Analysis: Noel brings tremendous risk

[Eoghan]

Should be noted that Noel was 216 when he entered college. Still would make him too light to be a center.

Garnett was 217 when he was drafted in '95.

[CBB_Fan]

Should be noted that Noel was 216 when he entered college. Still would make him too light to be a center.

Garnett was 217 when he was drafted in '95.

And Garnett is better at literally everything and is still capable of being pushed around by bigger players. Noel has no jump shot, can't shoot free throws, has none of Garnett's passing game, and is coming off a major injury. Everything that allows Garnett to play despite his slight build is something lacking in Noel's game.

[Jazzfan12]

Should be noted that Noel was 216 when he entered college. Still would make him too light to be a center.

Garnett was 217 when he was drafted in '95.

And Garnett is better at literally everything and is still capable of being pushed around by bigger players. Noel has no jump shot, can't shoot free throws, has none of Garnett's passing game, and is coming off a major injury. Everything that allows Garnett to play despite his slight build is something lacking in Noel's game.

Larry Sanders came into the league at 220 and is doing great as a center in the NBA, same with Noah and Chandler.

[CBB_Fan]

Larry Sanders came into the league at 220 and is doing great as a center in the NBA, same with Noah and Chandler.

Alright, let's compare those guys to Noel. First, none of them had major injuries coming out of college. Secondly, none of those guys were considered for a #1 overall pick. Now, look at their best year stats:

Larry Sanders
PPG FG% 3FG% FT% APG RPG BPG SPG
14.4 53.4 25.0 64.1 1.0 9.1 2.6 0.7

Joakim Noah
PPG FG% 3FG% FT% APG RPG BPG SPG
14.2 62.7 0.0 73.3 2.1 7.1 2.4 1.1

Tyson Chandler
PPG FG% 3FG% FT% APG RPG BPG SPG
10.4 63.8 0.0 69.4 0.9 10.6 1.2 0.6

Nerlens Noel
PPG FG% 3FG% FT% APG RPG BPG SPG
10.5 59.0 0.0 52.9 1.6 9.5 4.4 2.1

First, let's again recognize that all of those guys had to get up to 235ish to compete in the NBA. Noel is 206 right now. Secondly, let's note that they ALL can shoot significantly better than him. All have either higher PPG or FG%. Essentially all are much better players on offense.

Noel would more offensively limited than those players, and none of them were even slightly considered for the #1 overall pick. Noel is Ibaka minus the built body and jumpshot, plus injuries. He'd be the most offensively challenged #1 pick ever. I'm completely serious about that. For every Chandler or Noah, there are many more Kwame Browns, and Noel would be an absolute liability on offense and probably a liability on defense until he gets his weight up.

Here are your #1 picks that averaged less than 10 PPG for a career:

1950 Chuck Share (6'11, 235)
1951 Gene Melchiorre DNP
1952 Mark Workman (6'9, 215)
1955 Dick Ricketts (6'7. 215)
1956 Si Green (6'2, 185)
1957 Hot Rod Hundley (6'4, 185)
1964 Jim Barnes (6'8, 210)
1972 LaRue Martin (6'11, 208)
1977 Kent Benson (6'10, 235)
1989 Pervis Ellison (6'9, 210)
1998 Michael Olowokandi (7'0, 269)
2001 Kwame Brown (6'11, 243)

Notice something? Almost all those guys are big men. And all of them except for Kwame Brown had significantly more offense in college than Noel did.

[No-Man]

Neither Chandler or Sanders are better players on offense than Noel, leave alone the much better.

Noel has actually a nice touch, better than Noah at his age, he's a good passer too.

Noel can be a better version of Sanders, a worse version of KG.

[willywazza]

As long as he doesn't become Keon Clark.

[Indomitable]

Chandler isn't a bust and was an elite player

I would like to hear your argument on how Chandler WAS an elite player, and I still maintain that he is a bust to the Bulls.

Why is Chandler not in the thin, raw big men analysis when he was so thin he came into the league as a SF

I am only comparing Noel to those players in terms of their physical attributes and acknowledged that Noel has more potential than those players, but many scouts consider Noel as a role player at best offensively in the future, like all of those players mentioned. And one thing I found particularly interesting about Tyrus Thomas,again from DraftExpress :

Thomas is generally an extremely aggressive player, noticeably being more concerned with helping his team get wins rather than get on a highlight reel. He is a humble and very intelligent player both on and off the court, and is said to be an excellent student in the classroom and a highly coachable player in LSU’s practices.

It would not be a stretch to say that he has a higher ceiling that any other player in this draft class considering his physical attributes and how long he’s been playing basketball, but his intangibles lead you to believe that he also has what it takes to actually realize that potential as well.



Either DraftExpress is wrong, or they asked the wrong people for Tyrus Thomas (they used 'is said to be'), or Tyrus changed a lot after entering the league. Personally, I believe it is the latter of the three which is the biggest reason, since there is such a gigantic dropoff in the BBIQ level as per the site and the reality. Any normal person wouldn't have mistaken Tyrus Thomas and "a very intelligent player". To add, NBADraft.net gave him an 8/10 for his intangibles.

Also where is your evidence on Noel being intelligent?

Why did you limit your analysis to top 2

Noel is a guaranteed top 2 pick, which puts him in the group.

Tysons was not a bust in Chicago. He got moved because we signed Wallace. It was a huge mistake.

But I agree about Noels. I hate his body. He will struggle to gain weight.

[Gideon]

Here are your #1 picks that averaged less than 10 PPG for a career:

1950 Chuck Share (6'11, 235)
1951 Gene Melchiorre DNP
1952 Mark Workman (6'9, 215)
1955 Dick Ricketts (6'7. 215)
1956 Si Green (6'2, 185)
1957 Hot Rod Hundley (6'4, 185)
1964 Jim Barnes (6'8, 210)
1972 LaRue Martin (6'11, 208)
1977 Kent Benson (6'10, 235)
1989 Pervis Ellison (6'9, 210)
1998 Michael Olowokandi (7'0, 269)
2001 Kwame Brown (6'11, 243)

Notice something? Almost all those guys are big men. And all of them except for Kwame Brown had significantly more offense in college than Noel did.

The vast majority of #1 picks, period, are big men. Only 8 guards have gone #1 since 1970 (so 42 years), and since teams lean towards big men with top picks some of those guards have really been considered sure things. Still, John Lucas, Doug Collins, Austin Carr, and even John Wall (so far) haven't really had the sort of impact you look for in a #1 pick.

Also, if we're comparing apples to apples, I think we should be looking at the freshmen seasons of those big men to compare them to Noel, not their junior or senior years when they were 21 or 22. Olowokandi averaged 4-3 as a freshman. Ellison (who was actually a 20-10 guy one year and had lots of potential before injuries derailed his career) averaged 13-8 as a freshman. Kent Benson averaged 9-8 as a freshman.

Noel had a pretty good two-thirds of a season at Kentucky. He put together some nice all-around numbers and maintained efficiency, shooting .590 from the field and averaging just under 2 TOpg. I really have no problem with 10.5-9.5-1.6-4.4-2.1 in 32 mpg for the first two-thirds of his freshman year.

I understand the injury concerns about Noel, but I'm not medically knowledgeable enough to have an informed opinion about whether those concerns are significant enough that they should drop him in the draft or not... I just wouldn't know. However, I'm not on board with the concerns about him as a player. He has shown the ability to have a major impact on defense and the boards, and that should translate well to the NBA. I feel like his floor (assuming no serious injury issues) is basically Marcus Camby, and that's pretty damn good. I actually really dig players like Camby, Noah, and Sanders who are tenacious on D and don't need the ball in their hands to have a big impact. Every team could benefit from a guy like that imo.

[Takuya Kimura]

Tysons was not a bust in Chicago. He got moved because we signed Wallace. It was a huge mistake.

I admit I didn't watch basketball back then, but looking from statistics Tyson Chandler does not look like he was worthy of a 1st overall pick, he had good per 36 stats but apparently foul trouble stopped him from playing even 30 minutes a game, he also had a significantly lower FG% than his recent seasons.Even in his Hornets days when I started watching him he wasn't that spectacular either.

[Apollo64]

I think it's up to the doctors to ultimately decide how much risk Noel carries with him.

[Gideon]

Tysons was not a bust in Chicago. He got moved because we signed Wallace. It was a huge mistake.

I admit I didn't watch basketball back then, but looking from statistics Tyson Chandler does not look like he was worthy of a 1st overall pick, he had good per 36 stats but apparently foul trouble stopped him from playing even 30 minutes a game, he also had a significantly lower FG% than his recent seasons.Even in his Hornets days when I started watching him he wasn't that spectacular either.

That was a really weak draft year... even during his Chicago and NOLA years, Chandler was the second-best player to come out of the lottery that year (maybe third if you rank Joe Johnson over him, which I wouldn't). Pau (#3) was the only lotto pick that year to really blow up. In hindsight, I guess you could argue that Pau should have been #1, but it's definitely not like there were a bunch of logical picks at the top of that draft who had better careers than Chandler.

[No-Man]

That Draft was really strong and deep in the end.

And Parker should be the nº1.

[CBB_Fan]

The vast majority of #1 picks, period, are big men. Only 8 guards have gone #1 since 1970 (so 42 years), and since teams lean towards big men with top picks some of those guards have really been considered sure things. Still, John Lucas, Doug Collins, Austin Carr, and even John Wall (so far) haven't really had the sort of impact you look for in a #1 pick.

And that drafting philosophy is wrong. Big man prospects are usually waste of a draft pick. I care nothing about athleticism or length when it comes to big men because that rarely makes a difference in the long run; skills are more important. Size and athleticism is more important at the wing position or for centers that already have NBA level skills.

Now, to look at those guards: Wall has averaged 16.9 PPG and 8 APG, so he's been slightly better than the average #1 pick (15.96 PPG). John Lucas averaged 10.7 PPG and 7 APG. Doug Collins averaged 17.9 PPG and with limited RPG and APG. Carr had 15.4 PPG.

All better than what can be expected from Noel.

Also, if we're comparing apples to apples, I think we should be looking at the freshmen seasons of those big men to compare them to Noel, not their junior or senior years when they were 21 or 22. Olowokandi averaged 4-3 as a freshman. Ellison (who was actually a 20-10 guy one year and had lots of potential before injuries derailed his career) averaged 13-8 as a freshman. Kent Benson averaged 9-8 as a freshman.

Unfortunately, you cannot make that comparison. Noel played a much larger freshmen role than any of those guys not out of any excess of skill but because freshmen are more utilized now than the 50s, 60s, or even 90s. Would you say Nerlens Noel is better than Wilt Chamberlain because Wilt didn't even play his freshmen year?

Noel had a pretty good two-thirds of a season at Kentucky. He put together some nice all-around numbers and maintained efficiency, shooting .590 from the field and averaging just under 2 TOpg. I really have no problem with 10.5-9.5-1.6-4.4-2.1 in 32 mpg for the first two-thirds of his freshman year.

Those aren't #1 overall numbers. Everything he did well in college (dunks and blocks) will be much harder to get in the NBA, and his defensive impact will be determined more by his defensive intellect than his ability to get blocks and steals. His most impressive stat is that 4.4 BPG, and that is one of the least translating skills to the NBA. I don't think Serge Ibaka is a great defender and he averaged the highest BPG in the NBA.

His efficiency was high because he scored offensive put-backs and dunks. He cannot score outside the paint, which means that he will create spacing issues on offense as so many teams rely on a PF with a jump shot. His FT% means that he can be offensively eliminated with a few fouls.

His numbers and impact make him a good piece for an already good team (mid-lotto to late first round). A defensive roleplayer that doesn't give you much on offense. But I don't think he makes much of a difference for a team bad enough to pick #1 overall. The best argument for him at this point is that between the injury and his limited skillset that he likely wouldn't improve a team very much and they would be able to pick high again in next year's draft.

[Indomitable]

Tysons was not a bust in Chicago. He got moved because we signed Wallace. It was a huge mistake.

I admit I didn't watch basketball back then, but looking from statistics Tyson Chandler does not look like he was worthy of a 1st overall pick, he had good per 36 stats but apparently foul trouble stopped him from playing even 30 minutes a game, he also had a significantly lower FG% than his recent seasons.Even in his Hornets days when I started watching him he wasn't that spectacular either.

Actually we used him, Davis as the 4 quarter frontline. He should have stayed.