Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part V

[Ruzious]

Adams, Shabazz, Bennett are the most explosive athletes in this relative to their position in this draft. Adams has a sister who shot putts in the olympics, talk about explosive genetics.

But none of them are really great athletes, imo.

[dobrojim]

Can Bennett be a back to the basket type of player? I understand he can shoot the outside shot how good will his inside game be in NBA

Bennett is the ,most skilled offensive player in the draft. I'd be surprised if he didn't continue to develop offensively, including a post up game.

At this point, I still think Bennett is the right pick for us, but would be excited if its Zeller or Porter as well. Not so much Olapido, as I think we should be drafting starters at this point.

I doubt it. He may be the most intriguing match of skill & physical strength but most skilled? Not by a long shot. He certainly has shown precious little off the ball, especially in terms of awareness. He has no post up game to speak of either. No post moves, no hook shot, he's strictly a face up 4.

Personally, I think Olynyk is the most skilled big in the draft, by a wide margin.

and maybe CJM is the most skilled G...

the other thing is (as was discussed earlier), Bennett appears to have a lot to
learn about 5 on 5 basketball. He can have all the skills in the world (see Javale McGee)
but if he doesn't know how/when/where to put them to use, he ultimately won't
be that successful. I'm not saying I know that this is/will be true, but it is a definite
risk. Combine that with tweener size and the risk grows.

[dobrojim]

He's a lot like Bennett in that if someone is deciding to put him at the top of their board, it's based on unavailable evidence, and simply projecting out from hints.

Erm, no, this board is talking about Oladipo because Kevin's evidence-based system YODA gives Oladipo the top score in this draft.

and for a lot of us, he passed the eye test as well. VO is a player I thought about
(coveted) since BEFORE Nivek posted his YODA score.

[Dark Faze]

Great post Consiglieri , you mirror my thoughts exactly.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

Erm, no, this board is talking about Oladipo because Kevin's evidence-based system YODA gives Oladipo the top score in this draft.

I believe Cody gets the second highest score in the YODA System, and he fits a more pressing long term need than Oladipo does. If it were up to me, and Oladipo were the BPA at 3, I would trade down into a spot where I was certain to get Cody, and then use the additional assets from the trade to get into a spot to also pick up Steven Adams, Kelly Olynyk or Gorgui Deng (players that rate decently in Kevin's Yoda system).

I would do similarly, although I would try for Olynyk and Wolters with Marshall in round two.

[The Consiglieri]

After a few more days of contemplation, I'm starting to back away from my advocacy of Bennett. Although I think his high beta makes him an intriguing prospect who could conceivably pan out to be better than Porter, I'm starting to be less optimistic about his defensive upside.

The fact is, even if his disinterest in D can be coached away, he's still a 6-7 guy with a standing reach probably in the 8-9 range. Guys that small are never effective defenders at the PF position. Basically, even if he pans out to be a dynamic offensive player and a hard working defender, I'm concerned that his net effect on winning games will be zero or negative.

I'm also starting to think a little more highly of Porter. The statistical analysis about him by Nivek and that statgeek from the website I posted a while ago are pretty convincing. I have concerns about his light weight, but he definitely has a bigger frame than Tayshaun Prince. He'll put on weight over time. I could see him filling out to roughly the size of Scottie Pippen if he spends the time in the gym. He certainly won't pan out to be the next Pippen because he lacks Pippen's explosiveness, but maybe he ends up about as good as (a healthy) Danny Manning.

Pippen was listed at 210 as a 22-year-old draft prospect. Here's a youtube video of a rookie Scottie Pippen in his first NBA playoff start. He was a twig even though he was 3 months shy of his 23rd birthday. Porter turns 20 next week.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M79eJyW_T0M[/youtube]

I'm fluctuating a bit too, becoming more interested in Porter and Oladipo. Also alarmed by the news that Len is #3 on the Cavs board. Could he be that high on ours? Now it seems distinctly possible. The question would then be, who are the other two guys?

[nate33]

As was mentioned yesterday, there's a fundamental difference between being a player that logs serious minutes producing certain numbers, and a player that isn't logging heavy minutes producing certain numbers. Issues like fatigue and injury crop up more frequently with players that log the heavier minutes. Oladipo didnt have to deal with these issues hence it inherently distorts the numbers a bit, and I don't know any reliable way of adjusting for that, since you can't really create a "known quantity" out of what's missing.

I am completely baffled as to why you continually harp on the minutes issue with Oladipo. Oladipo averaged 28.4 minutes per game, second only to Zeller who averaged 29.5 minutes. That's easily enough minutes to make per-40 comparisons with other starting players. It's not like Oladipo came off the bench for 15 minutes a night and pounded on opposing bench players.

The only reason Oladipo didn't play more minutes is because Indiana benches their good players in blowouts. Over the first 11 games of the season (ignoring the 3 games against Georgetown, North Carolina and Butler), Oladipo averaged just 23 minutes a game. All but one of those 8 games were blowouts, usually by 30-40 points. He also played just 14 minutes in a blowout win over Perdue during February. Ignore those 9 games, and Oladipo averaged 31 minutes a game over 27 games, nearly all of those games against quality competition.

31 minutes a game is a completely normal amount for a starter and right on par with the other top players in this draft. Porter averaged 33 minutes a game; Bennett, 27; Olynyck, 26; Zeller, 29; Noel 32; Burke, 35; Len 26:, McLemore, 32.

[fishercob]

Olynyk only averaged 26 MPG???? Do not draft. Do NOT draft!

[tontoz]

The obvious allure of Bennett is how well he would fit with Wall, assuming he pans out to be a good player. But without measurements and athletic testing it is hard to get a handle on his true value. I also find it odd that he is apparently unwilling to do interviews.

[Dr Positivity]

I doubt it. He may be the most intriguing match of skill & physical strength but most skilled? Not by a long shot. He certainly has shown precious little off the ball, especially in terms of awareness. He has no post up game to speak of either. No post moves, no hook shot, he's strictly a face up 4.

Personally, I think Olynyk is the most skilled big in the draft, by a wide margin.

I trust Ryan Kelly's skill level more. 40% 3 and 80% FT two years in a row for a big is really impressive. Think he's too skilled and fluid offensively not to make it as at least a 3rd big. Same thing with Matthew Dellavedova who's fk'ing brutal in the area of athleticism and creating offense attacking the basket, but the guy has elite shooting, elite passing, elite instincts/feel and is a 6'4 PG, at a certain point if a guy is bowling a strike right down the middle in every area but 1, it can be overcome-able, even for a talent as important as athleticism

[montestewart]

As was mentioned yesterday, there's a fundamental difference between being a player that logs serious minutes producing certain numbers, and a player that isn't logging heavy minutes producing certain numbers. Issues like fatigue and injury crop up more frequently with players that log the heavier minutes. Oladipo didnt have to deal with these issues hence it inherently distorts the numbers a bit, and I don't know any reliable way of adjusting for that, since you can't really create a "known quantity" out of what's missing.

I am completely baffled as to why you continually harp on the minutes issue with Oladipo. Oladipo averaged 28.4 minutes per game, second only to Zeller who averaged 29.5 minutes. That's easily enough minutes to make per-40 comparisons with other starting players. It's not like Oladipo came off the bench for 15 minutes a night and pounded on opposing bench players.

The only reason Oladipo didn't play more minutes is because Indiana benches their good players in blowouts. Over the first 11 games of the season (ignoring the 3 games against Georgetown, North Carolina and Butler), Oladipo averaged just 23 minutes a game. All but one of those 8 games were blowouts, usually by 30-40 points. He also played just 14 minutes in a blowout win over Perdue during February. Ignore those 9 games, and Oladipo averaged 31 minutes a game over 27 games, nearly all of those games against quality competition.

31 minutes a game is a completely normal amount for a starter and right on par with the other top players in this draft. Porter averaged 33 minutes a game; Bennett, 27; Olynyck, 26; Zeller, 29; Noel 32; Burke, 35; Len 26:, McLemore, 32.

I was just about to post similar. Oladipo and Zeller were clearly Indiana's two top players, yet both fell short of 30 mpg, maybe for some other reason than the failings or inabilities of the players or the incompetence of the coach. Even discounting nate33's observation about Oladipo's early season minutes, his 28.4 per game translates into 34 mpg in a 48 minute NBA game. That doesn't exactly sound like "extremely limited."

Oladipo showed pretty well prior to this year not only in YODA but in other systems and in the estimation of other observers. This year, he made a leap forward, something frequently only hoped for in players drafted after freshman year. Oladipo gives whatever team drafts him the benefit of having already seen him made great strides.

A player that logs heavier minutes may be doing so only because the team has no valid option to take some of those minutes, even against lesser competition. Many of those additional minutes may come against bench players or equally fatigued starters, mitigating the presumption of a greater ability to play through fatigue.

I'm not a fan of drafting Oladipo for the same reasons many have already mentioned: he plays the same position as Beal and he doesn't seem to be a valid option at PG or SF. For a team that needs a shooting guard, I would think he's a top option, and for one that already has an alpha scorer and needs defense and all around skills, I would think he's the top option.

[pancakes3]

Adams, Shabazz, Bennett are the most explosive athletes in this relative to their position in this draft. Adams has a sister who shot putts in the olympics, talk about explosive genetics.

But none of them are really great athletes, imo.

Not elite 99th percentile athletes anyway.

This draft also has 6 of the top 20 max verts in combine history (according to DX).

[sfam]

The obvious allure of Bennett is how well he would fit with Wall, assuming he pans out to be a good player. But without measurements and athletic testing it is hard to get a handle on his true value. I also find it odd that he is apparently unwilling to do interviews.

Unwilling to do interviews with teams? Or with the media?

[sfam]

I doubt it. He may be the most intriguing match of skill & physical strength but most skilled? Not by a long shot. He certainly has shown precious little off the ball, especially in terms of awareness. He has no post up game to speak of either. No post moves, no hook shot, he's strictly a face up 4.

Personally, I think Olynyk is the most skilled big in the draft, by a wide margin.

I trust Ryan Kelly's skill level more. 40% 3 and 80% FT two years in a row for a big is really impressive. Think he's too skilled and fluid offensively not to make it as at least a 3rd big. Same thing with Matthew Dellavedova who's fk'ing brutal in the area of athleticism and creating offense attacking the basket, but the guy has elite shooting, elite passing, elite instincts/feel and is a 6'4 PG, at a certain point if a guy is bowling a strike right down the middle in every area but 1, it can be overcome-able, even for a talent as important as athleticism

That's not a worry with Kelly, as he won't get drafted. We could pick him up outside of the draft, although chances are he'll want to go someplace without a logjam at PF.

PS - I don't think Kelly is close to Bennett on offense but its probably not worth debating, as Kelly probably won't get drafted after his recent body fat percentage score.

[sfam]

Adams, Shabazz, Bennett are the most explosive athletes in this relative to their position in this draft. Adams has a sister who shot putts in the olympics, talk about explosive genetics.

But none of them are really great athletes, imo.

Not elite 99th percentile athletes anyway.

This draft also has 6 of the top 20 max verts in combine history (according to DX).

We don't have his combine scores, but Bennett really comes across as an elite athlete to me.

[dobrojim]

If they really like Dipo as top player on their board when it's their
turn, they should draft him.

the last year in particular as well as recent trends, IND notwithstanding,
is for smaller quicker more athletic players with range.

NY played 2 PGs, 1 SG and a SF for much of the season and was successful.
MIA (yeah, maybe an exception that proves the rule) often plays a 1, 2 or 3 3s and a 4.

If Dipo came to us, I think they could play him in a lineup with Wall, Beal, Ariza and Okafor,
at least for limited stretches and/or when they don't want to use a traditional 1,2,3,4,5 lineup.
Imagine that lineup going up against NY or MIA's small lineups.

If OP is the pick, I don't mind redundancy at the position where the biggest studs
in the league (Bron, Melo, KD) now play, or ideally now would play. IND got by last night
but their lack of depth at 3 against Bron isn't helpful to their cause.

[Zonkerbl]

How are moon beams, and cobwebs involved with the reality of very limited minutes for a starter, decreasing the issues of fatigue and the liklihood of injur? These are very serious issues when you're analyzing the stats of a player with a limited collection of data and or a limited collection of minutes to judge said player by.

As was mentioned yesterday, there's a fundamental difference between being a player that logs serious minutes producing certain numbers, and a player that isn't logging heavy minutes producing certain numbers. Issues like fatigue and injury crop up more frequently with players that log the heavier minutes. Oladipo didnt have to deal with these issues hence it inherently distorts the numbers a bit, and I don't know any reliable way of adjusting for that, since you can't really create a "known quantity" out of what's missing.

Secondly I question the reliability of statistics in a modern college basketball setting where conference to conference strength is erratic and not reliable in terms of comparisons, and where college as a whole sees its best players repeatedly declaring after a sole year, emptying out both elite talent, and depth of talent so that players excelling as juniors and seniors could be outright frauds, or just late bloomers/developers. How do you quantify any of this? I understand and very much value the imporantce of finding a way, anyway of attempting to quantify production, but I also would argue that college basketball statistics, particularly from juniors and seniors are likely the least reliable in all of basketball in terms of projecting the quality of a player.It's anything but "Facts".

As for "THIS BOARD", since when are Oladipo's supporters, THE Collective BOARD?

I respect the hell out of Nivek for coming up with his sytem. It does not, however, make his system sacrosant, or free from criticism, nor you. And I am certainly more than willing to accept criticism, there is a ton I don't know, and even more that I don't know I don't know. I have no problems with humility, just sarcastic and dismissive tones.

Other than that, I espect your opinion, and your right to say it.

I was responding to a statement that you made that people ON THIS BOARD are valuing Oladipo without any factual basis ("He's a lot like Bennett in that if someone is deciding to put him at the top of their board, it's based on unavailable evidence, and simply projecting out from hints."). That is untrue. One of the main reasons we (ON THIS BOARD) are discussing Oladipo is that he gets a high score in YODA, a fact-based metric. There may be discussions going on in other forums that I don't know about. The one ON THIS BOARD that I've been following has been completely and utterly fact-based.

You may disagree that Oladipo is as good as YODA says he is, because your interpretation of facts is different. You cannot truthfully say the Oladipo supporters do not have any facts to support their argument. It's just plain wrong to say that.

That's all I'm saying. Of course YODA has Noel lower than Oladipo because Noel is still a work in progress. Of course everybody agrees Noel is the better prospect, because YODA only captures what you have actually accomplished, not what you will be able to do once you grow into your body. Of course YODA doesn't capture desire or potential to improve. But that doesn't mean you throw YODA out. Just because YODA is not as valuable a tool as your eyes does not mean it is completely worthless.

In my mind, YODA and other, similar statistical exercises have a very specific purpose: they are best used as tools to help you find diamonds in the rough. There are about 300 Division I schools with 12 players each and who knows how many euro league teams. YODA will help you identify lesser-known players out there like Faried or Jae Crowder, who both were off the charts in YODA. YODA will highlight ten or so players you never heard of that may be worth checking out. Of those, maybe only half are the real deal. Somebody did an analysis of second round picks in this thread at some point, pointing out that only 6% of second round picks are any good. But what if using a tool like YODA gives you a 50% chance of finding a quality player, instead of 6%? Why would you throw that tool out?

It's like saying "This slot machine only gives me a jackpot 50% of the time. Why bother?"

YODA is also helpful for documenting actual achievement. It's a moneyball thing -- ignore how fat and short this guy is, ignore how ugly his game is, can he actually play? YODA can help you overcome biases. For example, there's a really strong bias against white players. There is a prejudice that white players are slower and less athletic, which may actually be true on average, who knows. But Cody Zeller is neither slow nor unathletic, according to his combine results. According to YODA, his documented achievement accomplishing the things that need to be done on the court ranks almost as high as anyone. Zeller has converted the excellent physical tools that he has into excellent accomplishments -- he is one of the most productive players in the draft this year. He deserves a close look. After taking into account aspects of the game that are not captured in YODA, can you determine whether Zeller is a better player than Porter? Facts force you to ask difficult questions, questions that other people casually dismiss. Skepticism is what protects you from groupthink. Skepticism is how you find the quality players that everybody else missed.

Getting back to the original focus of this discussion: Oladipo, according to the eye test, is one of the best defenders in college basketball. He has also converted his excellent physical tools, as tested in the combine, into excellent accomplishments on the court, as measured by YODA. The facts indicate we should take a closer look at him, so we are. It's a fact-based discussion, although, as you correctly point out, the facts we are using are not 100% reliable, so maybe in the end we'll decide that, say, Noel is still a better player, no matter what YODA says.

What I hear you saying is "because the facts are not 100% reliable, they are not really facts at all and we shouldn't be discussing Oladipo at all. Only the eye test is 100% reliable and statistics don't matter." If that's what you mean, I think you're flat out wrong. I think using data and statistics (properly, with a full understanding of the limitations of the tools you are using) to find things the herd have overlooked is precisely how you succeed at this sort of business.

[Ruzious]

I doubt it. He may be the most intriguing match of skill & physical strength but most skilled? Not by a long shot. He certainly has shown precious little off the ball, especially in terms of awareness. He has no post up game to speak of either. No post moves, no hook shot, he's strictly a face up 4.

Personally, I think Olynyk is the most skilled big in the draft, by a wide margin.

I trust Ryan Kelly's skill level more. 40% 3 and 80% FT two years in a row for a big is really impressive. Think he's too skilled and fluid offensively not to make it as at least a 3rd big. Same thing with Matthew Dellavedova who's fk'ing brutal in the area of athleticism and creating offense attacking the basket, but the guy has elite shooting, elite passing, elite instincts/feel and is a 6'4 PG, at a certain point if a guy is bowling a strike right down the middle in every area but 1, it can be overcome-able, even for a talent as important as athleticism

That's an interesting comp - Ryan Kelly to Olynyk. Kelly's actually got a significant standing reach advantage. And Kelly's a player who I think you can make the case that his other numbers would have been better if he hadn't been injured. He's recovering from offseason surgery now - and I'm not sure what the prognosis was - when he'll be healthy enough to play. Kelly at some point will play in the NBA.

[AFM]

Has anyone mentioned what I will coin as The Posterization Factor?
It seems that all elite wings regularly posterize defenders with their explosiveness off the dribble. It's a sign of both elite athleticism and the aggressive killer attitude it takes to bang on the rim. I can't find a single example of Porter dunking on an opponent. I can find multiple examples of Bennett destroying a defender even though he's shorter than Porter.

[Ruzious]

Has anyone mentioned what I will coin as The Posterization Factor?
It seems that all elite wings regularly posterize defenders with their explosiveness off the dribble. It's a sign of both elite athleticism and the aggressive killer attitude it takes to bang on the rim. I can't find a single example of Porter dunking on an opponent. I can find multiple examples of Bennett destroying a defender even though he's shorter than Porter.

Show me an example of Larry Bird or Joe Dumars or Chris Mullen doing it, and I'll believe in your TPF coinage.