2022 NBA Draft

[Chuck Everett]

Patrick Baldwin should just declare now. Dude falling to the 2nd round at this point, my goodness.

is going to Milwaukee the oddest school decision ever? tbh in general I don't think players should be playing on the same teams their dad is the coach, always creates weird locker room dynamics (see the Rivers)...and not only is he ruining his own stock, but his dad's stock as a coach too...he has absolutely no clue what to do with his own kid.

Somebody said he can shoot, but these numbers against Horizon league teams say otherwise. He's objectively playing bad. If he wasn't a top recruit, no one would be calling him an NBA player. He has been horrible across the board.

[CptCrunch]

My biggest question mark when it comes to Chet is can he do these things against NBA size, strength, and athleticism.

Its one thing to put up these kinds of numbers against San Diego. Its when he has gone up against the Texas, Duke, UCLA, and Alabama. Its not nearly the same kind of level of impact. Dont get me wrong Im not saying he is all bad in those games he played good in most of them. And I think a lot of people including myself have the question, what happens when he takes that next step of quality of opposition. Then the other question is, how long until he can put good weight on, also how much good weight can he put on with his frame.

Also to be clear, this isnt me saying he shouldn't be a lock for a top 5 pick. I definitely think he is. Just pointing out why there are some questions with him and why sadly the vast majority of WCC games wont give us a better answer to these questions. Because of just the lack of size and athleticism in that conference and that is the biggest question with Chet. Can he show the high level of offensive versatility and hold his own in the paint against legit big men with size and athleticism.

Code: Select all

|Rank     | GameScore|   PTS|   TRB|   AST|   BLK|   STL|   TOV|    PF| FTPct| Pct2Pt| Pct3Pt|
|:--------|---------:|-----:|-----:|-----:|-----:|-----:|-----:|-----:|-----:|------:|------:|
|Top20    |     8.920|  9.60| 8.000| 1.000| 3.200| 0.200| 1.600| 3.000| 0.636|  0.696|  0.214|
|Top50    |    19.800| 19.00| 9.333| 1.333| 4.333| 0.667| 1.333| 3.000| 0.727|  0.824|  0.583|
|BadTeams |    16.325| 15.25| 9.083| 2.417| 3.083| 0.583| 2.417| 1.667| 0.766|  0.750|  0.528

Just a simple showcase, his production tanks against top 20 teams (current rank based on KenPom, not rank at time of play). "Bad teams" are any teams rank > 50. Gonzaga has a lot of bottom feeders.

Chet's play does not instill confidence in me. Let alone his ability to translate with his frame. Here is a plot of basically the same data, he struggles against better competition. It is difficult for me to justify drafting him #1 based on his play against top P5 teams.

Game Score (GmSc) is an imperfect metric, but it serves as a reasonable aggregate summary of counting stats much like PER in this case.

Where do you get these plots?

I'd like to see them for Jabari, Ivey, Paolo, Davis

I imagine it's normal to have less counting stats against good teams. I'd be interested in scoring efficiency and rebounding % numbers though

As promised, here are the other prospects in contention for top 5. Only one missing is probably Griffin Jr.

1/ Age is at draft, NOT age today.

2/ The 'average' true OAD should be 19.6 years old at draft. Any freshman above that is old, below that young for draft.

3/ The shaded bands are 95% based on the sampling distribution. Davis rises to the occasion, Chet doesn't play well against better competition.

4/ I know Game Score is not a good metric. We are just trying to measure box score counting stats for convenience here.



(Image shrunk by bboard, right click open image in new window to full sized version)

[peZt]

Chet Holmgren just looks really good to me, having one of the best college seasons ever. What are some of the reasons people don't see him as a top 3 guy?

My biggest question mark when it comes to Chet is can he do these things against NBA size, strength, and athleticism.

Its one thing to put up these kinds of numbers against San Diego. Its when he has gone up against the Texas, Duke, UCLA, and Alabama. Its not nearly the same kind of level of impact. Dont get me wrong Im not saying he is all bad in those games he played good in most of them. And I think a lot of people including myself have the question, what happens when he takes that next step of quality of opposition. Then the other question is, how long until he can put good weight on, also how much good weight can he put on with his frame.

Also to be clear, this isnt me saying he shouldn't be a lock for a top 5 pick. I definitely think he is. Just pointing out why there are some questions with him and why sadly the vast majority of WCC games wont give us a better answer to these questions. Because of just the lack of size and athleticism in that conference and that is the biggest question with Chet. Can he show the high level of offensive versatility and hold his own in the paint against legit big men with size and athleticism.

Code: Select all

|Rank     | GameScore|   PTS|   TRB|   AST|   BLK|   STL|   TOV|    PF| FTPct| Pct2Pt| Pct3Pt|
|:--------|---------:|-----:|-----:|-----:|-----:|-----:|-----:|-----:|-----:|------:|------:|
|Top20    |     8.920|  9.60| 8.000| 1.000| 3.200| 0.200| 1.600| 3.000| 0.636|  0.696|  0.214|
|Top50    |    19.800| 19.00| 9.333| 1.333| 4.333| 0.667| 1.333| 3.000| 0.727|  0.824|  0.583|
|BadTeams |    16.325| 15.25| 9.083| 2.417| 3.083| 0.583| 2.417| 1.667| 0.766|  0.750|  0.528

Just a simple showcase, his production tanks against top 20 teams (current rank based on KenPom, not rank at time of play). "Bad teams" are any teams rank > 50. Gonzaga has a lot of bottom feeders.

Chet's play does not instill confidence in me. Let alone his ability to translate with his frame. Here is a plot of basically the same data, he struggles against better competition. It is difficult for me to justify drafting him #1 based on his play against top P5 teams.



Game Score (GmSc) is an imperfect metric, but it serves as a reasonable aggregate summary of counting stats much like PER in this case.

The games against Top 20 teams were early on in the season. He has been steadily improving ever since. He also was pretty good against Duke and UCLA. I don't think with a guy like Holmgren who's obviously getting better with every game he is playing you can hold his play from the beginning of the season against him.
Lets see how he plays in the tournament

[Duke4life831]

My biggest question mark when it comes to Chet is can he do these things against NBA size, strength, and athleticism.

Its one thing to put up these kinds of numbers against San Diego. Its when he has gone up against the Texas, Duke, UCLA, and Alabama. Its not nearly the same kind of level of impact. Dont get me wrong Im not saying he is all bad in those games he played good in most of them. And I think a lot of people including myself have the question, what happens when he takes that next step of quality of opposition. Then the other question is, how long until he can put good weight on, also how much good weight can he put on with his frame.

Also to be clear, this isnt me saying he shouldn't be a lock for a top 5 pick. I definitely think he is. Just pointing out why there are some questions with him and why sadly the vast majority of WCC games wont give us a better answer to these questions. Because of just the lack of size and athleticism in that conference and that is the biggest question with Chet. Can he show the high level of offensive versatility and hold his own in the paint against legit big men with size and athleticism.

Code: Select all

|Rank     | GameScore|   PTS|   TRB|   AST|   BLK|   STL|   TOV|    PF| FTPct| Pct2Pt| Pct3Pt|
|:--------|---------:|-----:|-----:|-----:|-----:|-----:|-----:|-----:|-----:|------:|------:|
|Top20    |     8.920|  9.60| 8.000| 1.000| 3.200| 0.200| 1.600| 3.000| 0.636|  0.696|  0.214|
|Top50    |    19.800| 19.00| 9.333| 1.333| 4.333| 0.667| 1.333| 3.000| 0.727|  0.824|  0.583|
|BadTeams |    16.325| 15.25| 9.083| 2.417| 3.083| 0.583| 2.417| 1.667| 0.766|  0.750|  0.528

Just a simple showcase, his production tanks against top 20 teams (current rank based on KenPom, not rank at time of play). "Bad teams" are any teams rank > 50. Gonzaga has a lot of bottom feeders.

Chet's play does not instill confidence in me. Let alone his ability to translate with his frame. Here is a plot of basically the same data, he struggles against better competition. It is difficult for me to justify drafting him #1 based on his play against top P5 teams.



Game Score (GmSc) is an imperfect metric, but it serves as a reasonable aggregate summary of counting stats much like PER in this case.

The games against Top 20 teams were early on in the season. He has been steadily improving ever since. He also was pretty good against Duke and UCLA. I don't think with a guy like Holmgren who's obviously getting better with every game he is playing you can hold his play from the beginning of the season against him.
Lets see how he plays in the tournament

Agreed, but the question that has to be asked is. Is he playing better because he is more comfortable and playing up to his potential. Or is he playing better because he is going up against teams that have starting front courts of guys that are 6'7 and 6'8 and wont ever sniff the NBA?

[jman3134]

BYU is fairly big. They aren't complete slouches. I think he is just getting more comfortable adjusting to the level jump. Unique player, which might get him the #1 spot depending on who is selecting there.

[clyde21]

not fud against Paolo or Chet, but if Jabari doesn't go #1 some GM is overthinking it.

[Duke4life831]

BYU is fairly big. They aren't complete slouches. I think he is just getting more comfortable adjusting to the level jump. Unique player, which might get him the #1 spot depending on who is selecting there.

BYU is pretty tiny. Lohner is the biggest guy that gets consistent minutes and he's a 6'7 guy who was a perimeter player in high school. Traore is a strong dude, but he's 6'6 at best.

And that's the thing, I don't think anyone questions what Chet can do against players like that. The question is how much of his game translates against guys with NBA front court size and athleticism.

The WCC year in and year out, tends to be a small perimeter oriented conference.

[zimpy27]

Code: Select all

|Rank     | GameScore|   PTS|   TRB|   AST|   BLK|   STL|   TOV|    PF| FTPct| Pct2Pt| Pct3Pt|
|:--------|---------:|-----:|-----:|-----:|-----:|-----:|-----:|-----:|-----:|------:|------:|
|Top20    |     8.920|  9.60| 8.000| 1.000| 3.200| 0.200| 1.600| 3.000| 0.636|  0.696|  0.214|
|Top50    |    19.800| 19.00| 9.333| 1.333| 4.333| 0.667| 1.333| 3.000| 0.727|  0.824|  0.583|
|BadTeams |    16.325| 15.25| 9.083| 2.417| 3.083| 0.583| 2.417| 1.667| 0.766|  0.750|  0.528

Just a simple showcase, his production tanks against top 20 teams (current rank based on KenPom, not rank at time of play). "Bad teams" are any teams rank > 50. Gonzaga has a lot of bottom feeders.

Chet's play does not instill confidence in me. Let alone his ability to translate with his frame. Here is a plot of basically the same data, he struggles against better competition. It is difficult for me to justify drafting him #1 based on his play against top P5 teams.

Game Score (GmSc) is an imperfect metric, but it serves as a reasonable aggregate summary of counting stats much like PER in this case.

Where do you get these plots?

I'd like to see them for Jabari, Ivey, Paolo, Davis

I imagine it's normal to have less counting stats against good teams. I'd be interested in scoring efficiency and rebounding % numbers though

As promised, here are the other prospects in contention for top 5. Only one missing is probably Griffin Jr.

1/ Age is at draft, NOT age today.

2/ The 'average' true OAD should be 19.6 years old at draft. Any freshman above that is old, below that young for draft.

3/ The shaded bands are 95% based on the sampling distribution. Davis rises to the occasion, Chet doesn't play well against better competition.

4/ I know Game Score is not a good metric. We are just trying to measure box score counting stats for convenience here.



(Image shrunk by bboard, right click open image in new window to full sized version)

That's awesome! Thank you for compiling that.

Yeah I asked for Davis because I'm quite high on him (in my top 5) because how he performs in big games and because he seems to be a guy with very few weaknesses.

[CptCrunch]

If you value 'feels', draft Paolo. Paolo just looks like a NBA star to me. No idea if he will play SF or PF, no idea if he can play PF on defense, or if he is a dreaded 'tweener'. No idea if he can initiate offense, but he shows signs. Just draft and pray he develops well.

If you value talent and skillset, draft Chet. Chet is no doubt the most talented out of the 3. His criticism is translatability, plays in a weak conference, played poorly against legit NBA size, most suspect frame for a top pick in decades.

If you draft based on fear (ie why Chet, Paolo suck), default to Jabari. Jabari is the most well rounded with a perfect predefined role from day 1. Hence some people's criticism that will never be anything more than a good third option kind of player.

[clyde21]

Code: Select all

|Rank     | GameScore|   PTS|   TRB|   AST|   BLK|   STL|   TOV|    PF| FTPct| Pct2Pt| Pct3Pt|
|:--------|---------:|-----:|-----:|-----:|-----:|-----:|-----:|-----:|-----:|------:|------:|
|Top20    |     8.920|  9.60| 8.000| 1.000| 3.200| 0.200| 1.600| 3.000| 0.636|  0.696|  0.214|
|Top50    |    19.800| 19.00| 9.333| 1.333| 4.333| 0.667| 1.333| 3.000| 0.727|  0.824|  0.583|
|BadTeams |    16.325| 15.25| 9.083| 2.417| 3.083| 0.583| 2.417| 1.667| 0.766|  0.750|  0.528

Just a simple showcase, his production tanks against top 20 teams (current rank based on KenPom, not rank at time of play). "Bad teams" are any teams rank > 50. Gonzaga has a lot of bottom feeders.

Chet's play does not instill confidence in me. Let alone his ability to translate with his frame. Here is a plot of basically the same data, he struggles against better competition. It is difficult for me to justify drafting him #1 based on his play against top P5 teams.

Game Score (GmSc) is an imperfect metric, but it serves as a reasonable aggregate summary of counting stats much like PER in this case.

Where do you get these plots?

I'd like to see them for Jabari, Ivey, Paolo, Davis

I imagine it's normal to have less counting stats against good teams. I'd be interested in scoring efficiency and rebounding % numbers though

As promised, here are the other prospects in contention for top 5. Only one missing is probably Griffin Jr.

1/ Age is at draft, NOT age today.

2/ The 'average' true OAD should be 19.6 years old at draft. Any freshman above that is old, below that young for draft.

3/ The shaded bands are 95% based on the sampling distribution. Davis rises to the occasion, Chet doesn't play well against better competition.

4/ I know Game Score is not a good metric. We are just trying to measure box score counting stats for convenience here.



(Image shrunk by bboard, right click open image in new window to full sized version)

appreciate the effort on this but I am not sure what these are telling us? why did you decide to go with GmSc as your metric?

[Hal14]

Baldwin might be saved by Michael Porter's example and also a few teams (currently, could change in either direction) having multiple firsts. Like if Memphis has 3 firsts and their core is Morant-Bane-Brooks-Zaire-JJJ that's a good fit for a tall 3. Also everyone needs big wings who can shoot. I think his floor is probably mid 20s.

Can he shoot, though?

Also, sure "big wings who can shoot" sounds nice and all. But how many dudes in the league right now are 6'9" or taller and the primary value they bring to the table is shooting (not very good at anything else) and they're actually good NBA players who are performing at the level of a top 20 pick? Porter Jr....Kuzma..any others? I guess maybe Dario Saric falls into that bucket.

It seems to me like most of the guys who are legit knock down shooters in the NBA who are starting (or a top reserve), really good shooters who don't do much else besides shooting....for the most part, these players either:

a) are 6'7" or shorter. for whatever reason, it seems like good NBA players who are 6'8" or taller, they're good at other things too - not just shooting

Or

b) these (for the most part) are guys who had large sample sizes of elite shooting prior to the NBA. just look at the shooting numbers that guys like Garrison Mathews, Aaron Nesmith, Sam Hauser, Duncan Robinson and Pat Connaughton put up in college - and most of these guys aren't even getting minutes in the NBA right now..

Baldwin doesn't fall into either of those 2 buckets..

[CptCrunch]

a) are 6'7" or shorter. for whatever reason, it seems like good NBA players who are 6'8" or taller, they're good at other things too - not just shooting

That's because shooting is a function of talent and work ethic. Suppose for a fixed subset of population, a proportion p becomes elite shooters, meaning that height is independent of one's shooting ability.

The number of people at great heights decrease exponentially with height (actually O(c^n) in Landau notation).

Roughly 1 out of 400 people is 6'5" or taller in the US.
1 in 1455 for 6'6"
1 in 6285 for 6'7"
1 in 31574 for 6'8"
1 in 184756 for 6'9"

Let's now compare 6'7" with 6'9", there are 29x more individuals who are 6'7" than 6'9". The probability simply works against super tall elite shooters like Kevin Durant.

This is why NBA elite shooters are shorter because there are more shorter players grinding their jumpshots in the gym in America/Europe/Asia. Once in a while, one of them enters the NBA when they hit the right combo with genetic luck, work ethic and player developmental support (via school/club coaching).

[azcatz11]

not fud against Paolo or Chet, but if Jabari doesn't go #1 some GM is overthinking it.

Do you agree with my comp of Jabari that he's an ultra rich mans' Boris Diaw or am I way off?

[jman3134]

BYU is fairly big. They aren't complete slouches. I think he is just getting more comfortable adjusting to the level jump. Unique player, which might get him the #1 spot depending on who is selecting there.

BYU is pretty tiny. Lohner is the biggest guy that gets consistent minutes and he's a 6'7 guy who was a perimeter player in high school. Traore is a strong dude, but he's 6'6 at best.

And that's the thing, I don't think anyone questions what Chet can do against players like that. The question is how much of his game translates against guys with NBA front court size and athleticism.

The WCC year in and year out, tends to be a small perimeter oriented conference.

Shocked you are right on Traore. He plays much bigger than his size. Still is quite a force inside.

St Mary's has a couple of 6'10 guys. Point being, it really isn't the conference. The NBA is always going to be a question mark because of its collection of unicorn bigs.

[clyde21]

not fud against Paolo or Chet, but if Jabari doesn't go #1 some GM is overthinking it.

Do you agree with my comp of Jabari that he's an ultra rich mans' Boris Diaw or am I way off?

i don't see it, to me he's more of a straight 4 Jay T.

[Duke4life831]

BYU is fairly big. They aren't complete slouches. I think he is just getting more comfortable adjusting to the level jump. Unique player, which might get him the #1 spot depending on who is selecting there.

BYU is pretty tiny. Lohner is the biggest guy that gets consistent minutes and he's a 6'7 guy who was a perimeter player in high school. Traore is a strong dude, but he's 6'6 at best.

And that's the thing, I don't think anyone questions what Chet can do against players like that. The question is how much of his game translates against guys with NBA front court size and athleticism.

The WCC year in and year out, tends to be a small perimeter oriented conference.

Shocked you are right on Traore. He plays much bigger than his size. Still is quite a force inside.

St Mary's has a couple of 6'10 guys. Point being, it really isn't the conference. The NBA is always going to be a question mark because of its collection of unicorn bigs.

The thing Im trying to say is, the biggest question mark is how much does Chet's game translate against NBA size and athleticism. Its very rare for Chet to go up against legit size in the WCC. Most games he is going against teams like BYU and stuff.

Now flip that to say guys like Paolo and Jabari. Ill go with Paolo because its easier to go off the top of my head, but all the stuff I say for Paolo can be said for Jabari (probably even more so for Jabari because the SEC is a stronger conference overall this year).

Like Paolo may not be going up against future pro big men every night. But he is seeing guys like an Armando Bacot (UNC), Malik Williams (Lou), PJ Hall (Clem), Swider and Edwards (Syr), the never ending list of 6'9+ bigs FSU throws out and so on. Again not saying these are all future NBA bigs, but he's seeing legit size every game pretty much and most of them were top 100 recruits coming out of high school. Again same goes for Jabari, game in game out they're seeing legit size in front courts and/or legit big athletic wings. For instance Paolo against UNC, he say Bacot (6'10 legit big), Manek (6'9 5th year forward), then a 6'7 Leaky Black who is a great athlete for a big wing.

And what Im saying is this is what we miss with Chet in the WCC. And to be crystal clear, this isnt me saying Chet is no good and not worth a top pick. I dont see how Chet cant be a top 5 pick. All Im saying is that is the big question mark with Chet. We know he has the skills and can show them off against physical lower tier players. Can he be that versatile guy against legit size. That is his question mark. Just like I think Paolo's legit question mark is can he be an impactful defender. And I doubt we can get that question answered prior the the draft because he gets to play alongside an elite big in Mark Williams.

[Duke4life831]

not fud against Paolo or Chet, but if Jabari doesn't go #1 some GM is overthinking it.

I wont lie Im starting to write in Paolo as my #1 with a more and more permanent ink.

[clyde21]

not fud against Paolo or Chet, but if Jabari doesn't go #1 some GM is overthinking it.

I wont lie Im starting to write in Paolo as my #1 with a more and more permanent ink.

disagreements make this more fun

[pad300]

not fud against Paolo or Chet, but if Jabari doesn't go #1 some GM is overthinking it.

Do you agree with my comp of Jabari that he's an ultra rich mans' Boris Diaw or am I way off?

I think you're way off. Young Boris was (IMO) a much better athlete (the max'ing a vertical jump test in flip flops thing), and I don't see the vision that Boris had in Jabari. Jabari has a much better jumper though.

[The-Power]

What's your take on Dalen Terry? Part of me is intrigued by his glue-guy potential, and part of me wonders if his problematic scoring game might be too much to overcome at the next level.