2020 Draft

[Ed Wood]

More adept scouts than I might abstract enough from tape to warm up to someone like Williams, but I kind of settle for being a statistical determinist - it's possible that there's a very good player that may emerge there, but he hasn't yet and I certainly have no real way of knowing if one will.

Williams is the sort of player I'd absolutely prefer to take two later picks in the first round rather than select, should those be the options on the table.

[WizarDynasty]

Williams to me reminds so much of Chris Singleton and Al Thornton especially feet movement and body movement. Bulky is probably the word I would use.

[payitforward]

It's great to have Ed Wood back on the board!

I don't know about statistical determinist, but I'll tell you this much: I can find no examples -- zero -- of guys who didn't put up good numbers in college but went on to put up good numbers in the NBA.

Patrick Williams did not put up good numbers in college, so if he succeeds in the league... it'll be a first.

I don't draft guys whose success depends on them being the first ever to break a pattern.

[TGW]

Dat--what's your scouting report on Deni Avidja?

I see all-star potential.

[Shoe]

McCollum, taken #10 -- YOU brought him up, not me. So tell me, how much better is he than Rudy Gobert, taken #27 in the same draft? ...

blah blah... #11- - traded for blah blah blah... ...blah blah blah and the elite scouting Nuggets blah blah blah for cash....

Answer the question, Shoe -- who is a better NBA basketball player, C.J. McCollum or Rudy Gobert?

Gobert's a lot better player than C.J. McCollum -- you & I both know that.

So does everyone else. 10 out of 10 people in the world of the NBA would answer my question by saying, "Rudy Gobert." So, if you don't want to say "Rudy Gobert," if you won't answer the question, I guess it's because you prefer to discuss a different question.

No problem -- people should talk about what interests them. Bring up a different subject if you like. But whatever subject you bring up, no matter how interesting (& you often bring up interesting subjects) Rudy Gobert, taken #27 in 2013, will still be a better NBA basketball player than C.J. McCollum, taken #10 in the same draft.

As you know perfectly well.

In fact, Gobert is better than every single one of the 26 players taken before him in the 2013 draft with the exception of one guy. & that guy is better than every single one of the 14 players taken before him.

Which illustrates my only point: how good a player is in this league doesn't correlate meaningfully with where that player was picked in the draft.

Another thing we can see from the graph is that star potential goes down very quickly after the first few selections. Based on the logistic regression, the #1 overall pick has a 64% chance of becoming an All-Star. By the time pick 5 comes around, that probability is more than halved to 30%. Pick #10 has roughly half the star potential of pick #5, at 16%.

The situation is even dicier from here. Historically, picks in the back half of the first round become All-Stars only 8% of the time. Hoping to snag the next Nikola Jokic in the 2nd round? Well, only about 3% of these 2nd rounders reached All-Stardom.

So there's no meaningful correlation, except for all of this meaningful correlation.

[Dat2U]

It's great to have Ed Wood back on the board!

I don't know about statistical determinist, but I'll tell you this much: I can find no examples -- zero -- of guys who didn't put up good numbers in college but went on to put up good numbers in the NBA.

Patrick Williams did not put up good numbers in college, so if he succeed in the league... it'll be a first.

I don't draft guys whose success depends on them being the first ever to break a pattern.

Williams defense is definitely ahead of his offense. His high IQ & awareness on D will get him minutes sooner than later. His ability to make open shots could keep him there. The Inabilty to create and lack of anything elite tops his ceiling as 4th or 5th option on the floor. I see a guy who might become a good backup 4 on a contender. I don't necessarily see him as a big minute starter.

Rumors are Detroit made a promise to him at 7 which would be insane.

[Dat2U]

I failed to mention, its great to see Ed as well!

[Shoe]

So the probability of drafting an all star raises the question of how important the accolade is, especially for players who only made the game once. I had to do a quick review of this past season and the distribution of players who had previously made the all star team.

Playoff teams

4 all stars
Lakers
Heat
Bucks

3 all stars
Celtics
Raptors
Sixers

2 all stars
Nuggets
Clippers
Rockets
Mavericks
Jazz
Blazers
Pacers
Nets

1 all star
Thunder
Magic

The teams with the most were the two favorites Lakers and Bucks, and the actual finals team Heat. The second tier had the contenders to make it out of the East, Celtics, Raptors, Sixers. The bulk of the West had a pair. The two teams with the least expectations only had one.

Non playoff teams

2 all stars
Spurs
Pelicans
Timberwolves
Cavaliers

1 all star
Suns
Warriors
Wizards
Pistons
Hawks

0 all stars
Grizzlies
Kings
Bulls
Knicks

(Wall, Griffin, Curry, Klay, I put on a physically unable to perform list)
(as well as Chandler and Noah as they played a combined 2 minutes in the playoffs)


Even making the game once delinieates a player as an upper echelon talent for the remainder of their career. In terms of draft strategy no wonder teams just shoot for who they think can be a potential all star. Can easily see why Tommy Sheppard would take Rui Hachimura - 6'8, handles, pull up game, 83% on 140 fta, probable 20 ppg scorer - over an energy big.
"obviously good players make your team good" no, no, all stars >>> good players.

Also looking at all star makeup of recent championship teams:
Lakers - 4
Raptors - 3
Warriors - 3
Cavaliers - 4
Spurs - 3
Heat - 6
Mavericks - 6

[Shoe]

It's great to have Ed Wood back on the board!

I don't know about statistical determinist, but I'll tell you this much: I can find no examples -- zero -- of guys who didn't put up good numbers in college but went on to put up good numbers in the NBA.

Patrick Williams did not put up good numbers in college, so if he succeed in the league... it'll be a first.

I don't draft guys whose success depends on them being the first ever to break a pattern.

Williams defense is definitely ahead of his offense. His high IQ & awareness on D will get him minutes sooner than later. His ability to make open shots could keep him there. The Inabilty to create and lack of anything elite tops his ceiling as 4th or 5th option on the floor. I see a guy who might become a good backup 4 on a contender. I don't necessarily see him as a big minute starter.

Rumors are Detroit made a promise to him at 7 which would be insane.

Ill go to bat for P Williams. He's the classic college 4 that you hope becomes a 3. Stuck in the front court at the collegiate level, having to stick near the paint because they're 6'8. Not given too many chances to show a potential face up offensive attack (Butler at Marquette, never would you think he'd end up playing PG in the NBA finals). But I can definitely see why some teams see the combo of measurements, defensive potential, and jumper and think "if he pans out, he's the wing of the draft". His teammate Vassell is wing-ish, less so in the NBA. Avdija and Bey are the only other guys that look like NBA wings, Okoro and Nesmith are kind of tweeners.

Averaged 83.8% from the FT line, an encouraging stat regarding his ability to develop into a high level face the basket scorer … His 32% from three is impressive when you consider his form and combine that with his potential to create shots … Blocked 30 shots on the year, one per game, showing an impressive ability to react and erase shots for a 6’8 forward … 4 rebounds per game, made more impressive when you consider he played in just 22 minutes per game … Shows a solid ability to cut off drives and pull up for jump shots with efficiency … Phenomenal hand strength, showing the ability to corral the ball very easily with one hand

Pull up elbow jumper off an onball screen, followed by disruptive passing lane potential

Jumpers to beat the Syracuse zone

Some flashes of driving off the dribble

Beating the close out, punishing the lack of close out

Biggest issue is he looks a bit stiff and upright for now. Could limit him to that backup 4 role like Markieff Morris.

[nate33]

Thread continues here