2019 NBA Draft

[3 Ball...GOT IT]

@Sir'Dom Pointer any chance you'll be posting Synergy numbers again this year?

 

[Sir'Dom Pointer]

@Sir'Dom Pointer any chance you'll be posting Synergy numbers again this year?

Not sure. Not now anyways. I can’t get in to the draft like I did last year unfortunately. Maybe I will, but now now.

 

[I'mWithDan]

Nas Little...yikes. I don't know who's been more disappointing between him, Reddish, and Barrett (yes, I know Barrett's been the best of the three, but he's been equally disappointing given how hyped he was).

For sure Little.

He's not even earning minutes, as a projected top 5 pick to start the year.

Cam & RJ have been more of a mixed bag but at least shown enough where they can be projected with more certainty.

With Little, I don't know if he isn't good, if Roy Williams isn't a good coach, if the guys in front of him are underrated.....or some combination of all 3. He's been the real dud for me, just seeing how much his profile grew the 18 months prior to this college season.

To me, it's more of a disappointment if a prospect seemingly can't earn the opportunity vs. being somewhat underwhelming with it.

 

[Nathan S]

For sure Little.

He's not even earning minutes, as a projected top 5 pick to start the year.

Cam & RJ have been more of a mixed bag but at least shown enough where they can be projected with more certainty.

With Little, I don't know if he isn't good, if Roy Williams isn't a good coach, if the guys in front of him are underrated.....or some combination of all 3. He's been the real dud for me, just seeing how much his profile grew the 18 months prior to this college season.

To me, it's more of a disappointment if a prospect seemingly can't earn the opportunity vs. being somewhat underwhelming with it.

Reddish basically in the same boat though, right? He's still starting, but Jack White is playing more minutes and looks like the better player. Wouldn't be a huge surprise to see him benched for the second half if he starts another game off on the wrong foot.

 

[I'mWithDan]

@Nathan S is JA on your radar? I can't remember seeing him in your spread sheet screenshots.

I had mentioned him in the Garland debate a while back and was curious where he slotted in your rater. TO's are ugly but everything else looks like he would rate through the roof in most analytic evaluations (thus far).

 

[3 Ball...GOT IT]

@Nathan S is JA on your radar? I can't remember seeing him in your spread sheet screenshots.

I had mentioned him in the Garland debate a while back and was curious where he slotted in your rater. TO's are ugly but everything else looks like he would rate through the roof in most analytic evaluations (thus far).

Morant's gunna kill models as long as he keeps his 3PT attempt rate up. I know Nathan's model takes AST-TOV into account pretty well, but I'd bet he's high on his.

I'm also curious @Nathan S if your model incorporates strength of schedule, or some other level of competition factors?

I'd expect Morant to be the top PG taken, though I think I may still end up preferring Garland. Also think Tre Jones has an outside shot at even the first half of the first round.

I watched that full Alabama-Murray St game and he was clearly the best player on the court. It'd take a lot of watching of him, but based on that game I'd say the STL/BLK rates are inflated by poor competition and the crazy athleticism advantage he has. He was hidden on defense almost the entire game... and has to really conserve energy for the offensive burden he has.

 

[Nathan S]

@Nathan S is JA on your radar? I can't remember seeing him in your spread sheet screenshots.

I had mentioned him in the Garland debate a while back and was curious where he slotted in your rater. TO's are ugly but everything else looks like he would rate through the roof in most analytic evaluations (thus far).

Morant's gunna kill models as long as he keeps his 3PT attempt rate up. I know Nathan's model takes AST-TOV into account pretty well, but I'd bet he's high on his.

I'm also curious @Nathan S if your model incorporates strength of schedule, or some other level of competition factors?

I'd expect Morant to be the top PG taken, though I think I may still end up preferring Garland. Also think Tre Jones has an outside shot at even the first half of the first round.

I watched that full Alabama-Murray St game and he was clearly the best player on the court. It'd take a lot of watching of him, but based on that game I'd say the STL/BLK rates are inflated by poor competition and the crazy athleticism advantage he has. He was hidden on defense almost the entire game... and has to really conserve energy for the offensive burden he has.

He's at +0.6 right now on my model, with his enormous turnover rate washing out positives in other areas. You won't be surprised to hear that his rating also has a huge calculated uncertainty, and fluctuates by multiple points from game to game. My model doesn't look at SOS (a noteworthy shortcoming when talking about mid and low-major prospects), but Morant's SOS isn't terribly weak so far this season.

I think he should be drafted, probably even in the first round, but I'd be shocked if he's the first PG off the board.

 

[3 Ball...GOT IT]

He's at +0.6 right now on my model, with his enormous turnover rate washing out positives in other areas. You won't be surprised to hear that his rating also has a huge calculated uncertainty, and fluctuates by multiple points from game to game. My model doesn't look at SOS (a noteworthy shortcoming when talking about mid and low-major prospects), but Morant's SOS isn't terribly weak so far this season.

I think he should be drafted, probably even in the first round, but I'd be shocked if he's the first PG off the board.

I actually just checked and ESPN has him mocked as the first PG off the board at #10, Garland next at #11 lol.

I don't expect him to sustain the shooting, but against his level of competition he should be able to maintain some crazy numbers. Also the more I think about it, the more I feel it's possible that Tre Jones could even go top 20. Not sure I'd take him there, but he's the definition of steady and he'll get more exposure than any other PG. Duke's reliance on him will overshadow some of his translation issues I expect.

The MCL injury really doesn't hurt Garland's stock for me. His game really doesn't rely much on athleticism as is. I've now watched 3 of his 4 games, and I think people are sleeping on him just a little bit. Btw I also am going to be super low on Shittu... not a fan at all the more I watch.

This would probably be my ranking of PGs for right now, but could change like tomorrow:
Darius Garland
Ja Morant
Tre Jones
Carsen Edwards
Shamorie Ponds
Coby White
Devon Dotson

Ty Jerome and Ky Bowman would be in there somewhere too, but haven't watched them enough. Also need to watch more Ponds. A lot of people like Coby White, but the games I watched early in the season really soured me on him I think. I watched UNC-Michigan and he was much better there, but still lower on him than most.

 

[Nathan S]

I actually just checked and ESPN has him mocked as the first PG off the board at #10, Garland next at #11 lol.

I don't expect him to sustain the shooting, but against his level of competition he should be able to maintain some crazy numbers. Also the more I think about it, the more I feel it's possible that Tre Jones could even go top 20. Not sure I'd take him there, but he's the definition of steady and he'll get more exposure than any other PG. Duke's reliance on him will overshadow some of his translation issues I expect.

The MCL injury really doesn't hurt Garland's stock for me. His game really doesn't rely much on athleticism as is. I've now watched 3 of his 4 games, and I think people are sleeping on him just a little bit. Btw I also am going to be super low on Shittu... not a fan at all the more I watch.

This would probably be my ranking of PGs for right now, but could change like tomorrow:
Darius Garland
Ja Morant
Tre Jones
Carsen Edwards
Shamorie Ponds
Coby White
Devon Dotson

Ty Jerome and Ky Bowman would be in there somewhere too, but haven't watched them enough. Also need to watch more Ponds. A lot of people like Coby White, but the games I watched early in the season really soured me on him I think. I watched UNC-Michigan and he was much better there, but still lower on him than most.

Ah, I'm thinking of Culver, Norvell, and Alexander-Walker as likely PGs at the next level, so was baffled that you said you had Morant #1

For now, I'm thinking of Morant as pretty similar to Ponds. Boom-or-bust guards who could be scoring machines or duds at the next level, interesting if I have a pick in the 20's and there's no one else with any decent upside. I'll start to warm up to Morant if he shows more consistency...I think the mainstream has jumped the gun going from completely ignoring him to overrating him a bit.

I'd probably have Culver and Norvell 1a/1b, Garland, Jones, and Alexander-Walker 2a/2b/2c, and then a heap of players including Morant, the other guys you mentioned, Horton-Tucker, Nembhard, and maybe a couple others. Obviously that third tier will start to take a more definite shape after another month or so of basketball.

 

[I'mWithDan]

Ah, I'm thinking of Culver, Norvell, and Alexander-Walker as likely PGs at the next level, so was baffled that you said you had Morant #1

For now, I'm thinking of Morant as pretty similar to Ponds. Boom-or-bust guards who could be scoring machines or duds at the next level, interesting if I have a pick in the 20's and there's no one else with any decent upside. I'll start to warm up to Morant if he shows more consistency...I think the mainstream has jumped the gun going from completely ignoring him to overrating him a bit.

I'd probably have Culver and Norvell 1a/1b, Garland, Jones, and Alexander-Walker 2a/2b/2c, and then a heap of players including Morant, the other guys you mentioned, Horton-Tucker, Nembhard, and maybe a couple others. Obviously that third tier will start to take a more definite shape after another month or so of basketball.

I'm higher on Morant because he's the scorer / creator / defender combo. You get guys that are two of those but it is tougher to find college players who do all 3 to an acceptable level (or project well across all 3 categories).

Ja inflates some of his defensive box score stats due to competition level but he's a solid guy on that end with a lot of athletic potential. His thinner frame can be limiting, he'll get bounced around a bit but he's not just steal hunting, he's playing defense in a stance on most occasions and competing (motor). He's also a + rebounder at the PG position, which is added defensive value.

Ja is also, really, really young for his grade. He didn't turn 19 until August of this year. He is younger than a handful of the top freshman PG's this season. To play your first NBA season at age 20 and have 50 college tapes under your belt is really uncommon.

He has some sneaky combo potential too. He lead the NCAA (by a mile) on PPP spot up initiated drives......so he does also have some nice off the ball potential as a combo attacking player......and even before his frame has filled out, he's converting at the rim at a really high clip (60+%) and he already seems to understand a good shot mix, as a heavy 3PT / at rim guy. His FT rate isn't great though, for someone with his athletic talents and finishing skill.

I think some people are getting a little carried away with his rating but I do believe he'll be in the conversation for a lottery selection.

 

[Nathan S]

I'm higher on Morant because he's the scorer / creator / defender combo. You get guys that are two of those but it is tougher to find college players who do all 3 to an acceptable level (or project well across all 3 categories).

Ja inflates some of his defensive box score stats due to competition level but he's a solid guy on that end with a lot of athletic potential. His thinner frame can be limiting, he'll get bounced around a bit but he's not just steal hunting, he's playing defense in a stance on most occasions and competing (motor). He's also a + rebounder at the PG position, which is added defensive value.

Ja is also, really, really young for his grade. He didn't turn 19 until August of this year. He is younger than a handful of the top freshman PG's this season. To play your first NBA season at age 20 and have 50 college tapes under your belt is really uncommon.

He has some sneaky combo potential too. He lead the NCAA (by a mile) on PPP spot up initiated drives......so he does also have some nice off the ball potential as a combo attacking player......and even before his frame has filled out, he's converting at the rim at a really high clip (60+%) and he already seems to understand a good shot mix, as a heavy 3PT / at rim guy. His FT rate isn't great though, for someone with his athletic talents and finishing skill.

I think some people are getting a little carried away with his rating but I do believe he'll be in the conversation for a lottery selection.

Is he *actually* a good defender? Last year he averaged less than 1 steal in 34 minutes per game...that's remarkably bad for a PG. I know he rebounds the ball well, but I'm not sure if that's because he's actually a fundamentally sound defender, or because he's ridiculously more athletic than the average low-major guard. I think he's a mystery box at best on that end, and we may not get a great feel for him before the draft because (as @3 Ball...GOT IT pointed out) he often hides/rests on defense.

As for his offense, obviously it's incredible to see him putting up such huge numbers after averaging 13 ppg on modest efficiency last year, but 4 games is a tiny sample size. If he regresses to something like 20 ppg, which seems realistic, what reason is there to have him above major-conference PGs who're putting up similarly impressive numbers?

 

[I'mWithDan]

Is he *actually* a good defender? Last year he averaged less than 1 steal in 34 minutes per game...that's remarkably bad for a PG. I know he rebounds the ball well, but I'm not sure if that's because he's actually a fundamentally sound defender, or because he's ridiculously more athletic than the average low-major guard. I think he's a mystery box at best on that end, and we may not get a great feel for him before the draft because (as @3 Ball...GOT IT pointed out) he often hides/rests on defense.

As for his offense, obviously it's incredible to see him putting up such huge numbers after averaging 13 ppg on modest efficiency last year, but 4 games is a tiny sample size. If he regresses to something like 20 ppg, which seems realistic, what reason is there to have him above major-conference PGs who're putting up similarly impressive numbers?

I think his film looks like he can be a good defender and he'll have decent box score stats to back it up. He has highlight plays on that end that (I think) reliably indicate he can defend well at the NBA level. Certainly there's concern about his competition level......he's a + high major athlete playing what will end up being a mid to low major schedule.

In this draft, (average scout) probably likes him a bit more than the major-conference PG's because he's a + NBA athlete with good feel, motor. His athletic potential also translates both on and off the ball.....he's just a great functional athlete and his frame has yet to fill out. He's also a tough shot maker, which is an important skill for NBA guards. Proficient in the P&R, in the top 20% via synergy last season.

His 3PT shot will determine his ceiling. It is a little slow and his release needs to get a little higher but he's at least a passable shooter to start, as a + slasher and + athlete. Wide open NBA game, across the board production, paired with his athleticism is why I would take him over someone like Garland. He's a far more electric player on film.

 

[Nathan S]

I think his film looks like he can be a good defender and he'll have decent box score stats to back it up. He has highlight plays on that end that (I think) reliably indicate he can defend well at the NBA level. Certainly there's concern about his competition level......he's a + high major athlete playing what will end up being a mid to low major schedule.

In this draft, (average scout) probably likes him a bit more than the major-conference PG's because he's a + NBA athlete with good feel, motor. His athletic potential also translates both on and off the ball.....he's just a great functional athlete and his frame has yet to fill out. He's also a tough shot maker, which is an important skill for NBA guards. Proficient in the P&R, in the top 20% via synergy last season.

His 3PT shot will determine his ceiling. It is a little slow and his release needs to get a little higher but he's at least a passable shooter to start, as a + slasher and + athlete. Wide open NBA game, across the board production, paired with his athleticism is why I would take him over someone like Garland. He's a far more electric player on film.

I'm not really familiar enough with Garland to make the case for him (and Tre Jones is a tricky comparison because of his unusual role)...but what about Morant vs. Norvell or Culver or Alexander-Walker?

 

[I'mWithDan]

I'm not really familiar enough with Garland to make the case for him (and Tre Jones is a tricky comparison because of his unusual role)...but what about Morant vs. Norvell or Culver or Alexander-Walker?

Culver looks similar to me on the defensive end, minus the wow athletic plays Morant has. He's not super engaged, seems like he should be a more willing defender but he lacks motor to a degree and for his size and length, his box score output is just ok (similar to Morant last year). To clarify more, he seems to float a lot on defense.....lose his man and miss close outs or not be close enough to challenge shots.

I don't know if I would call him a plodder but he looks like a more average athlete. He's also more of a straight line driver who uses his length to score over smaller college players. I'd imagine most project him as a more of a spot up player at the NBA level. 96% of his made 3's last year were assisted. Really small split this year but it looks like a few more self created opportunities.

I like his size but why do you project him as a PG? He doesn't seem to have the dribble creativity necessary to play that spot in the NBA. I like him a lot as a SG, a lot less as a PG.

I admittedly have not watched Norvell or Alexander-Walker at all, so can't really provide anything useful for comparisons sake.

 

[Nathan S]

Culver looks similar to me on the defensive end, minus the wow athletic plays Morant has. He's not super engaged, seems like he should be a more willing defender but he lacks motor to a degree and for his size and length, his box score output is just ok (similar to Morant last year).

I don't know if I would call him a plodder but he looks like a more average athlete. He's also more of a straight line driver who uses his length to score over smaller college players. I'd imagine most project him as a more of a spot up player at the NBA level. 96% of his made 3's last year were assisted. Really small split this year but it looks like a few more self created opportunities.

I like his size but why do you project him as a PG? He doesn't seem to have the dribble creativity necessary to play that spot in the NBA. I like him a lot as a SG, a lot less as a PG.

I admittedly have not watched Norvell or Alexander-Walker at all, so can't really provide anything useful for comparisons sake.

He's leading his team in assists so far, which is a promising sign. There's a learning curve, of course, for guys transitioning from SG to PG, but the early returns for him are promising. I also put a lot of stock into the fact that he's the clear #1 guy on a very good team...if he finishes the season leading a top-20 Texas Tech team in points, assists, and rebounds, that would be extremely impressive to me.

Admittedly, I may have a slightly different view of these prospects if I wasn't a Cavs fan...it's easy to imagine slotting Culver (or Norvell, or Alexander-Walker) next to Sexton. Morant, not so much.