How Concerned — or Alarmed — Should We Be?

[leswizards]

So, my methodology was a little unfair in the sense, if a player isn’t very good in his first 3 years, but suddenly gets good it will be hard for that player to be in the top 10 for the draft in terms of ws because he basically got no ws his first 3 seasons.

So, I went back and looked at the same four drafts, and looked at the top 10 picks in each draft which I had already not looked at (ie in the 2020 draft I had already looked at 5 of the top 15 picks, so I looked at the other top ten picks in those top 15), to see if I could find any “diamonds in the rough” (ie, players who didn’t look very good in their first 3 seasons, but suddenly got good thereafter). I found 12, but none were particularly all that great. I stand by the assertion that teams should basically be looking for nba ready players, and if they draft someone who is not nba ready, they are basically wasting their resources.

The 12 “diamond in the roughs” are: Aaron Nesmith, Cole Anthony, Deni Advija, Coby White, Rui Hachimura, Collin Sexton, Lonnie Walker, Markelle Fulz, Lonzo Ball, Jonathon Isaac, Zach Collins, and Malik Monk

[payitforward]

Way to put your brain & creativity to work, leswizards -- good stuff!!

[DCZards]

I stand by the assertion that teams should basically be looking for nba ready players, and if they draft someone who is not nba ready, they are basically wasting their resources.

Most teams typically draft with a player’s high-end potential in mind rather than who is NBA-ready and can help in the short-term.

Take the 2023 draft, for example. Older, more experienced players like Jaime Jacquez and Trace Jackson-Davis have been more impactful than almost all of the players drafted ahead of them.

But if the draft was redone today, raw youngsters like Brandon Miller and Amen Thompson would still be drafted ahead of the older, more experienced Jacquez and Jackson-Davis.

While they might not have been as NBA-ready as Jacquez and Jackson-Davis, Miller and Thompson have a much higher ceiling and that’s what matters most to teams and GMs…and understandably so.

[J-Ves]

So, my methodology was a little unfair in the sense, if a player isn’t very good in his first 3 years, but suddenly gets good it will be hard for that player to be in the top 10 for the draft in terms of ws because he basically got no ws his first 3 seasons.

So, I went back and looked at the same four drafts, and looked at the top 10 picks in each draft which I had already not looked at (ie in the 2020 draft I had already looked at 5 of the top 15 picks, so I looked at the other top ten picks in those top 15), to see if I could find any “diamonds in the rough” (ie, players who didn’t look very good in their first 3 seasons, but suddenly got good thereafter). I found 12, but none were particularly all that great. I stand by the assertion that teams should basically be looking for nba ready players, and if they draft someone who is not nba ready, they are basically wasting their resources.

The 12 “diamond in the roughs” are: Aaron Nesmith, Cole Anthony, Deni Advija, Coby White, Rui Hachimura, Collin Sexton, Lonnie Walker, Markelle Fulz, Lonzo Ball, Jonathon Isaac, Zach Collins, and Malik Monk

You are confusing “nba ready” with guys who happen to have good stats early in their careers. Like no one would have called Ware or Missi particularly nba ready players or that Dunn and McCain would be more nba ready than Sheppard.

To your point though maybe the concept of drafting the project player and having him develop into his high end outcomes is closer to a mythical than probable

[leswizards]

You can frame it any way you want as far as I concerned, but it seems to me that the best players drafted are consistently good from the start of their careers, and those who aren’t very good at the start of their careers rarely make up for it later.

To me, if I were a gm, and I saw a scouting report that said “not nba ready, but has superstar potential”, my red flags would immediately go off.

[dckingsfan]

You can frame it any way you want as far as I concerned, but it seems to me that the best players drafted are consistently good from the start of their careers, and those who aren’t very good at the start of their careers rarely make up for it later.

To me, if I were a gm, and I saw a scouting report that said “not nba ready, but has superstar potential”, my red flags would immediately go off.

And that goes with where you are drafting as well, right? Have you seen any picks of "superstar potential" out of the top 3 or may 5 in the last 20 years? If you are drafting after the first 5 and you see, "superstar potential" but the 18-year-old isn't NBA ready, you might draft them? Yeah, not as black and white as all that. You would then want to do due diligence to see if that kid is a gym rat (among other things).

The real issue here is "whom" is doing the labeling of "superstar potential", IMO? Actually, the labeling is "most" of the problem. If you ignore the labeling this type of thinking doesn't hold water over time.

I think most FOs do their due diligence on player evaluations and then have rankings. Sometimes they are accurate and sometimes not. Sometimes they are drafting for need and sometimes for long-term potential based upon the needs of their clubs at the time (some would argue that you should always draft BPA, but that doesn't always happen).

I would argue that most FOs don't try to draft players that aren't good at the start of their collective careers, they just misjudge the talent of that particular player or "wish" that the player will "develop" a particular aptitude. A big learning to bang or a guard learning to shoot shouldn't be that difficult, right?

[doclinkin]

You can frame it any way you want as far as I concerned, but it seems to me that the best players drafted are consistently good from the start of their careers, and those who aren’t very good at the start of their careers rarely make up for it later.

To me, if I were a gm, and I saw a scouting report that said “not nba ready, but has superstar potential”, my red flags would immediately go off.

One aspect you are not correcting for though is age.

Pages back, either in this thread or in the Deni Memorial thread I looked at a number of super young teenagers who entered the league to see whether they produced early. Guys like Devin Booker, Kobe, even Deni put up mediocre and inefficient stats as young players, but broke loose as they developed. They were teenagers entering the draft, young for their draft year.

Years ago I read a study presented at the Sloan sports statistics conference at MIT that basically said his stats showed that the younger a guy shows signs, the higher their upside is. Until then my bias has always been towards players with a couple years of seasoning, since you can see the track record of their development to see if they improve. I still follow that methodology in looking for 2nd round picks, but it tugged my sleeve to also finding the young players in a draft whose stats show signs of maturity but are suppressed due to their youth. (That helped me tab players like Tyler Herro for instance, a productive freshman on a winning team but whose raw numbers were not eye-popping, just solid. But like Deni he was 19 entering the league, with a bday in January).

This is one reason why a kid like Cooper Flagg is a prize that teams covet. He's been putting up numbers at age 17. Okay the best of the best show it in high school. LeBJ. Wemby. Kareem. Shaq. It's easy to see that a guy like Dwight Howard will be productive at age 18 almost by accident. Where a player like Paul George was not highly recruited going into college since he was in the middle of a growth spurt. Teams now look for the Giannis types who have similar markers: guys who are still growing, but have the mindset to improve as they grow into their bodies.

Yeah there's a lot of Jaxon Hayes, James Wiseman types who are simply tall and athletic looking but without the aptitude or desire to improve. That's the thing that separates the talented from the successful. Everybody in the NBA is talented. Players who work on their games and improve every year are the ones who become perennial allstars. Bradley Beal is a name reviled around her right now, but he was a decent player young who actually improved on his game. Only 6'4"ish but for a time he led the league in scoring, by adding versatility to his game every offseason. Where my guy John Wall relied most heavily on his natural born talents and did not put new tools in his kit every year.

This front office early on is investing in development. They're picking young players and hoping to shape them. Where they show innovation is in deliberately picking players who are long for their position, and who the docs say are still growing. Bilal, Bub and George are apparently all still in growth phases, physically. Alex Sarr won't turn 20 til April, and true Bigs tend to develop late, though he's been a pro since he was age 16.

The question is whether this team has the environment personnel and mentors to develop the talent they are collecting. A team like Houston spent years being terrible before they got enough talent to where they could bring in an accomplished coach and a few veterans like Van Vleet and Dillon Brooks to mentor the young guys. We are still in the talent collecting phase here. Nice to have JV but its hard for any young team to win in this league. At some point you need players to get a taste of winning for them to learn how it is done.

I'm okay being patient. I know I could build a team of solid team-first skilled players. And win more than average. But very few teams win a chip without a #1 overall MVP caliber player. To land that guy you either get lucky in the draft and pull the franchise guy that everyone sees coming (see LeBJ, Wemby etc) or you pick an overlooked guy lower down like Jokic with his beer drinking physique, baby faced Stef Curry. Or you luck out and get a late bloomer like Giannis and Kawhi. Which is what this front office is trying to do drafting teenagers in back-to-back years. Since there was no franchise guy waiting top 3 this year.

Very few teams simply build a great team out of chemistry and solid good players. Even complete teams like the Celtics rely on two guys drafted top 3 in Tatum and Brown.

Looking at the past couple drafts, I see productive guys, guys I would have taken, but I don't see anybody in either draft who would be winning us that many more games if we had taken them instead of the young guys. Prove me wrong, what's the best team you could have built if you were playing rookies and sophomores and only had 1 pick last year and 3 picks this year.

Me I'm fine playing the long game and trying for franchise guys in back to back years. If so then we could be looking at a true dynasty, and the young guys we got these past 2 years will have plenty of time to learn to win behind the instant winner scratch off ticket contenders.

[pancakes3]

I actually think teams on a whole have drafted pretty well lately, and the most recent busts that come to mind are because the players psychologically didn't pan out (Fultz in 2017, Simmons in 2016).

Jury's still out on 2024 but going back the last few drafts, picks 1-5 are:

Wemby, Brandon Miller, Scoot Henderson, Amen/Ausar Thompson (no real diamonds missed)
Paolo, Chet, Jabari Smith Jr, Keegan Murray, Jaden Ivey (Jalen Williams went 12)
Cunningham, Jalen Green, Evan Mobley, Scottie Barnes, Jalen Suggs (Franz Wagner went 8, Trey Murphy went 17, Sengun went 16)
Antman, Wiseman, Lamelo, Patrick Williams, Okoro (Deni went 9, Haliburton went 12, Maxey went 21)

Maybe it's confirmation bias (it's just a good stretch), or recency bias (these guys are young, and higher drafted young guys get more playing time to show out), or some other type of bias, but it looks like teams are not messing up as badly with their top 5 picks as they have in previous years.

Even for 2024 draft class,

With Risacher, Sarr, Reed Sheppard, Castle, Ron Holland, it appears that there's a miss on Jared McCain at 16 not being top 5, but I wouldn't call Jaylen Wells at 39th overall a miss but rather a guy that's overplaying his draft position but doesn't necessarily mean the top 5 don't below to be drafted top 5.

Compare that with 2013 where Anthony Bennett, Oladipo, Otto Porter Jr, Cody Zeller and Alex Len went 1-5, and the top 5 in career WS from that draft were Giannis, Gobert, Steven Adams, Mason Plumlee, and CJ McCollum, all of whom were all drafted 10 or later.

2012: AD, MKG, Beal, Waiters, Thomas Robinson by draft order. AD, Dame, Drummond, Draymond, Barnes by WS (yea, Barnes has more WS than Beal; Khris Middleton was drafted 39).

2011: Kyrie, Derrick Williams, Enes Kanter, Tristan Thompson, JV by draft order. Jimmy Butler, Kawhi, Kyrie, JV, and Vucevic by WS (Tobias Harris, Kemba, Klay in spots 6-8).

2010: John Wall, Evan Turner, Derrick Favors, Wesley Johnson, DeMarcus Cousins by draft order. PG13, Gordon Hayward, Derrick Favors, Hassan Whiteside, Greg Monroe by WS. Eric Bledsoe at 18th and Avery Bradley at 19th overall, behind the likes of Bow legged Al-Farouq Aminu, Xavier Henry Luke Babbitt, and Kevin Seraphin.

[payitforward]

Here's hoping today's trades put an end to this thread.

[nate33]

Here's hoping today's trades put an end to this thread.

Why would they?

It's still some cause for concern that none of Sarr, Bub or George are fairly certain to project as quality NBA starters. I'm not saying it's unlikely either, but they're leaving enough doubt that I am concerned.

The fact that we traded a couple of vets for an unlikely pick swap and some SRP's doesn't really alleviate my concerns.

[FarBeyondDriven]

your FO since taking over has been incredible. I hope you're all appreciating it after years of ineptness. You're building the right way imho with great drafts and savvy trades. If you get Flagg or Bailey you're golden. I've adopted the Wizards as my 2nd team but might just pay more attention going forward to you then the Kings because I've had it.

[leswizards]

Here's hoping today's trades put an end to this thread.

Why would they?

It's still some cause for concern that none of Sarr, Bub or George are fairly certain to project as quality NBA starters. I'm not saying it's unlikely either, but they're leaving enough doubt that I am concerned.

The fact that we traded a couple of vets for an unlikely pick swap and some SRP's doesn't really alleviate my concerns.

I agree. However, during the Wizards 3 game winning streak,George and Bilal have had 3 good games in a row, and Bub has had 2 out 3 good games with the 3rd game being serviceable. Maybe the youngsters have turned the corner. I will be keeping my eyes on it.

[TheBlackCzar]

your FO since taking over has been incredible. I hope you're all appreciating it after years of ineptness. You're building the right way imho with great drafts and savvy trades. If you get Flagg or Bailey you're golden. I've adopted the Wizards as my 2nd team but might just pay more attention going forward to you then the Kings because I've had it.

Most aren't they are whining like 5 year olds because Deni was traded... In the end we have the best FO we've had since I've been alive, and I'm not a kid so that is a step in the right direction.. I mean I've never witnessed a 50 win team in my entire life.... Not one season, we've sucked every year, ruined every top draft prospect, picks, FA, resigning our own FA's to deals that turn out to be horrible almost everytime...


Yesterday morning me and one of my mans were discussing our 2nd round picks... He thought they were nothing that anybody wanted and even declared them to be as worthless as 7th round picks in the NFL (Hello Brock Purdy), and I told him that they were for picks but also to sweeten trades.... Then boom the last 2 days happened, and what I said we were doing, we did... We bundled up picks for better picks, and rinse wash repeat multiple times... I was in shock we were moving and shaking like that..... I'm even more confident in the capabilities of our FO, as I've been pleased with the flashes of our 4 now 5 youngings and I'm liking how they are going about accruing more and more assets with strategic preemptive thinking and not this reactionary garbage we've been forced to suffer through seemingly a lifetime..... So a breath of fresh air is refreshing to smell every once and a while and it's nice to see that on our side, where it's been stanking perpetually for decades.....

[payitforward]

...One aspect you are not correcting for though is age. ...

Using the above phrase to hijack this thread for a moment.

If I look at our new roster, & I remove all the guys who it's likely won't be here next year (Middleton, Brogdon, Gill, Holmes, Len & Smart), what's left is a group of 11 guys -- Poole, Bey, Kispert, Champagnie, Jones, George, Vukcevic, Coulibaly, Johnson, Sarr, & Carrington -- whose average age is 21.5.

Add 3 or 4 even younger next Summer. Wow....

[DCZards]

...One aspect you are not correcting for though is age. ...

Using the above phrase to hijack this thread for a moment.

If I look at our new roster, & I remove all the guys who it's likely won't be here next year (Middleton, Brogdon, Gill, Holmes, Len & Smart), what's left is a group of 11 guys -- Poole, Bey, Kispert, Champagnie, Jones, George, Vukcevic, Coulibaly, Johnson, Sarr, & Carrington -- whose average age is 21.5.

Add 3 or 4 even younger next Summer. Wow....

Even in the midst of a rebuild, I think you still need vets. I’d expect 2 or 3 vets (most likely Brogdon or Holmes or Smart or Middleton) to be on the roster next season.

While it might be fun to just rollout the ball and let a bunch of 19-22 yr olds go at it, I believe that’s a recipe for the kind of oncourt disorganization that hinders, rather than helps, the development of young players.

[payitforward]

Here's hoping today's trades put an end to this thread.

Why would they?

It's still some cause for concern that none of Sarr, Bub or George are fairly certain to project as quality NBA starters. I'm not saying it's unlikely either, but they're leaving enough doubt that I am concerned....

Fair enough, but you are talking about the players; I view this thread as, essentially, about Dawkins. I.e. should we be concerned or alarmed by the new FO's work.

Thus, the relevant question about Sarr would ask whether there was a better candidate to take at 2. Now, Ajay Mitchell went at 34 I believe, & he's been better than most every other rookie -- but he wouldn't have been a candidate to take at #2.

Really, it's only "should we have taken Sheppard or Clingan instead?" For the moment at least, it's hard to be "concerned or alarmed" based on those alternatives (tho Clingan has been pretty good, no doubt).

The fact that we traded a couple of vets for an unlikely pick swap and some SRP's doesn't really alleviate my concerns.

Well, we did a little more than that!
All the same, we'll have to wait before we know whether yesterday's moves help accelerate the rebuild.

What I saw was evidence of a lot of brainy imagination. That I do think should alleviate anyone's concern or alarm. Not saying it's conclusive, but it looked good work to me!

[The Consiglieri]

The most frustrating most stressful thing right now, is that about 75-85% of what the next decade holds will come down to the balls that bounce around and come out in May of 2025 and 2026. So much work, 45 years of suffering as this teams fan base, and so very much is just riding around on ping pong balls. We've got a 1 in 2 chance this year of getting a top 4 guy (technically a touch more than that I know), and if we can just get past the 5th and 4th revealed cards (assuming we finish in slot 1), I genuinely think we're part of the way there, but it's terrifying to consider that we basically have about a 48% of just being totally ----ed, again, like always historically (I know 2001, and 2010, but those weren't world changing drafts like this one is, and to some extent '26). It's wild to think the past 2 years of building, and all the suffering comes down to that, but it does. Failing that, we just have to nail our scouting perfectly, and select the next best guy if we get hosed, and hope for the best, but man, if we could just land a top 3 pick, and especially the 1 (feels like almost the equivalent of calling your # on a dice roll but not quite), its crazy to think how transformative it would be, but in the end there's 5 out of 6 chances Flagg won't be ours (a bit different than that, but you get my point). For now, I'm more pinning my hopes on the 40ish percent chance we have at a top 3 pick, trying to not be too greedy, praying after all the years of misery we finally get some luck, particularly in this right draft where we need it so much. 40% chance. Crazy. It does make me get irritated when I think of it, to think back over how these situations for instance always have seemed to go San Antonio's way the past 38 years or so (landing mega stud Robinson in '87, sucking for the first time in a decade in '96-'97 and lucking into transformative Duncan, having another great run after that, finally hitting rock bottom just in time for the Wemby draft and getting him too. Really seems like some teams get that luck, and others just don't. Hopefully this year we are one of the lucky ones.

[dckingsfan]

The most frustrating most stressful thing right now, is that about 75-85% of what the next decade holds will come down to the balls that bounce around and come out in May of 2025 and 2026. So much work, 45 years of suffering as this teams fan base, and so very much is just riding around on ping pong balls. We've got a 1 in 2 chance this year of getting a top 4 guy (technically a touch more than that I know), and if we can just get past the 5th and 4th revealed cards (assuming we finish in slot 1), I genuinely think we're part of the way there, but it's terrifying to consider that we basically have about a 48% of just being totally ----ed, again, like always historically (I know 2001, and 2010, but those weren't world changing drafts like this one is, and to some extent '26). It's wild to think the past 2 years of building, and all the suffering comes down to that, but it does. Failing that, we just have to nail our scouting perfectly, and select the next best guy if we get hosed, and hope for the best, but man, if we could just land a top 3 pick, and especially the 1 (feels like almost the equivalent of calling your # on a dice roll but not quite), its crazy to think how transformative it would be, but in the end there's 5 out of 6 chances Flagg won't be ours (a bit different than that, but you get my point). For now, I'm more pinning my hopes on the 40ish percent chance we have at a top 3 pick, trying to not be too greedy, praying after all the years of misery we finally get some luck, particularly in this right draft where we need it so much. 40% chance. Crazy. It does make me get irritated when I think of it, to think back over how these situations for instance always have seemed to go San Antonio's way the past 38 years or so (landing mega stud Robinson in '87, sucking for the first time in a decade in '96-'97 and lucking into transformative Duncan, having another great run after that, finally hitting rock bottom just in time for the Wemby draft and getting him too. Really seems like some teams get that luck, and others just don't. Hopefully this year we are one of the lucky ones.

Well, it does seem like this FO is having to rely on luck. So, luck it is with our fingers and toes crossed.

One more thing - if they make the current youngsters available for more trade assets, then we have a better chance to "luck out". I don't think the draft class of '24 will yield anything that is all that.

My biggest cause concern is that this FO will "value" who they picked AND that they have to be lucky.

[pancakes3]

The Spurs run has been absolutely insane. Not just generational talents in DRob and Duncan but hitting on Manu, Parker, and Kawhi.

The extra crazy part about Wemby is that Centers aren't even supposed to be good anymore in today's game, and yet he's one of the two C's in the league who are of the caliber that can be a cornerstone for a perennial contender. And the Spurs got him.

The other sad part is leaving aside the fact that the Spurs are 1 of 1 when it comes to ping pong balls and lotto talent, other teams in the interim with far less draft success were able to get at least ONE guy and win a chip. Milwaukee were able to get their Giannis, Denver got Jokic and Carmelo, GSW got Steph. The Heat got Wade. Cleveland, obviously, with a detour.

And not even talking about championships, OKC got a run from Durant and now SGA, Orlando got Dwight, Dallas got Dirk, Minny got KG, and the Blazers with Dame.

We had like 3 seasons of Gil that would come anywhere near something like that (and it's still not close) and one amazing 49-win season of Wall/Beal amalgamation.

[dckingsfan]

Okay, adding another cause for concern... We are going to be competing with OKC, Lakers and the Spurs. We have to do better than them to get there. Haven't seen that track record thus far.