Official Speculation Thread (Pt.LIV "Lottery/Draft"Edition)

[trebone]

And I value your dissenting opinion BMP, and I agree that as long as people want Noel, want to tank, and want to ship out BBD, you can say whatever you want.

Thanks. But, I will try not to overdo it. Sometimes, when I see those "I want Noel" or "BBD Sucks" posts, I cannot help myself. My fingers start doing the talking. I gotz no control!

But I do want Noel and BBD does suck!

[trebone]

Important for us to realize our rookies, despite playing tons of minutes, go no love in the voting. They're just not that good. We are not purposefully tanking, our players are just not that good.

Being on the worst team in the NBA doesn't help voting. Votes don't equal how good a player is either. Our talent is developing and we're on the right track.

I think votes do equal how good a player is in this case. This is voted on by coaches. But I wasn't saying they won't be good in the future, just that they aren't good now. As in basketball players, they're not good. So when everyone is being outraged that we might purposefully tank next year, I say it's not on purpose, it's natural. They're not good now. One could hope they would get better next year, but how many rookies get significantly better in their 2nd year? As in going from scrub to legit NBA starter?

Saying the voting being done by the head coaches is invalid for the most part IMO, you do realize Mike James of former D League Mike James received two all NBA Defensive 1st team votes this season right? That is an award voted on by the NBA HCs.

[tiderulz]

but how many rookies get significantly better in their 2nd year? As in going from scrub to legit NBA starter?

Paul George - rookie 7.8 ppg, 3.7 rpb, 1 apg
2nd year, 66 games started, 12 ppg, 5.6 rpg, 2.4 apg

Tony Parker, rookie, 9 ppg, 5 apg
2nd year, 15 ppg, 5 apg

Gordon Hayward - rookie 5 ppg 2 rpb, 1 apg
2nd year - 58 games started, 12 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 3.1 apg

Monta Ellis - rookie 6 ppg, 2 rpg, 1 apg
2nd year - 16.5 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 4.1 apg

it happens all the time.

[Blue_and_Whte]

Important for us to realize our rookies, despite playing tons of minutes, go no love in the voting. They're just not that good. We are not purposefully tanking, our players are just not that good.

I'm going to give 19 year old Maurice Harkless a chance to grow. He's not even close to hitting his peak. I think he's better than Singler right now.

I watched quite a few Pistons games via feeds and Harkless definitely was better than Singler. Maybe not 1st half of the season though. After all-star break, it was all Harkless.

Thats true. I guess that would be their logic.

[BadMofoPimp]

I watched quite a few Pistons games via feeds and Harkless definitely was better than Singler. Maybe not 1st half of the season though. After all-star break, it was all Harkless.

Thats true. I guess that would be their logic.

The main difference is that Singler was a starter for almost the entire season whereas Harkless maybe played about much less minutes than Singler played all season long.

[rcklsscognition]

but how many rookies get significantly better in their 2nd year? As in going from scrub to legit NBA starter?

Paul George - rookie 7.8 ppg, 3.7 rpb, 1 apg
2nd year, 66 games started, 12 ppg, 5.6 rpg, 2.4 apg

Tony Parker, rookie, 9 ppg, 5 apg
2nd year, 15 ppg, 5 apg

Gordon Hayward - rookie 5 ppg 2 rpb, 1 apg
2nd year - 58 games started, 12 ppg, 3.5 rpg, 3.1 apg

Monta Ellis - rookie 6 ppg, 2 rpg, 1 apg
2nd year - 16.5 ppg, 3.2 rpg, 4.1 apg

it happens all the time.

What you're showing is that these players got more stats. What you're not showing is the the 95% of these increased were due to increased minutes. The increases in stats are close proportion to the increase in minutes. None of those players significantly increased their shooting percentage, in fact, some got worse.

The only guy who actually jumped in production was Tony Parker. He basically played and started his entire first season and then his stats jumped in season 2, an actual productivity increase. His shots per game and shooting percentage lept and never really came back down again.

What I'm looking for are guys that were statistically poor in their first years and made productivity jumps in their 2nd year enough to be legit NBA starters. Not just minutes leading to extra stats.

[Skin]

What you're showing is that these players got more stats. What you're not showing is the the 95% of these increased were due to increased minutes. The increases in stats are close proportion to the increase in minutes. None of those players significantly increased their shooting percentage, in fact, some got worse.

The only guy who actually jumped in production was Tony Parker. He basically played and started his entire first season and then his stats jumped in season 2, an actual productivity increase. His shots per game and shooting percentage lept and never really came back down again.

What I'm looking for are guys that were statistically poor in their first years and made productivity jumps in their 2nd year enough to be legit NBA starters. Not just minutes leading to extra stats.

But bro... the guys who were on those all rookie teams were guys who had significant minutes.

Getting minutes (unless filling in for an injury) normally means you're getting better. You can't ask who's getting better while playing the same amount of minutes because that's just not how judging a player's improvement works. Basketball isn't played in a vacuum.

[rcklsscognition]

They're not good now. One could hope they would get better next year, but how many rookies get significantly better in their 2nd year? As in going from scrub to legit NBA starter?

Which of our rookies are scrubs?

When I say they are scrubs, I am not looking at potential, I am looking at actual production. Facts. Scrubs are players that don't make a difference in a game, players that can be easily replaced. Remember, not potential, current production.

Harkless is a scrub now.

8 PPG/4.4 RGP /1.2 SPG/0.8 BPG/0.7 APG/---> Projected 11 PPG/6 RPG/1.6 SPG/1.1 BPG/1 APG

Nicholson is a scrub now.
7.8 PPG/3.4 RPG/0.3 SPG/0.4 BPG/0.3 APG/--->Projected 17.5PPG/7.65 RPG/0.675 SPG/0.9 BPG/ 1.35 APG

KOQ is a scrub now.
4.1 PPG/3.7 RPG/0.2 SPG/0.5 BPG/0.9 APG/---> Projected 13.1 PPG/11.8 RPG/0.6 SPG/1.6 BPG/2.8 APG

Jones is a scrub.
Not even going to waste my time on this one.

Looking at my projections based solely on minutes increases, you can see what we've got here. Harkless would be roughly 15th in the NBA in steals but significantly behind everyone above him in every other stat category. Most similar starter by far is Andre Igoudala. Is Harkless projected to be a scrub? No, Iggy is no scrub, and if paid correctly, Harkless will be valuable.

Nicholson with increased minutes most closely resembles David West. Again, not a scrub. KOQ is like JJ Hickson statistically.


Then compare to the 2nd all-rookie team

Drummond- 14 PPG/13.5 RPG/2.88 BPG---> Stud
Valanciunas- 13.8 PPG/9.5 RPG/2 BPG----> JJ Hickson
Gilcrist- 12.4 PPG/8 RPG/ 1.2 BPG----> Thaddeus Young
Singler- 11.2 PPG/ 5 RPG/ 1.1 APG----> Scrub
Zeller- 10.9 PPG/ 7.8 RPG/ 1.2 BPG----> Emeka Okafor

[rcklsscognition]

What you're showing is that these players got more stats. What you're not showing is the the 95% of these increased were due to increased minutes. The increases in stats are close proportion to the increase in minutes. None of those players significantly increased their shooting percentage, in fact, some got worse.

The only guy who actually jumped in production was Tony Parker. He basically played and started his entire first season and then his stats jumped in season 2, an actual productivity increase. His shots per game and shooting percentage lept and never really came back down again.

What I'm looking for are guys that were statistically poor in their first years and made productivity jumps in their 2nd year enough to be legit NBA starters. Not just minutes leading to extra stats.

But bro... the guys who were on those all rookie teams were guys who had significant minutes.

Getting minutes (unless filling in for an injury) normally means you're getting better. You can't ask who's getting better while playing the same amount of minutes because that's just not how judging a player's improvement works. Basketball isn't played in a vacuum.

Statistically there is no proof that the majority of players get better and thus earn more minutes. There are certainly exceptions, players make significant leaps in efficiency after their first year, but in the great majority of cases, players simply extend their production into more minutes and the increases go in step.

I saw some people ask about Harris and Vucevic. You go back and look at their stats and the increases we saw this year could have been predicted fairly closely last summer.

Let's look at Harris:

11 PPG/ 5.2RPG /0.5 APG/ 0.2 BPG in his rookie year at 11.2 MPG

Increased to 36 MPG, which he did actually play with us in Orlando, so there is something to compare to-->
Projected---15.75 PPG/ 7.5 RPG /1.57 APG/ 0.6 BPG
Actual--- 17 PPG/ 8.5 RPG / 2.1 APG / 1.4 BPG

Vucevic:

5.5 PPG / 4.8 RPG / 0.6 APG / 0.7 BPG at 15.9 MPG his rookie year.

Increased to 32 MPG-->

Projected---11.4 PPG/ 10 RPG /1.24 APG/ 1.45 BPG
Actual---13.1 PPG/ 11.9 RPG /1.9 APG/ 1 BPG

The point I'm trying to make here is that huge increases in player efficiency rarely happen. Usually the first jump, the rookie jump, is simply the result of increased minutes. The numbers and efficiency don't get much better or worse due to training or improvement. You can see the projection fairly accurately in 90% of the cases. The next jumps are usually smaller and more incremental, due to higher IQ, practice, training, and improvement.

[MasterGMer]

They're not good now. One could hope they would get better next year, but how many rookies get significantly better in their 2nd year? As in going from scrub to legit NBA starter?

Which of our rookies are scrubs?

When I say they are scrubs, I am not looking at potential, I am looking at actual production. Facts. Scrubs are players that don't make a difference in a game, players that can be easily replaced. Remember, not potential, current production.

Harkless is a scrub now.

8 PPG/4.4 RGP /1.2 SPG/0.8 BPG/0.7 APG/---> Projected 11 PPG/6 RPG/1.6 SPG/1.1 BPG/1 APG

Nicholson is a scrub now.
7.8 PPG/3.4 RPG/0.3 SPG/0.4 BPG/0.3 APG/--->Projected 17.5PPG/7.65 RPG/0.675 SPG/0.9 BPG/ 1.35 APG

KOQ is a scrub now.
4.1 PPG/3.7 RPG/0.2 SPG/0.5 BPG/0.9 APG/---> Projected 13.1 PPG/11.8 RPG/0.6 SPG/1.6 BPG/2.8 APG

Jones is a scrub.
Not even going to waste my time on this one.

Looking at my projections based solely on minutes increases, you can see what we've got here. Harkless would be roughly 15th in the NBA in steals but significantly behind everyone above him in every other stat category. Most similar starter by far is Andre Igoudala. Is Harkless projected to be a scrub? No, Iggy is no scrub, and if paid correctly, Markless will be valuable.

Nicholson with increased minutes most closely resembles David West. Again, not a scrub. KOQ is like JJ Hickson statistically.


Then compare to the 2nd all-rookie team

Drummond- 14 PPG/13.5 RPG/2.88 BPG---> Stud
Valanciunas- 13.8 PPG/9.5 RPG/2 BPG----> JJ Hickson
Gilcrist- 12.4 PPG/8 RPG/ 1.2 BPG----> Thaddeus Young
Singler- 11.2 PPG/ 5 RPG/ 1.1 APG----> Scrub
Zeller- 10.9 PPG/ 7.8 RPG/ 1.2 BPG----> Emeka Okafor

Where did you get all the projections? That is the key.

[Bensational]

rcklsscognition doin a sound job of backing himself up. nice work man.

i think Harkless is the most likely to make a dramatic improvement, if he can just get smarter with his offense. work on his 3s and handles, and he will be able to extend his ability to get to the line and maximize how well he moves off the ball already.

[Skin]

The point I'm trying to make here is that huge increases in player efficiency rarely happen. Usually the first jump, the rookie jump, is simply the result of increased minutes. The numbers and efficiency don't get much better or worse due to training or improvement. You can see the projection fairly accurately in 90% of the cases. The next jumps are usually smaller and more incremental, due to higher IQ, practice, training, and improvement.

I have no problem with them not being on the All Rookie teams. While it's certainly nice recognition for the player, I don't put a lot of weight into it as far as using it to judge them as players. That's where you and I differ. You said that they just aren't that good. I disagree. I do think that Harkless was a overlooked. Probably because he didn't start all year combined with the fact that we lost so many games. But towards the end of the year, in the games he had starter minutes, he performed as well as some of those guys who got recognized. I'm not comfortable sitting here, saying he's not good because he wasn't on the all rookie team.

What I'm really curious of is what are your projections then for Harkless and Nicholson next year?

[rcklsscognition]

Projections are based off MPG increases. There are no adjustments. The only change I made was for Vucevic in the above example with Harris because Vuc only played 33 minutes a game. Everything else had their stats projected up to 36 MPG off their rookie season stats.

All you do is take the player's rookie MPG and calculate the % increase to get to 36 minutes. Then multiply that percentage by every stat. It's crazy how similar the numbers are in over a great majority of the cases.

You'd think that there would be some sort of dropoff from playing against bench players in a rookie season then stepping up into a starter role later on, but there doesn't appear to be much of that happening.

Skin- I'm saying based purely of production, they aren't good. I love Harkless and AN and Harris, but if I gave you a stat sheet with no name, age, or other identifying information and it read 8 PPG/4.4 RGP /1.2 SPG/0.8 BPG/0.7 APG/ would you tell me that player is not a scrub? The coaches are not thinking potential when they vote for these rookie teams. They're looking at actual contribution and production. That's all I'm saying. I think we are all guilty of projecting our own visions for what our rookies will one day be onto their present skills.

As far as my projections for Harkless, Nicholson, and KOQ for next year, that is projecting their stats for 36 MPG. Basically what we'd expect if they were starters. Then I ran a comparison for the most similar player across all stat categories and added up the differential. The players with the smallest differences were:

Moe= Andre Igoudala
Nicholson= David West
KOQ= JJ Hickson

[Dunstown magic]

In regards to the draft, If i were Hennigan I would be aiming to pick up either Trey Burke or Ben Mclemore and then trying to acquire another 1st round pick between 15-25 and picking up Steven Adams. Adams is a specimen very very raw offensively, however the man is a beast and a great athlete. In my opinion he was under utilized at pitt. Its on the defensive side that Adams excels hes big, long, athletic and moves well and has fairly good defensive instincts particularly blocking shots. I do think that he is going to rise on draft boards once the combine begins because of this size and athleticism and teams maybe willing to take a risk in a weaker draft. I don't doubt that he'll be a project but one worth taking a risk on in a weak draft.

[drsd]

In regards to the draft, If i were Hennigan I would be aiming to pick up either Trey Burke or Ben Mclemore and then trying to acquire another 1st round pick between 15-25 and picking up Steven Adams. Adams is a specimen very very raw offensively, however the man is a beast and a great athlete. In my opinion he was under utilized at pitt. Its on the defensive side that Adams excels hes big, long, athletic and moves well and has fairly good defensive instincts particularly blocking shots. I do think that he is going to rise on draft boards once the combine begins because of this size and athleticism and teams maybe willing to take a risk in a weaker draft. I don't doubt that he'll be a project but one worth taking a risk on in a weak draft.

Orlando could trade with Phoenix for what could be #4 and #30 and that could get Burke and Adams. Additionally, the TPE to the Bulls for Boozer and #20 makes sense (maybe Harrington gets thrown in for Hamilton to balance that out). In that scenario, Orlando would have three rookies: lets call them Burke, Adetokoubo, and Adams.

The roster becomes:
Nelson/Burke/Adetokoubo
Afflalo/Moore/Lamb?
Harkless/Hamilton/Jones
Davis/Harris/Nicholson
Vučević/O'Quinn/Adams

That's quite an interesting roster. Depth and balance are the strengths. I can see 30+ wins there, if Nelson, Afflalo, and Davis can all log 70 games a piece.


..

[drsd]

..

A must read story:
NBA.com: Denton: Inside Look at Draft Lottery and Magic's Odds

Since the NBA went to a heavily weighted lottery system in 1990, the team with the worst record has only gotten the top overall selection just three times. The Cleveland Cavaliers (2003 with LeBron James) and the Magic (2004 with Howard) did it in consecutive years, while the then-New Jersey Nets (1990 with Derrick Coleman) were the only other team to snag the top pick while having the NBA’s worst record.

... no team with the NBA’s worst record since the Magic in 2004 has won the lottery. Over the last eight years, teams with the ninth-best odds (Bulls in 2008), eighth-best odds (Clippers traded to Cavaliers in 2011), sixth-best odds (Bucks in 2005 and Blazers in ‘07), fifth-best odds (Raptors in 2006 and Wizards in ‘10), third-best odds (Hornets in 2012) and second-best odds (Clippers in 2009) have won the lotteries.

[Dunstown magic]

I like the ideas of the trades drsd! Although i think 30 would be too late to pick up Adams when talking about the trade with phoenix. Are there any other teams with multiple first round picks? However, I would go in the other direction instead of trying to win 30+ games/ make the playoffs i would be tanking and be trying to trade baby. I still believe that Afflalo can be a good to better than good 3 option on a good team.

Let's say a couple of years down the road lineup is:

PG: Burke
SG: Afflalo
SF: Harris/ Harkless or Max Free Agent
PF : Harris or Max Free Agent
C: Vucevic/ Adams

With an additional 2014 Draft pick and fillers

Although I do believe Harris is a great talent I don't like our chances of competing for a title in the long run with him as our primary 4, I prefer him as a 3. Although I do Hope i'm wrong. In this scenario above I believe Afflalo would flourish as a third option.

[IGotDaMagicInMe]

I dont even really care what pick we get, to be honest the guy i want won't be picked first or second but on the other hand i want to see who henny would pick first overall. . .

[glennathan]

In regards to the draft, If i were Hennigan I would be aiming to pick up either Trey Burke or Ben Mclemore and then trying to acquire another 1st round pick between 15-25 and picking up Steven Adams. Adams is a specimen very very raw offensively, however the man is a beast and a great athlete. In my opinion he was under utilized at pitt. Its on the defensive side that Adams excels hes big, long, athletic and moves well and has fairly good defensive instincts particularly blocking shots. I do think that he is going to rise on draft boards once the combine begins because of this size and athleticism and teams maybe willing to take a risk in a weaker draft. I don't doubt that he'll be a project but one worth taking a risk on in a weak draft.

Orlando could trade with Phoenix for what could be #4 and #30 and that could get Burke and Adams. Additionally, the TPE to the Bulls for Boozer and #20 makes sense (maybe Harrington gets thrown in for Hamilton to balance that out). In that scenario, Orlando would have three rookies: lets call them Burke, Adetokoubo, and Adams.

The roster becomes:
Nelson/Burke/Adetokoubo
Afflalo/Moore/Lamb?
Harkless/Hamilton/Jones
Davis/Harris/Nicholson
Vučević/O'Quinn/Adams

That's quite an interesting roster. Depth and balance are the strengths. I can see 30+ wins there, if Nelson, Afflalo, and Davis can all log 70 games a piece.


..

I like the idea of getting Boozer and Hamilton from the Bulls. Boozer could work with Vucevic and Nicholson on their toughness. Hamilton would be a good teacher to work with Harkless.

The Suns trade I do not like. I personally would offer the #1-4 pick to the Wolves for Shved and the #9 if you can. Maybe throw something else in there with it.

[drsd]

However, I would go in the other direction instead of trying to win 30+ games/ make the playoffs i would be tanking and be trying to trade baby.

The easiest way for Orlando to be awful next year is to trade Nelson. Add Davis and Harrington to given trades, and the Magic would not win 20 games.

..