2019 NBA Draft

[Nathan S]

Updated statistical rankings...dropped Hoard, added Nembhard, Smith, and Haliburton

Iowa State is a team to watch going forward with two extremely interesting freshmen in Haliburton and Horton-Tucker. They've faced a weak-ish schedule so far, but some of the lines they've put up are ridiculous no matter the context.

Grant Williams also continues to impress; he could become the first player in NCAA history to average 20/10/5 for a season. Barrett feasted against a couple of weak opponents, helping to erase his lackluster start to the season.

 

[I'mWithDan]

Updated statistical rankings...dropped Hoard, added Nembhard, Smith, and Haliburton

Iowa State is a team to watch going forward with two extremely interesting freshmen in Haliburton and Horton-Tucker. They've faced a weak-ish schedule so far, but some of the lines they've put up are ridiculous no matter the context.

Grant Williams also continues to impress; he could become the first player in NCAA history to average 20/10/5 for a season. Barrett feasted against a couple of weak opponents, helping to erase his lackluster start to the season.

Can you humor me and run Jordan Poole's numbers?

His early season is likely going to drag him down but sheesh......look a these last 5 splits:

Per Game:

18.8 PPG, 4.6 REB, 2.6 AST, 18/28 3PT (62.3%), 33/54 FG(61.1%)

That last 5 included 2 ranked teams, as well as NW and SC.

He's averaging 13/4/2 on the year after scoring 3, 3 and 7 points in his first 3 and 4 points in his 5th game.

He's also extending his range and hitting a lot of NBA 3's. Every time I watch him, I like him more. He just seems to be one of the few guys I have seen this year that have the mix of range / athleticism / creation skills that elite 2's tend to have. I don't think he's that guy yet but he jumps jumps off the screen on a good team. It's possible he's simply riding the hottest streak of his career but it looks real as you watch it......and so I'm curious what different people's models say about him.

For people who have missed his games.....the effortlessness of his release and the variety displayed in just one game is exciting.


Jab steps, catch and shoot, off dribble pull up, nice P&R feel, handful of nice assist creations, floater......pretty much the full offensive repertoire in 36 minutes.

 

[Nathan S]

Can you humor me and run Jordan Poole's numbers?

His early season is likely going to drag him down but sheesh......look a these last 5 splits:

Per Game:

18.8 PPG, 4.6 REB, 2.6 AST, 18/28 3PT (62.3%), 33/54 FG(61.1%)

That last 5 included 2 ranked teams, as well as NW and SC.

He's averaging 13/4/2 on the year after scoring 3, 3 and 7 points in his first 3 and 4 points in his 5th game.

He's also extending his range and hitting a lot of NBA 3's. Every time I watch him, I like him more. He just seems to be one of the few guys I have seen this year that have the mix of range / athleticism / creation skills that elite 2's tend to have. I don't think he's that guy yet but he jumps jumps off the screen on a good team. It's possible he's simply riding the hottest streak of his career but it looks real as you watch it......and so I'm curious what different people's models say about him.

For people who have missed his games.....the effortlessness of his release and the variety displayed in just one game is exciting.


Jab steps, catch and shoot, off dribble pull up, nice P&R feel, handful of nice assist creations, floater......pretty much the full offensive repertoire in 36 minutes.

My model doesn't like him at all (-1.0 on offense, -1.6 on defense), mainly because a lot of his statistical weaknesses are really bad. In particular, he doesn't get many free throws, offensive rebounds, steals, or blocks, which are probably the best box-score measures of functional athleticism.

That's not necessarily a death sentence, but I would ask the following questions:

1. How is he going to score inside the arc at the NBA level? If he doesn't have a great first step or a big, strong frame, he'll need to become an elite ballhandler or else end up settling for a lot of tough midrange shots.

2. Does he have the potential to develop into a point guard? There's only so much value he can add as an off-ball player since he doesn't seem willing or able to mix it up in the paint.

3. Is there any reason to believe he's a *much* better defender than his box score stats indicate? The list of players who average less than 1 steal+block per game in college and go on to be decent NBA defenders is probably pretty short. If he's not going to be a decent defender, and he's not a primary ballhandler on offense, it'll be very difficult for him to have a positive overall impact.

 

[I'mWithDan]

My model doesn't like him at all (-1.0 on offense, -1.6 on defense), mainly because a lot of his statistical weaknesses are really bad. In particular, he doesn't get many free throws, offensive rebounds, steals, or blocks, which are probably the best box-score measures of functional athleticism.

That's not necessarily a death sentence, but I would ask the following questions:

1. How is he going to score inside the arc at the NBA level? If he doesn't have a great first step or a big, strong frame, he'll need to become an elite ballhandler or else end up settling for a lot of tough midrange shots.

2. Does he have the potential to develop into a point guard? There's only so much value he can add as an off-ball player since he doesn't seem willing or able to mix it up in the paint.

3. Is there any reason to believe he's a *much* better defender than his box score stats indicate? The list of players who average less than 1 steal+block per game in college and go on to be decent NBA defenders is probably pretty short. If he's not going to be a decent defender, and he's not a primary ballhandler on offense, it'll be very difficult for him to have a positive overall impact.

He has two games where he scored 18+ and had 4 AST, so I think he has combo guard potential. Primary ball handler? Honestly, my best answer is I don't know because he is such a valuable off ball player in Michigan's scheme....and Simpson is one of the better college floor generals. With that said, he has started to show really nice feel in the P&R.....certainly a huge leap from a year ago. He scores at all levels as a young player for his age (he's 3 months older than Reddish, who's a freshman).

Free throws would be the one concern but they have ticked up as he has started to attack more. He shot 7 against SC.....obviously just one game but he's finishing at an elite level at the rim (69.9% on 2.3 attempts per game), so it's not as if he isn't attacking at all. More than half of those are unassisted off the dribble. Additionally, only half of his 3's are assisted, which is again a nice marker of a guy who has on ball potential as a lead scorer.

Defense, he's an effective team defender but not necessarily a lock down player. I do believe he has that potential (2-way) but I think he will grow in to it. He has made big strides in that area from this to last year, just from an effort standpoint. I can't say for certain he will sustain that but he does guard and he's on a team that is going to keep him honest.....box score data is lacking but if you watch Poole vs. Barrett, your eyes are a little more comfortable with Poole's effort. That's not to say he will be a better defender than Barrett but the habit of effort on that end is typically a good indicator he will at least be a wash there (with upside).

He's a really smooth player......it looks like he has a good first step but he's a hard guy to gauge, because it is more effortless. But because he is such a good 3 point shooter, whatever he may lack in first step is mitigated by the closeout pressure applied to a defender. I think that is a constant at all levels and there just aren't enough NBA defenders to slow a guy like that, who can truly knock down NBA shots.

Again, he's not there yet but he's showing signs of being a really interesting wing scorer. I want to see if he sustains both his finishing at the rim and his P&R PPP, at least to a decent degree.

 

[Nathan S]

He has two games where he scored 18+ and had 4 AST, so I think he has combo guard potential. Primary ball handler? Honestly, my best answer is I don't know because he is such a valuable off ball player in Michigan's scheme....and Simpson is one of the better college floor generals. With that said, he has started to show really nice feel in the P&R.....certainly a huge leap from a year ago. He scores at all levels as a young player for his age (he's 3 months older than Reddish, who's a freshman).

Free throws would be the one concern but they have ticked up as he has started to attack more. He shot 7 against SC.....obviously just one game but he's finishing at an elite level at the rim (69.9% on 2.3 attempts per game), so it's not as if he isn't attacking at all. More than half of those are unassisted off the dribble. Additionally, only half of his 3's are assisted, which is again a nice marker of a guy who has on ball potential as a lead scorer.

Defense, he's an effective team defender but not necessarily a lock down player. I do believe he has that potential (2-way) but I think he will grow in to it. He has made big strides in that area from this to last year, just from an effort standpoint. I can't say for certain he will sustain that but he does guard and he's on a team that is going to keep him honest.....box score data is lacking but if you watch Poole vs. Barrett, your eyes are a little more comfortable with Poole's effort. That's not to say he will be a better defender than Barrett but the habit of effort on that end is typically a good indicator he will at least be a wash there (with upside).

He's a really smooth player......it looks like he has a good first step but he's a hard guy to gauge, because it is more effortless. But because he is such a good 3 point shooter, whatever he may lack in first step is mitigated by the closeout pressure applied to a defender. I think that is a constant at all levels and there just aren't enough NBA defenders to slow a guy like that, who can truly knock down NBA shots.

Again, he's not there yet but he's showing signs of being a really interesting wing scorer. I want to see if he sustains both his finishing at the rim and his P&R PPP, at least to a decent degree.

I tend to agree that his at-the-rim efficiency and volume is an important thing to keep an eye on going forward. Either his percentages should regress, or he should start getting to the line more consistently (like he has in his last couple games)...pretty rare to see a guard get good volume/efficiency in the paint but not the free throws to match.

There's a give and take playing alongside a great floor general like Simpson...on one hand, he doesn't get to showcase/develop certain parts of his game, but on the other hand he gets more higher-quality off ball opportunities. I don't know how to systematically adjust for these things, just food for thought.

As for his defense, I think people generally underrate how difficult it is to be an average defender at the NBA level. Probably half of all college players are athletic enough to be average NBA defenders in theory, but a much smaller fraction have the necessary IQ, reflexes, and toughness. If those things don't come naturally to Poole, it's hard to expect him to hold his own in the NBA.

 

[Nathan S]

Doumbouya notched a DNP-CD today...quite a weird situation with him, as he's persistently in the lottery of every mock I've seen, sometimes even in the top-5, but his quality of play this season has been extremely low, to the point that he probably doesn't deserve to be drafted at all on merit. I don't think the Cavs would be dumb enough to draft him even if they ended up picking in the 8-10 range, but it's a terrifying possibility.

 

[STAT]

https://www.thestepien.com/2018/12/06/draft-notes-need-talk-luguentz-dort/

So after reading this piece and watching about ten minutes of highlights (a rigorous analysis obviously), I'm wondering why Luguentz Dort isn't currently being considered as a top ten-ish prospect.

I suppose I can answer my own question by looking at his numbers around the rim, free throw percentage, and relative obscurity in high school.

But as The Stepien points out he has a truly excellent first step, which has helped him be superbly productive on offense so far for AZ State. His jumper isn't too bad either: he's taking about 6 threes a game (at a 34% clip). And he's even fairly active defensively (2.0 spg).

Overall, he just looks like a guy that could be an offensive star at the next level.

 

[Cavatt]

https://www.thestepien.com/2018/12/06/draft-notes-need-talk-luguentz-dort/

So after reading this piece and watching about ten minutes of highlights (a rigorous analysis obviously), I'm wondering why Luguentz Dort isn't currently being considered as a top ten-ish prospect.

I suppose I can answer my own question by looking at his numbers around the rim, free throw percentage, and relative obscurity in high school.

But as The Stepien points out he has a truly excellent first step, which has helped him be superbly productive on offense so far for AZ State. His jumper isn't too bad either: he's taking about 6 threes a game (at a 34% clip). And he's even fairly active defensively (2.0 spg).

Overall, he just looks like a guy that could be an offensive star at the next level.

Am I wrong in thinking his first step and athleticism look more like Rodney Stuckey than Wade?

 

[Nathan S]

https://www.thestepien.com/2018/12/06/draft-notes-need-talk-luguentz-dort/

So after reading this piece and watching about ten minutes of highlights (a rigorous analysis obviously), I'm wondering why Luguentz Dort isn't currently being considered as a top ten-ish prospect.

I suppose I can answer my own question by looking at his numbers around the rim, free throw percentage, and relative obscurity in high school.

But as The Stepien points out he has a truly excellent first step, which has helped him be superbly productive on offense so far for AZ State. His jumper isn't too bad either: he's taking about 6 threes a game (at a 34% clip). And he's even fairly active defensively (2.0 spg).

Overall, he just looks like a guy that could be an offensive star at the next level.

My draft rater is lukewarm on him at the moment (+2.0 offense, -1.4 defense). I'm interested to see if he can improve his mediocre assist:TO ratio, maintain his respectable 3-point percentage on high volume, and maintain his overall level of productivity against better competition (obviously Nevada was a very strong opponent, but the rest of his schedule so far has been pretty weak). If he can do those things, he'll probably end up in the lottery.

 

[3 Ball...GOT IT]

Doumbouya notched a DNP-CD today...quite a weird situation with him, as he's persistently in the lottery of every mock I've seen, sometimes even in the top-5, but his quality of play this season has been extremely low, to the point that he probably doesn't deserve to be drafted at all on merit. I don't think the Cavs would be dumb enough to draft him even if they ended up picking in the 8-10 range, but it's a terrifying possibility.

His age and tools are his best selling point, which isn't going away regardless of his play. I've not watched him enough to say anything on his actual play though, but I think he's safely in the lottery even this early.

https://www.thestepien.com/2018/12/06/draft-notes-need-talk-luguentz-dort/

So after reading this piece and watching about ten minutes of highlights (a rigorous analysis obviously), I'm wondering why Luguentz Dort isn't currently being considered as a top ten-ish prospect.

I suppose I can answer my own question by looking at his numbers around the rim, free throw percentage, and relative obscurity in high school.

But as The Stepien points out he has a truly excellent first step, which has helped him be superbly productive on offense so far for AZ State. His jumper isn't too bad either: he's taking about 6 threes a game (at a 34% clip). And he's even fairly active defensively (2.0 spg).

Overall, he just looks like a guy that could be an offensive star at the next level.

I've watched a lot of Dort. His biggest issue is that he has very little touch around the rim. Relies so much on getting calls... The first stat I always check in the box score is his FTAs, and it usually correlates to how well of an overall scoring night he had. His streaky shot of course is another issue in itself.

Defensively I like him in 1-on-1, and with his strength he should be able to handle most wings. Biggest issue for me though is his ability to get around screens. I don't know if it's because he's too bulky or what, but alot of times he doesn't even try to get skinny around them. I think he tires easily as well on that end. Off the ball he's been pretty hit or miss with awareness.

I think he's top 20 for me, but I don't know how he's going to be a positive offensive player without a stable jumper. And defensively it's been a mixed bag. That's just my two cents.

 

[Nathan S]

His age and tools are his best selling point, which isn't going away regardless of his play. I've not watched him enough to say anything on his actual play though, but I think he's safely in the lottery even this early.

His tools aren't as good as people think, though. 6'9" with a 6'11" wingspan doesn't exactly blow your socks off (even if he's grown an inch or so). I think he's comparable to Bonga last year...interesting physically and very young, but years and years away from putting it all together.

 

[3 Ball...GOT IT]

His tools aren't as good as people think, though. 6'9" with a 6'11" wingspan doesn't exactly blow your socks off (even if he's grown an inch or so). I think he's comparable to Bonga last year...interesting physically and very young, but years and years away from putting it all together.

It's his fluidity/movement to go along with the size that's important. He's basically a 6'9" wing with probably a close to 9' standing reach. Without the fluidity/movement then those measurements are pedestrian because he'd be limited to playing as a big.

 

[Nathan S]

It's his fluidity/movement to go along with the size that's important. He's basically a 6'9" wing with probably a close to 9' standing reach. Without the fluidity/movement then those measurements are pedestrian because he'd be limited to playing as a big.

Well yeah, that's why i gave him credit for being "physically interesting."

And to my point, your above post could apply equally well to Bonga last year. Prospects like that are typically second round material.

 

[3 Ball...GOT IT]

Well yeah, that's why i gave him credit for being "physically interesting."

And to my point, your above post could apply equally well to Bonga last year. Prospects like that are typically second round material.

Plus tools on the wing > plus tools for PGs imo.

Bonga had plenty of physical limitations as well... he's slow and pretty unathletic, needs strength too.

 

[Nathan S]

Plus tools on the wing > plus tools for PGs imo.

Bonga had plenty of physical limitations as well... he's slow and pretty unathletic, needs strength too.

Not sure why you'd say plus tools on the wing > plus tools for PGs...that point aside, I look at Doumbouya and see a guy who has plus tools but not exceptional tools. There are 5-10 wing/big types with similar bodies to him in every draft.

The guys that combine those tools with impressive on-court production end up in the lottery, and the guys who're less skilled end up going late first or second round. No matter how you look at it, Doumbouya has looked far, far less skilled than scouts probably expected. That's inevitably going to have a big effect on his draft stock.