 16.4% of their total minutes.  Among regular rotation players this year, Smart has a 4.6% steal rate and the second highest is Brian Williams at 2.3%.  Fringe prospects Markel Brown (1.4%) and Le’Bryan Nash (1.1%) create a small fraction of the steals that Smart does.  As a freshman he boasted a 5.3% steal rate which was more than double any of the Cowboys’ regular rotation players.

Further, Oklahoma State’s opposing eFG% has flourished since Smart’s arrival.  Ford had some defenses that forced difficult shots at UMass, but in his first 4 seasons at Oklahoma State they ranked 219th, 136th, 71st, and 122nd respectively in eFG% defense.  In Smart’s two seasons they have ranked 27th and 49th.  This is less directly attributable to Smart, but there is a good case to be made that he deserves more credit than any other Oklahoma State player for this recent leap.

Of course the counterpoint to all of this is that he cannot shoot.  Even if he is the next Tony Allen defensively, he needs to set himself apart from Tony Allen offensively to justify a top 5 pick.  His overall offensive stats are comparable to those of senior Tony Allen, except he is posting them at 2+ years younger.  His poor shooting is mitigated by his handling, passing, and finishing ability, and he also excels at getting to the line and making his free throws at a decent clip.  Also his shooting woes are mitigated by the fact that he understands that 3 > 2.  He is shooting 29.3% from 3 and 30.2% on non-rim 2’s, which unfortunately compares to Aaron Gordon who is shooting 32.3% from 3 and 27% on long 2’s.  But his overall eFG on non-rim shots is 39.5% vs Gordon’s 31.2%, simply because he knows not to relentlessly launch long 2’s and Gordon doesn’t.  His free throw percentage offers an inkling of hope that he can develop into a respectable 3 point shooter in the pros, after all he shoots an awful lot off the dribble with just 56% of his 3 point makes coming assisted this season.

A common comparison for Smart is Tyreke Evans, and I do not believe it is an unflattering one.  Evans was worse from both 3 (27.4% vs 29.2%) and FT (71.1% vs 76.0%) in college, his shot has developed poorly in the pros, yet he is still a capable scorer.  He had similar efficiency on higher usage (33 vs 28) to Smart as a freshman, but as a sophomore Smart has cut down on his turnovers to improve his efficiency and surpass Evans’ overall freshman stats by a slim margin.  Being behind Evans as a collegiate scorer is not the worst thing in the world, as Evans appeared to be on the path to stardom as a rookie before regressing.  Between Smart’s work ethic, competitiveness, confidence, and the fact that he probably will not be drafted by the Kings, he has a strong shot of developing much better than Evans as a pro.

A common critique of Smart’s game is that he bullies smaller competition and this will not translate.  This critique is poorly founded.  Opposing teams are aware of Marcus Smart and what he does on the basketball court.  They don’t simply let him post up 6’0 point guards ad nauseum.  Believe it or not, they will often use their bigger wing players to match up with him because they noticed that he is 6’4 and built like a linebacker and good at basketball.  It’s not costly for them to do this either, as he is never the smallest player on the floor for Oklahoma State in spite of being the PG.  He may not be able to fully translate his FT rate, but he should prove adept at getting to the line in the pros as he will continue to have a significant advantage in strength over opposing guards.

The important questions regarding Smart are his shooting ability and his ability to run an offense.  If either of these were stronger, he would be in the conversation for a top 3 pick.  But between his array of skills and his elite intangibles, he has a decent shot of nevertheless becoming a valuable offensive player who is a force defensively.  And even if he never quite pans out offensively, he can still be better than Tony Allen on that end with similar or slightly worse defense.  In short, he should be at least as useful as Tony Allen a significant % of the time and he has clear star upside as well.  That may not be enough to merit top 3 consideration, but after Embiid, Exum, and Parker there is no clear #4 and I believe Smart makes as compelling of a pick as any other prospect in that slot.

Video

Andrew Wiggins: An Ordinary Player In An Extraordinary Body

14 Friday Feb 2014

Posted by in NCAA

≈ 17 Comments

Tags

A common critique of Andrew Wiggins’ game is that he plays passively, but passive is a slippery word that is often misconstrued. Wiggins’ passiveness comes in a different flavor than the traditional narrative of not looking for his shot.  He seems to be carrying the correct level of usage based on his offensive skill set, so it would not be advantageous for him to shoot more frequently.  The problem is rather that he has been unable to convert his spectacular tools into dominant play. In spite of his tremendous first step, he hasn’t regularly blown by his opponents in the half-court. In spite of his explosive athleticism, he hasn’t finished strong at the rim in traffic.  In spite of his quick feet, he has often gone under screens when he has the tools to go over and still keep pace with his matchup. In spite of all of his explosiveness, mobility, and length he hasn’t generated a particularly impressive steal rate (although his steal rate isn’t bad). I recently wrote about the importance of synergy between tools and skills, and Wiggins seems to lack the skills to capitalize on his tools and produce at a superstar level as advertised.

He has managed to be a good college player nevertheless, as he has been an effective transition scorer and wing defender. But I have not seen signs of him using his tools in a way that screams future NBA superstar, so I checked the stats to see how he compares to past toolsy wing prospects. I used Paul George’s sophomore season, everybody else’s freshman year. Note that Opp D-Rtg is as per kenpom.com, and adjusted O-Rtg adjusts each player’s usage (1.25 pts of O-Rtg = 1 pt of usage) and strength of schedule to match that of Wiggins:

Usage O-Rtg Opp D-Rtg Adj O-Rtg Steal%
Kevin Durant 31.5 116.9 99.8 125.4 3.0
Carmelo Anthony 27.8 113.6 96.4 121.6 2.3
Jabari Parker 31.5 113.5 100.5 121.2 2.1
Marvin Williams 20.4 119.9 96.6 118.3 2.5
Luol Deng 23.7 110.6 95.9 113.8 2.4
Thaddeus Young 23.2 112.9 99.5 111.4 2.4
Andrew Wiggins 24.5 110.6 99.6 110.6 1.8
Harrison Barnes 24.9 106.5 98.2 108.5 1.3
Quincy Miller 23.0 107.5 98.1 107.2 1.6
Paul George 27.6 105.1 101.8 106.6 3.9
Rudy Gay 19.7 107.4 99.2 101.8 1.5

Kevin Durant is miles ahead of everybody. Not only was he an elite freshman player, but he has improved by leaps and bounds every season in the league.  At this point it is safe to say that Wiggins is completely drawing dead to be Durant level good.  Melo and Jabari are also well ahead of him statistically, as Jabari continues to look Melo-esque.

It seems that many people have yet to open their minds to the possibility that Wiggins will be as underwhelming as Marvin Williams, which is silly. Williams was straight up better as a freshman, and sometimes good toolsy players just don’t develop the way people would hope. Wiggins finds himself sandwiched between fellow 5 star freshmen Luol Deng, Thaddeus Young, Harrison Barnes, and Quincy Miller. While his tools are superior to those players, it is a solid group to estimate his baseline value. I especially like the Thaddeus Young comparison since he shares Wiggins’ 3 + D + transition skill set. (Rudy Gay is also there, to provide a baseline.)

Sophomore Paul George is behind all of the freshmen, and it is stunning that he was able to become a top 5 player in the league in just his 4th NBA season.  But George’s accelerated development is incredibly rare, and if there was any statistical signal that this was forthcoming it was his steal rate. Perhaps his steal rate not only is indicative of the synergy between his tools and his defensive acumen, but also the aggressive mentality that has enabled him to become a star on both ends of the court.  Even if not, George is an outlier in every regard, exemplified by the fact that he grew 2 inches at age 21.  Wiggins will also become a franchise changing star if he grows an additional 2 inches and improves his game at an extraordinary rate, but it is not wise to base his draft stock on this as a likely occurrence.

More important than the stats is how they are accrued.  Wiggins receives acclaim for excelling in transition, but half-court scoring is far more important to NBA translation. This intuitively makes sense, as teams that are overly reliant on transition scoring often underperform in end game situations (see: 2013-14 Timberwolves) or in the playoffs (see: George Karl’s Nuggets). So let’s see the individual stats on Kansas players when the defense has time to set itself. Note that eFG/40 is FG’s made per 40 minutes with 3 pointers counting as 1.5 FGM:

eFG eFG/40
Joel Embiid 60.8% 6.3
Perry Ellis 51.0% 5.7
Brannen Greene 58.1% 5.5
Tarik Black 59.2% 4.7
Andrew Wiggins 43.5% 4.5
Wayne Selden 52.8% 4.3
Naadir Tharpe 59.6% 3.9
Jamari Traylor 67.5% 3.2
Frank Mason 43.2% 3.0

Not only does Wiggins have middling volume, but he is horribly inefficient as a half-court scorer. Only Frank Mason has an eFG as poor as Wiggins, everybody else on the roster is miles more efficient.  Some people blame Bill Self for Wiggins’ underachieving, but his less talented teammates do not seem to be plagued with his half-court woes.  Even Wayne Selden and his 12.3 PER scores with similar volume + significantly better eFG.  This also illuminates one reason why I am so infatuated with Joel Embiid, as he has shown potential to be a monster half-court scorer. Sure he’ll have a tougher time against bigger and stronger NBA competition, but he has the tools and skills to translate and has plenty of room to develop.

The biggest wart preventing Wiggins from being a useful half-court scorer is his poor finishing ability.  I compiled all of his rim attempts and a few short jumpers from 6 conference games (Iowa St x2, Baylor x2, @Texas, vs Oklahoma State).  In sum he shot 41.4% from 2 in these games and averaged 14.5 pts, and he is averaging 42.4% from 2 and 16.4 ppg in conference play, so I think it’s a fair selection even if not the most flattering:

There’s no way around it: Andrew Wiggins has horrific touch around the rim and is completely inept at finishing in traffic.  In 10 games against teams that are top 130 in both defense and block %, Wiggins is shooting just 22/72 (30.6%) from inside the arc.  There’s likely bad variance on long 2’s in that sample, but the fact remains that it’s hard to find footage of him finishing over trees.

These are not pace adjusted, but seeing that Kansas plays at an above average tempo, adjusting for pace would only paint Wiggins in a less flattering light:

Yr. HC FG/40 HC eFG% Trans FG/40 Trans eFG%
Jabari Parker Fresh 8.1 52.0% 1.9 53.9%
PJ Hairston Soph 7.7 55.1% 2.4 55.2%
Harrison Barnes Soph 6.1 45.9% 3.0 55.0%
KJ McDaniels Junior 5.9 47.4% 1.6 66.7%
Austin Rivers Fresh 5.7 50.8% 1.5 50.0%
Marcus Smart Soph 5.5 46.5% 2.0 53.8%
Gary Harris Soph 5.4 45.1% 3.2 59.5%
James Young Fresh 5.3 52.3% 1.7 46.4%
Quincy Miller Fresh 5.3 47.4% 1.4 53.5%
Aaron Gordon Fresh 5.0 47.4% 1.4 54.5%
Glenn Robinson Soph 4.9 51.4% 1.8 61.5%
Nik Stauskas Soph 4.6 54.3% 2.0 83.3%
Andrew Wiggins Fresh 4.5 43.5% 2.4 62.7%

Again his half-court scoring splits look poor in comparison to those of his peers.  This highlights why PJ Hairston is absolutely a lottery talent, as he is an elite weapon in the half-court with his endless barrage of high % 3’s.  Again Jabari completely outclasses Wiggins on both volume and efficiency.  Even Aaron Gordon scores with greater volume and efficiency in the half-court in spite of having a completely broken shot.  Gary Harris is nearly as inefficient at 45.1%, but that seems in part due to fluke as he had a 53% half-court eFG as a freshman.

I also included transition stats to show that while I am weeding out a strength of Wiggins’ game, he isn’t a uniquely good transition scorer.  He is among the best in this sample, but he doesn’t blow everybody away because he still struggles to finish when he doesn’t beat the entire defense down the court.

It is hard to say whether there have been any past examples of such poor half-court scorers who developed into stars, because nobody tracks these splits prior to 2011-2012.  But this all stems from Wiggins’ inability to get to the rim and finish.  He has converted a grand total of 30/58 (51.8%) half-court rim FG’s in 24 games.  He has done a solid job of drawing free throws, but until he adds weight and becomes a respectable finisher, he will likely have a tough time fully translating this to the NBA.

Currently he has several problems, and none of them can be addressed independently of the others:

1) He does not have advanced ball handling skills to get to the hoop at will
2) He does not have the touch to finish contested shots in traffic
3) He doesn’t atone for his lack of touch by using his athleticism to dunk over everybody

He has issues with both creating and finishing, and he will need to address them simultaneously.  If does make a stellar improvement skill-wise and add bulk to his frame, his tools will enable him to be a weapon in the half-court.  Skills can be learned, tools cannot.  But when he is starting so incredibly far behind his peers, is it realistic to project such drastic growth such that he is able to become a good attacker in the half-court against NBA defenses?  It would be swell if it did happen, but it seems like a long shot to me.  The best argument for his upside is that a sharp coach finds a way to unlock some hidden upside unseen by this analysis, but again this is not safe to bank on.

Realistically, I would expect Wiggins to continue to provide value in the areas where he currently does.  The Thaddeus Young mold of 3’s, defense, and transition suits him well.  Also he could contribute in other ways playing off the ball, such as finishing lobs and scoring on cuts and putbacks.  A slightly toolsier Thad Young is a happy return on a pick in the middle of the lottery.  But in the top 3, it is insane to take him on the outside shot that he mimics Paul George’s otherworldly development curve and becomes a two way superstar. It’s more likely that he becomes Marvin Williams (or worse) than Paul George (or better).  Wiggins still has time to improve his stock, but at this stage I believe he belongs in the 4-9 range and I suspect that he will not be in the top 5 of my final big board.  It is time to update the narrative that he is a rare prospect.  Andrew Wiggins has rare tools but his skill level and employment of his tools are alarmingly worse than advertised.

Video

Is Tyler Ennis Clutch?

13 Thursday Feb 2014

Posted by in NCAA

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

,

After Tyler Ennis’s amazing shot to preserve Syracuse’s perfect record, there seems to be quite a bit chatter about him being clutch:

It was a swell play, but there was obviously a bit of luck involved.  So I decided to look at a variety splits to explore the Ennis clutch narrative.

First, I’d like to clarify what I mean by “clutch,” which is better in high leverage situations (i.e. late and close, vs. quality competition, or both).  Regardless of your feelings regarding the impact of pressure on the performance of athletes, there is a clutch skill set in basketball as some players translate better to late game scenarios than others.  For instance, Dirk Nowitzki’s Mavericks often overperform their expected record based on margin of victory.  During his prime from 2004-2005 to 2010-2011, Dallas won 19 more games than their point differential would suggest.  Also Dirk has a higher playoff PER (24.7) than regular season (23.5) in spite of the increased quality of defense.  It makes sense, as he is so tall and so elite at shooting and once he catches the ball there’s little that the defense can do to stop him.  They just have to hope he misses.  Dirk is living proof that clutch exists in basketball.

The fact that Syracuse is undefeated is a good start for Ennis.  ESPN posted that his stats in the last 5 minutes of 1 possession games are 8/9 FG 6/6 FT 6 assist 0 turnovers, and last night he committed his first turnover in the final 5 minutes of any game this season. Those are both awfully impressive, and it is easy to buy the narrative that he has an awesome half-court skill set with his combination of handling, shooting, and basketball IQ.  And a half-court skill set equates to a clutch skill set, since high leverage situations are normally against a set defense when transition opportunities wane.  This is supported by his splits, as he has a 42.3% eFG in transition and a 48.2% eFG in the half-court as per hoop-math.com.

Earlier I posted about how Julius Randle posts much better statistics against doormat teams than actual competition, so let’s see how Tyler Ennis fares with this test.  I split out the 10 worst defenses Syracuse faced and the 14 best, which were all top 90 as per kenpom.com:

Pts eFG% TS 2P% 3P% Ast TOV
top 90 D 14.9 50.4% 57.8% 50.0% 34.8% 6.5 1.7
not top 12.2 42.8% 47.7% 34.9% 40.7% 6.5 1.6

That is an incredible split, as he actually performs better vs. good defense.  And it’s not like this is hugely altered with the line drawn elsewhere- he fared decently against #97 and #98 defenses Minnesota and Wake Forest.  His worst games were at home vs Cornell (#349), Binghamton (#260), and St. Francis (#122).  Among the good defenses, his worst performance was against #23 defense Eastern Michigan who has the #263 offense and lost to Syracuse by 23.  Perhaps the narrative is that he coasts against weaker teams, so let’s check out his splits sorted into games in which they were 10+ point Vegas faves vs expected close matchups:

spread Pts eFG% TS% 2P% 3P% Ast TOV
< 10 pts 16.4 50.6% 58.8% 48.7% 37.9% 5.9 1.6
10+ pts 9.2 45.0% 42.1% 34.0% 38.1% 7.5 1.9

OK, now we’re just getting ridiculous.  In fairness, the close games are boosted by a much better FTA:FGA ratio (.81 vs .26 hitting 83% vs 48%) that likely is in part due to end game fouling, but that does not change the fact that his splits are amazing.  This bodes incredibly well for his odds of translating to the NBA, and emphatically confirms the narrative that he is clutch.  Ennis may not have the size, speed, or athleticism to overwhelm weaker competition with sheer physicality, but he does have the skills and intelligence to dominate whoever he chooses with sheer basketball playing ability.

The only downside with Ennis is that he has questionable tools and projects to be a defensive liability.  Although he has a good steal rate, it cannot be trusted as it has come in Syracuse’s zone, and he only got 10 steals in 9 FIBA games playing for Canada.  But with his half-court skill set and elevated performance in high leverage situations, who cares?  Ennis’s upside knows little bounds offenisvely, he should be assigned a small but non-trivial probability of becoming the next Steve Nash or John Stockton.  At this point he has cemented himself as a top 10 draft value, and should merit serious consideration in the top 5 if he continues to dominate high leverage situations.

Video

The Exum Factor: How High is Dante’s Peak?

05 Wednesday Feb 2014

Posted by in International

≈ 6 Comments

Tags

, , , ,

Now that Dante Exum has officially declared for the draft, I figured it’s time to put him under the microscope to see whether his hype is justified.  I analyzed his performance vs Spain in the FIBA u19 games this summer to try to get a feel for what he brings to the table as a prospective NBA player.  Note that this game occurred the week before he turned 18:

This was Exum’s best scoring game, so perhaps not all of his weaknesses were fully exposed.  I looked at DraftExpress’s scouting report to see if they listed any weaknesses that may not have been on display.  Their list:

-Perimeter shooting- this is the one that everybody acknowledges
-TO Prone/PG Skills- this took my by surprise- I’ll touch on this below
-Shot selection- easy to see why, although I don’t think it is a significant weakness.
-Strength- this is the other obvious one on top of shooting.

With respect to turnovers, they claimed that he sometimes plays out of control which is true to an extent- one or two of his turnovers this game could have been qualified as such.  Also against the US he was benched due to playing out of control after committing 4 turnovers in 11 minutes, as Australia went on to lose 94-51.  But he still only had 21 total turnovers in 9 games over the tournament, which is excellent.

Let’s compare his FIBA stats to those of Tyler Ennis.  Ennis played for Canada which was a similar caliber team (Canada finished 6th, Australia finished 4th, the teams shared a 4-5 record, and Australia had a slightly better PD +1.8 vs +0.6).  Differences of note are that Australia played a tougher schedule (both teams played the US once, but Australia played the second best team in Serbia twice while Canada didn’t play them at all), and Ennis had Trey Lyles on his team as a second big time scorer to draw defensive attention.  Ennis led the u19 games scoring 20.9 points per game, Lyles was third with 20.3.  Australia’s second leading scorer was Dane Pineau who averaged 11.8 pts/game.  Also Australia was slightly better defensively (97.2 D-Rating vs 98.2) so it’s not like Exum had the benefit of a hugely pro-offense team construction that Ennis did not:

Mins FG FGA FT FTA Ast TOVs Pts
Ennis 279 74 159 36 51 25 24 188
Exum 266 54 121 39 64 34 21 164

As a freshman at Syracuse, Ennis is averaging 34.4 mpg 12.1 ppg 5.6 apg 1.5 topg playing as more of a distributor than scorer.  That is an excellent turnover rate for any point guard, let alone a college freshman and it will be a large reason why he is likely a lottery pick.  Yet at the FIBAs, Exum had more assists and fewer turnovers against a tougher schedule with just a slightly larger scoring load, and DraftExpress gleaned that turnovers and PG skills is a weakness!

On one hand they are doing their due diligence to list everything that can be perceived as inadequate for an unproven player vying for such a high draft slot.  And it’s possible that he got lucky to have a low number, as 9 games is a small sample and I noted in the video that the scorekeeper miscredited one of his turnovers vs Spain.  But even after you add up the out of control possessions and the lazy low leverage passes that went awry, his bottom line result was excellent.  He clearly is doing something correct to avoid them, and I believe it is a testament to his ball handling, passing, and basketball IQ.  Against Spain he repeatedly got into the lane and made beautiful passes to his teammates, but of his pile of turnovers only one of them came on a drive and kick when his pass was deflected.

DX’s qualm with his PG skills is that sometimes he misses teammates and forces shots, which is a perspective I understand after seeing some of his forced shots in the paint vs Spain.  But in that game, he did much more finding teammates than he did missing them.  I’m not sure if it was an above average distribution game where his teammates did a below average job of converting.  But he was credited with 4 assists and averaged 3.8 for the tournament, and it’s inevitable that his teammates failed to convert some significant amount of quality looks created by Exum in other games.

With respect to shot selection, I again do not think he was particularly bad.  He should inevitably attempt some bad shots with such a great disparity between his talent and that of his teammates, and his intelligence inspires confidence that he will learn to improve his shot selection with better NBA teammates.  Also DX takes exception to his volume of 3 point attempts, but he shot 33.3% for the tournament so again the bottom line does not look bad.  It would be more upsetting if he instead insisted on launching long 2 pointers.

Taken altogether, I’d qualify all things efficiency and basketball IQ related (turnovers, PG skills, shot selection) to be a distinct positive.  The fact that DraftExpress listed this as a weakness is a testament to the fact that there’s so little to dislike about Exum.   His actual weaknesses are his shot and strength, and he is reportedly investing significant effort to improve both.  My next biggest qualm is that while he is a fluid athlete, he is not particularly explosive.

Even without great strength or explosiveness, his tools are decidedly positive as he brings elite speed, quicks, height, and length to the PG position.  Even without a great shot, his combination of ball handling, passing, and touch around the rim offer promise as a future offensive centerpiece, especially if surround by good shooting.  He projects to be a positive defensively as well.  The only thing that could prevent him from becoming good is poor development, but he reputedly has an excellent work ethic.

Exum idolizes Derrick Rose, which is sensible as the players offer similar value.  They both have a great combination of size and speed for the PG position.  Rose is stronger and more explosive, but Exum is taller and longer as he is 6’6 with a 6’9 wingspan vs Rose’s 6’2.5 with a 6’8 wingspan.  They share questionable shooting as their weakness, as Rose’s shooting improvement played a large role in his winning MVP in his 3rd season in the league.  While Rose’s freshman season was good, his ability to grow was what made him such an appealing prospect and successful NBA player until derailed by injury.  While Exum’s future growth rate is a mystery, his work ethic and intelligence are two strong points in favor of it being good.  Even his college stats parallel closely to Exum’s FIBA stats:

MPG PPG APG TOPG SPG 2p% 3p% FT%
Rose 29.2 14.9 4.7 2.7 1.2 52.1% 33.7% 71.2%
Exum 29.6 18.2 3.8 2.3 1.7 52.9% 33.3% 60.9%

This is not an apples to apples comparison by any stretch, but you can see the similarities in their mold.  It’s possible that Exum would have been worse than Rose with a season in college, but he also may have been better and I don’t think he would be at risk of being as bad as Andrew Harrison.  Also Exum will be a year younger on draft night than Rose was.  It’s fair to give Rose the edge as an overall prospect due to his edge in athleticism and his excellent performance in the NCAA tournament, but I do not believe Exum is particularly far behind.

Exum’s value largely hinges on his performance in workouts. If he is as working as hard on his shot and body as people around him indicate, he will likely boost his stock and vault into the top 3.  Exum is perceived as the mystery box of the draft, but with Andrew Wiggins’ underwhelming freshman performance he is no longer a can’t miss star.  Even if you assign a Marvin Williams level floor to Wiggins, that’s hardly much consolation for a top 3 pick.  I doubt that Williams becoming a semi-useful pro makes Billy Knight feel particularly better about selecting him over Chris Paul.  Especially at the top of the lottery, a player’s value is almost entirely driven by his upside and his odds of achieving it.  While Wiggins has shown better outside touch and more potential as a complementary piece on offense, Exum’s upside as an offensive centerpiece is more attractive.  I don’t think Wiggins has a significant enough (if any) defensive edge to offset this.  As of right now, I rate Exum as the 2nd best prospect overall in this draft, with Jabari Parker having the best shot of supplanting him with a strong finish to his season.

The worst thing that can be said about Exum is that he is young and needs to spend time developing before making a large impact as a pro.  But I believe in his upside, and I believe that he is unlikely to flop completely.  Indications are that this mystery box just might contain a boat after all, and you know how much we wanted one of those.

Video

Rodney Hood’s Defense vs Lamar Patterson: Don’t Believe Everything Jay Bilas Tells You

03 Monday Feb 2014

Posted by in NCAA

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , ,

When Pittsburgh All-American candidate Lamar Patterson struggled offensively in a home loss to Rodney Hood and the Duke Blue Devils, the immediate media reaction was to applaud Hood’s defensive performance. He spent most of the game guarding Patterson, who finished with 14 pts 4-14 FG 5-6 FT 1 Ast 5 TOVs, which is a decidedly bad line for a normally efficient scorer.

It’s natural to assume that some significant portion of credit goes to Hood, and it raises the possibility that I have been underrating his defense and/or he has improved throughout the season.  The team as a whole has recently been playing better on that end, so it’s fair to wonder if Rodney Hood is transforming from a sieve to a passable defensive player.

I compiled the key plays to display how Duke shut Patterson down:

Conclusions:
-Hood was only guarding Patterson for 1 of his 5 turnovers, and it was when Marshall Plumlee came to help for the trap. It does not require much defensive acumen to force a turnover in that situation.
-Pitt’s bad spacing and elite help defense neutralized Patterson almost every time he penetrated. He got all the way to the rim only twice when Jabari Parker failed to cut off his drive and fouled him for free throws.
-Did anybody notice Hood doing anything impressive? He contested a couple of shots and he ripped away the ball on the trap, but that’s it. None of his good plays are indicative of an ability to hang with NBA SF’s
-There were four occasions on which Patterson badly faked out Hood. Aside from having questionable tools to hang with NBA SF’s, Hood exacerbates his projection by being easily juked. Consequently he gets blown by regularly, only this game he had Amile Jefferson at his back to keep him from looking too bad.

Overall this shows why measuring defense by counterpart performance is entirely worthless. The main credit goes to Coach K for finding a way to mitigate the impact of Hood’s defensive deficiencies, and Amile Jefferson for playing good help defense. At both the NCAA and NBA level defense is a team effort, and Hood’s role against Patterson could have been fulfilled by any wing draft prospect. In the NBA Hood will once again be reliant on help from his teammates, except it will be more difficult to find a solution when all of the good NBA offenses have far better spacing than the Pittsburgh Panthers.

Video

A Randle Walk Down Fraud Street

29 Wednesday Jan 2014

Posted by in NCAA

≈ 9 Comments

Tags

, , ,

Julius Randle is the #2 RSCI freshman and is ranked as a top 5 draft pick (#5 ESPN #4 DX).  All of those are far too high and any team that expends a pick in that range on him will be sorely disappointed.  He is at best a shaky defensive prospect with questionable offensive translation.  His performance and playing style are both rife with red flags that I highlight in this video.

Some may say I’m being too harsh, as he has good pedigree and good statistics and I’m looking for the negative in every play he makes.  This is true, but it’s also rare for a lottery prospect to have such extreme red flags.  First let’s try to back trace the source of his pedigree.  According to Kenpom.com, Kentucky has played 5 woefully bad defenses (ranked 229th or worse) and 15 defenses ranging from respectable to good (ranked 136th or better).  This gives us a conveniently large rift to draw the line between cupcakes and not cupcakes to see how Randle fares against each grade of defense:

opposing D Pts/30 Rbs/30 Ast/30 TOV/30 eFG FTA:FGA
average + 14.5 9.4 1.6 3.6 50.0% 0.68
pathetic 22.7 13.7 2.1 2.1 64.0% 1.16

He absolutely demolishes bad teams and his bulk stats, efficiency, and turnover rates all fall off a cliff against respectable opponents.  It is natural that there should be some gap, but his discrepancy is massively troubling.  It should shed some light on how he became rated so highly.  He relies heavily on his strength to completely dominate smaller competition.  So if he put that level of hurting on doormat college defenses, imagine what he did to even smaller and weaker high school defenses.  Since no high school defense is in a position to expose his weaknesses, it is easy to see why he garnered so much acclaim as a recruit.

On the other hand, given the slope of respectable college defenses to bad ones, imagine what the output would be if there was another data point of NBA defenses that completely crush the good college defenses he has been facing.  It would be ugly, and this alone causes serious concern for his NBA translation.

His overall stats should not be taken at face value, since the tough portion is only tangentially related to his NBA projection and his performance against dregs is completely worthless.  But for the sake of argument let’s pretend that he happened to have good days against the bad teams and see how his overall stats measure up to similar players.  Let’s start with basic offense: usage, O-Rtg, and defensive strength of schedule as per kenpom.com.  Final column is a catchall that adjusts each player’s O-Rtg to Randle once they are normalized to the level of defenses he has faced and his usage rate at the standard 1.25 points of O-Rtg per 1 pct of usage:

Player Season Usage O-Rtg Opp D-Rtg Adj O-Rtg
Kevin Love Freshman 27.4 126.9 98.9 129.1
Kelly Olynyk RS Junior 30.2 123.1 99.6 127.9
Derrick Williams Soph 28.6 123 99.2 126.2
Jared Sullinger Freshman 26.9 120.9 99.1 122.0
T Hansbrough Freshman 26.5 119 98.3 120.5
Zach Randolph Freshman 26 116.9 97 119.3
Anthony Bennett Freshman 26 113.9 99 113.8
Julius Randle Freshman 28.5 112 101.7 112.0
Troy Murphy Freshman 26.3 109.2 99.5 108.8
JJ Hickson Freshman 26.6 107.4 99 107.9

Kevin Love is the one example of a player with Randle’s size and poor athleticism who has become an NBA star.  But he completely outclassed Randle as an NCAA freshman with vastly superior basketball IQ, outside shooting, and pretty much everything else.  Randle’s offensive upside is not in the same stratosphere, which rules him out as a reasonable top 5 selection given his defensive woes. Even when you include his dominance over the dregs, he finds himself at the bottom of the list in not particularly flattering company.

Steal % Block % Height Wing
Jared Sullinger 2.2 4.0 6’9″ 7’1.25″
T Hansbrough 2.2 2.3 6’9.5″ 6’11.5″
Zach Randolph 2.1 3.7 6’9″ 7’5″
Troy Murphy 2.0 4.1 6’11” 6’11”
Derrick Williams 1.9 2.3 6’9″ 7’1.5″
Kelly Olynyk 1.5 5.0 7’0″ 6’9.75″
JJ Hickson 1.4 4.8 6’9″ 7’3″
Anthony Bennett 1.4 4.5 6’7″ 7’1″
Kevin Love 1.4 5.0 6’9.5″ 6’11.25″
Julius Randle 0.7 2.5 6’9″ 6’11”

Even with 3 steals vs LSU, Randle finds himself at the bottom of the steal list by a comfortable margin, and only slightly ahead of Hansbrough and Williams in block rate.  Anthony Bennett is the only taller player and Kelly Olynyk is the only player with shorter arms, but they each have advantages in the other category to help offset.

Zach Randolph is a common comparison for Randle.  But on top of being better as a freshman, he also has significantly longer arms which shows how misguided it is to expect similar production from Julius.

Randle is a good example of why steals are a strong predictor of NBA success.  In the Stauskas video, I showed an example of him using smarts + instincts to read the offense and make a steal.  Randle is so woefully slow at reading offenses that he can’t do this, and most of his steals are the byproduct of a teammate stripping a ball that falls into his lap, including the completely undeserved one in the video that he fails to corral (also one of his steals against Vanderbilt was a blatant error).  And these woes are also correlated to offensive issues.  Steals are more than a proxy for athleticism – they also can shed insight into a player’s basketball IQ.  Randle has mediocre NBA tools, but for the college level they are pretty good and he should make far more plays than he does.

O-Reb% D-Reb% Assist% TOV%
Julius Randle 14.9 22.2 11.9 22.0
JJ Hickson 11.8 21.8 9.2 21.1
Zach Randolph 18.7 20.0 10.1 18.5
Kelly Olynyk 11.8 20.5 15.0 18.4
Derrick Williams 11.8 21.9 8.7 18.3
Troy Murphy 11.1 22.0 9.6 18.2
T Hansbrough 14.0 14.6 8.7 17.1
Anthony Bennett 10.2 21.8 8.7 15.2
Kevin Love 15.4 28.5 14.0 15.0
Jared Sullinger 12.4 23.8 8.6 13.7

It shouldn’t be a surprise that the two lowest turnover rates are also the two highest IQ players in this sample in Love and Sullinger.  Basketball IQ is a good way to overcome questionable tools, but Randle likely grades out worse than anybody else in the sample in this regard as supported by his exorbitant turnover rate.  He does have a good assist rate as he is a willing passer, but nevertheless turns it over a ton because he is not sharp enough to make good decisions on the fly and often attacks doubles and triples when he clearly should not.

It is worth noting that his stats do not stand out from that of JJ Hickson, except Hickson has obviously superior length and athleticism.  Hickson has not been an especially rewarding return on the 19th overall pick (his stats are OK, but Portland improved significantly by replacing him with Robin Lopez), so what would make Randle worth so much more?

FTA:FGA FT% 3PA 3P% eFG
Derrick Williams 0.871 74.6% 74 56.8% 65.0%
Kelly Olynyk 0.497 77.6% 30 30.0% 64.1%
Kevin Love 0.635 76.7% 82 35.4% 59.4%
JJ Hickson 0.706 67.7% 1 0.0% 59.0%
Zach Randolph 0.536 63.5% 1 0.0% 58.7%
Anthony Bennett 0.467 70.1% 96 37.5% 58.0%
T Hansbrough 0.724 73.9% 4 50.0% 57.3%
Troy Murphy 0.591 74.1% 13 30.8% 54.4%
Jared Sullinger 0.519 76.8% 40 40.0% 53.7%
Julius Randle 0.798 72.9% 11 18.2% 53.6%

Randle also grades out with the worst eFG in the sample, which is troubling since he does not currently have 3 point range and he will see much higher % of shots rejected in the pros.  He largely relies on bullying his opponent for free throws, but that trick did not translate favorably for Derrick Williams who shares a poor feel for the game, and appears to be a bust in spite of superior tools and stats.

Troy Murphy offers an inkling of hope, as he shares a similar tools and freshman shooting stats and became a prolific NBA 3 point shooter.  It is not worth gambling on Randle on the chance that he can develop Murphy’s shooting touch, but it is a possible out for him.

Defensively Randle has decent man to man potential and competes hard, but lacks rim protection ability and has horrific instincts and awareness.  He will be bad on this end and needs to be great offensively to atone and become a useful starter.  Yet he projects as a post-up scorer with mediocre length, mediocre athleticism, poor basketball IQ, and a loose grip that causes him to get stripped frequently.  His strength only gets him so far as his bully ball is already failing against respectable college defenses.  I am not sure how his offense can be projected to be good enough to make him a solid starter in spite of his defensive woes, let alone give him a shot of becoming a top 30 player to justify a lottery pick.  Perhaps he can improve his skills and instincts and find a coach who can put him in a position to succeed, but I simply don’t see the upside that he is purported to have.

I had rated Randle 12th on my big board, but after compiling this video and post I realized that was far too high and intended to drop him.  And then he had a horrible game against LSU’s long, athletic defense to re-affirm my suspicions.  He is likely the Shabazz Muhammad of this year’s class and a fringe 1st rounder.  He can improve his standing by showing some semblance of competence against good defenses, but I wouldn’t wait underwater for it to happen.

Video

Nik Stauskas Makes A Case For Defense Being Unimportant

27 Monday Jan 2014

Posted by in NCAA

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

, , ,

In spite of the importance of defense with respect to prospect value, not all prospects who project as liabilities on that end have limited value. Stephen Curry, Steve Nash, and Ryan Anderson are examples of players who provided elite value at their draft slots that would have been missed with steadfast refusal to draft such types. In this year’s expected crop, the prospect with the best odds of paying similar dividends is Nik Stauskas. Not only is he an elite shooter and floor spacer, but he has also shown tremendous ball handling and passing skills this season, which offers a dimension to his game that other defensively challenged prospects such as Rodney Hood and Doug McDermott are lacking. I compiled a video briefly touching upon his defensive limitations, but mostly glazing over them and highlighting his offensive strengths.

If anybody was hoping to see his offensive shortcomings, he doesn’t have any striking flaws beyond his physical limitations. If there is any complaint to be made with his offense, it is that he does not shoot enough as he hardly makes any mistakes at all.  He is boasting an astronomical 67% TS and a miniscule 11.3% turnover rate. That efficiency is unprecedented for a player who serves as an offensive centerpiece for a team that has played the 8th toughest schedule in the nation. Here is how he statistically compares to historical perimeter prospects with questionable tools, as well as Hood and Ougie. Opponent D-Rtg is based on the player’s team strength of schedule as per Kenpom.com. The far right column is how the player’s O-Rtg compares to that of Stauskas once you normalize to his SOS and usage rate, using 1.25 points of O-Rtg per 1 percent of usage as the conversion rate to offer a rough estimate:

Player Season Usage O-Rtg Opp D-Rtg Adj O-Rtg
Jimmer Fredette Senior 36.3 115.3 99 133.4
JJ Redick Senior 28.9 121.4 97 132.9
Nik Stauskas Soph 23.4 132.8 100.5 132.8
Doug McDermott Senior 32.5 121.2 101 131.9
Luke Jackson Senior 28.6 120.8 98.9 129.4
Stephen Curry Soph 31.5 122.1 102.8 129.3
Kyle Korver Senior 22.9 129.6 101.6 127.6
Rodney Hood Junior 22.9 128.3 101.2 126.8
Luke Babbitt Soph 25.9 120.7 101.7 122.4
Luke Ridnour Junior 27.6 112 99.4 118.5

I used each player’s final season of college except for Curry, since his sophomore season is a more pertinent comparison to Stauskas, and I do not believe he progressed enough as a junior to drastically boost his value. Not only do Stauskas and Curry have similar mannerisms as they maneuver through the opposing defense, but they are the two premier offensive prospects in this sample as they were able to achieve dominance at an earlier stage of their careers than others on the list. Granted that Curry did take on a larger role in his offense, Stauskas’s ball handling ability likely would enable him to do likewise if necessary.

The closest comparison is senior Redick, as he has a usage closer to Stauskas’s range and they were both centerpieces of elite major conference offenses.  The fact that Stauskas is performing on the same level as a sophomore is quite the feather in his cap, as Redick’s senior year is acclaimed as an all-time great college season.  The same adjusted O-Rtg for Redick was 125 as a sophomore, and 126.5 as a junior.

Senior Jimmer grades out the highest, but he is also the shakiest comparison given his monstrous usage.  It’s not certain that he had the basketball IQ to play such mistake free ball at a more moderate usage, as he posted just a 112.5 O-Rtg on 24.8 usage as a sophomore.

Of course bottom line production matters, but the distribution of point production is also important for translation concerns:

3 2 FT
Kyle Korver 64.1% 17.9% 18.0%
Stephen Curry 52.2% 33.6% 14.2%
Nik Stauskas 44.1% 29.4% 26.4%
JJ Redick 43.3% 33.8% 22.9%
Luke Ridnour 37.4% 37.6% 25.0%
Jimmer Fredette 34.8% 41.6% 23.6%
Rodney Hood 34.0% 43.1% 22.9%
Luke Jackson 33.4% 41.8% 24.8%
Doug McDermott 30.2% 47.3% 22.4%
Luke Babbitt 17.0% 56.3% 26.8%

The interesting bit in this sample is the strong correlation between percentage of points from 3 and NBA value with respect to draft slot.  3’s translate, but scoring inside the arc with shaky tools may be a problem. It is not a mystery why Luke Babbitt failed as a prospect, as he dominated inside the arc as a 6’9 mid major player and went on to shoot 37% from 2 as an NBA player. This does not bode well for McDermott, who attempts the majority of his 2’s at the rim and has worse tools. Hood is less of a translation concern than Ougie with superior tools and a greater frequency of two point attempts coming from midrange, although his inside the arc translation still can’t be taken for granted.

On the other side of the spectrum, it is easy to see why Curry is such a force in the NBA as he was able to sustain high efficiency on a large workload with a huge % of his attempts coming behind the arc.  This is where he sets himself apart from Stauskas, as nobody else is a pure enough shooter to be that good on that volume behind the arc.

Once again Stauskas mirrors Redick’s senior year, as they have near identical point distributions.  Their assist and turnover rates are not horribly different either (Stauskas 21.3% assist 11.3% TOV, Redick 15.7% assist 13.0% TOV).

Steals, blocks, and height:

Player Steal% Block% Height
Stephen Curry 3.5 1.4 6’3
Luke Ridnour 2.8 0.1 6’2
Kyle Korver 2.6 2 6’7
JJ Redick 2 0.1 6’4
Luke Jackson 2 0.4 6’7
Jimmer Fredette 2 0 6’2
Nik Stauskas 1.5 0.8 6’6
Luke Babbitt 1.5 1.8 6’9
Rodney Hood 1.3 0.7 6’8
Doug McDermott 0.5 0.5 6’8

This is a friendly reminder that in spite of Stauskas’s solid instincts and ability to jump a little, he still does not stand out in this collection as a defensive playmaker.  He remains a significant defensive liability.

Curry again sets himself apart from Stauskas.  Even though he was correctly projected to become a bad pro defender, his defensive playmaking at the collegiate level gives him an additional edge.  He was also a better rebounder in spite of being smaller.  Curry is clearly the overall better prospect, although Stauskas is not as far behind as current perception would suggest.

On the other hand, he continues to equate to senior Redick.  Redick had more steals, quicks, and speed, Stauskas more blocks, size, and athleticism.  And like JJ, Stauskas has the benefit of a strong work ethic.  It is difficult to envision how he was able to chisel his body and improve his handles and passing to the extent that he did and still have time to eat and sleep this offseason.  It is not a guarantee that he reaches the same level as Redick in the pros given that JJ likely achieved the upper bound of his NBA range.  But given Stauskas’s work ethic and feel for the game, his odds seem favorable.  And given that he achieved this level of success two seasons earlier and 15.5 months younger, he clearly has more upside.

Overall Nik Stauskas’s prospect value as well as style lies somewhere in the middle of JJ Redick and Stephen Curry.  If he achieves his upside as they did, he offers an excellent offensive piece to fit in any NBA offense that will make his defensive woes worth stomaching.  He still has plenty of time for his stats to lose a bit of luster, but if he continues to perform at this level through the rest of the season he likely will have value worthy of the back end of the lottery.

Video

Meet the Press with Wayne Selden

22 Wednesday Jan 2014

Posted by in NCAA

≈ Leave a comment

Wayne Selden is currently rated as a 1st round pick (22nd DX, 21st ESPN) and I’m not sure why.  He was the 13th RSCI recruit in his freshman class, which is a range that yields more busts than players who go on to have long NBA careers.  The early signs have been indicating that Selden is a bust as he has not performed well for Kansas, and his stock has not dropped nearly as much as it should have.  One of his greatest flaws is turnovers.  Here are 4 of his 5 turnovers that he committed vs Oklahoma State, where he seemed to have particular trouble with their full court press:

Sure he’s only 19 and still has plenty of time to pull his act together and carve out an NBA career, but until he at least proves to be useful as a college player I don’t think he merits much discussion as a draft prospect.

Video

Joel Embiid’s Peaks and Valleys vs Oklahoma State

22 Wednesday Jan 2014

Posted by in NCAA

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

Joel Embiid is rapidly cementing himself as the #1 pick in the eyes of the public, as nearly every game he puts on a show with his surprising coordination, offensive skill, and defensive rim presence.  I compiled this video to focus on the latter, along with the mistakes that he is prone to on defense that demonstrate how he remains somewhat raw in spite of his high level of skill and production:

Note that I give audio commentary to describe each play as opposed to having a table of contents this time.

Key points
1) Embiid is better at contesting shots without fouling than people realize. People see his exorbitant foul rate and assume that it largely stems from contesting shots, but he racks up fouls in a variety of ways, including battling for position in the post, going over the back on rebounds, committing technicals (which count as personal fouls in college), and in this game a perimeter handcheck. He also does foul on contests, but 8 blocks and several other solid contests without fouling against a top team is extremely impressive, even if it is an outlier performance.

2) In spite of his errors on offense, Embiid still made a huge positive impact on defense. Oklahoma State shot 14/38 on 2 pointers, attempted just 16 FT’s, and had to resort to bombing 3’s and hitting 12/28 to stay in the game and eventually lose by 2.

3) As an NBA rookie he won’t be able to dominate as much on natural ability, but if he even shows an average ability to learn and grow he has favorable odds of being good on both ends. Based on signs thus far that he was able to be better than expected and was able to quickly pick up on the simple detail that Oklahoma State was using Murphy as a passer to keep him away from the rim, he has shown enough to set himself apart from the Javale McGee/DeAndre Jordan low IQ types.  And if he proves to be a fast learner and hard worker, he will inevitably become one of the all time greats.

This is just one game where he did set a career high in blocks, but overall his stats measure up favorably to the historically elite defensive big man prospects in their final season of college. This is with Kansas having played the 2nd toughest schedule in the nation thus far:

Player Season Dreb% Steal% Block%
Anthony Davis Fr 23.7 2.5 13.7
Joel Embiid Fr 23.7 2.2 12.7
Greg Oden Fr 23.6 1.1 12.6
Hasheem Thabeet Jr 22.0 1.1 11.9
Emeka Okafor Jr 22.2 1.8 11.0
Roy Hibbert Sr 17.0 1.3 9.8
Tim Duncan Sr 29.7 1.2 8.7
Andrew Bogut So 30.9 1.8 6.2

These players were all drafted 1st or 2nd overall with the exclusion of Hibbert who went 18th.  Defensive stats are not the ultimate indicator of NBA success (see: Thabeet), but Embiid is making plays against tough competition as much as anybody else has, and he has the physical tools to translate as he stands 7′ 250 pounds with a 7’5 wingspan and nimble feet.

His offensive game merits similar analysis that I will offer in the future, but for now suffice it to say that it mirrors his current defensive disposition.  He offers great skill, college production, and a world of upside, but he also has plenty of fat to be trimmed with his exorbitant turnover rate.

Overall he has elite two way player upside, and it’s easy to see why he is rapidly emerging as the obvious #1 pick in the draft.  There is plenty of uncertainty with respect to his learning ability, but this uncertainty doesn’t necessarily mean that he is a significant bust risk.  Given that he is already this good this soon, it is difficult to envision him not becoming a competent NBA player.  He may not be a lock to become a superstar, but I do not believe he carries the same downside risk of players such as Thabeet or Darko who were merely NBA bodies that never demonstrated much basketball skill or acumen.  Embiid does carry the same injury risk that everybody else does, and it is possible his fiery personality will cause issues along the way.  But there is far too much working in his favor for him to be a complete flop, and I believe he has the highest floor in the draft on top of the highest ceiling.  As far as I am concerned he should be locked into the #1 pick, even if he tears his ACL or is revealed to be 22 years old.