Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part II

[gesa2]

What I see in the Olynyk videos is ballhandling skills that are very advanced for a college C. I don't think he gets by people using his first step so much as craftiness and skill. Those matter too, though. If he can somehow make himself into Marc Gasol with an even better outside shot he'll be great.

[stevemcqueen1]

Yeah I agree with Ruz on those Olynyk videos. I don't see the kind of explosiveness with Olynyk that you do Dr. Positivity. You're right that he's a long strider and can cover ground quickly when running in the open court. And he's definitely coordinated and shows excellent body control for a big. But I just don't see quickness or vertical explosiveness in his movement. On those drives and executing those pivots, it looks like he really has to gather himself to get moving and he looks deliberate. And in the section of the video labeled "explosiveness" it really shows how limited his leaping ability is.

I think he's a pretty good athlete for the C position but I think he'll be slow for the PF position. He's going to have trouble adjusting to the NBA where he'll no longer be faster or stronger than many of his match ups. He's got skill and he can shoot, so he'll still be able to score. But I think he'll lose particular chunks of his offense and lose a lot of his efficiency as he becomes more perimeter oriented. I see him as kind of a poor man's Zeller in a lot of ways except shooting. And I think Zeller has the potential to close the gap between them as a shooter from mid range early in his career. I think you'll see the difference between the two come out in where each get drafted. I expect Zeller to be an early to mid lotto pick and Olynyk to be a late lotto pick.

This is how I would probably rank the big men today:

1.) Noel
2.) Bennett
3.) Zeller
4.) Len
5.) Olynyk
6.) Plumlee

I will say I'm definitely intrigued by Steven Adams and Mitch McGary late in the first if they decide to leave this year. Adams has NBA ready size and I like McGary's scrappy game and gift for rebounding.

[doclinkin]

What I see in the Olynyk videos is ballhandling skills that are very advanced for a college C. I don't think he gets by people using his first step so much as craftiness and skill. Those matter too, though. If he can somehow make himself into Marc Gasol with an even better outside shot he'll be great.

Marc Gasol is a very good positional defender, excellent passer, and was the rebounding anchor of all those championship Spain teams. Widebody space clogger. Not a great comparison to Olynyk.

Olynyk has a nice array of skills at this level, will see his stuff blocked more and get pushed off position more often but should be able to adjust. But his while his rebounding numbers have suffered by playing next to the underrated Elias Harris (who will find a team and stick in the league, his outside shot is better than he showed this year) all of Olynyk's numbers were engorged by feasting on lesser competition. He will prove a proficient scorer. But that's not what I want most from my front court player.

Championship teams seem to need defensive anchors on the front court more than back-to-the basket lowpost skills. Yes a mid-range big allows room for divebombing perimeter players in the no-hand-check era, and I won't cry if we land KO, but I see better synergy with other players. And better value in a trade down if possible (Utah or Hawks?).

Wittman's tendency already is to bang it into the post player and ask him to create We'd use Olynyk for sure. Maybe too much. KO would be an offensive back-up for Nene, if less of a defensive presence. In my frontcourt I prefer players who can challenge and recover on the P&R, and make players think twice about driving inside; run the court quickly in transition and make quick reads to fill the behind a player who gets beat. Offensive skill set is secondary, yes I want them to be able to make swift decisions with the ball in their hand, be able to be effective as an after thought, be able to run a lane and finish in transition if necessary, roll quickly off the pick catch and finish, and hit a midrange J if left open. But more than anything our offense will rely on our exterior attackers.

I like Noel of course. Though skinny shotblockers don't always translate at the next level, his steals numbers show swift hands on the P/R defense. But with both offensive and defensive synergy with our current squad I like Gorgui Dieng on a trade down for better value if someone else has fallen in love with Olynyk and offers something to move up. Offensive numbers are gaudy and pretty and tend to attract suitors. Someone will want KO more than I do even if I can see where and how he will succeed in the league. It's a subtle thing. I just think he'd improve us just enough to get beat. Too good on offense not to play but not a game changer on defense where the role of a Big is most important.

[doclinkin]

Underrated.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpxLbcI_fQY[/youtube]

Quick reads, quick reaction, no ball stalling to get his points in, quick reads on defense shading for teammates who get beat. It's his mind and quickness I'm reading, not his 'grown man against babies' type of body.

[payitforward]

...we unconsciously employ all sorts of hindsight biases when reviewing (or ignoring) our record of these types of predictions in order to reinforce an idea that we have much better powers of prediction than we really do.

+1
We have many practitioners of that art on this site.

(I'm not one of them, no way. The reason I'm right so much is because of my incredible analytical skills and my crystal ball)

...Trying to claim X player will succeed and Y player will bust is a fool's errand IMO.

Agreed -- all the tools that work are statistical, but statistical tools do not scale down to a single player, because they mask too many effects at the individual level. But... if you *ignore* statistical tools you can be sure to get bad players.

Another way to put this: there are lots of false positives -- guys who do well in the NCAA but don't do well in the league. But there are very very few false negatives -- guys who don't put up good numbers in the NCAA but do well in the NBA.

All the freshmen in the draft these days means these tools are less reliable -- smaller sample sets and players much earlier in their development.

[fishercob]

...we unconsciously employ all sorts of hindsight biases when reviewing (or ignoring) our record of these types of predictions in order to reinforce an idea that we have much better powers of prediction than we really do.

+1
We have many practitioners of that art on this site.

(I'm not one of them, no way. The reason I'm right so much is because of my incredible analytical skills and my crystal ball)

...Trying to claim X player will succeed and Y player will bust is a fool's errand IMO.

Agreed -- all the tools that work are statistical, but statistical tools do not scale down to a single player, because they mask too many effects at the individual level. But... if you *ignore* statistical tools you can be sure to get bad players.

Another way to put this: there are lots of false positives -- guys who do well in the NCAA but don't do well in the league. But there are very very few false negatives -- guys who don't put up good numbers in the NCAA but do well in the NBA.

All the freshmen in the draft these days means these tools are less reliable -- smaller sample sets and players much earlier in their development.

Good points. One reason why, on the whole, we should never be as good as an NBA front office in player selection is that they have access to so much more data. I'm not talking about advanced stats that aren't publicly available (but those may mean something too). I'm talking about info about the person putting up the stats -- interviews, conversations with scouts and coaches, background checks, etc. Since almost no one comes into the league prepared to be dominant or even very good player, a lot of what we want to determine is whether a guy will improve. If we want to know that, we want to know (a) has he shown improvement in the past -- which stats can show us (b) does he have the personality traits and life circumstances that will enable him to put in the requisite work to improve. The latter seems even more important when when we're looking at one-and-done types for which there isn't much of a data trail.

[fishercob]

Underrated.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpxLbcI_fQY[/youtube]

Quick reads, quick reaction, no ball stalling to get his points in, quick reads on defense shading for teammates who get beat. It's his mind and quickness I'm reading, not his 'grown man against babies' type of body.

Impressive stuff. I'm concerned that he's already 23 and his overall production has been basically flat for three seasons. Not much reason to expect him to fill out that much or improve significantly, is there?

[AFM]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LLePKmfknmM[/youtube]
His slashing ability and the way he dribbles with the in and out move reminds me of Wade. Obviously a lot smaller than Wade

[TGW]

Wouldn't be mad with Dieng, Olynyk, Len, Bennett, or Noel. They all bring a skillset the Wizards could use.

Surprisingly enough, the big man in this draft that I wouldn't draft is Zeller, and he was arguably the most productive out of all of them.

[stevemcqueen1]

Championship teams seem to need defensive anchors on the front court more than back-to-the basket lowpost skills. ...

...In my frontcourt I prefer players who can challenge and recover on the P&R, and make players think twice about driving inside; run the court quickly in transition and make quick reads to fill the behind a player who gets beat. Offensive skill set is secondary, yes I want them to be able to make swift decisions with the ball in their hand, be able to be effective as an after thought, be able to run a lane and finish in transition if necessary, roll quickly off the pick catch and finish, and hit a midrange J if left open. But more than anything our offense will rely on our exterior attackers...

Your post got me thinking about ideal lineups. I think you're on to something highlighting the importance of defense for bigs. Back in 2011, it struck me as curious and confusing that Chicago could compete on an even footing with Miami despite having (seemingly) inferior talent--one star versus three. How were they doing it? I've been looking at lineups for successful teams recently, you've got teams like Chicago and Memphis on one pole, Golden State and Denver on the other.

My question was, what would an ideal lineup/rotation look like? The theory I've sort of settled on was to take the best parts of the really offensively minded teams and also the defensive teams: you want three scorers and two defenders. Ideally, every player on the floor can hit open or even lightly contested jumpers; every player can help your team rebounding be superior; every player can make the right passes to facilitate movement; and no player should be a complete sieve. Those being the fundamentals of good basketball at every level. When you start getting into specialized roles, I think you really want three sources of offensive creation on the floor at all times and two guys who excel at playing defense and/or rebounding/boxing out. The lucky teams have elite players who can knock out two of those roles with one player.

You can create offense with perimeter guys (or even some PFs) that can score off the dribble or get open off the ball and knock down shots. You can create offense with low post ISO scorers. Or you can create offense with passing, particularly out of the post. So you could have any sort of combination of offensive players and make it work. So long story short, I would go more general than you have and say that elite teams probably need just one good defensive big and then another defender/dirty work type at any of the other four spots. You could make your PF an offensive minded player if your PG or one of your wings is a stopper and your center is a good defender and you could still play great defense IMO. Chicago did this. Noah is the defensive anchor and Deng/Bogans were the stopper out on the perimeter. Boozer is a scorer and a rebounder and is very limited as a defensive player. Memphis has kind of done this too, Gasol being the elite defensive presence, ZBo being a limited defender but a scorer and rebounder, and Tony Allen being a premier stopper. We've got a great defense right now because Okafor is that defender/rebounder, Ariza a stopper, and Nene is a creative offensive player (mostly as a post passer and low post ISO scorer) but Nene is huge and can also play pretty good defense. Plus John and Beal should be great two way players eventually, giving us some flexibility. We could start a weak defensive, scoring big like Olynyk or Bennett at PF and still probably play D so long as the 5 is a great defender.

Olynyk's rebounding worries me more than his D. That I don't think you can easily compensate for. Nene doesn't pull down a ton of boards but he improves the team rebounding because he boxes out. Olynyk doesn't look like he establishes good position regularly and I definitely didn't like seeing him get beat to rebounds when he actually did have good position because of his limited hops and physicality.

[Dark Faze]

Olynyks rebounding percentage is similar to the top bigs in this draft though, so I don't understand that argument. Also the DX scouting video of Olynyk had some laughable clips of "bad rebounding", pretty long boards that went over his head that nobody could get, odd bounces off the rim that no amount of boxing out could have fixed, etc.

Another thing to consider though is the possibility that this will be our frontcourt until Nene expires. Looking back at Okafors career stats he's looked very healthy over a large percentage of his career. I don't know that I see him slowing down a ton. The age is a concern, but having such an intelligent front court is clearly a big advantage.

I'd love to basically move Seraphin/Booker/Vesely in order to get Withey with a late 1st and use our early pick to get some combination of Bennett/Olynyk. That way we'd have a lot of insurance against Nene/Okafor injuries.

[fugop]

If Dieng is on our board, this should probably be the reason why:

[queridiculo]

Underrated.

Quick reads, quick reaction, no ball stalling to get his points in, quick reads on defense shading for teammates who get beat. It's his mind and quickness I'm reading, not his 'grown man against babies' type of body.

Dieng seems very economic with his movements. There's a lot of standing around, so his explosiveness and decisiveness caught me a bit of guard.

Extremely fluid, with great timing and instincts on defense and a very nice touch moving the ball on offense.

[stevemcqueen1]

Dieng looks good on the back end of the first. He knows how to play and is more fluid and athletic than Withey IMO. He does a good job on offense and he's a brilliant defender. Adams and McGary probably have more upside given their ages, (but also might stay in school). Dieng would be a nice addition though and is someone moving back into the first round for IMO. He strikes me as the type of player Chicago would draft.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

Underrated.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpxLbcI_fQY[/youtube]

Quick reads, quick reaction, no ball stalling to get his points in, quick reads on defense shading for teammates who get beat. It's his mind and quickness I'm reading, not his 'grown man against babies' type of body.

Impressive stuff. I'm concerned that he's already 23 and his overall production has been basically flat for three seasons. Not much reason to expect him to fill out that much or improve significantly, is there?

Age is really an important consideration.

Dieng and Plumlee are 23. Len is not yet 20. Zeller is 20. Olynyk is almost 22. Some guys in this draft are almost 24 years old. Trevor Mbakwe and Kenny Kadji really are men playing amongst boys at 24 years old. Some of the 22 year olds have recently shown quite a bit of progress in their games. Mike Muscala is still developing at 22.

Dieng seems like flat out the best defender in the bunch. He's a solid rebounder, solid shot blocker, and a tremendous athlete. He's physically strong. I like his elbow jumper. He will be at the very least serviceable in the NBA. Muscala and Olynyk are really smart, high IQ big men. Olynyk is physically tougher and he likes contact. Because of his physicality I put him at the top offensively. He knows how to get to a spot to get his shot off. He's learned with time. Similarly, Muscala seems to play stronger than he is. He understands position and is tremendously fundamentally sound at pretty much everything I saw in his videos. (DX put out a new draft scouting video on Muscala on 3/28). I love how he gets low and how Muscala reacts on defense. He's quick. Unfortunately, he's still weak. Len for 19 is not really all that weak, he needs to be lower and more instinctive.

I think youth should factor in a bit on Len.

[Dat2U]

Underrated.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpxLbcI_fQY[/youtube]

Quick reads, quick reaction, no ball stalling to get his points in, quick reads on defense shading for teammates who get beat. It's his mind and quickness I'm reading, not his 'grown man against babies' type of body.

Excellent points doc. That's something you can't really teach. I'm not sold if he really brings enough offense to the table to be a starter at the NBA level but his awareness / IQ gives him a long term job at the next level. Dieng & Withey are similar prospects. Solid backup Cs with value in the mid 1st rounder area.

[doclinkin]

Impressive stuff. I'm concerned that he's already 23 and his overall production has been basically flat for three seasons. Not much reason to expect him to fill out that much or improve significantly, is there?

Some call that "consistency".

Lack of variation is not bad when you are pretty good. By some measures Dieng is one of the best defenders in the NCAA over the past few years.

http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/pla ... eaderboard
http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/lea ... areer.html
http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/lea ... areer.html

But yes on our squad he's a role-player, but in a key position, and in the role you want him to play. Developing on the bench behind players who are ideally suited to mentor him by example (in Nene and Okafor) his game is very like the UConn version of Okafor, with a little more of Nene's passing and range.

[doclinkin]

Excellent points doc. That's something you can't really teach. I'm not sold if he really brings enough offense to the table to be a starter at the NBA level but his awareness / IQ gives him a long term job at the next level. Dieng & Withey are similar prospects. Solid backup Cs with value in the mid 1st rounder area.

Agreed with one qualifier. Dieng added that longer ranged shot relatively recently. He is in fact developing, subtly, adding an improved assist % , cutting fouls, reducing TO's. And championship contending experience goes a long way towards further improvement. AFAIC he's the most important player on a team I'm going to say will probably win the NCAA tourney. In any case, any other player on the squad could have had their foot flapping like a dirty sweatsock but if that was Dieng then Pitino's squad doesn't win.

Eeegh, that injury still makes my innards wince. Gruesome.

[nate33]

Dieng has very good but not particularly eye-popping numbers in the sexy defensive stats: rebounds and blocks. But what I like the most about him are his sneaky good numbers in steals, assists, TOV% and fouls. Those numbers really support doc's praise of his basketball IQ. It's possible that he might pan out to be a bit more like a Joakim Noah/Ben Wallace type of defensive quarterback, rather than merely a Theo Ratliff/Robin Lopez type of rebounding/shot blocking grunt.

After looking at the numbers, I think I'd place Dieng ahead of Withey among the polished ready-for-NBA defensive bigs. Our only problem is that we are currently chock full of young, athletic defensive minded front court players. We need a few more guys who know how to put the ball in the basket. It's tough to contemplate using our #10ish pick on Dieng, but if we can trade down with Atlanta or Utah, pick up 2 picks, and use one of them on Dieng and the other on an offensive player, I'd be pretty happy.

[fugop]

Dieng's game has matured an incredible amount in three years. There isn't a highlight video that focuses just on his play in the Big East championship game, but it was the most impressive performance I've seen from a center in a long time. Dieng ran the entire offense from the high post. He finished the game with 8 assists. You can see some of the details in the video in this story:

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketb ... east-title

Like I said in my long post on Dieng a few days ago, I think he's going to be a great pro, but still a role player.