Some Research I did on the last 5 NBA Drafts.
A couple weeks back I did some research about past NBA drafts and where players are coming from out of college. Something to understand is this if you don't play Major conference ball (Big East, Big 12, Big 10, ACC, SEC, or PAC-10) a players chances of getting drafted in either Round 1 or 2 is extremely low. After playing college ball a player's most likely chance of getting drafted is being international. Guys like Stephen Curry, Eric Maynor, anyone who played for Memphis under coach cal, and Gonzaga players the likelihood of getting drafted as a mid-major is very low. C-USA has had 1 player drafted in the last 5 years who did not play for Memphis was Morris Almond out of Rice. The A-10 1 player in the last 5 years, Mardy Collins. These are all facts, so don't say anything that I am wrong w/o looking it up.
Don't you think it might have something to do with the best players wanting to play for the best teams?
I think that plays a role too, but only in the case of the mid-major programs. Take Jermaine Taylor for example out of UCF I know they did not make the tourney, but had they I think he could have been picked in the 1st round, he was an early 2nd.
Also what about Patrick Mills and Lester Hudson I bet if they played for an average Big East team like Seton Hall or Cincinnati then they could have been picked in the late 1st round.
Sometimes scouts only go to the games where top team are so obviously you will tend to pick a guy you know over and unknown. That is a safe way to keep your job as a GM because most of the time top 25 teams players are hyped so they are easy to keep your job.
A lot of the times with a 2nd round pick especially, NBA teams are just looking for a guy to fill a role on the team, not necessarily the guy with the most upside left on the borad and a lot of that means picking a role player from a major conference rather than a high scoring player from a mid-major. Cleveland took Danny Green from UNC, Sacremento took John Brockman, and Pheonix took Taylor Griffin because they knew they would work hard and fill that role, when you could argue there were players left on the board with more upside. I think you are right, it does take more to get noticed if you are from a smaller conference.
Glad to see you commenting on this. I have always liked your input. I am a huge fan of mid-major college basketball because I see it more pure where major conference ball is more a speed bump to the pros. I agree with what you said. Also, when a mid-major player gets signed as an undrafted player and then makes the team and plays well it does not surprise me it's just where he came from. On a side note Joe, do you know anything about Charles Jenkins from Hofstra University?
Thanks man, I thought it was an interesting thread. I'm too like mid-major basketball especially the MVC. I'm glad to see Anthony Tolliver making the most of his opportunity in Golden State. You are right though, I think a lot of talented mid-major guys are just going to have to do it the hard way singing on as free agents. One thing that will help your chances as a mid major player is if your team makes the NCAA tournament, I bet the number drops off down even more for players playing for mid majors that didn't make the big dance.
I'm not too familiar with Charles Jenkins, I haven't had a chance to see Hofstra yet this year. Just in the limited scouting I've done on him he is a high scoring combo guard who is really strong, but since I haven't seen him play I don't really know what his game is like.
No, just on my own, I'm just a big fan of college and pro basketball, and Iove the NCAA tournament and scout a lot of players and teams going in to the tournament because I enjoy knowing more about the teams and players going in, and the draft is a perfect combination of college and pro ball. Just a fan of basketball, lol
That's cool. Yeah, I am the same way. What do you think about the tournament being expanded to 96???
I personally think its fine the way it is, the only problem I have with the current set up is when there are a lot of upsets in the conference championships (especially the small conferences) and a lot of teams that had no chance of getting in bump out teams that probably would have had gotten an at large bit. Sure, those upset teams its a great story and whatnot, but most of the time they get thumped in the first round where the team they beat in the championship had a legit chance to upset someone. I would like there to be more emphasis placed on the NIT, I think that would address some of the problems without having to vastly expand the feild.
What are your thoughts on it?
I like it if they do it like this. All Conferences that are overall just the auto bid to the NCAA get 2 bids (1 for the regular season champion and 1 for the conference champion) That would double the bids from 22 to 44, leaving among the 6 major conferences and the two conferences that get multiple bids consistently (A-10 and MWC) to get more bids from the system. With having the regular season champ getting a bid it makes the regular season a lot more important than it is. Also, if a team that wins the regular season and conference championship could ensure a larger seed, so motivation is not lost. I don't think the NCAA will do it like that, it is going to end up benefiting the Major 6 where the Big East and ACC get anywhere from 9-11 teams in the tournament.
if you go back 1 more year to 2004 you have jameer nelson and delonte west going in the first round ... i think it just has to do with the more presitigous programs more consistently landing the best prospects
That St. Joes team was ranked #2 at one point in the season after winning something like 16 straight, there are exceptions, but its usually when the mid-major team either is a top 25 team or makes a run in the NCAA tournament (also see Wally Szerbiac) It just takes more for mid-major players to get noticed, but you are right about the big programs getting more prestegious prospects.