[thparadoxParticipant]

I analyzed the draft from a risk / reward perspective. The first section is my overall draft strategy. The second section details risk and reward ratings for my 10 top picks from the draft, with several more profiles as well.

Draft Philosphy:

 – To implement a good draft strategy, it is necessary to understand the distribution of player value in the NBA. More than any other major team sport, Basketball is dominated by a handful of elite players, known as superstars or franchise players. In any given year, generally, a team needs to have one of the top 5-10 players in the league in order to compete for a title. They must also have a second player how is at that level, or near it, say top 20. If not, they need 2-3 other star quality players, perhaps top 40 in the league. 

This year, the players in this elite category were Lebron, Durant, Chris Paul, Blake Griffin, Kevin Love, Stephen Curry, James Harden, and an argument could be made for Dirk Nowitzki, Paul George, Carmelo, and Westbrook.

You will notice that I have not included any members of the Spurs in this group. They are perhaps the rare championship team who does not need a superstar. Conversely, you can argue that they have an abundance of stars, with Duncan, Parker, Ginobili and Kawhi Leonard all within the top 30-40 players in the league. This goes without mentioning Marco Bellinelli, Boris Diaw, and Patty Mills, who were all elite performers off the bench. Add Coach Poppovich to the mix, and the lack of a top 10 player is less important.

– To get one of these top players, a team must either get a top 3 pick and draft a generational talent, or pick a player with superstar potential and hope they pan out.

– There are very few superstar players. They are extremely scarce. Conversely, league average players are highly abundant

– Since the payoff of hitting a home run is so much higher than being correct on an above average starter, it makes sense for teams lean towards players with very high potential, rather than going with the safe pick. At the end of a rookie contract, player has zero value if they drop out of the league. Due to opportunity costs, the player still has zero value to the team if they are merely league average, because the team can just as easily replace them through free agency.

– In conclusion, a good strategy will always target players with very high potential.

– Sam Presti has a great record or drafting this way. He took Russell Westbrook, who had not shown an ability to shoot or play the PG position, but was off the charts as an athlete and competitor. Then he took Serge Ibaka, a relativel unknown player from the Congo who was extremely athletic and a potential shot blocker. James Harden was a safer pick, but one still loaded with upside. Since then, they’ve drafted Reggie Jackson, Perry Jones, Steve Adams, and Jeremy Lamb. All players with the highest possible upside. Many people say that Presti is lucky, but I think he has simply executed a great strategy.

– Another example of this strategy was Kevin Pritchard with the Portland Trail Blazers. He drafted a team featuring Greg Oden, LaMarcus Aldridge, Brandon Roy, and Nicolas Batum. Although we know in hindsight that two of these players had career ending injuries, at the time of the draft it was only Brandon Roy whose injury concerns were documented. Even though Roy succumbed to his injuries, it was still a great pick, as Roy was one of the best scorers in the league during his years in Portland.

 

 

Notes on risk:

– Position makes a big difference. A SG has to shoot the ball well, same with a SF. Whereas, a Center needs to either rebound and play defense, or be a dominant post scorer.  A PG needs to either shoot the lights out and be a scorer, or be a great penetrator and passer and defender (with a shot that could be average)

– Another reason that postion makes a big difference is positional scarcity. There is an absurd abundance of point guard talent in the league, with very few elite shooting guards. Point guards are doing more of the shooting and scoring these days, and the importance of shooting has allowed NBA teams to play 3pt specialists instead of the more athletic slashing wing players.

– It’s better to be quite good in many areas (rebounding, passing, shooting, defensive positioning, offensive awareness, defensive awareness). Why? diversification. 1) Its easier to move from a 7/10 to a 9/10 in a particular skillset, than from a 5/10 to an 8/10. 2) the risk of the diversified player never being able to pick up one of those skills is not as big a problem. If you select a great offensive player who is terrible on defense, then they MUST figure out that skill. If not, the player may be out of the league, or only useful as a 3pt specialist. Whereas, the diversified player might still be average at that skill, even if they never improve

– Certain stats translate better to the NBA than other stats. Rebounding stats translate very well to the NBA. Steals and blocks are highly correlated with success in the NBA (because they also correlate with athleticism).. A player with good FT% has a much better probability of developing a consistent jump shot, than a player with a poor FT%

– Shooting is probably the most important skill in today’s NBA. A player like Matt Bonner can survive in the league by being an elite 3pt shooter, with no other skills above average. A players inability to shoot can jeopardize the entire offense in today’s NBA. Players like Tony Allen, MKG, and to a lesser extent Ricky Rubio (b/c he’s a great passing PG) are practicaly unplayable at times because the defense sags off them so much. To some degree, the Spurs took the same approach with Wade in this years Finals, challenging him to shoot. A great shooter, who plays below average defense, can often be hidden in the defensive rotations. The Golden State Warriors made tremendous strides because Klay Thompson improved from below average to above average defense, while Curry is still not a good defender.

– Injury risk is highly dependent on position and type of injury. Embiid’s situation is particularly scary because the outcome of navicular injuries has very often been career ending for centers. Embiid also has a back injury, which is another common problem for centers. A player like Stephen Curry, who has a very weak ankle, is known as injury plagued, but it’s the type of injury that he is able to play through, or return within a week or 2 to an elite level.

 

Notes on Potential:

– potential looks at the players best foreseeable outcome, but it also factors in probability of reaching that potential, to some degree.

– size and athelticism are major factors in potential because skills have a chance of being learnt, but you can’t teach height. Similarly, you can’t teach quickness. Often, you cannot teach body control and coordination either, as some people are simply gifted with proprioception.

– Potential involves a judgement on which things the player is capable of changing, and whether they will take steps to make the change.

– Age is a very important factor in potential. If a senior is 3 years older, we expect him to have a much clearer skill set than a freshman. Many of the franchise / superstar player finished in the top 5 in MVP voting by the age of 25.  If a player is already 23, they had better be close to that level already if you expect them to be a superstar.

– Attitude and basketball IQ go a long way to increasing  the probability that a player reaches his potential.

 

 

 

 

1) Andrew Wiggins SF

Risk: 5/10

Potential: 10/10

Wiggins entered his freshman year with several years of hype as the best prospect of this draft class and one of the best prospects since Lebron. Much of this hype stems from Wiggin’s rare size and athletic gifts.

These expectations were so high that they were practically impossible to meet. Jabari Parker made it seems worse, as his polished offensive game made Wiggins look unskilled by comparison.

Wiggins, however, is the player who remains the better prospect. Although Parker is close to a sure thing as an offensive threat, Wiggins was just as dominant on the defensive end.

The difference is that Parker looked amateurish on defense, but Wiggins offensive numbers, while inefficient, were still quite good and leave a great deal of room for optimism.

Wiggins numbers from his freshman season are a mixed bag. He clearly has potential in every area of the game, but his offensive awareness was sorely lacking. He had roughly 19% usage, which is far below what is expected of a superstar. Wiggins was completely lost in the Kansas offense. Part of this was due to poor guard play from his teammates. But his lack of aggression was a probably the most significant factor.

CONCLUSION: Wiggins path to becoming a superstar will be a long one, so the team which drafts him must be patient, despite the high expectations which come along with a #1 pick. A stable focus on process over outcome in his early years will make a big difference. I would only pick him over Parker because his overall potential is a bit higher.

 

2) Jabari Parker SF/PF

Risk: 4/10

Potential: 9.5/10

Incredible size and scoring ability. The comparison to Carmelo Anthony is apt. Jabari Parker has been labelled a "tweener", but in today’s NBA, that could be a good thing. I think he’s a stretch 4. He has excellent size, with above average athleticism at 6’9". Considering his scoring and shooting ability, he should fit in very well at the 4 position.

The biggest question mark for Jabari is his defense. He shows a low defensive IQ, and also poor lateral movement. Although he is athletic and long enough to get some blocks, his defense is disappointing.

CONCLUSION: Of the elite prospects in this draft, Parker is the most polished. He is the least risky pick, projecting quite clearly as a Paul Pierce / Carmelo Anthony type. However, he is the least athletic of the elite prospects, and is the most one dimensional, so he probably has a slightly lower ceiling than the others. It is more than a fair trade off, so Parker should be one of the top 2 picks

3) Marcus Smart PG/SG

Risk: 4/10

Potential: 9.5/10

Marcus Smart is a rock solid point guard and a leader. I think that Smart has been lost in all the hype of the top 4 prospects. Smart is a very low risk pick. He is very strong, and is an underrated athlete. He has great size at 6’4" for a PG. In many ways he is remiscent of Jason Kidd. Smart has truly elite defensive ability. Not only is he strong and athletic, but he has great anticipation. He could be a shut own defender on the next level. He averaged 3 steals per game, and that is one stat which translates well to the next level, and generally correlates with athleticism. The media made a big deal about his confrontation with a fan, but I thought it showed a competitive spirit and fire which is rare.

Smart has potential as a scorer. He was able to get into the paint at will. He is very aggressive and finishes well at the rim. He is also very capable of seeing the floor an passing to open teammates.

Smart’s biggest weakness, similar to Dante Exum, is the jump shot. Shot selection was also a concern, but many of these issues will likely disappear as the talent level of his teammates improves. 

  CONCLUSION: From a risk perspective, Smart has the highest basement level of any player in this draft. As such, I think he is one of he lowest risk prospects. He also has upside which would appear to be slightly below the level of Embiid, Wiggins, Parker and Exum. Smart has to improve his jump shot if he expects to become a star player, but he isn’t that far from developing a good stroke. Some of his jump shooting problems may simply be poor shot selection, which he certainly must improve. He should be a top 4 pick.

4) Dante Exum PG

Risk: 7/10

Potential: 10/10

Dante Exum is the complete package. He shows ability in every aspect of the game. He is incredibly gifted from a physical standpoint, at 6’6" from the PG position with 6’9" wingspan. Jawdropping quickness. Strong ballhandling and shows an ability to create off the dribble that is rare. Clearly has court vision. High basketball IQ on both offense and defense.

His biggest weakness at this point is the jump shot. This is crucial in today’s NBA. However, he is very young, and has potential to improve in this area. 

CONCLUSION: For the sake of analysis, it would have helped if he played a year of college. However, the potential he has is very obvious. He is less of a risk because his athleticism, finesse, and IQ are all off the charts, with only his shooting as a potential issue. Exum’s risk however, is much higher because of the lack of information. We simply do not know how good a defender he will be, or how he would have responded to higher levels of athletic competition.

He should be a top 4 pick.

 

5) Joel Embiid C

Risk: 8/10

Potential: 10/10

By all accounts, Embiid is a generational talent at the center position. There is practically no area of the game in which Embiid has not shown the potential to excel.

However, the navicular fracture which he suffered is a major concern. Injury concerns are particularly threatening to centers, and many players with size have been deterred by foot issues. Yao, Ilgauskas, Brook Lopez, and many others have had their careers swiftly shortened by the exact same injury.

CONCLUSION: That said, Embiid was the clear top prospect in this draft, and still has the most upside. What follows is likely a binary outcome. Either the injuries ruin the next few years of his career, defeating the purpose of drafting him, or he will become healthy and turn into a great center. With the clear superstar prospects off the table (Wiggins, Parker, Exum, Smart), this is a nice spot for Embiid to be drafted.

6) Noah Vonleh

Risk: 6/10

Potential: 9/10

Vonleh has tremendous size and athleticism. This extends to co-ordination. His movements are smooth and fluid. He has a hook shot with either hand.  Excellent rebounder on both ends of the court. (rebounding translates well to the NBA). He shows promise as a shooter, at 58% from 3, despite a very small sample size. Works hard on defense. Vonleh’s biggest downside is a lack of basketball IQ and awareness on both ends of the court. Vonleh has all the raw athleticism and talent to be a great player, but it could take a long time for his decision making to allow him to utilize his skills .

CONCLUSION:  As such, he has a very high ceiling in this draft, but there is quite a large gap from where he is now to his full potential. Vonleh has similar potential to many of the high upside guards like Lavine and Payton, but in their worst case scenarios, I think  Vonleh will be more valuable, since he will at least have an impact on rebounding, and as a finisher in the pick and roll.

I would be happy to use a top 10 pick on him, but definitely not before Wiggins, Parker, Smart and Exum are off the board.

 

7) Dario Saric SF/PF

Risk: 7/10

Potential: 9.5/10

Saric has potential in every area of the game. He has great length, combined with fluidity and decent quickness. Although he may end up as a 3, I think it’s more likely that he ends up as a stretch 4, who may not be quick enough to defend 3s but could create matchup problems for slower power forwards. He seems to be a hardworking player who looks to share the ball with his teammates. While I think that his passing skills are overstated (he turns the ball over frequently), he certainly has court vision. There is no doubt that he has excellent basketball IQ overall. 

His shot is a work in progress, but it is showing steady signs of improvement. He has a great handle for a player his size (he was once a PG). His basketball IQ also transfers to the defensive end, where he shows excellent anticipation for steals and blocks. His biggest weakness at this point is his defensive positioning, both in the post and on the perimeter.

CONCLUSION: I think Saric has a very high upside because he shows potential in every aspect of the game. He has the length, quickness and basketball IQ to make improvements in the long run. He also has less downside than some of the other prospects because of his years of experience in the adriatic league.

I would not hesitate to use a top 10 pick on him. 

Since Saric has just signed with a Turkish team for 2 years, an NBA team will have to wait 2 years for him to come over. For many teams this will hurt his value, but it actually increases his value for a team which would prefer to be patient and develop players in a rebuilding effort. A team like the Philadelphia 76ers could take him at #10 and "tank" again this year. It would be interesting if they pick both Embiid and Saric, as this would be an obvious tanking strategy. This also applies to a team like the Nuggets who are in transition but have many players to give minutes to on their roster, or a team with multiple picks like the Magic, Celtics or Suns.

 

8) Zach Lavine PG/SG

Risk 7/10

Potential: 9.5/10

Lavine is a great prospect due to his length and athleticism. He is very quick and a great vertical jump. He also has some skills, with a fine ability to handle the ball, and excellent three point shooting ability. However, he is also very raw. Lavine is very dominant with his right hand, which causes problems on drives to the basket. He is also lacking in basketball IQ on both ends of the floor. These issues make Lavine a project SG. I believe Lavine is worth the risk because of his combination of shooting and athleticism. In isolation, shooting is the most important skill in the NBA. Lavine’s ability to shoot from 3 gives him a very valuable strength from which to get playing time while he builds out the rest of his game.

CONCLUSION: Although he is extremely raw, I think it’s worth the risk in this case considering his shooting, defense and athleticism are such a great combination of established skills.

I would be happy to use a top 10 pick on him. Great gamble, but there is a high probabi.

 

9) Elfrid Payton PG

Risk: 6/10

Potential: 9/10

Elfrid Payton is very similar to Rondo. It is clear that he as superior quickness, athleticism, rebounding, passing, ball handling, and defense. At a baseline level, he will be an excellent ball dominant PG who can penetrate and create shots for teammates. He will likely be a great defender and rebounder. 

However, his shooting is very poor, and will take time to develop. Considering the importance of shooting in the NBA, it’s likely that Payton will go as far as his jump shot takes him. 

CONCLUSION: Because Payton excels in so many areas (defense, penetration, passing), he has a fairly high basement projection. He has the potential to be a star player if he is able to improve his shooting. Shooting is an essential skill, and is difficult to improve from the level at which Payton currently resides. Overall, I think he’s worth the risk.

10) Julius Randle PF

Risk: 8/10

Potential: 9/10

Julius Randle has quite a unique profile. He is very quick for his size, and has an ability to handle the ball and create shots out of the isolation. He has an array of fakes in the post, and a good looking jump hook. However, his offense suffers from his lack of moves going to his right hand. He also has no jump shot. He shoots about 70% on FTs, so he may be able to develop a mid range shot, but at this point it is hard to expect much development in that area.

Furthermore, he did most of his efficient scoring off put backs. Otherwise, he was fairly average in post up scoring and inside finishing.

On defense, Randle’s quickness can be very useful. He has good lateral mobility, and can defend the pick and roll well. I think he can develop and a one on one defender. However, he is not able to get blocks and steals, which limits his potential on this end.

Randle is a strong rebounder, and this should be a dependable skill at the NBA level.

CONCLUSION: Despite his limitations, Randle has the quickness and dribbling ability to develop into a star player. However, I think there is potentially a long road ahead for Randle to improve. There is also quite a bit of downside here, as Randle currently lacks either a jump shot or passing ability. This makes him a one dimensional player a the moment. If he can develop these aspects of the game, and it’s possible that he can, the rest of his game (drives and post play) will open up and make him much more effective overall.

I see Randle as a top 10 pick, but I would hesitate to draft him over Lavine or Payton, who think have a slightly higher upside, and a slightly higher probability of being stars.

 

Beyond the top 10 (roughly in order):

Nik Stauskas

Risk: 5/10

Potential: 8.5/10

Stauskas is a lethal offensive player. Not only does he have an elite jump shot, but he has developed an ability to score off the dribble. He creates for both himself and his teammates. Although many scouts question Stauskas’ foot speed, he was excellent in the Draft Combine agility drills. Watching him play, it is evident that he is quite quick on his feet, and capable of creating shots. The downside for Stauskas is his defense. His awareness and fundamentals on defense are sorely lacking.

CONCLUSION: I consider Stauskas to be a low risk when you consider the value of his shooting ability. At minimum, he is likely to reflect JJ Redick’s value, with more upside as a playmaker. It is not absurd to imagine him as a Klay Thompson type of player. Stauskas may be a poor defender at this point, but he at least has average athleticism, which is a far less dire situation than some other players who simply don’t have the quickness to keep up with their man. As such, Stauskas is low risk, with strong potential to be an impact player on offense, along with average defense.

I think Stauskas would be a good pick for any team with a need for shooting on the wing, but it would be ideal for Stauskas to be developed as shot creator as well. 

 

Clint Capela PF/C

Risk: 8/10

Potential: 9/10

I see Capela as a similar case to Serge Ibaka. Capela is very athletic and smooth. He has strong timing on blocks and can change the game on that end with his length. Where Ibaka showed potential as a shooter, Capela seems to have a gifted touch in the post. He shot 74% on cuts and 65% on put backs. He should be an excellent option as the roll man, which has increased importance in the modern NBA.

CONCLUSION: Capela comes with a ton of risk, but it’s limited compared to many of the other PF/C prospects because he can make big impact without developing his jump shot. Game changing interior defense is a rarity in the league, and interior defenders with Capela’s quickness and touch around the basket are even more rare. 

I think that Capela is worthy of a lottery pick.

 

Aaron Gordon

Risk: 8/10

Potential: 8.5/10

It’s hard not to like Gordon. He plays hard working, unselfish basketball. He has an excellent basketball IQ, with a tremendous defensive impact. He can guard on the perimeter and in the post. He’s a solid rebounder. And he can pass the ball. The troubling thing is his offensive game. Aside from dunking the ball, he is  very poor finisher at the rim, and has no shot to speak of.

Also of a concern is his low steal and block rates. This does not make sense for a player of his athleticism.

Gordon is huge risk because his lack of offensive game could keep him off the floor entirely. All of his current strengths could translate to the NBA, but his inability to score (in any way) will keep him on the bench. If Gordon was a 6’10" center, this woud not be an issue, since many centers provide enough value as interior defenders that the don’t need much offense. But Gordon will play SF or PF.

CONCLUSION: I think Gordon’s best comparison is Andrei Kirilenko… but AK47 had good FTs at 77% as a rookie. Gordon shot 42% from the FT line. That puts a severe limit on his offensive potential. Another comparison is Marion. But Marion was a superior finisher on offense, and shot 73% from the FT line in his year in college.

I really like Aaron Gordon, but there are tons of red flags, and I think teams should avoid drafting him with a top 10 pick.

 

Doug McDermott

Risk: 7/10

Potential: 8.5/10

He may not be explosive, but he is no Adam Morrison. McDermott proved at the NBA Combine that he is at least an average athlete, in both vertical and speed tests. This season and last season, McDermott shot the lights out, but he did more than just come off screens and use ball fakes. McDermott was exceedingly crafty about making cuts and getting open. He shows an ability to put the ball on the floor, and post up as well. He scored efficiently in ALL of these ways, which raises the odds that his offense will translate in the NBA. 

CONCLUSION: His ceiling is fairly high if he can improve his defense. Even league average would go a long way to building confidence that he can be a star player. I certainly think that he can be a star with his considerable shooting and scoring ability, as long as he is not a major liability on defense. Unfortunately, it seems likely that he will struggle in a major way.

I think he is worthy of late lottery selection

 

TJ Warren SF/PF

Risk: 7/10

Potential: 8.5/10

Perhaps not an explosive athlete, but an above average one. He was one of the highest usage players in the NCAA, an scored efficiently, shooting over 50% FG. His game consists of cuts, put backs, midrange shots and a surprising number of runners, of which he scored at an excellent 49% clip. Clearly, he has a diverse face up game.

Warren did not shoot efficiently on his jump shot, but part of this was poor shot selection and a tendency to take early 3 point shots which were well contested. He has decent form, and the range to develop a stroke from anywhere on the court. His midrange shot is already decent enough to be used at the NBA level.

Warren is also excellent at anticipating passes and getting steals. He is great in transition, so these are nicely linked skills.

One of the biggest concerns with Warren is that he is undersized for PF, but not quite quick enough for SF. However, he is a fairly mobile player with a lot of strength. It’s possible that he will become a good PF defender with time. It’s not hard to see him turning into a stretch 4 if he can improve the consistency of his shooting form.

I think that Warren is a good prospect because he is coming out as a sophomore, where he improved considerably over his freshman year. He also has a diverse range of skills which can all be improved, allowing his game to grow. 

CONCLUSION:  Although Warren is strangely limited to the face up game, he excels at it as well. I think he can eventually turn into a stretch 4, which makes him a great pick in the late lottery.

Jusuf Nurkic C

Risk: 7/10

Potential: 8/10

A broad shouldered 7 foot center from Bosnia, Nurkic is a dominant finisher in the paint. He is mobile, knows how to use his body, and has good footwork on hook shots, spin moves, and catches as the roll man. Gets to the FT line often, and shoots a decent 70%, which can improve with time. Excellent defensive rebounder with good timing and anticipation. His mobility is used well on defense, as he is excellent at showing on the P&R, and often can get steals with his quick hands.

Nurkic’s biggest weakness is his defensive positioning on the interior. He seems to have trouble with defensive fundamentals and is not a good one on one defender. He also has an almost non-existent vertical at around 23". His low minute totals also raise concerns about his conditioning.

CONCLUSION: I think Nurkic is a player who shows potential, but my concern is that the competition he faced, and minutes played, may have hidden his limitations. I could see him as a Pekovic, with better mobility on defense, but the potential issues of conditioning and lack of jumping ability could make him a complete non-factor in the NBA.

I think that he is a good pick near the end of the lottery.

Gary Harris

Risk: 6/10

Potential:8/10

Harris comes into the league as a scorer from midrange and 3pt shots. He is a decent 3pt shooter at 35%, but was hurt by shot selection. He is an excellent spot up shooter, and pull up shooter. Unfortunately, he doesn’t show much else on offense. He doesn’t have exposive athleticism or length, so it’s difficult to see how his slashing game will evolve much in the NBA. HIs inability to create offense limits his potential.

Harris a gritty defender who is strong everywhere on the court, but particularly on the perimeter. It’s unclear if his physical limitations will prevent him from being an elite defender on the next level.

Harris should be able to get minutes in the league, as his shooting ability and defense are solid enough to warrant minutes.

 CONCLUSION: Harris should be able to grind out a role for himself, and this limits his downside. However, his lack of athleticism, size, and creativity with the ball limit his upside.

Harris should be a late lottery pick.

Kyle Anderson SF

Risk: 8/10

Potential: 8/10

Slo Mo is a perfect nickname for Kyle Anderson. He appears to be going in slow motion. The question: Is he actually going slow? or is he just so smooth and long that we can’t tell how fast he’s moving? I think that both of these factors are at play.

Anderson expanded a versatile offensive game in his sophomore year. His defensive rebounding is superb, especially considering that he was the primary ball handler for UCLA. He racked up assists, and showed an ability to create off the dribble. However, with his speed, the translation of his penetrating moves to the NBA is very worrisome.

Anderson shot the ball very well in his sophomore year, 48% from 3, but he has a slow release, and was shooting over much shorter players. He also only took 58 total 3s, so the sample size is a concern. I think he has good form and can become a shooter.

CONCLUSION: Kyle Anderson has a very unique profile, but he is considerably risky because of his lack of explosiveness. He is a very poor defender, despite getting some steals due ot his length. His lack of ability to guard in the post or on the perimeter will prevent him from getting minutes as he is developing.

Anderson’s lack of athleticism, small shooting sample size, and non-existent defense make him a high risk pick, but these factors also limit his potential. I would avoid drafting him inside the lottery

 

 

Tyler Ennis PG

Risk 6/10

Potential: 8/10

Ennis has a very interest profile coming into this draft. He is perhaps the only pure point guard in the first round of the draft. He was a masterful floor general, with a miniscule 9% turnover percentage. Part of this is because he makes the easy pass, but further than that, he makes the early pass. Some point guards rack up assists because they only pass on the drive and kick or drive and dish. Ennis, on the other hand, is perfectly happy pass to the open teammate very early in the possession.

Ennis has mediocre athleticism. He has an average vertical, and is not particularly quick. He has a good handle, but is not very adept at penetrating on the isoation and creating his own shot. He relied on floaters, and shot a poor percentage.

He didn’t take many jump shots, and shot a middling percentage. However, the shot looks fundamentally sound, and it is not hard to see potential improvement. He shot a respectable 77% at the FT line.

CONCLUSION: Athough the stats do not suggest a player with star potential, it’s possible that Ennis’ value will be much higher on a team with more talent. I can see him as similar to a Jose Calderon, a PG who is pure basketball IQ and finesse.

James Young SG

Risk: 9/10

Potential: 8.5/10

An intriguing prospect. He is very raw. Makes tons of mistakes on defense, did not show an ability to create his own shot off the dribble, and is inconsistent overall.

However, he flashed star potential in his freshman season. He has a huge wingspan, and occasionally made highlight reel plays which suggest a player who simply has not learned to use his physical gifts.

He has good mechanics with his shot, but is still somewhat inconsistent.

CONCLUSION: Although he is a major boom or bust prospect, he has a lot of potential for late in the first round.

 

PJ Hairston

Risk: 8/10

Potential: 8/10

Hairston is a knock down shooter. He lit up the D-league last year. Altough he is not a shot creator, he takes 3s in volume, and makes a strong percentage of them. Since he will not need to adjust to the NBA 3 point line, this is a highly reliable indicator of what he can do in terms of spot up 3 shooting in the NBA. 

He is also an excellent finisher in transition, using his length and strength to get to the basket and draw fouls. 

CONCLUSION: outside of the lottery, Hairston becomes an intriguing pick. I think he’s an excellent value late in the first round

 

Rodney Hood SF

Risk: 5/10

Potential: 7/10

I see him as a less athletic Rashard Lewis. He can come in and shoot both in spot up and off the dribble immediately. 

Unfortunately, Hood is quite a poor defender, with a low steal rate as well.

CONCLUSION: Given the importance of shooting, Hood will almost certainly be a useful player, but his upside seems quite low because of his defensive issues.

I would avoid drafting him until late in the first round.

 

Shabazz Napier

Risk: 7/10

Potential: 7/10

His potential is considerably lower than many of the other prospects because he is a senior. Furthermore, to be a starting PG in today’s NBA, a player must be truly elite. There are only a handful of teams in the league without Star point guards. 

Napier is an excellent PG in isoation and out of the pick and roll. He is also an excellent shooter. Unfortunately, he also struggles mightily with finishing in the paint, and this will have even more impact in the NBA.

CONCLUSION: I see Napier as a solid PG, but with limited upside. He should not be drafted until late in the first round.

 

Adreian Payne

Risk 6/10

Potential: 7/10

Payne is an excellent shooter and should enter the league as a stretch 4. He has good size and athelticism, but he is lacking some of the intangibles, particularly on defense. Furthermore, he has a lunch condition which will likely prevent him from playing extended minutes in the NBA. As a senior, his age is a limiting factor as well.

I think that it’s prudent to pick a player who appears to have higher potential.

 

Cleanthony Early

Risk: 5/10

Potential: 7/10

Early has limited risk, but also limted upside. He can shoot the ball well and is quite solid in most aspects of the game.

 

Jordan Adams

Risk 6/10

Potential: 7.5/10

Adams is an exceptional cutter and finisher. He was one of the best scorers, but almost all of them came from these situations. He lacks an ability to create his own shot, and he lacks the athleticism to beat anyone with his first step. His lack of explosiveness is also evident on the defensive end. 

Adams also has a good 3 point shot, and does get a lot of steals. He may lack atheleticism, but he makes up for it with hustle and awareness.

I like Adams, but I fear that his upside is limited due ot his physical tools

 

Jarnell Stokes

Risk: 6/10

Potential: 7/10

Stokes lacks the length and quickness that usual comes with high upside prospects. He is an excellent rebounder, and this skill will translate to the NBA. I can see him as a Reggie Evans type player who plays solid defense, and in addition has some strong post moves. He has an excellent hook shot. If he is able to translate these skills to the NBA, I think he’ll be a reliable role player, but it’s difficult to foresee much more than that.

Glenn Robinson III

Risk: 9/10

Potential: 8/10

Unbelievable physical tools, but he slumped badly in his sophomore year. His attitude and competitive spirit are highly questionable. Perhaps worthy of a second round pick.

 

Semaj Christon

Risk: 8/10

Potential 8/10

At first glance, he as a similar profile to Elfrid Payton. He has good size for a PG, and is quick. However, Christon is not nearly the penetrator, passer or steal manufacturer that Payton is. Christon has a bit more potential with his shot, going 38% from 3 on limited attempts, but his FT% is below 70%, and this suggests that Christon will struggle with his shot.

 

[Hector_Reyes_8Participant]

Imma just give you a plus 1 cuz I can’t read that all I have Finals but nice effort doo. d(^-^d) <- Thumbs up

[Hector_Reyes_8Participant]

Imma just give you a plus 1 cuz I can’t read that all I have Finals but nice effort doo. d(^-^d) <- Thumbs up

[thparadoxParticipant]

Thanks. It’s a serious TL;DR… just read the "CONCLUSION" sections.

[thparadoxParticipant]

Thanks. It’s a serious TL;DR… just read the "CONCLUSION" sections.

[Hector_Reyes_8Participant]

It seems really good, and reading the conclusions are much easier. I’ll read it all tomorrow after I get home though, I feel like this is a good post.

[Hector_Reyes_8Participant]

It seems really good, and reading the conclusions are much easier. I’ll read it all tomorrow after I get home though, I feel like this is a good post.

[Hector_Reyes_8Participant]

I finished reading this and believe you were right in these. There were a lot of points made both for and against the players, which is what posts should have. I am a bit confused when it comes to the x/10 thing, but besides that I really enjoyed reading this.

[Hector_Reyes_8Participant]

I finished reading this and believe you were right in these. There were a lot of points made both for and against the players, which is what posts should have. I am a bit confused when it comes to the x/10 thing, but besides that I really enjoyed reading this.

[thparadoxParticipant]

I’m glad you enjoyed it. Thanks for reading.

I wrote a message about the ratings (see below). Does that clear things up?

 

 

 

 

 

[thparadoxParticipant]

I’m glad you enjoyed it. Thanks for reading.

I wrote a message about the ratings (see below). Does that clear things up?

 

 

 

 

 

[WhodunitParticipant]

 Which is why im gonna give you some feedback from my own perspective (as i would like someone to do for me if i put in a lot of effort into a profile)

here goes:

While you werent telling me anything new with the top 10 prospects I did enjoy reading your analysis of the lesser guys like Hood, Capela, Warren and so forth.

You build up the post in the beggining putting forth your reasoning for basically selecting the guy who has the most potential. Aim for the stars is your motto, you might catch a star or fall very hard and long back on your face with nothing to show for.

I think you basically put forth your own rating of a players Risk and Potential. But i ask, does player A’s potential Equal player B’s potential if they are both 10/10potential? Is the risk rating relative to that player only or universal for all players? You made these numbers up as you saw fit for each player. Those numbers are VERY debatable I must say.  Like you put 8/10 risk for Randle and a 9/10 potential for him. I disagree immensely, i’d put it at a 4/10 risk and 10/10 potential. I also disagreed with some of the player assesments you put forth in the summary parts of them.

Also I disagree you ALWAYS take the player with the best potential. I make the case you take the player who has the best BbIQ mixed with Athleticism and skill. You’ve always gotta define potential relative to each indivdual player. Most times a Shabazz Napier or Draymond Greem is the best player to select. How many guys get drafted on Potential and are out after their rookie contract? What about proven guys with high IQ’s who have played at least a couple of seasons in college. Those guys usually find a niche in the league and stick. There is a balance to be had though.

But good effort, i can say i learned something from your post. Cant say that about most other posts on here. 

[thparadoxParticipant]

Thanks for giving feedback. Reading this took a lot of effort, too. I seem to be relatively pessimistic on Julius Randle. If there are any other disagreements I’d like to hear them.

1) The ratings are universal, but they are only a quantitative representation of my judgement. It’s just a tool that makes it more clear why I would rank Randle above Aaron Gordon.

Naturally, your ratings would be different from mine. You have a different opinion about Randle, so your ratings would be different.

2) It’s not "always". But you’re right that I’m VERY heavily swayed towards potential. I’ll sum up my argument from the introduction. Basically, the value of a league average player is zero. Draymond Green is probably slightly better than league average, but his value is still close to zero. Why? Because he isn’t that much better than a free agent or trade replacement. It’s nice to hit on a useful player, but unless they turn into a star (like Chandler Parsons), it’s a nonfactor.

Some players like Joakim Noah don’t seem to have a lot of upside, but they end up being star players. So my strategy would miss players like him.

But in most cases it’s better to go for the superstar potential. It’s kind of like this… let’s say I’m shooting all 3pt shots, while you’re taking 2 pointers. I might miss more shots than you. But if you’re hitting 50%, I only need to hit on 33% to score with the same efficiency.

I would argue that the NBA draft is even more extreme. It would be as if a shot from the 3 point line was actually worth 10 points…. think about how much Andre Drummond is worth, compared to Terrence Ross.

[thparadoxParticipant]

Thanks for giving feedback. Reading this took a lot of effort, too. I seem to be relatively pessimistic on Julius Randle. If there are any other disagreements I’d like to hear them.

1) The ratings are universal, but they are only a quantitative representation of my judgement. It’s just a tool that makes it more clear why I would rank Randle above Aaron Gordon.

Naturally, your ratings would be different from mine. You have a different opinion about Randle, so your ratings would be different.

2) It’s not "always". But you’re right that I’m VERY heavily swayed towards potential. I’ll sum up my argument from the introduction. Basically, the value of a league average player is zero. Draymond Green is probably slightly better than league average, but his value is still close to zero. Why? Because he isn’t that much better than a free agent or trade replacement. It’s nice to hit on a useful player, but unless they turn into a star (like Chandler Parsons), it’s a nonfactor.

Some players like Joakim Noah don’t seem to have a lot of upside, but they end up being star players. So my strategy would miss players like him.

But in most cases it’s better to go for the superstar potential. It’s kind of like this… let’s say I’m shooting all 3pt shots, while you’re taking 2 pointers. I might miss more shots than you. But if you’re hitting 50%, I only need to hit on 33% to score with the same efficiency.

I would argue that the NBA draft is even more extreme. It would be as if a shot from the 3 point line was actually worth 10 points…. think about how much Andre Drummond is worth, compared to Terrence Ross.

[WhodunitParticipant]

 Which is why im gonna give you some feedback from my own perspective (as i would like someone to do for me if i put in a lot of effort into a profile)

here goes:

While you werent telling me anything new with the top 10 prospects I did enjoy reading your analysis of the lesser guys like Hood, Capela, Warren and so forth.

You build up the post in the beggining putting forth your reasoning for basically selecting the guy who has the most potential. Aim for the stars is your motto, you might catch a star or fall very hard and long back on your face with nothing to show for.

I think you basically put forth your own rating of a players Risk and Potential. But i ask, does player A’s potential Equal player B’s potential if they are both 10/10potential? Is the risk rating relative to that player only or universal for all players? You made these numbers up as you saw fit for each player. Those numbers are VERY debatable I must say.  Like you put 8/10 risk for Randle and a 9/10 potential for him. I disagree immensely, i’d put it at a 4/10 risk and 10/10 potential. I also disagreed with some of the player assesments you put forth in the summary parts of them.

Also I disagree you ALWAYS take the player with the best potential. I make the case you take the player who has the best BbIQ mixed with Athleticism and skill. You’ve always gotta define potential relative to each indivdual player. Most times a Shabazz Napier or Draymond Greem is the best player to select. How many guys get drafted on Potential and are out after their rookie contract? What about proven guys with high IQ’s who have played at least a couple of seasons in college. Those guys usually find a niche in the league and stick. There is a balance to be had though.

But good effort, i can say i learned something from your post. Cant say that about most other posts on here. 

[Author]

Posts