By John Hooper and Trevor Smyth
Trev: Warriors over Celtics in 5
Hoop: Warriors over Cavs in 5
- Sixth Man:
- Most Improved:
1. Ben Simmons
3. Milos Teodosic
4. John Collins
5. Dennis Smith Jr.
- Sixth Man:
- Most Improved:
5. John Wall
Team Notes/Predictions/Wish List
- This will be Klay's best statistical season. He'll join the 50 / 40 / 90 club with 50.2% / 42.9% / 90.0% shooting and an average slash line of 25.7 / 3.4 / 3.1.
- Start John Collins at center. Win-win as you either see if he's the real deal or execute the righteous tank. Schroder-Bazemore-Prince-Ilyasova-Collins could be surprisingly watchable.
- Short term, it's near impossible for Kyrie to match IT's efficiency last year. Thomas posted a True Shooting Percentage of 62.5% at a 34.0% Usage Rate. Kyrie's career bests are a 58.3% clip for TS and a Usage Rate of 30.8%.
- Boston has done nothing to improve its fourth worst defensive rebounding rate from last year. One player who makes sense as a midseason target for them: Julius Randle.
- Congrats on climbing out of the cellar, my love!
- Play the kids - especially D'Angelo, LeVert, and Dinwiddie - as much as possible.
- Potential trade assets: Sean Kilpatrick, Trevor Booker, and... Jeremy Lin.
- If Dwight can't succeed in Steve Clifford's conservative rebounding and defensive schemes (and especially in the Hornets' locker room), this will be his last job in the NBA.
- Let's just keep it moving.
- The Cavs' best lineup will be Thomas-Smith-Crowder-James-Thompson.
- This is the best move the Cavs can make to make themselves a true championship threat this year. James moves to the 4 full time in this scenario.
- Henry Ellenson is one of my favorite players to watch because his style is so congruent with his body. I think he really believes he's an athletic 6'4" combo guard. Keep an eye on him for some fun highlights.
- Myles Turner, year 1, per 36: 16.3 / 8.7 / 1.1 / 0.7 / 2.3
- Myles Turner, year 2, per 36: 16.6 / 8.3 / 1.5 / 1.0 / 2.4
- Even though things look very similar, one main difference in Turner's two years was a big jump in his attempt rate on three pointers and free throws. If he continues that trend and embraces his larger role, he could be in for a breakout season.
- Short term, Justise Winslow is their kryptonite. Long term, Winslow needs to play to become the impact player he's shown the potential of becoming. Who says no?
- We need to find out if Giannis can play center. If he can, Jabari can fit alongside him long term. If not, should the Bucks pay max or near max money for Parker to be a super sub?
- It's amazing that a team can have such a bad point guard situation when it's such a strong position for the league right now. This year might get even darker than expected.
- Want to maximize Aaron Gordon's value? Play him at center. Sure, the Boogies of the league eat him up in the post, but can Boogie stay in front of Gordon on defense?
- A lineup of Payton-Ross-Fournier-Isaac-Gordon could actually be fun this year.
- Someone with nothing to lose should be rolling the dice on Mario Hezonia. I think this gets it done for Indy.
- Joining in the rest of the league in praying for a healthy Embiid.
- Ben Simmons will average 14 / 7 / 6 and win ROY. Also, he will start shooting with his right hand in year three.
- I love the CJ Miles signing.
- Serge Ibaka needs to be playing more of the 5 nowadays. A lineup of Lowry-Powell-DeRozan-Miles-Ibaka is intriguing.
- I thought OG Anunoby was going to be out because of injury for much longer. The Raptors may have pulled one over on the league, swooping him up at 23 in this last draft.
- Wall seems desperate to be included in the MVP discussion. I think he goes Westbrook on us this year and chases some round numbers. I'm predicting a 25 / 5 / 10 line for him.
- (starting a rookie point guard + Harrison Barnes as your best player) / (Carlisle sorcery) = missing the playoffs. Sorry.
- Treasure all Dirk moments this season as we may not have many more from the Big Mummy.
- I love them as is with their addition of Paul Millsap, but I agree with Zach Lowe that Eric Bledsoe will end up in Denver this season. Bledsoe-Harris-Chandler-Millsap-Jokic is an incredible lineup, both for talent and entertainment purposes.
- Jamal Murray and Will Barton will blitz opposing second units this year.
- Please give Jordan Bell 15+ mpg and Patrick McCaw 20+ mpg this year. That's all I ask.
- If Chris Paul, PJ Tucker, and Luc Mbah a Moute can improve the Rockets team defense, the Rockets may lead into 60 win territory. I don't expect this to happen, however, as they just lost the peskiest PG defender in the league.
- I'm predicting a familiar ending for the Rockets: out in 6 in the Western Conference Semis at the hands of the Thunder.
- The buzz around how will DeAndre Jordan look without someone spoon feeding him buckets needs to stop. Milos Teodosic will be the best passer in the NBA this year and will keep DJ fed.
- This will be a top 3 most fun team to watch in the league this year.
- Kentavious Caldwell-Pope is in for a big year. The upgrade in facilitation from Reggie Jackson to Lonzo is exponential, and he's on a one year, prove-it deal. Look for him to set career highs in 3P% and PPG on the way to an 4 year / $76M deal.
- I'm predicting a line of 12 / 5 / 7 for Lonzo this year.
- I think there'll be a major shakeup on the roster for the Grizzlies this year. As seen in a few of my Trade Machine creations, I predict Marc Gasol will be moved this year.
- For the life of me I can't understand why the T'Wolves signed Jeff Teague instead of George Hill to fit this team. Here's a statistical comparison of their careers for a few relevant categories.
- The Pelicans need guards and wings who can shoot on the cheap. Here are the players they should be targeting: Sean Kilpatrick (BKN), Tyus Jones (MIN), Damyean Dotson (NYK), Mario Hezonia (ORL), Davon Reed (PHX), and Bryn Forbes (SAS).
- Please run 4-5 pick and rolls until the cows come home. Who runs it better this year, the Pelicans or the Clippers?
- Yes, I may have gone on a tirade against Sam Presti in our recent podcast, but I love everything about this team.
- Look for Russ' averages to drop to a still excellent 24 / 6 / 10.
- I'm worried this team and therefore about Earl Watson's job security. I hope Watson gets to see this through until the majority of his roster can legally drink, but I'm worried that the brutal West may push the Suns into the basement.
- I'm way too excited for the Blazers letting Evan Turner handle the ball on offense and letting CJ McCollum and Damian Lillard tie defenses in knots off the ball as Zach Lowe reported a few days ago.
- Speaking of CJ, who says no to this masterpiece?
- I have no feel for this team, what types of lineups they'll play, and what their goal is. I'm rooting for big minutes for the Cauley-Stein and Labissiere pairing.
- I have concerns about their depth, health, and mood, but I'm predicting 50+ wins for them every year until proven otherwise.
- The big question for the Jazz this year is whether or not Rodney Hood can thrive in a featured role. The Utah internet contingent believes so, I'm dubious.
- Also, if Quin Snyder insists on starting Derrick Favors next to Rudy Gobert, this may be a bottom 5 least watchable team.
By John Hooper
The 2016 draft is an interesting one for us to look back on since it was the last time we evaluated prospects without having our projection model as a tool. With one year under the players' belts and now having their scores from the algorithm, we thought it'd be fun to look back at see how our pre-draft rankings are holding up.
To review the players and their rankings, I'm going to review them in order based on where they were selected. We'll be doing this as a series of articles for picks 1-20, then an article for other notable players, and finally with a summary for quick reference.
1. Ben Simmons
Ranking on our 2016 Big Board: 1
Ranking in our projection model: 1
Where I'd rank him now: 1
Simmons sat out his entire rookie season due to injury, but nothing's changed in our minds about him being far and away the best prospect from this class. He graded out as the fourth best prospect in our database (includes all drafted players since 2011 who played college ball) with a 99.8 overall rating, placing him behind only Anthony Davis, Joel Embiid, and Karl Anthony-Towns, and just ahead of Kyrie Irving and Myles Turner. Another interesting facet of Simmons' algorithm grade is that the margin between him and the second most highly rated player from the 2016 draft, Caris LeVert, is 8.0, which is the largest difference between the best and second best prospect in any class in our database (again going back to 2011).
My personal favorite thing about Simmons as a prospect is that even if he flops as a point forward, he projects as such a good scorer and rebounder that the model expects that his floor is basically John Collins, and everybody knows how much we love John the Baptist here:
Even with his shooting deficiencies, Simmons' propensity for getting to the free throw line, curated shot selection, and ability to finish at the basket make him one of nine players in our database to score a perfect 100 in scoring potential (as is John Collins), which is obviously a great sign for him and the Sixers.
After watching Simmons in Vegas in 2016, I was extremely impressed by his creativity, vision, and the sense of control he had over the action. After a year off and plenty of work on his jumper Simmons seems to be as confident as ever, and we can't wait to finally see his debut. Side note: ICFM! Come for the hoops talk, stay for the links to shirtless dudes!
2. Brandon Ingram
Ranking on our 2016 Big Board: 3
Ranking in our projection model: 4
Where we'd rank him now: 2
I placed Ingram into our model as a power forward, even though he only played 14% of his minutes there his rookie season, since that's where his long-term future in the league is. I still stand by my pre-draft sentiment that the whole Simmons vs Ingram debate was ridiculous (and backed up by Ingram being a distant 9.2 points behind Simmons in our model), but I can see why some have continued to make the baby Durant comparisons about his game, especially when he's flashing the way he did this summer against the Clippers.
Our pre-draft comp for him of Rodney Hood looks surprisingly accurate (at least statistically) after one year, considering that Hood was three years older than Ingram as a rookie. However, when comparing their ratings in our model, it's clear that Ingram has a much higher ceiling than Hood:
Even though Ingram will likely take another year or two to be an average starter, let alone a true difference maker, he's shown so much more potential than anyone other than Simmons in this class that we're bumping him up to the second spot on our updated rankings. We're hoping to see his more aggressive approach from his stint at Summer League this year carry over into the regular season, as well as progress with his consistency shooting from deep and physical strength.
3. Jaylen Brown
Ranking on our 2016 Big Board: 22
Ranking in our projection model: 15
Where we'd rank him now: 5
The most intriguing aspect about Brown's projection in our algorithm is that he's another of the nine players to earn a perfect 100 for scoring potential. This is a large departure from my opinion of him going into last year's draft (going off only game tape), where I expected Brown to be a Gerald Green-type as a streaky role player capable of lighting the arena on fire with his dunks, instead of the elite scorer that the model predicts him to become. Our model loves his aggressiveness, which is represented statistically by his usage rate (3rd highest of all SFs in our database) and his 8.9 made free throws per 100 possessions (6th most of all SFs), as well as his youth and otherworldly athleticism. Here's his full profile from our model:
Other than the insight into his vast potential as a scorer, the main reason that Brown's made such a jump in our rankings after his rookie campaign is his surprisingly good shooting from behind the arc this past year, posting a 34.1% clip from three on 1.7 attempts a game. Coming into the year, Brown ranked 42nd out of the 65 small forwards in our database in shooting potential after 43.1%/29.4%/65.4% shooting splits at Cal, so it's an enormously promising sign for the Celtics that Brown was already able to make such a large stride in becoming respectable from deep.
Our pre-draft comp of Harold Miner was made with the expectation that Brown may win a dunk contest, but would never be an impact player in the league. Right now, I'd put his career on track to be very much like Gerald Wallace. If he can continue to improve his shooting, we may be looking at the Iso Joe of the 2020s.
I'm also interested to see if Brown makes a leap while part of the Celtics or if he needs a change of scenery away from from Boston's packed depth chart to find the opportunity necessary to grow and showcase his talent.
4. Dragan Bender
Ranking on our 2016 Big Board: 7
Ranking in our projection model: n/a (no NCAA stats)
Where we'd rank him now: 19
Bender certainly has a unique skill set for a player of his size, but he also made one of the worst initial impressions of the players from the 2016 class during his rookie season. He had moments in Summer League this year where he flashed his unique skill set, but even so, some aspects of his body of work there, namely only tallying one block in five games and shooting 39% from the field, were still causes for concern considering second year lottery picks are expected to be dominant.
Bender, along with Wade Baldwin, was one of two players selected in the 2016 first round to produce negative win shares per 48 minutes this past season. Bender played sparingly this past year, averaging 13.3 minutes per game in 43 contests, and was mostly unproductive when he did see the court. His per 36 minute slash line of 9.2/6.5/1.4 inspires very little confidence, and his ghastly shooting splits of 35.4%/27.7%/36.4% only make things worse. However, for those looking for reason to be optimistic, there is at least one notable international player who had a similar rookie season as a 19 year old who's now gone on to great things.
It's way too soon to give up on Bender, but compared to some of the other bigs taken later in the first round, I'd have to guess that Phoenix wishes they could take a mulligan on this one.
5. Kris Dunn
Ranking on our 2016 Big Board: 4
Ranking in our projection model: 14
Where we'd rank him now: 20
Well here's one of the prospects where it certainly would've been helpful to have our model going into last year's draft! We ranked Dunn in our potential all-stars group and even gave him the comp of John Wall. About that...
What the model picked up on that we didn't with the eye test is how much that Dunn would struggle running an NBA offense (ranking him 43rd of 67 the point guards since 2011 in passing potential), and that his 37.5% from three as a junior at Providence was likely a mirage (ranking him 55th of the 67 in shooting potential).
Dunn did grade out as the best defensive point guard out of all prospects in our model, so here's to hoping he can carve out a Patrick Beverley-esque niche in the league. Beverley was a much better shooter in his first year in the league after his time in Europe, however.
In the big picture, things have obviously worked out for the Timberwolves in packaging Dunn along with Zach LaVine and the pick that became Lauri Markkanen for Jimmy Butler. However, in an alternate universe, it's fun to imagine Minnesota realizing how similar of a player to Dunn they could've picked up as an undrafted free agent in Gary Payton II:
and instead using their 2016 first rounder on Jamal Murray, Thon Maker, or another player who would've fit well with that roster's core. But hey, all's well that end's well, so cheers to T'Wolves and that new electric green!
Thanks for reading and look out for the article on picks 6-10 next week!
By John Hooper
Since Gordon Hayward's decision to sign with the Celtics as a free agent, I've spent way too much time thinking about the future of the Utah Jazz, especially for someone who's neither part of their organization nor a long-time fan of the club. There was something particularly gut-wrenching about watching the blueprint of a team that's built its roster patiently and thoughtfully being ripped to shreds by a single Player's Tribune article.
In this most recent season, the Jazz finally broke through and reached the playoffs after a four year drought. After an impressive postseason performance to cap off the year, Utah seemed on the verge of a period of sustained success behind their two homegrown cornerstones, Hayward and Rudy Gobert. Despite winning over 50 games for the first time since 2010, this past season could've been even better if they hadn't been bit so severely by the injury bug. Simply put, last year was a great year for Utah and all signs indicated that the future was even brighter, as long as their core was kept intact.
The good news for Jazz fans is that I'm here to help out, which is almost as good as watching Dwight Howard stop giving all fucks and troll fourteen year olds online. Basically, I like seeing small market teams compete despite the disadvantages they have when it comes to acquiring and keeping talent on their rosters, and I like seeing the teams that have front offices that make smart decisions succeed. So juuuuuust in case Dennis Lindsey and the gang are looking for a hand, I've crafted a 15 step plan to get them back on track.
Step 1: Reassess and redefine the franchise direction
One of the most surefire ways to become a perennial lottery participant is to make each roster move within a vacuum, without considering how it meshes with any previous or planned personnel moves, all while ignoring the overarching franchise strategy. Practicing this style of roster management is how you end up like Orlando, Sacramento (hopefully not for much longer), and Detroit - never good company.
With the Sixers finally beginning to realize the fruits of their labor thanks to the one true prophet, Sam Hinkie, and the Rockets on the verge of adding Carmelo Anthony and creating another super team, the league has become obsessed with an all of nothing philosophy. While I certainly see the merits of full tear-downs with hopes of landing a superstar for many franchises, I actually believe that the Jazz would be best served by zigging while the rest of the league zags and instead aiming to become a mainstay at the 3-5 seeds in the Western Conference.
Why such a modest goal? First off, there's no sense in dancing around the fact that Utah is one of the lowest ranking destinations for free agents despite having a good coach in Quin Snyder and being a respected organization. And if a team is unlikely to land a star through free agency, the only other options are to find one through the draft or by trade. The problem here is that with Utah's free agency challenges in mind, any assets that would be sent in a trade for a star would mostly likely have to come through the draft. Yes, the Utah front office has done a solid job in the last few drafts, so theoretically it's possible that they could find enough gems to swing a deal for a star. But the reality is barring any major changes or significant injuries, the Jazz will be too good to have the high lottery picks that give you a chance to draft or trade for elite talent.
And the reason they'll be too good is mostly because of one man, Rudy Gobert. Gobert came into his own last season, averaging career highs in points, rebounds, and blocks on his way to a 2nd Team All-NBA nod and runner-up finish for Defensive Player of the Year. He's also a favorite of the advanced analytics community, finishing the year second in total Win Shares, eighth in Value Over Replacement Player, and third in True Shooting Percentage. With a player as good as Gobert anchoring your team and especially your defense, it isn't possible to drop low enough in the standings to have a chance to take the Markelle Fultzes of the world. Plus, the whole goal of having a top three pick is to hopefully end up with a player of Gobert's caliber anyway, so by already having Gobert, the Jazz may already be closer to being back in the top eight of the West than many would expect.
Finally, and this is total conjecture, but I think Jazz fans would be happy without true title aspirations as long as they have a consistently good team to root for. I think having a winning team that's been built the right way, a la Memphis this decade, has become underrated at this point, plus the Warriors and the rest of the teams taking part in the current super team arms race make it highly unlikely the Jazz could make the leap into the championship conversation in the next 3-5 years anyway.
With that reasoning as our north star, instead of of bottoming out and rebuilding, our goal is to get Utah to a 50-55 wins a year level within the next 3 seasons, all while keeping one of the best fan bases in the league excited about their future. Here are few of the main focuses that we're going to use in building out a team to do just that:
Optimizing for Gobert
The Jazz have one of the best ten players in the league who just turned 25 and is under contract at a reasonable rate until 2021. If Bill Simmons still wrote his trade value articles, I'd have to imagine that Rudy would be in his top five considering his existing body of work, youth, and favorable contract. If Utah wants to build a sustainably successful roster, they need to surround him with players who augment his strengths and cover for his weaknesses.
Gobert is a high-efficiency (68.1% true shooting percentage last year), low usage player (294th in usage rate) who has zero range (1.0% of all shots outside 10 feet) on offense. Creating an offense that's tailored to him is straightforward - place shooters all around him, use him in pick and rolls, and have at least one other player who can be your team's main bucket getter. The caveat is that everyone else in the league is also looking for more shooting, so we'll have to be creative when surrounding Rudy with marksmen.
On defense, Gobert's the premier rim protector in the league today. He's also an elite rebounder. He's so good at both facets of the game that his skills can be used to mitigate some of his teammates' deficiencies there. His only defensive weakness is that his impact can be reduced by having to guard players that are perimeter threats, so ideally we'll still want to have players around him who can play the ball handler on pick and rolls well. The good news is that Mitchell and Exum should both be strong there.
With all of this in mind, a priority for us to implement asap is to pair Gobert with a 4 who can shoot well from deep. If the new 4's a good defender, great! If not, we're placing placing less importance on that player's rebounding and defensive skills because opening things up in the middle for Rudy is our top priority.
Developing Exum and Mitchell
In Dante Exum and Donovan Mitchell, Utah has two young, talented players with all-star ceilings. Similar to Gobert, Mitchell especially is type of player that teams are tanking to find. It's easy to imagine the two guards acting as interchangeable creators and scorers for the Jazz when they're running wild in Salt Lake City and Las Vegas against the competition in Summer League.
We loved Mitchell coming into this year's draft, ranking him seventh amongst this talented group of prospects in our final pre-draft rankings. His early returns in Summer League have only heightened our bullish stance on his future.
Exum is the greater enigma of the two players. He has even more potential that Mitchell with his 6'6" frame, 6'9" wingspan, and great athleticism. During his brief career, he's already shown flashes of every tool in the toolbox that you could ask for in a guard. At this point, it's about increasing his consistency and improving his defensive awareness so that he can harness his talent and help the team win ballgames. Watching him average 20/4/6 in his three games at SLC Summer League doesn't hurt our excitement for him either.
The first two focuses are admittedly pretty standard - of course you want to put your best youngsters in positions to succeed. It is a bit more unorthodox to purposefully target players who are lower ceiling, high floor types, but that's exactly why I think the Jazz should take this approach. While most organizations are obsessed with acquiring a top five player or someone with the potential to be one, great value can be found on quality role players who've slipped through the cracks. This means drafting experienced college players who have lost their new car smell, so less prospects like Thon Maker and more like Patrick McCaw. Don't get me wrong, I like Thon (age ain't nothing but a number!), but there was and still is a much higher chance of him having zero positive impact on a team than someone like McCaw who posted an elite steal rate (6th nationally in steals per game as a sophomore) and solid shooting and assist numbers while playing in a above average conference.
In free agency, this means avoiding bidding wars for middling talent, plus not paying anyone a premium as a bribe to get them to come to Utah. The Jazz should be more active in mid July once some teams have tied up their cap space and bargains can be had amongst the players whose pools of suitors have dried up. Basically, Utah should offer less contracts like Jeff Teague's and more like the one Sam Presti and the Thunder inked Patrick Patterson to earlier this summer. With the cap expected to increase only moderately over the next few years, it should be much easier to start signing players to reasonable deals again.
With our guiding principles now established, it's time to make some moves!
Step 2: Trade Derrick Favors
Derrick Favors has been a really nice player for the Jazz over the past seven seasons since coming over in the Deron Williams trade. He's averaged over 16 and 8 for them twice, and is still only 26 years old. The problem with Favors on the team that we're trying to build is that he's the antithesis of who we want to play next to Gobert. Going back to our plan to play a good shooter next to Rudy, last season Favors reached a career high in the proportion of his shot attempts coming from outside 16 feet, at 22.0%. It's nice to see him try to extend his range, but unfortunately he only shot 33.7% on the long 2s he took and 3/10 from three. The chances of Favors making a drastic improvement here are slim, and with his contract concluding at the end of the year, we may as well get something in return for him instead of letting him walk for nothing.
Favors' trade value rests in the eye of the beholder. It's lower to organizations looking for a long-term roster piece since they'd only have him under control for one season. On the other hand, his value is raised by virtue of being an expiring contract to teams that want to slash salary at the end of the year. He's also a rental option to other teams who are looking to add depth to their big man rotation without clogging their books.
It's a team in the last category that we decide to deal Favors to, sending him to Denver for Darrell Arthur and Monte Morris. Denver does this deal because they need another center to play behind Jokic, they want to win now after adding Paul Millsap, plus Jokic's style is the rare one that Favors can play next to in a dual big look. He fills a need and can play around 28 minutes a night for them in various lineups, while not locking them into a long-term commitment. The Jazz do this deal because they get to roll the dice on a player in Darrell Arthur who may be finally finding his niche in the NBA, having shot 38.5% and 45.3% from three in the past two years. Arthur gets a chance to start with Utah, and if he stays healthy, he'll likely play his way out of accepting his $7.5M player option for the 2018-19 season. In that sense, the trade's a rental for a rental swap, but the Jazz also add depth here by acquiring Monte Morris. We may have been a bit overly ambitious in our ranking and projection of Morris, but he has the look of a steady hand as a backup point guard.
Here's our updated depth chart and minute distribution heading into this season:
Our focuses for during the season:
Step 3: Revive Alec Burks
I loved Alec Burks as a prospect. The algorithm loved Burks as a prospect. The whole league loved him as a blossoming young talent after averaging 14 points a game in his third year our of Colorado. My favorite player of all time is Eddie Jones, and I saw a lot of similarities in Burks to Jones' smooth slashing game during his first few years as a pro. My heart was open and ready to love.
It's been a shame that Burks hasn't played more than 42 games in a season since that promising third year because of the multitude of injuries that he's suffered. But, if we want to look at the glass as half full here, that recent high of 42 games did come in this past season... so you're telling me there's a chance! He had a few moments where he flashed on tape again this year, most notably against the Thunder in March, that give room for optimism that he can regain some of his earlier form and be a valuable contributor again.
The Jazz should spend significant time this season finding out if that's indeed the case, because he's going to be a major factor in how they manage their roster spots in the next few years. If Burks can somehow fully revert to the 22 year old version of his game, the Jazz just dusted off a guy who can hang 20 on you on any given night and look good doing it. If he reaches his previous heights on some nights but can't be counted on to do so all the time (the most likely scenario), the Jazz have someone worth inking to a moderate contract as their first or second player off the bench. If Burks sadly has no more bullets left in the chamber, then it's an unfortunate what-if tale for him and Utah, and he becomes an $11M trade asset whose deal expires in 2019.
The Jazz should be thinking about development and medium-term positioning this year, and starting Alec Burks is one of the best things they can do to clarify the circumstances around one of the most volatile variables they have in their organization. Having a solid understanding of what Burks has left will be a major step towards keeping their rudder of Utah's ship righted towards eventual playoff contention.
Step 4: Reinvent Joe Ingles as a stretch 4
The Jazz pretty much had to extend the 4 year / $52M offer to Ingles that they did, with Ingles being one of (at that point undecided) Gordon Hayward's favorite teammates and Orlando reportedly waiving an even richer contract at Ingles. I can also say that in my brief interaction with him in May (story at 34:45 into through episode 31), Ingles seems like an all around great dude. But as an objective non-Jazz fan, I feel obligated to say that Ingles is going to have to take his glue-guying to a never before seen level to earn his money. In his breakout year last season, his he only averaged 10.6 points and 4.8 rebounds per 36 minutes, plus he's now on the wrong side of 30. I'd be remiss to not mention that he finished third in the league in three point percentage at 44.1%, however.
In this world, we're planning on sliding Rodney Hood to the 3 and starting Alec Burks at the 2 to maximize the minutes we can give to the young wings on the roster. With this lineup in mind and only Darrell Arthur and the Swedish Larry Bird on the depth chart at the 4, there's a clear opportunity for Ingles spend more time as a hybrid forward instead of the wing he's been in the NBA thus far (87% of his time at the 2 or 3). Ingles has the size to passably play the 4 at 6'8" and 225 pounds, he's a great complement next to Gobert as a high-level spot-up shooter, a plus passer for a 4, and his poor rebounding would be negated by Gobert's excellence there.
Frankly, I'm surprised Ingles has never played more than 19% of his minutes in a season as a stretch 4 considering his frame and mediocre athleticism. If he can expand his game and handle the ruggedness of the interior, his contract would become a lot more palatable since it would then be for a Ben Zobrist-type utility player.
Step 5: Trade Rodney Hood at the deadline
Rodney Hood has also been a really nice player for the Jazz. These are trades being made with the head and not the heart, since Hood and Favors both seem like they've been great pieces of the franchise.
Hood shoots a good percentage on a high volume of attempts from three, and he plays solid defense at either wing position. He's epitomizes the 3&D role that so many teams are desperate to fill right now, and the Jazz were smart enough to nab him with the 23rd pick in the 2014 Draft after most of the league had already passed on him. Hood will also be only 25 when he becomes a free agent at the end of the 2017-18 season, and because of that, he'll be in line for a major payday. Expect him to end up signing a deal next offseason somewhere between Tim Hardaway Jr.'s and Otto Porter's recent contracts.
Even though I'm recommending that the Jazz trade Hood, it's not that I think that he's less valuable than Porter or Hardaway Jr., it's more that I think both of those deals are poor values (despite my love of Otto's efficiency) that were handed out out of desperation and insanity, respectively. The last thing a team like the Jazz should do is tie up the majority of its cap space on the supplemental talent that surrounds their actual difference makers (see Blazers, Trail). When that happens, you've locked yourself into a team and limiting your path to improvement to solely player development.
The truth of the matter is that Hood has shown no evidence of being able to become a go-to scorer since he's been at the pro level nor while he played at the college ranks. He's never posted a usage rate above 23.8% at either level and he rarely gets to the free throw line, two bad signs because those are two of the main data points we've found useful in projecting scoring potential. He contributes little as a rebounder (career average of 4.1 rebounds per 36 minutes) and is not someone who creates shots for others (2.7 assists per 36 minutes for his career). He'll deservedly get paid because his skills are in demand right now, but instead of tying up 20ish percent of their cap for the next four years on a high quality role player, Utah would be best served swapping him for a useful asset and maintaining financial flexibility.
If the Jazz float it out to the league that Hood's on the market, there will be no shortage of suitors looking to add some shooting for their playoff run. Yes, he'll be a half-season rental at his current rate of $2.4M, but Utah will still be able to net a worthwhile return for him, at least something that will be better than letting him walk. The deal that I think makes the most sense is sending Hood to Oklahoma City in exchange for the rookie Terrance Ferguson.
OKC makes this deal because they've already pushed all of their chips to the middle for this year by trading for Paul George. Adding Hood and turning Roberson into a defensive specialist off the bench makes the Thunder a much scarier team offensively, and thankfully reduces the chances of us having to watch Russell Westbrook kill Alex Abrines and/or Doug McDermitt on the court this year. The Thunder with Hood on the team become the second best team in the Western Conference this season. I've already let my feelings be known about the Thunder's questionable selection of Ferguson this year in a previous article, but long story short, losing him doesn't affect their on-court product this year or next (at least).
And despite the salt that I've thrown on the pick, I'm not blind to the fact that Ferguson possesses a ton of talent and probably even has a higher ceiling than Hood because of his athleticism and feel for the game. He has a lonnnnng way to go, but Utah is now in a position where they can take a lottery ticket and let him come along slowly since we're in year one of a three year plan.
Step 6: Trade or buy out Joe Johnson at the deadline
This move is more out of doing right by a respected veteran, which also has the side benefit of bolstering the Jazz's reputation as a place that takes care of its players.
Iso Joe will be getting buckets when he's fifty. He can still be a contributor in a minor role for a playoff team this year, plus he's also attractive as an expiring contract to those trying to clear space. The Jazz should look to pick up a second rounder for him, while making sure they don't take on any bad contracts in return.
...Or, if the Utah front office is feeling frisky, who says no to this deal with the Spurs (obviously made without the Favors for Arthur swap occurring)?
Bill Simmons talked about Utah's Ewing Theory potential on a recent podcast and there's certainly credence to Utah sneaking up on the league this year with suffocating defense, but those such as Tom Haberstroh who are predicting them to have a better record than last year should slow their roll. Now that the dust has started to settle and the final pieces on Utah's opening day roster are falling into place, we're forecasting that the Jazz will finish 38-44 and just shy of a playoff berth. This will give Utah a late lottery pick to work with and $30(ish)M to play with in cap room during the 2018 offseason.
Our strategy this offseason will follow our singles hitting corollary, and that starts with Utah's selection in the 2018 Draft. (note: I'm assuming Arthur opts out of his player option)
Step 7: Acquire a young, talented power forward
The main hole on this team is a modern 4. The recently acquired Jonas Jerebko temporarily fills that role, but the Jazz still need a player who can be Rudy Gobert's partner in crime for the long run. Based on that logic... with the 13th pick in the 2018 NBA Draft, the Utah Jazz select... Justin Jackson, sophomore forward from the University of Maryland!
Why Jackson? For starters, he shot 44.1% percent from three (the same percentage as Ingles last year! Spooky!) in his freshman season in the Big Ten last year, showcasing a quick and accurate stroke from deep. He's a bit undersized as a 4 at 6'7" and is a mediocre rebounder, but his 7'3" wingspan and 20.2% usage rate last year are indicators that he could be the fourth or fifth best starter on a good team.
Will Jackson eventually be an all-star? I doubt it, but he does have a high floor because of his frame and shooting ability. He'll be more NBA ready than many other available prospects after receiving major minutes for two years in one of the better conferences in the NCAA, which is exactly what we're going for. Think of this like the Jazz drafting their Patrick Patterson.
Step 8: Re-sign Dante Exum for 4 years / $52M
With Dante Exum likely to reject his $6.6M qualifying offer this offseason, Utah would be wise to try and sign Exum early to an extension during the 2017-18 season so they don't have to worry about Brooklyn or Atlanta offering a near max deal that they may feel pressured to match. After a season where we're predicting an 8/3/3 line for him in 24 minutes a night as a 22 year old, we think the Jazz will be getting a bargain by locking in Exum for the Dion Waiters special at $13M a year.
Here is our updated depth chart and minute distribution heading into year 2 of this experiment:
And now, our focal points for the season:
Step 9: Start Donovan Mitchell
With the way that Mitchell's been lighting up the summer leagues in Salt Lake City and Vegas, there's a case to be made that he should start for the Jazz from day one. His development is one of the most important pieces of the plan to get the Jazz back to the playoffs, but starting him as a rookie will also reduce the amount of minutes available to Dante Exum and Alec Burks to make their own strides during the 2017-18 season. Instead, our plan is to begin his rookie year with him playing around 18 minutes a night as he acclimates to the pro game and ratcheting thing up until he's up to 30 minutes per game during the season's final stretch. In this version of the universe, expect him to put up a a 12/3/2 line in his 28 minutes per game and make the First-Team All-Rookie team.
After a strong finish to the 2017-18 season, Mitchell will be ready in his sophomore campaign to take over the starting 2 guard role and take on the challenge to become the spearhead of Utah's offense. There will be nights when he's inefficient from the field and turns the ball over too much, but the Jazz need to persist on prioritizing development over wins in the short term to build their foundation of young talent. A focal point for Mitchell during year two will be establishing chemistry on the pick and roll with Rudy Gobert. Stockton and Malone part two it's doubtful they will be, but their two-man game should become the bread and butter of Utah's offense for this season and the next 2-4 after that. In his new starting role and playing 30 minutes a night, look for Mitchell to average 16/4/3 with a few 30+ point eruptions that get Jazz fans giddy.
Step 10: Get Justin Jackson at least 20 mpg
Continuing our theme of placing importance on getting the youngsters reps, we want to let our new, shiny first round pick find his place in the league as a trial by fire. That means accepting that he'll make a few mistakes that may cost the Jazz games this year, and committing to allocate minutes to Jackson that could easily go to Jerebko or Ingles instead. Whether he's playing with Gobert or Tony Bradley at center, Jackson will be a great partner for either with his perimeter oriented game. Chances are it'll be a process getting him up to speed on the finer points of the Utah defensive scheme, but Jackson fits the bill as the type of player who can step in an begin to make an impact early in his career since he possesses a high value skill for his position. It's up to the Jazz to make room for him to thrive.
The 2018-19 Jazz were assembled as a deep team full of athletic, switchy players anchored in the middle by Rudy Gobert, who we're predicting will have received his first 1st Team All-NBA honor this year. The team's main warts will be its recklessness and its inconsistent scoring from the perimeter, but again, those are things that we're deciding to live with to facilitate maximal growth from the young core that's been assembled.
With this hypothetical composition of talent, the Jazz finish only one game better than last year at 39-43, and again just outside the playoff picture. With Mitchell and Exum now on track to become full time backcourt mates and Gobert reaching new heights, it's time to make moves to bring this team towards 50 wins.
Step 11: Let Rubio, Thabo, and Jonas walk as a Free Agents
The writing's been on the wall for Rubio as we've made Utah's desire to transition to Dante Exum as the point guard of the future transparent. Rubio will be 28 and in line for what will likely be his last major payday. The best move for him will be to find a home that will give him minutes and enough bread to feed his family, and the Jazz are no longer that team.
I hadn't touched on it at all yet, so I may as well state here that I'm not a fan of the recent Sefolosha signing since it seems likely that he's going to consume some of the generous minutes allotments we've set aside for Burks, Exum, and Mitchell. Love you Thabo but you're fucking up the vision here, bud.
If the Jazz use Sefolosha as a mentor and a fill-in when there are injuries, then it's a great signing. If the Jazz are going to reduce the opportunities for players that should be part of their long-term future for a 1% better chance of making the playoffs this year, then I'm mad for you, Jazz fans. Either way, we're keeping the bridge signings of him and Jerekbo as only that and extending neither.
Step 12: Re-sign Alec Burks 3/$36M
As mentioned in the 2017-18 season section, we expect Burks to have moments where he looks like the same unstoppable slasher he was once on the path to becoming, but for him to only reach that level every couple of games. Expect a line of 12/3/2 in 24 minutes per game over the 2017-19 period for him based on the role we've given him.
Here, in the 2019 offseason, Burks will turn 28, taking him into what will likely be the twilight of his prime since much of his game is predicated on athleticism. Based on his performance and age, we're re-signing him to a three year deal for an average of $12M per year to backup both wing positions. If all goes according to plan (I mean, all of this is going to happen, right?), he'll be one of the better sixth men in the league for the duration of his new contract.
Step 13: Trade Tony Bradley
We haven't spoken much about Tony Bradley yet, but we were fans of his as a prospect, listing him as the 31st best prospect this year and predicting that he'll have a quietly successful 10 year career. He's also looked good in Summer League so far, for what that's worth, doing his thing in the 20 minutes a night he's been playing.
So why would the Jazz want to trade him if he will likely be a productive player? It comes back to the first rule of this article: they need to surround Rudy Gobert with players that accentuate his strengths. Bradley will be good, but because he can't play next to Gobert, he has less value for Utah than he may for other franchises since he'll always be in a limited role here.
One team in particular that will be a good fit for Bradley's services in the summer of 2019 is the Los Angeles Clippers. This is the summer that the Clippers will be handling DeAndre Jordan's free agency (assuming he opts in to his player option in 2018, which we think he will because of the consensus that there will be a small number of organizations with max cap room in the 2018 offseason), and with so much money allocated to Blake Griffin and Danilo Gallinari, Jerry West and Co. will have to think long and hard about letting DJ walk.
The mutually beneficial solution that we're proposing is to trade Tony Bradley to the Clippers for Sindarius Thornwell (yes, we have an irrational love for Sindarius so we'd probably be devising a trade for him in every 5,000 word hypothetical deep dive that we write. But stay with us here). The Clippers make this trade because it enables them to walk away from DJ with a young, respectable replacement for 1/10 of the price. They lose a player in Thornwell who we believe is going to have a PJ Tucker-like career, but has been stuck behind the recently signed Gallinari in a small role on the Clippers. Thornwell will be most valuable on a defensive minded team with playoff aspirations. The Clippers teams of the next few years may still be decent without Chris Paul, but they're not being crafted as a defense first squad.
By swapping Bradley for Thornwell, the Jazz will be acquiring a gritty small forward entering his prime. Thornwell fits Utah's ethos perfectly with his versatile defense. He'll be able to guard opposing 2-4's and give the Jazz another player who can create his own shot.
Here is our updated depth chart and minute distribution for year 3:
And our few last moves here on the homestretch:
Step 14: Move Justin Jackson to the starting lineup
The beauty of drafting players who have significant experience playing major college ball is that they need less time to pre-heat before being ready. Because of that NCAA experience and our plan to play Jackson 20+ minutes a night last year, he'll theoretically be ready to be a supporting piece in the starting lineup in his second year. Expect Jackson to still have his fair share of bumps in the road as he continues to grasp the sets and rotations of the club, but the positives of his presence next to Gobert will outweigh the negatives.
Step 15: Tighten up the rotation
Now that Utah has built a roster full of versatile, young players who can defend and knock down threes around prime Rudy Gobert, it's time for Quin Snyder to shift the goal of the franchise from learning to winning. This means increasing the minutes of all the starters and using the bench for breathers and specialists instead of learning opportunities. We still have Ingles to play Swiss Army knife and Burks to provide a scoring jolt at either wing spot, but the focus is now on All-NBA regular Rudy Gobert and first time all-star Donovan Mitchell.
Expect this team to compete with Denver and Minnesota for the 4 seed in the West, finishing the 2019-20 season twelve games better than last year at 51-31 and poised to make noise for the next few years to come.
By Trevor Smyth
Throughout the years Hoop and I have had some dudes we have been pretty big fans of for one reason or the other (keep in mind this is pre ALGORITHM). So here are six draft busts that at the time we really liked… hit us back with some guys you liked that turned into busts.
It’s always sad when you google a former player’s name and he isn’t even on the first page of google results…JONNY where’d ya go brother?
The former orangeman was hard-nosed PG that rocked a dope headband that had the swagger of guy that didn’t think anyone in the world could guard him. If I am being honest with myself, I actually was hoping he would slip to the Warriors (the year GSW drafted Steph Curry)!! That would have changed the fate of the Bay’s franchise quite a bit had that happened. Anyway, I loved Jonny Flynn and here is an excellent clip that sums up so much of way I loved him: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pHY4vduNoRo
Notice: the shaking of the head post dunk — NOBODY CAN GUARD ME!
The next Charles Barkley??? Nope, just an overweight prospect with asthma. At the time, I really thought AB could be a Barkley type player. Evidence here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YUYOGrLwrl0
HOLY SMOKES this dude could throw down with power! I just imagined him running the one-man break a la Barkley in the pros and being unstoppable.. Nobody is stepping in the way of a man that large moving that fast. Sadly, health issues got in the way for ol Anthony to make an impact at the professional level… It’s interesting to think about the hypothetical situation of him slipping to the second round…maybe he has a chip on his shoulder, maybe he stays in shape, maybe he learns to be a beast defender, maybe, maybe, maybe??! It’s crazy how much situation factors impact the development of a young talent.
Good luck out there AB!
T-ROB is one of Hoop’s all time favorites and actually his algorithm points to why he was/is still a great prospect. Unfortunately he has played for six teams in his first five season in the NBA. Hard to find your place and get comfortable out there when you aren’t established in the rotation. I really hope Thomas makes a leap sometime soon otherwise he could find himself playing In China or Europe real quick. I love this recent article posted by Hoop Hype (http://hoopshype.com/2017/07/02/free-agent-thomas-robinson-looking-for-opportunity-stability/) where Robinson says he could be a top 5 rebounder in the league. I agree with him. What’s to say Thomas Robinson couldn’t be a better version of Tristan Thompson??? Time will tell on this one but as of right now he lands on the list because he has yet to find the right home.
Similar to Thomas Robinson, Benny has yet to find the right home. Getting stuck in the slums of Sacramento being ruled by an awful dictator, yes I am looking at you KING BOOGIE! It’s pretty hard to develop young players when you have a bully as your top player that actively seeks out young players to make them not feel comfortable within the organization. I hope Benny Mac can make a splash with Memphis. His athleticism and pure shooting form are special if he gets enough run he might just find a spot in the rotation in Memphis. Hopefully Coach Fiz can teach him how to be an NBA defender.
In 2005 the Warriors selected Ike Diogu out of Arizona State with the 9th overall pick. Initially I was pretty bummed about the pick because I was enamored by Danny Granger and really wanted the DUBS to select him with the 9th pick. But after reviewing Ike and his stats in college I really become convinced he could be the next Elton Brand. Unfortunately he did not pan out but he has played really well in CHINA ;) recently winning a CBL championship over there.
I was one of the many guys that fell in love with his workout! But in retrospect the way he runs looks off to me… I think i fell in love with the fact that he was working at UCLA and his jumper looked nice. Here take a look for yourself: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KyADXpenxzU
Biggest lesson upon reflection… don’t full in love with a work out video/highlight reel when analyzing a NBA prospect. Must use the golden three rule:
-How does his advance stats look?
-Does he pass the eye test? (Shooting stroke, effort, running style, bench behavior)
-What's he like outside the game? (who are the five guys he hangs out the most with--what're they like, how attractive is his significant other, what's his relationship like with his parents/family)
-COACH & HOOP
By John Hooper
It was a wild Thursday in Brooklyn on draft night, and we were lucky enough to be in attendance for the fireworks. The Jimmy Butler trade has already been covered ad nauseam and draft grades have been handed out across the internets, so instead I'm going to highlight the 11 points that I feel strongly about after watching from Barclays.
Winner: Philadelphia 76ers
I'm not as high as most on Markelle Fultz, but I still love the move that Philadelphia made to move up to get him. Fultz will be a perfect fit next to Ben Simmons and Joel Embiid as a secondary playmaker and scorer, plus the move also took Philadelphia out of an uncomfortable value versus need predicament it was facing with the third pick. If Fultz can be an effective catch and shoot player when he's playing off the ball, the ceiling is the roof for him and for the 76ers.
That being said, my goodness is Fultz boring. Maybe it's just because he's doing this next to the Big Baller Brand extravaganza, but his interview after being selected reminded me of a fourth grader begrudgingly telling his grandma about the summer camp he went to because she paid for it. Show some juice Markelle! And that's not even mentioning his Twitter gaffe. Thankfully Embiid has enough personality for the whole team.
I also was a big fan of the 76ers' selection of Jonah Bolden in the second round. The rotation will be a bit crowded up front for them, but Bolden profiles as an athletic, modern big who it's easy to imagine playing next to either of the 76ers' fragile franchise cornerstones because of his versatility. Bolden's a high-ceiling player who will likely pay dividends for them down the road, whether that's on the court or as a trade asset.
Loser: Boston Celtics
I don't understand what the Celtics are doing. If you want to contend now, trade this year's number three pick along with a few of your players for Jimmy Butler or Paul George. If you're only focused on contending 3-5 years down the road, keep your first overall pick this year and draft the player most likely to become a superstar. Even if you think you're actually getting Gordon Hayward in free agency, use this year's pick as a piece in a trade for George to build a team that is absolutely in the conversation for the title next season.
Jayson Tatum is a good player (we had him ranked fifth in our final rankings) but since he wasn't the player with the highest ceiling in the draft, it feels the Celtics have added another solid if unspectacular piece to a core that's already too full. It feels like Danny Ainge has become obsessed with assets and flexibility and it's causing the Celtics to straddle both potential timelines for Boston, which is preventing them from maximizing their chance to succeed in either. The Celtics needs to commit to a direction, otherwise they may end up in a purgatory in between 50 - 60 wins and outside the the group of true contenders for the next five years.
What I would've done as the Boston front office is make a trade for George based around these pieces, and kept the number one pick to take Lonzo Ball. Yes, George may still bolt to LA at the end of the year, but one of the main benefits of this would've been getting out from under the obligation of having to pay Isaiah Thomas $40M a year when he's an over-30 point guard. Ball would've also formed an ideal pairing with Avery Bradley, since Bradley could cover quick opposing point guards who'll likely will give Ball trouble, a la De'Aaron Fox last year. I also threw in the move for Trevor Booker because he's a borderline elite rebounder as a power forward and since trading for George would make Jae Crowder expendable. I think Ball - Bradley - George - Booker - Horford is more of a threat to the Cavs than Thomas - Bradley - Crowder - Brown(?) - Horford, but maybe that's just me.
On the bright side, I loved the Celtics' selection of Kadeem Allen in the second round. Allen is a defensive menace who makes life for opposing guards miserable. He's older and his shot is a work in progress, which is why he was available at 53, but there are a lot of similarities in his skill-set and style of play to Avery Bradley. I think it's reasonable to read the tea leaves here and infer that Allen makes Bradley more expendable when he becomes a free agent at the end of the year. Look for Allen to get more playing time than most would expect this season so Boston can see if they've found their new, cheaper version of Bradley.
Winner: Purple Suits
I had no idea this was even a thing, but multiple players wore oxblood suits and it looked pretty fucking great. Shout out to Frankie Smokes, Josh Jackson, and Frank Jackson.
I know I said I wouldn't rehash the shellacking that the Bulls front office has already taken in the media for trading Jimmy Butler, but their selection of Lauri Markkanen bothers me because they used the pick they just acquired to draft a player who's most likely going to essentially be Nikola Mirotic. I've heard people say that Fred Hoiberg is at least finally getting a player for his pace and space system in Markkanen, but Hoiberg's had Mirotic for his entire tenure. Markkanen will likely be a more accurate shooter than Mirotic, but he's worse defensively, so letting Mirotic walk and selecting Markkanen is really only a wash instead of a talent upgrade in my eyes.
If Chicago really wanted to bring in people who could stretch the floor, why not re-sign Mirotic and draft Malik Monk instead? Monk would work best with a defensive-minded backcourt mate like Kris Dunn anyway, and he was the ultimate pace and space player in the draft. Playing Monk alongside Zach LaVine would've been a sieve of lineup on defense, but it would make for some incredibly entertaining hoops to watch.
But to the surprise of no one who's been reading our pieces leading up to the draft, my real recommendation would've been that they take Zach Collins at seven. Collins would fit into Hoiberg's pace and space ethos, and offers immense potential for a team that's willing to let him grow. Chicago would've been a perfect place to let Collins come along slowly behind Robin Lopez for the next two years before letting Lopez leave in free agency and handing Collins the keys. Our (admittedly optimistic) comp for Collins is Pau Gasol, so he's clearly the type of player the Bulls would be interested in.
Overall, let's just say that I have no qualms with the "F" grades that the Bulls have received for their performance on draft night.
Winner: New York Knicks
First off, it's a win that they didn't trade Kristaps Porzingis. Crisis temporarily averted.
Secondly, I love their second round pick of Damyean Dotson. Dotson was ranked 22nd on our big board because he can absolutely rip it from deep. He can play either wing spot, which will lend itself to some welcome lineup versatility. Even with the overall saltiness of the Knicks' situation right now, I would definitely watch a lineup of Ntilikina - Lee - Dotson - Anthony - Porzingis. That's a fun team that could play five-out and put Anthony in situations to abuse poor defenders being left on an island without help trying to guard him one-on-one.
I even like the Knicks' selection of Frank Ntilikina, despite having listed him in our list of most overrated prospects. If the Knicks really are going to try and continue to run the triangle, they may as well take a point guard who has the potential to be as good of a fit as you'll find for it with his length, defensive ability, and a shooting stroke that hopefully can be tightened up.
Let's get out the s'mores and get the gang back together fellas. There's talent here if the Knicks can start moving together in the same direction again.
Loser: Miami Heat
I targeted Miami as a team that was likely to be in a trade because there wasn't a good match of talent and need for them at the fourteenth. Apparently Pat Riley agreed, but instead of trading the pick, he decided it would be best to just take whoever had the coolest name. Unfortunately, Bam Adebayo cannot play next Hassan Whiteside in today's NBA, and Whiteside is on the books through the 2019-20 season for roughly $25M per year.
I still think there may be a move to come here. It just doesn't add up that the Heat would use a lottery pick on a player that seemingly maxes out as a backup center for them for the next three years.
Winner: John Collins
At first, I hated this for Collins, who I consider one of my sons after all the love I've showered him with leading up to the draft. Once I thought more about it, however, I realized that Atlanta could be an ideal place for him to blossom into the player we predict he can be. First, and maybe most importantly, he will be under the tutelage of Coach Bud, whose staff has a great reputation for player development. Another thing that I love about the fit is that with their seeming acceptance that they're about to go through a rebuild, there will be a lot of minutes for Collins to soak up at either the 4 or the 5. And finally, and this is dependent on how the offseason shakes out for the Hawks, but all of the remaining bigs who finished the year on Atlanta's team would pair well with Collins. Paul Millsap, Ersan Ilyasova, Mike Muscala, and Kris Humphries are all above average shooters who could help keep the lane clear for Collins-Schröder pick and rolls.
I'm making an early prediction that Collins will come in the top 5 in Rookie of the Year voting. Others I predict will be in the running: Ben Simmons, Fultz, Lonzo Ball, De'Aaron Fox, Dennis Smith Jr., Donovan Mitchell, and Sindarius Thornwell.
Loser: Oklahoma City Thunder
I'm torn on the Thunder because their front office has frustrated me enough over the past few years that thinking about how I'd manage their roster is now a ongoing narrative in my head, but they're also my least favorite team in the league so I enjoyed a little schadenfreude when watching them have a night like they did on Thursday with their puzzling selection of Terrance Ferguson.
It's obvious that Ferguson has potential, but we had him ranked 44th on our big board going into the draft because he's such a long ways away from contributing at the NBA level. He's not quite Bruno Caboclo, but despite his gifts it's far from a guarantee that Ferguson ever makes an impact in the NBA. Ferguson averaged a 4.6/1.2/0.6 line in 15.1 minutes per game in Australia's National Basketball League. It's safe to assume that the level of competition is worse there than it is in the NBA... so Ferguson may be able to put up similar numbers for the Thunder in a year or so?
What I don't understand about the Thunder and their decision making is that they have a superstar who is in his prime right now. Wouldn't you want to do everything you could to support him and give yourself the best chance to maximize his unique talent? Wouldn't that especially be true if you're in the worst market in NBA and are highly unlike to end up with a talent like his again anytime soon? Why not take Tyler Lydon at 21 and give yourself an actual stretch 4 instead of forcing a square peg into a round hole with Domantas Sabonis there? Then they could've packaged Sabonis in a deal for backcourt depth and shooting such as this, but I digress.
Ok fine, side note/rant: the Ersan Ilysasova for Jerami Grant trade last season still boggles my mind. Ilyasova was the perfect player to have in that slot in their lineup to give Westbrook maximal room to work because Ilyasova's such a good shooter for a 4. His contract was expiring at the end of the year, so if cost was a concern then you could always just let him walk in free agency. But instead they decided to trade him AND a protected first 2020 rounder for a new 8th man. Whyyyyy?!?!
Yes, the Oklahoma City front office has made some great draft picks, most notably Westbrook, Serge Ibaka, James Harden, and Steven Adams, but I think they're low key a bottom five team at roster and salary management.
Winner: Los Angeles Clippers
The Jerry West era starts with a bang!
After it came out that Patrick McCaw was ranked 16th on Jerry West's board in the 2016 draft (no link, unfortunately) which lined up almost identically with my personal ranking of McCaw at 15th, I've enjoyed indulging in self-flattery and telling myself that I have similar taste in players as West, one of the best talent evaluators of all time. This year, West selected two of my most underrated players in the second round of the draft, Jawun Evans and Sindarius Thornwell, so clearly our telepathy still lives.
I love both picks from value standpoint, as we had both players ranked within the top 25 on our big board and the Clippers were able to acquire them with the 39th and 48th picks. I also love both picks from a fit perspective too. I wouldn't be surprised at all to see Thornwell take over for Mbah a Moute as the Clippers' defensive minded forward in the starting lineup if Mbah a Moute declines his player option this offseason. Even if he doesn't end up starting early on, I expect Thornwell to carve out a role similar to Malcolm Brogdon's last year as a 25 minute a night glue guy who does a little of everything to help the Clips win ballgames.
Evans is an intriguing pick for the Clippers as well. Obviously I think highly of Evans, but I never wrote down one thought in particular of mine about him because it felt so hyperbolic: when watching his tape, there were aspects of Evans' game that remind me of Chris Paul's. Look, I don't think Evans is the next Point God, but he he has the same type of frame as Paul (5'11" without shoes, a wingspan that's 5-6 inches longer than their height, 180-185 pounds), and both dominate the ball by alternating between acting as the floor general and attacking the hoop to score. Evans is not nearly the shooter nor the defender that Paul was and is, but Evans is now entering a dream apprenticeship for his development backing up Paul. If Paul leaves, it's obviously a very different story, but having Evans as a potential successor would be a great silver lining if that's how things play out.
While we're here, I'd like to give a few shout outs to other teams who made great second round picks. I loved Milwaukee grabbing Sterling Brown for wing depth. We had him ranked 21st overall on our big board, so nabbing him at 46 was a great value pick. Phoenix made two strong second round selections in Davon Reed and Alec Peters. I doubt either will play significant minutes this season, but both are players who shoot well and should carve out nice careers in the league. I also liked Denver taking Monte Morris at 51. Worst case scenario, Morris should be an elite backup point guard during his career.
A few other acquisitions to shout out, undrafted free agent edition: Washington getting Devin Robinson, Houston signing Cam Oliver, Orlando picking up Derrick Walton Jr., Minnesota signing VJ Beachem and Deonte Burton, and New Orleans adding a desprately needed shooter in Peter Jok.
Loser: Caleb Swanigan
I still think Swanigan will have a long NBA career, but he was drafted into a suddenly crowded frontcourt in Portland. Even if Festus Ezeli's contract is terminated and Meyers Leonard is left out of the rotation, Swanigan will be fighting for minutes with Jusus Nurkic, Al Faruq-Aminu, Ed Davis, Noah Vonleh, and fellow rookie Zach Collins.
I hope Terry Stotts is willing to push Davis and Vonleh to the bottom of Portland's depth chart and give Swanigan a shot to play relevant minutes with the Blazers' second team this season, because he's the type of player who can make an impact right away and immediately give a reserve unit a go-to scorer. If not, this may be an unfortunate example of how much the situation can affect a player's development and career arc.
If Swanigan's left languishing on Portland's bench, look for a smart front office like Boston or San Antonio to try to pick him up. Something tells me RC Buford would be keen to add DeJuan Blair plus ACLs and a three point shot.
Winner: Golden State Warriors
The rich got richer on Thursday. Given their recent draft day history, it felt like a matter of when, not if the Warriors were going to buy their way into this year's draft. This year they acquired Jordan Bell of Oregon with the 38th overall pick and added to Chicago's miserable night in the process.
We had Bell ranked 18th on our big board, and adding him to the Golden State's lineup does almost seem unfair since his versatile, high-energy defense fits their switch-heavy schemes perfectly. He'll also have world class players taking all the attention away from him on offense and on the offensive boards, which should lead to many easy chances for him. Frankly, I expect Bell to be the Warriors' starting center on opening night, and to play 20 minutes a night as a rookie, as Bob Myers and the Warriors again prove the draft might be simpler than we think.
P.S. - Here are a few pictures and a video from our trip to the draft. Enjoy!
And Barclays' reaction to the Knick's taking Frank Ntilikina, with a special cameo from Nobu Stevens:
By John Hooper
Similar to the article we published about the most overrated prospects in this year's draft, we're back with the five best players flying under the radar. These are the ones who we'll be coming back to in five years from now like how the hell did he last until the 38th pick?!
Let's start at the top:
I may be the biggest Collins lover on the planet, and I'm ok with that. On our last podcast I made the proclamation that Collins future was "bare minimum: Pau", and I've already published an article stating that he's the best player in the draft.
So why is my appetite for all things Collins so ravenous? I like to evaluate players based on who could log major minutes in this year's playoffs, plus whose style will thrive in the league of 3-5 years from now. Would Collins have started in the playoffs this year? Absolutely not. Could he have played a role like he did at Gonzaga where he played 15 minutes and protected the rim, rebounded, and caught lobs for the Celtics? I'm confident that he could've. What I love even more is that in four years his body will have filled out, his shot will be more consistent, and then we'll have a seven footer who's a beast on the block, a great rim-runner, can pick and pop at the three-point line, who's a good rebounder, AND blocks a ton of shots. The only players in the league right now who that could be describing are Karl Anthony-Towns and Anthony Davis.
Yes, he played a backup role against a weak strength of schedule. No, I don't know why Mark Few was so loyal to Przemek Karnowski. Sometimes you have to take a leap of faith on a prospect, and I feel strongly that this is one of those times.
Our Prediction: 8 time all-star. 7 seasons averaging a double-double. Borderline Hall of Famer.
John Collins is the player I'm most excited to see at Summer League. I can't wait to watch him try to destroy the rims at Thomas and Mack on top of the head of some poor G League veteran.
Collins is another player who we already have an article about, but in a nutshell, he's an undersized, highly athletic center who plays like dunks are worth 8 points and layups are worth 4. It's so much fun watching someone hunt out the rim like he does, whether its to bash one down or to simply shoot a high percentage shot near the basket. I'm not quite sure he knows how to pass, and despite the recent videos showing him rain threes he rarely shot the ball beyond twelve feet, but sometimes it just doesn't matter. The guy showed elite scoring and rebounding potential this past year, grading out with perfect scores in both categories in our algorithm.
His defense will likely be fine. Not great, but fine. He won't be an elite rim protector but his team was 4.3 points per 100 possessions stingier with him on the court that they were overall, so he made a positive impact on that end this year for Wake Forest. He also has the quickness to potentially be a player who can comfortably switch onto guards when defending the pick and roll.
My main concern with John Collins is fit. He's more of a power forward with his 6'10", 225 pound frame, but he's a center stylistically. My dream is for the Knicks to take him and pair him with Kristaps. Porzingis could stay bombing threes from the perimeter and leave the rim open for Collins to attack at will. Collins would help cover for Porzingis' rebounding deficiencies, and then both would contest shots in the paint... it might just be too beautiful for the league to handle. But the Knicks'll probably take Frankie Smokes instead.
Our Prediction: 12 year career. 64% career true shooting percentage. Peaks with a 24/12/0 season on 62%/34%/82% shooting.
Everyone wants the next Draymond but no one wants to accept that he's a once in a generation player. What we can do is learn from some of the indicators that told us that Dray should've gone higher so that we can identify a player who may have some similar attributes in the future. I'm here to tell you that that man is Caleb Swanigan.
The consensus on Swanigan is that he will be a fringe first rounder. He's too short, too fat, and he doesn't have a position... sound familiar? Like Draymond he also has an enormous wingspan for his height, has shown a great work ethic, oh and he fucking balls out on the court.
Swanigan was an absolute pleasure to watch on offense this year. On the block he shows an impressive combination of power to establish his position and muscle to the hoop along with nimble footwork and a soft touch at the rim. What excited me most about his pro potential are the two things he focused on last offseason - improving his body and developing a three point shot. He went from being an old school battering ram to a dynamic player who now beats his opponents down the court on fast breaks and steps out for pick and pops. I like what he brings to the table, but I love that he has the awareness and type of character to make such significant improvements to his game in one offseason. Those are the types of attributes that allow you to evolve and thrive in the NBA.
Our Prediction: 12 year career. 7 year starter. 2 time rebounding champ.
Evans is another player we've written about in detail, as we've loved his game for a while now. He racked up the sixth most assists per 100 possessions and scored the ninth most points per 100 possessions out of the point guard prospects since 2011, playing with a very high level of productivity. He's a bit of a throwback in that he's highly ball dominant, and will be best suited to a system where he's expected to be the maestro on offense. But at the end of the day, putting up numbers like that when facing the toughest strength of schedule of any point guard in our database means that that you can play, period.
Evans also projects surprisingly well defensively, having a just barely negative difference of 0.4 points on his defensive rating compared to Oklahoma State's team rating. This is actually a good number for a point guard, putting him at 19th best of the 63 point guards in our database.
The trajectory of Evans' career will be based on how well he shoots the ball, just as it is for so many other prospects. He shot 37.9% from three (on a low volume of attempts) and 81.2% from the free throw line. If he can maintain those percentages and while taking more threes, he'll be on the cusp of multiple all-star nods.
Our Prediction: 13 year career. 8 year starter.
We got on the Sindarius train early. In our pre-March Madness big board we had him ranked 24th, and he's only risen since leading South Carolina on their memorable run to the Final Four.
So why do we like Sindarius? It's about 65% because of his name, and the rest because he's good at everything on a basketball court. In our algorithm he graded out above average in all five categories compared to the other small forwards since 2011. The only others in the group to do that were Otto Porter and Justise Winslow.
I don't expect his scoring to translate as anything near what he was able to do this past year as a Gamecock, but I do think he can be a go-to guy on a second unit and a role player as a starter. He's a player that I can see accepting a new role as a 3&D player, while bringing the toughness and grit to a team similar to the way that PJ Tucker does. In fact, Tucker's exactly who I think Thornwell becomes in the NBA - a good defender who can play the 3 and the 4, shoots well enough that you have to respect him, and is a great presence in the locker room.
Similar to the hunt for the next Draymond, the new buzz is where to find the next Malcolm Brogdon. Thankfully it's not that complicated, since he was on your TV for most of March. Thornwell can help contribute at a position of scarcity and will bring competitiveness and savvy to an NBA second unit from day one. From the twentieth pick on, every team should thinking seriously about picking Sindarius.
Our Prediction: 14 year career. 6 year starter. 1 moment that swings a playoff series.
By John Hooper
As the 2017 NBA Draft draws near, players' draft ranges have begun to solidify. With that in mind, here are the players who we feel are most likely to disappoint based on where they're being projected:
We've detailed Fox's draft profile in our head to head comparison of him and Lonzo Ball, so we'll keep this one brief.
Fox will be a very good scorer in the NBA. He's extremely quick and has great bounce. However, other than getting into the lane to score, what's unique about what he offers? He projects as a mediocre facilitator, he's a terrible shooter who most assume will become at least adequate, and he's an average rebounder. His defense is the one other area where he has a chance to be impactful. He's shown that he can be a pesky on-ball defender, pressuring opponents out of their comfort zone. Can he do that to NBA level point guards though? And will he get bullied because of his lean 170 pound frame? Something tells me the Kyle Lowrys of the league will feast on Fox when he tries to check them.
Fox is a high-character player with great athleticism. That's a great combination and he'll have a 10+ year career in the NBA. The problem is that if he's being drafted in the top five, he'll be expected to be a superstar, and won't be that.
Our Prediction: 12 year career. 0 all-star appearances. 32% career 3P%.
Jarrett Allen has been mocked in the 10-20 range throughout the past year, and it looks like that's still the window that he'll end up being selected within. In some ways that would make sense - he's a young, long center who produced against good competition. However, when you actually look as his body of work, it's much closer to that of an undrafted free agent than that of a borderline lottery prospect.
Allen is the twelfth rated center this year in our algorithm, coming in two spots behind the immortal Luke Kornet. There is nothing that he excelled at in his one year at Texas. Here are his rankings per category in the algorithm (which factors in age and strength of schedule) amongst the sixty centers in our database, :
- Scoring: 27th
- Shooting: 37th
- Passing: Last
- Defense: 34th
- Rebounding: 25th
The confusing part about Allen's current status as a first rounder is that there's an abundance of centers this year, many of which excel in at least one facet of the game. Looking for scoring on the block? Try Johnathan Motley. Want a stretch 5? How about Thomas Bryant? Searching for a rim protector? Jordan Bell can do that. Going high-risk, high-reward? Justin Patton has shown great flashes.
And the list goes on. Add in the general movement of the league away from classic centers and Allen's value should seemingly be even lower. The nail in the coffin here is the concern around Allen's motor and love for the game.
Yes he's young, has a huge wingspan, and has incredible hair, but let's just say our comp for Allen is Patrick O'Bryant.
Our Prediction: 3 year career. Career high of 14 minutes per game.
First off, shout out to Chris Ryan of The Ringer for the Frankie Smokes nickname. That alone was almost enough to change our tune here.
Frank's spot on this list has little to do with statistical analysis since we have no idea what to do with numbers from the European leagues. This is completely on the gut feeling that we've seen this movie before. Player with long, thin frame dominates younger international circuit. Player gets drafted, takes four years to become a contributor, but only after finding his niche once he's gotten used to facing bigger, more athletic competition.
What worries us about Frankie Smokes? Streaky shooting, a weak handle, the international transition, and high expectations. If he gets stashed for two more years by the Spurs before coming over, he's a future all-star. Right now it looks like he's going to the Knicks for the triangle's last gasp. Gulp.
Our Prediction: 8 year career. Evolves into Thabo Sefolosha. Returns France and leads a team there to a championship while back in a featured role.
Giles is likely to be selected in the 15-25 range, completely based on what he did in high school. Yes, he was the number one recruit in his class, but as his number of surgeries have climbed, he's stopped showing what made him that player. He had the seventh worst max vertical leap at this year's combine, being outshone by the likes of Moritz Wagner and Thomas Bryant. His explosion is not back, and it's not guaranteed that it ever will be.
In his short time at Duke, Giles played in 26 games and averaged 11.5 minutes per game. Most telling is that once it was tournament time and Giles was the healthiest he'd been all year, Coach K played Giles for only six and nine minutes in Duke's two games. If Giles wasn't trusted to play major minutes against Troy, how long will it take before he's ready for significant role in the NBA?
In the few minutes Giles did play, he did accumulate stats that forecast him as a plus rebounder and defender. If you're drafting him with the expectation that in four years he can be your dirty-work center, then you'll likely be satisfied. For those thinking they've taking a player who who'll be dominating like he's back at Forest Trail Academy, just remember that we warned you.
Our Prediction: 10 year career. 4 year starter. 2 years averaging a double-double.
Jackson was another freshman contributor this year at Duke, often taking on the point guard duties next to some combination of Luke Kennard, Grayson Allen, or Matt Jones. It was a bit of a surprise to see him as an early entry this year after an unspectacular season, but after a stellar performance on the athletic testing portion of the draft combine, he's now being projected as a late first rounder.
One of the main reasons teams like Jackson is his positional versatility, citing how he slid back and forth between the 1 and the 2 at Duke. Yes, Jackson is fully capable of dribbling the ball up the court and starting the offense, but he showed minimal ability as a creator or a distributor. His passing potential grade in our algorithm was 58.5, good for 49th out of the 86 shooting guards in our database. For context, his grade would've been the third worst of all point guards since 2011.
Let's say you don't care about whether or not Jackson can run your offense. He does project to be a good shooter, grading out at 87.6, good enough for 20th amongst all shooting guard prospects. That's great, but his defensive grade of 34.1 is also cause for concern. It's the fourth worst grade of the eighty-six shooting guards our database, and this is with the boost he receives for being young and having a good strength of schedule. Defensively he was bad across the board, generating minimal deflections while also posting a personal defensive rating that was 5.8 points worse than Duke's overall team defensive rating.
Jackson has potential. He's young, athletic, and a good shooter. It's just that at this point he doesn't offer anything else on the court. Think a better shooting Shannon Brown. But shout out to Shannon Brown! If Jackson has a highlight tape like this when it's all said and done, take him top five!
Our Prediction: 7 year career. 2 year starter. 0 dunks as good as number four in that Shannon Brown video.
By John Hooper
Jayson Tatum and Josh Jackson have a lot of similarities on the surface. Both were in the national spotlight this season as freshman after being ranked as top three recruits in the 2016 class. Both are listed at 6'8" and 205 pounds. Even their per game stats were similar with Tatum putting up a line of 17/7/2/1/1 and Jackson a 16/7/3/1/2 line. Now they're both top five prospects heading into the NBA Draft.
Just like our head to head comparison of De'Aaron Fox and Lonzo Ball, we're going go category by category using the results from our algorithm to help us paint the picture of what makes these two players different and who we'd take first.
Jackson averaged more points per 100 possessions than Tatum and had a slightly higher usage rate, so it was a surprise that Tatum's grade of 80.7 was significantly higher than Jackson's of 68.7 for scoring potential.
So what drove Tatum's higher score? One part of it is how much better he was at racking up points at the free throw line. Per 100 possessions, Tatum averaged 7.0 made free throws to Jackson's 5.1. The ironic thing is that Jackson actually got to the line more often, but the abysmal 56.6% he shot there made free throws a less reliable source of points for him.
The other main data point that drove Jackson's lower scoring grade is something that will be a theme throughout the comparison - Jackson is more than a year older than Tatum. Yes, both players were in their freshman year this season, but how much better could Tatum's numbers have been if he had spent an additional year honing his game at a prep school before playing at Duke?
Expect Tatum to be a player who averages 21-23 points per game at his peak and Jackson to be in the 16-18 points per game range.
It's well known that Jackson struggled with his jump shot this year. He finished the year strong but it was to be expected that his shooting potential score of 64.3 would be a weak point of his profile. Tatum again performed surprisingly well with an excellent score of 86.1, which placed him sixth out of the sixty-five small forwards in our database for his shooting ability.
Again, free throw shooting played a major role in separating the two players. Jackson was the second worst out of the small forward group in free throw percentage while Tatum was fourth best. The free throw line is where much of the situational noise of shooting is stripped away and the truth about a player's skill is revealed.
When comparing how each player's jump shooting form looks today, it's easy to see that Jackson has a number of kinks he needs to iron out while Tatum has a smoother release. Both players have work to do here, but Jackson has further to go to become a consistently good shooter. Look for Jackson to eventually become a 32%-35% guy and Tatum a 39%-42% guy from deep in the NBA, with Tatum shooting a much higher volume.
Neither player performed well in the passing potential category, with Jackson scoring a 53.7 and Tatum a 46.8, putting them at 40th and 56th out of the 65 small forwards, respectively.
Jackson actually had the eighth most assists per 100 possessions, but also had the sixth most turnovers in the group. Both players had poor numbers when looking at their personal offensive rating compared to their team's overall offensive rating, which is a bit of a red flag for both. For Tatum, having a rating that was 4.3 points lower than Duke's overall rating may be an indicator that the isolation-heavy play that he's known for outweighed his individual scoring contributions. For Jackson, having a rating 4.5 points lower than Kansas's overall rating is likely due to a combination of frequently turning the ball over and his reputation as a non-shooter allowing opposing defenses to pack the paint.
I expected the defensive potential category to be an easy victory for Jackson but Tatum again scored surprisingly well here to keep it close. Jackson's score of 90.4 was the fifth best of the sixty-five small forwards while Tatum's 83.1 was still far above average, coming in at twelfth best.
The players had nearly identical numbers for blocks per 100 possessions and also fared similarly on the personal defensive rating versus team defensive rating comparison, ranking in the 12-16 range for both metrics. Jackson did outperform Tatum with the number of steals he was able to rack up per 100 possessions, coming in at tenth in the small forward group to Tatum's twenty-ninth.
Tatum gets a bad rap as a defender with people citing his average athleticism as a death knell. His defensive rating was 2.6 points better than Duke's overall rating, indicating a high level of awareness on defense. His mark here was especially impressive considering his youth and the high level of competition he faced. Don't sleep on Jayson Tatum as a defender!
Both players graded out in the top twelve for rebounding in the small forward group, with Jackson coming out on top, 77.6 to 75.0. One thing to note is that a much higher proportion of Jackson's rebounds came on the offensive end (31.3%) compared to Tatum's (18.3%). I'm calling this category a draw, but my personal preference is for a strong defensive rebounder who can end an opponent's possession. Look for both to average 6-7 rebounds per game in the NBA.
Jackson won three of the five categories, but Tatum has the higher overall grade of 92.4 in our model. When you look at the slash lines that we're projecting for the two players next to each other, Tatum's forecasted 22/7/3 line is more impressive that Jackson's 17/7/4 line. Jackson's superior defense should also be factored in, but so should Tatum's higher likelihood of being a knockdown three-point shooter.
So who do the two players compare most closely to in recent NBA history?
My initial answer for Tatum was Paul George. Both are wiry perimeter players who take and make a high number of tough isolation shots. George has averaged 23/7/4 since coming back from his gruesome leg injury, which is right where I expect Tatum to end up. I've since moved away from this comparison because I can't see Tatum guarding a player of Lebron James' ilk as well as Paul does simply because Tatum's not the athlete that George is. Instead, I'm stealing Bill Simmons' comparison of Danny Granger. Like Granger, expect Tatum to be a 20+ points per game scorer and a fringe all-star.
I've also changed my Jackson comparison recently. I originally projected him as another Shawn Marion - a great defender who filled up the stat sheet despite funky shooting form - but Jackson isn't the rebounder that Marion was. The player who I'm now expecting Jackson to be most like is Gerald Wallace, an impactful player whose offensive game eventually caught up to his high-level athleticism. At the end of the day, Jackson's future really depends on how much he can improve as a shooter, because if he makes a Kawhi-like jump, he'll be a perennial all-star. Also of note is how similar Jackson's profile is to Justise Winslow's in our algorithm.
I'm taking Tatum before Jackson. Jackson has a higher ceiling, but Tatum is more likely to reach his.
By John Hooper
Two of the most memorable clashes of this past year of college basketball were the Kentucky - UCLA duels. The games they played against each other felt like they were at a different level than any other NCAA games this season because of the abundance of NBA talent of the court, making for some highly entertaining games.
At the heart of the matchup was the point guard battle between De'Aaron Fox and Lonzo Ball. Now, the two players are now both top five prospects in this year's draft. Their teams split the two games but Fox dominated both matchups statistically. Some point to Ball's body of work as the reason he should be considered as the superior prospect, but others say that Fox emerged as the clearly superior player after lighting Lonzo and the Bruins up for 39 points in their second matchup in the NCAA tournament.
Let's take a dive into how the two players's freshman seasons stacked up versus one another with the results from our projection model.
This is the category where we have our largest gap between the two prospects. Fox only averaged 2.1 more points per game than Lonzo this year, but once all the factors are being taken into account, our models has Fox winning in a landslide here.
Fox received the fifth highest grade of all point guard prospects since 2011 in scoring potential. His aggressiveness, ability to penetrate, and the frequency with which he got to the line all bode very well for projecting him as a scorer. He graded out similarly to Kemba Walker and Damian Lillard here with a score of 91.2, so you can expect him to put up 21-24 points a night.
On the other end of the spectrum, Lonzo graded out as the fourth worst of all point guards in our database. Despite his good size and youth (potential positive indicators), he had the third lowest usage rate and the third fewest free throws made per 100 possessions of the sixty-three point guards in our database. Those numbers tell us that his style is to be a facilitator instead of a ball-dominant scorer, but they're also a red flag that he'll struggle to score consistently in the NBA since he's so dependent on making threes. His grade of 37.1 for scoring potential puts him in the lofty company of Peyton Siva and Marquis Teague. Expect Lonzo to be a 12-15 point a game scorer at his peak.
It's well known that Fox's biggest weakness is his outside shooting, but the players' grades here were closer than I expected.
Fox graded out at 70.3 for shooting potential, which put him at 46th of the 63 point guards in our database. His three point percentage of 24.6% was the second worst of the group, but his reasonable 73.9% clip from the charity stripe brought him back up to a somewhat acceptable level projection-wise. Being a young prospect also helps him here as our model factors in that he's likely to improve as he comes into his own as a player. Look for Fox to be a player who eventually shoots in the 30-34% range from deep.
Ball is one of the more unusual players to evaluate the shooting ability of, and that's without even taking his unique stroke into consideration. He hit 41.2% of his three-pointers (8th best of 63) and made the 18th most per 100 possessions of the point guard group. Based on that alone, I would've expected him to grade out much higher than the 80.3 he received. His poor free throw shooting came back to haunt him here, however, as his 67.3% rate was 6th worst of all point guards. Interestingly, his true shooting percentage was second best of the sixty-three man group, which is a testament to his Daryl Morey approved shot-selection. Expect Lonzo to shoot 38%-42% from three in the NBA and eventually become a 75%-80% shooter at the line.
Lonzo graded out as the better offensive facilitator out of the two, which should come as no surprise. I won't go into detail here because of how clear this is if you've watched the two play, but Lonzo received a 99.3 grade for his passing potential (3rd best) and Fox received a 74.1 grade (23rd best).
One statistic of note is that when comparing each player's personal offensive rating to that of his team, Lonzo's rating was 10.3 points higher than UCLA's overall rating and Fox's rating was 0.2 worse than Kentucky's overall rating. This is an indicator that Ball's presence on the court made a significantly positive impact on his team's offensive efficiency, while Fox was basically a net neutral. There are many factors other than passing and racking up assists that can play into this, but Ball's ability to bring the best out of his teammates really shines through here.
Fox is often touted as a player who will be able to wreck havoc on defense while Lonzo is looked at as a liability. Interestingly, Lonzo scored slightly better here, with a 70.8 rating to Fox's 66.7.
The two players had very similar steal rates, with Ball ranking 26th and Fox ranking 31st. Ball had a higher block rate, coming in fifth best of all point guards. It's a nice bonus but it's not a game-changing attribute of his. A similar comparison of the player's defensive rating against his team's overall defensive rating was one of the factors that gave the edge to Ball, as he had a positive 1.1 point impact compared to Fox's negative 1.1 point impact.
Despite the film telling us that Fox is lock-down defender and that Lonzo will need help, our model showed that Lonzo's overall impact on UCLA's team defense, likely as a result of his high awareness, was enough to swing this category in his favor.
Part of the reason Lonzo gets the Jason Kidd comparisons is because of how good of a rebounder he is for a point guard. He pulled in 6.0 rebounds per game and will be a consistent triple double threat at the next level. He ranked fifth of all point guards in rebounding potential with a 53.2 score. Look for him to average 6-7 rebounds a game at his peak.
Fox is an adequate rebounder for the position and will most likely be a neutral contributor for his team here. Expect him to average 3-4 rebounds a game during his career.
Lonzo had the higher grade in four out of the five categories, but Fox projects far better as a scorer. Depending on what you value in perimeters players, a case can be made for either being the superior prospect. Would you rather have the guy putting up 14/6/8 or the one going for 22/3/5? Our model gives Lonzo the edge.
I'm a believer in the Jason Kidd comparisons being made to Lonzo. He'll never be a dominating scorer, but he affects the game in many other ways with his passing, rebounding, and defense, using his great court awareness to help elevate the level of play of his team. The incredible thing about Lonzo as a prospect is that it's likely that he'll be a better offensive player than Kidd because of his three-point shooting. It's this kind of potential that has him as the number one prospect on our board this year.
There's a much larger range of potential futures for Fox in the NBA. If he can improve his shot to the degree that Mike Conley did after leaving Ohio Stage, the sky is the limit for him. He'd be likely to end up being a player very similar to Kyrie Irving if that's the case. If he doesn't improve at all as a shooter, he'll be closer to Elfrid Payton in the NBA. My guess is that he's somewhere in between those two universes, and the player he will be most similar to is Monta Ellis. Like Ellis early in his career, Fox is a lightning bolt on the court athletically with a slim 6'3" frame. Both have a knack for penetrating defenses but struggle from deep. Monta has been a 31.2% shooter for his career from three, which is right around where I anticipate Fox will end up. Monta's slash line from his time with Golden State for the first seven years of his career was roughly 20/4/5, which is right in line with what I expect from Fox.
So which of those players is more valuable in the league today? I'm a believer that Jason Kidd would be impactful in any era. His presence changed the dynamic of any game he was in through the way he controlled the pace and raised the level of play of his teammates. Monta thrived in the league of the early 2000s, but with his inability to be a consistent threat from three, it'd be a challenge to have a successful offense in today's game that was based around him.
Lonzo Ball is an elite all-around contributor and the number one player on our board. Believe the Jason Kidd hype.
De'Aaron is a talented prospect whose strengths fit best in bygone eras. He's the fourth best point guard prospect in this year's draft. He's not John Wall (smaller, inferior vision), nor is he Mike Conley (more aggressive, not a facilitator). Expect Warriors-era Monta Elllis production from him.