Stanley Johnson vs. Justise Winslow, let's get this over with

[Notanoob]

This is going to be a long one. I've been meaning to get all of this organized so we can hopefully get done with this debate nowish. I'm going to cover basically everything that I can, and I'm going to try to establish just the facts - none of this BS 'observations you got from watching one game in January' type stuff. Facts that are there to be seen with actual numbers.

Size
Winslow: 6’4.5” tall, 6’10.25” wingspan, 8’8.5” reach, 222 pounds
Johnson: 6’5” tall, 6’11.5” wingspan, 8’6” reach, 242 pounds
As we all know, Johnson and Winslow are not that far off in terms of size. Johnson’s better height and wingspan did not translate into a better reach than Winslow, which is a bit unexpected. Normally I’d suggest that the bigger, longer guy somehow having a shorter reach would be rolling his shoulders to make his vertical leap stand out more (since even though people know it isn’t that important, it draws attention, like it did for Pat Connaughton). However, neither Johnson nor Winslow participated in the vertical leap, so I trust these measurements to be true. Winslow has a strong, NBA-ready body. Only Johnson’s tank-like build makes him look bad. Although we lack combine data, I believe that Winslow is the better jumper and a bit quicker.

Shooting
Winslow: 41.8% from 3, 93.5% assisted, 46/110 attempts, 43 assisted, 64.1FT%
Johnson: 37.1% from 3, 81.4% assisted, 43/116 attempts, 35 assisted, 74.2FT%
Coming out of high school, neither of these guys were supposed to be shooters, but both surprised. Both still need to tinker with their mechanics still, but are threatening. 3 point shooting can be hard to project out of college. Rodney Stuckey shot 37.2% from 3 on 148 attempts his freshman year, both better marks than Johnson, but he never broke 30% from deep in the NBA. These days projection models use 3 point volume and FT%, since it’s better than just 3P%. Even then, Stuckey would have looked great. Johnson has the advantage over Winslow in both 3PAs (barely) and FT% (handily). Johnson made just 8 unassisted 3s to Winslow’s 3, so I wouldn’t expect either of them to be taking and making many shots off the dribble, and I don't want to hear people trying to explain away the difference in 3P% based on a tiny difference in unassisted rate. Rookies typically struggle from 3, having to adjust to the longer line and better, longer defenders closing them out, so don’t be surprised if they both are shooting around 33% from 3 their rookie year, but I would assume that both will be serviceable outside shooters for their careers.

Attacking the basket
Winslow: 66.7FG% at rim, 1.06 unassited rim FGs per40
Johnson: 52.7FG% at rim, .48 unassited rim FGs per40
Note that the second number excludes put-backs.
This is the first spot where we see a meaningful difference between the prospects. Despite the fact that Johnson possesses a pretty good handle and the strength to overwhelm future used car salesmen and Iraq-league all-stars, Johnson was a terrible finisher at the rim. We’ve seen how poor finishing can hurt a player in Detroit. Greg Monroe and Rodney Stuckey have little issue getting themselves good looks at the rim, but their awful finishing prevents them from being really elite offensive options. Unlike those two though, in addition to his poor finishing, Johnson also created very few of his own looks at the rim. Just .48 is really low. He actually had fewer unassisted FGs at the rim than Anthony Brown, who was basically just a spot-up shooter. Arizona’s spacing was bad, but it cannot excuse such poor numbers, as Arizona still managed the 15th best offense in the country. Consider Johnson’s teammate, Rondae Hollis-Jefferson, who had a weaker handle, and who lacked even a semblance of a threatening jumper. Rondae had .7 unassisted rim FGs per40, and finished 72.3% of his shots at the rim, better than Winslow and Johnson! Essentially, guys who can create looks at the rim and finish will do so regardless of circumstances, and it appears that Johnson can’t really do that.
Winslow finished pretty well but nothing to be wowed by, and his shot creation at the rim is very good but not elite. Winslow’s 2.5” advantage in reach (and possibly better vertical) are probably a bit of a factor here.

Put-backs
Johnson shot 33% on put-backs at the rim, which were 18.8% of his shots at the rim.
Winslow shot 75% on put-backs at the rim, which were 10.5% of his shots at the rim.
Just reinforcing the above point about finishing, Johnson really struggled here. Put-backs are defined as shots taken by a player within four seconds of getting an offensive rebound.

Free Throws and Shot distribution
Winslow: .63FTA/2PA, 43% of shots were at rim, 26.1% were non-rim 2s, 30.9% were 3 pointers
Johnson: .65FTA/2PA, 28.7% of shots were at rim, 41.5% were non-rim 2s, 29.7% were 3 pointers
Note that non-rim 2s is exactly what it says, so it includes hook shots, floaters, jumpers, anything not actually at the rim or beyond the three point line.
Johnson was a poor finisher, but everyone is better at the rim than they are away from it. In the NBA he’ll need to stop settling for mid-range shots. Johnson’s foul-drawing rate was basically the same as Winslow’s, but Johnson took far fewer shots at the rim. If he managed to get to the basket at the same rate that Winslow did, his FT rate would certainly be much higher. It’s nice that Johnson has a mid-range game, but that should be a fall-back option, not his primary method of scoring. Winslow’s shot distribution is much closer to the NBA’s ideal.

Passing
Winslow: 2.8 assists per40 pace adjusted, 1.15A/To, 13.2AST%, 14.2TOV% 22.9USG%
Johnson: 2.3 assists per40 pace adjusted, .77A/To, 11.6AST%, 14.7TOV% 26.6USG%
Winslow has a clear edge here, beating Johnson in every stat. His edge in assists is more impressive once you factor in that Johnson was his team’s #1 option while Winslow was Duke’s 3rd. Johnson had the ball in his hands much more but picked up fewer assists. Johnson’s A/To is kind of low for a wing prospect too.
Between these numbers and the unassisted rim FGs, we’re seeing a theme here. Winslow is a guy who you can give the ball to and expect to create for himself and for others, Johnson is not.

Rebounding
Winslow: 1.7 offensive rebounds per40 pace adjusted, 6.8 defensive rebounds, 5.4ORB%, 19.8DRB%
Johnson: 2.7 offensive rebounds per40 pace adjusted, 6.2 defensive rebounds, 8.9ORB%, 19.1DRB%
Here is Johnson’s biggest advantage, rebounding. I included defensive rebounding, but it’s a weaker predictor than offensive rebounding. Winslow actually had the highest DRB% at Duke this year, higher than Okafor. Johnson’s strength advantage shows up here, since he soundly beat Winslow on the offensive glass despite taking more of his shots farther away from the rim than him. We already saw that Johnson sucked at converting these opportunities into points himself, but he can just take the ball out rather than immediately go up for another shot.

Offensive stats
Winslow: 115.2ORTg, 473 Points Produced, .572TS%
Johnson: 111.1ORTg, 509 Points Produced, .551TS%
Johnson had the worst ORTg of Arizona’s top 7 players (actual rotation guys), with the next lowest guy having an ORTg 5.2 higher than Johnson’s. Winslow’s was 5th of Duke’s top 7 guys, with the next highest guy’s ORTg 4.7 ahead of him. Johnson being a less efficient scorer should be no surprise if you paid attention to the rest of this. ORTg is a team influenced stat though, so don’t take it as gospel comparing the two players.

Defensive stats
Winslow: 1.8 steals per40 pace adjusted, 1.1 blocks, 92.8DRTg
Johnson: 2.1 steals per40 pace adjusted, .5 blocks, 87.6DRTg
Johnson has higher steal rate but Winslow has the higher combined steals and blocks. Johnson has the longer arms so he gets a few more steals, but Winslow has the higher reach so he gets more blocks. Both Winslow and Johnson had the best DRTgs on their teams. Winslow had a pretty clear edge of 2.6 over the next best Dookie getting minutes, while Johnson was just .2 ahead of his teammate Rondae Hollis-Jefferson and .6 ahead of TJ McConnell. Again, don’t take DRTgs to mean that Johnson was a clearly better defender, as the stat is influenced by their teammates, and Johnson had a much stronger defensive supporting cast than Winslow.

Statistical models
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/projecting-the-top-50-players-in-the-2015-nba-draft-class/
Winslow 2nd with a SPM of .88, Johnson 3rd with a SPM of .68. That may not seem like much but it’s a significant drop off in SPM. Winlow’s SPM projection is better than Wiggins or Parker’s was.
Winslow 8.4% chance to be a star, 51.1% for starter, 17.7% for role player, 23% for bust
Johnson 6.8% chance to be a star, 42.4% for starter, 27.9% for role player, 29.6% for bust.
http://nyloncalculus.com/stats/layne-vashros-draft-projection-tools/
Winslow’s EWP is 9.4, tied for 3rd best in the draft. 38% Star, 22% Stud, 31% Starter, 7% Bench, 1% Bust.
Johnson’s EWP is 7.6, 5th best in the draft. 19% Star, 22% Stud, 43% Starter, 14% Bench, 2% Bust
http://apbr.org/metrics/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=8904&start=60#p24098
Winslow is first, Johnson is 4th, only the separation is just .02DEF.
http://apbr.org/metrics/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=8904&start=75#p24116
Winslow is 13th with a BPM of 10.4, Johnson is 15th with a BPM of 10.2.
http://apbr.org/metrics/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=8904&start=90#p24145
Johnson is 8th with a CPR of 5.6, Winslow is 10th with a CPR of 5.2
http://apbr.org/metrics/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=8904&start=90#p24185
Winslow is first with a score of 2.02, Johnson is 4th with a score of 1.66.
http://apbr.org/metrics/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=8904&start=165#p24369
Stanley Johnson is 8th with a PAWS-RSCI of 6.12, Winslow is 12th with a PAWS-RSCI of 5.95.
http://apbr.org/metrics/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=8904&start=195#p24401
Winslow is 4th with a score of 8.757, Johnson is 8th with a score of 7.84.

It's clear based on all of the evidence available to us that Winslow is the better prospect coming out of college. Similar size, similar shooters, but Winslow has a really massive advantage when it comes to making his own shot and getting looks for his teammates. Both players were defensive forces with high activity levels. Johnson's only real advantage is his rebounding, which is honestly meaningless to us since we have Drummond.

Given all of this information, I think that we made a mistake in drafting Johnson over Winslow. I'm hoping that everyone will just admit to this and not do that homer crap where you lie to yourself and everyone else. It's okay to say that the team seems to have made a mistake.

Johnson should be at least a solid player for us, but making sub-optimal moves, even if they're still good moves in isolation, is not how you get yourself a championship. However, we drafted Johnson over Winslow and there is no undoing that. Let's get this out of our collective system, try to move on and enjoy what we have.

[Paz]

Johnson is a stud. The Pistons are going to be VERY happy with him. He is a solid player with a good work ethic. The comparisons between the two players are very close. Honestly, it could go either way. Johnson was the right person to pick because he's who you picked. Winslow was better for the HEAT for the same reason. Honestly I think their differences are too negligible at this moment so just enjoy your great pick and be excited for your bright future... if you want.

[Todd3]

Interesting stuff. Always nice to see side by side comparisons of players. Stats in college really don't mean anything in the NBA though. So for you to be adamant that this is the definitive conclusion to which will be the better pro, and even say its ok now to admit they made a mistake is little ridiculous to be honest. Stan had access to this same data months before the draft. If it were that easy to just look at the stats and know who is going to be better in the NBA, he would not have made this 'mistake' as you call it.

College stats are now irrelevant. As of now every player 1 through 60 starts over from the same place with a fresh slate and 0s across the board in their NBA stat lines. When they start playing, we can start tracking their stats again. The cream will rise to the top through hard work and dedication on the court. It could be any one of the 60. Don't sell any of them short and don't proclaim any hall of famers just yet.

[DCintheD]

I've said it before and I'll say it again, for this team Stanley>Winslow

[GreekAlex]

Stats are fun but I wouldn't take them too seriously.

The sample sizes are way too small and there are many other factors that are hardly equal.

The level of skill from one player to the next as far as teammates and competition for these 2 prospects is way too inconsistent to draw any conclusions.

I'd also venture to say if you threw out a game or 2 out of the equation for either player it would skew the stats dramatically.

Another factor not measured by stats is whats between their ears. I don't think enough weight is put into their personalities and social make up when interacting with coaches and teammates in predicting a players potential success.

[kellmellus50]

Apples and oranges what was not measured is what in the player head Stanley wins hands down

[princeofpalace]

These points have been broken down in various threads but thanks for consolidating them. On talent, Winslow is a better prospect and I think Booker is as well.

However, at the end of the day, it sounds like SVG took Johnson because of his mentality/desire to be great- whether that translates into star level production remains to be seen. But I can see why he wanted somebody with that desire since it appears that neither KCP/Drummond have that fire inside them.

If SVG is correct in that Johnson is willing to do whatever it takes to win then Id expect for Johnson to put work into his shot, get leaner and work on his explosion and finishing. At the end of the day, I think Johnson becomes the type of role playing glue guy that most fans love, which is ok but not the type of upside I wanted at 8.

[tmorgan]

One thing I think is fair to say: SVG is always prepared. So, it's one of two things here...

1) he let the workouts and interviews influence him unduly and chose Stanley based in that. This would be a mistake.

2). He looked at fit (size) and need and perhaps chemistry and chose the guy the team needed. This would NOT be a mistake.

I wanted Winslow, but I'm willing to trust SVG on this. I will, however, be watching both players closely.

[Mr. Krabs]

Stanley has more tools in offense. Justise has no mid-range or off the dribble shooting ability. His offense is mostly slashing and finishing or spot up threes. Stanley is the better shooter. He can create, face up, shoot the 2-3 dribble mid-range shot, spot up. Also one thing he developed this year which has became his go-to move was the mid range floater. He has been killing with 2-3 dribble going to 2nd base and shooting a floater. His inside game is bad, he can get to the rim but doesn't have the touch that Justise has. Their roles in their particular teams were also very different. Justise was the 3rd option in Duke while Stanley was the 1st option. Arizona also had spacing issues due to their personnel. In transition both players are very good but Stanley running the floor is a freight train. He has the handles to go coast to coast. Justise has a bit better speed and handles but his frame isnt as scary as Stanley's.

I see Justise as an NBA 2 guard, small ball 3. While Stanley can play 2-3 in NBA level and small ball 4.

This is basically KCP vs. McLemore.

[Laimbeer]

Nice OP.

Winslow is the superior eyeball and statistical prospect by most accounts. SVG apparently felt Johnson's intangibles more than covered the gap. But, yeah, posters here who suddenly like the Johnson pick just because we made it are being disingenuous.

[hoophabit]

To all the Winslow supporters: The draft is over guys. In a couple of years we'll be able to be pretty sure which was the correct pick, or if it was essentially a wash. Time to let it go.

[Blkbrd671]

To all the Winslow supporters: The draft is over guys. In a couple of years we'll be able to be pretty sure which was the correct pick, or if it was essentially a wash. Time to let it go.

Lol this, don't understand these threads as no one will ever end up right.


Detroit vs Everybody

[ImHeisenberg]

These raw stats still neglected the essential truths that these two players were in vastly different situations. Winslow played with the #3 pick and another first round selection. He was the 3rd option on offense. SJ was the #1 option on offense, with a team that had poor spacing. I remember watching an Arizona game and thinking, "We're never going to have a shot at this kid, he's too good!" At that point, I think SJ was #3 on most mock drafts. And, I remember him grabbing some offensive rebounds and trying to go back up over 3 or 4 defenders. He made some of them, but they were outrageously difficult shots.

I think SJ tried to draw too many fouls, which hurt his finishing percentage. This might be a continual issue in the NBA, as Stuckey and Monroe were always trying to draw fouls, to limited success.

Interesting enough- the context of Winslow and Johnson's roles may continue into the NBA. Winslow goes to Miami, where his offense will be subjugated by Wade, Dragic and Bosh. Whereas in Detroit, they may end up starting Johnson and requiring his offense and defense from the start.

Then there's the one key facet that isn't caught in a box score- personality. Johnson may not be an all-timer, but I have little doubt that whatever ceiling he has, he's going to work hard to reach it. I can't say that about Winslow.

[Scout Taron]

Lol what a joke. Do you watch college ball, man? You can't use ONLY stats to judge a player in college. The systems and personnel are so varied it's insane. You have to look at skills that players have, and use stats to complement that and determine how good they really are at those skills. BUT, you still need to take context into everything.

Like, if you legitimately believe that Winslow is a better creator than Johnson based on that stat you saw, it just shows that you don't watch these players. By those stats, a straight line drive off a close out is the same as a shot created on a set defense. Arizona's defense had the worst spacing of maybe any team I've ever seen in college. Point guard shot 33%, small forward shot 32%. power forward shot 20%, and the center didn't shoot any. Arizona's offense was based on having super tall athletes pack into the paint and dominate the boards, putbacks, posting up and finishing on smaller teams. If you WATCH tape, Stanley Johnson can beat his man. But once he got there, there are 3-4 people packed into the paint, because why not? Arizona can't punish you. He couldn't get a good look at the rim for himself because there was nothing there, and to compensate he was very efficient from midrange. Comparing him to Rondae-Hollis Jefferson is a joke, because Jefferson played two positions down and was never asked to create...pretty much ever.

By comparison, Winslow was a secondary piece in an offense that contained one of the most dominant low post forces in modern hoops history, and shooters EVERYWHERE. And yet....he still made it apparent that he couldn't create his own offense.

It is not just the Pistons who think Winslow was overrated by the media based on the context of his situation. You know. As the NBA draft showed you. This draft fall wasn't like other falls. Usually it's because they question their love of the game, or are injured, or aren't athletic enough to play in the NBA. None of these are true for Winslow. He's just overrated because people only watch in March and he got hot and shot like 7/14 from three in the tournament.

[princeofpalace]

OMG, this "you dont watch college ball" narrative needs to die particularly when its coming from ppl who rarely contributed in draft threads. Notanoob has proven himself through his many draft related posts- he didn't wait until June to start caring about college players

[Scout Taron]

OMG, this "you dont watch college ball" narrative needs to die particularly when its coming from ppl who rarely contributed in draft threads

I watch a ton of college ball...And just because I didn't post on this forum over the past year, it doesn't mean I didn't.

People trying to argue that Winslow is a way better prospect based on pure stats (which has been done a lot here, and which aren't even much better! Their TS% is separated by 1%) is just insanely ignorant in my opinion and shows a huge misunderstanding of how you analyze players and project them to the NBA at the very least.

[Blkbrd671]

This is basically KCP vs. McLemore.

Knight vs kemba


Detroit vs Everybody

[Blkbrd671]

OMG, this "you dont watch college ball" narrative needs to die particularly when its coming from ppl who rarely contributed in draft threads. Notanoob has proven himself through his many draft related posts- he didn't wait until June to start caring about college players

What does that have to do whether a point is valid or not ?


Detroit vs Everybody

[DETermination]

I like both players but I think SVG got it right and believe Stanley is the best player for this team. I do think Justise is just a little small for the sf position and might be better off at sg. I'm very happy with Stanley, he is a winner and a guy who can lead a team. He has a killer instinct and is someone you can count on to hit clutch free throws at the end of games. He played center in high school and knows how to do the dirty work and is a good rebounder for his position, he also played point guard and learned how to handle the ball and is definitely capable of running pick n rolls and creating his own shot. What I love most about him other than his attitude is his size, watching him bully his way to the basket will be fun and hopefully he gets better at finishing with more spacing here than in college. Before the ncaa tournament Stanley was a top 5 pick in pretty much every mock draft and Justice was around the 7-10 spots. I think if this draft happend before the ncaa tournament we would be here talking about what a steal we just got, but because Justise played for duke his stock went up and for some reason everyone acted like he was some superior prospect when its not really true. They are both good players and will both probably have a good nba career but I'm glad we went with Stanley.

[pistontr]

"It's clear based on all of the evidence available to us that Winslow is the better prospect coming out of college. Similar size, similar shooters, but Winslow has a really massive advantage when it comes to making his own shot and getting looks for his teammates. Both players were defensive forces with high activity levels. Johnson's only real advantage is his rebounding, which is honestly meaningless to us since we have Drummond"

that's it.