DCZards wrote:Nivek, I know YODA is more about stats than eye test but there are two guys not even on your list who will be first round picks and solid pros---Marcus Teague and Austin Rivers. In fact, Rivers is justifiably, imo, going to be an 8-12 pick. A lot of GM’s think highly of him. He’s got a lot of talent that was overshadowed by the immature and selfish way he often played at Duke.
I really like the way Teague improved his decision-making and running of the offense in the latter part of the Kentucky season. Not unlike Beal, he became more comfortable in his role as the season went on.
Rivers rates solidly in the "don't draft" category based on his freshman year. I include an adjustment for underclassmen -- freshman and sophomores essentially get a bonus (that bonus was calibrated through research). I know there are scouts and GMs who like him. I think they're wrong -- UNLESS Rivers puts in a ton of work on his game and his body.
Teague rates as a solid 2nd round pick.
I’m wondering…is it harder for guys with one-year of college ball to score highly on YODA, which might also explain why Beal and MKG are rated below guys with more years and more college stats like Zeller and Crowder ?
It's harder in the sense that freshman and sophomores often have less developed games and have a lot of improving to do. That said, the top 10 scores all-time in YODA include 5 freshmen, 3 sophomores and 2 juniors -- no seniors. The top 20: 7 frosh, 6 soph, 5 juniors, 2 seniors. YODA rewards young players who play well.
What percentage of YODA would you say is subjective?
Almost zero. I have one area for intangibles, which is purely subjective. Everything else is driven by the numbers, the combine measurements/times/scores, and research.
