Something like this:
Dat2u wrote:Emphasis IMO should be place on b-ball IQ, work ethic & b-ball character when drafting that high.
And trying to find measurables for that. The pet measurables I like to showcase BBIQ and gutty effort are:
-- Defensive rebounding which is often more about positioning and effort than height and bounciness, and even short dudes who rebound manage to carry this aspect into the pros.
-- Assists at positions other than PG.
-- Take a peek at shooting efficiency measures. Do they force bad shots or take what the defense gives them.
-- Free Throw %. Which is entirely a measure of gymrattery and strength of concentration.
-- Steals, especially not from backcourt players, suggest awareness and reaction speed. If you get a SF candidate with good steals numbers you're happy. They commonly become solid wing defenders. Also SF's and SGs who block shots without fouling. Used to love the blocks+steals/personal foul metric before DX removed it from their dbase.
Then I'll look to see how their physical anthropometrics match up against other players at their likely NBA position. Are they within the range of plausible? Standing reach and lane agility especially are the two that seem to carry over. Jumping matters more for attacking slashing wing types (especially dudes with high free throw attempt numbers) than for interior players -- who can challenge simply by being big and in the right place.
Then I'm looking at their stats vs ranked competition. This is where my players like Faried and S'Curry managed to stand out where others might disappear. Do they get up for big games. If they maintain high stats in these games, or better yet rise up and exceed their season averages then those are the guys I like. Size-of-the-fight-in-the-dog type players. This is where CCJ and I are often on the same page.
If a player has been in school a couple years I look at improvement in each of these categories. Especially maintaining or improving good #'s while their workload increases (possession %'s). You want to see steady advancement, which suggests a player who will adjust and work hard to fix mistakes etc.
If they are a freshman, you can look at their stats over the year. A player who comes on strong towards tourney time is a good bet. This is someone who gets comfortable figuring out what they can and cannot do at this level. I distrust players who tail off as the non-conference schedule is eliminated (except in sucky conferences like the Mountain West which will burn you EVERY year. Babbit, sure, also Dom McGuire, Freddette, etc. -- Kawhi Leonard is the only dude who bucked the trend). I had doubts about in Bradley Beal who was touted as a shooter but whose season avgs did not back that up, until I read the game log and saw him get stronger as the year went by, and even in games where his shot was off he was rebounding well (playing SF on a smallball team), getting to the line, etc. Finding ways to contribute. And suddenly he went off in the tourney. Then he was my guy.
By contrast highly touted prospects who begin with a bang and then falter seem like the type who get by on athleticism alone but fail to adjust once there's a book on how to stop them. Bennett has a few red flags in this respect. (On the one hand he has an injury excuse, on the other hand that too is a red flag given our training staff).
Defense being all about desire and awareness, I steer clear of any player who is one-dimensional here. Especially with our current coach who will bench the helloutta you if you fail to defend with poise and smarts and effort. A talented but one-dimensional player makes a sexy trade asset but does not add much in the way of post-season advancement unless they are a centerpiece franchise caliber scoring machine. Put simply the Spurs only draft 2-way players. Because Pop will not play them if they cannot play both ends. And guess what, our defensive guru learned at Popovich's elbow.
Now I tend to trust the scouts on raw types at the top end of the draft, they've watched these guys longer than I have. My methods work best at the back end of the draft, looking for surprises, value-for-pick, and role-players. This is where I'm telling you guys about Chandler Parsons and the like.
Lastly: it is vogue to pooh-pooh tournament experience. Not me. I value that highly. Especially on the championship team. These are players who know what it takes to win in elimination games. Look for the most valuable big man defender, and the most valuable ballhandler/shot-creator. I knew Mario Chalmers would find a career in the NBA. I suspect Peyton Siva will surprise. Joakim Noah figured to be a better pro than Al Horford since he was the lynchpin defender. Gorgui Dieng will find a role on a winning NBA squad. He rebounds, defends, talks on defense, takes responsibility for the team, makes smart passes. You can get him cheap on a trade down, maybe, but you won't kick yourself for spending a mid-late 1st on him. I won't kill a guy for falling short in the tourney, caoches will gameplan against a single guy, but do like a player who raises up then. Meets the pressure.
And if you can land young key championship players from international squads, taek a 2nd look even on a draft and stash (Marc Gasol). They will have 2-way fundamentals play the right way, and not get your coach fired for lackluster effort. Over there every coach is a Popovich. Because coaches and players do not have guaranteed contracts in the Eurosquads. You win or you are fired. You play the guys who help you win only. If a young guy beats a veteran for playing time, then you can trust him better. Especially if David Blatt is coaching him.
My 2 cents on BBIQ and work ethic.
