2022 NBA Draft Part II

[165bows]

how do you define 'success'?

"All star"--thus why I looked at the top 5. If you pick a player in the top 5 and their career peaks at "good starter" then either the pick was a failure or it was a crap draft.

As for your list:
- JV isn't a success as a top 5 pick.
- I don't think Favors is either.
- I didn't count Simmons as a big
- Using "all star" as the criteria means neither Ayton nor Jackson count as successes*

* This is probably the least fair since they're the youngest draft on the list

I'd be surprised if the average player at #4-5 throughout those draft was an all-start player.

[SelfishPlayer]

The weird thing about this time of year in the modern NBA is that we can all see guards and wings, full time perimeter players, lead their teams to NBA championships, yet without fail overvaluing height persists in ranking NBA draft prospects.

Jaden Ivey, Mathurin, Kendall Brown, and Eason as a group physically appear to be more like what leads a modern NBA team to a championship over Jabari, Chet, and Banchero.

Look at GSW and Boston, how much draft capital have they invested in their starting big men/front court/PF/C/4/5?

I had a quick look into this a while back and the data is pretty stunning. If you take the top 5 picks from the 2010-2018 drafts (essentially all players have had at least 4 years in the league) and divide into positional groups (bigs, guards, and wings) you get the follow distribution and results:
12 guards => 6 all stars => 50% hit rate
12 wings => 6 all stars => 50% hit rate
21 bigs => 5 all stars => 24% hit rate

Not to mention that mixed into that 5 were:
a) 2 clear #1 picks
b) 1 that probably would have gone #1 if not for injury
c) 1 that had an argument for #1 if not for attitude

So yeah, it's pretty shocking that the top 3 in this draft will likely be big men despite the data showing otherwise.

Full post here: viewtopic.php?f=29&t=2193939&p=99251152#p99251152

Cool post. There is a lack of consistency amongst people when it comes to this. They will criticize non full time perimeter players of the past for not being skilled enough to play in today's NBA, but that same person will favor height and non full time perimeter NBA prospects in the draft. They'll say that it's a perimeter player's league but devalue speed, agility, skill and creativity in favor of above average height when ranking prospects.

I think that people are afraid to move on...

[clyde21]

how do you define 'success'?

"All star"--thus why I looked at the top 5. If you pick a player in the top 5 and their career peaks at "good starter" then either the pick was a failure or it was a crap draft.

As for your list:
- JV isn't a success as a top 5 pick.
- I don't think Favors is either.
- I didn't count Simmons as a big
- Using "all star" as the criteria means neither Ayton nor Jackson count as successes*

* This is probably the least fair since they're the youngest draft on the list

of course those guys are successes for picks 4-5, again, do you have the success rate for 4-5 picks specifically? ROI is probably above average for both.

and again, how about a little context? picking a guy like Alex Len in the top 5 isn't the same as picking Jabari Smith. to act like they are similar archetypes is just being disingenuous.

also are you arguing that none of Bari, Paolo and Chet should be top 5 picks? if so what's your top 5?

[toooskies]

The possibility of Jabari Smith being a shorter Lauri Markkanen with better defense but worse touch around the basket is there. I'd rather have Chet or Paolo.

So Rashard Lewis (Who I think he likely turns out as w/ a small chance to be a Glen Rice type).

Still, for all the talk of Smith not being a guy that can score outside long jumpers he got near 5 FTA per game in 28mpg. Unless we are assuming those all come from being fouled at the 3PT line, its pretty clear he can drive to the lane.

Rashard Lewis had one season with a lower 2p% in the pros than in Jabari did in college, his rookie year when he was right out of high school. The floor is lower than that.

[The-Power]

and i'd say biggest part of the problem is that a lot of GMs have had a hard time catching up to today's NBA - drafting 'traditional' centers and bigs in the top5 like Okafor and Wiseman which was always insane, but guys like Jackson, Mobley, Towns, Embiid, etc. make it well worth the pick if you identify those guys, which isn't that hard.

I think you make it sound easier with the benefit of hindsight. Because I'm sure most of our posting histories show how every now and then we overvalued bigs that turn out to not be a desirable NBA archetype – or at least player – after all. Perhaps we've learned something from each case, but there's no guarantee that this isn't going to happen again.

[clyde21]

and i'd say biggest part of the problem is that a lot of GMs have had a hard time catching up to today's NBA - drafting 'traditional' centers and bigs in the top5 like Okafor and Wiseman which was always insane, but guys like Jackson, Mobley, Towns, Embiid, etc. make it well worth the pick if you identify those guys, which isn't that hard.

I think you make it sound easier with the benefit of hindsight. Because I'm sure most of our posting histories show how every now and then we overvalued bigs that turn out to not be a desirable NBA archetype – or at least player – after all. Perhaps we've learned something from each case, but there's no guarantee that this isn't going to happen again.

it's pretty straightforward, it isn't difficult to see what archetype a player fits and which big is more traditional.

same reason why I had Mobley #1 and a guy like Wiseman #10. don't think it's rocket science. doesn't mean Mobley will 100% be successful and Wiseman will 100% not be, but it's again looking at their skills it wasn't difficult at all to see which big is more made for today's NBA.

[basketballRob]

Jabari is the betting favorite to be the first pick. Plus, he was on IG a couple of days ago and liked all the future Magic comments.

https://sportsbook.fanduel.com/navigation/nba?tab=nba-draft

Sent from my SM-G950U using RealGM mobile app

[clyde21]

and i'd say biggest part of the problem is that a lot of GMs have had a hard time catching up to today's NBA - drafting 'traditional' centers and bigs in the top5 like Okafor and Wiseman which was always insane, but guys like Jackson, Mobley, Towns, Embiid, etc. make it well worth the pick if you identify those guys, which isn't that hard.

I think you make it sound easier with the benefit of hindsight. Because I'm sure most of our posting histories show how every now and then we overvalued bigs that turn out to not be a desirable NBA archetype – or at least player – after all. Perhaps we've learned something from each case, but there's no guarantee that this isn't going to happen again.

it's pretty straightforward, it isn't difficult to see what archetype a player fits and which big is more traditional.

same reason why I had Mobley #1 and a guy like Wiseman #10. don't think it's rocket science. doesn't mean Mobley will 100% be successful and Wiseman will 100% not be, but it's again looking at their skills it wasn't difficult at all to see which big is more made for today's NBA.

i will add that i did overvalue two bigs in 2018 in Ayton and Bamba, learned my lesson since. probably not the top of guys I'd take top 5 if they exist in this class, even in a weaker top5.

[The-Power]

I think you make it sound easier with the benefit of hindsight. Because I'm sure most of our posting histories show how every now and then we overvalued bigs that turn out to not be a desirable NBA archetype – or at least player – after all. Perhaps we've learned something from each case, but there's no guarantee that this isn't going to happen again.

it's pretty straightforward, it isn't difficult to see what archetype a player fits and which big is more traditional.

same reason why I had Mobley #1 and a guy like Wiseman #10. don't think it's rocket science. doesn't mean Mobley will 100% be successful and Wiseman will 100% not be, but it's again looking at their skills it wasn't difficult at all to see which big is more made for today's NBA.

i will add that i did overvalue two bigs in 2018 in Ayton and Bamba, learned my lesson since. probably not the top of guys I'd take top 5 if they exist in this class, even in a weaker top5.

I think that's an important point, though. These players didn't pan out and we then often say we learned the lesson – but if Bamba had become the next Gobert (as he was touted by some) or Ayton the next Bam in terms of switchability, would you still say you overvalued them based on archetype? Probably not. Instead, you'd probably count them as players supposedly easy to identify as great fits in today's NBA. And who knows, in a couple seasons we may talk the same way about how we learned from Mark Williams and his ranking in 2022 (or we won't, because he happened to pan out and we can claim to have known his elite fit in today's NBA).

[clyde21]

it's pretty straightforward, it isn't difficult to see what archetype a player fits and which big is more traditional.

same reason why I had Mobley #1 and a guy like Wiseman #10. don't think it's rocket science. doesn't mean Mobley will 100% be successful and Wiseman will 100% not be, but it's again looking at their skills it wasn't difficult at all to see which big is more made for today's NBA.

i will add that i did overvalue two bigs in 2018 in Ayton and Bamba, learned my lesson since. probably not the top of guys I'd take top 5 if they exist in this class, even in a weaker top5.

I think that's an important point, though. These players didn't pan out and we then often say we learned the lesson – but if Bamba had become the next Gobert (as he was touted by some) or Ayton the next Bam in terms of switchability, would you still say you overvalued them based on archetype? Probably not. Instead, you'd probably count them as players supposedly easy to identify as great fits in today's NBA. And who knows, in a couple seasons we may talk the same way about how we learned from Mark Williams and his ranking in 2022 (or we won't, because he happened to pan out and we can claim to have known his elite fit in today's NBA).

i think the end result is irrelevant, these are principles you gotta stick to at this point. I have Williams at 7 and I think that's probably the max I'd take him by virtue of his archetype. that won't change if he turns into the next Gobert.

that said, this archetype concept doesn't apply to guys like Bari and Chet and lesser extent Paolo. it was an odd argument from the get go.

[SelfishPlayer]

Regarding big men, Boston and GSW have successfully employed a technique of developing a starter while investing low draft capital. You can acquire a big later in the draft, have him get seasoned on the bench while playing behind veteran acquisitions that are giving him experience in practice as he waits his turn. The same strategy used to be done regularly with NFL quarterbacks before their position became much more important.

[BostonCouchGM]

The weird thing about this time of year in the modern NBA is that we can all see guards and wings, full time perimeter players, lead their teams to NBA championships, yet without fail overvaluing height persists in ranking NBA draft prospects.

Jaden Ivey, Mathurin, Kendall Brown, and Eason as a group physically appear to be more like what leads a modern NBA team to a championship over Jabari, Chet, and Banchero.

Look at GSW and Boston, how much draft capital have they invested in their starting big men/front court/PF/C/4/5?

I had a quick look into this a while back and the data is pretty stunning. If you take the top 5 picks from the 2010-2018 drafts (essentially all players have had at least 4 years in the league) and divide into positional groups (bigs, guards, and wings) you get the follow distribution and results:
12 guards => 6 all stars => 50% hit rate
12 wings => 6 all stars => 50% hit rate
21 bigs => 5 all stars => 24% hit rate

Not to mention that mixed into that 5 were:
a) 2 clear #1 picks
b) 1 that probably would have gone #1 if not for injury
c) 1 that had an argument for #1 if not for attitude

So yeah, it's pretty shocking that the top 3 in this draft will likely be big men despite the data showing otherwise.

Full post here: viewtopic.php?f=29&t=2193939&p=99251152#p99251152

this is misleading. a) several of the guys listed as "bigs" i.e. a PF were in actuality small forwards with size. We're talking guys like Aaron Gordon, Bennett, and Parker. So now that number is down to 18 "bigs". b) 2013 was arguably the worst draft in history and three of the "bigs" taken in that 21 number you have were from that draft. c) several of the guys who haven't made an all-star have had pretty stellar careers and were in the all-star conversation at one time or another like Gordon, Valanciunas, Ayton, and JJJ. d) Parker and Bagley dealt with injuries from day one.

Also, when Love and Bosh changed the 4 from back to the basket to being able to play inside and out and then Draymond and the Warriors made centers a liability with the three ball it took teams a few seasons to get the hint and change their drafting behavior. From 2010 until 2015 when these changes were happening, guys like Favors, Tristan Thompson, Zeller, Len and Okafor were taken top 5 so it skews the numbers, thus, misleading.

Point is, talent is talent no matter what position it is. "Bigs" with talent i.e. AD, Giannis, KAT, Ayton, JJJ, etc should always be taken over the similarly talented smaller guys because there's simply just less of them. Therefore there's a greater chance teams already have talented 1-3 on their roster. Besides, guys like Banchero, Smith and Chet play like wings not "bigs". There's nothing strange about it. NBA will always take the bigger athlete all things equal just based on supply and demand.

And another thing, G.M. and basketball people see bigs as taking longer to develop and having more upside. If you're a young G.M. or on shaky ground, getting a guy you can develop and convince owners he just needs time can buy you more time on the job.

[BostonCouchGM]

it's pretty straightforward, it isn't difficult to see what archetype a player fits and which big is more traditional.

same reason why I had Mobley #1 and a guy like Wiseman #10. don't think it's rocket science. doesn't mean Mobley will 100% be successful and Wiseman will 100% not be, but it's again looking at their skills it wasn't difficult at all to see which big is more made for today's NBA.

i will add that i did overvalue two bigs in 2018 in Ayton and Bamba, learned my lesson since. probably not the top of guys I'd take top 5 if they exist in this class, even in a weaker top5.

I think that's an important point, though. These players didn't pan out and we then often say we learned the lesson – but if Bamba had become the next Gobert (as he was touted by some) or Ayton the next Bam in terms of switchability, would you still say you overvalued them based on archetype? Probably not. Instead, you'd probably count them as players supposedly easy to identify as great fits in today's NBA. And who knows, in a couple seasons we may talk the same way about how we learned from Mark Williams and his ranking in 2022 (or we won't, because he happened to pan out and we can claim to have known his elite fit in today's NBA).

How has Ayton not "panned out"? He puts up 17-10 shooting 37% from three in an offense where he's an afterthought and he helped PHO get to a Game 6 of an NBA Finals putting up 15-12. It takes longer to develop and the right system for bigs to shine. He's only 23 y/o.

And writing off Bamba is lazy. Kid was drafted, knowing he would need 2-3 years to develop, onto a Magic team that were trying to make the playoffs (did) with a veteran laden team with Fournier, Gordon, Vucevic and Ross. He played decent but missed the second half of the season with a stress fracture in his leg. Then you had the bubble. Then they completely blew it up and he was surrounded by 21 year olds. You had coaching and G.M. changes. Let's just say, he hasn't had the best circumstances. Yet he put up 11-8 and shot 38% from three with almost two blocks a game. He just turned 24 y/o. There's still time for him to make a nice career for himself.

[clyde21]

i will add that i did overvalue two bigs in 2018 in Ayton and Bamba, learned my lesson since. probably not the top of guys I'd take top 5 if they exist in this class, even in a weaker top5.

I think that's an important point, though. These players didn't pan out and we then often say we learned the lesson – but if Bamba had become the next Gobert (as he was touted by some) or Ayton the next Bam in terms of switchability, would you still say you overvalued them based on archetype? Probably not. Instead, you'd probably count them as players supposedly easy to identify as great fits in today's NBA. And who knows, in a couple seasons we may talk the same way about how we learned from Mark Williams and his ranking in 2022 (or we won't, because he happened to pan out and we can claim to have known his elite fit in today's NBA).

How has Ayton not "panned out"? He puts up 17-10 shooting 37% from three in an offense where he's an afterthought and he helped PHO get to a Game 6 of an NBA Finals putting up 15-12. It takes longer to develop and the right system for bigs to shine. He's only 23 y/o.

And writing off Bamba is lazy. Kid was drafted, knowing he would need 2-3 years to develop, onto a Magic team that were trying to make the playoffs (did) with a veteran laden team with Fournier, Gordon, Vucevic and Ross. He played decent but missed the second half of the season with a stress fracture in his leg. Then you had the bubble. Then they completely blew it up and he was surrounded by 21 year olds. You had coaching and G.M. changes. Let's just say, he hasn't had the best circumstances. Yet he put up 11-8 and shot 38% from three with almost two blocks a game. He just turned 24 y/o. There's still time for him to make a nice career for himself.

not writing Bamba off at all, I love Bamba, always been a fan, but yea no doubt he's been a disappointment as a top5 pick.

[SelfishPlayer]

Anyone take a real close look into Dyson Daniels' poor free throw shooting? He played two schedules one where he shot 38.5% and another where he shot 73.7%. He's looking too much like Dante Exum...

[The-Power]

i will add that i did overvalue two bigs in 2018 in Ayton and Bamba, learned my lesson since. probably not the top of guys I'd take top 5 if they exist in this class, even in a weaker top5.

I think that's an important point, though. These players didn't pan out and we then often say we learned the lesson – but if Bamba had become the next Gobert (as he was touted by some) or Ayton the next Bam in terms of switchability, would you still say you overvalued them based on archetype? Probably not. Instead, you'd probably count them as players supposedly easy to identify as great fits in today's NBA. And who knows, in a couple seasons we may talk the same way about how we learned from Mark Williams and his ranking in 2022 (or we won't, because he happened to pan out and we can claim to have known his elite fit in today's NBA).

How has Ayton not "panned out"? He puts up 17-10 shooting 37% from three in an offense where he's an afterthought and he helped PHO get to a Game 6 of an NBA Finals putting up 15-12. It takes longer to develop and the right system for bigs to shine. He's only 23 y/o.

And writing off Bamba is lazy. Kid was drafted, knowing he would need 2-3 years to develop, onto a Magic team that were trying to make the playoffs (did) with a veteran laden team with Fournier, Gordon, Vucevic and Ross. He played decent but missed the second half of the season with a stress fracture in his leg. Then you had the bubble. Then they completely blew it up and he was surrounded by 21 year olds. You had coaching and G.M. changes. Let's just say, he hasn't had the best circumstances. Yet he put up 11-8 and shot 38% from three with almost two blocks a game. He just turned 24 y/o. There's still time for him to make a nice career for himself.

Ayton is a solid player but has not lived up to the expectations of a #1 pick. If he had, Phoenix would have maxed him already. Bamba still has time to turn it around but whenever the team that drafted you #6 ponders over whether they should even offer the QO after your Rookie contract, you clearly haven't panned out as a high lottery pick.

[The-Power]

I know Dieng has received some more recognition recently but I've now watched a couple full games and feel like we're still not talking nearly enough about him. He's a fantastic prospect and probably should go really high in this draft.

[Pipp33]

Anyone take a real close look into Dyson Daniels' poor free throw shooting? He played two schedules one where he shot 38.5% and another where he shot 73.7%. He's looking too much like Dante Exum...

Completely different style of player though.

Exum still hasn't got control of his body when driving, but I think he will get another chance in the NBA after a very solid season at Barcelona. His development was crueled by consistent injury issues that fragmented every season he played. Will be able to play a 3 & D role with some playmaking for most teams and can certainly knock down the 3 when set.

Daniels is a far better passer and a better defender at that age and his 3 point shooting improved considerably as the season went on and he adjusted. Daniels has been exposed to playing against a lot better talent than when Exum was drafted. Exum had not played regular basketball against top competition prior to being drafted, even amongst his peers.

[God Squad]

Best big likely remaining in the second round?

Jaylin Williams
Christian Koloko
Ismeal Kamagate
Trevion Williams

Koloko and Kamagate are the "flashy-ier potential" picks, but I just like the way both Williams play and specifically think the game. I love Jaylin defensive IQ and Trevions crisp passing, which could be bordering on elite.

[jezzerinho]

Best big likely remaining in the second round?

Jaylin Williams
Christian Koloko
Ismeal Kamagate
Trevion Williams

Koloko and Kamagate are the "flashy-ier potential" picks, but I just like the way both Williams play and specifically think the game. I love Jaylin defensive IQ and Trevions crisp passing, which could be bordering on elite.

Koloko for me is the star-in-waiting, but I also think a team who can use Treyvion specifically to take advantage of his unique skills could get a gem.